Hi Chris/Mike
I think I have understood the difference - I recognise Local Lists are/were about buildings, and SMR's were archaeology.
My point is that HER's should be about both ie an HER should include buildings and archaeology, as they are both elements of the Historic Environment. The
historic fact of the existence of the SMR/Local List different systems does not mean that the two systems should be continued. I thought that one of the points of PPS 5 was to make all the Historic Environment be treated similarly, and that logic, to me, seems
like it should also apply to the information systems about it. This may be an aspirational aim, but is one I think many HER's would agree with ie they wouldn't exclude buildings now.
The point about the difference between the two systems and how they identify assets that Chris gave, breaks down once you start considering earthwork sites.
These may be clearly identifiable/delineatable (I may have just invented that word..) sites which can be preserved and quoting Chris, " could easily be recognised and afforded some kind protection. All of which can be regarded in planning terms as
being a constraint and [worth] preserving in their present condition in some form or other."
As Nick says, SHONE records could be included - but hasn't SHINE already identified them as worthy as preserving,? So why do they need to be included in yet another subset of the HER to be protected?
In Durham, we have no Local lists, nor did any of the previous districts, so we would have to create one from scratch. What I am unclear of is why this is
better than just adding the relevant old Grade III buildings, other identified buildings and other structures to the HER, and having them protected by the processes for which the HER is used?
This is emphasised, to me, by the point Mike makes. I agree that Local Listing makes something undeniably a Heritage Asset. But does that not also imply that
everything not Locally Listed is NOT a Heritage Asset? Given that most local lists historically will be building based, then does this not automatically downgrade the status of archaeological sites? As for re-doing the list to include archaeology - well that
would be a huge job in most HERs, and as Chris points out, many would not make the cut not because they are not worthy, but because they are insufficiently researched.
I think that the two-tier element the local list would bring into records could easily make people think that if its not on the local list its not worth protecting,
and I think that there is a real risk that this could be an un-intended conclusion drawn by planning officers. Whilst you could argue against it, I think it could be more difficult to persuade them to protect stuff that is not locally listed. I predict that
may well be an argument we have with planners in the future in those places with Local Lists. Anecdotal evidence from the North east also suggests that Local Lists have lead to the demolition of buildings put on it, presumably to avoid the constraints implied.
There is also the issue of currency. Using the process being consulted on, drawing up a local list will be resource intensive, and realistically I would suggest
that it is unlikely to happen more than once a decade. So what happens to the site that comes in the day after the local list is published? It is protected through normal means. If that’s good enough, what is the value of the local list?
Overall, I think Local Lists could easily add confusion about what is worth protecting, and that’s why I suggested they are a red herring.
If they don't add confusion, I think they imply a lot of work for what I see as relatively minimal benefits.
That said, if the HER users round here want them, then we'll come up with them, after all my job as HERO is to make the HER fit for user needs
But so far, no one has convinced me that they're such a good thing I should be leading the charge.
best wishes
Nick Boldrini
Historic Environment Record Officer
Durham County Council
Tel: 0191 3708840
Fax: 0191 3708897
From: Issues related to Historic Environment Records [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Mike Shaw
Sent: 15 March 2011 10:56
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Local Listing - a red herring?
Local lists can include all sorts of sites, including buried archaeological deposits, if a council wishes them to do so. Surely the main point about them is that
any site on the local list has been through a scrutiny process and has been placed on the list with approval from the council. As such there is no problem with a local list site being considered a heritage asset. The same presumably does not apply to all
sites on the HER (a question I asked at the HER Forum at Chester).
Regards,
Mike
Mike Shaw
City Archaeologist
Wolverhampton City Council
Civic Centre
Wolverhampton
WV1 1RP
e-mail
[log in to unmask]
Tel: 01902 555493
From: Issues related to Historic Environment
Records [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris Wardle
Sent: 15 March 2011 10:29
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Local Listing - a red herring?
Hi Nick,
I think you've failed to consider the difference between a Local List and an HER.
As someone else has pointed out Local Lists arose out of all those buildings that were grade 3 listed prior to the lists being revamped in the 1970s(?) after which grade 3 buildings were no longer regarded as being of sufficient Architectural
or Historic Interest to justify their being designated nationally. Some planning authorities did not wish to abandon all protection on these buildings to chose to maintain a local list of these buildings. Other planning authorities stated to maintain a local
list at a later date, and EH is now suggesting that all planning authorities consider doing the same.
-The crucial thing about all the buildings/structures on a local list is that they are (in theory at least) upstanding things that could easily be recognised and afforded some kind protection. All of which can be regarded in planning terms
as being a constraint and preserving in their present condition in some form or other.
As we are all aware HERs have evolved out of the old SMRs and contain of information about a wide range of entities from:-
-Archaeological monuments of national importance and which (for the most part) are capable of having their extent defined in some way or other by the presence of physical structures or earthworks, by historic boundaries, by cropmarks, by
the evidence from excavations, or by a combination of any of the others. These clearly form constraints in planning terms and worthy of preservation.
To
-Archaeological monuments and landscapes that are either are of some importance but not enough to be regarded as being of nationally importance (an example of which might be a badly damaged moated site) or which could not be provided with
a national designation (an example of which be a mediaeval settlement site that is still a thriving settlement). These may form constraints in planning terms, but making a record of is more likely to be an option than preservation as such.
