The National Planning Policy Framework 2018
The government’s policy on conserving and enhancing the historic environment is contained in the National Planning Policy Framework which was recently updated. In this article Hannah Armstrong of the Pegasus group explains the changes and how they affect listed property owners.
The final version of the revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published on 24 July 2018. Little has changed in respect of the ‘Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment’ Section (Paragraphs 184-202) since the publication of the draft text in March 2018. This section largely reflects the wording of the original 2012 version, albeit there have been some minor changes to the wording and definitions of the text for clarification purposes. Key elements of the revised policy which have the potential to be relevant to listed property owners are detailed below.
It was anticipated, due to the wording of the draft revised NPPF (March 2018), that there would be an alteration in the manner to which impacts of development on the significance of designated heritage
assets would be considered. This has now been clarified within Paragraph 193 which states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on a designated heritage asset, decision-makers should give great weight to the asset’s conservation ‘irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance.’ When reviewed against the original 2012 version of the NPPF, it can be concluded that this is genuinely a clarification rather than a major change.
Paragraph 196 states that where development proposals will lead to ‘less than substantial harm’ to the significance of a designated heritage asset ‘this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use.’ The term ‘optimum viable use’ was included in the original 2012 NPFF, but the addition of ‘where appropriate’ is new. Further guidance is anticipated as to what will be considered ‘appropriate’.
In summary, changes to historic environment policy set out within the
Council spends £10,000 a month on empty historic building
of this year, which includes the money paid to DCA Consultancy, and other non-routine payments, was £49,190.
Councillor Chris Robson, who chairs the working party, said heating was required to protect the mansion and associated buildings from frost and damp, but the bulk of the routine payments were for security.
Routine payments for security and utilities such as electricity and gas at Oldway Mansion is costing a council roughly £10,000 a month. The former council offices have been empty for five
years and plans to turn the Grade II* listed mansion into a luxury hotel fell- through in 2016.
The total bill for the first three months
The historic Grade II* listed house, built by the Singer family in the 19th century, on the back of their sewing machine wealth, has been empty since the council moved out in 2013. It said the buildings were too expensive to maintain.
Continued >> Listed Heritage Magazine September/October 2018 7
revised NPPF will have little additional impact on listed property owners. Notably, when applying for Listed Building Consent or Planning Permission, applicants are still required to provide sufficient information regarding the heritage asset which is affected, and to consider any potential harm that may result to the significance of the asset. Such harm would then need to be considered in a balanced judgement against the public benefits of the proposals, as discussed above. The obligations of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 which requires special regard to made to the desirability of preserving the special architectural and historic interest of a Listed Building and its setting, remains.
Hannah Armstrong, Principal Heritage Consultant, Pegasus Group
Pegasus Group is a leading independent consultancy specialising in planning, design, environment and economics.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152
