The Institute of Histori Bu·lding Cons rvation No 58 Ju ---------------- In th•s issue: TRUSTINGINTRUSTS Forced e try to lastedbuildings: how to do it C Hywes n s one slat Fiel barns f the Yorkshire Dales Thema •c:l:istin survey of farm buildings Listed bu lding prosecutions: the facts Cambus Iron bridge Protecting Sheffield's histor;c:p: arks and gardens 8
ijtubor ~oof ijtile @o. 1fiimiteb Manufactureorsf HANDMADECLAYROOFTILES StrengthandFrosttestedto BS402 OR~ llTIDlllL ICCRIIIITITIDI OFCER!fl&ITION BDm Certificate No. FM 11616 BS EN ISO 9002:1994 Registered Company Suppliedwithfullrangeoffittings,OrnamentalsO, astandKentPegs,Flat andCrossCamberedAvailablienfivecolours,SussexRed,SussexBrown, Red,MediumAntiqueandDarkAntique. NOWAVAILABLE TudoruniqueINVISIBLUENDERTILEVENTINGSYSTEM. Theessentiaclomplementto a HandMadeclaytileroof. Privatehousere-roofedin theMediumAntiquecolourof TUDORTraditionaHl ANDMADECLAYROOFTILES Acceptedinsensitiveareasandregardedbythe mostdiscerningspecifiersas the finest handmadetileon the market.Tudorgivethe highestgradeofserviceto ourcustomerswho cantakepleasureintheirinvestmenkt nowingthattheyare addingto the qualityofthe environmenatndourheritage. TUDORROOFTILECO.LIMITED DengeMarshRoad,Lydd,KentTN29 9JH Telephone01797 320202 Fax01797 320700
THE INSTITUTE OF HISTORIC BUILDING CONSERVATION http:/ /homepages.thefree.net/ihbc Context and !/-/BCNews Editor Bob Kindred, 4 Henley Road, Ipswich !Pl 3FS, Tel: 01473 259441 (Ipswich Borough Council), Tel: 01473 262934, Fax: 01473 262974 e-mail: ihbc_editor@mkcn.org.uk mBC Officers Chairman.· Dr Malcolm Airs (Department of Continuing Education, Oxford University, Tel: 01865 270395), 39 High Street, Dorchester-on-Thames, Oxon OXJ0 7HN, Tel: 01865 340075. e-mail: malcolmairs@conted.ox.ac.uk Vice-Chairman.· Alan Taylor (Staffordshire County Council, Tel: 01785 277282), 15 Village Gardens, Walton on the Hill, Stafford ST17 0LL, Tel: 01785 664473, e-mail: ihbc_vicechair@mkcn.org.uk Secretary.- Dr Richard Morrice (English Heritage, Tel: 0171-973 3132), Old Laundry Cottage, Mote Road, Ivyhatch, Kent TNJ 5 0NT, e-mail: ihbc_secretary@mkcn.org.uk Treasurer.· Robert Parkinson (West Oxfordshire District Council, Tel: 01993 770247), The Old Priory, Priory Lane, Bicester, Oxon OX6 713G,e-mail: ihbc_treasurer@mkcn.org.uk Membership Secretary: Gus Astley (Bath & North East Somerset Council, Fax: 01225 477674), Manor House, Wells Road, Hallatrow, Bristol BS39 6EJ, Tel/Answerphone: 01761 453047, e-mail: ihbc_membership@mkcn.org.uk Branches Co-ordinator.- Julia Smith (Milton Keynes Council, Tel: 01908 252501), 49 Chaucer Drive, Aylesbury HP21 7LH, Tel: 01296 435187, e-mail: ihbc_branches@mkcn.org.uk Consultations Co-ordinator.- Graham Arnold (Sefton Borough Council, Tel: 0151-934 3574), 13 Sefton Drive, Liverpool L8 3SD, e-mail: ihbc_consultations@mkcn.org.uk Education Co-ordinator.- Philip Grover (Oxford Brookes University, Tel: 01865 483425), 7 Palmer Road, Sutton-on-Trent, Notts NG23 6PP, Tel: 01636 822089, e-mail: prgrover@brookes.ac.uk Technical Panel Co-ordinator.- Marion Brinton (Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council, Tel: 01256 844844), Development Department, Civic Offices, London Road, Basingstoke, Hanes RG21 4AH Pub/icily Officer: David Davidson (Birmingham City Council, Tel: 0121-303 2323), 59 Dunsmore Road, Hall Green, Birmingham B28 SEA, Tel: 0121-777 2434, e-mail: ihbc_publicity@mkcn.org.uk Branch Officers North: Ian Goodman, Tel: 01670 519391, e-mail: ihbc_north@mkcn.org.uk North West: Sheila Stones, Tel: 0161-793 3770, Fax: 0151-934 3587 Yorkshire: Sarah Higgins, Tel: 01653 600666, e-mail: ihbc_yorkshire@mkcn.org.uk West Midlands.- David Baxter, Tel: 01432 364674 East Midlands: Michael Taylor, Tel: 0116-252 7296 South: Martin Andrew, Tel: 01494 421578 South West: David Stirling, Tel: 01249 760670, e-mail: dstirling@northwilts.gov.uk b'ast Anglia: Paula Judson, Tel: 01376 572286 South East: Nigel Barker, Tel: 0181-541 9417, e-mail: ihbc_sourheasr@mkcn.org.uk London.- Rosemarie MacQueen, Tel: 0171-641 2455 Scotland: Ronnie Robertson, Tel: 01343 563287 Wales.-Neil Sumner, Tel: 01656 643159, e-mail: ihbc_wales@mkcn.org.uk Northem Ireland: Laurence Manogue, Tel: 01232 23500 ext 279, e-mail: ihbc_ireland@mkcn.org.uk Registered as a Charity Number 1061593. Company Limited by Guarantee. Registered in England Number 3333780. Registered Office: Old Laundry Cottage, Mote Head, Ivy Hatch, nr Sevenoaks, Kent TN15 0NT. Context58 June1998 Context News 4 Letters 5 TRUSTING IN TRUSTS Building Preservation Trusts - a continuing success stoty. Debbie Dance and Lucy Bartlett 6 The work of the Theatre Trust's Architectural Officer. Catherine Croft 9 The Railway Heritage Trust: conservation and change. Richard Tinker 13 Forced entry to listed buildings: how to do it. Bob Kindred 16 M'Learned Friend. Charles Mynors 18 Commenting on Collyweston stone slate. Catherine Bates and David Watt 20 What future for the field barns of the Yorkshire Dales? Kate Holcroft 22 Thematic listing surveys of farm buildings. Jeremy Lake and Bob Hawkins Editorial THELONGORSHORTARM OFTHELAW? 24 Listed building enforcement continues to be something of a Cinderella subject for conservation professionals. Considerable amounts of time and effort are spent in pre-application and postregistration negotiations concerning the appropriateness of works to historic buildings, but how often does the final scheme depart from what has been approved and how good is the monitoring of the works that are executed? It is increasingly common to find the professional involvement of the agent ending with the granting of consent, and equally common to find the contractor on site has unrevised drawings; no copy of the consent and no awareness of any conditions imposed. If a proposal has any ambiguities there is a good chance that the completed scheme will vary significantly from what was app roved. More effort needs Sir Titus. Christmas Day in the Workhouse. Dave Morton Listed building prosecutions: establishing some facts. Bob Kindred Supporting Columns. Iron corrosion and repair. Brian Morton Cambus Iron Bridge, Cambus, Clackmannanshire. Andrew Millar Protecting Sheffield's historic parks and gardens. Valerie Greaves and Marion Barter Gazebo. Engaging with the new? 26 28 31 33 34 Samantha Gibson 36 IHBC News 39 Book reviews 41 Illustrations in this issue 5 to be placed on the processes after approval than is currently the case. In this issue we include two items related to this theme -the need on occasion and as a last resort to force entry to a building to determine what has happened; and, in circumstances where consent has not been obtained or where damage has been done, what the outcome of criminal prosecution proceedings has been been. Recently a national building company was fined a record £200,000 for demolition of a listed building (the details of which will be covered in a future issue). The fine was almost three times higher than any previously made for the same offence. This 'penalty' represented the profit the builder stood to make on the site in question. If therefore the defendant would still end up 'breaking-even', it is worth questioning whether even this record amount was really an effective sanction? 3
