CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 6 Appendix 4 24/04/2020

AGENDA ITEM 6

APPENDIX 4

DRAFT CUL­TUR­AL HER­IT­AGE NON-STAT­UTORY GUIDANCE

PLAN­NING Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2020 Non-stat­utory guid­ance: Policy 9 – Cul­tur­al Heritage

Cairngorms NATION­AL PARK

Con­tents How to use this guid­ance Intro­duc­tion and con­text. Safe­guard­ing cul­tur­al her­it­age — gen­er­al prin­ciples .3 Repair and restore for re-use 5 Re-pur­pose 6 Replace 6 Cul­tur­al her­it­age interests in the Park. .7 Sched­uled Monu­ments 7 Con­ser­va­tion Areas. 8 Lis­ted build­ings and struc­tures. 10 Planned towns 10 Invent­ory Gar­dens and Designed Land­scapes || Bat­tle­fields. 12 Archae­ology and Nation­al Monu­ments Record sites 12 Build­ings at Risk Register (BARR) 13 Fea­tures of loc­al import­ance 14 Sup­port­ing inform­a­tion for plan­ning applic­a­tions. 14 Oth­er con­sid­er­a­tions.. 16

How to use this guid­ance This non-stat­utory guid­ance forms part of the Cairngorms Nation­al Park Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan 2020 and applies to all plan­ning applic­a­tions with­in the Cairngorms Nation­al Park. The Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan is avail­able via https://​cairngorms​.co​.uk/​p​l​a​n​ning- devel­op­ment/­loc­al-devel­op­ment-plan- 2020/ and should be read along­side this guidance.

This guid­ance should be used dur­ing the pre­par­a­tion and assess­ment of plan­ning applic­a­tions to ensure that the require­ments of Policy 9 are met.

Intro­duc­tion and con­text Policy 9 of the Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan’ applies to all devel­op­ment and provides the frame­work for how con­sid­er­a­tion of cul­tur­al her­it­age interests should be incor­por­ated into devel­op­ment proposals.

Note, policy word­ing may change fol­low­ing the exam­in­a­tion of the Pro­posed Plan. Policy 9 – Cul­tur­al her­it­age 9.1 Lis­ted buildings

Devel­op­ment affect­ing a lis­ted build­ing or its set­ting should: a) pre­serve the spe­cial qual­it­ies of the build­ing or struc­ture; and

b) enhance its char­ac­ter, and the con­tri­bu­tion it makes to the cul­tur­al her­it­age of the Nation­al Park.

The lay­out, design, mater­i­als, scale, sit­ing and use of any devel­op­ment must be appro­pri­ate to the char­ac­ter and appear­ance of the build­ing and its setting.

There is a pre­sump­tion against demoli­tion or oth­er works that adversely affect the spe­cial interest of a lis­ted build­ing or its setting.

Where devel­op­ment would res­ult in a sig­ni­fic­ant adverse impact, the pro­pos­al must: a) demon­strate that less intrus­ive options have been con­sidered; b) demon­strate that the impacts are clearly out­weighed by social and eco­nom­ic bene­fits; and

c) min­im­ise and mit­ig­ate any adverse effects on the asset or its set­ting through appro­pri­ate sit­ing, lay­out, scale, design and construction.

Any pro­pos­als for the demoli­tion of a lis­ted build­ing will be expec­ted to provide evid­ence to demon­strate that:

a) the build­ing is not of spe­cial interest; or

b) the build­ing is incap­able of repair; or

c) the demoli­tion of the build­ing is essen­tial to deliv­er­ing sig­ni­fic­ant bene­fits to eco­nom­ic growth or the wider com­munity; or

d) the repair of the build­ing is not eco­nom­ic­ally viable and that it has been mar­keted at a price reflect­ing its loc­a­tion and con­di­tion to poten­tial restor­ing pur­chasers for a reas­on­able period.

Enabling devel­op­ment will be con­sidered favour­ably where it provides a means of provid­ing funds to secure the pre­ser­va­tion of a lis­ted build­ing which is in ser­i­ous risk of col­lapse or irre­voc­able decay. Such devel­op­ment should be used only after all altern­at­ive means of fund­ing or enabling have been exhausted. Any such devel­op­ment will be the min­im­um required to secure the building’s res­tor­a­tion. 9.2 Cul­tur­al and his­tor­ic des­ig­na­tions Devel­op­ment affect­ing a sched­uled monu­ment, invent­ory garden, designed land­scape and/​or bat­tle­field should: a) have no adverse effect on a struc­ture or oth­er remains of human activ­ity or their set­ting. This may require remains to be pre­served in situ, with­in an appro­pri­ate set­ting; and

b) con­serve and where appro­pri­ate, enhance any struc­ture or oth­er remains; and enhance its char­ac­ter, and the con­tri­bu­tion it makes to the cul­tur­al her­it­age of the Nation­al Park.

Devel­op­ment affect­ing a sched­uled monu­ment should require remains to be pre­served in situ and in an appro­pri­ate set­ting unless excep­tion­al cir­cum­stances can be demon­strated to the sat­is­fac­tion of the authority.

Devel­op­ment affect­ing an invent­ory bat­tle­field should be designed to con­serve and, where appro­pri­ate, enhance the key land­scape char­ac­ter­ist­ics and spe­cial qual­it­ies of the des­ig­na­tion. 9.3 Con­ser­va­tion areas Devel­op­ment in or affect­ing a con­ser­va­tion area should:

a) pre­serve or enhance its char­ac­ter and appear­ance; and

b) use design, mater­i­als, scale, lay­out and sit­ing appro­pri­ate to the site and its set­ting. There will be a pre­sump­tion against devel­op­ment which would res­ult in the loss of a build­ing with­in a con­ser­va­tion area which makes a pos­it­ive con­tri­bu­tion to its char­ac­ter. Pro­pos­als for demoli­tion should demon­strate that attempts for the building’s reten­tion, res­tor­a­tion or sym­path­et­ic con­ver­sion to anoth­er com­pat­ible use have been considered.

Giv­en the import­ance of design mat­ters plan­ning per­mis­sion in prin­ciple will not be con­sidered appro­pri­ate. 9.4 Oth­er cul­tur­al her­it­age Devel­op­ment affect­ing a site, fea­ture or use of land of loc­al or wider cul­tur­al, his­tor­ic or archae­olo­gic­al sig­ni­fic­ance or its set­ting should:

a) con­serve and enhance the fea­ture and its set­ting in situ where pos­sible; or

b) take reas­on­able meas­ures to avoid, min­im­ise and mit­ig­ate any adverse effects. 2

The cul­tur­al her­it­age of the Nation­al Park is an integ­ral part of what makes the Park spe­cial. All devel­op­ment pro­pos­als must demon­strate how they have avoided adverse effects on cul­tur­al her­it­age fea­tures and interests. The fol­low­ing sec­tions of this guid­ance provide advice on what needs to be con­sidered and provides links to use­ful sources of information.

In addi­tion to using this guid­ance, cross ref­er­ence to oth­er Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan policies and their guid­ance (where present) will be required to ensure that rel­ev­ant issues are con­sidered. For example, Policy 3 design and place­mak­ing, Policy 4 nat­ur­al her­it­age and Policy 5 land­scape may apply. Safe­guard­ing cul­tur­al her­it­age — gen­er­al prin­ciples Cul­tur­al her­it­age con­sists ofstruc­tures and oth­er remains res­ult­ing from human activ­ity of all peri­ods, lan­guage, tra­di­tions, ways of life and the his­tor­ic, artist­ic and lit­er­ary asso­ci­ations of people, places and land­scapes. It includes build­ings, struc­tures, land­scapes, archae­ology as well as fea­tures such as wells, vet­er­an trees, tra­di­tion­al meet­ing places, ancient routes (fig­ure 1) and places men­tioned in folk lore.

cc-by-sa/2.0‑Glen Isla from the Cat­er­an… by Rob Bu q.uk/p/1112614 Fig­ure I — Cat­er­an trail near Glen Isla in Angus, fol­low­ing ancient tracks & drove roads Some cul­tur­al her­it­age interests have offi­cial recog­ni­tion and leg­al pro­tec­tion, for example lis­ted build­ings, con­ser­va­tion areas and sched­uled monu­ments. These interests require spe­cial con­sent from the plan­ning author­ity before oth­er per­mis­sions (such as plan­ning per­mis­sion) can be sought. More details about spe­cial con­sents can be found in the

Cul­tur­al her­it­age interests in the Park sec­tion of this guid­ance. Part of the first aim of the Nation­al Park set out in the found­ing legis­la­tion is to con­serve and enhance cul­tur­al her­it­age. The key to con­serving the cul­tur­al her­it­age of the Park is man­aging change in an appro­pri­ate way. Cul­tur­al her­it­age interests should there­fore be safe­guarded in a way that con­serves their qual­it­ies, enhan­cing where appro­pri­ate, with a view to ensur­ing the long term future of the cul­tur­al her­it­age interest for the bene­fit of the cur­rent and future generations.

The best way to con­serve a build­ing or struc­ture of cul­tur­al sig­ni­fic­ance is to keep it in act­ive use. Every effort should be made to find solu­tions that allow unused build­ings or struc­tures to come back into use, or to be adap­ted a sim­il­ar use without dam­age to their char­ac­ter and that of the wider area. If re-use is not feas­ible, re- devel­op­ment to an altern­at­ive pur­pose may be appro­pri­ate where the works are com­pat­ible with the con­ser­va­tion and enhance­ment of the wider cul­tur­al her­it­age in the area. Replace­ment should only be con­sidered when oth­er options have been exhausted (fig­ure 2). 3

First option: repair and restore for re-use It is prefer­able to bring the cul­tur­al her­it­age interest back into its ori­gin­al use by sym­path­et­ic­ally restor­ing and repair­ing it using tra­di­tion­al mater­i­als and meth­ods where appro­pri­ate. An example is the Her­cules Garden at Blair Castle, which is over 250 years old and con­tains lis­ted fea­tures. It fell out of use dur­ing the World Wars, but was restored in the late 1900s, bring­ing it back into use as a garden and safe­guard­ing the his­tor­ic­al and cul­tur­al her­it­age of the loc­a­tion and features.

Second option: re-pur­pose Where re-use is not feas­ible, adapt­ing the cul­tur­al her­it­age interest to a new pur­pose by sym­path­et­ic­ally restor­ing, repair­ing and redevel­op­ing it, enhan­cing it where neces­sary and appro­pri­ate for its fea­tures, his­tor­ic­al con­text and set­ting. An example is the Gas­house in Boat of Garten, loc­ated next to a com­plex of lis­ted built cul­tur­al her­it­age interests at Boat of Garten rail­way sta­tion. Ori­gin­ally used to store acet­ylene gas for lamps for steam trains in the 1800s, it has been sym­path­et­ic­ally restored and re-pur­posed in recent years, open­ing as a café in 2018.

