Life after redundancy Institute of Historic Building Conservation No 93 March 2006
NIMBUS CONSERVATION LIMITED Nimbus has 20 years experience in conservation of historic buildings, statues and monuments throughout the country. Cleaning is carried out on external and internal elevations of stone, brick and marble. Sensitive replacement carving is provided by the team of stone masons. Clients include the National Trust, Historic Royal Palaces, English Heritage, Council for the Care of Churches, local authorities and private individuals. Eastgate, Christchurch Street East, Frome, Somerset BA11 1QD Tel: 01373 474646 Fax: 01373 474648 Email: enquiries@nimbusconservation.com Website: www.nimbusconservation.com Guildford Stewkley Great Yarmouth Great Witley St Paul’s Cathedral Photo: A.Hornak
C O N T E X T 9 3 : M A R C H 2 0 0 6 Context Cover: Acrobats at St Paul’s, Bristol, a church (built in 1789–95 to designs by Daniel Hague) in the care of the Churches Conservation Trust (see p17). ©English Heritage and James Davies Redundant is not the right word Editorial Briefing 2 Out of Context 3 Periodically 4 The writer’s voice 6 Model settlements conference RachelWalmsley 7 Managing historic suburbs conference Graham Arnold 8 Legal Briefing Charles Mynors 9 The United States’ National Trust DwightYoung 13 Caring for a thousand years of history Richard Griffiths 17 Protecting the disused but beautiful Matthew Saunders 22 Problem owners, not problem buildings Allan Morrison 27 The art of making stage 1 THI applications Nathan Blanchard 31 Notes from the chair 34 Director’s cut 35 Membership notes 36 Vox pop 34 Profile: Mike Brown, the Context editorial board’s new chair 37 Book reviews 38 Products and services 41 The Institute of historic building conservation www.ihbc.org.uk Registered as a Charity Number 1061593. Company Limited by Guarantee. Registered in England Number 3333780. Registered Office: 3 Stafford Road,TunbridgeWells, Kent TN2 4QZ. IHBC Officers President: David Lovie email president@ihbc.org.uk Chairman: JohnYates email chairman@ihbc.org.uk Vice Chair: Dave Chetwyn email vcpolicy@ihbc.org.uk Secretary: Richard Morrice email secretary@ihbc.org.uk Treasurer: Michael Knights email treasurer@ihbc.org.uk Membership Secretary: Mike Lea email membership@ihbc.org.uk Consultations Secretary: Karen Holyoake email consultations@ihbc.org.uk Education Secretary: John Preston email education@ihbc.org.uk Publicity Secretary: Sarah Buckingham email publicity@ihbc.org.uk Law & Practice Coordinator: vacant email law@ihbc.org.uk Director: Sean O’Reilly email director@ihbc.org.uk IHBC Committee Chairs Policy: Dave Chetwyn email vcpolicy@ihbc.org.uk Membership & Ethics: Mike Lea email membership@ihbc.org.uk Finance & Resources: Richard Morrice email resources@ihbc.org.uk Education: John Preston email education@ihbc.org.uk Communications & Outreach: Fiona Newton email communications@ihbc.org.uk Branch Officers North: John Pendlebury Tel 0191 284 2119 NorthWest: Anthony Blacklay Tel 01270 610050 Yorkshire: Keith Knight Tel 01904 658482 West Midlands: Karen Holyoake Tel 01384 826891 East Midlands: Fiona Newton Tel 01507 601111 South: Gill Butter Tel 02380 285324 SouthWest: Colin Ellis Tel 01305 838334 East Anglia: Pippa Colchester Tel 01245 437337 South East: David Kincaid Tel 01227 862185 London: David McDonald Tel 020 8881 6724 Scotland: Charles Strang Tel 01835 822560 Wales: Nathan Blanchard Tel 020 7591 6062 Northern Ireland: Sharon BrownTel 028 9754 3087 Republic of Ireland: Bernard DeeTel 00353 1 873 7226 Business Office Jubilee House, High Street, Tisbury, Wiltshire SP3 6HA England Tel 01747 873133 Fax 01747 871718 email admin@ihbc.org.uk Halfway through constructing the Norman nave, the builders learned about gothic, so they adopted the new style. If funds had allowed, they would have torn down those old-fashioned rounded arches and started again. Later, a fashion for flat pointed arches and big windows caused the lancets to be replaced. Further changes to the fabric followed reforms to the liturgy. Then the congregation demanded to be kept warm and to have facilities to serve tea. Still later the church was adapted to a much smaller band of worshippers. Church buildings have a long history of adapting to changes in liturgy, technology, fashion and architectural style. The greatest change of all may come when the building is no longer required for Christian worship and is declared redundant. Often demolition or drastic and destructive adaptation seems the inevitable step. But redundancy may be the wrong word. The building may still have an important role as a repository of history, art and memory, as a local landmark, as an oasis of tranquillity, or as a community facility. This issue of Context highlights what can happen when redundancy is accepted as just one more change in the life of the building. Sometimes a church that has been unloved, neglected and barely used for years can come to life, its glories opened to new audiences, and previously unsuspected potential discovered. As Richard Griffiths points out (p17), the surest safeguard for a redundant church is the place it holds in the hearts and minds of the local community. Matthew Saunders (p22) notes that some churches come into his care friendless but end up as the belle of the ball. Putting new life into a redundant church is often a case of rediscovering its wider cultural significance. In the case of those vested in the Churches Conservation Trust the significance may be architectural (such as St James, Toxteth, with the earliest known surviving use of cast-iron columns); historical (St Mary, Battlefield, built by Henry IV to give thanks after the Battle of Shrewsbury); archaeological (Holy Trinity, Goodramgate,York, untouched for centuries); social (St Helen’s, Little Cawthorpe, a Victorian church considered by The Ecclesiologist as a paradigm of the type commended for poor parishes); or landscape (such as those that are the most important built feature in towns and villages). Redundant? That’s just the start. Life after redundancy Institute ofHistoricBuildingConservation No 93 March2006
