notices,dangerous structures arguements and the possibility of listed building enforcement notices must surely follow? Watch this space for further adventurest F'ROMWITI-IOUTRATHER THAN F'ROM WI THIN • ............ ~ ........ . Good things from the Northern Conso:tt:ium of Housing Authorities come in the form of information leaflets and discussion notes on such topics as "New life for redundant buildings" & "the use & m~suse of tempo~ary buildings" Copies and details from the Secretary,John Moralee,DMA,MILGA The Civic Centre,Newcastle Road Chester-le-street,Co Durham. Tel 882521 ext 215. An Historic Buildings Survey and feasibility study for the reuse of empty old buildings has been undertaken by Rosemary Curry RIBA in Middlesborough, sponsored by the Teeside Civic Society,Teeside Branch of the RIBA in co-operation with the Borough Council.over 106 old properties were identified,dated and studied in depth with the aim of securing their retention & reuse. SCORING POINTS Congratulations to Burnley Borough Council for publishing a leaflet on the dangers of strap pointing.In June 1982 the Council banned strap pointing on all its own properties and commenced printing the advice note.Available for free within the district and for 25p out of town, it makes good reading. Many CONTEXT readers will know of pointing atrocities in our stone walled areas.Is anyone tackling the problem at source in the bricklaying colleges? CANNY SCOTS The conservation officer for Glasgow has been a busy boy.The district have produced a series of advice notes including those on "Shopfront design","Stone cleaning & repair" and the problems of "Replacement windmvs" Tel 041.221.9855 for details. 6. ,1storic Building:, an agreement for :ection 5A of the ments Act I953, , or for a consider but that it is not 1hom the buildin :xcept by virtue ~rt may, under ,h a scheme ~ ::inn if ' Tony Jenkins writes: LEGAL EAGLE PROBLEMS WITH COMPULSORY PURCHASE COMPENSATION AND SECTION 115 (FULL REPAI.R°S-) NOTICES ON LISTED BUILDINGS A fairly severe obstacle has recently presented itself when trying to assess compensation for compulsory purchase following a full repairs notice. I think it is now fairly common knowledge that to go for 1minimum compensation 1 is almost impossible, since it depends on proving that the owner had deliberately neglected the building so as to secure its demolition. No owner is likely to admit this and those dealt with usually express the intention of repairing the building and often have schemes drawn up. for the purpose even if they persist in doing nothing over long periods of time. In the light of this I think we were prepared to pay market value so as to secure buildings from dereliction, allowing for the cost of repairs in the calculation. However, following a recent repairs notice, it seems that in a good proportion of instances, development value would also have to be paid. The fly in the ointment here is that seemingly little known effect of Section 6 to the 1974 Town and Country Planning Amenities Act. This section amended Section 116 of the 171 Act so that when assessing compensation for compulsory purchase, it could no longer be assumed that demolition would be allowed. But, and it 1s a big but, the section goes on to say 11except so far as they ( the words 1or for its demolition 1 ) refer to demolition for the purpose of development of any class specified in the 171 Act (or-Schedule 6 of the 172 (Scotland) Act) (development not constituting new development)". Referring to Schedule 8, para 6, we are informed that compensation including
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=