4 Context Editor: Bob Kindred 4 Henley Road, Ipswich IPl 3FS, Tel: 01473 259441 (Ipswich Borough Council), Tel: 01473 262934, Fax: 01473 262974 e-mail: ihbc_editor@mkcn.org.uk Deputy Editor: Vacant 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. © Institute of Historic Building Conservation 1998 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 e-mail: hallmccartney@compuserve.com Nonmember subscriptions to Context Context is available to nonmembers of the !HBC at an annual subscription rate, including postage, of: United Kingdon Elsewhere: £38.00 US$108.00 Subscription orders, together with remittances payable to Hall-McCartney 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. COVERSTORY Our cover illustration shows the Royal Border Bridge, Berwick-upon Tweed, Northumberland uniting England and Scotland. It was built in 1850 for the York, Newcastle & Berwick Railway and designed by the celebrated Engineer Robert Stephenson. It is Listed Grade I. The illustration shows the bridge before 1995. In this issue, Richard Tinker of the Railway Heritage Trust describes the work of the Trust in conserving the railway built heritage. NEWS EARLBYARN REOPENED The Great Barn at Wanborough in Surrey, right, has recently been opened to the public by Guildford Borough Council. Built in 1388 by the Cistercian monks of Waverley Abbey (situated about five mile away), the building is not strictly a tithe barn, but part of a grange. The barn was enlarged in 1705 and repaired last year as a condition of planning consent for an adjacent housing scheme. It now hold a historical exhibition but is to be let for appropriate local events. CONSERVATION GUIDETOWAR MEMORIALS Many War memorials were designed by distinguished architects, and some of the more architecturally important ones are now Listed. There is increasing concern about the preservation of these structures but until recently there has not been any useful guidance on a proper conservation strategy or where expert advice could be obtained. A National Inventory of War Memorials is in preparation. It was initiated in 1989 by the Imperial War Museum and the RCHME and has support from the HLF. In three years time it will form a national archive on the estimated fifty to sixty thousand memorials throughout the British Isles. In order to stimulate interest and disseminate information, the Imperial War Museum has produced a useful free 20 page AS booklet The Conservation of War Memorials which gives a useful background-to the subject, details about the work of the Inventory, the first steps to counter threats to those memorials that remain uncared for; sources of advice, funding and a list of useful organisations and their addresses. Copies are available from: National Inventory of War Memorials, Imperial War Museum, Lambeth Road, London SEl 6HZ. Tel: 0171-416-5353 or E-mail nhewitt@iwm.org.uk As the project is dependent on sponsorship, any financial contribution, large or small would be appreciated by the Project Co-ordinator, Nick Hewitt. CHANGESATTHE HELM The Institute elected a new Chairman at the IHBC AGM in Shrewsbury in April. Malcolm Airs succeeds Mary King who has worked tirelessly to ensure a smooth transition from the Association to the new Institute in the first year of the latter. Malcolm will be familiar to many Institute members but introduces himself to us as Chairman in his Chair's Notes elsewhere in this issue. The Institute also has a new Publicity Officer in David Davidson of Birmingham City Council. He succeeds Katherine Baird who successfully raised the Institute's profile at our National launch last Autumn. All the remaining unwaged slaves (Sorry - IHBC Officers) have agreed to continue. Some of the compositions of Branches have changes as their rolling programmes of Branch AGMs continue. Please check regularly that you are abreast of these changes. FORTHCOMING ISSUE-SDEADLINES ANDTHEMES Copy deadline for the Autumn 1998 issue will be Friday 17July. Please adhere to this deadline. Issue 59 will cover the Institute's first Annual School in Shrewsbury. Looking further ahead, the Winter issue will deal in particular with the question of maintaining local distinctiveness, but other contributions, experiences, technical notes and case studies are welcome (space permitting). Articles under 2,000 words are much preferred. If you have copy longer than this please discuss it in advance with the Editor. If you submit copy, please do so on 3.5 inch floppy disk in Windows 95 format. Do not send disks from Apple Macs, as these are not formatted for the Editor's Windows 95 machine. Alternatively you can e-mail text to the Editor at: ihbc_editor@mkcn.org.uk Make sure on disks to state on the label what software it is written in. Don't just give the title of the file! The Conservation Portfolio In the June 1998 edition of the Portfolio are: A E F Projects Ltd Restoring, Repairing and Draught Proofing Period Timber Windows Clement Windows Group Ltd Steel Window Manufacturers, Highlighting their Cast Rooflight The Theatres Trust Established by Act of Parliament to Promote Better Protection of Theatres for the benefit of the Nation. See Editorial Feature, page 9 Architectural Heritage Fund Funds for Historic Buildings in England and Wales - A Directory of Sources Weatherwell Roof Tiles Ltd New Development - Duchess Slate now Factory Weathered to Lifetime Finish Context58 June1998
