Applicationof PPG 15 and PPG 16 to recordindustrial andmodernbuildings Recentexamplesfrom Essex Shane Gould discusses the role of the Planning Policy Guidance Notes in ensuring adequate recording before decisions are made about important historic buildings. INTRODUCTION The introduction in September 1994 of Planning Policy Guidance Note 15 (PPG 15): Planning and the Historic Environment (DoE and DNH) was welcomed by most Conservation Officers and archaeological curators. Government advice on listed buildings, conservation areas and archaeology was seen to be moving in a similar direction, and the recommendations within the new PPG were a considerable improvement on DoE CircularB/87(1987). The paragraphs on impact appraisal and building recording generated much interest within the profession and debate continues on the need and level of such an assessment. For the majority of buildings where the scheme of works is relatively small scale with only a minor impact on the surv1v1ng historic fabric, the Conservation/ Archaeological Officer can normally undertake any necessary recording without recourse to more formal procedures. This practice has been widespread for many years and often involves exploratory opening up in order to make an informed appraisal of a development proposal. The following sets out particular examples from Essex where the advice given in Government PPGs has been used to secure detailed programmes of recording for large and often complex standing buildings. IMPACTASSESSMENT In some instances where the importance of a building is not fully understood and the scheme involves major works an impact assessment may be required before the determination of a planning/listed building application. PPG 15, para. 2.11 states: 14 "The Secretary of State attaches particular importance to early consultation with the local planning authority on development proposals which would affect historic sites or structures, whether listed buildings, conservation areas,parks and gardens, battlefields or the wider historic landscape ... "They should expect developers to assess the likely impact of their proposals on the special interest of the site or structure in question, and to provide such written information or drawings as maybe required to understand the significance of the site or structure before an application is determined' (my emphasis). Figure l Gardners' Brewery, Coggeshall. Gardners' Brewery,Coggeshall A preliminary planning enquiry was submitted to Braintree District Council in 1995. to convert the redundant Coggeshall brewery (Figurel) into two residential units and bedsits. The building was listed Grade II in 1987 and has been on Essex County Council's Buildings at Risk Register since 1989. The site comprises a two and three-storey part brick-built and timber-framed brewhouse, various storage buildings and stables; the brewhouse contains a brewing pan, a slate water tank in the roof, a Yorkshire Slate Square (a slate fermentation vessel), several grist barrows and objects connected with the brewing process. Other original features include door and window fittings, and painted signs denoting room function. At the time of the enquiry, the historic building Conservation Officer was aware that more information was required on the surviving technological features before an informed assessment could be made on the impact of the scheme. Prior to granting any planning/listed building consent it was therefore decided that the building needed to be fully recorded, this advice being based on that given in PPG 15, paragraph 2.11. A recording brief written by the archaeological/historic buildings Conservation Officer was issued to the applicant together with a list of specialist building recording contractors. The brief set out the recording level which specified scale drawings, photographs (both black and white, and colour slide), documentary research, report format and archive deposition. The contractor's specification had to be app roved by the archaeological/ Context54 June 19-9.7
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=