Salisbury Plain Army Basing Programme 8. CULTURAL HERITAGE 8.1 Introduction This chapter presents an outline appraisal of known cultural heritage assets within the various sites that form part of the Army Basing Programme on Salisbury Plain. It also assesses the potential impacts from the proposed developments on the cultural heritage resource which consists of archaeology, built heritage and the historic landscape. This chapter represents the environmental appraisal of the recommended site options for the SFA, garrison sites and training areas. The impact assessment of the now discarded sites is preserved in Appendix 8C. 8.2 Policy Context Prior to 2006, developments on MOD land were subject to Crown Immunity and therefore not subject to planning legislation. Crown Immunity was revoked in 2006 and ensured that the Crown was required to comply with the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (DCLG Circular 02/2006) 1. The removal of Crown Immunity means that developments where there may be an impact upon the character or fabric of a listed building are now subject to the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 2 and are required to apply for listed building consent. The Act imposes a duty on the Secretary of State to compile lists of buildings of special architectural or historic interest. In consideration of proposals within the setting of Listed Buildings, the 1990 Act establishes a requirement to have special regard to the desirability of preserving that setting (Section 66). Section 72 of the 1990 Act establishes a desirability to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of a conservation area. A conservation area is an area of local interest designated principally by the Local Planning Authority. Crown Immunity is still in force with regards to the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 3. This removes the requirement for Scheduled Monument Consent with regards to applications which directly impact upon a Scheduled Monument. It is MOD policy to replace this with a requirement for Scheduled Monument Clearance (under CLG 02/06). This is a more streamlined process which takes into consideration the specific requirements of Crown Land but remains as a formal application process to English Heritage and the Secretary of State who will respond directly to applications. This also provides the opportunity to establish Standing Clearance Permissions, an agreement between the MOD and English Heritage and the Secretary of State, which defines categories of minor works which can be undertaken without making an application for specific Scheduled Monument Clearance, providing they adhere to the terms of the Standing Clearance agreement. English Heritage is enabled by Section 8C of the Historic Buildings and Ancient Monuments Act 1953 4 (introduced by paragraph 10 of Schedule 4, of the National Heritage Act 1983 5) to 1 DCLG 2006, Crown Application of the Planning Acts Circular 02/2006 . 2 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. TSO. London 3 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979. TSO. London. 4 Historic Buildings and Ancient Monuments Act 1953. TSO. London. OVERARCHING ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL CULTURAL HERITAGE 8-1 Salisbury Plain Army Basing Programme compile a Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in England. Although designated of national interest, a park or garden on the register is not otherwise statutorily protected, although Local Planning Authorities are required to include policies for their protection in their Local Plan. The principles of the Protection of Military Remains Act 1986 6 may apply to any previously unidentified military aircraft crash site discovered as part of the baseline studies. If this does occur, the wreckage will not be disturbed unless necessary. If disturbance is required to allow development to proceed, the regulations of the Act will be followed in full. 8.2.1 Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill 2013 The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill was passed in 2013. The bill brings in a number of legal reforms in relation to the historic environment, particularly listed buildings and conservation areas. The aim is to make heritage protection more efficient and effective by removing legislative burdens. The main tenets of the bill include the simplification of conservation area consent by removing the requirement for separate applications for both planning consent and for conservation area consent. It also addresses listed buildings through the improvement of listing descriptions to identify which elements are significant, allowing other elements to be specifically excluded. Further reform will see the establishment of Listed Building Orders which will enable the authorisation of particular schemes of work without a requirement for Listed Building Consent. 8.2.2 National and Local Policy National Planning Policy Framework (2012) 7 The NPPF sets out Government planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. Section 12 of the NPPF sets out the importance of being able to assess the significance of heritage assets that may be affected by a development. Significance is defined in Annex 2 as being the, “ value of an asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. This interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic interest .” The definition of significance provided in Annex 2 also clearly states that significance is not only derived from an asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting. The setting of a heritage asset is defined in Annex 2 as, “ the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve .” Paragraphs 128 and 129 of the NPPF state that when determining applications, local authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of assets that may be affected by a development, to a level of detail that is proportionate to their importance and that is no more than sufficient to understand the potential impact on their significance; this should also include assets where their setting may be affected by a proposal. Paragraph 132 recognises that heritage assets are irreplaceable and that where proposed development may impact on the significance of designated heritage assets, great weight should be placed on its conservation; the more important the asset, the greater the weight 5 National Heritage Act 1983. TSO. London 6 Protection of Military Remains Act 1986. TSO. London. 7 National Planning Policy Framework 2012. DCLG. London OVERARCHING ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL CULTURAL HERITAGE 8-2 Salisbury Plain Army Basing Programme should be. Substantial harm to or loss of assets of the highest significance, for example scheduled monuments, registered battlefields, Grade I and II* listed buildings, registered parks and gardens and World Heritage Sites should be wholly exceptional. The NPPF notes that alteration or destruction of a heritage asset or development within its setting can harm its significance. Where substantial harm is found, substantial public benefits must be achieved to outweigh this loss. The NPPF sets out four tests in paragraph 133 for local authorities to consider when assessing applications of this nature. The NPPF states that the effect of a planning application on non-designated heritage assets should be taken into account when considering the application. Paragraph 135 sets out the need for a balanced judgement between the significance of the heritage assets and the scale of any harm or loss, when considering assets directly or indirectly affected by proposed development. At paragraph 139, the NPPF recognises that non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest may be of equivalent significance to a scheduled monument. In such cases the NPPF directs that such assets are to be considered subject to the policies for designated assets. Development with the potential to impact upon World Heritage Sites or their setting is addressed in paragraphs 137 and 138. Paragraph 137 states the importance for local planning authorities to treat more favourably those proposals which seek to preserve the elements of the setting which make a positive contribution to or better reveal the significance of World Heritage Sites. Paragraph 138 recognises that not all elements of a World Heritage Site contribute to its significance. It requires a local planning authority to carefully look at development proposals which could impact upon World Heritage Sites and if the loss or removal of any part of an element or building which contributes to the significance is proposed, the test of substantial or less than substantial harm of paragraphs 132 and 133 should apply as appropriate to the asset, and its contribution to the overall significance. Conversely then, the removal of a structure or element which does not contribute to the overall significance should be viewed more favourably, under the guide of paragraph 137. National Planning Policy Guidance (2014) 8 The NPPG was published as a web-based resource in March 2014. This document provides up to date advice for the application of the policies within the NPPF. Guidance related to heritage issues is provided in the conserving and enhancing the historic environment section of the guide. The NPPG starts by reiterating the importance of conserving the historic environment as stated in the NPPF: “ Protecting and enhancing the historic environment is an important component of the National Planning