Lets talk about Grand Designs last night. Who wants to live in a castle?

[sassy]

How mad was the bloke? How tolerant was his wife?
But that HOUSE! (swoon)

and how can EH proactively seek new owners for land they have no legal interest in?!
(you need SPAB for that - they have a list of wrecks that need rescuing)

I really disagree with that point Twinklemegan. I think losing it would be infinitely worse.

I couldn't disagree with you more, in the nicest possible way Aloha. I don't think they obstructed anything, I think they facilitated alot. I was amazed actually, I couldn't believe how easy it all was (for an incredibly difficult project IYSWIM)

One of my friends works for SPAB (and friends of friendless churches, which is a wonderful name for an organisation) The bitterness, rivalry and envy between all those heritage organisations is extraordinary.

I admit I don't get it

I don't get a lot of planning stuff

If he hadn't bought it - no-one would have cared - it would have fallen down and rotted and become a part of the landscape

Eventually 30-300 years down the line some one would have said we are so short of houses we will build there and it would disappear under a futuristic barrett/wimpey home development

& no archeology would have been done

Aloha - in an ideal world that is what would happen. But in this day and age, with a government that's much more interested in things like the Olympics than in protecting our heritage, there is nothing like enough funding available to even scratch the surface.

I think though that one of the reasons we are losing these buildings is because it is so incredibly difficult to restore them because of the 'help' of organisations like EH. I know dear old Kevin lays it on a bit thick, but it is horribly difficult, so people don't bother, and another fabulous building is lost forever.

And don't get me onto what this awful Olympic business is doing to heritage...

Ahem Katymac. Plenty of archaeology would have been done - believe me. The site would possibly still have been scheduled, and it would definitely have still been of archaeological interest for the below-ground deposits. Assuming the archaeological profession still exists in 30-300 years time, archaeological work would have been required before planning permission was even granted.

Aloha - if you could see what butchery can be done to buildings and archaeological sites without specialists advice you might change your opinion.

god well Katy then you might as well say there is no point in protecting anything. Hell, lets put PVC windows into Blenheim castle, what does it matter

So if he hadn't bought it and wanted to live in it - when would it have been surveyed (if that's the word) by an archeologist?
5 yrs?10...or 50? Probably never unless someone wanted to do something to it

Unless EH send people in on a rota basis to do random archeology?

PVC would be kind of appropriate on Blenheim, though, given that it was built by the people who were the essence of nouveau riche. The Posh and Becks of their day.

....but aloha this fabulous building HASN'T been lost forever.....

sigh.

Twinkle what are the chances of me getting permission to put windows into the roof of a 1730 rather unusually double-hipped elm framed brick orangery? Just into one side which was "restored" in the 70s with softwood timbers and concrete tiles anyway? (Rest of it original)

Dunno if it is even worth the application.

I think if the cost of perfect heritage planning is wonderful ancient buildings lost forever (I don't know that it is, but wouldn't be surprised) surely something needs to give?

On the basis of your scenario Katymac, you're right it's possible that the structure could have collapsed without a proper record. But as I said, if in the future a housing development was proposed for the site (unlikely), it would be targeted for archaeological work to inform the planning decision.

These are really difficult decisions, I'll admit, and as a profession I'm sure we don't have all the answers. But the fact is, the law states that scheduled monument consent is required for works to scheduled ancient monuments. SMC cannot be granted without full archaeological information on which to base the decision. It's just a fact.

It is a blessing EH were involved and is probably down to them that the exterior was such a resounding success as left to their own devices or with local planning officers without archaeological knowledge he may have cut corners when the money ran low and produced some sort of mock castle horror

No, I know this one was saved, and though I wasn't mad about the fireplace or hall floor, I think it's wonderful. But so many are not. They just fall down. As I said, I really wasn't aware a building could just disintegrate so quickly. I thought at first that building had been uninhabited for centuries, not since the 1930s.

This guy was hardly a Barratt home developer! I'm sure he knew as much as the pink-faced chap as EH, or rather, I suspect he knew a lot more.

Oh PPH, I'm not a conservation officer I'm an archaeologist. Have you spoken to your district council? I presume it's a listed building is it? The listed building consent application would be free so you haven't anything to lose really, apart from architect's fees I suppose. It would depend on how much impact it would have on historic fabric and the character of the building, but I've seen people get permission for all sorts of things. The best thing you can do is have prior discussions and supply plenty of information with your application, including photographs. Good luck.

That floor!There is one similar in our local barclays bank!And the furniture just didn't have enough weight within the walls.

Considering the amount of time the UK has been populated I am surprised any new building is every allowed

Surely every bit of land has been inhabited at some point

I love Timeteam, & I watch lots of programmes whoich depend upon archeology for their existance - but I wonder at the necessity to record everything

By excavating now using "modern" techniques are we causing as much damage to future generations as the Victorian archeologists in Egypt did at the end of the last centurary?

Aloha - I don't think so. He didn't realise all the implications of owning a scheduled ancient monument for a start.

He may know less about EH's regulations, but I would bet he knows a great deal more about the structures of ancient buidlings, and castles in particular.

yes everything listed around here. will cost £1000 to survey, then architects fees. I've had a timber survey done already (oooh, elm, well that is used a lot around here but the trouble is it rots from the inside so difficult to know what we need to do until we take the roof off, may have to replace the whole thing in Oak, that will be 90k madam thank you very much) so I'm in for a penny I suppose. It won't change any historic fabric because of the 70s work, and that side isn't visible from the main house or the rest of the property so maybe....