6 LETTERS view to producing an advisory leaflet for listed building owners, Spring/Summer 2000. Have any other local authorities, charities or associations recently produced any such related leaflets ? If so could they send me any copies? In addition, we have a grade II* monument, without an owner, which is in a poor state of repair. Does anyone have any experience of: □ Restoring 'Monuments at Risk' □ Sourcing specific funding for them □ Putting together packages to rescue them Any advice on how to persuade people to take them on. Any case studies or advice on how others have approached this problem would be gratefully received. Information on both topics should be sent to: me at the address below. Yours sincerely Ruth Connolly, ConseivationAssistant, Peak District National Park Authority Aldern House, Derbyshire DE45 JAE, tel. 01629816238, e-mail aldern@peakdistrict.org ENABLING DEVELOPMENT Sir: As the consultant behind the English Heritage Policy Statement Enabling Development and the conservation of historic assets, I would like to offer a personal (rather than English Heritage) response to Dave Morton's review article (Context 64, pp 39-40). I think it impo1tant to correct the misconception, at the start of the article, that the Statement advocates a presumption against all enabling development to support historic assets. Rather, it advocates a presumption against such enabling development which does not meet stated criteria. The final criterion is ve,y simple, but crucial: taken as a whole: do the benefits outweigh the disbenefits? The greatest benefit to be weighed in the balance will normally be securing the future of an historic asset at risk. Why Mr Morton should think that the Policy "does not allow any account to be taken" of it escapes me. The negative tone of the document was an inevitable Bryn Gilby Historical Mortars TRADITIONAL BURNT LIME PROVIDING BEST QUALITY LIME PUTTY. LIME MORTARS, LIME WASHES '&? LIME PAINTS Sole distributor for Wales of St Astier Natural Hydraulic Limes Details '32 prices on request Tel: 0 I 656 659040 Fax: 01656 657313 Mobile: 0410 965549 response to widespread concern about the damaging impacts and perceived abuses of enabling development -not least as a vehicle for circumventing constraints on development in the Green Belt and open countryside. There was overwhelming support from English local authorities for the consultation draft - and many helpful suggestions, borne of practical and often unhappy experience, which were incorporated in the final version. But the criteria themselves can readily be framed in positive rather than double-negative terms. Indeed I did so at the Buildings at Risk: Some Options and Solutions conference in Northern Ireland last October. I fail to see why a document which recommends a structured and transparent process for assessment, which sifts out obvious nonstarters early on, and leads logically to a conclusion, should result in more cases going to appeal. Our aim was quite the opposite, but only time will tell. A planning authority would surely be very foolish to refuse consent rather than face assessing the financial evidence. True, this will almost certainly involve the use of external consultants. However, most authorities routinely accept the need to do so in other regulatory areas, such as checking engineering calculations submitted in support of Building Regulation applications. So why do some seem to have a mental block about doing so in relation to enabling development? Rather than being an alternative to public funding, enabling development is arguably a type of public funding. The idea of the community giving up one asset to acquire a greater one is, after all, not dissimilar to the that of individuals paying taxes to acquire the right to public goods and services - including the conservation of our historic environment. The essential difference is that the community pays in kind which is converted to cash, rather than cash itself. On this premise alone, enabling development should arguably be subject to the same degree of financial scrutiny as cash grants from public funds. And if its use is likely to increase - which I agree is probable - then establishing a generally accepted and transparent basis of assessment is vital. This certainly does not rule out recognising the heritage value of maintaining continuity of ownership, as para 3.4 of the Statement makes clear. As Dave Morton says, successful schemes rarely make news. A ve,y few were mentioned in responses to the consultation draft of the policy statement. I would like to hear in detail about more, to inform the Practical guide to assessment, now being developed - English Heritage hopes to issue a consultation draft in June. The need for such a document was stressed in many responses to last year's consultation. Its value will be enhanced by distilling positive experience from many sources. Yours sincerely Paul Drury Historic environment policy and practice 23 Spencer Road Twickenham TW2 5TZ Tel. 020 8894 4711, fax. 020 8894 4699 ABRC:NEW CHAIRMAN Sir: Alhough some of your readers may have seen the announcements in the national press, you may wish note the Archbishops' appointment of John Newman MA FSA as the next Chairman of the Advisory Board for Redundant Churches as from 1 January 2000. Mr. Newman is a reader in the histo1y of art at the Courtauld Institute, and the author of several books and articles on historic architecture, of which the "Pevsner" guide to the buildings of Kent is, perhaps, the best known. In addition to membership of the English Heritage Historic Areas and Buildings Committee, Mr. Newman was author of a Government report on the Ecclesiastical Exemption. Mr. Newman has been a member of the Council of the Council for the Care of Churches and is currently a member of the Rochester Diocesan Advisory Committee. It may also be of interest to some of your readers to note the death of Michael Gillingham on 22 October 1999. He was 66 years of age and was clue to retire as the Board's Chairman on 31 December after a distinguished period of ten years in office. Yours sincerely Jeffrey West Secretaiy to the Board Context65 March2000
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=