)NSTITUTE OF (ISTORIC "UILDING #ONSERVATION .O -ARCH 0IONEERS OF INFORMED CONSERVATION #!"% URBAN TRUTH IS IN THE FLOW
&5($7,9( 5( 86( 2) /$1' %8,/',1*6 6 7 0 , & + $ ( /· 6 4 8 ( ( 1 6 7 5 ( ( 7 '(5%< '( 68 7(/ )$; HQTXLULHV#ODWKDPDUFKLWHFWV FR XN /DWKDP $UFKLWHFWV 8UEDQ 'HVLJQ RIIHUV D FRPSOHWH FRQVHUYDWLRQ SODQQLQJ JUDQW DGYRFDF\ DQG GHVLJQ FRQVXOWDQF\ VHUYLFH IRFXVHG RQ WKH UHQHZDO DQG UHYLWDOLVDWLRQ RI KLVWRULF DQG VHQVLWLYH SODFHV IDFLQJ WUDQVLWLRQ ,I \RX DUH WKLQNLQJ RI FRPPLVVLRQLQJ XV ZRUNLQJ ZLWK XV RU IRU XV SOHDVH JLYH -R 5LFK D FDOO
# / . 4 % 8 4 - ! 2 # ( #ONTEXT 4(% ).34)454% /& ()34/2)# "5),$).' #/.3%26!4)/. WWW IHBC ORG UK 2EGISTERED AS A #HARITY .UMBER #OMPANY ,IMITED BY 'UARANTEE 2EGISTERED IN %NGLAND .UMBER 2EGISTERED /FFICE 3TAFFORD 2OAD 4UNBRIDGE7ELLS +ENT 4. 1: )("# /FFICERS 0RESIDENT -ALCOLM !IRS EMAIL PRESIDENT IHBC ORG UK #HAIRMAN %DDIE "OOTH EMAIL CHAIR IHBC ORG UK 6ICE #HAIR 2ONNIE 2OBERTSON EMAIL VVCMEMBERSHIP IHBC ORG UK 6ICE #HAIR *OHN9ATES EMAIL VCPOLICY IHBC ORG UK 3ECRETARY 2ICHARD -ORRICE EMAIL SECRETARY IHBC ORG UK 4REASURER -ICHAEL +NIGHTS EMAIL TREASURER IHBC ORG UK -EMBERSHIP 3ECRETARY 'US !STLEY EMAIL MEMBERSHIP IHBC ORG UK "RANCHES #OORDINATOR *ULIA 3MITH EMAIL BRANCHES IHBC ORG UK #ONSULTATIONS 3ECRETARY $AVE #HETWYN EMAIL CONSULTATIONS IHBC ORG UK ,AW 0RACTICE #OORDINATOR &RANK +ELSALL EMAIL LAW IHBC ORG UK )4 -ANAGER 0ETER "ADCOCK EMAIL IT IHBC ORG UK "RANCH /FFICERS .ORTH )AN 'OODMAN 4EL .ORTH7EST 3HEILA 3TONES 4EL 9ORKSHIRE 3TEPHEN "ATEMAN 4EL 7EST -IDLANDS +AREN (OLYOAKE 4EL %AST -IDLANDS &IONA .EWTON 4EL 3OUTH 'ILL "UTTER 4EL 3OUTH7EST $AVID 3TIRLING 4EL %AST !NGLIA -ICHAEL +NIGHTS 4EL 3OUTH %AST 0ETER #OBLEY 4EL ,ONDON *ON &INNEY 4EL 3COTLAND *IM -C$ONALD 4EL 7ALES 4REFOR 4HORPE 4EL . )RELAND ,AURENCE -ANOGUE4EL 2EPUBLIC OF )RELAND "ERNARD $EE 4EL "USINESS /FFICE *UBILEE (OUSE (IGH 3TREET 4ISBURY 7ILTSHIRE 30 (! %NGLAND 4EL &AX EMAIL ADMIN IHBC ORG UK #OVER 3IR 2ICHARD -AC#ORMAC S SCHEME FOR RESTRUCTURING "ROADCASTING (OUSE DESIGN IN AN HISTORIC CONTEXT AT ITS BEST 3EE @"UILDING IN CONTEXT THE #!"% CASEBOOK ON P )MAGE ¥ (AYES $AVIDSON 7HAT WE HAVE AND WHY IT MATTERS %DITORIAL PAINTINGS MODELS SCULPTURE WRITING MUSIC OR THE RECORDED WORD *OHN 3TONARD P PUTS THAT PROJECT IN THE CONTEXT OF THE (ISTORIC %NVIRONMENT OF ,IVERPOOL 0ROJECT 7HEN OTHER CITIES WERE ENJOYING BOOMING ECONOMIES AND PUTTING THEIR HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT TO THE BULLDOZER ,IVERPOOL LAY FALLOW .OW THAT IT TOO IS BUILDING IT IS TIME TO DECIDE WHOSE FEELINGS FOR THE CITY S HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT WILL SHAPE ITS FUTURE -ARIE (ADDLETON P TELLS THE STORY OF WHAT SHE SAYS HAS BEEN THE "IRMINGHAM *EWELLERY 1UARTER S YEARLY ORDEALS BY URBAN REGENERATION (ERE AGAIN RECORDING WHAT THERE IS AND WHY IT MATTERS HAS BEEN AN ESSENTIAL STEP 4HE ACTION SHE HOPES HAS FINALLY ENDED THAT DESTRUCTIVE CYCLE OWES A GREAT DEAL TO AN INTENSIVE SURVEY BY %NGLISH (ERITAGE OF THE QUARTER S BUILDINGS AND THE PUBLICATION OF A BOOK CHRONICLING ITS GLORIES *IM 'ARD NER P QUOTES -ARTIN #HERRY S CLAIM THAT EVERY SINGLE APPLICATION SEEN BY %NGLISH (ERITAGE S 5RBAN 0ANEL HAS SUFFERED FROM AN INADEQUATE UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONTEXT AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PLACE 5NTIL INFORMED CONSERVATION IS THE RULE RATHER THAN THE EXCEPTION COUNCILS WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE ILL INFORMED DECISIONS AND BUILDING OWNERS TO MISUNDERSTAND THE REAL VALUE OF THEIR ASSETS "RIEFING 0ERIODICALLYx 4HE THATCHING CONTROVERSY 4HE CASE OF LONG STRAW VERSUS COMBED WHEAT REED THATCHING )AN ,UND ,AW AND PRACTICE !PPEAL DECISIONS !LEXANDRA &AIRCLOUGH 2ECORD FINES AND COSTS FOR UNAUTHORISED WORKS TO LISTED BUILDINGS $AVID "URTON 0YE 3UPPORTING COLUMNS #ONVINCING THE COUNCILLORS "RIAN -ORTON -EMORY "LOCK BUILDING A PICTURE OF THE PAST -IRIAM ,EVIN 5SING A CHARACTER BASED APPROACH *OHN $ARLINGTON "UILDING IN CONTEXT THE #!"% CASEBOOK 0ETER 3TEWART 4HE (ISTORIC %NVIRONMENT OF ,IVERPOOL 0ROJECT *OHN 3TONARD (OW ) SURVIVED THE REGENERATION PROCESS -ARIE (ADDLETON 3AVING .ORTHERN )RELAND S VERNACULAR HOUSES (ARRIET $EVLIN )NFORMED CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE *IM 'ARD NER )("# NEWS .OTES FROM THE CHAIR )("# NEWS -EMBERSHIP NOTES "OOK REVIEWS 0RODUCTS AND SERVICES 7HAT MATTERS 7HY DOES IT MATTER 4HOSE SIMPLE QUESTIONS LIE AT THE HEART OF HISTORIC BUILDING CONSERVATION 4HEY ARE NOT QUESTIONS JUST FOR THE EXPERTS 3UCCESSFUL CONSERVATION DEPENDS ON A WHOLE RANGE OF PEOPLE WHO UNDERSTAND PLANNERS ARCHITECTS COUNCILLORS LANDOWNERS COMMUNITY GROUPS AND MANY MORE @)NFORMED CONSERVATION IS THE NAME GIVEN TO KNOWLEDGE ABOUT CONSERVATION SET OUT IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY 4HIS ISSUE OF #ONTEXT HIGHLIGHTS EXAMPLES WHERE THAT KNOWLEDGE IS BEING NOT ONLY ACQUIRED BUT ALSO COMMUNICATED *OHN $ARLINGTON P REPORTS ON HOW TECHNIQUES OF CHARACTERISATION STUDYING THE CHARACTER OF AN AREA AN ACCEPTED TOOL IN ANALYSING THE HISTORIC LANDSCAPE HAVE BEEN TRANSFERRED TO THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT !T ITS BEST CHARACTERISATION CAN HELP GENERATE A DIALOGUE WHERE NONE WAS POSSIBLE BEFORE )F CONSERVATION IS NOT JUST FOR EXPERTS HOW DOES ANYONE ELSE GET TO SAY WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO THEM -IRIAM ,EVIN P EXPLAINS HOW THE -EMORY "LOCK PROJECT IN ,IVERPOOL HAS DRAWN IN PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT TRADITIONALLY AN %NGLISH (ERITAGE AUDIENCE 4HE AIM HAS BEEN TO BUILD UP A PICTURE OF ,IVERPOOL S PAST THROUGH THE MEMORIES OF THE PEOPLE LIVING THERE EXPRESSED THROUGH ANY MEDIUM THAT CAN BE FITTED INTO A SMALL BOX PHOTOGRAPHS
# / . 4 % 8 4 - ! 2 # ( #ONTEXT %DITOR 2OBERT #OWAN %DITORIAL #OORDINATOR .IGEL "ARKER 7ORPLESDON 2OAD 'UILDFORD 3URREY '5 24 4EL EMAIL NIGEL UK YAHOO CO UK %DITORIAL "OARD .IGEL "ARKER CHAIR #ATHERINE #ROFT CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION REVIEWS 3USAN "ROOKS TREASURER AND )4 .IGEL #ROWE MAIN FEATURES 0ETER DE &IGUIEREDO BOOK REVIEWS *ULIA 3MITH )("# BRANCHES -ICHAEL 4AYLOR MAIN FEATURES #ONTEXT IS PUBLISHED FIVE TIMES PER YEAR AND IS DISTRIBUTED TO ALL MEMBERS OF THE )NSTITUTE OF (ISTORIC "UILDING #ONSERVATION ¥ )NSTITUTE OF (ISTORIC "UILDING #ONSERVATION )33. 0UBLISHER 0UBLISHED FOR THE )NSTITUTE OF (ISTORIC "UILDING #ONSERVATION BY #ATHEDRAL #OMMUNICATIONS ,IMITED (IGH 3TREET 4ISBURY 7ILTSHIRE %NGLAND 30 (! 4EL &AX EMAIL BCD CATHCOMM DEMON CO UK WWW BUILDINGCONSERVATION COM .ON MEMBER SUBSCRIPTIONS TO #ONTEXT #ONTEXT IS AVAILABLE TO NON MEMBERS OF THE )("# AT AN ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION RATE INCLUDING POSTAGE OF 5NITED +INGDOM a %LSEWHERE 53 3UBSCRIPTION ORDERS TOGETHER WITH REMITTANCES PAYABLE TO )NSTITUTE OF (ISTORIC "UILDING #ONSERVATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE )("# "USINESS /FFICE AT *UBILEE (OUSE (IGH 3TREET 4ISBURY 7ILTSHIRE 30 (! 