onex The Institute of Historic Building Conservation No 54, June 1997 In this issue: FUNDING FOR CONSERVATION More on lime Recording modern and industrial buildings Site safety procedures
mubor ~oof mile Olo. 1fiimiteb Manufacturersof HANDMADECLAYROOFTILES StrengthandFrosttestedto BS402 Ou~ 1=11• OFCERTIIICITIOI BOm 1 Certificate No. FM 11616 BS EN ISO 9002:1994 Registered Company Suppliedwithfullrangeof fittings,Ornamentals, Oastand KentPegs,Flat and CrossCamberedAvailablein fivecolours,SussexRed,SussexBrown, Red,MediumAntiqueandDarkAntique. NOWAVAILABLE TudoruniqueINVISIBLEUNDERTILEVENTINGSYSTEM. Theessentialcomplemento a HandMadeclaytileroof. St Maryin CastroChurch,DoverCastle,refurbishedin the DarkAntiquecolourof TUDORTraditional HANDMADECLAYROOFTILES Acceptedin sensitiveareasand regardedbythe mostdiscerningspecifiersas the finest handmadetileon the market.Tudorgivethe highestgradeof serviceto our customerswho cantakepleasurein theirinvestment knowingthat theyare addingto the qualityofthe environmentand our heritage. TUDORROOFTILECO. LIMITED DengeMarshRoad,Lydd,KentTN29 9JH 1991 Historic Houses Association Award Winner Telephone01797 320202 Fax017.97320700
THE INSTITUTE OF HISTORIC BUILDING CONSERVATION Context and ACO News Editor Bob Kindred 4 Henley Road, Ipswich !Pl 3FS, Tel: 01473 259441 (Ipswich Borough Council, Tel: 01473 262934, Fax: 01473 262974) IHBC Officers Chairman: Ma,y King (English Heritage, Tel: 0171-973 3853), 24 Beech Road, Aughton, Ormskirk L39 6SJ, Mobile: 0410 534911 Vice-Chairman: Alan Taylor (Staffordshire County Council, Tel: 01785 277282), 15 Village Gardens, Walton on the Hill, Stafford STl 7 OLL, Tel: 01785 664473 Secretary: Dr Richard Morrice (English Heritage, Tel: 0171-973 3132), PO Box 301, Brighton, E Sussex BN2 lBQ Treasurer: Robert Parkinson (West Oxfordshire District Council, Tel: 01993 770247), The Old Priory, Priory Lane, Bicester, Oxon OX6 7BG Membership Secretary: Gus Astley (Bath & North East Somerset Council, Fax: 01225 477674), Manor House, Wells Road, Hallatrow, Bristol BS18 5EJ, Tel/ Answerphone: 01761 453047 Consultations Co-ordinator: Graham Arnold (Sefton Borough Council, Tel: 0151-934 3574), 13 Sefton Drive, Liverpool L8 3SD Education Co-ordinator- John Selby (South Cambridgeshire District Council, Tel: 01223 443000), 77 Deacons Lane, Ely, Cambs CB7 4PS Technical Panel Co-ordinator: Marion Brinton (Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council, Tel: 01256 844844), Development Department, Civic Offices, London Road, Basingstoke, Hants RG21 4AH. Publicity Qfficer: Kathy Baird (North Shropshire DC, Tel: Business: 01939 232771, office fax: 01939 238422; Other times Answerphone/Fax: 01691 656516), Edinburgh House, New Street, Wern, Salop SY4 4DB Regislered as a Charity Number 1061593. Company Limited by Guaran1ec. Registered in England Number 3333780 Registered Office: Old Laundry Cottage, Mote Road, Ivy Hatch, nr Sevenoaks, Kem TN15 ONT. Branch Officers North: (Acting) Jan Ayris, Tel: 0191-232 8520 ext 5626 North West: Graham Arnold, Tel: 0151-934 3574, Fax: 0151-934 3587 Yorkshire: Bob Scriven, Tel: 01775 761161 ext 4275 West Midlands: Colin Richards, Tel: 01584 874941 ext 2321 or David Baxter, Tel: 01432 36474 East Midlands: Michael Taylor, Tel: 0116-252 7296 South.-Julia Smith, Tel: 01908 252501 South West: Paul Dadson, Tel: 01823 255425 East Anglia: (Acting) John Selby, Tel: 01223 443000 South East: Nigel Barker, Tel: 0181-541 9417 London: Rosemarie MacQueen, Tel: 0171-641 2455 Scotland: Ronnie Robertson, Tel: 01343 543451 Wales: Neil Sumner, Tel: 01656 643159; Northern Ireland: Laurence Manogue, Tel: 01232 23500 ext 279 Context54 June1997 Context Contents News 4 CONSERVATIONFUNDING An entrepreneurial approach. Peter de Figueiredo 6 Pumping life back into the coalfield community. Philip Grover and Roy Lewis 8 How to win the Lottery. David McDonald 10 Second thoughts of a Lottery. Jonathan Hurst 12 Application of PPG 15 and PPG 16 to record modern and industrial buildings. Recent examples from Essex. Shane Gould 14 Conservation can damage your health. Inspecting hazardous buildings. Ian Hume 17 Documents by the tonne. Jonathan David 21 Sir Titus. The setting of a conservation area. David Morton 22 Conservation and restoration of Pugin tiles at the House of Commons. Leslie Durbin 24 The future is now: an update. David Lermon 25 Comment WELCOMETO THEINSTITUTEOF FUN? A crystal ball would occasionally be useful in writing Editorials. By the time you read this, the General Election will be over and a new government will have a new agenda. Who ever wins, there will not be much recognition or reconsideration of heritage matters or cultural values in the near future if the electioneering was anything to go by! What will continue to concern ordi nary citizens is the quality of their lives expressed through the quality of their environment. Centralised governments seem unable to grasp the fundamental importance of the cherished local scene to local people. It will be important that the new Institute makes its voice heard in government as the leading professional body for the historic environment. The Secretaries of State at the DoE, DTI and the DNH all gave the Institute proposals their blessing - now we must build on this in contacts with their officials. Agendas for the Institute are emerging. Our internal objectives for our first Issue54 June 1997 An overview of building limes. Ian Pritchett 28 The trouble with lime ... Jane Schofield 30 Edinburgh Old Town Renewal Trust. Using a computer model to evaluate new buildings within a conservation area. Kirsteen Thompson 32 The IHBC cartoon 33 Reviewing the register for the year 2000. Carol Davies 34 'Supporting Columns'. Timber structural repairs. Brian Morton 36 M'Learned Friend. Charles Mynors 38 Conferences and courses Two views of the SPAB Autumn repair course. Roz Artis-Young and Helen Hossack 40 Set in concrete? - the conservation of 20th century buildings. Jason Clemons 42 IHBC and ACO Business News 43 Book reviews 44 Illustrations in this issue 51 twelve months were eloquently set out in ACO News 13. Externally an agenda is also forming: continuing concerns about local authority staffing for conservation; the dash for cash - the deflation of English Heritage's budget and the irresistible rise of the Lottery; the problems of permitted development - Wirksworth writ large (see Context 53); the redefinition of partial and total demolition - the Shimitzu case (covered in this issue) to name but a few. The Executive and Council of the new Institute will be pursuing these and many other matters in the relevant quarters. So far our initiation as an Institute has been deliberately low key given the media focus on the election. In the coming months it is up to all of us to promote the new Institute, its aims and objectives and its newly won status to bring the profession we support onto a larger stage and more clearly in the spotlight so that it will have a real influence on the issues that concern us. 3
