A
Anonymous
Guest
I would suggest that any amenity society which formally wishes to respond to this issue would be well advised to discuss it with their committees and if any of them wish to raise any issues further they do so in an appropriate manner, not in this silly way. It would appear, 'conservationist', you have little idea of appropriate conduct and the way in which heritage organisations work...
None of the houses DARE is working with is a house with contents, they are houses which have suffered on the past from neglect. Many are houses which in fact have been in institutional use, with all that entails. Large scale enabling development of the sort which may ruin listed parkland is not on their agenda.
One amenity society recently held their awards ceremony at the premises of a well-known auction house, one which has been known to split up and flog off the contents of country houses. It's not a route I would suggest any amenity society should go down, whinging about others. It may come back and bite them on the rear. Working together is rather more productive, possibly.
All amenity societies, of course, as statutory consultees, are able to respond to planning permission applications, as indeed is English Heritage. Where II* buildings are concerned EH is a statutory consultee. Local authorities have Conservation Officers. All members of the public are entitled to make their views known to planning applications.
If any amenity society (or indeed individual) is unhappy with any planning decison they have the right and the ability to ask for it to be called in, or to challenge it at Judicial Review. It's called democracy.
If you have a personal axe to grind, write to the appropriate people in the appropriate organisation is my advice.
I would suggest, however, that SAVE has done a great deal over the past thirty years to stop the destruction of our built heritage, including country houses. Possibly you may not agree with that and would have preferred to demolitions to continue.
None of the houses DARE is working with is a house with contents, they are houses which have suffered on the past from neglect. Many are houses which in fact have been in institutional use, with all that entails. Large scale enabling development of the sort which may ruin listed parkland is not on their agenda.
One amenity society recently held their awards ceremony at the premises of a well-known auction house, one which has been known to split up and flog off the contents of country houses. It's not a route I would suggest any amenity society should go down, whinging about others. It may come back and bite them on the rear. Working together is rather more productive, possibly.
All amenity societies, of course, as statutory consultees, are able to respond to planning permission applications, as indeed is English Heritage. Where II* buildings are concerned EH is a statutory consultee. Local authorities have Conservation Officers. All members of the public are entitled to make their views known to planning applications.
If any amenity society (or indeed individual) is unhappy with any planning decison they have the right and the ability to ask for it to be called in, or to challenge it at Judicial Review. It's called democracy.
If you have a personal axe to grind, write to the appropriate people in the appropriate organisation is my advice.
I would suggest, however, that SAVE has done a great deal over the past thirty years to stop the destruction of our built heritage, including country houses. Possibly you may not agree with that and would have preferred to demolitions to continue.