4HE VIEWS EXPRESSED IN #ONTEXT ARE NOT NECESSARILY THOSE HELD BY THE )("# NOR THE PUBLISHER .EITHER THE PUBLISHER NOR THE )("# SHALL BE UNDER ANY LIABILITY WHATSOEVER IN RESPECT OF CONTRIBUTED ARTICLES 7E GRATEFULLY ACKNOWLEDGE THE SUPPORT OF FIRMS WHOSE ADVERTISEMENTS APPEAR THROUGHOUT THIS PUBLICATION 7HILE EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO ENSURE THAT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS ISSUE OF #ONTEXT IS CURRENT AND CORRECT NEITHER THE )("# NOR THE PUBLISHER CAN BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS WHICH MAY OCCUR "RIEFING #OPY DEADLINES #OPY DEADLINES FOR #ONTEXT IN )SSUE $ATE -AY )SSUE -ARCH *ULY )SSUE -AY 3EPTEMBER )SSUE *ULY .OVEMBER )SSUE 3EPTEMBER #ONTEXT IS PUBLISHED FIVE TIMES A YEAR IN -ARCH -AY *ULY 3EPTEMBER AND .OVEMBER 7E LL SEE YOU IN COURT .UMBER 7ALTON 3TREET ,ONDON 37 FORMS PART OF A MID TH CENTURY CLASSICAL TERRACE OF PAIRED STUCCOED HOUSES ,ISTED 'RADE )) IN IT IS SITUATED WITHIN THE 4HURLOE %STATE AND 3MITH S #HARITY #ONSERVATION !REA ! PROSECUTION CASE WAS BROUGHT BY THE 2OYAL "OROUGH OF +ENSINGTON AND #HELSEA AGAINST 4REVOR ,AW OF "RACKENBURY 2OAD (AMMERSMITH ,AW APPEARED BEFORE -ARYLEBONE -AGISTRATES #OURT IN .OVEMBER CHARGED WITH REMOVING AND ALTERING THE ROOF OF 7ALTON 3TREET WITHOUT PLANNING OR LISTED BUILDING CONSENT A CRIMINAL OFFENCE UNDER THE 0LANNING ,ISTED "UILDINGS AND #ONSERVATION !REAS !CT ,AW IS A MEMBER OF )NTERIOR $ECORATORS AND $ESIGNERS !SSOCIATION AND USES LETTERS -)$$! AFTER HIS NAME /N THE ASSOCIATION S WEBSITE HE OFFERS HIS SERVICES AS A DESIGNER AND PROJECT MANAGER FOR TRADITIONAL AND MODERN DEVELOPMENTS ,AW PLEADED NOT GUILTY TO THE CHARGE )N HIS DEFENCE HE DENIED THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ROOF TO THE SPECIAL ARCHITECTURAL AND HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING (E ALSO CLAIMED THAT THE REMOVAL OF THE ENTIRE ROOF WAS IMPLIED BY A PLANNING PERMISSION AND LISTED BUILDING CONSENT GRANTED IN !PRIL .EVERTHELESS THE MAGISTRATES FOUND HIM GUILTY AS CHARGED AND FINED HIM a (E WAS ALSO ORDERED TO PAY THE BOROUGH S LEGAL COSTS OF a 4HE CONSENTS GRANTED BY THE 2OYAL "OROUGH OF +ENSINGTON AND #HELSEA #OUNCIL IN !PRIL WERE IN FACT FOR LIMITED ALTERATIONS TO A NON ORIGINAL DORMER WINDOW ON THE REAR ROOF SLOPE AND OTHER WORK AT THE REAR GROUND AND LOWER GROUND FLOOR LEVELS )N .OVEMBER ,AW INSTRUCTED THE REMOVAL OF NEARLY THE WHOLE ROOF STRUCTURE AND THE CEILINGS OF THE SECOND FLOOR ROOMS BELOW 4HE ORIGINAL ROOF CONSISTED OF A @TRUE MANSARD PROFILE WITH DISTINCTIVE GABLED FRONT DORMERS 4HE ORIGINAL MANSARD ROOF SLOPES AND THE PITCHED ROOFS OF THE FRONT DORMERS WERE DEMOLISHED LEAVING ONLY THE CARCASSES OF THE FRONT DORMER FACES STANDING 4HE STRUCTURE WAS DISPOSED OF BEFORE THE COUNCIL CONSERVATION AND ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ARRIVED ON SITE 4HE ROOF WAS SUBSEQUENTLY RECONSTRUCTED WITH STEEPER UPPER MANSARD SLOPES AND A RAISED RIDGE LINE DISRUPTING THE SURVIVING VIRTUALLY UNIFORM ORIGINAL RIDGE LINE OF THE HISTORIC TERRACE IN WHICH THE HOUSE STANDS )N ADDITION UNAUTHORISED FLUES NOW PROJECT FROM THE VISIBLE UPPER FRONT MANSARD SLOPE AND A SATELLITE DISH WAS PLACED ABOVE THE RIDGE LINE @+ENSINGTON AND #HELSEA HAS A WONDERFUL ARCHITECTURAL LEGACY AND THIS COUNCIL INTENDS TO LOOK AFTER IT SAID THE 2OYAL BOROUGH S CABINET MEMBER FOR PLANNING #OUNCILLOR "ARRY 0HELPS @4O ANY BUILDER ARCHITECT INTERIOR DESIGNER OR INDEED hCONTRACT ADMINISTRATORv WHO FLOUTS PLANNING LAW AND DAMAGES A LISTED BUILDING WE PROMISE A DAY IN COURT AND A 02 DISASTER TO FOLLOW 4HE COUNCIL IS NOW PURSUING FURTHER ENFORCEMENT ACTION TO ENSURE THAT THE ROOF COMPLIES WITH THE CONSENTS GRANTED IN "UILDINGS AT RISK 4HE 4WENTIETH #ENTURY 3OCIETY IS UPDATING ITS "UILDINGS AT 2ISK REGISTER )F YOU KNOW OF ANY POST BUILDINGS THAT OUGHT TO BE INCLUDED PARTICULARLY 'RADE )) " LISTINGS NOT COVERED BY THE NATIONAL "!2 PUBLICATIONS THE SOCIETY WOULD LIKE TO HEAR ABOUT THEM 0LEASE WRITE TO "UILDINGS AT 2ISK 4WENTIETH #ENTURY 3OCIETY #OWCROSS 3TREET ,ONDON %# - %* OR EMAIL INFO C SOCIETY ORG UK HEADING YOUR MESSAGE "UILDINGS AT 2ISK 7ALTON 3TREET SHOWING ROOF REMOVED BEHIND THE CARCASSES OF THE ORIGINAL FRONT DORMER FACES 7ALTON 3TREET SHOWING UNAUTHORISED RAISED ROOF PROFILE
# / . 4 % 8 4 - ! 2 # ( ,ETTER 3ALARIES MORE OR LESS (OUSES OF RENAISSANCE 3COTLAND &ROM #HARLES -C+EAN PROFESSOR OF 3COTTISH ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY 5NIVERSITY OF $UNDEE 4HE LATE !UBERON7AUGH HELD THAT THE PRIMARY DUTY OF A REVIEWER WAS TO EXPLAIN TO HIS READERS WHAT A PARTICULAR BOOK CONTAINED !GAINST THAT YARDSTICK $R / 2EILLY S REVIEW OF 4HE 3COTTISH #HÊTEAU #ONTEXT .OVEMBER FAILS LAMENTABLY $R / 2EILLY FOCUSES UPON THE ONE CHAPTER ADDRESSING WHETHER THE 3COTTISH RENAISSANCE COUNTRY HOUSE REALLY DESERVED ITS TITLE @CASTLE AND THEREFORE DID NOT ADDRESS THE TWO POINTS THAT OCCUPIED THE REST OF THE VOLUME 4HE FIRST n OF PARTICULAR INTEREST TO CONSERVATION OFFICERS n IS THAT IF THEY WERE COUNTRY HOUSES WE SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR THE TYPICAL APPURTENANCES OF SUCH n COURTYARDS SERVICE COURTYARDS GARDENS STABLES ETC !ND WE SHOULD BE LOOKING WITHIN AT THE PAINTINGS FURNISHINGS AND FURNITURE )T IS CURIOUS TO DISCOVER ROOMS LINED WITH MOHAIR OR SUEDE &AR FROM BEING @CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THE BOOK IS SUBSTANTIALLY FOUNDED UPON INTER ALIA INVENTORIES THAT HAD NOT BEEN USED FOR THIS PURPOSE BEFORE 4HE SECOND OBJECTIVE WAS THE ARGUMENT THAT THESE HOUSES EVOLVED IN STYLE AND PLAN ACCORDING TO THE MONARCH JUST AS WE ACCEPT WAS THE CASE IN OTHER COUNTRIES IE %LIZABETHAN *ACOBEAN ETC AND THUS DURING THE 2ENAISSANCE UNDERWENT A HUGELY SIGNIFICANT EVOLUTION DRIVEN BY STRONG POLITICAL AGENDAS 3O THE BOOK SUGGESTS A NOVEL TYPOLOGY AND DATING $R / 2EILLY WAS PERHAPS IN ERROR TO SUPPOSE THAT THE SOLE ILLUSTRATION OF A CHAIR THAT WAS NOT REFERRED TO IN THE TEXT WAS TYPICAL OF THE OTHER WHICH ARE EXTENSIVELY DISCUSSED IN THE TEXT (IS DIFFICULTY IN COMPREHENSION IS ONE SHARED NEITHER BY READERS OF OTHER ACADEMIC JOURNALS NOR BY READERS OF THE $UNDEE #OURIER WHICH IMPLIES THAT IT IS PERSONAL TO HIM #HARLES -C+EAN &RIEND OR FOE 4HE 3IXTH .ATIONAL #ONSERVATION #ONFERENCE WILL BE HELD AT !STON 5NIVERSITY "IRMINGHAM ON &RIDAY -AY WITH THE THEME @7ATER FRIEND OR FOE 4HE KEYNOTE ADDRESS WILL BE BY *OSEF 3TULC DIRECTOR OF THE 3TATE )NSTITUTE FOR (ERITAGE 0RESERVATION IN 0RAGUE &URTHER DETAILS FROM#HARLIE "ISNAR #ONSERVATION #ONFERENCES TELEPHONE CHARLIE BISNAR BTOPENWORLD COM "OB +INDRED PRESENTS BELOW THE ANNUAL )("# DATA ON CONSERVATION OFFICER SALARIES FOR !VERAGE MEDIAN SALARIES ARE STILL ONLY PER CENT HIGHER THAN IN n 4HE NATIONAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT PAY SETTLEMENT RESULTED IN SLIGHT IMPROVEMENTS IN ADVERTISED POSTS TOWARDS THE END OF THE YEAR BUT THE GENERAL AVERAGES REMAIN LOW 4HERE ALSO REMAINS A DISTORTION DUE TO HIGHER SALARIES IN ,ONDON AND THE 3OUTH %AST AND SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER ONES IN THE %AST -IDLANDS AND9ORKSHIRE ,OCAL AUTHORITY CONSERVATION OFFICER SALARIES REGIONAL VARIATIONS %NGLISH (ERITAGE REGION 3AMPLE 3TARTING &INISHING -EDIAN 6ARIATION FROM SALARY a SALARY a SALARY a NATIONAL AVERAGE %AST !NGLIA %AST -IDLANDS n ,ONDON .ORTH %AST .ORTH 7EST 3OUTH %AST 3OUTH 7EST n 7EST -IDLANDS 9ORKSHIRE n %LSEWHERE .ATIONAL &IGURES FOR LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY &4% POSTS 6ACANCIES NOT SAMPLED FROM7ALES AND 3COTLAND s PER CENT OF ADVERTISED POSTS OUT OF HAD AVERAGE PAY BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE s 3EVEN PER CENT OF ADVERTISED POSTS WERE MORE THAN PER CENT BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE s PER CENT OF ADVERTISED JOB VACANCIES WERE IN ,ONDON