The second issue that arose is one that commonly arises in the context of groups of listed buildings; that is, whether the new building affected the setting of all of the listed buildings in the group, or that of the Grade II buildings only. The judge was unimpressed with the argument that only the Grade II buildings were affected. True, three of the buildings were only Grade II, but of the remaining two, one was Grade I and the other Grade II*. I have no doubt that the proposed building affected the setting of the last two, as well as the others. The words are: "affect the setting of a listed building", and it is impossible, in my judgement, to cut this grouping of listed buildings at the castle into sections. Some parts are no doubt of greater architectural merit and importance than others. None the less, this is a setting (p 87). He held accordingly that English Heritage should have been notified; and the planning permission that had been issued was therefore quashed. His "careful and thorough" judgement was subsequently upheld in the Court of Appeal ([1990] EGCS 34). This suggests that, in the case of a group of listed buildings of mixed grades, it would always be prudent for the planning authority to assume that a development proposal affecting the setting of any one of the group affects the setting of all, and to notify English Heritage and amenity groups accordingly. Reinstatement of listed buildings Finally, the case of Beaumont v Humberts (1990) The Times 17th July may be noted, on the question of insuring listed buildings. It concerned a Grade II listed farmhouse, thatched and built principally of brick and flint but with some original cob walls filled with a mixture of mud and cow dung. One wall had settled over the centuries and was some four inches out of true. A surveyor was asked to value the building "for insurance reinstatement purposes". There were three possible interpretations of 'reinstatement'. The first was the provision of an exact copy, including cob in the walls and one wall four inches out of true. No one contended that was what the surveyor should have estimated for, not least because it would have involved certain sections of the house having no foundation, but simply resting on the earth, which would be contrary to present building regulations. Alternatively, he could have estimated for a replacement which was as near as practicable an exact copy of the existing house (approximately .(300,000). PHOTARC SURVEYS THE COMPLETE SURVEY SERVICE. Historic Building Surveys Site Survey Elevation Surveys Rectified Photography Aerial Survey Digital Mapping Photogrammetry PHOTARC SURVEYS LTD. Compass House, 22 North Street, Wetherby West Yorkshire, LS22 4NN. Tel. 0937 584936 Fax. 0937 580136 CONTEXT 29 What the surveyor actually did was to estimate for a sensible reconstruction in the same style and general shape, and with the same general accommodation, but redesigned in parts to make it more liveable and more convenient. The "higgledypiggledy back additions", one of the staircases and certain other features would not be replaced, and the walls would not be three feet thick. This led to a figure of around .(175,000. The Court of Appeal upheld (albeit only by a majority) the finding that the third approach was not negligent. If what had been wanted had been an estimate for what would be as nearly as practicable an exact copy, it should have been asked for in plain terms. This suggests that the owner of a listed building should insure it for enough to enable it to be properly rebuilt; ifhe or she does not, and the building is lost, the planning authority will either have to accept a substandard replacement or else provide very substantial grant aid. * * * * * * I have not discussed the Mansion House case (Save Britain's Heritage v the Secretary of State) this time, since a judgement by the House of Lords was only delivered as this issue went to press. See the next issue for a full analysis. £S"JABLISHED189:l WINTHER BROWNE From stock or made to order in Pine, Mahoganyand Oak. Period Mouldings in traditional patterns. Dados, skirtings, panel mouldings, cornices,architraves, capitals,pediments etc. Dentil, Twist, Eggand dart, Sausage and bead, and many other decorative patterns. Winther Browne & Co. Ltd. Nobel Road, Eley Estate, Edmonton, London NJ8 3DX Tel: 081-803 3434 Fax: 081-807 0544 31
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=