C O N T E X T 1 1 5 : J U LY 2 0 1 0 27 for the time being and in the absence of new legislation. In a practical sense, the term ‘significance’ in the planning policy reflects such circumstances as would, for example, trigger the need for listed building consent, which the law requires if proposed works to a listed building ‘would affect the special character of the listed building as a whole.’ The practice guidance by English Heritage that accompanies the planning policy statement is a key support for the PPS and the two need to be read together. The guidance amplifies the PPS and gives detail on how it should be applied. The new policy statement is relatively short and abstract, and to be implemented it needs quite a lot of practical explanation by the national heritage body. For some time English Heritage has been publishing guidance and advice for local planning authorities, professionals, developers and users of heritage assets that anticipates the practical importance of determining and understanding the significance of these assets. English Heritage’s guidance and advice documents include Conservation Principles (2008), which describes the way in which English Heritage determines significance, and recommends others follow. For analytical purposes, this guidance identifies at least four sets of values that may contribute to the significance of a place: evidential, historic, aesthetic and communal. These values may overlap. Not all will be equally important in any particular case. We can imagine other values that may apply. Other English Heritage documents about protecting and enhancing the historic environment refer to these principles. The legitimate public concern with heritage assets extends, as both law and planning policy recognise, to their setting. Protection of an asset would not amount to much if new developments nearby could with impunity detract from appreciation of its significance or even hide it from view. The setting of a particular asset is not usually something that can be defined once and for all time; it has to be worked out case by case. The protection of views is closely related to the protection of setting. Designed views, which were created intentionally to be admired, such as Greenwich Naval Hospital and Palace seen from across the Thames in London, or the political philosophy embodied in the many facets of Stowe Park, Buckinghamshire, are relatively straightforward to explain. They are like works of art in themselves. But many views are likely to be the unplanned cumulative products of history, with a more complicated, composite character. Some views of this kind may be focused strongly on a few prominent assets, such as a place of worship with a tower, spire or dome, while others may include a much broader mixture, such as a streetscape, a skyline or a river valley. An example of detailed practical advice, which I have been especially concerned with, is an approach to assessing the impact on views of proposed development called Seeing the History in the View. English Heritage published this in draft form for consultation in 2008, and many useful comments have been received. It sets out a method of analysing views to provide knowledge and understanding of their significance, as a baseline. Once that has been done, this baseline can be drawn on in particular cases to assess the likely impact on that significance of any proposed development. The first task is to establish a viewing place and, within that, viewpoints and assessment points. There may be one, several, or continually shifting viewpoints. The next task is to identify and weigh up the significance of the different elements in the view, which may not all be designated assets. It is important to consider the ways in which the significance of the whole view may be greater than simply the sum of its parts. The last task, when a specific development is proposed, will be to assess the visual impact of this development on what has been identified as significant in the view. English Heritage commissioned Land Use Consultants in 2007 to help develop and write the first draft of the guidance. Devising this guidance has helped me and my colleagues to a better understanding of the factors at work in the heritage value of certain views and their consistent assessment. Experience shows that while everyone may agree that a development will have some effect on the historic environment, it is difficult to evaluate the locus and extent of benefit or harm. Achieving consistency in this and ensuring that fair, balanced and reasonable assessments are made is crucial to sound planning decisions. The English Heritage approach is to help all parties to assess visual impact based on a common understanding of essentials, establishing facts, and reducing the scope for unnecessary differences of judgement. The approach is not to impose or dictate a particular judgement, for planning decisions are ultimately the responsibility of the local planning authority and other authorities. This kind of analysis is most urgently needed in large cities, especially London, where redevelopment and innovation are constant. Of course, development may remove eyesores and enhance a view. Views in a large city like London present perhaps the best opportunity for new architecture to make a bold and positive contribution to the scene. By contrast, views in smaller and more vulnerable places, smaller towns and villages, rural landscapes, parks and gardens, and on the coast, are by their nature less likely to be able to accommodate radical innovation. In London, the most dramatic innovation of our time has been tall buildings. English Heritage and CABE have suggested area studies, to enable proper assessment of proposed tall buildings (2007). Although planning authorities are advised to identify areas which are either appropriate or too sensitive for tall buildings, to date the level of detail provided in many local development frameworks has been insufficient. English Heritage’s London Region is intending to help support this process in the London boroughs by developing a best practice note on the most appropriate way for individual boroughs to plan ahead for tall buildings. The London Plan, the Mayor of London’s spatial development strategy, is supported by the London
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=