AND THE 3OUTH %AST s ,ONDON AND THE 3OUTH %AST WERE GENERALLY SIGNIFICANTLY ABOVE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE s -EDIAN ADVERTISED SALARIES IN %AST -IDLANDS THE 3OUTH7EST AND9ORKSHIRE WERE SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE s 4HE FIGURES FOR SEVERAL REGIONS WERE BASED ON SMALL SAMPLES ,OCAL AUTHORITY CONSERVATION OFFICER SALARIES REGIONAL VARIATIONS %NGLISH (ERITAGE REGION 3AMPLE 3TARTING &INISHING -EDIAN 6ARIATION FROM a a a NATIONAL AVERAGE %AST !NGLIA n %AST -IDLANDS n ,ONDON .ORTH %AST n .ORTH 7EST n 3OUTH %AST 3OUTH 7EST n 7EST -IDLANDS n 9ORKSHIRE n %LSEWHERE .ATIONAL &IGURES FOR LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY &4% POSTS 6ACANCIES NOT SAMPLED FROM ELSEWHERE FOUR IN7ALES ONE IN 3COTLAND s PER CENT OF ADVERTISED POSTS OUT OF HAD AVERAGE PAY BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE s PERCENT OF ADVERTISED POSTS WERE MORE THAN PER CENT BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE s PERCENT OF ADVERTISED JOB VACANCIES WERE IN ,ONDON AND THE 3OUTH %AST IN LINE WITH DISTRIBUTION OF HERITAGE RESOURCES s ,ONDON AND THE 3OUTH %AST WERE GENERALLY SIGNIFICANTLY ABOVE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE AND WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR RAISING THE OVERALL NATIONAL MEDIAN FIGURE s !DVERTISED SALARIES IN %AST !NGLIA APPEAR TO BE ABOUT THE NATIONAL AVERAGE s 4HE FIGURE FOR THE .ORTH %AST IS BASED ON A VERY SMALL SAMPLE ,OCAL AUTHORITY CONSERVATION OFFICER PROVISION 3ALARY ANALYSIS ADVERTISED POSTS n 9EAR 0OSTS 3TARTING &INISHING -EDIAN 3TARTING &INISHING -EDIAN SAMPLED a a a a a a !VERAGES BASED ON ALL POSTS !VERAGES SMOOTHED n n n n n 4OTAL SAMPLE !LL POSTS INCLUDING7ALES AND 3COTLAND 3MOOTHED FIGURES REMOVING BOTTOM THREE AND TOP THREE STARTING AND FINISHING SALARIES TO DISCOUNT EXTREMES OF LOW CAREER GRADE POSTS AND GENERALLY SHORT TERM UP TO THREE YEAR HIGH END ,ONDON AND THE 3OUTH %AST CASES ETC
# / . 4 % 8 4 - ! 2 # ( 4HE LATEST ISSUE OF THE *OURNAL OF !RCHITECTURAL #ONSERVATION 6OL .O .OVEMBER MAINTAINS ITS ECLECTIC COVERAGE OF DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL MATERIAL /F THE FORMER "RIDGET &RANKLIN DESCRIBES THE DEVELOPMENT AND EVENTUAL ABANDONMENT OF TH CENTURY LUNATIC ASYLUMS AND HOW HOUSE BUILDERS ARE TAKING ON THE RISKY PROCESS OF PRESERVING AND CONVERTING THIS UNIQUE AND DIFFICULT BUILDING TYPE 4HREE EXAMPLES TWO IN $EVON AND ONE IN #HESHIRE DEMONSTRATE HOW THE OUTCOMES DEPEND ON THE APPROACHES AND ATTITUDES OF THE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY AND THE DEVELOPER -AVERICK INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPERS ARE SEEN TO BE MORE LIKELY TO SUCCEED THAN CONVENTIONAL ONES BUT LOCAL AUTHORITIES THAT HAVE TRIED TO USE THEIR BEST ENDEAVOURS TO SAFEGUARD THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SITES FEEL THE RESULTING UNENLIGHTENED COMMERCIAL PRESSURES HAVE RESULTED ONLY IN MEDIOCRITY /N THE INTERNATIONAL FRONT THERE ARE SUCCINCT REPORTS ON TWO OF THE WORLD S MOST FAMOUS BUILDINGS 4HE TECHNIQUES USED TO STABILISE THE ,EANING4OWER OF 0ISA ARE CLEARLY EXPLAINED (ERE THE CAUSES WERE WELL ESTABLISHED BUT WITH THE4AJ -AHAL THE REASONS FOR THE RECENT DEGRADATION OF THE WHITE MARBLE WERE NOT )T HAD BEEN ASSUMED THAT POLLUTION GENERATED BY THE NEARBY -ATHURA /IL 2EFINERY WAS RESPONSIBLE BUT THIS NOW APPEARS NOT TO BE THE OBVIOUS CAUSE WITH AIR POLLUTION PLAYING ONLY A MINIMAL ROLE )T HAS BEEN CONCLUDED INSTEAD THAT A LACK OF MAINTENANCE HAS BEEN A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTORY FACTOR THAT MIGHT BE ALLEVIATED BY BETTER FUTURE MANAGEMENT OF THE MONUMENT )("# MEMBER $ENNIS 2ODWELL LOOKS AT THE MANAGEMENT PARAMETERS OBJECTIVES AND PROGRESS TOWARDS IMPLEMENTING THE MANAGEMENT PLANS OF THE FIVE 5+ INDUSTRIAL7ORLD (ERITAGE 3ITES )RONBRIDGE 'ORGE "LAENAVON $ERWENT6ALLEY -ILLS .EW ,ANARK AND 3ALTAIRE (E ALSO EXAMINES HOW THESE PLANS RELATE TO !RTICLE OF THE 7ORLD (ERITAGE #ONVENTION ON NATIONWIDE PROTECTION AND CONSERVATION OF THE CULTURAL HERITAGE AND HE IDENTIFIES OF THE POINTERS TO BE DRAWN TOGETHER INTO A COMMON VISION AND PATTERN OF IMPLEMENTATION !N ARTICLE BY !YLIN /RBASLI AND 0HILIP 7HITBOURN ON PROFESSIONAL TRAINING AND SPECIALISATION IN CONSERVATION ALTHOUGH SUBTITLED @AN )#/-/3 VIEWPOINT NEEDS TO BE READ WITH SOME CAUTION )T IS BASED ON A ONE DAY WORKSHOP HELD IN -AY 7HILE IT REVIEWS PROGRESS OF THE )#/-/3 'UIDELINES ON %DUCATION AND4RAINING IN #ONSERVATION IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY FULLY REFLECT THE PRESENT SITUATION IN THE 5+ OR MORE RECENT DEVELOPMENTS WHERE THE )("# WHICH IS NOT MENTIONED AT ALL HAS BEEN PLAYING A MAJOR ROLE 4HE PROGRESS ON BUILDINGS AT RISK IN ,IVERPOOL IS FEATURED IN4HE 'EORGIAN THE MAGAZINE OF THE 'EORGIAN 'ROUP !UTUMN 7INTER 4HE CITY IS ONE OF THE FEW OUTSIDE ,ONDON TO EMPLOY A BUILDINGS AT RISK OFFICER 4HE LAUNCH IN -ARCH LAST YEAR OF THE CITY S (ISTORIC %NVIRONMENT OF ,IVERPOOL 0ROJECT (%,0 SEE P OF THIS ISSUE OF #ONTEXT HAS REFOCUSED EFFORTS ON DEALING WITH THE PROBLEM BUILDINGS USING MAJOR4OWNSCAPE (ERITAGE )NITIATIVE FUNDING %ARLY PROGRESS ON THIS IS DESCRIBED #ONTINUING A THEME ON INTERIOR DETAILS A NICELY ILLUSTRATED ARTICLE ON FINE STAIRCASE JOINERY IN MODEST HOUSES SHOWS AN OPEN WELL CUT STRING STAIRCASE OF AROUND IN -ILTON +EYNES 4HE STAIR RISING BETWEEN GROUND AND FIRST FLOORS AROUND THREE SIDES OF A DOUBLE HEIGHT HALL HAS DELIGHTFUL FLUTED NEWELS AND SLENDER HANDRAILS 4HE ISSUE ALSO DESCRIBES THE RESTORATION OF THE ROMANTIC 'RADE ) REGISTERED GARDENS AT 7ENTWORTH #ASTLE THE ONLY GARDENS OF THAT GRADE IN 3OUTH9ORKSHIRE AND CONTAINING 'RADE )) AND 'RADE )) STRUCTURES 4HE WORK IS BEING ASSISTED BY a MILLION FROM THE (ERITAGE ,OTTERY &UND 4HE HOUSE IS THE ONLY %NGLISH EXAMPLE OF *OHANN DE "ODT S &RANCO 0RUSSIAN BAROQUE STYLE 4HE 30!" IS REISSUING A REVISED EDITION OF ONE OF ITS BEST SELLING PUBLICATIONS 4ECHNICAL 0AMPHLET .O ON2EPOINTING )N THE WINTER .EWSLETTER 6OL .O $OUGLAS +ENT THE SOCIETY S TECHNICAL SECRETARY FOCUSES ON THE CENTRAL ISSUES SURROUNDING ADVANCES IN BEST PRACTICE !LSO OF GREAT VALUE IS AN ARTICLE ON THE PRACTICAL ASPECTS OF THE ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT OF MAJOR REPAIR PROJECTS ANSWERING SIMPLE BUT FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS LIKE HOW CAN WE PERSUADE FUNDING SOURCES TO MEET UP FRONT PRE CONTRACT COSTS 4HE ISSUE ALSO ILLUSTRATES A NUMBER OF SPLENDID ARCHITECTURAL MODELS BY7REN 3OANE .ASH AND 'IBBS RECENTLY DISPLAYED AT THE @"UILDINGS IN -INIATURE EXHIBITION AT THE6 ! AND SUMMARISES THE CONCLUSIONS 0ERIODICALLYx OF A STUDY DAY HELD TO REVIEW THE MAJOR RESTORATION OF THE7EST &RONT OF7ELLS #ATHEDRAL A BATTLEGROUND FOR CONFLICTING IDEAS OF CONSERVATION WHERE THE 30!" S METHODS HAVE PREVAILED 4HOSE WITH A PARTICULAR INTEREST IN HISTORIC INTERIORS WILL FIND4HE6ICTORIAN .OVEMBER .O HAS EXTENDED ARTICLES ON 0UGIN S DOMESTIC INTERIORS DESCRIBING HOW THE ARCHITECT S GOTHIC IDEAS WERE APPLIED TO THE MODERN HOUSE AND ON !GNES AND 2HODA 'ARRETT THE FIRST PROFESSIONAL WOMEN HOUSE DECORATORS ESTABLISHED IN THE S %LSEWHERE THE ISSUE INVESTIGATES THE IMPACT OF PRINTED MATERIALS PARTICULARLY ELABORATELY ILLUSTRATED TRADE CATALOGUES ON THE DESIGN OF ORDINARY 6ICTORIAN HOUSES STILL IMPORTANT ARCHIVAL SOURCES OF ADVICE !S AN ENCOURAGING EXAMPLE OF A LOCAL SUSTAINABLE SOURCE OF TRADITIONAL