A Matter of Degree: Significance, Spatial A Matter of Degree: Significance, Spatial Planning, and the Historic EnvironmentPlanning, and the Historic Environment

Kae Neustadt, Kae Neustadt, BA, MABA, MA

Centre for Archaeology, Anthropology and Centre for Archaeology, Anthropology and HeritageHeritage

School of Conservation SciencesSchool of Conservation SciencesBournemouth UniversityBournemouth University

Significance:What does it matter what matters? The act of ‘valuing’ is embedded into

human nature Heritage resources are finite Development and change are inevitable Governments are accountable Decisions must be made Transparency in decision-making is required “If you do not understand what is important,

how can you possibly make decisions about it?”

The first step in an effective heritage protection system is “identifying those aspects of the past that are most important to us and explaining why they are important.”

Planning and Significance How to meet the demands

of the modern world without sacrificing history, identity, and a ‘sense of place’?

Necessary to answer this question to be able to achieve “sustainability.”

Everyday decisions relating to development control and infrastructure maintenance must answer this question.

Planning and Consents: Where does the Historic Environment fit in? National Level: Planning Policy Statements (to replace

Planning Policy Guidance Notes) General policy guidance such as PPG 15/16

Regional Level: Regional Spatial Strategies Must contain a vision statement, a spatial strategy with a key in

diagrammatic form, sustainability appraisal and an implementation plan.

Other strategies may be integral with the RSS, but prepared as separate plans and documents

May be sub-regional or extra-regional. Regional authorities develop regional plans, but also involve county

authorities, national parks, unitary districts, and others.

Planning and Consents: Where does the Historic Environment fit in? cont’d Local Development Framework

Includes local development schemes, statements of community involvement, site-specific allocations and proposal maps, monitoring reports, planning zones, and supplementary documents.

Long-term spatial strategies and broad policies. The historic environment is not specifically addressed.

Development Control Should refer to the local development plan/ framework. Most of the day-to-day planning operations fall under this

category. Heritage management is a critical issue at this level.

Planning and Consents: Where does the Historic Environment fit in? cont’d Archaeology, Listed Building Consent, and

Scheduled Ancient Monument Consent. Case-by-case consideration May correspond to development control measures and

planning permissions, but are not the same Perceptions of limited options: excavate archaeological

sites, refuse other requests. Other types of heritage resources (parks and gardens,

battlefields, conservation areas, trees and woodlands, AONB) will have separate procedures and guidelines which may be apart from listed building/ SAM consent procedures.

The intersection of Heritage and Planning Legislation is based on the presumption

in favour of preservation of “special architectural and historic interest” (per PPG 15/16)

Therefore, these special architectural and historic elements must be defined in order to comply with heritage management legislation.

Decisions taken in the course of development control have long-term impacts and can profoundly effect societal welfare and quality of life.

Significance and value are thus the cornerstones of developing proactive and sustainable plans for the management of the historic environment.

The case for and against valuing significance

FOR Ease and transparency

in decision making Platform for public

input Ability to prioritize

management needs Increased opportunity

for education and promotion

Management & Planning Issues

AGAINST Significance varies

depending on individual perceptions

Fear of introducing bias into the system

Desire to remain ‘scientific’ in approaches to heritage management

Fear of creating an imperfect system

Academic & Theoretical Issues

The Big Philosophical Questions Does the historic environment

have any inherent value absent human perception?

If it does not, whose perception matters when determining what the best treatment for the historic environment?

Ask yourself: Is this trip necessary?

Bridging the Gap A tool for planning and

management of the historic environment, easily accessible in a format understood by heritage management professionals, planners, and presentable to the general public.

Something that could build on what has already been done by other amenity organisations and can adapt to the changing needs and resources of both planning and heritage management.

A tool that can be both locally specific and cross-sectoral.

Historic Landscape Characterisation: A Holistic Approach HLC was designed to be a

comprehensive approach to the historic landscape.

Practical tool for planning and management.

HLC is presented as a value-neutral approach to the historic landscape.

In practice, HLC “permits all degrees of importance to be considered against differing spatial and temporal parameters, relating importance for its own sake to importance for its contribution to the present, and to local character.” (Bishop 1999).

How does HLC address value and significance?

HLC is mostly informative – it provides information without guidance.

Begins with the premise that all is of interest and value (Herring 2007).

An alternative approach is to look at change in terms of being consistent or divergent from the inherited character of the landscape (Lake 2007).

Most HLCs, however, do not currently provide guidance regarding value or sensitivity to change.

The Role of English Heritage’s Conservation Principles The historic environment is a shared resource Everyone should be able to participate in sustaining the

historic environment Understanding the significance of places is vital Significant places should be managed to sustain their values Decisions about change must be reasonable, transparent, and

consistent Documenting and learning from decisions is essential

How to Evaluate Historic Resources: English Heritage’s Heritage Values

Evidential Value Historical Value

Illustrative Associative

Aesthetic Value Design

Communal Value Commemoration and

symbolism Social value Spiritual value

Assessing Significance from Heritage Values Consideration: fabric and evolution

Material remains, change over time, documentary evidence, archaeological evidence

Consideration: Who and Why Values Engagement with stakeholders Understanding history and human behaviour

Consideration: relative importance of values Consideration: contribution of associated materials Consideration: contribution of setting and context Consideration: comparison with other places sharing

similar values.