LETTERS LETTETROSTHEEDITOR DESIGNATORY LETTERS Sir: I am concerned to see that full members of the new Institute are supposed to style themselves "IHBC". I am aware that there are one or two members who are institutions in themselves, but most of us are people. It is possible for a person to be a member, a legal member, an associate, a fellow, a president, even a past president, of a professional body, but he or she cannot be the body itself. The RTPI and the RICS get this right (MRTPI, LMRTPI, FRTPI, PPRTPI, ARICS, FRICS etc), as RETHATCHINING WATER-REED Sir: One point which was not mentioned in the Appeal article in the December 1997 issue (Context 56 p.10 "Difference between long straw thatch and reed thatch hardly noticeable") which is particularly relevant to Dorset, at least, concerns the way in which various thatching materials are applied to the roof. Whilst the normal practice is to apply an over-coat of long straw, or combed wheat to exdo, for example, all the medical bodies. And almost all professional bodies, with the notable exception of the RIBA. That august body, in an early outburst of political correctness, abolished the ranks of Associates and Fellows, but in the process introduced the ridiculous rule whereby all members are simply "RIBA". No architect-even the President - is the Royal Institute of British Architects. And no conservation professional is the IHBC. We are all members. Can we not be simply styled as such. Charles Mynors FRTPI ARICS MIHBC (Learned Friend - formerly M'Learned Friend) isting layers of thatch, it is less common in the case of waterreed. In this County, re-thatching in water reed usually involves the complete removal of the old thatch. Re-coating in combed wheat, therefore, ensures that historic layers of thatch can be preserved (until the old roof structure rots out, anyway) and it is this building up of successive layers which accounts for the unique character of such roofs. Ray Bird Wimborne, Dorset. ILLUSTRATIOINSTHISISSUE Cover: Royal Border Bridge. Photo: © Milepost 92½. p 4: Wanborough Barn. Photo: Guildford Borough Council. p7: Hamilton Street, Belfast. Photos: Association of Building Preservation Trusts. p9: Theatre Royal, Chatham. Photo: A M Pope Photographers. pp13-15: projects assisted by the Railway Heritage Trust: Photos: Bridgwater station Messrs Broderick; Grange-over-Sands station, © Milepost 92½; Royal Albert Bridge, Railway Picture Library; Balcombe Viaduct, Railway Heritage Trust. p20: examples of Collyweston slates. Photos: Davit Watt. pp22 and 23: Yorkshire field barns. Photos: Kate Whitecroft. pp24 and 25: Park Farm, Bylaugh, Home Farm, Culford, and Church Farm, hethel. Photos: Jeremy Lake. pp26 and 27: Stanway and Amersham Workhouses. Photos: David Morton. p31: stitching of iron. Photo: Brian Morton. P33: Cambus Iron Bridge, Photos: Andrew Millar pp34 and 35: Sheffield parks. Photos: Valerie Greaves pp36 and 3 7: bad and good landscaping. Photos: Samantha Gibson Context58 June1998 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, SHERBORNE ST.JOHN, ~ I -I '1 BASINGSTOKE,HAMPSHIRE RG24 9JZ ;:-~.... 1ELEPHONE (01256) 850177 FACSIMILE (01256) 851089 Reg;steredKouse-Builc'er HISTORIC BUILDING CONSULTANTS We have a good understanding of old buildings and materials and can provide the following specialities:- ❖ Building surveys and inspections ❖ Drawings, specifications and schedules of repair ❖ Feasibility studies ❖ Historic building analysis and recording under PPG 15 and PPG 16 ❖ Project management of conservation works ❖ Grant aid and Lottery applications ❖ Planning and listed building applications ❖ Liaison with English Heritage and Conservation Officers ❖ Party Wall etc, Act legislation We undertake work throughout the U.K. for further advice contact:- GEOFFREY W. MAYBANK Dip. Vern, F.S.V.A., Dip.Build.Cons.(RICS) 6 Market Street Ashton-Under-Lyne Lancashire OL6 6BX Tel: 0161-330 1192 Fax: 0161-343 2415 ■ 5
6 Trustingin Trusts BuildingPreservationTrusts a continuingsuccesstory - The Association of Preservation Trusts (APT) is the representative body for buildings preservation trusts throughout the UK. Here Debbie Dance and Lucy Bartlett of APT outline the work of BPTs, and the ways they can co-operate with other professionals in the re-use of historic buildings. An introduction to BPTs Reuse of redundant historic buildings, regeneration, sustainability, making significant contributions to local communities, these are all matters talked of in the same breath as conservation in 1998; these are all matters integral in the success of the building preservation trust movement. BPTs undertake schemes with the fundamental aim of conserving a building or range of buildings. They form an important part of the wider conservation movement, though their importance can sometimes be overlooked by others within the profession. They are able to undertake projects to find new compatible uses for historic buildings at risk, providing access to various sources of funding, and so securing the long term future of the historic building in question. They achieve many of the aims of PPG15, Local Agenda 21 and Local Plans. The BPT mechanism works. There are now 180 BPTs registered with the UK Association of Preservation Trusts. Most are based in a particular area, with eleven operating nationally. They are usually run by committed local volunteers, bringing together a wide variety of experience with relevant experts often acting as Trustees or technical advisers. An increasing number employ qualified members of staff. But perhaps their real force lies in their strong local contacts and their even stronger will to succeed, often against all odds, with their particular project. The completed projects speak for themselves. Projects undertaken vary enormously, from the large and complex inner city area (Ancoats Preservation Trust in Manchester) to small business centres and shops (Birmingham Conservation Trust) to houses (Orkney Historic Buildings Trust). Context 57 (March 1998) carried an article on Heritage of London Trust Operation's successful rescue, repair and re-use of 84-98 Ashfield Street, London, a detailed example of the work of BPTs. Just as there are no typical historic buildings, there are no typical BPTs. They offer a flexible approach dictated by the needs of the individual area or building for which the BPT operates. Depending on their individual constitution, BPTs may sell buildings on the open market or retain property as say offices, houses, holiday accommodation or museums. Usually non-profitmaking charitable companies limited by guarantee they divide into two main categories. The first is the 'revolving fund' BPT where a building is repaired and improved and then sold on or leased, and the money put back for future projects. The second is the single project BPT responding to a particular building. Following repairs and necessary