BUILDING MATERIALS .ATURAL 3TONE 3PECIALIST /CTOBER REPORTS ON A NEW COMPANY -ELBURY 'REENSTONE ,TD SET UP TO PRODUCE 3HAFTSBURY 'REENSTONE FOR THE FIRST TIME IN DECADES /UTPUT COULD BE TONNES A YEAR %LSEWHERE IN $ORSET THE .OVEMBER ISSUE REPORTS THE OPENING OF THE FIRST MINE TO EXTRACT 0ORTLAND !LTHOUGH MINING APPEARS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN QUARRYING IN TERMS OF WINNING THE STONE THERE IS NO OVERBURDEN TO DEAL WITH AND TOTAL EXTRACTION COSTS SHOULD BE SIMILAR 4HE ISSUE ALSO FEATURES THE USE OF -ANDALE $ERBYSHIRE FOSSIL LIMESTONE EXTRACTED WITHIN THE 0EAK .ATIONAL 0ARK 4HE STONE ONCE USED NOT ONLY ON LOCAL VERNACULAR BUILDINGS BUT ALSO ON (EREFORD #ATHEDRAL #ASTLE (OWARD AND THE .ATURAL (ISTORY -USEUM IS EXPERIENCING A REVIVAL UNDER NEW QUARRY OWNERS 4HE .EWSLETTER OF THE 0AUL -ELLON #ENTRE FOR "RITISH !RT )SSUE .OVEMBER REGULARLY SETS OUT ITS SUPPORT FOR SCHOLARSHIP THROUGH AWARDS WHERE USEFUL PUBLICATIONS MAY BE EXPECTED IN DUE COURSE 4HESE INCLUDE TWO RESEARCH GRANTS TO COMPILE THE FOURTH EDITION OF THE "IOGRAPHICAL $ICTIONARY OF "RITISH !RCHITECTS 3IR (OWARD #OLVIN AND A HISTORY OF %LIZABETHAN AND *ACOBEAN ARCHITECTURE -ARK 'IROUARD 0UBLICATION GRANTS HAVE BEEN MADE TOWARDS %DWARD #RESY ARCHITECT AND CIVIL ENGINEER $IANA "URFIELD AND AN ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY OF #HETHAM S (OSPITAL AND ,IBRARY -ANCHESTER #LARE (ARTWELL "OB +INDRED -"%
# / . 4 % 8 4 - ! 2 # ( 4HE THATCHING CONTROVERSY 4HE CASE OF LONG STRAW VERSUS COMBED WHEAT REED THATCHING &OLLOWING ON THE HEELS OF THE #ONTEXT ARTICLE ON THE THATCHING CONTROVERSY BY #HRIS 7OOD AND $AVID "ROCK #ONTEXT *ULY ) AM ABLE TO REPORT ON A RECENT CASE THAT WAS TAKEN TO APPEAL ! PROPOSAL TO CHANGE A LONG STRAW THATCHED ROOF ON A LISTED BUILDING TO COMBED WHEAT REED HAS BEEN DISMISSED 4HE OWNER SUBMITTED HIS APPLICATION TO +ENNET $ISTRICT #OUNCIL IN !PRIL 4HE TIMING IS NOT WITHOUT SIGNIFICANCE 4HE LOCAL AUTHORITY REFUSED LISTED BUILDING CONSENT IN -AY ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE WORKS WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE CHARACTER OF THE PROTECTED BUILDING AND WOULD WEAKEN LOCAL DISTINCTIVENESS 4HE APPLICANT IMMEDIATELY SUBMITTED AN APPEAL ARGUING THAT A NUMBER OF OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE LOCALITY HAD BEEN SPAR COATED IN COMBED WHEAT REED AND THAT THE APPOINTED THATCHER DID NOT HAVE SUPPLIES OF GOOD QUALITY LONG STRAW !LSO IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT THE USE OF COMBED WHEAT REED WOULD BE MORE ECONOMICAL 4HAT THE LONG STRAW STYLE OF THATCHING HAS ITS OWN CHARACTERISTICS WHICH WOULD BE ALTERED BY THE PROPOSAL WAS NOT DISPUTED 4HE PROPERTY HAS TWO MAIN PARTS &IRST THERE IS THE ORIGINAL TIMBER FRAMED COTTAGE PARALLEL TO THE VILLAGE STREET 3ECOND THERE IS A PROJECTING CROSS WING WITH HIPPED ROOF "OTH PARTS ARE BENEATH THATCHED ROOFS LAID IN THE LONG STRAW STYLE 4HE CONDITION OF THE SOUTH FACING SLOPE OF THE CROSS WING WAS IN POOR CONDITION AND THE NEED FOR REMEDIAL WORK WAS UNDENIABLE 4HE CONDITION OF THE OTHER SLOPES HOWEVER WAS REASONABLE AND A REQUIREMENT FOR RE THATCHING WAS NOT OBVIOUS !MONG OTHER THINGS THE LOCAL AUTHORITY HAD BEEN CONCERNED THAT THE INTRODUCTION OF COMBED WHEAT REED TO ONE SLOPE WOULD RESULT IN A HYBRID APPEARANCE BUT THE APPELLANT CONFIRMED THAT IT WAS HIS INTENTION TO RE THATCH THE WHOLE OF BOTH MAIN ROOFS 4HE LOCAL AUTHORITY DREW ATTENTION TO ITS POLICY LEAFLET FIRST PUBLISHED IN BEFORE %NGLISH (ERITAGE S MORE RECENT PUBLICATIONS 4HIS EXPLAINS THAT THE TRADITIONAL THATCHING MATERIAL IN THE AREA IS THE LONG STRAW METHOD /LD PHOTOGRAPHS AND CONVERSATIONS WITH ELDERLY THATCHERS WHO OPERATED IN THE AREA HAVE CONFIRMED THAT THE LONG STRAW STYLE WAS GENERALLY UNIVERSAL UNTIL THE SECOND HALF OF THE TH CENTURY (OWEVER IT IS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT DURING THE S LONG BEFORE VERNACULAR BUILDINGS RECEIVED STATUTORY PROTECTION THE COMBED WHEAT REED STYLE TOOK A STRONG HOLD 4HE NUMBER OF LONG STRAW ROOFS DECLINED AND THERE WAS CONCERN THAT THE NUMBER OF REMAINING CASES WAS REACHING A CRITICAL LEVEL 4HIS INFLUENCED THE AUTHORITY TO ADOPT A PROTECTIVE STANCE 5NLESS SURVIVING LONG STRAW ROOFS WERE CONSERVED WHO WOULD MAINTAIN THE THRESHING MACHINES 7HO WOULD BOTHER TO TRAIN UP AS A LONG STRAW THATCHER 4HE COUNCIL S POLICY HOWEVER HAS NOT SOUGHT TO TURN BACK THE CLOCK MERELY TO MAINTAIN LONG STRAW ROOFS WHERE THEY SURVIVE .EVERTHELESS IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT IN RECENT YEARS THERE HAS BEEN A STEADY TRICKLE OF ROOFS RESTORED BACK TO THEIR ORIGINAL LONG STRAW APPEARANCE INCLUDING A .ATIONAL 4RUST PROJECT AT THE 'REAT "ARN IN !VEBURY !CCORDING TO THE LOCAL AUTHORITY S RECORDS OF THE LISTED BUILDINGS IN THE AREA HAVE A THATCHED ROOF "Y THE EARLY S THE PROPORTION OF ROOFS THATCHED IN THE LONG STRAW STYLE HAD DIPPED TO AROUND PER CENT OF ALL THATCHED ROOFS IN THE AREA 4HE NUMBER OF SURVIVING LONG STRAW ROOFS IS CURRENTLY ABOUT PER CENT 4HE APPELLANT ARGUED THAT THIS LOW PROPORTION WAS A REASON TO ACCEDE TO HIS REQUEST 4HE LOCAL AUTHORITY CONTENDED THAT IT WAS A COMPELLING REASON TO PROTECT COMPARATIVELY RARE SURVIVING EXAMPLES !PPEAL PROPERTY FROM THE VILLAGE STREET *ANUARY
# / . 4 % 8 4 - ! 2 # ( /N THE QUESTION OF ECONOMICS THE LOCAL AUTHORITY ACCEPTED THAT THE PROPERTY HAD BEEN LAST RE THATCHED YEARS AGO AND THAT THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SOUTH FACING SLOPE HAD BEEN DISAPPOINTING (OWEVER IT WAS NOT ACCEPTED THAT THIS WAS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE THATCHING STYLE 2ATHER RIGHT FROM THE TIME OF THE LAST RE THATCHING THE TENSION OF THE CASEWORK LOOKED TO BE UNEVEN AND FINISHING DETAILS AT THE EAVES RIDGE AND CHIMNEY WERE CRUDE 4HE MAIN PROBLEM HAD BEEN THE APPARENT QUALITY OF THE CRAFTSMANSHIP NOT THE GENERIC STYLE !LTHOUGH LONGEVITY WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE A DETERMINING FACTOR IN AN APPLICATION FOR LISTED BUILDING CONSENT IT IS INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT OVER THE PAST DECADE THE COUNCIL HAS IDENTIFIED ONLY FIVE CASES WHERE THERE HAD BEEN PREMATURE GENERAL EROSION /NE OF THESE CASES WAS THE APPEAL PROPERTY 4HE OTHER FOUR BUILDINGS HAD BEEN COATED IN THE COMBED WHEAT REED STYLE !LTHOUGH LITTLE CAN BE INFERRED FROM THESE FIGURES IT CERTAINLY CAN NOT BE CLAIMED FROM THESE FINDINGS THAT LONG STRAW ROOFS ARE MORE LIKELY TO BREAK DOWN THAN THOSE COATED IN THE COMBED WHEAT STYLE 4HE COUNCIL S CONSERVATION TEAM PLANS TO CARRY OUT FURTHER EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON GRANT CASES WHERE THE EXACT DATE OF RE THATCHING IS KNOWN LATER DURING /N THE ISSUE OF THE AVAILABILITY OF HIGH QUALITY MATERIALS THE COUNCIL ARGUED THAT WHILE IT HAD NO REASON TO DOUBT THAT THE CHOSEN CONTRACTOR WAS CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A WORTHY JOB IN EITHER COMBED WHEAT OR LONG STRAW HE WAS NOT A LONG STRAW SPECIALIST 4HIS EXPLAINED WHY HE DID NOT HAVE ACCESS TO A STOCK OF HIGH QUALITY THRESHED STRAW "UYING IN AT A LATE STAGE IN THE THATCHING CALENDAR WAS A WELL KNOWN PROBLEM )N THE COUNCIL S VIEW EXPRESSED SOON AFTER THE APPEAL WAS LODGED IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SENSIBLE TO PATCH REPAIR THE SOUTH FACING SLOPE AND AWAIT THE ARRIVAL OF THE NEXT HARVEST WHEN THE THATCHER COULD BE FIRST IN THE QUEUE FOR HIGH QUALITY THRESHED STRAW !LTERNATIVELY THE APPELLANT COULD SEEK TO ENGAGE A SPECIALIST LONG STRAW THATCHER )N DECIDING THE APPEAL THE INSPECTOR n A MEMBER OF THE )("# n TOOK A STRAIGHTFORWARD VIEW OF THE ISSUES 4HE RELATIVELY SHORT LIFE OF THE PRESENT COVERING WAS TO BE REGRETTED BUT WAS NOT NECESSARILY AN INDICATION OF HOW LONG A NEW STRAW ROOF WOULD LAST )N SUMMARY HE REASONED THAT THAT THE APPEARANCES OF THE TWO THATCHING STYLES ARE QUITE DIFFERENT EVEN WHEN THEY ARE COVERED WITH PROTECTIVE WIRE AND HAVE A WEATHERED COLOUR ,ISTED BUILDINGS CAN BE ROBBED OF THEIR SPECIAL INTEREST AS SURELY BY UNSUITABLE ALTERATION AS BY DEMOLITION "ECAUSE FEATURES OF SPECIAL ARCHITECTURAL INTEREST WOULD NOT BE PRESERVED LISTED BUILDING CONSENT SHOULD NOT BE FORTHCOMING )AN ,UND PRINCIPAL CONSERVATION OFFICER +ENNET $ISTRICT #OUNCIL 4HE 0LANNING )NSPECTORATE S APPEAL REFERENCE !00 % % 3OUTH FACING ROOF SLOPE OF THE APPEAL PROPERTY *ANUARY ! TYPICAL CASE OF RECENTLY LAID LONG STRAW THATCH IN +ENNET $ISTRICT 7ILTSHIRE
# / . 