Protection of the Historic Environment

[monitor lizard]

Hi Barnsey

There's quite a number of ways to preserve 'setting'. For example, applications near a Scheduled Ancient Monument will always have setting taken into account. I assume this is true for some Listed Building consents, particularly those in Conservation Areas, where the character of the whole is maintained. If the site is a registered park & garden setting is important, and I suppose that in a round about way protected trees provide a character/setting to a landscape that can't be altered. In London views are protected (the Tower, St Paul's) which has an affect on the setting of new buildings - especially tall ones. I also imagine there a number of general planning considerations about appropriateness too.

So lots of ways to look after setting. More difficult would be arguing what makes a setting special in the first place.

cheers

ML

[Cautionary Tale]

Ta ML. I would suppose the issue in this case was that the 'setting' was too large to protect in the ways you describe. I doubt if either of us, let alone the whole archaeological community, could agree on what consitutes 'special', though I would venture that the 'specialness' of this buildings environment lay in the fact that it was practically isolated from Modern development (or so I recall the action groups soundbite). Regardless, cheers for the bits to chew over (I'm particularly interested in the protection of views, will do more reading).

[Curator Kid]

PPG15 (paragraphs 2.16 - 7) makes provision for the consideration and protection of the setting of a listed building within the planning process, and states that the setting should not be considered on too narrow a basis. The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act makes no provision for the protection of a monument's setting, although the issue is a material consideration in the determination of planning applications in such an area.

This is rather a problem area to communicate with the wider community. Retaining the fabric of a specific site area or feature is often seen as being sufficient, whilst damaging its context is ignored (Thornborough Henges would be a good example of just such a debate going on at the moment). However, the question of just what the "setting" is, is massive. Building a housing estate right next door to a monument is a quite simple case to argue, but a telephone mast on the horizon that ruins the best view from, or of, an Iron Age hillfort, is a far different matter entirely. Archaeological Heritage Law by Neil Cookson gives a fairly digestible summary of some of the issues.

[drpeterwardle]

Setting of a listed building is defined in PPG 15 and is in fact fairly straight forward. I would also suggest that for most listing buildings it is in fact obviously what the setting is.

Peter Wardle

[troll]

I feel a rant in the parallel example of Thornborough Henges coming on.......

[Sith]

quote:Originally posted by troll

I feel a rant in the parallel example of Thornborough Henges coming on.......

Why? Straightforward question with a number of straight answers.

D. Vader
Senior Consultant

Vader Maull & Palpatine
Archaeological Consultants

We are the consultants you are looking for

[Curator Kid]

quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle

Setting of a listed building is defined in PPG 15 and is in fact fairly straight forward. I would also suggest that for most listing buildings it is in fact obviously what the setting is.

Peter Wardle

I'm not sure I agree entirely that the setting is mostly obvious. Many of the rural sites in this area have been affected badly by development - not visually however, but by constant noise from the M25, which carries for miles across the landscape. Similarly, a few years ago I visited Binham Priory in Norfolk, which looks beautiful in photographs. However it was sited next door to a working Chicken farm which absolutely stank to high heaven. PPG15 sticks largely to the visual and physical aspects of development and doesn't specifically deal with these kinds of issues.

[troll]

Good mornin all. Sith- setting can/should be seen as an important consideration equal in resonance to that of the building itself. If you like, setting/environment is the context the building finds itself in. Thornborough issue is very similar in many ways to the issue raised by Barnsey.Context is everything..........

[drpeterwardle]

quote:Originally posted by Curator Kid

Many of the rural sites in this area have been affected badly by development - not visually however, but by constant noise from the M25, which carries for miles across the landscape. Similarly, a few years ago I visited Binham Priory in Norfolk, which looks beautiful in photographs. However it was sited next door to a working Chicken farm which absolutely stank to high heaven. PPG15 sticks largely to the visual and physical aspects of development and doesn't specifically deal with these kinds of issues.

Noise is a material considereation for conservation areas.

Peter

[Tim]

So is access to light.

Little Tim