improvement works, the BPT will often retain and manage the building. BPTs will usually register with the Architectural Heritage Fund, a funding and advisory body for BPTs with whom APT works closely. The AHF can then provide grants towards the costs of Feasibility Studies and offer low interest loans to a BPT, which in most cases provides the working capital without which the project would not be able to proceed. In addition, BPTs have access to a wide range of funding, statutory, lotte1y, grant making trusts and the general public. BPTs have received 36 grants from the Heritage Lottery Fund to elate, ranging from £3,700 to £2,809,000. No one can pretend that the process is easy. BPTs are often described as 'restorers of last resort': undertaking those buildings outside the usual developer's market. Such projects are by definition going to have considerable difficulties attached. Sometimes cornpromises have to be made in order to achieve a viable and marketable solution for a difficult building: the concept of optimum value (PPG 15). Sometimes full restoration of a special feature may not be possible as no funds can be found. It is easy to look back on a completed scheme only to see the omissions, quite forgetting that without the input of the BPT the building itself would have been lost. BPTs will operate within the wider property market, they have to live in the real world but cannot dictate to it. And yet BPTs do achieve the seemingly unachievable and the list of successful and completed projects is there to prove it. How BPTscan be used Local Planning Authorities can and should consider using this mechanism provided by BPTs for their own ends. In some areas the two already work in partnership on Repairs Notices, Compulsory Purchase Orders, Conservation Area Partnership Schemes, (and soon Townscape Initiatives) and Buildings at Risk Registers (local or national). This is in addition to the normal practice of consultation between Conservation Officers and BPTs over problem buildings, problem owners and sources of funding. The launch of the English Heritage new Buildings at Risk strategy in May 1998 provides a convenient opportunity to revisit the ways BPTs can be used (throughout the UK). Case study: compulsory purchase order Somerset County Council and Mendip District Council secured the future of the Grade I, 1707, Rook Lane Chapel in Frome by working in conjunction with Somerset Buildings Preservation Trust. The Chapel had been abandoned in 1965 and since then the Planning Authority had considered many developContext58 June1998
36-46 HamiltonStreet,Belfast,one of the manyprojectscompletedby the HearthRevolvingFundtrust. ers' plans to convert it into flats or offices, none of which were acceptable. A developer then bought the building but did nothing with it, leading to significant deterioration. In 1992 Somerset County Council served a Repairs Notice, but the repairs were not carried out and so serving a Compulsory Purchase Order was considered. The Council would not risk serving the order without a viable strategy for the building's repair. Discussions were held with Somerset Buildings Preservation Trust and it was agreed that, in exchange for a guarantee (in letter form) from the BPT that it would undertake the repairs if it owned the building, the CC would serve a CPO and sell the building straight on to Somerset BPT for a peppercorn sum. At the same time, Somerset BPT made another deal, this time with Mendip District Council, that the DC would buy it from the BPT at District Valuer's valuation, on condition that the repairs were carried out to the DC's satisfaction. In this way an important building at risk was saved and is currently being prepared for community use (a condition imposed by Somerset BPT in recognition of the high level of public funds and donations committed to the project). Case study: buildings at risk and local authority powers The Conservation Officer at Great Yarmouth Borough Council also acts as the Technical Adviser to Great Yarmouth Building Preservation Trust. With this dual role, he can both protect, enhance and save buildings at risk in the town. 32-33 Baker Street, a 16th-century timber framed building was saved from complete dereliction by the linkup of the two organisations. In 1991 the Borough Council served a CPO. It then Context58 June1998 took the case to the Lands Tribunal to establish the value. Fortunately for the BPT which was carrying the risk, the value was established at £17,000. With the aid of seven different sources of grant aid, including, crucially an AHF loan, the BPT carried out £351,000 of capital work. In partnership with Living over the Shop, Great Yarmouth BPT became the first trust to work successfully with a Housing Association. By doing this, the BPT greatly reduced its risk, it was also able to lease the upper storeys to the Housing Association before the work was complete, allowing it to draw down the LA Housing Association Grant. 8 Market Row, a 16th-century house with an 18th-century fa,;ade, was nearly destroyed by fire in 1995, since when it has been empty. By the little used 215 Notice the Borough Council took the owners to Magistrate's Court. This legal mechanism can force the repair of a listed building in a Conservation Area if it can be proved that there has been detriment to the character of the Conservation Area, which there clearly had been in this case. Although the Borough won the case, the owners had in the meantime taken the insurance money and set up a company with no assets, and then failed to repair the building. The building was eventually sold to GYBPT for £1. The shortfall funding between the cost of repairs and the eventual value of the building is met by English Heritage CAPS and an historic buildings grant from the Borough Council. Phase one, to repair the structure is now complete. The upper storeys will be leased to a housing association which, with LOTS will contribute finance to the cost of improvement, and the ground floor will be leased as a shop, fitted out by the first lessee in exchange for a rent-free period. Following these successes the BPT has now bought the Tower Curing Works which will be a potential £2.5 million project to convert to a new Maritime Museum and an 18th-century Merchant's House which will provide 20 housing units. These are now the subject of feasibility studies. The advantages of working with the BPT from the Conservation Officer's point of view is that the trust takes on the project leadership, takes