Last option: replace Repla­cing cul­tur­al interests should only be con­sidered where it can be demon­strated that it is not feas­ible to re-use or re-pur­pose the cul­tur­al her­it­age interest, and sig­ni­fic­ant socio- eco­nom­ic bene­fits would res­ult from repla­cing it. Care­ful con­sid­er­a­tion of and integ­ra­tion with the wider his­tor­ic­al con­text and sur­round­ings will be essen­tial. An example could be repla­cing a irre­pair­ably dam­aged, long derel­ict his­tor­ic­al build­ing with afford­able hous­ing secured in per­pitu­ity through a hous­ing asso­ci­ation. Fig­ure 2 — options flow­chart Some cul­tur­al her­it­age interests will require a mix of inter­ven­tions to secure their long term future. An example is the extens­ive res­tor­a­tion and rebuild of the Roy­al Sta­tion in Bal­later fol­low­ing extens­ive fire dam­age in 2015², which houses sev­er­al busi­nesses as well as the tour­ist inform­a­tion office. All inter­ven­tions must be com­pat­ible with the his­tor­ic con­text, not over­whelm or impose on it. They must be planned with a thor­ough under­stand­ing of the his­tor­ic con­text and provide a reasoned jus­ti­fic­a­tion for their need.

In advance of any works, eval­u­ation and record­ing of the exist­ing struc­ture should take place. Where neces­sary, this ana­lys­is should be car­ried out by a suit­ably qual­i­fied spe­cial­ist. This allows changes or devel­op­ments to be informed by the ori­gin­al struc­ture, while ensur­ing that noth­ing of import­ance to the cul­tur­al her­it­age of the struc­ture or fea­ture will inad­vert­ently be dam­aged or destroyed.

2 See https://​con​struc​tion​.mor​gansin​dall​.com/​case- study/bal­later-old-roy­al-rail­way-sta­tion. 4

Repair works, alter­a­tions, re-devel­op­ment and replace­ment should be under­taken to the bene­fit of the cul­tur­al her­it­age interest and those in the sur­round­ing area. The highest stand­ards of mater­i­als and work­man­ship will be required. Mater­i­als and tech­niques used must respect tra­di­tion­al prac­tice, unless mod­ern sub­sti­tutes are proven to provide a sig­ni­fic­ant and sus­tain­able advantage.

Pro­cesses that are revers­ible, or sub­stan­tially revers­ible are encour­aged. This allows for cor­rec­tion or future alter­a­tion should the need arise. Pro­pos­als that are revers­ible but oth­er­wise phys­ic­ally or aes­thet­ic­ally inap­pro­pri­ate are unlikely to be acceptable.

Where repairs, alter­a­tions, re-devel­op­ment or replace­ment may have an adverse effect on cul­tur­al her­it­age interest(s), the plan­ning author­ity will consider:

the rel­at­ive import­ance of the cul­tur­al her­it­age interest;

the scale of the impact of the pro­pos­als on the interest and sur­round­ing cul­tur­al her­it­age interests;

wheth­er there are oth­er options that would ensure a con­tinu­ing bene­fi­cial use with less impact on the spe­cial qual­it­ies or fea­tures of the interest;

wheth­er there are sig­ni­fic­ant socio- eco­nom­ic bene­fits that jus­ti­fy a depar­ture from the pre­sump­tion against works that adversely affect the cul­tur­al her­it­age interest or its setting.

The plan­ning author­ity may also be required to con­sult His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land, for example on pro­pos­als affect­ing leg­ally pro­tec­ted cul­tur­al her­it­age interests or oth­er interests recog­nised in legis­la­tion. Repair and restore for re-use Where prac­tic­al and real­ist­ic, the first option (fig­ure 2 options slow­chart) for pro­pos­als affect­ing cul­tur­al her­it­age interests is to repair and restore them back to their ori­gin­al form and func­tion. This should enable the interest to be brought back into use and their future to be secured for the long term (fig­ure 3). The Engine Shed, part of His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land, provides inform­a­tion about tra­di­tion­al mater­i­als and meth­ods via https://www.engineshed.scot/building- advice/.

Repairs and alter­a­tions should not nor­mally be dis­guised or arti­fi­cially aged, nor should they be obtrus­ive. Inap­pro­pri­ate mater­i­als should not be used to provide a dra­mat­ic con­trast. The aim should be to retain the visu­al integ­rity of the build­ing or struc­ture, while leav­ing a clear his­tory of the works under­taken in a way that does not con­fuse the his­tor­ic­al record that of the build­ing or structure.

cc-by-sa/2.0‑Forth Bridge from Hawes Pier by Dav­id Dix­on geo​graph​.org​.uk/​p​/​1​8​97840 Fig­ure 3 — per­haps the most infam­ous repair pro­ject in Scot­land, paint­ing the B lis­ted Forth rail bridge (now done on a ~20 yearly basis) 5

Re-pur­pose If repair­ing and res­tor­a­tion to enable re- use is not prac­tic­al or real­ist­ic, the second option of re-devel­op­ment (fig­ure 2 options flow­chart) to enable the struc­ture to be brought back into use for a dif­fer­ent pur­pose may be considered.

Alter­a­tions and re-devel­op­ment should only be con­sidered where pro­pos­als are com­pat­ible with and neces­sary to fur­ther the con­ser­va­tion and enhance­ment of the interest and the wider cul­tur­al her­it­age in the area. Pro­posed change should be man­aged to pro­tect the par­tic­u­lar fea­tures and qual­it­ies of the cul­tur­al her­it­age interest(s), while enabling it to be brought back into or remain in act­ive use (fig­ure 4).

