FAQs

The current Planning Practice Guidance defines a heritage asset as a:

‘Building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having heritage significance’.

Heritage assets can be divided up into designated assets (such as a listed building, conservation area, or scheduled monument) or non-designated assets identified through local planning policy. The difference in important as some designated heritage assets require their own type of permission (e.g. listed building consent).

Importantly, not everything from our past is formally identified as a heritage asset. To be defined as a heritage something must have a degree of ‘significance’. Designated heritage assets are generally considered to be of national, if not regional, significance. Non-designated heritage assets are of local significance.

Importantly, the weight afforded to the conservation of a heritage asset in planning decisions is proportionate to the significance of an asset.

A listed building is the most common type of designated heritage asset. It a structure that has been placed on the National Heritage List for England because of its ‘special architectural and/or historic interest’. They can be anything from stately homes to sculptures and milestones.

To find out if you building is listed and some information about it visit: Search the List: Map Search | Historic England

In legal terms, the character of a listed building is ‘desirable to preserve’. Preserve has been identified by the Courts as ‘to do no harm’. Changes that might alter the special character of a listed building require a specific permission: Listed Building Consent.

If the works proposed are considered to be ‘development’, as defined by Section 55 (1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, then planning permission is also required. Development is defined as:

“the carrying out of building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on, over or under land, or the making of any material change in the use of any buildings or other land.”

The two consents are a bit confusing, but don’t worry as applications for listed building consent and planning permission are typically combined on one application.

Non-designated heritage assets are defined as:

“Buildings, monuments, sites, places, areas or landscapes identified by plan-making bodies as having a degree of heritage significance meriting consideration in planning decisions but which do not meet the criteria for designated heritage assets.“

Local Planning Authorities are responsible for identifying non-designated heritage assets. Some councils keep a ‘Local List’ of them, around 50% don’t. Regardless, a non-designated heritage asset can be identified at any time, including during an application process.

What is absolutely critical, and sometimes missed, is that the process of identifying a non-designated heritage asset must be transparent and based on a clear set of criteria.

It’s not unusual for developers to disagree with local authorities whether a building or other feature is or is not a non-designated heritage asset, especially as it can affect the outcome of a planning permission.

A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) is the main tool that we use to support applications for listed building consent and planning permission. Something of a shorter version is called a Heritage Statement.

There is industry guidance about the production of Heritage Impact Assessments and it’s important that they are thorough, undertaken by a competent person, and provide the local authority with enough information to work with.

The most important aspect of an HIA is to articulate what makes a heritage asset significant, as this forms the baseline for understanding if and how proposed works will or will not impact upon the significance of a heritage asset. An HIA should set out what is and what isn’t of interest, why it is interesting, and how important that interest is. When we understand the nature, level and extent of an asset’s significance we can then start advising on future change.

An HIA will go on to evaluate the impact of a scheme upon the significance of a heritage asset.

Finally, in conjunction with other consultants, an HIA should provide a justification for the works proposed, including any harm that will arise. This case for change is often missed out. Instead, the justification is best considered from the outset to give an application the best chance of obtaining permission.

It’s something of an industry joke that heritage consultants always talk about harm! Unfortunately it is the adopted term in policy, so that’s why we use it.

Harm means that proposed change will detrimentally alter the significance of a heritage asset. Very often proposed changes will have a neutral impact on a heritage asset’s significance or may even enhance it.

Where harm occurs, it falls into two categories which are important to note:

Less than substantial harm is the most common category, and you’ll often here it expressed as ‘towards the lower or higher end of the scale’. The degree of impact depends on the level of harm caused to the significance of the asset.

Substantial harm is a high test, and is where a key element of an asset’s significance is seriously impacted upon. Complete demolition is almost always classed as substantial harm, but the degree of harm really relates to the impact of proposed works on the significance of the asset rather then the scale of works.

Can I cause harm to a heritage asset? Yes, you can. However you’ll likely need permission to do so, and harm will need to be clearly justified. Finally, you’ll need to outweigh the degree of any harm by the public benefits from a scheme.