When is it needed?
Policy HE5 of the NPPF published on 17 August 2026 requires a proportionate description of the significance of heritage assets affected by a proposal, including any contribution made by their setting. The required detail depends on the importance of the asset and the likely effects of the work. This is not confined to applications that physically alter a listed building. [1]
Check the council's validation list and the actual heritage interest at the site. A modest window alteration and the redevelopment of land beside a major historic building should not automatically receive the same assessment scope. Historic England's advice emphasises understanding significance before assessing the impact of change. [2]
What does the report cover?
A useful report separates three questions: what matters, what will change, and why the change is acceptable. Recording a building's age or copying its list entry is not enough to explain the effects of a particular intervention. Relevant evidence may include historical research, site inspection, photographs and the relationship between the asset and its surroundings. [2] [3]
Ask the author to organise the assessment so the reader can follow each proposed change. For example, identify the existing feature, explain its significance, refer to the proposed drawing, and then assess the effect. Where less harmful options were considered, explain the reasoning for the selected approach.
Include both positive and negative effects. A proposal to improve a building does not remove the need to examine the loss of historic fabric, alterations to its appearance or effects on its setting. The NPPF requires clear justification for harm to designated heritage assets. [1]
Who prepares it?
The level of expertise should match the heritage issues. An experienced designer may coordinate a straightforward submission; more sensitive work should involve someone with relevant historic-building or conservation expertise. Archaeological potential can require additional specialist input. National policy calls for appropriate expertise where it is necessary to understand the asset and the proposal's effects. [1]
When comparing appointments, ask whether the service includes an inspection, historical research, assessment of alternative designs and responses to the council. These are useful scope questions, rather than a standard package every project must purchase.
Coordinate the statement with the application
A heritage statement can sometimes be combined with a Design & Access Statement, provided the combined document covers both purposes clearly. Historic England accepts proportionate, coordinated information rather than duplication for its own sake. [3]
Keep the assessment aligned with the demolition drawings, specifications and proposed details. If the design changes, ask the author whether the heritage conclusions also need updating. Do not leave a statement praising retention of a feature that the final drawings remove.
The report informs the planning or listed building consent decision; it is not itself consent to carry out the work. Treat any proposed mitigation as something that must also be reflected in the scheme submitted for approval. [4]