To
-A whole raft of other entities, such as isolated findspots, documentary references where there is uncertainly about the location, reliability to what they mean, cropmarks that are not properly understood. Any one of these might indicate
the presence of a monument, perhaps even one of national importance, but the present state of information makes it difficult to describe them as constraints or capable of preservation. The best that is likely to happen in a planning context is to gain a further
understanding of the significance and possible extent of such an entity.
So Local Lists are much more focussed upon the desire, on behalf a local planning authority, of conserving the character of a structure or an area than a wide ranging HER is ever likely to be.
Chris
>>> Nick Boldrini <[log in to unmask]> 11/03/2011 10:06 >>>
Hi Brian
but so would having the building on the HER.
And that’s my point, I don't see what Local Listing achieves that putting the record on the HER doesn't. So whats the point?
That said, I take Kens point that in a 2 tier authority the situation may be different, but we are a unitary here, so from a purely selfish point of view,
I am wondering if there is any benefit in creating a local list.
best wishes
Nick Boldrini
Historic Environment Record Officer
Durham County Council
Tel: 0191 3708840
Fax: 0191 3708897
From: Issues related to Historic Environment Records [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Brian Giggins
Sent: 11 March 2011 09:56
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Local Listing - a red herring?
Local listing may help in justifying a building recording condition where planning consent is obtained for demolition or major alterations.
regards
Brian Giggins
On 11 March 2011 09:25, Winfield, Hugh <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Nick,
A local list should be used to flag buildings (or whatever you decide to put on it as it's not exclusive to buildings) that are of greater interest than your standard
HER entry, and therefore should receive more attention and require stricter planning control than usual. The key to ensuring control of a local list is to Article 4 everything residential and to keep a four-yearly log of the buildings on the list in order
to catch any unauthorised alterations before the 5-year enforcement deadline is reached. A local list also needs to be approved by the Borough's planning committee and put in the LDF or SPG to show that the council will take a hard line when making decisions
on any planning application affecting the monument/building - this floats well with most planning inspectors who will back up the council's hard-line.
A local list should also make sure that buildings etc of high importance are flagged up before any planning applications are validated, which is especially important
when trying to make sure that the developer submits an assessment of significance.
As you know, I'm compiling our borough's list, and although it only contains buildings at the moment, I will eventually move archaeological sites onto it once
the councillor's are used to the idea of working with an updated and modern list.
Cheers,
Hugh
Hugh Winfield
Archaeologist
Development Management
Regeneration Department
Origin Two, Origin Way
Europarc, Grimsby
North East Lincolnshire
DN37 9TZ
Tel: (01472) 32 3586 Fax: (01472) 32 4216
Balfour Beatty working in partnership with North East Lincolnshire Council
From: Issues related to Historic Environment Records [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Nick Boldrini
Sent: 11 March 2011 08:21
To: Winfield, Hugh
Subject: Local Listing - a red herring?
hi folks
I am not sure if many of you have been doing this, but I have been looking at the draft criteria for Local Listing and I am confused.
What is the point of Local Listing?
I can see a historic reason for their existence.
As I understand it , Local Lists used to be purely buildings or structures (i.e. built environment objects I suppose), and were a way of identifying those of interest which were
not Listed Buildings to ensure their protection.
To me, that sounds very much like an SMR but for buildings. It is recording non-designated assets to make sure they are protected.
Given that HER's are supposed to now have a wider remit and should include Historic buildings, it seems to me that the idea of a Local List is a bit redundant.
If something is worth protecting, stick it on the HER and that will ensure it will get flagged up during Planning or other land-use change processes and can be taken into account.
As I have read the document, the wording about what a Local List is seems to me to overlap massively with what the HER does.
So why have a Local List?
I can also see disadvantages to the new Local Listing proposals.
The new regime would need to include all aspects of the historic environment, which means drawing up a Local List would be more involved and time consuming. And I can see it being
increasingly hard to argue for preservation of things not on a Local List, if you have one, as the creation of the List is a de facto raising of status of a particular Heritage Asset. The guidance says this isn't the case, but the vary act of rating some things
as worthy to be on a Local List and others not will have that effect in practice I think.
So what is the point of creating one? Couldn't you just say the Local list is anything on the HER?
I may be missing some things here, but would be interested to know what people think.
best wishes
Nick Boldrini
Historic Environment Record Officer
Archaeology Section
Design and Historic Environment Team
Planning Service
Regeneration and Economic Development
Durham County Council
Rivergreen Centre
Aykley Heads
Durham
DH1 5TS
Tel: 0191 3708840
Fax: 0191 3708897
Help protect our environment by only printing this email if absolutely necessary. The information it contains and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are only intended for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may be unlawful
for you to use, share or copy the information, if you are not authorised to do so. If you receive this email by mistake, please inform the person who sent it at the above address and then delete the email from your system. Durham County Council takes reasonable
precautions to ensure that its emails are virus free. However, we do not accept responsibility for any losses incurred as a result of viruses we might transmit and recommend that you should use your own virus checking procedures.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P
Reduce your environmental footprint, please do not print this
email unless you really need to.