Con­tinu­ation of the ori­gin­al use that for the build­ing or struc­ture was been designed for will be encour­aged. If this is not prac­tic­al, applic­ants will be required to show that efforts have been made to con­tin­ue its ori­gin­al or present use. Where changes of use are pro­posed, pre­ser­va­tion of the archi­tec­tur­al fea­tures, ori­gin­al plan form and lay­out will be required. The his­tor­ic value and set­ting of the ori­gin­al interest should not be adversely affected. Unsym­path­et­ic alter­a­tions and unne­ces­sary loss or dam­age to his­tor­ic fab­ric should be avoided.

BAL­LATER STA­TION cc-by-sa/2.0‑The Roy­al Sta­tion, Bal­later by Richard Webb geo​graph​.org​.uk/​p​/​6​2​82594 Fig­ure 4 — Bal­later old sta­tion, par­tially repaired, re-pur­posed and replaced after fire Replace If repair­ing, res­tor­a­tion or re-devel­op­ment to enable re-use or re-pur­pos­ing is not prac­tic­al or real­ist­ic, replace­ment of the cul­tur­al her­it­age interest may be con­sidered as a last resort (fig­ure 2 options flow­chart). How­ever, per­mis­sion to demol­ish a lis­ted build­ing, build­ing with­in a con­ser­va­tion area, or oth­er fea­ture of des­ig­nated or fea­ture of loc­al cul­tur­al her­it­age import­ance will not nor­mally be gran­ted unless it can be demon­strated that there is no viable altern­at­ive. His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land will be noti­fied by the plan­ning author­ity of all pro­pos­als to demol­ish lis­ted build­ings, and also non-lis­ted build­ings in con­ser­va­tion areas.

Demoli­tion may require spe­cial con­sent from the rel­ev­ant plan­ning author­ity to avoid com­mit­ting a crim­in­al offence. It is the applicant’s respons­ib­il­ity to ensure that all rel­ev­ant con­sents and per­mis­sions are in place before any works start.

Replace­ments do not neces­sar­ily have to rep­lic­ate their pre­de­cessor or those of the sur­round­ing area. They should be sited and designed to respect, enhance and have a pos­it­ive effect on the site and surrounding.

Pro­pos­als should take advant­age of oppor­tun­it­ies that exist for eco­nom­ic, com­munity and envir­on­ment­al enhance­ment. Advice on this can be found in the His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land guid­ance New Design in His­tor­ic Set­tings, 6

avail­able via https://www.historicenvironment.scot/archi ves-and- research/publications/publication/?publicati onid=9b50b83c-1e60-4831-bc81- a60500ac5b29. Cul­tur­al her­it­age interests in the Park The main types of cul­tur­al her­it­age con­sid­er­a­tions in the Park are iden­ti­fied in the fol­low­ing sec­tions, along with links to sources of inform­a­tion about them.

Some cul­tur­al her­it­age interests have offi­cial recog­ni­tion and leg­al pro­tec­tion, for example lis­ted build­ings, con­ser­va­tion areas and sched­uled monuments.

Oth­er cul­tur­al her­it­age interests play an import­ant part in the his­tory and land­form of the Park, and require care­ful con­sid­er­a­tion as part of the plan­ning pro­cess to ensure they are safe­guarded for the bene­fit of the cur­rent and future gen­er­a­tions. Sched­uled Monu­ments There are 110 nation­ally import­ant sites, build­ings and oth­er man-made fea­tures (fig­ure 5) in the Park giv­en leg­al pro­tec­tion under the Ancient Monu­ments and Archae­olo­gic­al Areas Act 1979.

cc-by-sa.2.0‑Ruthven Bar­racks M ‑ge ph​.org​.uk/​p​/​3​91882 Fig­ure 5 — the Ruthven Bar­racks sched­uled monu­ment and set­ting, near Kin­gussie It is a crim­in­al offence to carry out unau­thor­ised works, or to allow unau­thor­ised works to be car­ried out, on a sched­uled monu­ment. Sched­uled Monu­ment Con­sent is required from His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land (in addi­tion to and in advance of any plan­ning or oth­er per­mis­sions required). Applic­ants are encour­aged to con­sult His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land pri­or to sub­mis­sion for any applic­a­tion for Sched­uled Monu­ment Con­sent so that they can advise on pro­posed works.

Plan­ning applic­a­tions must demon­strate how the devel­op­ment will pre­serve known and form­ally recog­nised, or sched­uled, archae­ology in situ, as well as ensur­ing no adverse effect on the set­ting occurs. The plan­ning author­ity will noti­fy His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land who will have an input into the decision made on the application.

More inform­a­tion about Sched­uled Monu­ments can be found via https://www.historicenvironment.scot/advi ce-and-sup­port/l­ist­ing-schedul­ing-and- des­ig­na­tion­s/sched­uled-monu­ment­s/.

Sched­uled monu­ments may also be with­in or in prox­im­ity to oth­er cul­tur­al her­it­age interests, such as invent­ory gar­dens and designed land­scapes or lis­ted build­ings. There­fore oth­er con­sent pro­ced­ures and con­sid­er­a­tions will apply where rel­ev­ant. 7

Con­ser­va­tion Areas Con­ser­va­tion areas include build­ings and archi­tec­tur­al fea­tures as well as open space and trees that com­bine to give the area a par­tic­u­lar character.

