Research and Conservation Making Connections Local Delivery 1

Research and Conservation Making Connections Local Delivery 1

SGT – Current Approach • SGT Conservation Committee. Joint Chairmen Roger Dowty and Jim Stockwell + 5 others • Current work – mainly reviewing planning applications affecting Registered parks and gardens identified from TGT weekly list or in some cases directly from Local Planning Authorities (LPAs), SGT members/public • Some 14 applications considered in the past 6 months • Process involves: – Preliminary review by Roger or Jim (planning application, historic and contemporary maps, the HE Register entry and SGT research report where available) – Further more detailed review if merited involving others – Formal comments submitted online and copied to TGT 2

Case Study – New Housing near Borde Hill • 210 new houses near Grade II* park • SGT objected Re tree screening • Several meetings held and developer amended the landscape management plan • LPA refused permission - but on appeal the inspector granted permission 3

Case Study – New House at Kidbrooke Park • In May, SGT commented that the design was unsympathetic to the setting in a Gd II* registered park & made two other recommendations • In Sept, SGT welcomed a revised plan & repeated the two earlier recommendations 4

How are Planning Applications Assessed? • The process is set out in legislation and described in a detailed guidance document called the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) • Significance the key concept • Applicants are required to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting • In determining planning applications LPAs should take account of the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets 5

Gap Analysis • The statutory process is limited to registered sites and we don’t yet have a process to identify planning applications affecting non-registered sites • Sometimes LPAs fail to consult TGT anyway! • Financial challenges mean LPAs have limited resources. • SGT research is not very visible to owners, developers and planners – Planning staff don’t look at entries on the PGUK website – Only a few LPAs include parks and gardens on their Local Lists – Few sites are included on Historic Environment Records (HERs) 6

Sussex Local Planning Authorities 14 LPAs in Sussex, including: • South Downs National Park • Brighton and Hove • 7 in West Sussex • 5 in East Sussex 7

Gap Analysis – What can we do? • TGT Leaflet soon to be distributed • Ensure new research reports include a Statement of Significance • Work with LPS staff to add sites to Local Lists and if possible HERs • Check weekly lists for each LPA • Review and comment on draft Local Plans • Review past SGT research – are there gaps and is the significance of the site described 8

Case Study: Lime Park, Herstmonceaux • Application for 70 new houses on land adjacent to Lime Park • Lime Park is an unregistered park, but it has been researched by SGT • Based the research report & site visit, SGT made an objection because of the adverse visual effect on the setting 9

Moving Forward • Ensure research and conservation work closely linked • Find volunteers to help with existing conservation casework and begin to look at LPA weekly lists to identify planning applications affecting non-registered sites • Ensure future research reports include a Statement of Significance • Build relationships with LPA – perhaps using the new TGT leaflet as a trigger • Liaise with LPAs to add sites to Local Lists • Continue with the scanning project so SGT research reports can easily be shared with SGT volunteers 10