4 % 8 4 - ! 2 # ( ,!7 !.$ 02!#4)#% !PPEAL DECISIONS !LEXANDRA &AIRCLOUGH PROVIDES AN UPDATE 3NOWDONIA .ATIONAL 0ARK !UTHORITY )NSPECTOR 2EPORTER 0 -AC$ONALD 7ELSH !SSEMBLY !DDRESS (ENDRE (OUSE ,LANRWST #OUNCIL S COSTS PART RECOVERABLE FOLLOWING WORKS TO LISTED BUILDING 4HE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY EXECUTED WORKS TO A LISTED BUILDING IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION OF THE !CT AND SERVED NOTICE ON THE OWNER SEEKING TO RECOVER THE EXPENSES )T WAS QUESTIONED WHETHER THE LETTERS ISSUED BY THE AUTHORITY CONSTITUTED VALID NOTICES AND IF SO WHETHER THE EXPENSES RECOVERED WERE REASONABLE 4HERE WAS NO PRESCRIBED FORM FOR NOTICES UNDER THE !CT (OWEVER THE #OURT OF !PPEAL IN "OLTON ; = COMMENDED AS @MODELS OF THEIR KIND THE NOTICES SERVED BY THE COUNCIL UNDER THE THEN PROVISIONS OF SECTION OF THE !CT 4HE NOTICES SERVED BY THE AUTHORITY IN THE INSTANT CASE FELL FAR SHORT OF WHAT WOULD NORMALLY BE EXPECTED BUT SINCE THEIR VALIDITY HAD NOT BEEN CHALLENGED NO PREJUDICE HAD OCCURRED 0ART OF THE COUNCIL S ACTION HAD BEEN TO BOARD UP THE WINDOWS IN THE LISTED BUILDING WITHOUT ENSURING ADEQUATE VENTILATION !S A CONSEQUENCE THIS ACTION POTENTIALLY EXACERBATED THE SPREAD OF DRY ROT /THER WORKS WERE EXECUTED WHICH WERE NOT DESCRIBED IN THE NOTICES AND CONSEQUENTLY A PROPORTION OF THE COUNCIL S EXPENSES WERE NOT TO BE RECOVERABLE 7EST "ERKSHIRE $ISTRICT #OUNCIL )NSPECTOR 2EPORTER $ $YER !DDRESS 4HE "ARN (OUSE 0ARK 7ALL ,ANE ,OWER "ASILDON 6EHICULAR ACCESS WOULD HARM LISTED WALL 0ERMISSION WAS REFUSED FOR THE CREATION OF A NEW VEHICULAR ACCESS THROUGH A WALL SURROUNDING AN HISTORIC PARK IN "ERKSHIRE 4HE APPELLANT HAD ALREADY DEMOLISHED PART OF THE WALL AND THE COUNCIL ARGUED THAT IT WAS PROTECTED BY VIRTUE OF ITS FIXATION TO LISTED GATES #ONVERSELY THE APPELLANT CLAIMED THAT THE PHYSICAL ATTACHMENT WAS SLIGHT 4HE INSPECTOR CONCLUDED THAT THE WALL DID FALL WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF A LISTED BUILDING EVEN THOUGH IT WAS NOT BONDED INTO THE BRICKWORK OF THE GATE PIERS 4HERE WERE PHYSICAL TIES AND ANY SEPARATION WAS SO SLIGHT THAT IT DID NOT AFFECT THE REQUIREMENT IN THE !CT FOR THE STRUCTURE TO BE @FIXED TO THE LISTED BUILDING )T WAS ALSO HELD THAT THE CONFIGURATION OF THE PROPOSED ACCESS TOGETHER WITH THE CHANGES IN GROUND LEVELS WOULD AFFECT THE OVERALL APPEARANCE OF THE WALL AND CHARACTER OF THE LOCALITY THROUGH THE INTRODUCTION OF A SUBURBAN FEATURE WHICH WAS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE PARKLAND SETTING (OWEVER THE INSPECTOR AWARDED A FULL SET OF COSTS TO THE APPELLANT 4HE COUNCIL HAD FAILED TO PRODUCE A PRE INQUIRY STATEMENT AND HAD MISLED THE APPELLANT S TEAM BY INDICATIONS THAT THE LISTED BUILDING ISSUE WAS TO BE DROPPED 4HESE ACTIONS AMOUNTED TO UNREASONABLE BEHAVIOUR 3OUTH 'LOUCESTERSHIRE #OUNCIL )NSPECTOR 2EPORTER 2 *AQUES !DDRESS ,A $OLCE 6ITA (ORSE 3TREET #HIPPING 3ODBURY !DVERTS AND PROJECTING LIGHTS HARMFUL TO LISTED BUILDING ,ISTED BUILDING AND ADVERTISEMENTS CONSENTS WERE DENIED IN RESPECT OF THE RETENTION OF OVER HANGING LIGHTS AND AN EXTERNALLY ILLUMINATED RESTAURANT SIGN !N INSPECTOR NOTED THAT THE PROPERTY WAS LOCATED WITHIN A PROMINENT LOCATION WITHIN AN HISTORIC MARKET TOWN AND ALTHOUGH THE SIGNS WERE ATTRACTIVE THEY DOMINATED THE FA ADE AND OBSCURED A SUBSTANTIAL PART OF THE BUILDING S ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES 4HEY ALSO DETRACTED FROM AN APPRECIATION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL PROPORTIONS OF THE BUILDING 7ITH REGARD TO THE FOUR PROJECTING LIGHTS THESE WERE PROMINENT FEATURES THAT WERE ALIEN TO THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY AND TO ITS CONTRIBUTION TO THE CONSERVATION AREA !NY COMMERCIAL NEED FOR THE LAMPS AND ADVERTISEMENT DID NOT OUTWEIGH THE HARM TO THE CONSERVATION AREA 3OUTH /XFORDSHIRE $ISTRICT #OUNCIL )NSPECTOR 2EPORTER $ .ICHOLSON !DDRESS /LD -ANOR #OTTAGE 7ALLINGFORD 2OAD .ORTH -ORETON 'LAZED LINK WOULD DETRIMENTALLY AFFECT CHARACTER OF LISTED COTTAGE ! SCHEME INVOLVED THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO STOREY BRICK EXTENSION WITH GLAZED LINK TO A THATCHED COTTAGE 4HE PROPERTY WAS LISTED 'RADE )) AND THE INSPECTOR NOTED THAT PARTS OF IT COULD DATE BACK YEARS 4HE PROPOSED EXTENSION WOULD BE NEARLY AS LARGE AS THE EXISTING COTTAGE AND IN THEORY A GLAZED LINK COULD BE INCONSPICUOUS (OWEVER OVER TIME THE ROOF COULD BECOME STAINED WITH UNSIGHTLY DEPOSITS THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO CLEAN AND THEREBY HARM THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING ! CONDITION REQUIRING THE LINK TO REMAIN FREE OF SUCH DEPOSITS WOULD NOT MEET THE ADVICE IN #IRCULAR ON THE USE OF CONDITIONS /VERALL THE SIZE AND BULK OF THE EXTENSION COUPLED WITH THE LINK WOULD HARM THE ARCHITECTURAL IMPORTANCE OF THE BUILDING AND DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OF THE CONSERVATION AREA 4HIS HARM WOULD BE COMPOUNDED BY THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE LINK WOULD PRODUCE STRONG REFLECTIONS ON SUMMER AFTERNOONS AND THUS WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE AMENITY OF RESIDENTS IN AN ADJACENT COTTAGE .ORTH .ORFOLK $ISTRICT #OUNCIL )NSPECTOR 2EPORTER 3 0APWORTH !DDRESS -ARKET 0LACE &AKENHAM #ASH DISPENSER WOULD HARM LISTED BUILDING 4HE .ATIONWIDE "UILDING 3OCIETY SOUGHT PLANNING PERMISSION AND LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF AN AUTOMATIC TELLER MACHINE !4- IN THE MARKET TOWN OF &AKENHAM IN .ORFOLK 4HE APPEAL PREMISES 'RADE )) LISTED WERE SITUATED WITHIN A CONSERVATION AREA 4HE SCHEME INVOLVED REMOVING A GROUND FLOOR WINDOW IN ORDER TO INSERT THE !44HE APPELLANT ARGUED THAT THE SASH WINDOW COULD BE REPLACED WHEN THE MACHINE WAS NO LONGER REQUIRED !N INSPECTOR WHILE NOTING THAT THE WORKS COULD BE REVERSED HELD THAT THE !4- WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY DIMINISH THE SYMMETRY OF THE BUILDING S COMPOSITION THEREBY ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE ENTIRE ELEVATION AND SURROUNDING TOWNSCAPE $ARTMOOR .ATIONAL 0ARK !UTHORITY )NSPECTOR 2EPORTER # "ALL !DDRESS 3T ,AWRENCE ,ANE !SHBURTON 3UN BLINDS REJECTED AT LISTED SHOP ! PROPOSAL INVOLVED THE INSTALLATION OF TWO EXTERNAL SUN BLINDS TO A TH CENTURY 'RADE )) LISTED BUILDING OCCUPIED BY A POST OFFICE AND SHOP ON THE GROUND FLOOR )N ASSESSING THE PROPOSAL AN INSPECTOR FORMED THE VIEW THAT WHILE THE GROUND FLOOR OF THE PROPERTY HAD BEEN IN RETAIL USE FOR SOME CONSIDERABLE TIME IT
# / . 