ASSOCIATION OF GARDENS TRUSTS
CONSERVATION
AND PLANNING REPORT
Since our last report in September 2008 the following have been progressed/noted= :
The Marine Bill &
Coastal Access – parks and gardens will not be included in the ri=
ght
of coastal access but Natural England is to draw up guidelines as to what
should be included in the definition of parks or garden. While EH can
identify those coastal parks and gardens on their Register, they are also
concerned with those of local and regional historic significance, particula=
rly
where they contribute to local character and distinctiveness and where new
access could adversely impact on their historic significance and design
qualities. If you have local knowledge of parks and gardens that exte=
nd
along the coastline and/or go down to the shore in your county then please =
let
us know. We have already circulated information to the conservation contacts
about the need for identification of the parks and gardens with coastal
Garden Grabbing:
The Government said the fundamental elements of the Bill remained intact including the new planning system for major infrastructure projects but the amendment was unnecessa= ry. A Communities and Local Government spokesperson said: "There is simply= no need for additional legislation. We believe this amendment takes away = from local authorities the power to make their own balanced judgments based on t= heir knowledge of the overall needs of the local area. Local authorities h= ave always had the power to turn down applications for inappropriate housing development in
2.
bac= k gardens and new planning rules (Planning Policy Statement 3) that came into force in April last year have strengthened those powers further. In particular, councils have now b= een given the ability to set local policies that specifically protect gardens a= nd to separate gardens out from their wider Brownfield development targets."
- Government Review We have been pleased to learn that despite the Commons overturning the Lords amendment to the then Planning Bill the Government has decided to carry out= a review to see whether action is needed to tackle ‘garden grabbingR= 17; by developers. This is due to begin this month (January 2009).=
All Landscapes Matte=
r –&nbs=
p; a
draft policy from Natural England. The AGT is in the process of
formulating a response (it links with AGT Conference on the European Landsc=
ape
– Crossing Boundaries, held in April 2008). The deadline for the
consultation is the beginning of March. The policy is on the Natural
England website: http://w=
ww.naturalengland.org.
EH now has a program= me for trainees (DCMS funded). Trainees from various backgrounds will have two years internal training wit= h EH to equip them with a broad range of experience and expertise. It is h= oped that they can then work with local authorities. This is a three-year programme with 10 trainees taken on each year. Yorkshire Gardens Trus= t has offered parks and gardens assistance to the EH York office. AGT/CGTs could liase re assistance with their regional EH office.
HERITAGE CHAMPIONS CONFERENCE, hosted by English Heritage
Attended by Sally Wa= lker
The aim of the conferen= ce was to inform and encourage the Heritage Champions in their role, as the histor= ic environment plays an important part in meeting shared local and national priorities for growth, regeneration and community engagement. <= /p>
Champions and the= DCMS Agenda:&nbs= p; Talk by Harry Reeves, Head of Architectural and the Historic Environment, Department of Culture Media and Sport (DCMS)
Mr Reeves commenced his= talk by saying that he recognised that there were concerns among the consultees regarding the Heritage Protection Bill (HPB) but felt that some controversy= was inevitable. He acknowledged that there were many who felt that there were not enough resources available to oper= ate as required, including the lack of conservation officers and properly train= ed staff.
Regarding funding issue= s, the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) was insisting that the DCMS makes a reasonable assumption of funding and that it has to provide the sums required. The DCMS wants to simplify the system, with a si= ngle list and system that is more transparent. There was a need to inform owners about their responsibilities.
3.
Andy Burnham, Minister,= DCMS, has stated that reform will continue despite any delays in the Bill. There are issues of cultural values versus economic values and it was necessary to encourage people to understand the value of the historic environment.
Champions and tha= t CLG agenda:&nbs= p; The Planning Policy Statement (PPS) replacing Planning Policy Guidance (PPG= s) 15 (Historic Environment) and 16
(Archaeology) Talk by Ruth Marshall, Planning Directorate, DCLG.
The priorities for the = new PPS were:
Place shaping – a vision for the future
Priorities, policies an= d land allocations
Framework for private investment and regeneration
To co-ordinate the publ= ic sector elements of the vision.
There is a need to chan= ge, the present system being too complex, too divorced from customer focus. The aim was to create a more strategic and clearer vision and to maximise the contribution of heritage assets to ‘the spirit of= the place’.
Local Development Frame= works (LDF): There are to be documents to support the historic environment and decisions as to the weight they will have, to be called Supplementary Planning Documents. An LDF’s Core Strategy vision should highlight the issues contained within the SPDs and signposts = from the Core Strategy should refer to them. Design guides are also useful tools. Local Authorities should get to know their amenity societies and use their expertise.
Planning authorities sh= ould plan positively for a high level of design, as stated in PPS1. Also documents should be developed that demonstrated the value of the heritage.
Heritage Protecti= on for the 21st Century: Peter Beacham, Heritage Protection Director, English Heritage
Val, Sally and Kate
Conservation Group, AGT=
February 2009&nb= sp;