4 NEWS Context Editor: Bob Kindred 4 Henley Road, Ipswich !Pl 3FS, Tel: 01473 259441 (Ipswich Borough Council, Tel: 01473 262934, Fax: 01473 262974) Deputy Editor: Liz Marten 10 Kristiansand Way, Letchworth, Herts SG6 1UE (North Herts District Council, Tel: 01462 474411) Production Editor: Jonathan David, Tel: 01582 763415, Fax: 01582 467480 Context is published quarterly and is distributed to all members of the Institute of Historic Building Conservation. q Association of Conservation Officers 1997 ISSN: 0958-2746 Published for the Institute of Historic Building Conservation by Hall-McCartney Ltd, Heritage House, PO Box 21, BALDOCK,Herts SG7 SSH. Tel: 01462 896688 Fax: 01462 896677 Nonmember subscriptions to Context Context is available to nonmembers of the !HBC at an annual subscription rate, including postage, of: United Kingdom Elsewhere £36.00 US$93.00 Subscription orders, together with remittances payable to HallMcCartney Ltd, should be sent to the address shown above. The views expressed in Context are not necessarily those held by the !HBC or the publishers. Neither the publishers nor the !HBC shall be under any liability whatsoever in respect of contributed articles. The products and services advertised in this publication are not necessarily endorsed by the Institute. Front cover Do not be tempted to climb on unboarded or unfinished scaffolding, even if it is as carefully erected as this example around Pickering Castle. As Ian Hume points out in a vital article on site safety in this issue - "You only have one life; don't waste it". For details of illustrations in this issue see page 51 HLFAWARDTOPRESERNVEATIONALLY IMPORTANDTESIGNCOLLECTIONS The National Heritage Lottery Fund has awarded a £1,644,000 grant to Middlesex University to build a new Museu·m of Domestic Architecture and Design at its Cats Hill campus in north London. The Museum will house one of the world's most comprehensive collections of designs and printed materials reflecting the history of town and suburban houses between 1850 and 1950. One of the collections held is from the Silver family's studio, which over that period pioneered Art Nouveau, Art Deco and other styles for homes in the UK, USA and France. The Silver Studio Collection, recognised by the DNH as.being of "outstanding national importance", was under threat of being exported to the USA. It was impossible, with previous funding resources, to house the vulnerable paper-based collections appropriately. Now they can be displayed and interpreted in suitable, secure, environmentally controlled conditions. Wide public access to the Collections will be possible for the first time by Spring 1999. Admission to the Museum, which will house two exhibition galleries, a conservation studio and study facilities, will be free. It will make possible a major cataloguing programme, tracing the history of domestic decorative art from 1850 to 1950. This will be the only museum of its kind in the country. The unique database facility will enable suppliers of period fixtures, fittings, paints, floorcoverings and wallpaper to be traced. As well as undertaking a full academic function as a university museum for scholars, there will be an approachable information service to anyone needing advice on authentic decoration and restoration. For further information contact Sarah Mansell, Collections Manager, Museum of Domestic Architecture and Design, Middlesex University, Bounds Green Road, LondonNl 12NQ, tel:01813625244,fax: 0181-3626639. ANOTHERSUCCESFSORTHEHISTORICHAPELTSRUST The Dissenters'· Chapel, Kensal Green Cemetery, until recently on English Heritage's Buildingsat-Risk Register, has recently been re-opened by Sir Jocelyn Stevens following repairs by the Historic Chapels Trust (HCT). Funding for the project was provided by North Kensington City Challenge, English Heritage - which offered its architectural services to the scheme - and the Heritage Lottery Fund. Small grants were also made by the Jill Franklin Trust, Manifold Trust and Metropolitan Public Gardens Association. The Grade II* Dissenters' Chapel stands at the south-east corner of the Cemetery near to the Grand FORTHCOMING ISSUE-S DEADLINES AND THEMES Copy deadline for the Autumn 1997 issue will be 20July. Please adhere to this deadline. Issue 55 will look at 'The Philosophy of Coservation' - the theme of this year's Annual School in Canterbury. Other contributions, experiences, technical notes and case studies are welcome (space permitting) but articles under 2,000 words are much preferred. Copy in word-processed form on 3.5 inch floppy disk would be appreciated where possible. Please be sure to state the name of the software it is written in on the label. Don't just give the title of the file! Union Canal. Kensal Green Cemetery is a conservation area and Grade II* on the National Register of Historic Parks and Gardens. Kensal Green (All Souls) was London's first public cemetery, established by Private Act of Parliament in 1832. It is of the highest importance in the history of landscape design. Three other listed buildings in the cemetery are the Anglican Chapel (II*), Main Entrance (II*) and Colonnade (II). Many of the monuments are also listed. The Dissenters' (Non-Conformist) Chapel was designed by John Griffith of Finsbury Cl 796-1888), surveyor to the General Cemetery Co, and built about 1834. The Chapel, in the Greek Revival manner, has a portico of Ionic columns based on the ancient Greek Temple on the Ilissus near Athens. The main body of the Chapel and its flanking colonnades have been repaired, the latter reinstated using a combination of old and new stone. An historic paint scheme of the 1860s, discovered during the repairs, has been retrieved. New fittings have been installed based on Griffith's surviving drawings. The Chapel is now held on a long lease from the General Cemetery Co, freeholder of the Cemetery, by the HCT, which has sublet it to the Friends of Kensal Green Cemetery. The Conservation Portfolio of the Portfolio are: Conplex Architectural Lead Casting Eurocom Enterprise Ltd Options Using Uginox Terned Stainless Metal Window Co Ltd Conservation Rooflight Sugg lighting Ltd Manufacturers and Restorers of Electric and Context 54 June 1997