on the financial risk and puts the funding package together, as well as finding an eventual viable end use. Conversely, the BPT benefits through the Borough Council using its legal powers to serve Repairs Notice and to follow through with CPOs. Case study: buildings at risk West Wemyss, Fife, has suffered decades of decline. The population has dropped from 1200 to 160 residents; it is the only outstanding conservation area in central Fife, containing over 50 listed buildings. Many of these are owned by Wemyss Properties Ltd, a company controlled by the Wemyss family who live in the adjacentWemyss Castle. Though many buildings in the village have been restored, the south side of Main Street, fronting onto the Firth of Forth remains derelict. This prominent frontage contains 13 listed buildings and its centre piece is an early 18th-century tollbooth. These properties have been the subject of a number of feasibility studies and project initiatives, but the scale of funding required and the deficits involved have deterred action by the owners. The remaining population in the village is anxious for the buildings to be restored, not only to the remove the blight but to help repopulate the village and support dwindling services and facilities. Fife Council is equally keen to see the buildings retained and restored - several buildings are in a 7
8 critical condition and further delays could result in the loss of at least four or five listed buildings. The difficulty has been the reluctance of Wemyss Property Ltd to sell the buildings, the reluctance of the Local Authority and public agencies to provide large sums of grant aid to a private landlord and the difficult political situation whereby villagers want the properties restored but would not wish to see public money used to 'support' Wemyss Properties, or to encourage them not to restore the other buildings in the village at their expense. It was against this background of mistrust - by all parties - that the suggestion was made that the newly formed Fife Historic Buildings Trust become involved. The Trust offers a way of achieving the owners' aims for the village and allows them to concentrate their efforts and investment on other buildings requiring upgrading. The Trust also offers an acceptable channel for public funding, with shared aims, values and standards and an organisation which the villagers could trust. Fife HBT is to buy eight buildings from Wemyss Properties and convert them into 15 houses and flats for sale. Wemyss Properties will undertake to finance and undertake the restoration of the remaining houses within an agreed time scale. Together this will completely remove the blight within the village and perhaps pave the way for a wider Townscape Initiative. The project's success will depend upon gaining an HLFgrant and support from seven other agencies. Theway forward LPAs and BPTs both face enormous problems in securing threatened historic buildings. But so much more could be done and more projects undertaken, buildings brought back to life. All the evidence shows that where a local BPT works closely with its local authorities, officers and councillors, very great achievements can be made. Professionals working in the field of conservation, in accepting and understanding the mechanism of the BPT where one exists, could aid this process: working with either LAofficers or members to make them aware, liaising with BPTs on suitable buildings at risk and advising on any available grants (not just for historic buildings butERDF, SRB etc). A BPT and a Conservation Officer who share a vision can be a dynamic force in the conservation of historic buildings. The Association of Preservation Trusts provides a forum through which BPTs throughout the UK can consult each other and share experiences. BPTs meet regularly at area meetings (to which other professionals, representatives of funding bodies etc are also welcome) and nationally at seminars and conferences organised by APT and individual BPTs. APT provides fu1ther information to its members through Guidance Notes and Newsletters. In addition, APT represents its members at government level, and is in constant discussion with statutory organisations and funding bodies. For more information please contact APT, Clareville House, 26-27 Oxendon Street, London, SWl Y 4EL, tel: 0171-930 1629, fax: 0171-930 0295, email: lucy@ahfund.co.uk website: http:/ /www.heritage.co.uk/apt Debbie Dance MSc ARICS is Chair of APT and Administrator of the Birmingham Conservation Trust withfirst hand experience of working closely with Birmingham City Council. Lucy Bartlett is APT Administrator with past experience working for a national BPT, the Viva/ Trust. TZ1anksalso to Hugh Stafford, Somerset BPT; Alan Lodge, Fife Historic Buildings Trust and Steve Earl, Great Yarmouth BPT. PFC Corofil Fire Stop Products Ltd CF and CW Fire Protection Systems A simple and effective method of increasing the fire resistance of timber compartment floors and stud walls. All components are lightweight and the complete system can be installed by one person. Because of the simplicity of installation, disturbance and risk of damage to adjacent areas is kept to a minimum. Suitable for installation in either new or existing buildings, particularly where these are converted into flats, or where the preservation of the ceiling is important, i,e, in historic buildings etc. Install PFC Corofil CF and CW Fire Protection Systems to provide a minimum of one hour fire protection to upgrade timber floor and wall constructions. An installation instruction sheet is available for both systems. PFC Corofil Fire Stop Products Ltd., Davis Road, Chessington, Surrey KT9 1TU Tel: 0181-391 0533. Fax: 0181-3912723. UPPARK House CW system installed. Context 58 June 1998