4 % 8 4 - ! 2 # ( IT HAD RETAINED ITS DOMESTIC APPEARANCE BECAUSE IT DID NOT HAVE A FORMAL SHOP FRONT )T WAS A HANDSOME BUILDING MAKING A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION TO THE LOCAL SCENE )TS GROUP VALUE WITH SURROUNDING BUILDINGS CONTRIBUTED SIGNIFICANTLY TO THE PARTICULAR CHARACTER OF THE STREET AND THE WIDER CONSERVATION AREA 4HE APPELLANT ARGUED THAT THE BLINDS WERE REQUIRED NOT ONLY TO PROTECT THE STOCK FROM SUNLIGHT BUT ALSO TO ADVERTISE THE PRESENCE OF THE SHOP TRADING IN A SECONDARY LOCATION 7HILE THE INSPECTOR APPRECIATED THAT BLINDS WERE OFTEN PART OF A TRADITIONAL SHOP FRONT HE CONCLUDED THAT THE PROPOSED BLINDS WOULD NOT BE IN SYMPATHY WITH THE APPEARANCE OF THE BUILDING SINCE THEY WOULD LARGELY OBSCURE GROUND FLOOR DETAILS OF INTEREST 4HERE WERE MORE APPROPRIATE WAYS OF PROTECTING THE STOCK DURING THE LIMITED TIMES WHEN IT WAS EXPOSED TO SUNLIGHT SUCH AS INTERNAL BLINDS WHICH WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE STREET FRONTAGE OF THE LISTED BUILDING )T WAS ALSO JUDGED THAT THE ADVERTISING ON THE SUN BLINDS IN ISOLATION WOULD NOT OVERCOME THE LOCATIONAL DIFFICULTIES AND CERTAINLY DID NOT JUSTIFY THE HARM THEY WOULD CAUSE TO THE LISTED BUILDING AND THE CONSERVATION AREA "RISTOL #ITY #OUNCIL )NSPECTOR 2EPORTER $ -C#OY !DDRESS A /RCHARD 3TREET "RISTOL #HIMNEY ALTERATIONS CONSIDERED HARMFUL !N INSPECTOR DISMISSED AN APPEAL FOR THE REMOVAL OF A CHIMNEYPIECE FROM A LISTED BUILDING AND ITS REPLACEMENT WITH ONE DESIGNED TO ACCORD WITH THE DATE OF THE BUILDING S CONSTRUCTION 4HE CHIMNEYPIECE WAS ORIGINALLY A FIXTURE IN ANOTHER BUILDING +INGS 7ESTON (OUSE BEFORE BEING ACQUIRED IN FOR USE IN THE 4RUSTEES BOARDROOM OF THE "RISTOL -UNICIPAL #HARITIES "UILDING 4HERE WAS NO QUESTION ABOUT THE INTRINSIC INTEREST AND QUALITY OF THE CHIMNEYPIECE BUT THE APPELLANTS ARGUED THAT IT WAS NOT AN ORIGINAL FEATURE OF THE BUILDING AND ITS REMOVAL WOULD NOT DAMAGE THE SPECIAL INTEREST OF THE BUILDING 4HEY FURTHER ARGUED THAT AS TRUSTEES OF A CHARITY THEY WERE UNDER A LEGAL DUTY TO MAXIMISE THE FINANCIAL BENEFITS FROM THE PROPERTY AND WERE OF THE OPINION THAT THE SALE OF THE CHIMNEYPIECE WOULD REALISE BETWEEN a AND a 4HE INSPECTOR WAS OF A DIFFERENT VIEW FEELING THAT THE BOARDROOM PROVIDED A PARTICULARLY FINE SETTING FOR THE CHIMNEYPIECE AND NOTING THAT 00' ADVISED THAT CHIMNEYPIECES COULD OFTEN BE CENTRAL TO THE DESIGN OF A ROOM AND SHOULD RARELY BE REMOVED AND EVEN THEN SHOULD BE SAVED FOR USE ELSEWHERE IN THE BUILDING )N THIS INSTANCE IT WAS NOTED THAT THE APPLICATION WAS UNEQUIVOCAL IN STATING THAT THE INTENTION WAS TO DISPOSE OF THE CHIMNEYPIECE ON THE OPEN MARKET SO THERE WAS NO INDICATION OF WHERE IT MIGHT END UP 4HE INSPECTOR CONCLUDED THAT ALTHOUGH THE DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE CHIMNEYPIECE HAD BEEN CAREFULLY CONSIDERED AND WAS NOT INAPPROPRIATE IT DID NOT COMPENSATE FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE PRESENT ONE "RISTOL #ITY #OUNCIL )NSPECTOR 2EPORTER $ -C#OY !DDRESS "EECH (OUSE "ARKLEYS (ILL 3TAPLETON &AILURE TO COMPLY WITH APPROVED PLANS JUDGED HARMFUL TO LISTED BUILDING !N INSPECTOR DISMISSED TWO APPEALS FOR RETROSPECTIVE PERMISSION AND CONSENT IN RESPECT OF WORKS WHICH DID NOT FOLLOW THE APPROVED DRAWINGS FOR THE CONVERSION OF AN TH CENTURY MANSION IN "RISTOL INTO FLATS OR APARTMENTS 4HE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY WAS PARTICULARLY CONCERNED THAT THE ROOF OF THE SINGLE STOREY ELEMENT WAS BUILT WITHOUT A PARAPET ECHOING THE REST OF THE BUILDING WHILE AN ENTRANCE AND EXTERNAL STEPS WERE INTRODUCED IN PLACE OF A WINDOW INITIALLY PROPOSED IN THE SOUTH ELEVATION 4HE INSPECTOR CONSIDERED THAT THE WORKS COULD BE CONVENIENTLY CONSIDERED AS FOUR SEPARATE ELEMENTS THE DOOR STEPS UP TO IT HANDRAILS AND A COACH LIGHT 4HE INSPECTOR CONSIDERED THE COACH LIGHT WAS MUCH LESS OBJECTIONABLE THAN DID THE LOCAL AUTHORITY BUT THE VARNISHED HARD WOOD PANELLED DOOR WAS A PARTICULARLY DISCORDANT FEATURE IN THIS ELEVATION OF THE MANSION CONTRASTING UNSATISFACTORILY WITH THE ELEGANT DELICATE WHITE PAINTED DOORS AND FANLIGHT IN THE PORTICO ON THE MAIN BLOCK OF THE BUILDING )N RESPECT OF THE SIX STEPS UP TO THE DOOR THE INSPECTOR WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE CONFIGURATION WAS MUCH TOO GRAND FOR WHAT WAS A VERY MINOR ENTRANCE )T WAS ALSO CONCLUDED THAT THE WHITE PAINTED HANDRAILS WERE OUT OF PLACE ON THE BUILDING AND COMPOUNDED IN A SUBTLE BUT SIGNIFICANT WAY THE INAPPROPRIATE GRANDEUR OF THE ENTRANCE )N DISMISSING THE APPEALS THE INSPECTOR CONSIDERED THAT TAKEN AS A WHOLE THE WORKS DETRACTED FROM THE SPECIAL INTEREST OF THE LISTED BUILDING AND CONFLICTED WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE "RISTOL ,OCAL 0LAN 4HE EROSION OF THE BUILDING S QUALITY WAS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE PRESERVATION OR ENHANCEMENT OF THE CONSERVATION AREA ).34)454% /& &)%,$ !2#(!%/,/')343 5NIVERSITY OF 2EADING %ARLEY 'ATE 0/ "OX 2EADING 2' !5 4EL &AX %MAIL ADMIN IFA VIRGIN NET WWW ARCHAEOLOGISTS NET !NNUAL #ONFERENCE FOR !RCHAEOLOGISTS n !PRIL AT THE 5NIVERSITY OF 7ALES "ANGOR IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE $EPT OF (ISTORY AND 7ELSH (ISTORY 5NIVERSITY OF 7ALES "ANGOR 3ESSIONS INCLUDE %THNIC PARTICIPATION "RITISH MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY )RON !GE &RANCE )NLAND WATERWAYS )&! 'ROUPS %UROPEAN FUNDING !RCHAEOLOGY YOUNG PEOPLE 5RBAN DESIGN )NFORMATION STANDARDS IN %UROPE )&! 2EGISTERED !RCHAEOLOGICAL /RGANISATIONS 5PLANDS ARCHAEOLOGY !GENCY ARCHAEOLOGY 0LANNING ARCHAEOLOGY 2EMOTE SENSING %VENTS #ONFERENCE DINNER WINE RECEPTION PARTY EXCURSIONS
# / . 4 % 8 4 - ! 2 # ( ABOUT THE USE OF HARD CEMENT MORTARS 4HE COUNCIL HAD NO HESITATION IN AGREEING TO PROSECUTE FOR THE UNAUTHORISED WORKS PROVIDED THAT THEIR STRATEGIC DIRECTOR LEGAL WAS SATISFIED AS TO THE EVIDENCE AND ALSO TO TAKE ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST THE OWNER IF NO AGREEMENT WAS REACHED REGARDING REINSTATEMENT 4HE LESSEE DID AGREE TO A 0!#% 0OLICE AND #RIMINAL %VIDENCE INTERVIEW BUT THIS PROVED INCONCLUSIVE !T THE SAME TIME TWO ADDED COMPLICATIONS WERE THROWN INTO THE POT &IRST THERE WAS THE POSITION OF THE OWNER AND HIS FORMER LESSEE 3ECOND A NEW LESSEE WISHED TO USE THE BUILDING FOR WEDDINGS AND CONFERENCES )N PRINCIPLE THIS WAS AS ACCEPTABLE AS THE OFFICE USE HAD BEEN IN ) WAS NOW DEALING WITH THREE PARTIES THE FORMER LESSEE THE NEW LESSEE AND THE OWNER AND ALL THEIR PROFESSIONAL ADVISERS n ARCHITECTS BUILDING SURVEYORS SOLICITORS n WHILE MAINTAINING MY OWN #HINESE WALL TO ENSURE THAT ) GAVE NO INFORMATION TO ANY OF THEM WHICH MIGHT HAVE PROVED PREJUDICIAL TO THE PROSECUTION 4HIS WAS DIFFICULT AND FRUSTRATING AT TIMES PARTICULARLY FOR THE NEW LESSEE WHOSE BUSINESS PLANS INCLUDED THE OUTBUILDINGS 7E WERE RELUCTANT TO SEE ANY WORK CARRIED OUT WHICH MAY HAVE OBLITERATED EVIDENCE 4HERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF DISCUSSION AS TO HOW TO PROCEED 3HOULD WE PROSECUTE FOR EIGHT OFFENCES OR ONE COVERING ALL ITEMS 3HOULD THE CASE GO TO A MAGISTRATES COURT WHERE LAY MAGISTRATES WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER A $AVID "URTON 0YE 2ECORD FINES AND COSTS FOR UNAUTHORISED WORKS TO LISTED BUILDINGS 4HE CASE OF 3OMERFORD (ALL "REWOOD 3OUTH 3TAFFORDSHIRE !NY CONSERVATION OFFICER EMBARKING ON PROSECUTING AGAINST UNAUTHORISED WORK TO LISTED BUILDINGS WILL KNOW THAT THEY CAN BE IN FOR A LONG HAUL ON A BUMPY HEAVILY PITTED ROAD 4HIS WAS CERTAINLY THE CASE IN !PRIL WHEN ) HAD A PHONE CALL ALERTING ME TO THE FACT THAT WORKS HAD BEEN CARRIED OUT AT 3OMERFORD (ALL A 'RADE )) COUNTRY HOUSE IN 3OUTH 3TAFFORDSHIRE ! REPAIRING LEASE HAD BEEN TAKEN ON THE PROPERTY 4HINGS HAD GONE WELL WITH THE LESSEE AND WE DISCUSSED HIS PROPOSALS IN SOME DEPTH (OWEVER IT WAS EVIDENT TO ME FROM MY SITE VISITS THAT THE LIST DESCRIPTION FOR THE COMPLEX AROUND THE HALL WAS INADEQUATE IN SPITE OF THE RESURVEY CARRIED OUT IN THE MID S ) REQUESTED SPOTLISTING FOR SEVERAL OF THEM AND WAS PLEASED WHEN THE STABLE RANGE AND ATTACHED COURTYARD BUILDINGS WERE LISTED IN *ULY 4HE LESSEE EMPLOYED A GOOD LOCAL ARCHITECT !FTER VERY EXTENSIVE DISCUSSIONS AND NEGOTIATIONS ON MATTERS OF DETAIL SUCH AS FIRE DOORS AND SKIRTINGS PLANNING PERMISSION AND LISTED BUILDING CONSENT WAS GRANTED FOR THE WORKS !T THE SAME TIME APPLICATIONS WERE ALSO MADE FOR CONVERSION OF PART OF THE STABLE BLOCK TO RESIDENTIAL USE FOR THE LESSEE S PARENTS 4HIS CONVERSION SUBSEQUENTLY WON AN AWARD IN THE COUNCIL S #ONSERVATION AND $ESIGN !WARDS ) MADE A NUMBER OF SITE VISITS TO CHECK ON THE WORK AND WAS SATISFIED WITH PROGRESS 4HERE WERE SOME ITEMS IN THE MAIN HOUSE THAT ) HAD RESERVATIONS ABOUT SUCH AS FIRE DOORS BEING STAINED RATHER THAN PAINTED BUT OUR DISCUSSIONS WERE ALL CONDUCTED ON AN AMICABLE BASIS (OWEVER ON ONE OCCASION FOR NO APPARENT REASON THE LESSEE S WIFE TOLD ME IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS NEVER TO VISIT THE SITE AGAIN WITHOUT AN APPOINTMENT ) TOOK HER AT HER WORD AND ONLY WENT BACK WHEN REQUESTED TO DO SO BY THE LESSEE OR SUBSEQUENTLY HIS BUILDINGS MANAGER )N -AY ) VISITED THE SITE AND DISCUSSED WITH THE LESSEE THE OUTBUILDINGS WHICH STAND AT THE REAR OF THE LISTED STABLE BLOCK ) ADVISED HIM THAT THEIR CONVERSION TO RESIDENTIAL USE SEEMED ACCEPTABLE IN PRINCIPLE BUT CAUTIONED AGAINST WHOLESALE REPOINTING ) SAID THAT REPLACEMENT OF WINDOWS MIGHT BE ACCEPTABLE AS A HOLDING EXERCISE THEY HAD NO LINTELS AND BRICKWORK WAS FAILING AROUND THEM BUT SAID THAT REPAIRS SHOULD BE INCLUDED AS PART OF ANY APPLICATIONS FOR CONVERSION /N A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS IN ) VISITED TO DISCUSS REPAIRS TO THE BALLROOM CEILING n A QUITE SUPERB ROOM WITH ORNATE PLASTERWORK n AND TO INSPECT THE FINISHED WORK !FTER THIS POINT ) HAD NO REASON TO GO BACKx UNTIL THE PHONE CALL IN !PRIL 7HEN ) DID RETURN ) WAS HORRIFIED AT THE EXTENT OF THE UNAUTHORISED WORKS THAT HAD BEEN CARRIED OUT )N THE 'RADE )) HOUSE FIREPLACES AND A CHIMNEY BREAST HAD BEEN REMOVED CREATING ONE ROOM WHERE THERE HAD BEEN TWO THE GLAZED CONSERVATORY ROOF HAD BEEN REPLACED WITH ROOFING FELT AND A BALANCED FLUE INSTALLED THROUGH THE PAINTED GLAZING BARS OF A TROMPE L OEIL WINDOW 4HE WORK TO THE OUTBUILDINGS WAS ALMOST BEYOND BELIEF ! FORMER CARTWAY HAD BEEN FILLED IN THE ORIGINAL WHITE PAINTED CASEMENT WINDOWS HAD BEEN REPLACED WITH STAINED DOUBLE GLAZED UNITS AND FREESTANDING GABLE WALLS HAD BEEN REDUCED IN HEIGHT CAPPED WITH PAVING SLABS "UT THESE PALED INTO INSIGNIFICANCE AGAINST THE MAJOR ITEMS 4HE BRICKWORK HAD BEEN RENDERED AND PAINTED WHITE AND THE DOVECOTE REPOINTED IN THE HARDEST MORTAR ) HAD EVER SEEN 4HE GAZEBO A DELIGHTFUL GOTHICK FOLLY HAD ALSO BEEN RENDERED )T SEEMED TO ME THAT THIS WAS SHEER WANTON VANDALISM n ESPECIALLY AFTER ) HAD ADVISED THE OWNER OF THE NEED FOR CONSENTS AND CAUTIONED 4HE RENDERED OUTBUILDINGS WITH THE CARTWAY FILLED IN AND THE DOUBLE GLAZED UNITS INSTALLED
# / . 4 % 8 4 - ! 2 # ( GREAT DEAL OF CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE OR #ROWN COURT WHERE VERY SERIOUS CRIMINAL CASES ARE DEALT WITH )N THE END EIGHT CHARGES WERE LAID AGAINST THE DEFENDANT 4HEY RELATED TO 4HE REMOVAL OF WALLS CHIMNEYBREASTS FIREPLACES AND CORNICES 4HE INSTALLATION OF A WALL MOUNTED BOILER WITH A BALANCED FLUE PROTRUDING THROUGH A PAINTED WINDOW 4HE REMOVAL OF A GLAZED CONSERVATORY ROOF AND ITS REPLACEMENT WITH ROOFING FELT 4HE INFILLING OF A CARTWAY LAYING OF A CONCRETE FLOOR CREATION OF A NEW DOORWAY AND INSERTION OF A WINDOW 4HE RENDERING OF BRICK OUTBUILDINGS AND THE REPLACEMENT OF WINDOWS WITH STAINED DOUBLE GLAZED UNITS 4HE REPOINTING OF A DOVECOTE 4HE REMOVAL OR LOWERING OF FREESTANDING GABLE WALLS AND CAPPING THEM WITH CONCRETE COPINGS 4HE RENDERING OF A GAZEBO #OLLECTION OF EVIDENCE WAS PAINSTAKING AND TIME CONSUMING BUT FORTUNATELY THERE WAS EXCEPTIONALLY GOOD PHOTOGRAPHIC COVERAGE OF THE BUILDING FROM 7HEN CONSENT WAS GIVEN FOR THE CONVERSIONS IN THE APPLICANT WAS OBLIGED TO GIVE THE 2#(-% THE OPPORTUNITY TO RECORD THE BUILDING PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING AND THIS WAS DONE 4HE PUBLISHED REPORT ON THE HOUSE AND THE EXTENSIVE ACCOMPANYING PHOTOGRAPHIC COVERAGE WERE CRUCIAL IN ESTABLISHING THE NATURE AND CONDITION OF THE BUILDINGS WHEN THE OWNER TOOK THEM OVER 3UBSEQUENTLY ) TOOK MY OWN PHOTOGRAPHS TO TRY TO REPLICATE THE SAME VIEWPOINTS 4HEY WERE EQUALLY COMPREHENSIVE AND IN MANY CASES ) TOOK DETAILED CLOSE UPS !N EARLY DECISION WAS TAKEN TO EMPLOY COUNSEL AND SINCE THE OFFENCES WERE CRIMINAL THE COUNCIL S SOLICITOR INSTRUCTED A BARRISTER SPECIALISING IN BOTH CRIMINAL AND PLANNING LAW RATHER THAN EMPLOYING SIMPLY A PLANNING BARRISTER 4HIS WAS UNDOUBTEDLY A GOOD DECISION COUNSEL S GRASP OF THE ISSUES WAS CLEAR FROM THE OUTSET (E ADVISED THAT THE RENDERS AND MORTARS SHOULD BE ANALYSED TO ESTABLISH THEIR COMPOSITION (IS ADVICE ALSO LED ME TO CHANGE THE FORMAT OF MY EVIDENCE STATEMENT SO THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL OFFENCE WAS DEALT WITH IN THE SAME METHODICAL WAY s ! FACTUAL DESCRIPTION OF THE WORK s 2EFERENCE WHERE APPROPRIATE TO THE APPROVED PLANS s 2EFERENCE TO 2#(-% PHOTOGRAPHS AND MY PHOTOGRAPHS s -Y OBSERVATIONS ON THE EFFECT OF THE WORKS s 2EFERENCE TO THE ADVICE IN 00' IF THE WORKS WERE REFERRED TO THEREIN OR OTHER DOCUMENTS SUCH %NGLISH (ERITAGE S 4HE 2EPAIR OF (ISTORIC "UILDINGS s ! CONCLUDING STATEMENT INCLUDING THE PHRASE @FOR THE ABOVE REASONS AMONGST OTHER THINGS THE WORKS HAVE SEVERELY ALTERED THE LISTED BUILDING IN A MANNER WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECTS ITS CHARACTER AS A BUILDING OF SPECIAL ARCHITECTURAL OR HISTORIC INTEREST -Y PROOF OF EVIDENCE RAN TO PAGES WITH ALMOST PAGES OF APPENDICES )F ANY MEMBER IS CURRENTLY CONSIDERING A PROSECUTION ) WOULD BE HAPPY TO E MAIL THEM WITH A COPY OF MY PROOF OF EVIDENCE JUST TO SHOW THE MATTERS COVERED AND THE DETAIL IT CONTAINS 4HE DECISION ON WHERE THE CASE SHOULD BE HEARD WAS MADE EASIER BY THE FACT THAT GUILTY PLEAS WERE ENTERED AND MAGISTRATE S COURT WAS AGREED "EFORE THE CASE WAS FINALLY HEARD BY MAGISTRATES THERE HAD BEEN CONSIDERABLE NEGOTIATION AS TO THE ACCEPTABILITY OF THE PLEAS TO BE TENDERED "ASED ON HIS EXPERTS EVIDENCE THE DEFENDANT WAS PREPARED TO ENTER GUILTY PLEAS UNDER SECTION FOR SOME OF THE CHARGES BUT WOULD ONLY PLEAD GUILTY TO DAMAGE UNDER SECTION A MUCH LESSER OFFENCE WITH A MAXIMUM FINE OF ONLY a TO MANY OF THE ITEMS ) WAS UNDER SOME PRESSURE FROM THE COUNCIL S OWN LEGAL ADVISERS TO ACCEPT SOME OF THESE PLEAS SINCE THEY WERE CONSCIOUS OF THE DRAMATICALLY INCREASED COSTS THAT WOULD HAVE ARISEN HAD THE COUNCIL PROCEEDED TO FOLLOW MY