Listed buildings and planning conditions

[Sparky]

In a parallel universe, a grade 2 listed 17th century barn was being converted for housing without any conditions. Although the National Heritage Quango had recently blocked alterations to the wooden roof structure they seemed to relent to the local authority (who approved the planning consent) without any condition to record the structure before the owner altered the height of the building.
Is this normal and is this acceptable under our heritage laws and procdures?

'I wanna be a punk rocker but my mammy will ne let me'
Campbell

[vulpes]

As far as I am aware 'National Heritage Quangos' are not normally consulted on Grade II listed structures, the responsibility lies with the local planning authority Conservation Officer and Planning Officers (or ultimately the Council planning committee). Or at least that is the case in England. I'm not a CO so I may be wrong here, but that's my understanding. The case does sound a bit dodgy though, but as long as it happened in a parallel universe I wouldn't worry too much. Also, the conversion would have also required Listed Building Consent, which is the important bit here. Maybe 'Historic Building' could elaborate further on this?

[historic building]

Slightly pissed rant on...

Roof works on a Grade II listed building are an interesting beast. If trusses are being removed then the aforesaid quango has to be consulted. If the roof is being raised and no timbers are being lost then is there any impact upon the roof that would require a letter to the quango?

Without knowing exactly what is happening to the building or without seeing the plans or without knowing the state of curatorial coverage in the county, district or whatever it is, there simply may not be the coverage of an archaeologist to impose a condition. This may well be one of the examples that shows the considerable division between archaeologists and conservation officers and one that we should retain in mind no matter what our profession turns into.

If the roof is being raised, and no fabric is being lost, what exactly needs recording if no fabric is being lost? Philosophical argument (I would definitely recommend recording in a situation such as this so please do not nag me - whether it is necessary is another matter and what value it would actually bring does need to be considered).

If timbers are being cleaned - sandblasted or bleached then information has been lost and dendro samples should have been taken - timber framed or mass walled barn?

[Sparky]

Its a mass walled barn. I believe, in this hypothetical situation, they are using the existing timbers but there will be some modifications.
I would have thought that photographic record may have been at least a planning condition.
The curatorial coverage may be somewhat complex in this parallel universe....

[historic building]

I have to agree I would consider a good run of photos a minimum together with plans and a section through the barn showing the original form of the truss and its relationship to the wallplate etc.

Now if a timber is to be lost and the building is old enough then dendro.

Who knows what happens when curatorial coverage is complex. It could also just be a cockup - never underestimate the power of cockup.

[Sparky]

Thanks for your thoughts, HB. Appreciated.