SLAKEDLIM E "PUTTY The vital ingredient for the conservation and repair of historic buildings. Bleaklow lime putty is 96% pure calcium oxide ground to a fine powder and slaked fresh before maturing a minimum of 30 days. This makes it ideal for preparing all mortars, plasters and washes without requiring further treatment. SLAKEDLIME MORTARS Coarse, medium and fine stuff pre mixed non-hydraulic mortars for use where direct matching of.the original is not critical. Bleakl~w lime putty based mixes are prepared using carefully gradeel and batched aggregates and are available in 40kg sack? or Big Bags. These mixes are rich enough to allow for _ the1addition of pozzolanic materials if required or hydraulic lime for a more rapid set (we stock a hydraulic lime for this purpose). ~BLEAKLOW BLEAKLOWINDUSTRIES LTD HassopAv, Hassop,Bakewell Derbyshire DE45 lNS. fax 01246 583192 lei: 01246 582284 South.eastern part pallet sales and distribution (Kingston) tel/fax, 0181 977 0816 SUPPLIERSOF LIMEPUTTYTOTHE NATIONALTRUST, ENGLISHHERITAGE Context54 June1997 As a local family company, spanning three generations, we aim to provide personal attention, close supervision and comprehensive after sales care. For maintenance and repairs, however small, we provide a prompt reliable service. We have the experience and resources to have carried out contracts of all types and sizes, from literally a few pounds to several millions of pounds; our main objective being to provide a quality job and a satisfied client. With a large, directly employed workforce, we have the resources to cover all aspects of building work including decorating, electrical work, roofing, plumbing and heating etc. together with a full design and planning service. Many of our craftsmen are trained and experienced in the more specialised areas of their crafts, such as:- Specialist paint techniques Running decorative plaster cornices and mouldings Use of traditional lime putty in brickwork and plastering Purpose made joinery We run a large joiners shop from which we faithfully reproduce period joinery such as doors and windows, stairs and mouldings as well as designing and manufacturing high quality bedroom and kitchen furniture. Our estimates and advice are free. R.W. ARMSTRONG & SONS LIMITED HIGH QUALITY BUILDING AND DESIGN ALDERMASTONROAD, SHERBORNEST.JOHN, ~ j ·r-1 BASINGSTOKE,HAMPSHIRE RG249JZ ;,,_~,,,, TELEPHONE (01256)850177 FACSIMILE(01256)851089 Reg1slere:!H~use.Buider M·H MINTON HOLLINS ORIGINAL TILE 1840 MINTON HOLLINS 1997 Past Perfect RESTORATION & REFURBISHMENT SERVICES • The authority on traditional Victorian floors • On-site national service for projects of any size • Comprehensive historical archives • Recommended Fitting teams • Handmade, traditional ceramic products • Techn'ical,maintenance and cleaning advice • Visitor's gallery to view products in situ Recent commissions have included: Capitol Building, Washington, USA; Palace of Westminster, London; St Saviours, London; Smithsonian Institute, Washington, USA; New Zealand Parliament Building; Hurlingham Club, London; Melbourne Club,Australia; St Aidan's, Eire; Manchester Crown Courts; Ll.verpoolTown Hall to name a few. H&R JOHNSON A NOHCIIOS Com.,awy Minton Hollins Specialist Products Department CX, H & RJohnson Tiles Ltd., Highgate Tile Works, Tunstall, Stoke-on-Trent ST6 4JX. Tel:01782 575575 Fax:01782 577377 5
6 CONSERVATIONFUNDING An entrepreneurial pproach Peter de Figueiredo begins this feature with a look at alternative and innovative sources of funding. For local authorities squeezed by ever declining budgets and rigid spending controls, conservation funding has rarely been a priority. Only in major historic towns has the vital link between conservation and economic development been fully recognised. Yet the Government's recent conversion to planning for sustainability encourages regeneration, and here the Conservation Officer can play a significant funding role. For over 25 years, Chester has sought to conserve and enhance the built heritage as a means of strengthening the City's economy. An expanding tourism and retail market followed a programme of public investment in the City's historic fabric. The trend continues today, providing vital job opportunities in the retail and commercial sectors. THECHANGINGNATUREOF THECONSERVATION In the early years of Chester's Conservation Programme, English Heritage (and its governmental predecessor) provided generous funding. This is no longer the case. From 1971 to 1988 under the Chester Town Scheme, English Heritage matched, pound for pound, the Council's own revenue contribution: the combined average spend was £400,000 annually. The current Chester Conservation Area Partnership Scheme receives a mere £20,000 per annum from English Heritage. The Council's Other Se1vices (i.e. non-housing) Capital Programme also had a strong conservation/environmental bias, part financed in the 1980s and early 1990s from the European Regional Development Fund. Projects managed by the Conservation Section included pedestrianisation and surface treatment of City Centre streets; a riverside promenade; major repairs to the City Walls; heritage interpretation schemes; and tourism signage. But in 1995 Chester District lost its Objective 2 status, and the Council's ability to fund major conservation projects was severely affected. OTHERFUNDING Since then, a more entrepreneurial approach to funding has been adopted to ensure that the City maintains its competitive edge as a tourism and heritage destination. Competition between local authorities has increasingly become the Government's method of allocating resources, in the belief that this achieves better value for money and more innovative solutions. Whatever the arguments, the development of a competitive culture is an advantage if the opportunities are to be seized. Chester's success rate for regeneration and conse1vation projects has so far been encouraging. Eastgate: "Capital Challenge funding secured improvement of city centre streets". 