There are five con­ser­va­tion areas (Bal­later, Blair Atholl, Brae­mar, Grant­own on Spey and Inverey — fig­ure 7 over­leaf) in the Park, which are pro­tec­ted under the Plan­ning (Lis­ted Build­ings and Con­ser­va­tion Areas) (Scot­land) Act 1997.

Applic­ants must give six weeks notice to the plan­ning author­ity of any inten­tion to cut, lop, top, uproot, dam­age or des­troy a tree in a con­ser­va­tion area. This is sep­ar­ate to any oth­er per­mis­sions or con­sents that may be required.

It is a crim­in­al offence to demol­ish a build­ing in a con­ser­va­tion area without con­sent from the rel­ev­ant plan­ning authority.

His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land will be noti­fied by the plan­ning author­ity of all pro­pos­als to demol­ish build­ings in con­ser­va­tion areas. A con­di­tion of con­sent will be applied requir­ing applic­ants to arrange for fea­tures to be recor­ded that would be des­troyed by pro­posed works.

All plan­ning applic­a­tions with the poten­tial to affect con­ser­va­tion areas must demon­strate how pro­pos­als make a pos­it­ive con­tri­bu­tion to the char­ac­ter of the con­ser­va­tion area and are con­sist­ent with the rel­ev­ant con­ser­va­tion area apprais­al and/​or man­age­ment plan. Pro­pos­als should pro­tect any trees on the site, unless rel­ev­ant noti­fic­a­tion pro­ced­ures to the plan­ning author­ity have been made and completed.

Gen­er­al inform­a­tion and advice about con­ser­va­tion areas, con­sents and oth­er require­ments can be found via: https://www.historicenvironment.scot/advi ce-and-sup­port/y­our-prop­er­ty/own­ing-a- tra­di­tion­al-prop­er­ty/liv­ing-in-a- conservation-area/

Bal­later, Brae­mar, and Inverey con­ser­va­tion areas are covered by an added level of pro­tec­tion. Aber­deen­shire Coun­cil can advise on what the addi­tion­al pro­tec­tion means. More inform­a­tion on these con­ser­va­tion areas can be found via https://​www​.aber​deen​shire​.gov​.uk/​p​l​a​n​n​i​n​g​/buil t‑her­it­age/­con­ser­va­tion-area/.

Inform­a­tion about the Grant­own on Spey con­ser­va­tion area (fig­ure 6) can be found

via:

https://​www​.high​land​.gov​.uk/​i​n​f​o​/​1​9​2​/​p​l​a​n​ning_ listed_​buildings_​and_​conservation_​areas/​167 /​conservation areas/​2.

cc-by-sa/2.0‑War Memori­al, Grant­own-on-Spey by Mick Gar​ratt​-geo​graph​.org​.uk/​p​/​6​23001 Fig­ure 6 tree lined and lawned centre of Grant­own on Spey con­ser­va­tion area, and cat­egory B lis­ted war memori­al Inform­a­tion about the Blair Atholl con­ser­va­tion area can be found via: https://​www​.pkc​.gov​.uk/​c​o​n​s​e​r​v​a​t​i​o​n​areas. 8

Id Aven­ue GRANT­OWN ON-SPEY D High Street (B9102)

1. Grant­own-on-Spey 88075
2. Blair Atholl Vide River Tilt 5 BRAE­MAR ROAD(03 2 43 B8079 Blair Atholl Inverey Lime hoad River Tilt Leis­ure Park
3. Inverey Fig­ure 7 — Con­ser­va­tion areas in the Park. See Loc­al Devel­op­ment Plan for detail. Con­tains Ord­nance Sur­vey data Crown copy­right and data­base right 2020. 9 BALLATER
4. Bal­later Mar Road Auchendryne Braemar
5. Brae­mar
   • Chuniebank Road TULICHIRO GLEN­SHEE ROAD (ASC

Con­ser­va­tion areas may also con­tain lis­ted build­ings, be with­in planned towns or con­tain oth­er cul­tur­al her­it­age interests. There­fore oth­er con­sent pro­ced­ures and con­sid­er­a­tions will apply where rel­ev­ant. Lis­ted build­ings and struc­tures There are around 753 build­ings or struc­tures of spe­cial his­tor­ic or archi­tec­tur­al interest in the Park that are pro­tec­ted under the Plan­ning (Lis­ted Build­ings and Con­ser­va­tion Areas) (Scot­land) Act 1997.

Alter­a­tions, exten­sions and demoli­tion works to lis­ted build­ings or struc­tures are likely to require lis­ted build­ing con­sent from the rel­ev­ant plan­ning author­ity. This is sep­ar­ate and addi­tion­al to any oth­er con­sents or per­mis­sions that may be required, such as planning.

Con­sent is not nor­mally required for like- for-like repairs. How­ever if repairs involve alter­a­tions that could affect the char­ac­ter of the build­ing, con­sent is likely to be required. Advice from the rel­ev­ant plan­ning author­ity should be sought. It is a crim­in­al offence to mater­i­ally alter, extend or demol­ish a lis­ted build­ing or struc­ture without con­sent from the rel­ev­ant plan­ning author­ity. His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land will be noti­fied by the plan­ning author­ity of all pro­pos­als to demol­ish or sig­ni­fic­antly alter lis­ted build­ings. A con­di­tion of con­sent will be applied requir­ing applic­ants to arrange for fea­tures to be recor­ded that would be des­troyed by pro­posed works.

