46 C O N T E X T 1 2 6 : S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 2 Director’s cut Conservation: a partial dialogue Disclaimer: All the characters in this dialogue, and many of the facts, are fictional, as we all try to look into a very murky future. ‘I’d like to welcome the councillor as our new heritage champion, and ask you, councillor, John, to explain to the planning committee what your problem with this application for listed building consent actually is. And remember how things are these days: if it’s not policy, it’s not relevant’. ‘Thank you. I appreciate, Janet… ahem… apologies, madam chairman, that it’s not about one specific policy. As usual this is a matter of judgement. But I’ve been through this with the locals, the businesses and the faith groups, and they are all clear that what’s on the table is not really right for the area or, even more, for its future. I can confidently say that, applicant excepted, there’s unanimous opposition to this.’ ‘And I appreciate, madam chairman, that it’s not against one specific policy. This is a matter of judgement. But for everyone I have spoken to, the proposal seems to mark the first step in a most unwelcome downslide for this muchloved place. And that’s just what the new national policy says we should consider as well, especially for the sake of local character. So, as I think of it, it might be a policy matter, I suppose, but a policy judgement too, about heritage impact as well as planning. While the applicant has made a, er, cogent case through their agent, we are not convinced by the conclusions.’ ‘OK, John. I see. So the problem is one of judgement.’ ‘Essentially, yes.’ ‘What does our conservation officer, Jane, say. She’s usually pretty sound on this sort of thing.’ ‘An interesting question.’ ‘An obvious one, which is why I asked it, not least as I don’t see anything here from her.We do pay her for advice, don’t we? Where is it, or have I missed it?’ ‘That’s an interesting point, Janet. The applicant has followed that new procedure or protocol – I’m not sure what to call it – under which they can bypass council officers by using an registered agent.’ ‘I remember hearing something about that. It’s the one where the applicant pays a specialist to figure things out, so they need not worry about the conservation officer getting involved, or something like that.’ ‘Not quite that simple, but not far off, as I understand it. As Jack, our head of planning, has explained it, the agent is paid for by the applicant, but they do the job for us, as they advise on the matter of public interest – the kind of public policy concerns I’ve just mentioned.’ ‘Interesting, John. I presume there is a ‘but…’.’ ‘Yes, many: ‘but’ in this case, we do not agree with the advice; ‘but’ we’re not specialists; ‘but’ we’re not saying the agent is simply wrong – actually the council used him as a consultant before appointing Jane as conservation officer, and he has noted the local concerns very fairly, ‘but’ just doesn’t agree with them. And: ‘but’ we have a different view to him on this application.’ ‘So, again, ask Jane!’ ‘We can’t. Our lawyers say that as the applicant has paid their agent under the new system, that means the agent has “replaced” our adviser too. Jane’s out of the loop.’ ‘Then we’ll just have to live with it, John. As you’ve heard me say before: “If that’s what the system is, that’s what the system does’’.’ ‘It’s not that easy. The lawyers also say our statutory duty is to take account of impact as a whole, it seems, and policy is the “framework”. So in good conscience, and not least on the basis of these discussions, we can not do that and also allow the scheme. If an objector wanted to challenge us in court, they could, especially given what’s recorded in committee. And I won’t commit perjury Janet… ahem... madam chairman. Anyway, objectors might well not win, but they could cause an awful lot of trouble. And the applicant’s neighbour is very litigious, and very worried about the proposal.’ ‘If the applicant has bypassed Jane through some sort of contract, then we just need to get other advice. Not a nice thought, having to pay twice, but if we must…’ ‘Our lawyers say that getting conservation advice from outside is not
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=