C O N T E X T 9 3 : M A R C H 2 0 0 6 Context Briefing Copy deadlines Context is published five times a year, in March, May, July, September and November. Copy deadlines in 2006 are: Issue Date May, Issue 94 17 March July, Issue 95 19 May September, Issue 96 14 July November, Issue 97 15 September Editor Robert Cowan Editorial Coordinator Mike Brown, 54 High Road, Essendon, Hertfordshire AL9 6AP Tel 020 8379 3865 email mike.brown@enfield.gov.uk Editorial Board Mike Brown (chair) Susan Brook (treasurer) Nigel Crowe (main features) Peter de Figueiredo (book reviews) Michael Taylor (main features) Cartoons by Robert Cowan Context is distributed to all members of the Institute of Historic Building Conservation. © Institute of Historic Building Conservation 2006 ISSN 0958-2746 Publisher Published for the Institute of Historic Building Conservation by Cathedral Communications Limited, High Street, Tisbury,Wiltshire, England SP3 6HA Tel 01747 871717 Fax 01747 871718 email context@cathcomm.demon.co.uk www.buildingconservation.com Non-member subscriptions to Context Context is available to non-members of the IHBC at an annual subscription rate, including postage, of: United Kingdom £50.00 Elsewhere £75.00 Subscription orders, together with remittances payable to Institute of Historic Building Conservation, should be sent to the IHBC Business Office at Jubilee House, High Street, Tisbury, Wiltshire SP3 6HA. The views expressed in Context are not necessarily those held by the IHBC nor the publisher. Neither the publisher nor the IHBC shall be under any liability whatsoever in respect of contributed articles. We gratefully acknowledge the support of firms whose advertisements appear throughout this publication.While every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this issue of Context is current and correct, neither the IHBC nor the publisher can be held responsible for any errors or omissions which may occur. Action on parish churches Inspired! is a campaign led by English Heritage to secure a future for church buildings. It will involve research, pilot projects, training and capacity building to identify how to keep parish churches thriving, and to attract government support. In some places groups of volunteers are struggling to maintain their buildings, while in others successful churches with growing congregations urgently need to adapt and expand to accommodate new patterns of worship.Without forward thinking, says English Heritage, both trends threaten the survival of historic church buildings. Often the buildings provide the only remaining physical and spiritual focus for rural communities. In urban areas, redevelopment and shifting populations may mean that they are of significance’ should describe what is particularly special about the architecture and character of a church building to inform decisions on changes.Too often they are just a list of facts. EH will encourage congregations to draw in local sources of knowledge when creating them.The statements can be part of denominational reviews and inform the new unified designations to be created under the Heritage Protection Review proposals. Further information from churches@ english-heritage.org.uk Dorchester Abbey Cloister Gallery A new display of medieval stonework at Dorchester Abbey, near Oxford, sets around 100 pieces of the former monastic buildings against a 12th century wall (which could not be drilled into) in a new traditionally built gallery created where the abbey cloister once stood. The Abbey Church at Dorchester onThames, the surviving part of a 12th-century Augustinian Abbey, has undergone a five-year restoration and refurbishment.The monastic buildings were demolished after the dissolution in the 1530s, but a number of carved stones survived stored behind the altar. A new ‘pentice’, built of green oak and roofed with Cotswold stone, has been added on the site of the south range of the original cloister. A hundred worked stones were selected to form the basis of an exhibition.The brief was to give visitors an idea of monastic life and suggest the appearance of the missing buildings. Chris Hudson and Sally Rousham the only remaining physical link to the origins of that part of town.Whatever denomination or faith built them, they may be valued by believers and nonbelievers alike. An audit of the physical condition of listed church buildings will help to estimate outstanding repair bills for all historic places of worship in England and the average cost of annual maintenance. Questionnaires have already been sent to the 137 congregations in Manchester, Newcastle, Suffolk, Cheltenham and Portsmouth who took part in a similar survey in 1994/5, providing a comparison. English Heritage will also be surveying other areas, including nonChristian listed places of worship. Places of worship in need will be mapped to identify the areas of the country with the most vulnerable places of worship.The criteria will include statistical data on repair costs, expenditure on repairs, congregational and community support, and contributions. An important question is whether grants might be better used to fund maintenance as well as repair. English Heritage is funding two maintenance pilots (in the dioceses of London and St Edmundsbury and Ipswich) and hopes to commission others. English Heritage says that ‘statements
