PASW Regional Newsletter: Autumn 2001
Regional Projects - Planning, Property and Public Art!
Wearing my planning hat, the benefits of incorporating public art in developments have always seemed pretty obvious - better quality environment, distinctive character, a sense of place, bringing art to the community, cultivating local skills are all well rehearsed arguments and well founded. Delivering Public Art through the planning process however is more problematic.
It is of course perfectly legitimate in dealing with planning applications for local planning authorities to require Planning Obligations from developers in certain circumstances. Here an example may help. The volume housebuilder presents an application for a new residential estate of family housing. What can the LPA require?
The answer depends on the local situation. Assuming that the Local Plan has appropriate policies and say, there are no available places in local primary schools - ie. no spare capacity - then the LPA can require financial contributions towards the provision of new primary school places to meet the additional need that the development has created. In other words, where a development places extra demands on local infrastructure, whether its schools, transport, health care, playspace etc., the LPA can require the developer to make appropriate contributions and if those contributions are absent, then there are grounds for refusal. Public Art does not fall into this category and cannot be required but can be sought/encouraged by LPAs - ie. it's voluntary.
On a more positive note, this does not mean that LPAs cannot include Public Art policies in Local Plans - far from it, many have done and those that haven't are being pressed to do so by PASW. Further, some LPAs committed to Public Art have issued Supplementary Planning Guidance which encourages developers to include Public Art in their schemes - see South Gloucestershire DC for a good example. For a good example: indeed our latest survey for PASW shows a marked increase in interest in issuing SPGs on Public Art from local authorities in the South West.
So what are developers actually doing, if Public Art is voluntary and other contributions may be mandatory ? The answer might be surprising. Some developers of commercial space such as Land Securities, the largest in the UK, have included public art in all their schemes for many years, but most volume housebuilders don't bother. Why ? There are several explanations. Many commercial developers recognise that Public Art can be used as a smart marketing tool, giving developments a particular image and making them different from the competition. It doesn't cost much but art can help raise market awareness and that has financial benefits. The housebuilders in contrast are less enlightened, catering to a mass market where school places will be more important for most buyers. But who knows, even housebuilders may eventually realise that a small outlay on art may make a difference to cash flow!
Chris Marsh
Principal of Sustainable Property Consultants and Planning Advisor to PASW