All plan­ning applic­a­tions with the poten­tial to affect a lis­ted build­ing must demon­strate how the pro­pos­als pro­tect and enhance of the lis­ted structure(s), ensur­ing no adverse effect on the structure(s), cur­til­age (where rel­ev­ant) and set­ting. Where pos­sible the devel­op­ment should have a pos­it­ive effect on the lis­ted structure(s).

Gen­er­al inform­a­tion about lis­ted build­ings includ­ing inform­a­tion and advice about con­sents and oth­er require­ments can be found via: https://www.historicenvironment.scot/a ce-and-sup­port/l­ist­ing-schedul­ing-and- des­ig­na­tion­s/l­is­ted-build­ing­s/. Fig­ure 8 — cat­egory C lis­ted sum­mer­house with­in Inver­cauld garden and designed land­scape, near Brae­mar Lis­ted struc­tures may also be with­in con­ser­va­tion areas, planned towns or invent­ory gar­dens and designed land­scapes (fig­ure 8). There­fore oth­er con­sent pro­ced­ures and con­sid­er­a­tions will apply where rel­ev­ant. Planned towns There are five planned towns in the Park (Bal­later, Blair Atholl, Tomin­toul, Grant­own on Spey and Kin­gussie) import­ant for their his­tor­ic­al and archi­tec­tur­al interest. 10

These towns con­tain lis­ted build­ings, and parts of Bal­later (fig­ure 9) and Grant­own on Spey are also con­ser­va­tion areas. Lis­ted build­ings and/​or con­ser­va­tion area con­sent pro­ced­ures will there­fore apply.

How­ever the planned sec­tions of the towns out­with these des­ig­na­tions are still import­ant to the cul­tur­al her­it­age of the Park and should be safe­guarded for the future. Plan­ning applic­a­tions in planned towns should demon­strate what efforts have been taken to retain the struc­tures and fea­tures that con­trib­ute to the char­ac­ter of the planned town.

cc-by-sa/2.0 — Bridge Street, Bal­later by Richard Webb geo​graph​.org​.uk/​p​/​5​9​28185 Fig­ure 9 — Bridge Street in Bal­later, part of the planned town, con­tain­ing lis­ted build­ings and in the con­ser­va­tion area Pro­pos­als should make a pos­it­ive con­tri­bu­tion to the char­ac­ter of the planned town (and oth­er cul­tur­al her­it­age interests) for the long term.

More inform­a­tion about the planned towns can be found via: Bal­later, Blair Atholl, Grant­own on Spey: see the links provided for con­ser­va­tion areas

Kin­gussie: https://​can​more​.org​.uk/​e​v​e​n​t​/​1​0​00629

Tomin­toul: https://​can​more​.org​.uk/​s​i​t​e​/​1​0​7​4​09/to min­toul-gen­er­al Invent­ory Gar­dens and Designed Land­scapes Elev­en gar­dens and designed land­scapes are lis­ted on the Invent­ory and giv­en leg­al recog­ni­tion under the Ancient Monu­ments and Archae­olo­gic­al Areas Act 1979. More inform­a­tion about invent­ory gar­dens and designed land­scapes can be found via https://www.historicenvironment.scot/advi ce-and-sup­port/l­ist­ing-schedul­ing-and- des­ig­na­tion­s/gar­dens-and-designed- landscapes/

The rel­ev­ant plan­ning author­ity is required to con­sult His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land on plan­ning applic­a­tions that include land­scap­ing or redesign works affect­ing gar­dens and designed landscapes.

Suf­fi­cient inform­a­tion will need to be provided with plan­ning applic­a­tions about the poten­tial effects on the par­tic­u­lar fea­tures of the Invent­ory list­ing. The land­scape and visu­al effects on gar­dens and designed land­scapes could be con­sidered as part of a land­scape and visu­al impact assess­ment see the Policy 5: Land­scape non-stat­utory guid­ance link to be added once pub­lished for fur­ther inform­a­tion and advice.

Invent­ory gar­dens and designed land­scapes may also be con­tain or be in prox­im­ity to lis­ted build­ings or oth­er cul­tur­al her­it­age interests (for example Her­cules Garden, shown in fig­ure 10). There­fore oth­er con­sent pro­ced­ures and con­sid­er­a­tions will apply where relevant. ||

co-by-sa/2.0‑Fruit blos­som in the… by Lis Burke geo​graph​.org​.uk/​p​/​1​2​83987 Fig­ure 10 — Her­cules garden near Blair Atholl, a B lis­ted walled garden also on the Invent­ory Gar­dens and Designed Land­scapes Bat­tle­fields There are two bat­tle­fields (Crom­dale and Kil­liecrankie) in the Park that are iden­ti­fied on the Invent­ory of His­tor­ic Bat­tle­fields, main­tained by His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land. How­ever not all bat­tle­fields are lis­ted in the Invent­ory, for example the sites of the battles of Invernhav­on and Culblean.

Plan­ning applic­a­tions should demon­strate how the bat­tle­field land­scape and its indi­vidu­al ele­ments have been taken into account dur­ing the sit­ing and design pro­cess, and how dam­age has been avoided.

Plan­ning applic­a­tions must include suf­fi­cient inform­a­tion to allow a full assess­ment of the impact of the pro­pos­al on the bat­tle­field. An archae­olo­gic­al apprais­al may be required to sup­port plan­ning applications.