Trustingin Trusts TheworkoftheTheatres Trust's ArchitecturalOfficer Catherine Crqft describes the work of this newly created position. Last September, I started at the Theatres Trust as its first full time Architectural Officer. This reflects a deliberate decision by the Trust to increase the amount of casework in which it gets involved, to be more proactive and take more time to travel to theatres around the count1y to offer practical advice and support. Theatre buildings are unique in having an organisation specifically set up to look after their particular interests; however, not surprisingly, many of the things we have learnt from concentrating on one specific building type are much more widely useful and applicable to other groups of buildings. We get involved in individual cases in a variety of ways: sometimes we are contacted by theatre owners or managers, sometimes by local planners or Conservation Officers and sometimes by enthusiastic locals keen to get a 'Save our Theatre' group off the ground. My architecture and conservation background is complemented by my colleagues' knowledge of arts policy and funding, and I can draw on specialist technical and historical expertise from a wide range of consultants. There is generally no charge for our advice. What are the aims of the Trust? The Trust was set up by Act of Parliament in 1976, when many theatres were seriously threatened by property developments. Although that period of extreme crisis has now thankfully passed, live theatre has not experienced the same amazing renaissance that is currently filling cinemas. Although many multiplexes are brash and insensitive in townscape terms, the cinema revival has at least in part been encouraged by a concerted po! icy of making the buildings more comfortable, exciting and distinctive. In the face of competition from video, cinemas have worked hard to provide venues which are an enjoyable part of an evening out and in many cases have been successful. Theatres have even more potential to do this, and ensuring Context58 June1998 that it happens is critical for their future. As well as inspiring the audience, the atmosphere of a theatre building can stimulate the actor and director and contribute to a unique experience. The disillusionment with multipurpose spaces and the attempts at neutral 'black boxes' have caused a reaction and there is now more interest in more distinctive spaces. Some directors have deserted traditional theatres in favour of 'found spaces' - including power stations, train sheds and commercial potting sheds, but some 'found spaces' are in fact abandoned and derelict theatres, rich in memories to be reinterpreted. New theatres need not be bland, and old ones need not promote only nostalgia. In both cases, clients need the confidence to develop challenging briefs which reflect changes in society and city life in particular. Theatres are an important part of our cultural heritage and will continue to have an essential cultural role in the 21st centu1y. What the Trust does Unlike the amenity societies, tl1eTrust is fonnally consulted on planning applications, and not statutorily on demolitions requiring listed building consent, although most planning authorities also refer listed building consent applications to us and we encourage this. This legal distinction reflects the fact that we are primarily interested in theatre use, ie keeping theatre buildings open for live performance and getting new ones built. When a theatre use is not feasible, we will seek to preserve the potential for such a use at a future date. This is actually our primary purpose over and above preserving the fabric of historic theatre buildings. Potentially this subtle difference could lead to conflict with those with a straightforward conservation remit, but on the whole I think we The Theatre Royal, Chatham, Kent's largest Victorian theatre, now owned by a charitable trust which is energetic in restoring it to its orginal splendour. Consolidation works have been recently been completed. will be on the same side as conservation professionals, at least 95% of the time. Potential impact of the Lottery In the last couple of years our caseload has increased dramatically. The lotte1y has been a great opportunity for theatre owners to tackle years of neglect and getting by on a pittance, to commission a brand new building or propose a big extension. Although visiting a challenging or glamorous building should be a key part of what makes going to the theatre special, spending money on the building itself frequently comes a poor second to getting a production on stage. Theatres are also classic examples of a building type where the demands of the late 20th century greatly exceed those of the major era of construction: almost every Victorian and Edwardian theatre was designed without the size of bars and number of lavatories people now 9
find essential, and even though many actors seem to have a perverse liking for squalid and poorly lit dressing rooms and green rooms, there is a limit to how far theatre managements feel it is fair to ask them to suffer. On top of this the social segregation inherent in traditional theatre design (separate entrances for holders of expensive tickets and pokey back stairs for the cheap seats) is no longer acceptable, and of course public buildings with many staircases are especially difficult for disabled access. Meanwhile many of those theatres put up in the 1960s and 1970s, which saw the first building boom after the Victorian and Edwardian period, also have major problems and some of them are in a worse condition than more traditional building stock. The current situation Like many others, theatre owners who have not yet secured lottery funding are worrying that they may have left it too late. The process seems even more of a gamble to a group which is in theory ideally placed to apply to either the Aits Councils or the HLF (or both). The Theatres Trust advises both HLFand the Ms Councils on applications for theatre projects as well as talking direct to individual theatres that want help with their bids. In addition to the practicalities of theatre layout and planning we have been developing expertise on both sets of Lottery criteria, the issues raised by joint bids and the possibility of asking different funds for grants at different stages of a project. Most Conse1vation Officers will now have considerable experience of the HLF's requirements and know what an. HLF-style conservaADVERTISEMENT The Theatres Trust operates throughout the United Kingdom and is concerned with all theatres - old and new, used and disused. It has a statutory role in considering planning applications, provides advice on theatre buildings to grant making bodies, including the Arts Council and Heritage Lottery Fund and helps theatre managements and preservation bodies with specific campaigns and feasibility studies. The Trust publishes a quarterly Newsletter and a se1ies of Advice Notes on topics such as how to set about saving a threatened theatre. 