1 Single Regeneration The objectives of SRB are not specifically conse1vation related, but in a historic area, regeneration must involve enhancement of heritage assets. Chester's successful SRBI and SRBIII bids have built on a conservation-led strategy for development of the Old Port area of the city. SRBIIIprovides £7 million over seven years towards a total package of £35 million, and includes reclaiming the historic waterfront and improving the setting of the Chester canal and the medieval Water Tower which is a part of the City Walls. 2 Capital Challenge A successful Capital Challenge bid focuses on access and transportation solutions for a sustainable economy. The programme contains a range of projects aimed at improving City Centre living, making the City more accessible, developing public transport and providing alternatives to car travel. Conservation led capital schemes include: • resurfacing pedestrianised streets and squares • improving city centre security • Living Over the Shop • lighting improvements • enhancement of the inner ring road. All these projects improve the setting of historic buildings and enhance the environmental quality of the city. Capital Challenge loan approvals provide £7 million towards a total package of £31 mil1ion. The programme is also funding two temporary posts in the Council's Conservation and Design Section. 3 European The loss of assisted status reduces the potential for access to mainstream European funds, but there is the opportunity under community and interregional co-operation initiates to tap Context 54 June 1997
into Regional Development Aid, particularly through partnerships with member states with Objective 1 status. For example, Chester has received funds under the community programme to develop ways of interpreting historic document collections through IT. This is being developed in partnership with Genoa, Granada and Sligo. Chester's individual project involves interpreting the Rows, and is based on a conservation led research project recording the history and archaeology of this unique building type. A RECITEProgramme initiative is currently being led by Chester in partnership with Catania, Limerick, Vale de Lima (Portugal) and Visby (Sweden). This explores the concept of economic development by strengthening Local Distinctiveness in hjstoric urban centres. __r A further Technical Exchange Programme is being explored to share ( experience and( expertise in conservation ma,nagement across Europe. 4 Private The bulk of investment in the historic built environment has always been provided by the private sector. The Council's Conservation Fund which is used to fund historic building repairs is largely justified by the beneficial leverage it achieves (20% ~ublic : 80% private on average). But increasingly the city has been looking to the private settor to provide sponsorship and part fund capital projects such as street improvements. For this approach to succeed, a clear vision of local objectives must be established, and an assessment made of marketing and economic advantages. In this respect, conservation has much to learn from the arts world. Like the arts, the historic environment is a marketable product and many companies will wish to be associated with its quality image. 5 Association for Business Sponsorship of the Arts Direct sponsorship by the private sector can also be used to attract funding from ABSA. A contribution by MANWEBof £25,000 to fund an Architectural Lighting Strategy for the city was matched by ABSA under its Pairing Award for the Built Heritage in 1995. The Lighting Scheme is currently the subject of a major Heritage Lottery Fund application. 6 Local organisations and agencies To support the Lighting Strategy, an Economic Impact Assessment measurContext54 June1997 Old Port: "SRB funding for restoration of 18th Century wharf as part of regeneration strategy". ing possible benefits was commissioned. Funds for this economic study were obtained from a range of partnership organisations including the City Centre Management Panel and the Chester and Ellesmere Port TEC (CEWTEC). Support for the project has also been provided by Chester Civic Trust. The main lesson here is to .· target the most appropriate organisation for the specific project. CONCLUSIONS In this resume I have avoided covering the role of English Heritage, the grantmaking trusts, and the lottery distributors. They are the most obvious agencies for conservation funding. My purpose has been to show that there are many other sources, particularly in the context of urban regeneration. Successful bids for all these competitive funding programmes are likely to be based on: • A strategic approach.-The best way of opening up funding opportunities is to set any conservation objectives within a clear strategic context for regeneration. By this means it is possible to interest English Partnerships (or the Scottish and Welsh Development Agencies) where they would not be if the project merely involved the conservation of a building. These agencies can pump prime area regeneration which will bring about private sector investment in conserving or enhancing a place. • Partnership.- There must be clear evidence of local support and involvement. • Innovation.- This is important, particularly in funding mechanisms, e.g. joint ventures, PFI etc. • Valuefor money.-An aim of bids will generally be to lever in other funding sources and to maximise the benefits of contributions from other key partners. • Environmental benefit: Protection and enhancement of the built and natural environment should be considered both at a local level and as a contribution to more global issues. Key Local and Regional Priorities Projects should be seen as part of a local capital investment strategy, for example stimulating the economy, creating new jobs, encouraging a more sustainable transport system etc. In conclusion, it must be said that none of this activity is straightforward or easy. The bidding process is timeconsuming, often frustrating, and needs new areas of expertise. Many Conservation Officers may not see it as part of their normal duties. But the move to more flexible working arrangements within local authorities, the team approach and the breaking down of professional boundaries allows the Conservation Officer to work alongside the External Funding Manager and the Regeneration Team. This will encourage a more entrepreneurial culture to develop. It is clear that the future of public funding will remain tight whatever the political agenda. So, to keep ahead, look creatively at all funding opportunities, however unlikely they might at first sight appear, and assess how they might effectively be use them for the advantage of the built heritage. Peter de Figueiredo is Conservation Officer, Chester City Council 7
