Critical appraisal of the practice of urban conservation

Abstract

This M.Sc. thesis presented at Edinburgh University is an attempt to analyse a particular branch of planning, conservation planning, as defined by Part 1 of the Civic Amenities Act, 1967. For reasons of ease of designation, increased environmental awareness and scope for public participation, conservation is now a much used technique. Because of strong financial pressures and a certain misunderstanding as to its use, however, much has still to be achieved, and this thesis suggests the future directions to follow.

Chapter 1 argues the case for conservation in terms of environmental, aesthetic, social, psychological and financial considerations. Conservation is seen as a way of preserving environment from the effects of new development and traffic. Moreover it is argued that conservation is required at a more basic level, in that environment conditions human beings, their habitat greatly influencing their character, and the more diversified the habitat the more resilient the character. Problems of economic viability are examined in the light of associated benefits together with the structure of a conservation area. Conservation emerges as a two level system, requiring a place both in a general planning strategy and in a detailed design scheme.

Chapter 2 set the scene for a discussion on the practice of conservation planning. The technique was introduced by the Government primarily to save money, so that whilst physical aspects of area delineation are well featured, financial aspects are not. The dilemma is that practical conservation is based on area policy, whereas financial conservation is based on individual buildings, and until this is rectified then progress must necessarily be slow.

Chapter 3 describes the practice of urban conservation. Although problems of famous historic towns are noted, the real problem exists in the ordinary towns of Britain where pleasantness of environment is their only advantage - and this is consequently where protection is most needed, but still not forthcoming. Reports are analysed in detail as to content and once again the isolationism of conservation schemes to other planning strategy, and the negative attitudes of control are noted. For the future, it must be realised that "conservation” is only another word for planning in an historic environment, that negative attitudes should cease as financial provisions are increased (as they surely must be), that conservation planning should be regarded as planning for its own sake and not an exercise in public participation, and that some form of rationalised directives as to detailed policy be made available to enliven conservation from its present mediocrity.