PREFERRED COURSE OF ACTION AND GO TO #ROWN COURT 4HEY ALSO SAW THE ATTRACTION OF A SET OF GUILTY PLEAS AND HENCE THE CERTAIN CONVICTION OF THE DEFENDANT !T ONE OF OUR CONFERENCES WITH COUNSEL THE OPTION OF ACCEPTING LESSER PLEAS WAS MOOTED 4O HIS CREDIT HE WAS HAVING NONE OF THIS AND WAS KEEN TO PRESS THE OTHER SIDE S COUNSEL FOR GUILTY PLEAS ON SOME OF THE OTHER SERIOUS OFFENCES -OST OF THE LEGAL ARGUMENTS WERE 'REEK TO ME ) WAS BECOMING INCREASINGLY CONCERNED THAT WE WERE HAVING TO SHOW OUR HAND TO THE OPPOSITION (OWEVER THE COUNCIL S SOLICITOR WAS VERY FIRM IN HER VIEWS ON SUCH MATTERS 7E WERE A PUBLIC AUTHORITY WITH A DUTY TO BE FAIR AND OPEN AS A PROSECUTOR WE HAD DUTIES OF DISCLOSURE TO THE DEFENCE AND A DUTY TO THE COURT OVER AND ABOVE PURSUING A CONVICTION AT ALL COSTS 4HE DEFENCE WAS PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH GETTING THE CLIENT ACQUITTED OR THE PROSECUTION DROPPED ALTHOUGH THEY ALSO HAD DUTIES TO THE COURT 4HE DUTY OF DISCLOSURE MEANT THAT ULTIMATELY MOST ITEMS IN THE PROSECUTION FILE WOULD BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE DEFENCE IN DUE COURSE ANYWAY AND AS WE HAD NOTHING TO HIDE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL EVIDENCE AND ITEMS REQUESTED BY THE DEFENCE COULD NOT HURT OUR CASE 4HIS WAS SUBJECT ONLY TO CERTAIN ITEMS REQUESTED BY THE DEFENCE ON WHICH COUNSEL S ADVICE WAS SOUGHT PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 4HE CASE WAS FINALLY HEARD IN $ECEMBER !FTER SOME ROBUST DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN THE PROSECUTING AND DEFENCE COUNSEL OVER PROCEDURAL 4HE WHOLESALE DISREGARDING OF A CONSERVATION OFFICER S ADVICE CAME AS A SHOCK
# / . 4 % 8 4 - ! 2 # ( MATTERS AND AFTER FORMAL AND UNEQUIVOCAL GUILTY PLEAS HAD BEEN ENTERED THERE WAS NO AGREED BASIS OF PLEA THE MAGISTRATES RETIRED FOR SOME FORTY MINUTES TO GIVE THE PARTIES OPPORTUNITY TO SEE WHETHER ANY AGREEMENTS COULD BE REACHED ON THE DEFENCE S STATEMENTS OF EVIDENCE SOME OF WHICH HAD BEEN SUPPLIED ONLY TWO DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING 4HE PROBLEM WAS THAT THE DEFENCE WISHED TO PRODUCE IN MITIGATION OF THE OFFENCES EXPERT EVIDENCE THAT HAD BEEN PREPARED WITH THE PROSPECT OF A FULL TRIAL 4HIS WAS EVIDENCE THAT CONCLUDED THAT THE DEFENDANT WAS NOT GUILTY OF THE OFFENCES TO WHICH HE HAD NOW PLEADED GUILTY n THIS IN THE ABSENCE OF THE DEFENDANT OR ANY OF HIS EXPERTS 4HE PROSPECT WAS THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF AGREEMENT AS TO THE EVIDENCE AND BASIS OF THE GUILTY PLEAS A DIFFERENT KIND OF HEARING KNOWN AS A .EWTON HEARING WOULD HAVE HAD TO TAKE PLACE (OWEVER AGREEMENT WAS REACHED AS TO WHAT WAS AND WHAT WAS NOT MITIGATION AS OPPOSED TO CONTRADICTION OF MY EVIDENCE n WHICH ) WOULD HAVE STOOD BY AND THE SENTENCING HEARING PROCEEDED 4HE DEFENCE IN MITIGATION POINTED OUT THAT THE DEFENDANT HAD MADE NO FINANCIAL GAIN FROM THE WORKS )T WAS SUGGESTED THAT THE LESSEE SHOULD REALLY BE GIVEN CREDIT FOR THE GOOD WORKS THAT HE HAD DONE AND THAT ANY PENALTIES SHOULD BE MINIMAL )T WAS CLAIMED THAT THE COUNCIL S COSTS WERE HUGE AND THAT THE NUMBER OF HOURS SPENT WERE EXCESSIVE 4HE MAGISTRATES WERE INVITED TO CONSIDER THE GLOBAL PENALTY TO THE LESSEE EITHER REDUCING THE PENALTIES OR REDUCING THE COSTS !T THIS POINT ) THOUGHT THE ARGUMENTS ABOUT THE LESSEE HAVING PAID FOR THE WORK RANG A LITTLE HOLLOW (AVING IGNORED MY ADVICE ABOUT REPAIRS MATERIALS TECHNIQUES LISTED BUILDING CONSENT AND PLANNING PERMISSION ) FOUND IT HARD TO COME TO ANY CONCLUSION OTHER THAN THAT THE LESSEE HAD BROUGHT ALL OF THIS ON HIMSELF THROUGH HIS ILL ADVISED FLOUTING OF THE LAW 4HE MAGISTRATES SEEMED TO THINK SO TOO )T WAS AN HOUR AND FORTY MINUTES BEFORE THEY RETURNED TO THE COURT WITH THEIR SENTENCES n QUITE A LONG TIME TO BE EXCHANGING SMALL TALK AND PLEASANTRIES WITH PEOPLE WHOSE CLIENT YOU HAVE JUST TAKEN TO COURT 4HE CHAIRMAN SAID THAT THEY REGARDED ANY UNAUTHORISED ALTERATIONS TO A 'RADE )) BUILDING AS MOST SERIOUS MATTERS AND HANDED DOWN FINES AS FOLLOWS 5NAUTHORISED WORKS 3ECTION s 2EMOVAL OF FIREPLACES AND CHIMNEY BREASTS a s )NSTALLATION OF BOILER AND BALANCED FLUE a s 2EMOVAL OF GLAZED ROOF AND REPLACING WITH FELT a s )NFILLING OF THE CARTWAY CONCRETE FLOOR AND WINDOW a s 2ENDERING THE OUTBUILDINGS AND INSTALLING DOUBLE GLAZING a s 2EPOINTING THE DOVECOTE a $AMAGE 3ECTION s 4AKING DOWN THE GABLE WALLS AND CAPPING THE REMAINS a s 2ENDERING THE GAZEBO a 4OTAL FINES a 4HE COUNCIL S FULL APPLICATION FOR COSTS WAS GRANTED a n AND PENCE )T IS TOO EARLY TO DRAW CONCLUSIONS ) AM STILL DISCUSSING REPAIRS WITH THE OWNER n INSOFAR AS THEY CAN BE EFFECTED 3OME OF THE DAMAGE IS BEYOND REPAIR AND IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE AT THIS STAGE TO SPECULATE ON WHERE AND HOW THESE NEGOTIATIONS WILL LEAD -Y THOUGHTS ON THE PROSECUTION HOWEVER ARE CLEAR 7HEN ) FIRST SAW THE DAMAGE THAT HAD BEEN CAUSED MY REACTION HAD BEEN ONE OF DISBELIEF ) SIMPLY COULD NOT BELIEVE THAT MY ADVICE TO THE LESSEE ON WHAT WAS APPROPRIATE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SO COMPREHENSIVELY IGNORED ) WANTED A RESULT AND A FINE THAT WOULD STICK (OWEVER ) HAD LITTLE IDEA AS TO THE LEVEL OF DETAIL THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED #OUNSEL NEVER LOST SIGHT OF THE SERIOUS NATURE OF THE OFFENCES 7HEN ) WAS TEMPTED BY OUR IN HOUSE LEGAL ADVISERS TO ACCEPT LESSER PLEAS ON THE BASIS THAT WHAT WAS BEING OFFERED WAS A REALISTIC AND ACCEPTABLE COMPROMISE HE WOULD HAVE NONE OF IT (E PRESSED THE DEFENCE VERY HARD AND THE END RESULT BORE HIS TACTICS OUT )F ) HAVE ANY REGRETS IT IS THAT WE ACCEPTED A LESSER CHARGE OF DAMAGE TO THE BEAUTIFUL GAZEBO "UT THE HARSH REALITIES OF NEGOTIATING ACCEPTABLE PLEAS AND SUSTAINING A PROSECUTION WERE PRESSING 4HE CASE HAD BEEN RUNNING FOR TWO YEARS THE NEW LESSEE WANTS TO PROGRESS HER BUSINESS PLANS AND ) STILL HAVE TO GET REPAIRS AGREED 4HE COSTS AROSE FROM FOUR CONFERENCES WITH COUNSEL INCLUDING A DAY S SITE VISIT AND THREE COURT APPEARANCES HOURS OF MY TIME HOURS OF THE SOLICITOR S TIME LABORATORY ANALYSIS AND EXPERT OPINION ON THE MORTARS AND RENDERS USED PHOTOGRAPHS AND OTHER INCIDENTALS !T TIMES THE PROSECUTION SEEMED LIKE A PROCESS OF ATTRITION BUT THE FINES OF a ARE A RECORD FOR ALTERATIONS AS OPPOSED TO DEMOLITIONS AND THE COSTS OF a ARE A RECORD TOO 4HE CASE WAS WELL PUBLICISED A WEEK LATER IN THE LOCAL EVENING NEWSPAPER WITH FRONT PAGE HEADLINES AND A COLOUR PHOTOGRAPH OF THE DEFENDANT ) WAS DISAPPOINTED AND SURPRISED THAT THE CASE DID NOT ATTRACT THE NATIONAL PUBLICITY ACCORDED TO 4HERESA 'ORMAN n ESPECIALLY SINCE THE DEFENDANT AND HIS COMPANY HAD ATTRACTED A GREAT DEAL OF COVERAGE FOR OTHER MATTERS SINCE THE CASE FIRST CAME TO MY ATTENTION (OWEVER ) HAD BEEN DETERMINED NOT TO GIVE ANY INFORMATION TO THE PRESS BEFOREHAND BECAUSE OF CONCERNS THAT THE DEFENCE COULD HAVE CLAIMED THAT SUCH MATERIAL COULD HAVE BEEN PREJUDICIAL TO A FAIR TRIAL .ONETHELESS ENJOYING A CELEBRATORY DRINK OVER THE RESULT IN THE PUB IT SEEMED WORTH IT AFTER ALL 4HE VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THIS ARTICLE ARE SOLELY THOSE OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF HIS EMPLOYER 3OUTH 3TAFFORDSHIRE $ISTRICT #OUNCIL 4HE CONSERVATORY WITH REPLACEMENT DOOR AND FANLIGHT AND ITS GLAZED ROOF REPLACED WITH ROOFING FELT
www.ihbc.org.ukRkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=