3 MINUTES 26.10.2012
HERITAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Canal & River Trust office, Milton Keynes.
Attending members: Neil Cossons, Peter Brown, Laurence Newman, Nigel Crowe, John
Yates, Stephen Hughes, Jane Kennedy, Edward Holland.
Apologies: Alan Baxter.
Introductory remarks



NCo welcomed everyone to the meeting.
NC had received apologies form AB who was unable to attend the meeting.
NC reminded the Committee that Stuart Mills, the Trust’s Property & Enterprise
Director would be giving a presentation to the meeting.
1. Minutes of last HAC meeting on 1 August 2012


General agreement that the minutes were acceptable and covered the discussion
held at Foxton in the Summer.
NC updated briefly on the actions, including those in hand and on-going.
2. Presentation on the Trust’s property (Stuart Mills)






Stuart Mills’ presentation on property and the work of his department was well
received and there was general recognition that property was a key source of
income for the Trust.
Questions were asked about cottages and vacant sites, and covenants. It was
suggested that the National Trust might be able to help with issues relating to
covenants.
North Warehouse, Sharpness was discussed and it was suggested that its interior
remains might be worthy of detailed study.
The issue of heritage assessments arose.
ACTION: NC to circulate the recently revised Heritage Management Approved
Process (Sept 2012).
Stuart was warmly thanked for his interesting presentation.
3. Pontcysyllte Aqueduct Safety Dilemma






The issue of whether/what kind of safety fencing should be fixed to the handrail
on the towpath of Pontcysyllte Aqueduct was tabled and discussion followed.
The discussion was related to that about the ‘wider setting’ of heritage assets
and it was agreed that the WHS currently fell short of what might be expected of
such an important site.
It was pointed out that various reports about the management of the WHS had
been prepared and an overall strategy for the WHS would be the right place to
address safety concerns inter alia.
The related discussion held recently with the Museums & Attractions and
Marketing teams was rehearsed in the WHS context; especially the aim of
developing key heritage sites as model attractions.
ACTION: the HAC would like to be involved with the WHS strategy.
ADDITIONAL NOTE: during a break in the meetings SH showed a very good digital
3-D representation of the historic construction of Pontcysyllte Aqueduct which
was appreciated by all.
4. Historic Boat Discount scheme


The HAC agreed it was sympathetic to the idea of a discount continuing and
recognised that the existence of historic boats was good for the waterways.
It was also recognised that agreement needed to be reached on eligibility of
boats and a more precise and qualifiable definition of ‘historic’ needed
developing. ACTION: JY was asked by the HAC Chairman if he would take the
subject forward and report back with some suggestions for basic principles and
definitions that would assist formulation of some HAC ‘policy advice’.
5. The ‘setting’ of heritage assets - discussion




The Trust’s CEO had raised the issue of enhancing the ‘setting’ and presentation
of heritage assets and the Trust’s historic environment in general.
The National Trust was suggested as a model for visitor expectations (good car
parks, toilets, signs, shop, café, volunteers etc)
All agreed it would be useful to develop a) some minimum standards and b) get
them across the most important heritage/visitor sites. ACTION: NC to look into
how this might be achieved.
There was debate on the micro-setting and the macro-setting of heritage assets
and it was suggested that a pre-emptive statement might be useful in terms of
stating policy on protecting the setting of the historic environment. (to include
non-designated and designated sites).
6. Canal & River Trust ‘manifesto’





The ‘manifesto’ draft had been circulated prior to the meeting
There was discussion as to what use it should be put/where placed and it was
proposed to re-cast it as a set of heritage ‘values’ and included in the Heritage
Strategy.
Suggestions to amend the draft included: adding museums &
archives/setting/other waterways not in the Trust’s care.
ACTION: all to feed comments back to the HAC Chair by the weekend of 17/18
November 2012.
ACTION: NC to check that no conflicts exist with the Trust’s Mandatory Standard.
7. State of the Waterways Heritage report 2011/12




The latest SOWH report had been circulated prior to the meeting with a view to
enhancing its contents in future years.
The report was highly commended and suggestions for the future included:
adding a section on museums & archives, especially the Heritage Boatyard;
including an introductory paragraph on the CRT/TWT; quantifying all heritage
assets, not just designated assets; making a statement about the entirety of the
Trust’s historic environment; adding some ‘dynamic debate’ about
pressures/pros/cons facing heritage; including an appendix of Heritage at Risk
assets.
It was agreed that the next report should be a ‘HAC document’ and be approved
and signed off by the HAC.
ACTION: NC to effect the changes suggested above.
8. AOB


The issue of taking a strategic approach to conservation areas on waterways was
raised and it was agreed that the HAC would take ideas/look at the whole issue
for discussion at a later date. ACTION: JY to come up with some ideas as to how
best to approach this subject.
SH announced that his book on the Archaeology of the Montgomeryshire Canal
was now available as an e-book.
9. Date of next meeting


A date for the next meeting would be sought and circulated.
It was agreed that meetings should be held quarterly: in Jan/Apr/Jul/Oct.
26 October 2012