22 C O N T E X T 1 2 6 : S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 2 S Framework (NPPF). A map of England illustrating the setting of all heritage assets excluding Grade II listed buildings and conservation areas suggested that most of the country could be classified as being within the setting of a heritage asset. Morrice used this to illustrate the point that the sector’s interest could not be about the preservation of setting, and must be about the management of change. But perhaps the main message in Morrice’s presentation was that setting was not a designation in its own right. So the issue was not one of identifying harm to an asset’s setting, but rather of understanding how setting contributed to that asset’s significance and then assessing how its significance might be harmed by a proposed development within its setting. To assist in that process, English Heritage has developed its Setting of Heritage Assets guidance document (October 2011), which includes a framework for undertaking this work. Morrice outlined the English Heritage guidance, which is designed to be sufficiently flexible to cope with the wide range of settings casework, from issues surrounding tall buildings (illustrated by means of the Shard, towering over St Paul’s Cathedral) down to that of an internally illuminated sign on a shop adjacent to a listed building, while also taking on board the artistic or literary contributions to the significance of a site, together with the non-visual impacts of noise, dust, vibration and odour. However, as Morrice ruefully noted, ‘time waits for no one’. He is already having to update the English Heritage guidance to bring it in line with the NPPF and to include recent appeal decisions, such as the Bicton and Lyveden New Bield wind farms, and Moorfields Primary School in London (see page 10). The English Heritage guidance onSetting of Heritage Assets can be downloaded from the HELM website at www.helm.org.uk. David Grech Materials significance Alison Henry, a senior architectural conservator in the building conservation and research team at English Heritage, is the IHBC representative on the English Stone Forum. Her subject brought us to the nuts and bolts of conservation by looking at one material, stone, to illustrate how materials in their sources, transport, construction and ageing can contribute so much to the significance of a structure. Before getting down to the detail, we were reminded of how the significance of materials fits into the English Heritage’s Conservation Principles Policies and Guidance (2008) in terms of providing evidential value, historic value and aesthetic value (the fourth category, communal value, not being relevant in regard to materials). Photographic examples to illustrate each of these values followed. Viewing and scientific analysis of a stone wall ruin can not only tell us the source of the stone, but may also reveal the construction techniques, such as the use of different mortars for the outer facework and inner corework. They are also a source of much information regarding phasing and dating to provide both evidential and historic value. The craftsmanship in surface finishes is a tangible link with the past, and can tell us not only about the type of tools used but also the status of the building. Not usually visible in complete structures, signs of quarrying and splitting marks all add to the historic value of a building. Once the source of stone walling and roofing material has been identified, the transport logistics of how that material reached the site of the building further adds to the historic value. Aesthetic value in vernacular buildings may well be fortuitous in that what was immediately available locally did match well. In designed buildings, however, Richard Morrice of English Heritage’s government advice team illustrates how setting relates to significance. Alison Henry, the IHBC’s representative on the English Stone Forum, looks at the effects of transport on the materials and their contribution to significance.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=