8 CONSERVATIONFUNDING • Pumpinglifebackintothe coalfieldcommunity Philip Grover and Roy Lewis describe how a cocktail of funding has given a new lease of life to Boughton Pumping Station, Nottinghamshire. The story of the decline and eventual re-use of the Blackburn Engine House at Boughton Pumping Station in many ways mirrors what has happened in a number of cases of successful re-use of historic buildings elsewhere. What is, significant however, about the Boughton case is its topicality in terms of sustainability, community involvement and partnership. The case is also of particular interest as it is an example of how conservation specialists can work effectively with a variety of other groups to achieve successful conservation and regeneration through major external funding. The Boughton case seems therefore to be very much within the spirit of government advice outlined in recent PPGs. Background Situated on the edge of Sherwood Forest in the North Nottinghamshire Coalfield, Boughton Pumping Station was developed in the early years of this century by the Nottingham Water Company to provide a water supply to the city from the underground sandstone aquifer. Two pumphouses were constructed, together with an associated superintendent's house and five workers' cottages. The superb landscaped grounds, with granite sett roadways, ornamental planting and attractive boundary walls and railings were all maintained to a meticulously high standard for most of this century. Theprincipal elevationof TheBlackburnEngineHouseshowingthe (now debased)landscapesetting. The Blackburn Engine House, the main pumphouse, was designed in 1905 by W B Starr in a flamboyant eclectic baroque revival style and the huge brick chimney forms a distinctive local landmark. Internally the building comprised a single space, containing a massive 'state of the art' tripleexpansion beam engine pumping water from a deep well directly below the building and supported on monumental foundations. The engine house was listed Gracie II in 1974. Obsolescence By the 1960s, the once innovative beam engine was replaced by a much smaller electric pump installed in an adjoining building. The original engine was scrapped leaving the Blackburn House redundant. In 1980 the Severn Trent Water Authority, was refused listed building consent to demolish the building. An appeal was withdrawn immediately prior to a public inquiry. The 1980s saw the promotion of various proposals by the District Council to find a new use for the building including a motorcycle museum and a small factory. Attempts were, however, thwarted largely as a consequence of restrictive site conditions and access, resulting from operational use of the surrounding land and buildings by STW. At this stage the building was reasonably sound but suffering from long-term lack of maintenance. The unpromising future for the building took a sudden turn for the worse in 1988when mining subsidence put the sandstone substrata into tension eausing massive fissuring and alarming damage to the building and surrounding landscape. Huge cracks appeared in the Blackburn House, other smaller buildings on the site were seriously damaged and many trees were lost. From this point onwards the future of the building looked bleak. Economic decline The worsening local economic climate during the early 1990s made the situation appear hopeless. Having suffered the effects of coal mining subsidence, the local community was hit by the devastating and ironic news of widespread local colliery closures. Unemployment soared, leading to economic and social deprivation. The prospect of seeing a viable economic re-use for the Blackburn House looked further away than ever. Once again, there was enormous pressure from STW to demolish the building. Inevitably it featured prominently on the District Council's Buildings at Risk Register and the Context54 June1997
I ( Conservation Team, supported by English Heritage, applied increasing pressure on both STW in respect of neglect, and British Coal for the havoc wreaked by coal mining subsidence. A further setback was encountered in October 1990 when blue asbestos was discovered in the building and this was put forward by STW as a further obstacle to its conservation. However, the asbestos problem had to be addressed in any event, even if the building was to be demolished. In December 1990 the District Council served an Urgent Works Notice, requiring repair to the slate roof, rainwater goods, securing of doors and windows, timber treatment, and ensuring ventilation. Since the District Council would have been ill equipped to carry out such an extensive repair scheme in the event of non-compliance with the Notice, this action was essentially a bluff, but did have the effect of helping to kickstart the situation. A further action by District Council conservation staff was to secure the designation of the pumping station complex and its immediate environs as a Conservation Area. This recognised the value of the site and facilitated subsequent grant aid. Grassroots initiative In frustration STWpublicised the problem an open letter in a local magazine asking for sensible suggestions as to how the building could be re-used. A lead was taken by Ollerton and Boughton Parish Councils which in November 1992 called a special 'brainstorming' meeting, inviting anyone who they thought might be able to make a positive contribution. The well-atContex5t 4 June1997 Evidence of major damage by coal mining subsidence and tended meeting resulted in the formation of a Working Party comprising representatives from Parish, District, County, STW(owners) and Rural Community Council. District conservation staff were key players. Throughout 1993 the Working Party worked intensively to broaden the involvement of local community interests and to secure ideas for re-use. This led to the commissioning of a feasibility study, financed jointly by the Working Party partners to identify a viable and sustainable new use for the building in accordance with the