If archae­olo­gic­al remains are dis­covered dur­ing ground invest­ig­a­tions or dur­ing devel­op­ment works, the plan­ning author­ity must be informed imme­di­ately. Appro­pri­ate mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures must be imple­men­ted to ensure appro­pri­ate excav­a­tion, report­ing and ana­lys­is if pre­ser­va­tion in situ can­not be achieved. Fail­ure to noti­fy the plan­ning author­ity is likely to res­ult in a tem­por­ary stop notice being issued.

More inform­a­tion about bat­tle­field sites can be found via https://www.historicenvironment.scot/advi ce-and-sup­port/l­ist­ing-schedul­ing-and- designations/​battlefields/​. Bat­tle­field sites may also be con­tain or be in prox­im­ity to lis­ted build­ings or oth­er cul­tur­al her­it­age interests (fig­ure 11). There­fore oth­er con­sent pro­ced­ures and con­sid­er­a­tions will apply where relevant.

org​.uk/​p​/​17526 Fig­ure 11 — Claverhouse’s stone, a sched­uled monu­ment, at the site of the battle of Kil­liecrankie Archae­ology and Nation­al Monu­ments Record sites There are numer­ous his­tor­ic­al records show­ing the pat­tern of human activ­ity across the Park, provid­ing an indic­a­tion of where past human activ­ity has occurred in the past. 12

If archae­olo­gic­al remains are dis­covered dur­ing ground invest­ig­a­tions or dur­ing devel­op­ment works, the plan­ning author­ity must be informed imme­di­ately. Appro­pri­ate mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures must be imple­men­ted to ensure appro­pri­ate excav­a­tion, report­ing and ana­lys­is if pre­ser­va­tion in situ can­not be achieved. Fail­ure to noti­fy the plan­ning author­ity is likely to res­ult in a tem­por­ary stop notice being issued.

Plan­ning applic­a­tions should demon­strate how Nation­al Monu­ment Record sites and oth­er archae­olo­gic­al interests have been taken into account dur­ing the sit­ing and design pro­cess, and how dam­age has been avoided. Plan­ning applic­a­tions must include suf­fi­cient inform­a­tion to allow a full assess­ment of the impact of the pro­pos­al on the how Nation­al Monu­ment Record site and/​or oth­er archae­olo­gic­al interests where present. An archae­olo­gic­al apprais­al may be required to sup­port plan­ning applic­a­tions. More inform­a­tion about Nation­al Monu­ment Record sites can be found via https://​can​more​.org​.uk/

Inform­a­tion and advice about archae­ology in the five plan­ning author­ity areas in the Park can be found via:

Aber­deen­shire Coun­cil (also cov­er­ing Moray as part of north east Scot­land) https://​www​.aber​deen​shire​.gov​.uk/​leisu re-sport-and-cul­ture/ar­chae­ology/

Angus Coun­cil https://​www​.angus​.gov​.uk/​p​l​a​n​n​i​n​g_and _​building/​conservation/​archaeology_​an d sched­uled monuments

High­land Coun­cil https://​www​.high​land​.gov​.uk/​i​n​f​o​/​2​0004/ local_​history_​and_​heritage/​509/​archae ology/​2

Perth and Kinross Her­it­age Trust for Perth and Kinross Coun­cil http://​www​.pkht​.org​.uk/​r​e​s​o​u​r​c​e​s​/​infor mation/​Build­ings at Risk Register (BARR) Prop­er­ties of archi­tec­tur­al or his­tor­ic mer­it con­sidered to be at risk or under threat, usu­ally (but not always, fig­ure 12) a lis­ted or unlis­ted build­ing with­in a con­ser­va­tion area. BARR does not include all build­ings at risk, just those that have been repor­ted to or iden­ti­fied by His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scotland.

cc-by-sa/2.0‑Old farm build­ings Upper… by jeff collins​-geo​graph​.org​.uk/​p​/​3​7​20757 Fig­ure 12 – BARR lis­ted derel­ict farm at Upper Tul­loch­grue, near Aviemore

More inform­a­tion about the Build­ings at Risk Register can be found via https://www.historicenvironment.scot/advi ce-and-sup­port/­plan­ning-and- guid­ance/build­ings-at-risk-register/. 13

BARR build­ings may be lis­ted, with­in con­ser­va­tion areas, and/​or may be with­in or be in prox­im­ity to oth­er cul­tur­al her­it­age interests. There­fore oth­er con­sent pro­ced­ures and con­sid­er­a­tions may apply where rel­ev­ant. Fea­tures of loc­al import­ance Land­scapes shaped by human activ­ity and oth­er fea­tures can be of par­tic­u­lar loc­al import­ance. The Park Author­ity, in com­bin­a­tion with loc­al com­munit­ies, has iden­ti­fied some of these (fig­ure 13). Inform­a­tion is avail­able via https://​cairngorms​.co​.uk/​c​a​ring- future/­cairngorms-land­scapes/­land­scape- areas/

An under­stand­ing of past ways of life, hous­ing and cul­ture can help identi­fy what fea­tures may be of loc­al or wider import­ance. Inform­a­tion provided by the Park Author­ity and the High­land Folk Museum is avail­able via https://​cairngorms​.co​.uk/​c​a​ring- future/­cairngorms-land­scapes/­cairngorms- spe­cial-land­scape-qual­it­ies/spe­cial- land­scape-qual­it­ies-cul­ture-his­tory/ and https://​www​.high​life​high​land​.com/​h​i​g​h​landf olkmuseum/​collections/​.

cc-by-sa/2.0‑Community garden, Boat of… by Jim Bar​ton​-geo​graph​.org​.uk/​p​/​3​5​10750 Fig­ure 13-com­munity garden at Boat of Garten, iden­ti­fied dur­ing com­munity con­sulta­tion as a fea­ture of loc­al import­ance If a pro­pos­al affects a build­ing, struc­ture or fea­ture con­sidered to be of loc­al cul­tur­al her­it­age import­ance, or its set­ting, this should be high­lighted in the plan­ning applic­a­tion. The applic­a­tion should demon­strate what meas­ures have been taken to con­serve and enhance fea­tures and struc­tures of loc­al cul­tur­al sig­ni­fic­ance, includ­ing their set­ting. Where this is not pos­sible, the applic­a­tion should detail the meas­ures that have been taken to min­im­ise and mit­ig­ate adverse effects.

