Institute of Historic Building Conservation No 95 July 2006 Technical challenges Timber repairs with synthetic resins Part L of the building regulations Remedies for rising damp
traditional building products conservation advice mortar matching professional courses seminar & exhibition facilities lime putty hydraulic lime limewash stone dust ready-mixed lime mortars hair riven laths air-dried oak ochres & pigments pozzolanic additives pointing irons traditional drawn glass Bursledon Brickworks Conservation Centre has a wide variety of exhibitions & educational displays, explaining the history & development of building materials & conservation practice, housed in the lateVictorian Grade II* brickworks Courses include hands-on training, covering the use of traditional skills & techniques, materials & building conservation at introductory, CPD & post graduate level BURSLEDONBRICKWORKS(TRADING)LTD Coal Park Lane Swanwick Southampton SO31 7GW Tel/Fax 01489 576248 Email: [email protected] www.hampshirebuildings.org.uk Registered No 2838216 VAT Registration No 631 7400 68
C O N T E X T 9 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 6 Context Cover: Freston Tower, Suffolk (Photo ©The Landmark Trust, John Miller) See p14. Technical challenges of conservation Editorial Briefing 2 Out of Context 3 Letters 4 TheWriter’s Voice 4 Periodically 5 Ironbridge conference on world heritage Dennis Rodwell 7 Legal Briefing Charles Mynors 10 Supporting Columns Brian Morton 14 Letting Bromley Hall speak for itself Paul Latham 17 Rising damp in historic buildings Julian Bagg 20 Using synthetic resins to conserve and repair timber Iain McCaig 25 The energy performance minefield ChrisWood 30 Working with highway engineers in Suffolk Ruth Stokes 33 English Heritage publications 34 Notes from the chair 36 Vox pop 37 Book reviews 38 Products and services 41 The Institute of historic building conservation www.ihbc.org.uk Registered as a Charity Number 1061593. Company Limited by Guarantee. Registered in England Number 3333780. Registered Office: 3 Stafford Road,TunbridgeWells, Kent TN2 4QZ. IHBC Officers President: David Lovie email [email protected] Chairman: JohnYates email [email protected] Vice Chair: Dave Chetwyn email [email protected] Secretary: Richard Morrice email [email protected] Treasurer: Michael Knights email [email protected] Membership Secretary: Mike Lea email [email protected] Consultations Secretary: Karen Holyoake email [email protected] Education Secretary: John Preston email [email protected] Publicity Secretary: vacant email [email protected] Law & Practice Coordinator: vacant email [email protected] Director: Seán O’Reilly email [email protected] IHBC Committee Chairs Policy: Dave Chetwyn email [email protected] Membership & Ethics: Mike Lea email [email protected] Finance & Resources: Richard Morrice email [email protected] Education: John Preston email [email protected] Communications & Outreach: Fiona Newton email [email protected] Branch Officers North: John Pendlebury Tel 0191 284 2119 NorthWest: Anthony Blacklay Tel 01270 610050 Yorkshire: Keith Knight Tel 01904 658482 West Midlands: Karen Holyoake Tel 01384 826891 East Midlands: Fiona Newton Tel 01507 601111 South: Gill Butter Tel 02380 285324 SouthWest: Colin Ellis Tel 01305 838334 East Anglia: Pippa Colchester Tel 01245 437337 South East: David Kincaid Tel 01227 862185 London: David McDonald Tel 020 8881 6724 Scotland: Charles Strang Tel 01835 822560 Wales: Nathan Blanchard Tel 01285 642428 Northern Ireland: Sharon BrownTel 028 9754 3087 Republic of Ireland: Bernard DeeTel 00353 1 873 7226 Business Office Jubilee House, High Street, Tisbury, Wiltshire SP3 6HA England Tel 01747 873133 Fax 01747 871718 email [email protected] Bungeroosh? Bungaroosh? If you live in Brighton you may have received a flyer inviting you to a ‘Bungeroosh Get Together: bring your own drums to the West Pier’.You might have heard the Brighton-based DJ called Bungeroosh, who plays Cuban-fusion music. Or you might have come across the Brighton-based artists collective, also called Bungeroosh, which creates artwork on the theme of cultural fusion, bringing together decorative styles from all over the world to make what it calls ‘bungeroosh ornamentation’. This strange word, whose new meaning denotes cultural fusion, multiculturalism, and the mix of peoples who are thrown together in towns and cities along the south coast of England, derives from an older (also local) meaning, described in our Briefing article ‘Life with bungaroosh’ on page 2. Bungaroosh (that spelling seems more common in this context, but a number of variants are seen) is a building material, a flint rubble commonly used in the Brighton area for party walls. Householders who discover it beneath the plaster are generally as pleased as they would be if they found that their house was built of porridge. Bungaroosh, for all that the