following criteria: Emergency repairs underway in early 1994 with the benefit of a Buildings at RiskGrant from English Heritage.' (a) enjoy local support; (b) be a mix of commercial/non-commercial; (c) respect character and integrity of the building; • (d) be good neighbourly/accessible; (e) be energy efficient/environmentally friendly; (/) be eligible for maximum grant aid; (g) be susceptible to a local, probably trust based, management regime. Specialists in re-use of historic buildings were invited to tender for the feasibility study and Robert Bacon (architect and ACO member) was appointed to undertake the initial work in April 1993. He developed ideas in collaboration with the Working Party for an imaginative mixed-use scheme involving a combination of community and commercial floorspace. Fundamental to the emerging ideas was the concept of sustainability, and the association of the building and the local area with the energy industry. Ollerton/Boughton had already become the focus of national interest in 'green architecture' circles due to a District Council-led energy initiative which aimed to secure the regeneration of this coalfield community in an environmentally sustainable manner. It therefore seemed natural to develop this theme in the recycling of the Blackburn House, and this proved to be a decision of crucial influence in subsequent fund raising efforts. Progress In January 1994 STW let a programme for emergency repairs at a cost of £177,000 which was subject to a Buildings at Risk Grant of £43,406 from English Heritage, conditional on STW actively pursuing a new, trust-based, re-use of the building. Completed in July 1994, these works far exceeded the minimum standards required the Urgent Works Notice and secured the building against further rapid decay. STW also let a contract for the removal of the asbestos at a cost of £100,800. The investment of over £277,000 represented a sea-change in attitude and philosophy by STW and assured a change in fortunes for the Blackburn House. A change in fortunes The ideas set out in the feasibility study were well received by the local community and others concerned with the re-use of the Blackburn House but the next major problem was how to fund this ambitious and costly scheme, estimated at around £3 million. An economic feasibility study was commissioned from Cobham Resource 9
• Consultants to explore in detail the viability of the scheme. Recommendations were made to increase the letta ble floorspace within the complex. Fortuitously, in early 1994, the Rural Development Commission launched a major government funded scheme called 'Rural Challenge'. It was immediately clear that although the competition was going to be tough, the aims and objectives of the Boughton Project needed only minor 'tweaking' to demonstrate close conformity with all eligibility criteria for Rural Challenge. One of the key concepts that had 'blossomed' over the months of development of the project was sustainability. Dialogue with the Forest1y Commission locally had led to the innovative idea of heating and powering the building by a combined heat and power (CHP) engine fuelled by forestry waste. This, and other 'green' concepts for the building, were to prove a vital key to the success of the project in 'Rural Challenge' and in November 1994 it was announced that the Partnership was the winner of one of the six £1 million prizes throughout the country. As well as acquiring new partners in the project, the Rural Challenge process moved the Working Party towards a more formal Partnership status and the establishment of a Charitable Trust. A downside of success in Rural Challenge was that the RDC demanded a start on the project by April 1995 and planning permission and listed building consent had yet to be granted! Success at Rural Challenge spurred the Partnership to further efforts and despite pledges of funding from members of the consortium (mainly public bodies) amounting to approximately £1 million it was clear that substantial additional funds would still need to secured. The scheme by now had been included in the District's SRB programme, adding an extra £8,000 to the total. The next major boost to the project came in 1995 when a further £900,000 was secured from the European Union. With the bit now firmly between the teeth the partnership made a bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund and in March 1997this yielded an additional £750,000. With funding from a number of partners, both public and private, the Pumping Station Project was now on a firm footing. A start on phase 1 of the building work had been made on site in February 1996 and early in 1997 the first tenants, including the Furniture Project and a local potter moved in. The second and final phase of the project is due for completion before the end of the year. An essential ingredient to the proper future management of the project has been 10 the establishment of a limited company with a formal structure of Directors. A further essential element has been the 'gifting' of the land and building to the Trust by STW, valued to be worth £180,000. The end product The essence of the Boughton project has been to produce a balanced mix of commercial and non-commercial floorspace including: • managed workshops located in the former boiler house; • high quality offices in the Engine House, set around an atrium which retains the internal scale and spatial qualities; • community facilities including lettable function space; • visitor facilities based on a renewable energy theme; • restaurant. The total scheme cost (including building works and facilities) amounts to nearly £4m. Conclusion The Boughton Pumping Station project is not yet fully complete but already some valuable lessons have been learnt. Securing a cocktail of funding from a variety of sources has clearly been essential to the success of the project, but this has not been without its problems - not least because of conflicting requirements of different funding bodies. For example, in order to meet Rural Challenge and European Union funding requirements the phase 2 contract had to be let by July 1996 but the Lottery Award on which the project would rely was not made until March 1997! Ultimately, the major lesson from the Boughton Project has been that to deal with a multi-problem building like the Pumping Station, those involved need to be both pragmatic and tenacious, and