C O N T E X T 9 3 : M A R C H 2 0 0 6 ‘You didn’t much like my idea of using digital recordings of buildings as an alternative where the buildings can not be kept intact. Instead, you argued for increased public funding to ensure that we can conserve as much of our heritage as possible for future generations. ‘Ideally I would like to do both, and I certainly agree with you that digital recordings should never become a cheap substitute for the bolder alternative preserving valuable parts of the physical fabric of our history.’ Heritage secretary Tessa Jowell speaking at the ‘Capturing the public value of heritage’ conference ‘In Bradford middle class Asians are working hard to preserve their heritage – the mills from the industrial revolution. These buildings represent the beginning of their economic contribution to Britain. They help them feel part of Britain. ‘Remember too that the Sikh community is travelling by bus up and down the country visiting sites and artefacts highlighted on the Anglo-Sikh heritage trail – a trail which highlights the contribution their community has made to Britain. ‘And in London, where we said goodbye to the last Routemaster buses last month, the biggest tears were from theWest Indian drivers and conductors for whom the Routemaster came to symbolise their journey to London in pursuit of a better life. ‘Our task is to revive that radical, empowering conception of heritage; to engage that mass of the public interested in the historic environment and its meaning for them; and to help build a Britain at ease with its present because it understands, values and is able to access its past.’ Culture minister David Lammy at the ‘Capturing the public value of heritage’ conference ‘Powered flight transformed modern warfare. Britain’s aviation structures form powerful witnesses to the world wars, and to the role of the Royal Air Force in securing victory.The aeroplanes have – generally – departed, but the aerodromes remain.The hangars, officers’ messes, technical buildings and defensive structures form moving ensembles that provoke remembrance and demand respect.’ Roger Bowdler, head of designation at English Heritage, on the DCMS’s decision to list 255 buildings at military airfields ‘There are parts of New Orleans that are not fit for human habitation. They never were and never will be. Most experts agree that the roughly one‑quarter to one-third of the city located dangerously below sea level should not be rebuilt.’ Michael M Liffmann of Louisiana State University after studying land-use issues along the Gulf Coast, quoted in Architects’ Journal ‘SOMETIMES English Heritage surprises me and supports an application.’ Deputy prime minister John Prescott speaking at CABE’s annual gathering ‘I have no quarrel with the Gherkin itself. It is beautiful, indeed wonderful, perhaps the finest tower in the world. Its form is exhilarating and graceful, not merely big. Like a Gothic steeple, each stage in its elevation leads the eye to a visual climax, not to some arbitrary cutoff point.The bulging entasis and spiral banding lend added thrust. ‘I can therefore both admire the beauty of this building and yet regret its location, regret another desecration and another shift in London’s visual environment from streets to towers and boxes… ‘The popularity of the Gherkin (other than with letting agents) is being used to justify a swath of further destruction to its north and east.Yet commercial rents in conservationistWestminster are racing ahead of those in the City. Office workers regard theWest End as more desirable because its environmental character is protected. I have no doubt that one day the City will bitterly regret its failure to value what remained of its 19th-century streets and buildings. ‘The Gherkin is magnificent.That is not the point.’ Simon Jenkins writing in the Guardian ‘It is right that the high standards of consultation, fairness and efficiency established in the 2004 Planning Act should be seen to apply to the Crown as well as private developers.We are now consulting on the measures needed to activate these provisions, including safeguards to ensure national security is not compromised and to enable quicker decisions on urgently-needed developments.’ Planning ministerYvette Cooper, launching the government’s consultation into its proposals for integrating Crown property into the planning system ‘It is cheering that an anomalous situation has been rectified and that we now have the same official status as our senior colleagues, the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB), the Georgian Group and the Victorian Society.This recognition also indicates how important the architectural legacy of the 20th century has become, and how much casework we now have to deal with.’ Twentieth Century Society chairman Gavin Stamp welcoming the society’s new status as a statutory consultee. Local authorities in England andWales must notify it of all applications for listed building consent involving the demolition (or partial demolition) of listed buildings. ‘WHILE the Southampton University tests have shown [the new design of memorial stone] will withstand 250kg, this does not support the maker’s claim that the system is “robust enough to withstand the force of eight determined 14-stone vandals”. ‘Assuming eight vandals could get their hands on a memorial, and each would apply 70kg of force, this would equal a combined force of 560kg – more than twice the Southampton University certified resistance rating.’ The Association of Burial Authorities commenting in its newsletter on the continuing controversy about the stability of memorial stones. ‘WITH two million items [in the collection] it is always possible for someone to slip something in a bag and take it, but we have a trusted staff and it is very unlikely.’ RIBA chief executive Richard Hastilow commenting in Building Design on the theft of drawings and photographs from the institute’s collection.The thief was caught after selling some of them, including photographs of furniture by arts and crafts architect CFAVoysey, on eBay. ‘IWOULD prefer the archive to go abroad – I’m not sure it should stay in this country in the British scene.’ The architect Peter Cook, formerly of Archigram, telling the Architects’ Journal his views on the future of the group’s archive.
