Martin

I don't want to get into an argument over this I was merely trying to point 
out that "listing" is also related to structures of National importance. 
Your earlier email suggested that scheduling was more important then listing 
as it had a "national" element to it.

Scheduled monuments ARE of national importance as you quiet rightly point 
out and quote in your email (see below)
Listed Buildings are however ALSO of national importance - on the English 
Heritage website, if you go to the following page 
(http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.1374) you will find  a 
section about why buildings are listed.  It includes:

a.. architectural interest: all buildings which are nationally important for 
the interest of their architectural design, decoration and craftsmanship; 
also important examples of particular building types and techniques, and 
significant plan forms
a.. historic interest: this includes buildings which illustrate important 
aspects of the nation's social, economic, cultural or military history

Both clearly include a national element in the importance as part of their 
basis for listing - how important a building/structure will determine it's 
grade.  A more precise definition of the grades is given on the same web 
page rather than my "rule of thumb" one quoted earlier

Personally I have very strong reservations about the listing & scheduling 
process and can quote numerous examples of buildings that should have been 
preserved and weren't, ones that are included but don't merit it and many 
where listing (or the threat of listing) has actually resulted in the 
deterioration or even loss of the building completely.  A continued active 
use is usually far preferable than any statutory means of trying to 
preserve.  Often the best sites are those where a group of interested people 
have worked to preserve what remains whether listed or not. 
Listed/Scheduled status may enhance the site and open options for funding 
but it can also significantly hinder &/or delay any preservation work. 
Anyone considering applying for a structure to be scheduled or listed should 
take the time to investigate what might be entailed.

I am not sure where you got your comment
"Scheduling aims to broadly preserve a site as it is, whereas listing allows 
for changes and alterations but aims to preserve the character of the
building or structure"
There are procedures for applying for consent for both scheduled monuments 
and listed buildings, which although covered by different legislation are 
broadly similar. In theory at least you can apply for the same type of work 
to either type of site.  SAMs tend to be lumps and bumps rather than 
structures so there is usually less changes and alterations that apply. i.e. 
you would be struggling to get consent to put a roof on Stonehenge whereas 
you might get permission to reinstate one on an engine house.  An engine 
house could however be a scheduled monument or a listed building.  I look 
forward to the day when they merge the two together

regards

David





----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Roe" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 2:31 PM
Subject: Re: [MINING-HISTORY] Groverake mine


>I am not sure what guidelines you are quoting but can i suggest that you 
>have a look at the English Heritage website 
>@http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/ where you will find a more up to date 
>and more detailed definition of both scheduling and listing, including 
>definitions of what the listing grades actually mean.
>
> Both listing and scheduling are systems of protection for "sites" deemed 
> important. Both have different origins and use different judgment criteria 
> and give different types of protection. It is wrong to think that 
> buildings or structures cannot be scheduled, they can.
>
> To quote the EH website:
>
> "Scheduling is applied only to sites of national importance, and even then 
> only if it is the best means of protection. Only deliberately created 
> structures, features and remains can be scheduled.
>
> When buildings are listed they are placed on statutory lists of buildings 
> of 'special architectural or historic interest' . Buildings and standing 
> structures of historic interest, especially if they are or can be made 
> usable, are generally best protected by listing, where the emphasis is on 
> continuing active use."
>
> Scheduling aims to broadly preserve a site as it is, whereas listing 
> allows for changes and alterations but aims to preserve the character of 
> the building or structure.
>
> As with any general discussion the situation with individual cases can be 
> more complex. There is currently a major review going which aims to 
> simplify the whole system and will see the merging of the scheduling and 
> listing systems.
>
> Martin Roe
>
> President, Northern Mine Research Society,nmrs.co.uk
>
> Conservation Officer NAMHO, National Association of Mining History 
> Organisations, http://www.namho.org
>
> Lead Mining in the Yorkshire Dales, 
> http://www.martinroe.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
>
> Meerstone Archaeological Consultancy 
> http://www.martinroe.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/meerstone.htm
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 22/07/2005
>
>