10 For further information contact us at: 22 Charing Cross Road, London WC2H OHR Tel: 0171 836 8591 Fax: 0171 836 3302 E-Mail: ttt@theatrestrust.org.uk * Estahlislied by Act of Parliame11t to promole the heifer protec:tio11of 1hemresfor 1he be11efi1of rhe 11arim1 tion plan looks like. The Aits Council of England's three-stage process will probably be much less familiar and getting the Regional Aits Board's support and involving local authority arts officers (both essential for an Ms Council bid) may be a new experience. We can arrange meetings to set up contacts and make sure that everyone involved understands what the others' points ofview are. We often act as an intermediary helping to achieve practical solutions We therefore like to get involved in projects at the earliest stage possible, so that fundamental issues can be addressed. Some theatres still retain historic stage machinery. It is obviously important to establish whether or not it is particularly rare or significant and if it should be retained or recorded, and if so, how. We have recently helped finance and organise feasibility studies to establish whether theatres abandoned by bingo in Burnley, Dundee and Doncaster could have a future as restored live venues. We can help theatres select architects and consultants, usually through competitive interview process, and are happy to provide specialist input to selection boards. As well as architects, getting the right business plan/arts consultant is important and the sort of task very few clients have ever had the need to do before. New theatres The Theatres Trust is also getting increasingly involved in trying to ensure that new theatres are well designed. Of course, this too is relevant to Conservation Officers. Frequently theatres are built on prominent citycentre sites where they are almost bound to have a major impact on a conservation area or listed buildings. PPG6 makes this all the more likely as theatres can be an important element of a night-time economy and add use diversity. They can act as a catalyst for wider urban regeneration spawning bars, restaurants and clubs and giving a focus for a sense of local identity. Despite the opportunities, on the whole, the design quality of recent new theatres is disappointing. Perhaps because this is perceived as a 'difficult' or excessively complex building type, there is a tendency to play safe. More imaginative choices could be made: many younger practices which have not yet built a theatre have put up buildings which show that they really do know how to look afresh at complex requirements and create a sense of wonder and occasion. Theatre consultants (a profession I had not come across before I started this job) can advise on planning and circulation, acoustics, sightlines, seating capacity and stage equipment etc as part of a consultant team so a detailed knowledge of these issues is not a primary requirement. Potential areas of conflict Earlier on I suggested that occasionally The Theatres Trust's remit to protect live theatre potential might mean that we will end up on a different side from conservationists. In general I do not think this is likely to happen where The Theatres Trust is pushing for practical alterations to be allowed . Most Conservation Officers I have worked with have a sensibly pragmatic but balanced view of the necessary compromise between preserving existing fabric and allowing alterations for greater comfo1t, safety and practicality. We also recognise that there are some buildings which are of such great historical importance tl1at they require special treatment and cannot therefore be brought up to ideal modem standards. What are more controversial are those cases where a theatre (possibly long disused) is identified by an A3 operator as a potentially lucrative bat/ restaurant. If we feel that there is a demand for a live venue, either now or in the foreseeable future, we would oppose such a change of use, less because of the physical alterations but because the resultant increase in value of the site is likely to price it beyond the each of a theatre group. In such circumstances we may be rejecting a scheme which would generate enough profit to finance a thorough refurbishment and even reinstatement of lost historic features, inside and out. Finally, we do not work in isolation. As well as I iaising closely with the amenity societies, we are in close contact with other specialist groups. If a building originally showed both films and had live performances, you may hear from both The Theatres Trust and the Cinema Theatre Association. The CTA will also help with specialist knowledge of items such as cinema organs. We may also recommend that major planning application schemes are put before the Theatre Planning Committee of the Association of British Theatre Technicians. This group, which was set up in the 1960s and meets at our offices, offers peer level review of projects and will produce a short written report concentrating on the practicalities of backstage and auditorium design. Please hang on to our leaflet. By the vety nature of the job, Conservation Officers have to be generalists rather than specialists. Unless you work in Westminster, you will not have a theatre case every week, but when you do we would like to hear from you and will be very pleased to help. Catherine Croft is Architectural Officer with 7be Theatres Trust. Context58 June1998
Renovating,Repairing AndImproving OriginalSashWindows? Ventrolla offer a nation wide service to renovate and upgrade original windows. Fitted by experienced craftsmen the Ventrolla System will: • Reduce external noise by up to lOdb • Virtuallyeliminate draughts and rattles • Ensure sashes open and close with ease • Maintain the architectural integrity of these period windows • Offer easy cleaning and painting r with our Sash Removal System option Recognised for its use in Conservation areas and Listed Properties, windows installed with the Ventrolla System benefit from modern standards of comfort and energy efficiency. ~ Vzntrollla® SASHWINDOWRENOVATION SPECIALISTS I I Hornbeam Square South, Harrogate HG2 SNB For details for how Ventrolla can help with your refurbishment plans, please call FREEPHONE0800 378278 STONEHEALTH LIMITED 73 London Road, Marlborough, Wiltshire. SN8 2AN Telephone & Fax: 01672 511515 The most gentle way to clean limestone, sandstone, terracotta, brick, faience etc. Chemical free environmentally friendly swirling vortex No other system can match the over-all perfonnance of JOS JOS is gentle and cleans without damage - Retain the patina and mellow character of an old building without making it look-new Paint removal problems'? Use Stonehealth's new steam system. I>OFF will remove oil based, them10plastic and masonry paints, bitumastic coatings, heavy deposits of oil and grease etc........ even chewing gum without damage to the substrate A Safer to use, yet effective, range of products without using chlorine or hazardous solvents - biodegradable - water soluble MICONE Cleaners, degreasers, biocides, paint and graffiti removers Soot removal, limescale, nicotine and other pollutants
MAXIMISTEHEPERFORMANCOEFYOUR EXISTINSGLIDINGSASHWINDOWS ! ARETHEYINNEEDOFDRAUGH-TPROOFINAGNDREPAIR? ASINSTALLEINDEDINBURGCHASTLE ON BEHALOFFHISTORISCCOTLAND Installatiofnourunique,nvironmentally friendlpye, rimetseeraling draught-proofing systemprovideashighleyffectivaendeconomailcternativtoe replacemeBnytt.acklintgheinherendtefectosftraditionsaalshand casewindodwesigno,urconcealseydstemeliminatdersaughtisr,ritatinrgattling, wind- blowdnustandrainintrusiorne,ducehseatlosshencfeuelbills andreducensoispeollutiointoyoupr remisbesyupto50%. LISTEDBUILDINGASNDCONSERVATIAORNEASAPPROVEFDULL SPECIALISEJDOINERYOVERHAUALNDPERIODREPRODUCTIONS. FORFREECONSULTATION ANDDEMONSTRATION CALL HERITAGWE INDOWSYSTEMS ON osoo 371 349 Glass for peiriod window§ The London Crown Glass Company specialises in providing authentic glass for the windows of period buildings. This glass, handblown using the traditional techniques of the glass blowers, is specified by The National Trust, The Crown Estates and indeed many others involved in the conservation of Britain's heritage. Specify authentic period glass for your restoration projects. THE LONDON CROWN GLASS COMPANY 21 Harpsden Road, Henley on Thames, Oxfordshire, RG9 IEE Telephone: 01491 413227 Facsimile: 01491 413228 Context58 June1998
Trustingin Trusts TheRailwayHeritageTrust: conservationandchange Richard Tinker describes the massive job facing the organisation. The Railway Heritage Trust was established in 1985 by the British Railways Board. Its objectives were first the conservation and restoration of the built railway heritage in its ownership, and secondly the transfer to new owners of those historic buildings and structures no longer in operational railway use. The Trust's initial budget was £,1 million, a large sum for British Rail to commit solely to its heritage in those straitened times. It is now sponsored by Railtrack pie and Rail Property Ltd, with a budget of £2.3 million. Since 1985, the Trust has supported over 600 projects with grants of over £17 million, specifically focused on historic railway buildings and· structures. As satisfactory to the Trusts has been the total of over £16.5 million contributed to those projects by other partners. These include local authorities, enterprise companies, national heritage bodies and many tenants, such as train operating companies, • national and local retailers and individual traders. The Trust's grants are normally in the range of from 10% to 40% of total project costs. Since 1985, the number of listed railway buildings and structures in mainland Britain has increased from 681 to 1,310. The number is still growing, as buildings built as recently as 1964 have been listed. Buildings in Conservation Areas have increased from 633 to 1,147. This article deals with buildings and structures in Railtrack and Rail Property Ltd ownership. The Trust is very pleased to respond to requests for information in this field. Some councils now consult it directly over planning and Listed Building Consent applications, giving the Trust first-hand opportunities to assist in their assessment of projects. Many railway heritage projects would have failed, had not individual officers and staff in planning and conse1vation departments strongly supported them. The Trust wishes to improve these contacts, for the benefit of councils and the Trust. Context58 June1998 Bridgwater Station, Somerset. 1841 for the Bristol & Exeter Railway. Design attributed to lsambard Brunel. Grade II. Many railway heritage projects are only realised through partnerships. One such project was at Bridgwater Station in Somerset, on the Bristol & Exeter Railway. Diagrams of a station building for Bridgwater survive from Isambard Brunel's sketchbook, suggesting that the core of the station dates from 1841. It was extended by the Great Western Railway in 1882 into its present form: single-storey stuccoed buildings, with metal and glass platform canopies and a covered footbridge. The group, unusual in having survived largely complete, is listed Grade II. At one stage, the buildings were threatened with demolition, but this proposal was abandoned. A partnership was formed by the then Regional Railways, Sedgemoor District Council and the Trust for restoration, funded equally by the parties. The whole station was repaired and restored, and a new ticket office formed in the main building. The Gill Sans letters on the facade date from GWR days and were found abandoned on the roof during the works! It was also discovered that the cast iron balusters of the footbridge staircases were cast by the same firm in Bridgwater that made the cast iron tubes laid between the tracks for Brunel's ill-fated atmospheric propulsion system for the South Devon Railway. Since completion in 1994, time has not dealt kindly with the restored station. Reductions in staffing levels and the station's remoteness from the town centre have left it vulnerable to vandalism, providing an object lesson in how long-desired investment in a cultural asset can quickly be negated. The Trust has learned from this situation, and it now gives the same priority to projects to bring unoccupied historic premises back into use as to restoration projects. Grange-over-Sands Station in Cumbria, on the Furness Railway main line between Carnforth and Barrow, is listed Grade II and stands in a Conservation Area. It dates from 1865-72, and forms the focal point of the Victorian resort developed by the Furness Railway. The station was in the first stage of Railtrack's Station Regeneration Programme. A wide partnership has supported the repair and restoration of the stone buildings and the fine metal and glass platform canopies, with all their finials and details. The partners, led by Railtrack, included Cumbria County, South Lakeland District and Grange Town Councils, English Heritage (through a Conservation Area Partnership scheme in the town centre), North Western Trains and the Trust. North Western Trains has provided a new ticket office. The Trust has funded a 13
ihbc.org.ukRkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=