C O N T E X T 9 3 : M A R C H 2 0 0 6 Periodically… Your reviewer was recently asked why the Newsletter of the Ancient Monuments Society was not among the publications appearing with varying frequencies in this column. My response was that its wide-ranging and compendious content makes it, in the best possible sense, unreviewable. If you want to tap in to its coverage, the only answer really is to join the AMS. The most recent newsletter had 64 densely packed pages (A5 format), full of nuggets of information, interest and insight. There are three issues a year and a further volume of annual Transactions covering conservation issues, subjects or research in depth. This runs to another 150 pages. If this all reads a bit like a plug, well it is. As a longstanding member, the Newsletter is one of the few I read from cover to cover as soon as it arrives. If you haven’t done already – join. Several publications pass this way only rarely. One noted recently was Architectural Heritage XVI, the journal of the Architectural Heritage Society of Scotland. The interest beyond the usual individual historic buildings is in this case an extended essay by Miles Glendinning about the role of Sir Robert Matthew in the burgeoning conservation movement in Scotland, and the ground-breaking work in establishing the Edinburgh New Town Committee at a time when the district was physically disintegrating. Matthew had been a convinced modernist but came increasingly to believe that the reconciliation of globalism and localism, imbued by a growing sense of Scottish nationalism, could find particular expression through conservation. Matthew had at one point become known in some circles as ‘the destroyer of George Square’ – a (partial) destruction of which the Scottish Georgian Society, ancestor of the AHSS, had been founded to oppose. This story of the sinner who repenteth should be required reading by the current proponents of redevelopment rather than regeneration. It is surprising how undervalued the art and archival value of photography would appear to be if judged by the recent coverage in conservation publications. SPAB News (Winter 2005, Vol 26, No 4) is therefore welcome in helping to redress this deficiency by focusing on the very early days of recording historic buildings in this way. Many will be familiar with Francis Frith and his aim to record, albeit commercially and with a team of assistants, a photographic image of every city, town and village in Britain. A sort of photographic Pevsner, he started in 1860 and ended only in 1898 when he died in Cannes. His family continued his work and the company ceased trading only in 1971. One wonders what Frith would have made of digital photography? Less known for his photography than his repair of ancient buildings was a stalwart supporter of the SPAB, WilliamWeir. As an architect and SPAB committee member until 1950, he was a prodigious and methodical recorder of ancient buildings. He visited an average of 21 new locations a year for 64 years, and made return visits amounting to another 1,000 outings, many by cycle with bulky photographic kit and many over long distances. The same issue also highlights the importance of surviving historic decorative leadwork, which is often disregarded and under threat.We are also alerted to the society’s new technical publication (No 17) Conservation of Decorative Leadwork by Peter Rumley. It will probably be available by the time you read this. To hit 40 is something of a milestone and an opportunity for reflection. The latest edition of the RICS Building Conservation Group Journal (No 40) has also prompted a redesign. It has certainly come a long way since the five photocopied pages of its mid-1988 first issue. Recently the number of longer, authoritative articles seems to have declined, as have the informative green centre-spread Do’s and Don’ts Guides.
C O N T E X T 9 3 : M A R C H 2 0 0 6 Perhaps a general raising of expertise makes these less necessary. There are still opportunities for insights, however. Adrian Stenning suggests ‘slightly controversially’ a way of taking better control of historic building repair contracts by way of the JCT Form of Contact. He takes as his theme the sixth recital of the JCT Intermediate Contract and particularly the Information Release Schedule (IRS), the essence of which he feels has been overlooked for too long. This is often deleted (indeed the JCT is almost framed to encourage it). It is sometimes contended that the IRS is not appropriate to historic building projects because it ties the hands of the contract administrator, who can not guarantee dates for providing information due to opening up delays, a need for a considered reaction to what is found, design of a sympathetic solution and agreement of the approach with the client or others. Extensions of time can lead to additional costs and the possible opprobrium of the client. Stenning cites a re-roofing project as a typical example. Here it is often not possible to ascertain what repairs will be necessary to the structure beneath but it will be possible to know what information might be provided. Without the IRS there can be dispute and pressure to negotiate alternative dates. Stenning argues that if the dates for providing the information are fixed by the conservation specialist, control is taken back from the contractor, who can not then pretend that his programme and tender require the design information by an unrealistic date. Stenning argues that ‘used carefully, the Information Release Schedule can be a very effective management tool’, and that just because it is not included in the Minor Works Form, that does not mean it can not be accommodated within other contract documents. A different milestone is celebrated by TheVictorian, the magazine of the Victorian Society (November 2005): the completion of the revision of the London ‘Pevsners’. Originally comprising two slim volumes (three if counting Middlesex) they now fill six, solid, brick-sized hardbacks getting on for 5,000 pages overall. This is made a highly informative issue by contributions from Simon Bradley about the influence of the Westminster volume (No 6) on the future of Victorian central London; Bridget Cherry on Pevner’s approach to Victorian London churches; and Charles O’Brien on the underappreciated East End (London 5: East. The Journal of Architectural Conservation (Vol 11, No 3, November 2005) is a special issue on the current thinking on cleaning techniques by leading practitioners.We have come a long way in the past 20 years. This important issue brings together informed methodologies for traditional buildings. Martin Stancliffe in his article on the cleaning of the interior of St Paul’s Cathedral remarks on how the chronological evolution has involved first dry and wet sand blasting, followed by chemicals, high and low pressure jets, rotational whirl systems and finally laser cleaning. Nicola Ashurst’s introduction emphasises that there is no better way to demonstrate techniques than through practical projects undertaken on the basis of a sound understanding of the substrate to be cleaned, the soiling to be removed and the intimate relationship between the two. Deborah Slaton and Kyle Normandin provide an invaluable overview of current North American practice and techniques in masonry cleaning technologies. Especially useful is their appraisal from both historical and current perspectives of the vexing difference in policy terms between soiling (extra, undesirable) and patina (inherent, desirable). As well as physical and policy issues there are questions of the visual perception of soiling. Carlota Grossi and Peter Brimlecombe discuss this after questioning visitors to the Tower of London about the streaky staining of the light-coloured Kentish Ragstone of the White Tower. For most respondents this represented