Agenda item

QUESTION FROM MS JULIE VALLANCE TO COUNCILLOR R BLUNT

“1. Given the evidence we have put forward can you please explain why you believe this is not extensive re-building and why it meets the local heritage criteria when there is clearly substantial evidence of additional sq ft being added, modern materials being used, different roof heights and shapes and modern windows particularly floor to ceiling glass windows being added?

2. What is the purpose of the local listing. Given the local list is comprised of buildings that don’t merit a statutory grade listing and has pictures and descriptions on the NWL website, is one of the main reasons for public interest?

3. If one of the main reasons is for public interest - this is a business site and it is unreasonable for NWL to be promoting public interest in what are private business sites with all the potential security, privacy and interference implications that can arise from that. Surely as business rate payers we are entitled to be left alone as much as possible to get on with running a successful business, and contributing to the NWL economy?”

RESPONSE FROM COUNCILLOR R BLUNT

“1. The Old Vicarage was erected c.1800 and incorporates the remains of a building erected c.1700. Buildings that predate the reign of Queen Victoria are considered to have qualities of age that justify their inclusion on the ‘local list’. This is consistent with the DCMS Principles of selection for listing buildings and our adopted Criteria for identifying local heritage assets. In 2006 we permitted extensions to the building, including a two-storey side extension (our reference 06/00269/FUL). Officers considered that the extensions were “appropriate” in their scale and proportions. The side extensions are faced in red brick beneath hipped slate roofs to match the principal building. The extensions have conserved the significance of the building; on that basis officers advise that the building should be included on the list of local heritage assets. In the 1980s a large double-height stair window was installed on the building’s rear elevation. In the context of the whole building this is not a “significant change” as the owner has asserted.

2. The purpose of the ‘list of local heritage assets’ is to recognise the architectural and historic interest of buildings in the district and to ensure that this interest is taken into account in the exercise of our planning functions.

3. The majority of buildings on the ‘list of local heritage assets’ and the majority of buildings on the statutory list are in private ownership. In this respect the council’s actions are neither unreasonable nor unusual. In terms of the perceived risks to security and privacy, a disclaimer has been added to our website (www.nwleics.gov.uk/local-heritage) and to the introduction of each of the four lists. The disclaimer reads as follows: “Please note that the inclusion of any building on the 'local list' does not mean that the building or its grounds are open to the public. Many of the buildings on the 'local list' are private homes or businesses, so please respect the occupiers’ privacy”.”

The Leader invited Ms J Vallance to ask a supplementary question.

Ms J Vallance stated that Although the changes made to the building had been as sympathetic as possible; the modern materials had been used and the footprint of the building had increased by 60%.  Could the Leader explain why this was not considered to be a significant change?

The Strategic Director of Place advised that the point had been considered in the responses and during the planning process and careful consideration had been given to the changes to ensure acceptable in planning terms. Therefore in terms of meeting the criteria the changes including extensions and use of new materials had conserved the significance of the building.

Councillor R Blunt highlighted that many of the buildings included in the list were schools that, over the years, had been extended and changed to accommodate the usage required but the earliest part of the building still had special merit. He felt that it highlighted that the history of a building, even if it had been extended or altered over the years could justify its inclusion on the list of heritage assets.

Ms J Vallance raised concerns that inclusion on the list would encourage people to come into the grounds of the building, which would raise both security and health and safety issues, and that a disclaimer on the website would not discourage those with a keen interest from visiting.

Councillor R Blunt felt that the number of people who had the time to visit special houses was decreasing. He stated that in reality it was a special building and he was pleased that the Council was trying to protect these buildings and that it was an extension of the national listing.