Evid­ence may need to be included on how the loc­al import­ance of the struc­ture or fea­ture was assessed. Spe­cial­ist sur­vey work or addi­tion­al detailed invest­ig­a­tions are unlikely to be required, unless ini­tial sur­veys reveal inform­a­tion that the interest is of great­er import­ance than anti­cip­ated (par­tic­u­larly if that may lead to its form­al recog­ni­tion as a form­ally des­ig­nated site). In such situ­ations, the advice of the rel­ev­ant plan­ning author­ity should be sought.

Fea­tures of loc­al import­ance may be with­in con­ser­va­tion areas, and/​or with­in or in prox­im­ity to oth­er cul­tur­al her­it­age interests. There­fore oth­er con­sent pro­ced­ures and con­sid­er­a­tions may apply. Sup­port­ing inform­a­tion for plan­ning applic­a­tions Fig­ure 14 shows how dif­fer­ent cul­tur­al her­it­age con­sents inter­act with the plan­ning pro­cess. It is the applicant’s respons­ib­il­ity to ensure that all rel­ev­ant con­sents and per­mis­sions are in place before any works start. 14

Yes Is the pro­pos­al with­in or will it have an effect on a Sched­uled Monu­ment, Lis­ted Build­ing and/​or a Con­ser­va­tion Area? Con­sent required from Plan­ning Author­ity before oth­er per­mis­sions sought. Cul­tur­al her­it­age con­sent gran­ted, pro­ceed with plan­ning applic­a­tion Inform­a­tion on the des­ig­nated cul­tur­al her­it­age interests affected required to sup­port plan­ning applic­a­tion. Yes Will the pro­pos­al affect oth­er cul­tur­al her­it­age interests? (planned towns, gar­dens & designed land­scapes, bat­tle­fields, unsched­uled monu­ments, loc­ally import­ant fea­tures, archae­ology) Inform­a­tion on the oth­er cul­tur­al her­it­age interests affected required to sup­port plan­ning applic­a­tion. No Pro­ceed with nor­mal plan­ning applic­a­tion or oth­er per­mis­sion pro­cess. No No addi­tion­al cul­tur­al her­it­age sup­port­ing inform­a­tion required. Fig­ure 14 con­sents and sup­port­ing inform­a­tion flow­chart Some or all of the inform­a­tion used to sup­port applic­a­tions for cul­tur­al her­it­age con­sents is likely to be suit­able to sup­port plan­ning applications.

Applic­a­tions for replace­ment struc­tures must include sup­port­ing inform­a­tion detail­ing the re-use and re-pur­pos­ing options explored and the reas­ons they are not being taken for­ward. As part of the sup­port­ing inform­a­tion, a struc­tur­al sur­vey of the exist­ing build­ing or fea­ture to be replaced may also be required.

If pro­pos­als requir­ing a plan­ning applic­a­tion have the poten­tial to affect a sched­uled monu­ment, cat­egory A lis­ted build­ing, invent­ory bat­tle­field or gar­dens and design land­scapes and/​or their set­ting, this must be high­lighted in the plan­ning applic­a­tion. The plan­ning author­ity will noti­fy His­tor­ic Envir­on­ment Scot­land who will provide advice.

Where plan­ning applic­a­tions are required, the applic­ant should pre­pare sup­port­ing draw­ings and oth­er related doc­u­ments as appro­pri­ate. 15

The scope of the inform­a­tion required will vary depend­ing on the cir­cum­stances of the case, but may include:

draw­ings illus­trat­ing the rela­tion­ship of the pro­pos­al to its set­ting evid­ence of the struc­tur­al con­di­tion of the building/​structure a repair sched­ule spe­cific­a­tion of mater­i­als pro­posed res­tor­a­tion tech­niques annot­ated pho­to­graphs his­tor­ic records of building/​structure Advice from the rel­ev­ant plan­ning author­ity should be sought as to the type of assess­ments, inform­a­tion and level of detail required to sup­port both cul­tur­al her­it­age con­sents and plan­ning applic­a­tions for works affect­ing cul­tur­al her­it­age interests. Inform­a­tion can be found on the rel­ev­ant plan­ning author­ity web­site: Aber­deen­shire Coun­cil https://​www​.aber​deen​shire​.gov​.uk/p lan­ning/­plan­ning-applic­a­tion­s/check- if-you-need-planning-permission/

Angus Coun­cil https://​www​.angus​.gov​.uk/​p​l​a​n​ning_ and_​building/​planning_​permission_​a nd_​applications/​how_​planning_​per mis­sion works

High­land Coun­cil https://​www​.high​land​.gov​.uk/​i​n​fo/20 5/plan­ning- _​policies_​advice_​and_​service_​level S

Moray Coun­cil http://​www​.moray​.gov​.uk/​m​o​r​ay_st