not dirtiness but the grandeur of age. Blackened surfaces, it seems, have a certain social acceptability. This is something to remember when an owner wants to make building ‘look like new’. Analysis, cleaning and conservation of the folded concrete beams which form a key architectural feature of the Sydney Opera House are covered by Paul Akhurst, Susan Macdonald and Trevor Waters. They highlight the importance of a methodology based on sound understanding of the historical development and construction of the building and the significance of the concrete in the architectural language of the place. Claudia Kavenagh and John Gembinski discuss the techniques used to investigate the soiling resulting from the serious 2001 fire at the Cathedral of St John the Divine in NewYork. St John’s is the third largest church structure in the world and the largest cathedral in the French Gothic style. Rapid mobilisation by staff on site at the time limited the amount of physical damage but the smoke soiling was considerable. Careful analysis established that soiling had penetrated all areas of the cathedral, including enclosed stairwells and the interstitial space between ceiling vaults and the roof. The extent and the materials burnt helped in developing a comprehensive cleaning test programme for all interior materials and specific cleaning techniques for the interior. This is still in progress. Three technical advances of particular note are latex poultice cleaning for stone; laser cleaning; and water jetting of metals. Martin Stancliffe, with Eddy and Inge De Witte, provide an informative history of the soiling of the interior of St Paul’s Cathedral and previously unsatisfactory superficial 1930s cleaning. This is followed by a detailed discussion of its resolution using recent developments for interiors, involving a peelable poultice technique based on a specially formulated aqueous dispersion of natural rubber. Martin Cooper illustrates the technical and practical considerations of laser cleaning and its potential eventual migration from interior architectural detail and studio sculpture cleaning applications to buildings. Large-scale outdoor cleaning has been undertaken only very infrequently so far – for example the entire front
C O N T E X T 9 3 : M A R C H 2 0 0 6 façade at Rotterdam City Hall – but Cooper implies that to scale up from conservation studio applications to buildings in future might require automated delivery systems to be effective. Bi-annual conferences (which also involve equipment manufacturers) are driving this technique forward. Finally, the conservation of historic metal using ultra-high pressure waterjetting techniques is discussed. The examples used will be considered highly exotic to Context readers: a large recovered section of the SS Titanic and a static (but deteriorating) display of two NASA Saturn 5 Space Rockets in Houston, Texas and Huntsville, Alabama. In Theatres, the magazine of the Theatres Trust (Issue 6,Winter 2005) Peter Longman rather devastatingly exposes – in his last piece before retiring as director – the frequently appalling standard of theatre interior re-planning and how refurbishment funding frequently runs out when the back-of-house facilities need bringing up to scratch. Theatre administrators are castigated for seeming to lack any spatial awareness about the spaces they expect to use, when one would think this was a fundamental prerequisite of the job. There is also a fascinating piece from Mike Sell about the mixed fortunes of Victorian and Edwardian theatres in Lancashire. This highlights the sterling work of the Manchester buildings-atrisk officer in getting to grips with the seriously decaying large playhouses in Hulme. Shorter items include revelations about the chance discovery of Britain’s oldest (by at least a century) stage timbers (c1787) on which, topically, news of Nelson’s victory and death at Trafalgar would first have been broken in mainland Britain. A rather shocking illustration of the historic Wellington Pier Theatre in Great Yarmouth shows it reduced entirely to its skeletal metal frame. It was due to be remodelled, but it seems that the discovery of asbestos led to an astonishing almost total degree of destruction. ‘On this evidence, cynics among us may conclude that the whole building was constructed of the stuff!’ The editorial in The Georgian, the magazine of the Georgian Group (Issue 2, 2005), is perhaps a little hard on the English Heritage ‘number crunchers’ behind Heritage Counts ‘who dutifully bend over backwards each year to quantify the socio-economic contribution of our historic buildings. In a civilised society they should be given something better to do’.Well, it seems we are not civilised enough to properly fund our historic environment but at least Heritage Counts (an unfortunate misnomer) gives us some ‘statistics execrated by our desiccated calculating machines’ to argue for an improvement. There are noteworthy articles on Regency Pembrokeshire, on the back of Tom Lloyd’s recent Pevsner of that county; on artificial light in Georgian interiors, on the back of the group’s new, updated and illustrated lighting guide; and the discoveries associated with one of the finest picturesque and sublime landscapes of 18thcentury Britain at Piercefield in Monmouthshire. Finally, the Newsletter of the Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art (No 21, December 2005) has recently announced research awards An extract from Joseph Roth’s 1932 novel The Radetzky March, translated by Michael Hofmann ‘In the years before the Great War, at the time the events chronicled in these pages took place, it was not yet a matter of indifference whether a man lived or died. When someone was expunged from the lists of the living, someone else did not immediately step up to take his place, but a gap was left to show where he had been, and those who knew the man who had died or disappeared, well or even less well, fell silent whenever they saw the gap. When a fire happened to consume a particular dwelling in a row of dwellings, the site of the conflagration remained for a long time afterwards. For masons and bricklayers worked slowly and thoughtfully, and when they walked past the ruins, neighbours and passers-by alike recalled the form and the walls of the house that had once stood there. That’s how it was then! Everything that grew took long to grow; and everything that ended took a long time to be forgotten. Everything that existed left behind traces of itself, and people then lived by their memories, just as we nowadays live by our capacity to forget, quickly and comprehensively.’ to individuals, probably leading in due course to publications of interest to conservation professionals. Building conservation related subjects feature less prominently than usual, but awards include those to the Corpus Vitrearum Medeii Aevi for a publication on the Mediaeval Stained Glass of Cheshire and Lancashire; the Buildings of Scotland Trust for the Borders ‘Pevsner’, and the Public Monuments and Sculpture Association for the Public Sculpture of South London. Bob Kindred MBE