prepared to 'play the long game'. Without a doubt the project can be regarded as a major success in terms of community involvement in conservation, local commitment and sustainable re-use. In short, an example of conservation, not just for its own sake, but as part of an imaginative initiative to regenerate the whole community. Philip Grover is Director of the MSc/Diploma Course in Historic Conservation at Oxford Brookes University (and former Consernation Manager at Newark and Sherwood District Council); Roy Lewis is Principal Consernation Assistant at Newark and Sherwood District Council. We all probably imagine at some time or other how we might spend that multi-million pound win should our numbers come up on a Saturday night. It may not be quite the same, but it gives quite a warm glow to find out that a pet scheme has been successful in its bid for Lottery funding. At the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea we have been fortunate enough to attract about £1 million in the first batch of grants awarded under the Heritage Lottery Fund's Urban Parks Programme. The park concerned is the quaintly named Emslie Horniman Pleasance in North Kensington. It is perhaps unusual for a Conservation Officer to co-ordinate a bid under this Programme, but my role was justified because the park contains a walled garden by CF A Voysey (listed Grade II). For those involved in making the bid it was ve1y much a learning process, but one where the lessons learned should help future bids. Emslie John Horniman was a grandson of the founder of the famous tea-importing company. In common with a number of Victorian businessmen, he had a philanthropic commitment to improving urban conditions and gave the completed park to the London County Council in 1914. Horniman already had a longstanding relationship with Voysey who had recently refurbished the interior of his Chelsea town-house, Garden Corner, in 1906. Voysey designed the walled garden with its shelters, moat, pergola and Japanese bridge, but the planting of the central island was designed by specialist landscape architect Madeleine Agar. Remarkably, her original plan survives along with Voysey's, and these have been used to guide the restoration. The original garden with an informal landscaped area behind, was surrounded by Victorian housing. This was cleared in the early 1960s to create a larger park and changed its relationship with its surroundings leaving the walled garden strangely Context54 June1997
CONSERVATIONFUNDING HowtowintheLottery David McDonald explains the restoring a C. F. A. Voysey designed listed public garden in London using Heritage Lottery Funding. The rose garden will be replaced by reinstating a moat, oak pergola and Japanese bridge. isolated in its park setting. Problems of vandalism in recent years had led to increasing concern about its future and it was included on English Heritage's Buildings-At-Risk Register. Fortunately, North Kensington City Challenge had allocated funds in its final year for the restoration of the park, but it was clear that while this would include basic remedial works to the Voysey Garden and the Park, it was not sufficient to carry out full restoration or improve the design weaknesses. The Urban Parks Programme was a once-and-for-all chance to improve the park for future generations. A good start was having the majority of the partnership funding (25% of total cost) in place right from the beginning and it was clear that to make a successful bid the right project team had to be put together. Studio E Architects had already been commissioned to design improve-ments to the park and the surrounding public realm. Following competitive interview, Julian Harrap Architects were employed specifically Context54 June1997 for the Voysey Garden restoration. The architects along with a City Challenge representative, the Council's Parks Manager and the Conservation Officer made up the core team but with considerable support from other professionals including quantity surveyors, landscape architects, engineers, an historian and a business planner. It is worth emphasising that devoting sufficient resources to making the bid is likely to pay dividends. For a relatively small bid such as this, the Council had to accept expenditure on consultants on a speculative basis. For a large bid, an initial application to pay for a feasibility study would be advisable. When we obtained the HLF's application form and guidance notes the requirements were carefully examined; our own list of information requirements was made together with points that needed clarification. A meeting was sought with Lottery Fund staff to ensure that the bid was going in the right direction. We received some very useful guidance from Dr Stewart Harding, Head of the Urban Parks Programme. As well as some constructive criticism on the design work which had already been carried out, he emphasised our need to stress the improvements to the 'Heritage Asset', in this case the Voysey Garden. This we did in a number of ways, for example by placing it first in the reports submitted with the application and ensuring that the designs placed it as the focus of the Park improvements. Harraps had also wisely commissioned Wendy Hitchmough, author of a recent book on Voysey, to carry out the historical research on the garden. We were scrupulous in following the HLF's guidance notes and Dr Harding's advice. This included the commissioning of a business adviser to advise on the provision of a cafe or kiosk. This was seen as essential in bringing more life to the park as well as giving some degree of passive security. In the end, because of doubts over viability, the cafe was dropped in favour of the kiosk, combined with a park-keeper's office. Overall, this process was essential to ensure the bid's credibility. Early consultation was also held with English Heritage officers (as advisors to the Lottery Fund). Early discussion was also important as the application for listed building consent (as a Council's own application) would be determined by the DoE on English Heritage's advice. Emslie Horniman Pleasance is situated in an area of the Borough known as Kensal Town. In the past it has often seen itself as a place apart from the rest of North Kensington and public consultation exercises have frequently been unsuccessful. This time, as well as exhibitions, meetings and leaflet drops, a local focus group was set up which eventually became 'The Friends of Emslie Horniman Pleasance'. The Friends have been closely involved in the design process. It is hoped this will continue well after implementation to give the local community a real sense of owning the park. City Challenge staff made great efforts to get businesses, schools and other local organisations involved as well as local residents. Every year the park is taken over at August Bank Holiday Weekend by the Notting Hill Carnival. Not only did this mean accommodating this albeit short term activity in the design but it entailed extensive consultation with the Carnival Committee. Once the Lottery Fund application had been submitted, I made early contact with our case officer to ensure that we had provided adequate 11
