A developer has asked AA's help with a water tower; he wants to de#olish it to #ake way for his building project. The local council used to own it, it was listed, but parts of it were de#olished and then it was de-listed. It is now rather a#biguous. What is left of the building was #ostly built in about 1881 - though there is an older section dating to the 1840s. The building is in grand water works Ro#anesque style. It is a beauty - but no one can find a use for it as it is. It stands in a Conservation Area. It's a tricky business, AA has to report on it to the local authority - to help the developer get Planning Per#ission to de#olish it. Unfortunately, for the developer, if he gets per#ission to de#olish it he will probably have to pay AA a largeish lu#p of £££ to record it.
In an ideal world all #agnificent architecture would be kept, used and loved, but we don't live in that world. The developer wants us to be his friend, but we have to report on the building in an unbiased way - if we don't, our evidence is co#pro#ised. This is a situation we have encountered several ti#es - developers are si#ply not aware of the potential costs involved in getting Listed Building Consent or Planning Per#ission - and when they find out, they can feel they have been stitched up by an unholy alliance of the archaeologist and the conservation officer. It just isn't true!
Not sure what we can do to get over this #essage - Historic Building Recording is often an essential part of getting planning per#ission for a listed property - it needs to be budgeted for. The level of recording required can vary fro# a few photos and a description, to a co#plete survey, detailed drawings and photographs and a great deal of historic research (which #eans hours or days in the local record office.) Either way, it isn't up to the archaeologist to decide - that's what the conservation officer decrees. We are only obeying orders! We have little influence on the situation.
In an ideal world all #agnificent architecture would be kept, used and loved, but we don't live in that world. The developer wants us to be his friend, but we have to report on the building in an unbiased way - if we don't, our evidence is co#pro#ised. This is a situation we have encountered several ti#es - developers are si#ply not aware of the potential costs involved in getting Listed Building Consent or Planning Per#ission - and when they find out, they can feel they have been stitched up by an unholy alliance of the archaeologist and the conservation officer. It just isn't true!
Not sure what we can do to get over this #essage - Historic Building Recording is often an essential part of getting planning per#ission for a listed property - it needs to be budgeted for. The level of recording required can vary fro# a few photos and a description, to a co#plete survey, detailed drawings and photographs and a great deal of historic research (which #eans hours or days in the local record office.) Either way, it isn't up to the archaeologist to decide - that's what the conservation officer decrees. We are only obeying orders! We have little influence on the situation.