C O N T E X T 9 3 : M A R C H 2 0 0 6 Model settlements conference A model past and a sustainable future Port Sunlight, a village of unique character with many features that make it a typical model village, was the venue for a lively discussion on the future of model settlements in Britain. The conference was planned to contribute to a two-year study by the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA), supported by English Heritage and the Lady Margaret Paterson Osborn Trust, on ‘Garden city communities and their future.’ The purpose is to investigate how garden city communities can be managed and developed. I opened the debate by exploring what we mean by a model settlement. For the purpose of the day’s discussions it referred to a planned village or settlement, varying from picturesque arrangements of estate cottages to workers’ villages and utopian community villages. A whole range of model settlements exist. Many are the result of social experiments, for example that of Ebenezer Howard, who experimented with catering for basic human needs and desires in the physical environment. Some of these settlements are being successfully conserved with the aid of planning legislation and other such controls. Others are suffering the consequences of social, economic and environmental change. Jane Blackburn of the Hampstead Garden Suburb Trust talked about some of the challenges Hampstead Garden Suburb was facing. Despite the suburb benefiting from different forms of protection (such as conservation status and an Article 4 direction), they are not sufficient to give the suburb the protection it deserves. It has become a victim of its own success. Its highquality buildings and landscaping, and ingenious design and grouping of buildings, make it an attractive place to live, but the social and economic pressures associated with its popularity threaten to destroy it. Changing social attitudes mean that property is bought for the uniqueness of its environment or its capital value. Changing technology means that there is a demand for satellite dishes, central heating and double-glazing. National planning policy also brings difficulties. The government promotes urban intensification, increased densities and infill, but what is appropriate in one area is not necessarily appropriate in another. In Port Sunlight the pressures are slightly different. Lionel Bolland, chief executive of Port Sunlight Village Trust, reported that the character and quality of Port Sunlight village was at a greater risk from the lack of funds to manage community assets. The trust is financially stretched to carry out necessary repair, maintenance and management work to the public buildings, monuments, landscaped grounds and street trees. This problem is made worse by the fact that Port Sunlight’s maintenance grant paid by residents is frozen at £1 per year.Yet, £70,000 was needed to carry out conservation work on the Port Sunlight War Memorial. These tensions are not lessened when model settlements such as Port Sunlight inherit schemes of management and tenancy agreements that are less relevant to the settlements today than when the schemes and agreements were first produced. The scheme of management in Hampstead Garden Suburb, for example, makes reference to planning issues that are out of date. Like Port Sunlight, Hampstead Garden Suburb has a management charge that is not related to property values. While some model settlements are managed according to the provisions in the schemes of management and tenancy agreements, and focus on conservation and preservation, some local authorities and trusts have managed these settlements proactively as sustainable communities. Lorna Davidson of the New Lanark Conservation Trust illustrated how the village has been restored and revitalised (New Lanark was developed as a model community in 1785).World heritage status has given New Lanark a longterm safeguard within which the trust has maintained investment through tourism and education programmes. But it is difficult to find a sustainable balance between New Lanark’s visitors and residents, and between the pressure for new housing and the scenic quality. Bradford Metropolitan District Council has adopted the proactive approach to the management of Saltaire, a purpose-built model Victorian industrial village. The village has been the subject of conservationled regeneration since the late 1960s. It benefits from world heritage site status, and the council has developed a management plan that aims to develop Saltaire as a world-class destination. Nigel Ingram of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation explained how the foundation was emulating the ideas behind the development of New Earswick 100 years ago by developing a new community, Derwenthorpe, to the north of York, as a model community. The conference’s discussions also helped to support the study being undertaken by the TCPA on garden city communities. The research will culminate in a best practice guide on the conservation and development of garden city communities in the 21st century. In the interim, and by popular demand, the TCPA and English Heritage are developing a forum to bring together people involved in model settlements, to share experience and best practice. If you would like to be part of this forum or find out more, please contact me at rachel@tcpa.org.uk. RachelWalmsley New Lanark world heritage site Saltaire:Titus Salt’s vision
C O N T E X T 9 3 : M A R C H 2 0 0 6 Managing historic suburbs conference Creating a new dynamic for historic suburbs The IHBC NorthWest Branch conference at Stockport Town Hall, supported by English Heritage, focused on suburbs – where the majority of Britain’s population lives. Here we report on just a few of the conference’s highlights. The development of suburbs in the 19th and early 20th centuries was one of the UK’s major contributions to town planning. Although a distinctive element in the character of towns, often designated as conservation areas and popular places to live, suburbs face threats due to demographic shifts, changing lifestyles and economic pressures leading to an erosion of character. Rachel Walmsley of the Town and Country Planning Association noted that a study by the Civic Trust in 1998 reported that 86 per cent of the population lived in them. Increasing social, economic and environmental problems would require sensitive analysis, recognising the different types and their varying relationships to the central town or city. Colum Giles of English Heritage was concerned with evaluating ‘the spacious suburb’, whose problems were similar to those of conservation areas. Their strong sense of identity can be threatened by change. National pressures to use brownfield sites lead to the piecemeal intensive use of urban space. English Heritage will be providing guidance in early 2006 on the sustainability, local identity and character preservation of historic suburbs, to produce an array of management mechanisms which can be adapted to local and economic circumstances. That vision depends on evaluation, using different methodologies to assess cumulative change and the underlying causes. Historic area characterisation, although broad brush and covering large areas, can expose the differences in types of suburb. The EH guidance will espouse a question-led approach to evaluation, to provide contextual understanding and statements of significance on such matters as landscape, road patterns, house types and layout and pre-existing features. It is difficult to come to judgements on threatened suburbs using historic environment criteria alone. The value placed on them depends also on residents’ evanescent associations, memory and family cycles. A form of village design statement, as promoted by the Countryside Commission, can help to develop the link between people and places. Care and appreciation by residents is the most important factor in preserving character while allowing change. Harold Baxter presented an architect’s view of development in historic suburban areas in Stockport. In a series of case studies he demonstrated a developing consciousness of fitting strategy for dealing with housebuilder depredations in historic suburbs. Councillors’ consciousness had been raised by awards for contemporary buildings in the city centre following the IRA bomb of 1996. The councillors went against officer advice on five major schemes in the suburbs involving the demolition of existing buildings.Winning all the appeals at public inquiries, assisted byWarren’s evidence, gave members the