Penners
Member
- Messages
- 17,294
- Location
- Suffolk, England
Better than nothing - absolutely! As for it being a shambles - well, I suppose one can always find weaknesses in any system.
But the main weakness in our listing system is one that - I suspect - is insurmountable. That is the subjectivity of it. In the final analysis, the listing of a building, and afterwards any consents for repairs and/or alterations to that building, rely on the subjective judgement of "experts" for their permissability.
Virtually by definition, every listed building is unique. The uniqueness may be on a grand scale or in small details, but unique they are nonetheless. And uniqueness and individuality are the enemies of standardisation. So it's totally impossible to muster a set of clear, standardised definitions and rules as to what repairs/alterations may or may not be permitted on any building.
So we're stuck with subjectivity. It falls to the Conservation Officer to decide subjectively what is permitted and what is not. And where you have subjectivity you'll always find disagreement.
But the main weakness in our listing system is one that - I suspect - is insurmountable. That is the subjectivity of it. In the final analysis, the listing of a building, and afterwards any consents for repairs and/or alterations to that building, rely on the subjective judgement of "experts" for their permissability.
Virtually by definition, every listed building is unique. The uniqueness may be on a grand scale or in small details, but unique they are nonetheless. And uniqueness and individuality are the enemies of standardisation. So it's totally impossible to muster a set of clear, standardised definitions and rules as to what repairs/alterations may or may not be permitted on any building.
So we're stuck with subjectivity. It falls to the Conservation Officer to decide subjectively what is permitted and what is not. And where you have subjectivity you'll always find disagreement.