information and sought early feedback on the proposals. There was a six month gap between the final date for submission and consideration by the HLF's Parks Advisory Panel. Rather than being a quiet time, there was considerable activity as the design was refined, consultation continued and final Cqmmittee approvals were sought. A requirement for a 20% contingency sum was a late bombshell that had us rushing around in panic to secure commitment from already stretched Council budgets. Normally, a site visit is held with the case officer and a member of the Parks panel. They like this to be informal and not involve too many people. I arranged for four members of the Project Team to attend including the architects. The discussion was helpful and whilst we did our best to sell the project we were up-front about the few issues where a detailed design solution had not been finalised such as security and lighting. It was certainly a nail-biting time waiting for the HLF's decision, but great to get the good news. We're now in the middle of tender preparation and awaiting approval of the listed building application. Work should start on site in the autumn. At the beginning of the project I don't think any of us appreciated the amount of work involved but as a learning process it has been invaluable. To summarise those factors which should make a bid suc€essful are: • Make sure adequate resources are allocated to the bid. • Ensure you have an appropriately skilled project team. • Include extensive historical research and stress your heritage asset. • Closely follow the HLF's guidance notes. • Get early feedback on the strengths and weaknesses of the bid and get English Heritage on board. • Allow plenty of time for preparation of the documentation, and make sure it is well presented. • Carry out extensive consultation. • 'Sell' the project and be enthusiastic! I hope this encourages some of you to submit bids to the HLF for good conservation projects. It's certainly a worthwhile experience if only to give a chance to see things from the other side of the development process. In the meantime, keep buying those Lottery tickets - we need the money! David McDonald is Head of Conservation and Design, Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. 12 CONSERVATIONFUNDING Secondthoughts ofa Lottery Jonathan Hurst expresses an entirely personal view that there are two worrying aspects of the funding of historic building conservation. The first is the total unreliability of pronouncements on English Heritage's budget and highlights the summary of the proceedings of the AHF's 20th Anniversary Conference: 'Collaboration or conflict- the preservation challenge' last November in Manchester, where it was remarked in relation to BPTs (but where the comments could apply to any other eligible project): "Cuts in English Heritage's budget - a cause of acute concern in England and wholly contrary to the government's pledges about the National Lottery and 'additionality' mean that BPTs are being advised to look first to the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF), even though the two organisations' eligibility criteria and grant conditions differ in a number of important respects". The other is the extreme foolishness of becoming tied to a variable alternative source - the Lottery. 'Nobody knows if those making the handouts may not suddenly change their policy with regard to historic building conservation' First, there is absolutely no reason to suppose that the level of 'handouts' can be predicted accurately over the years into the future as the volatility of the 'punters' is completely unknown. Who can say that their level of ticket buying will not be affected by changes in the football pools, the world economy or anti-gambling crusades. Secondly, nobody knows if those making the handouts may not suddenly change their policy with regard to historic building conservation. This is exactly what has happened in New Zealand where an over-reliance on lottery handouts has caused disaster following an arbitrary change in policy. The Journal of the New Zealand Historic Places Trust reported in September 1996 under the heading 'Heritage in crisis' that "That need to co-ordinate the resourcing and managing of our heritage system has been underlined in recent days by the Lottery Environment and Heritage Committee's decision to slash its grant to the Trust by almost a third. More ominously, Lotteries says it will not fund operating costs for Trust properties from 1998'.Lotteries calls these costs a Crown responsibility. The Crown disagrees. The Trust, caught in the middle, is already struggling to make ends meet. Unless the Trust can find a dramatic and •imaginative solution, properties acquired, conserved and managed through a mix of Trust, Crown and Lottery funds over the last thirty years, will be placed at risk." In March this year the Trust reported that "Lottery grants were reduced by more than $500,000. A cut of another half-million is forecast for 1997-98." The British lottery boards are vulnerable to political interference and abrupt changes in public opinion (which could follow, say, a medical epidemic or a natural calamity) and cannot be considered a suitably reliable source of finding. Reliability of funding over lengthy periods is vital to undertake complex and difficult historic building repair programmes. The IHBC must make an enormous effort in lobbying, whatever the new government, to revert to sensible and reliable sources of funding for historic building conservation. Context 54 June 1997
ihbc.org.ukRkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=