confidence to take a more proactive role in protecting their suburbs. Spotlisting delays and the lack of certainty of local listing (now being abandoned by Leeds, for instance) led to councillors deciding to double the number of conservation areas by designating another 29 in the suburbs. They were not chocolate-box areas but they did provide a consistent character. Six have been designated in 20 months. In one case this has caused significant investment by the Manchester NW partnership in alleygating, property assistance and preserving back-alley setts. Nick Dodd explained how URBED had explored the dynamics of suburbs. A City of Villages study for the Greater London Authority indicated that older suburbs were at risk from new edgecity clusters where cheaper space, wider access to skilled staff and better communications were leading to strong investment. Suburbs were at risk due to changing lifestyles, the need to conserve energy and social exclusion. Dodd pointed to the need to reinforce the role of local centres, protect and support suburban employment, and promote travel alternatives to the car and improvements to the public realm. Fostering opportunities for housing intensification and balancing energy efficiency with maintenance of character would be substantial challenges for the planning system. At the micro scale the tools used in preserving and enhancing conservation areas can be adapted to the wider spread of suburbs, although with less planning control. The wide typology of suburbs and their great spatial diffusion means that the intensive approaches to the inner city of the recent past will rarely apply. Planning policy and management mechanisms will need a subtler hue. Graham Arnold new developments in a suburban location of strong character. His first essays were dominated by clients’ ideas of shoehorning detached houses into redevelopment plots. From flats with roof terraces cut out of sloping roofs at the rear he progressed to a terrace of four-storey town houses with conservatory and roof garden. The mass and design fitted the street scene better. Baxter’s latest project of replacing a six-bed house with eight apartments and basement parking with the appearance of an original larger house was caught by regional spatial strategy restrictions on new housing outside core areas. His firm is now investigating extensive sheltered housing for local needs over a 1960s shopping complex to enhance the central core of the suburb and sustain the economic life of its local centre. Warren Marshall of Manchester City Council explained his authority’s Don’t mess with Britain’s suburbs.
C O N T E X T 9 3 : M A R C H 2 0 0 6 One of the most irritating aspects of the law relating to historic buildings is the imposition of VAT on works to them. The position is far from straightforward; and it has been the subject of a great deal of litigation, both in VAT tribunals and the courts. It has recently been slightly clarified by the important decision of the House of Lords in Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Zielinski Baker and Partners. This article explores the background to the current rules and considers which buildings are eligible for relief. A second article in the next issue (Context 94, May 2006) will look at which categories of works are eligible, and outline the special rules relating to works to places of worship. Background Prior to 1984, all alterations to buildings were zerorated for VAT. The government then introduced VAT at standard rate on alterations, but retained the relief for listed buildings and scheduled monuments, in response to pressure from the heritage lobby. However, as with many tax ‘concessions’, the benefit is more apparent than real. In particular, following a 1988 decision of the European Court of Justice, the relief was significantly curtailed by the Finance Act 1989, so that it now applies only where the building is used after the works in question for residential or charitable purposes. The relevant legislation is contained in the VAT Act 1994, which contains (in Schedule 8) a number of ‘Groups’ of items that are zero-rated. Those that are principally relevant in the present context are Group 5 (construction of buildings etc) and Group 6 (protected buildings). This article relates to the Act as amended by statutory instruments 1995, Nos 280 and 283. Note that, as with almost all tax legislation, the VAT Acts apply throughout the UK. Further details can be obtained in a useful free leaflet Buildings and Construction (Notice 708), issued in July 2002 by HM Customs and Excise – the predecessor in respect of VAT matters to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC), obtainable from local VAT offices and on the HMRC web-site (http://customs/hmrc.gov.uk). In addition to the statutory scheme, a further concession is operated by DCMS to enable the reclaim of the VAT payable on repairs to places of worship. Overview As a result of the provisions described above, the current position is now as follows: 1) The cost of ‘approved alterations’ to ‘protected buildings’ is zero-rated. 2) Other alterations to protected buildings are liable to tax at the standard rate (currently 17.5 per cent). 3) Tax paid on the cost of the repair and maintenance of listed places of worship can be recovered in full. 4) The repair and maintenance of other buildings (‘protected’ or otherwise) is liable to tax at standard rate. And 5) The disposal of a protected building after it has been substantially reconstructed is zero-rated. The effect of this is that, where works to a listed building are carried out in such a way that they do not affect its special character, no listed building consent is required, and their cost does not attract VAT relief. Where on the other hand the works do affect the character of the building, so that consent is required, VAT relief will be available. The relief in its present form thus arguably encourages works to be carried out in a less sensitive manner. As a result it has been the subject of much criticism: it was described by a previous secretary of state for the national heritage as ‘a wholly indefensible anomaly’. The Treasury has nevertheless stoutly resisted all moves for reform. However, the Court of Appeal (in Arbib (1995)) has held that it is appropriate to consider the purpose of the exemption – that is, that Parliament must have had in mind the onerous responsibilities imposed upon the owners of listed buildings. While the onus is on a taxpayer to show on the balance of probabilities that he or she comes within the zero-rating provisions, therefore, it is reasonable in borderline cases or where they are unclear to construe those provisions in favour of the taxpayer. On the other hand, the VAT Tribunal in the same dispute had dryly observed that ‘common sense and the law applicable to VAT are not well acquainted’. Protected buildings In the context of historic buildings, zero-rating applies by virtue of Group 6 to the following: •The supply of goods and services in connection with the carrying out of approved alterations to a protected building; and •The disposal of a protected building following its substantial reconstruction. It will be observed that the common feature of these is the concept of a ‘protected building’. It is therefore essential to understand at the outset what is meant by that term. Each Group contains a number of Notes which interpret the terms used in the Items. Note (1) to Group 6 defines a ‘protected building’ as follows: ‘...a building which is designed to remain as or become a dwelling or number of dwellings (as defined LEGAL BRIEFING Value added tax and the heritage: part 1 In the first of two articles on VAT, Charles Mynors outlines the rules on the imposition of VAT on works to historic buildings, and considers which buildings are eligible for relief.
