Unrecorded materials in heritage buildings : social and legal impacts upon its survival

• Main Author: Coe, P. C.
• Other Authors: Perring, D.
• Published: University College London (University of London) 2018
• Online Access: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.747263

This research indicates the scale of unknown archaeological fabric that is uncovered during the repair, alteration or development of heritage buildings, and the extent to which this fabric is incorrectly managed or disposed of without record. To understand why this occurs, this thesis analyses information from interviews with 100 people living in heritage buildings in three English towns. It shows that, although people are deeply concerned about the importance of heritage, found archaeological fabric is often disposed of without record or altered into new material form in response to the emotional, psychological and physical needs of those living and working in heritage buildings. Heritage values are often regarded as secondary to personal needs, with individuals tailoring tangible heritage to their living and evolving requirements for home or workplace. Functional and personal aesthetic needs take precedence over heritage values and a sense of place. Often innocent ignorance of planning systems results in failure to comply with due process of planning regulations. Resources and time, as well as tension and hearsay of unfortunate experience with local bureaucracy, can lead to distrust of the planning and regulatory systems for the management and protection of heritage buildings. People see themselves as disenfranchised from the local heritage debate; and report observing an imbalance in the interpretation of the legislative and regulatory framework. They regard local planning authorities as failing to reflect the core principles of regulation: proportionality, accountability, consistency, transparency and of targeting. This research answers questions about why people do not comply with the planning regulatory framework for heritage buildings. It concludes that those owning or working within heritage buildings must be treated as full partners in the heritage debate, or substantial unknown archaeological fabric will continue to be lost without record.