JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for HERFORUM Archives


HERFORUM Archives

HERFORUM Archives


HERFORUM@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

HERFORUM Home

HERFORUM Home

HERFORUM  February 2010

HERFORUM February 2010

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Listed and Locally Listed Buildings

From:

Crispin Flower <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Issues related to Historic Environment Records <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 4 Feb 2010 16:02:41 -0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (214 lines)

Hi all
In response to the "duplication" comment, though at the risk of
preaching to the converted, I'll just clarify the reason for recording
"designations" as well as monuments in an HER...
A designation record is metadata about a legal entity (or quasi-legal
entity for various non-statutory designations) that affords some kind of
protective status. 
Designations have a many-to-many relationship with monuments; for
example one "scheduled monument" designation record may cover many
monuments from different periods; equally, one monument record may be
protected by several "listed building" records (e.g. a Georgian terrace
may be on the HER as one monument, but lots of separate listings). A
"conservation area" designation will certainly cover many monument
records.
The monument record evolves through time with collected data and
understanding; the designation record is generally static except through
defined processed (such as de-listing).
The monument record and the designation record (even where there is
superficially a one-to-one relationship) may have different boundaries.
i.e. this is not duplication, it is correct data modeling !
And yes, this means that you can manage designation records without
necessarily recording them as monuments, if you feel they do not fall
within your HER's recording guidelines for monuments. As an example, we
have some conservation teams using the HBSMR for things like Tree
Preservation Orders and sites of geological interest - not monuments!
All the best
Crispin

-----Original Message-----
From: Issues related to Historic Environment Records
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Winfield, Hugh
Sent: 04 February 2010 15:46
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Listed and Locally Listed Buildings

Some informative responses, thanks to all for commenting.  Just to
re-assure people, I consider the Designations module as part of the HER;
the only thing I am worried about is the monuments GIS file getting even
more cluttered, especially in central Grimsby, when there seems little
point adding the site onto the monuments module when it is already
entered into the designations module.

I do however keep records of demolished listed buildings, demolished
locally listed buildings, standing de-listed buildings, and
non-designated buildings of interest in the monuments module.  Also,
when we appoint our new conservation officer, I will try and get them to
use HBSMR to keep the buildings sections of the HER more up-to-date than
I would be able to on my own.

Cheers,

Hugh

Hugh Winfield
Archaeologist
Development Management
Regeneration Department
North East Lincolnshire Council
Origin Two, Origin Way
Europarc, Grimsby
North East Lincolnshire
DN37 9TZ
Tel: (01472) 32 3586 Fax: (01472) 32 4216 

-----Original Message-----
From: Issues related to Historic Environment Records
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris Wardle
Sent: 04 February 2010 15:24
To: Winfield, Hugh
Subject: Re: Listed and Locally Listed Buildings

Like Mike, we've put all listed buildings on the HER, both as Monuments
and as Designations. I don't believe this will overstretch HBSMR, but
then we have a fairly small HER. Moreover, as we are reassessing our
local listing (our existing list consists only of those buildings that
various Conservation Officers thought 'nice looking') we are putting
local listings and potential local listings on. We hope to devise a set
of criteria, such as being the work of prominent local architects or the
premises of important or innovative local industrialists, for inclusion
on a revised set of local listings. 

Chris

Chris Wardle
City Archaeologist
Planning Policy & Design 
Leicester City Council
Block A
New Walk Centre
Welford Place 
Leicester. LE1 6ZR
0116 2527282
[log in to unmask] 

>>> Mike Shaw <[log in to unmask]> 04/02/2010 14:39 >>>
We put all locally listed buildings on - as far as we are concerned they
all have an historic interest - which may or may not have been brought
out in the Conservation Area Appraisal.  At a time when we are trying to
widen the scope of HERs and strengthen bonds with our Conservation
colleagues it would be unhelpful to try and make a distinction within
locally listed buildings.  In fact if a Conservation Area Appraisal
mentioned a building as of interest I would hope to be able to put it on
to the HER even if it wasn't given a designation - though admittedly
current resources do not always permit.  Even better of course would be
some automated way of putting data from a survey such as a Conservation
Area Appraisal into the HER.  
 
Mike
 
Mike Shaw
Black Country Archaeologist
 

________________________________

From: Issues related to Historic Environment Records
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Winfield, Hugh
Sent: 04 February 2010 13:10
To: [log in to unmask] 
Subject: Listed and Locally Listed Buildings


Hi All,
 
I was hoping to get an impression of how people integrate Listed and
Locally Listed buildings into their HERs. I currently have them both in
the designations module of HBSMR; however the listed buildings and the
original 1973 local list also have monuments records, even if no further
information is available other then the listing entry. My main problem
with recording like this is that the new conservation area appraisals
being carried out here have added several hundred locally listed
buildings, most of which are 19th and 20th century Villas and Terraces
with no real historic interest attached to them.
I don't want to clog up the monuments module by duplicating the new
local lists into it, but if I don't add them it calls into question
whether I should keep all of the old lists and national listed building
on.
 
My current thinking is to keep records where the building has a historic
aspect (Docks custom house, WW1 aircraft hangar etc), but not to have
monument records for buildings which have just been listed for their
architectural interest (houses, a few offices and shops).  I can't
justify using a date based cut-off system as unfortunately most of our
historically interesting buildings are 19th and 20th century.
 
Anyway, if anyone else who has thought about this could email me with
any solutions they came up with, I would be grateful.
 
Thanks,
 
Hugh

Hugh Winfield
Archaeologist 
Development Management
Regeneration Department
North East Lincolnshire Council
Origin Two, Origin Way
Europarc, Grimsby
North East Lincolnshire
DN37 9TZ
Tel: (01472) 32 3586 Fax: (01472) 32 4216

------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------ 

P Reduce your environmental footprint, please don't print this e-mail
unless you really need to. 

The information in this message including any attachments may be
confidential or privileged and is for the use of the named recipient
only. If you are not the named or intended recipient you may not copy,
distribute, or deliver this message to anyone or take any action in
reliance on it. If you receive this message in error please contact the
sender immediately and delete it from your system 

Scanned by Anti Virus Software 


------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
DISCLAIMER: This email and files transmitted are
confidential and are intended solely for the use of the
intended recipient.  If you are not the intended
recipient, or the person responsible for delivering it to 
the intended recipient, you may not copy, disclose, 
distribute or use it in any unauthorised manner.  If you 
have received this email in error please notify us by 
email to [log in to unmask] and then delete 
it and any attachments accompanying it.  Please note that
Wolverhampton City Council cannot guarantee that this 
message or any attachments are virus free or have not been
intercepted and amended.
Any views or opinions expressed within this email are
those of the author and may not necessarily reflect those 
of Wolverhampton City Council and no contractual 
arrangement is intended to arise from this communication.
========================================================================
======

------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------ 
Reduce your environmental footprint, please don't print this e-mail
unless you really need to.

The information in this message including any attachments may be
confidential or privileged and is for the use of the named recipient
only. If you are not the named or intended recipient you may not copy,
distribute, or deliver this message to anyone or take any action in
reliance on it. If you receive this message in error please contact the
sender immediately and delete it from your system

Scanned by Anti Virus Software

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager