26 C O N T E X T 8 4 : M A Y 2 0 0 4 Recording levels In some cases the brief simply contained a set of outline requirements, but the majority gave a detailed account of the recording strategy to be employed. Documentary research, a written synthesis, measured survey and photography are the most commonly used techniques for historic building assessment and recording. The recording level was again determined by the significance of the building and the potential impact of the scheme on the surviving fabric. Although the recording activity must focus on those areas that are likely to be damaged or destroyed, it was often necessary to place the results within their wider context if they were to be fully understood. For the purposes of an impact assessment, the application drawings, simple sketches and 35mm photography were often adequate, whereas an academic record produced in order to satisfy a recording condition was normally accompanied by professional photography and dimensionally accurate drawings. Forty-seven of the 65 briefs (72 per cent) identified the need for further documentary research to discuss the development of the site, its origins, form, function and patterns of ownership. The historic buildings analyst was expected to consult a range of sources which might include the statutory list description, Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England (RCHME) County inventories, Victoria County History, Sites and Monuments Record (SMR), National Monuments Record Centre (NMRC), local libraries, County Record Office, Royal Institute of British Architects library and, if appropriate, the Public Records Office. Several briefs suggested that the current owner and/or their agent might be able to provide additional material. Where the results had to be placed within their wider context, general sources on particular categories of building and/or industrial processes had to be examined. As a minimum, the written observations must enable the historic buildings analyst to prepare a report on the surviving structure. However, the level of detail within many of the recording briefs was considerably greater, with references to materials, methods of construction, fenestration, plan form, function, doors, windows, joinery, decorative finishes, heating, lighting, sanitary arrangements, fixtures and fittings, machinery, phasing and change of use. Although the emphasis was placed on original details and historical alterations, low-level records were sometimes needed for relatively modern features. The nature and extent of the photographic and drawn record was again determined by the importance of the building and the perceived impact of the scheme on the surviving fabric. The historic buildings analyst was always encouraged to use any existing architects’ drawings as the basis for the measured survey, but their accuracy would need to be checked. Location and block plans were typically drawn at scale 1:2,500, 1:1,250 or 1:500; the latter being used whenever the written description involved several buildings or landscape features. Floor plans were generally no greater than 1:100. Elevations adopted the same measurement, although in some cases 1:50, 1:20 and 1:10 were also suggested. The location of sections (scale 1:100, 1:50 and 1:10) had to be agreed with the local authority conservation advisor, while scales of 1:20 or less were commonly used for detailed features. The measured survey was expected to show internal walls and partitions, windows, staircases, fireplaces, truss position and form, original fitted furniture, industrial equipment and blocked openings. Twenty-three briefs referred to the RCHME drawing conventions,6 but where a building contained a large number of alterations and additions this was to be accompanied by fully phased interpretive plans. All the drawings had to contain an appropriate title, north point and metric scale; a second, imperial scale was occasionally required. At its simplest level the photographic record comprised black and white prints, and colour slides of the building and/or effected areas. Further guidance was often given on the need to include external and internal coverage, and detailed shots of individual features, fixtures, fittings, decorative schemes, machinery and structural alterations. If the subject of the photograph was a series of identical features (doors, windows, columns, roof truss, etc), one shot of a typical example was usually sufficient. It was always advisable to include a graduated scale for detailed shots, and the record should be accompanied by a register with information on the location and direction of each shot. In some instances, the position and direction of each photograph had to be noted on a copy of the site plan. A number of briefs insisted that general photographs and details of structural elements should be taken using a large format or medium format camera with perspective control, whereas a medium format or 35mm camera would be appropriate for all other details. Interestingly, the specialist analysis of timber, plaster, mortar and other hidden architectural features, and the use of photogrammetry and rectified photography, were largely absent from the sample. Report format, dissemination and project archive All the recording briefs gave advice on the content and format of the resulting report, but the conservation advisors should always exercise their own professional judgement when deciding on the level of detail. Copies of the completed report were generally circulated to the applicant, the local authority, SMR and NMRC. The deposition of the site archive was mentioned in 35 briefs (55 per cent), but there was considerable confusion over its form, content and preferred location. Unless finds were recovered during an impact assessment, the archive would normally form part of the wider academic record which was produced in order to satisfy a recording condition. Where guidance was
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=