10 C O N T E X T 9 3 : M A R C H 2 0 0 6 in Note (2) below) or is intended for use solely for a relevant residential purpose or a relevant charitable purpose after the reconstruction or alteration and which, in either case, is: a) A listed building, within the meaning of [the Listed Buildings Act] or [the Scottish Listed Buildings Act] or [the Northern Ireland Order]; or b) A scheduled monument within the meaning of [the Ancient Monuments Act] or the Historic Monuments and Archaeological Objects (Northern Ireland) Order 1995.’ This formulation was considered at length by the House of Lords in Zielinski Baker. Lord Walker held that it could be divided into three elements. A protected building is thus: 1) A building, 2) which is designed to remain as or become a dwelling [or be used for a residential or charitable purpose], and 3) which is a listed building [or scheduled monument] within the meaning of the relevant legislation. Dwellings The type of building most commonly encountered in cases relating to zero-rating is ‘a building designed to remain as or become a dwelling or a number of dwellings’. It thus includes both a conventional house and a flat. However, works to a building that constitutes ancillary accommodation to a dwelling will not be not zero-rated, since such a building can not itself be a dwelling, and thus can not be a protected building – even where it is in the curtilage of a listed building. This provision was the subject of the decision in Zielinski Baker. Works were carried out to an outbuilding at the Mere, Little Houghton, in Northamptonshire, a listed building of around 1830. The outbuilding, built at around the same time as the main house and connected to it by an ornamental wall, was initially a stable and carriage shed, and latterly a garage and laundry. The outbuilding was not listed in its own right, but was undoubtedly in the curtilage of the listed house, and thus part of a listed building within the meaning of section 1(5) of the Listed Buildings Act. Listed building consent had been given for the conversion of the outbuilding into changing and games facilities. The question was whether the cost of those works could be zero-rated for VAT. The VAT and Duties Tribunal initially held that it was; that was overturned in the Chancery Division; its decision was in turn reversed (but only by a majority) by the Court of Appeal. That was then overturned in the House of Lords, who held – albeit, again, only by a majority – that the works were not zero-rated. That, if nothing else, indicates that the law is not altogether straightforward.The outbuilding in the instant case was accepted by all to be a separate building, and it was – to use Lord Hoffman’s accurate formulation – ‘a listed building, or more accurately part of a notional listed building’. But it was not itself to remain or become a dwelling; and it therefore failed to comply with the second of Lord Walker’s three tests. The outbuilding was thus not a protected building within the meaning of the VAT Act; and works for its alteration would therefore not qualify for zero-rating. It is therefore not enough that a building should be within the curtilage of a building listed in its own right, so that listed building consent is required for its alteration. The one exception to this principle is that the Act specifically provides that a dwelling does include a garage occupied with the dwelling, provided that it was built at the same time as the dwelling – or, where the dwelling was substantially reconstructed, at the same time as that reconstruction. This has recently been interpreted by a tribunal (in Grange Builders (Quainton) Ltd (2005)) as meaning that, to justify zerorating, the building to which the approved alterations are carried out must at the time of the alterations be used for the storage of vehicles, regardless of the purpose for which it was built. As a result of that decision, HMRC now accepts that the key test is that the building in question should have been in use as a garage before the works and continue to be used as one afterwards. Other categories of protected buildings A building may also be a protected building if it is intended for use for a ‘relevant residential purpose’. That includes use as communal living accommodation, such as a children’s home, nursing home, students’ hostel, barracks, home for the elderly, hospice or monastery – but not a hospital, a prison or a hotel. The key consideration is whether the residential element is primary (as in a home providing residential accommodation, with care for those who need it), in which case zero-rating is allowable, or secondary (as in a hospital, principally providing medical care). This was considered by a VAT tribunal in relation to a group of three former agricultural buildings in Herefordshire, converted to form respectively a nursing home (in the former farmhouse, listed in its own right), sheltered housing (in a barn attached to the farmhouse by a link block), and associated administration (in another building attached to the barn by screen walls) (Hill Ash Developments (2000)). The tribunal accepted that the three buildings had originally formed one complex; and that it was perfectly reasonable for the administration function to be in a separate building. Accordingly it allowed zero-rating on all of the conversion works. This decision is not altogether easy to reconcile with the barn cases noted above, but it would seem to indicate that a more relaxed approach might be allowed where a group of buildings are all used for a ‘relevant residential purpose’ than would be appropriate in the case of a building ancillary to a ‘dwelling’. The other broad category of listed buildings and monuments (alongside residential buildings) that attract zero-rating is ‘buildings in use for a relevant
www.ihbc.org.ukRkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=