Evaluating Significance:A US Example

Legal definition of ‘historic’ Buildings, District, Site,

Structure, Object Significance is relative, but

against a set of fixed criteria Criteria (with

considerations) + integrity = significance

Significance = Eligibility (for the National Register)

Evaluating Significance:A US Example Significance is evaluated

against criteria set out by the Keeper of the National Register of Historic Places, known as “National Register Criteria” A: associations with

important events B: associations with

significant individuals C: design and construction D: information potential

Must also be evaluated for integrity of: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.

Eligibility Analysis Matrix (Arizona)Criteria Building District Site Structure Object

A. Event/ History LocationMaterialsFeelingAssociation

LocationSetting Feeling Association

LocationSetting FeelingAssociation

Location Materials Feeling Association

MaterialsFeeling Association

B. Person MaterialsFeelingAssociation

LocationSettingMaterials

LocationSetting Association

MaterialsFeelingAssociation

MaterialsFeeling Association

C. Design/ Construction

DesignWorkmanshipMaterialsFeeling

Setting DesignFeelingMaterials

SettingDesignFeeling

DesignWorkmanshipMaterials Feeling

DesignWorkmanshipMaterialsFeeling

D. Information Potential

WorkmanshipMaterials

LocationMaterials

LocationMaterials

WorkmanshipMaterials

MaterialsWorkmanship

© Jim Garrison, Arizona SHPO

Using the Matrix: An Arizona Example The Wigwam Motel, Holbrook,

Arizona (US Route 66). Built in 1950, listed on the National

Register 2002. Eligible under Criteria A & C

Integrity of Location, Design, Materials, Workmanship, Feeling and Association.

Should change be proposed, these aspects of integrity are the ones that must be protected.

Reviewing proposed change

Materials (change would need to use sympathetic materials to those originally used)

Design (change would need to be sympathetic to the ‘wigwam’ design and those design aspects characteristic of 1950’s tourist motor-hotels associated with Route 66)

Workmanship (again, change would need to be sympathetic to the original – adding pre-fab aluminium clad outbuildings probably wouldn’t be acceptable)

Feeling & Association (harder to define, but changes that would alter the feeling of the 1950’s motor-hotel, the Route 66 ‘experience’, and such, would not be allowed)

Should change be proposed for the Wigwam (don’t worry, this is completely hypothetical), designers would need to respect:

Location (could not be moved from its location, as association with Route 66 is highly significant; could not be moved from roadside, as transportation association is important)

English Heritage’s Heritage Values as Criteria for Evaluating Significance Fabric

Physical remains/ materials

Time Depth Documentary Evidence Associated Materials

Artifacts, paintings, literary reference, etc.

Setting/Context

Comparability With similar properties, in

terms of preservation, uniqueness, representativeness, or group value

Relative Value Compared to other properties

(not necessarily similar)

Public Value Use

Continuation of traditional use

Heritage Value Listed Building Scheduled Ancient Monument

Archaeological Site

Evidential FabricTime depthDocumentary evidencePublic value

FabricTime depthSetting/ContextPublic value

FabricTime depthAssociated materialsRelative importanceComparability

Historical

Associative

Documentary evidenceFabricAssociated materialsSetting/ ContextPublic ValueUse

FabricDocumentary evidenceAssociated materialsSetting/ ContextPublic Value

FabricTime depthAssociated materialsSetting/ contextRelative importanceComparability

Illustrative

FabricRelative ImportanceComparability

FabricRelative ImportanceComparability

FabricSetting/contextRelative ImportanceComparability

Aesthetic

Designed

FabricComparabilityPublic Value

FabricComparabilityPublic Value

FabricComparabilityPublic Value

Organic development

FabricTime DepthSetting/ContextComparabilityPublic Value

FabricTime DepthSetting/contextComparabilityPublic Value

FabricTime Depth (perceived)

Setting/contextPublic Value

Communal Commemorative/ Symbolic

Public ValueUse

Public ValueUnlikely to be applicable

Public ValueUnlikely to be applicable

Social Public ValueUseTime Depth

Public ValueUseTime Depth

Public ValueUseTime Depth

Spiritual Public ValueUse

Public ValueUse

Public ValueUse

Summary Spatial planning and development control measures do not

always provide adequate guidance for addressing the historic environment.

Planning decisions require judgments to be made about the value and importance of historic resources. If archaeological professionals are not making these judgments, someone else will.

Historic Landscape Characterisation has the potential to act as a platform and a tool to bridge the gap between planning and heritage management.

In order for HLC to fulfill this role, the issue of significance needs to be addressed.

Significance can be addressed by applying the concepts and guidelines already developed.

THANK YOU