name is delightful and has been borrowed to describe other things composed of bits and pieces thrown together, is a technical challenge. Which is as good a way as any of introducing the technical features in this issue of Context.We do not, as it happens, reveal how to cope with crumbling bungaroosh (prayer is probably as effective as anything else). Instead members of the IHBC technical committee discuss synthetic resins, Part L of the building regulations, and rising damp. Iain McCaig (p25) argues that the use of synthetic resins in conserving and repairing timber should have a place in the building conservator’s toolbox. Chris Wood (p30) reports that late changes to Part L of the building regulations on conserving fuel and energy might benefit historic buildings but could lead to much more work for conservation officers. There are apparent legal anomalies covering buildings in conservation areas and scheduled ancient monuments, he notes. For example, building regulation 9 states that if the work would affect the character and appearance of a building in a conservation area it would be exempt from Part L. But legislation is written to protect the character and appearance of conservation areas, so there is little protection or control in planning law to cover most works to improve energy efficiency. Julian Bagg’s article (p20) points out that rising damp is the most commonly misdiagnosed form of dampness in historic buildings, and he warns that remedial solutions for it are often inappropriate. He provides some sound advice on how to approach the problem. Unless you are dealing with bungaroosh, in which case you are on your own.
C O N T E X T 9 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 6 Context Briefing Copy deadlines Context is published five times a year, in March, May, July, September and November. Remaining copy deadlines in 2006 are: Issue Deadline September, Issue 96 14 July November, Issue 97 15 September Editor Robert Cowan Editorial Coordinator Mike Brown, 54 High Road, Essendon, Hertfordshire AL9 6AP Tel 020 8379 3865 email [email protected] Editorial Board Mike Brown (chair) Susan Brook (treasurer) Nigel Crowe (main features) Peter de Figueiredo (book reviews) Michael Taylor (main features) Cartoons by Robert Cowan Context is distributed to all members of the Institute of Historic Building Conservation. © Institute of Historic Building Conservation 2006 ISSN 0958-2746 Publisher Published for the Institute of Historic Building Conservation by Cathedral Communications Limited, High Street, Tisbury,Wiltshire, England SP3 6HA Tel 01747 871717 Fax 01747 871718 email [email protected] www.buildingconservation.com Non-member subscriptions to Context Context is available to non-members of the IHBC at an annual subscription rate, including postage, of: United Kingdom £50.00 Elsewhere £75.00 Subscription orders, together with remittances payable to Institute of Historic Building Conservation, should be sent to the IHBC Business Office at Jubilee House, High Street, Tisbury, Wiltshire SP3 6HA. The views expressed in Context are not necessarily held by the IHBC or the publisher. Neither the publisher nor the IHBC shall be under any liability whatsoever in respect of contributed articles. We gratefully acknowledge the support of firms whose advertisements appear throughout this publication.While every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this issue of Context is current and correct, neither the IHBC nor the publisher can be held responsible for any errors or omissions which may occur. Life with bungaroosh Being a person who both lives in a house in Brighton which was built in the 1860s and is having repairs done to the walls of his kitchen, BobYoung has suddenly become very interested in bungaroosh. Bungaroosh (the name seems to be local to Sussex, especially Brighton) is a flint rubble material commonly used for party walls.Young’s researches led him to a n article by Rob Fraser in Context (March 1991). Fraser notes that the builders of Regency Brighton concentrated largely on the front elevations, which were often brick. ‘The party walls, however, seem invariably to be bungaroosh,’ Fraser writes. ‘Often the rear wall was bungaroosh too and if an owner was singularly unlucky the front wall could be as well, underneath the elegant render façade.’ The walls were constructed by pouring lime mortar into shuttering and throwing in flints, brick rubble, lumps of chalk, pieces of wood and anything else that came to hand. The timber in the mixture tends to create a good breeding ground for rot. ‘Since the mixture is very porous,’ Fraser notes, ‘the rot circulates quickly, and can usually find some damp somewhere to feed on.’ If bungaroosh is too dry it crumbles; too wet and the mortar becomes mobile. Fraser quotes a Brighton conservation officer suggesting that you could probably demolish a third of the city with a well-aimed hose. Home improvers find bungaroosh very difficult to attach anything too, being too hard (the flint) or too soft (the mortar), and too weak. It is almost impossible to repair. Fraser suggests that the term may derive from the practice of ‘bunging in’ a variety of material (contact The Dictionary of Urbanism at www. urbanwords.info if you know more). BobYoung comments: ‘It’s been interesting to find that, of the people who have been working on my house, the ones who are both local and older all know what bungaroosh means, but look apprehensive.The younger ones (as well as the kitchen fitter from out of the county) have never heard of it but, when given an explanation, look equally apprehensive.’ Retail therapy The IHBC London branch is holding its third annual day conference on Tuesday 7 November 2006 at the RICS, Great George Street, Parliament Square. The theme is ‘Retail Therapy: heritage and urban design in town centres’. The conference will examine the current issues facing established town centres and shopping parades, show the symptoms they exhibit, and present a range of treatments which might ensure that health is restored and longevity assured. Speakers include Sir Terry Farrell, Piers Gough, Kelvin Campbell of Urban Initiatives and Councillor Daniel Moylan, design champion at the London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. Details from Nick Collins, tel 020 7973 3739; [email protected] The leaflet: pass it on The campaign ‘History Matters: pass it on’ seeks to raise awareness, build support and encourage involvement in history and heritage in England and Wales. A leaflet outlines the aims and objectives of the campaigns, suggests ways of getting involved and provides an order form for a pack of supporting material (badges, posters, stickers and FAQ sheet). For copies email mail@ heritagelink.org.uk. The campaign, running from July to November, is a joint initiative between the National Trust, English Heritage, Heritage Link, the Civic Trust, the Council for British Archaeology, the Heritage Lottery Fund, the Historic Houses Association and others. Managing projects A five-year bursary scheme funded by heritage insurer Ecclesiastical will enable ten students to study University College London’s Sustainable Heritage MSc, which claims to be the only course of its kind in the world to teach professionals the skills to manage major heritage projects. The course has attracted, among others, conservators, architects, archaeologists, surveyors and curators. It Brighton ©DHD
C O N T E X T 9 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 6 is accredited by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and supported by the National Trust and English Heritage. Heritage dividend The Heritage Dividend Methodology: measuring the impact of heritage projects is the report of research carried out for English Heritage by Urban Practitioners. The methodology is for evaluating heritage-related projects and programmes carried out or funded by central or local government, charitable or voluntary organisations, or other private organisations. Download the report free from www.helm.org.uk/upload/pdf/heritagedividend-methodology.pdf or request a hard copy from [email protected]. ‘When someone says history does not matter, whether it is national, local or family history, I know they are taking away my rights and freedoms’. Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, speaking at the launch of History Matters ‘History is not the story of strangers, aliens from another realm. It is the story of us had we been born a little earlier.’ The writer Stephen Fry speaking at the launch of History Matters ‘History 3, Football 2.’ The score according to public opinion, as shown by a MORI poll commissioned to mark the launch of History Matters. Seventythree per cent of those polled were interested in history, while only 48 per cent expressed interest in football. ‘KATIE Fforde’s relocation romance, Practically Perfect (Century, £10.99), adopts a pragmatic approach to men and property. Designer Anna has staked her future on renovating an idyllic cottage. Midway through ripping out the floorboards, she’s visited by listed buildings officer Rob Hunter. A combatative pas de deux ensues, followed by a cathartic tumble between the Cath Kidson sheets.’ Emma Hagestadt’s review in The Independent tells of a conservation officer finally getting his due. ‘IT’S A fabulous and dramatic bit of post-war architecture, with a great bit of landscape design by Sylvia Crowe. It’s also a very popular landmark... Its problem is not that this is an uneconomically viable building – we have been told that until the trustees stopped renting it out it was generating an income of around £2 million a year, which is more than enough to repair the odd leak. ‘There is little doubt that if it were offered for sale at a reasonable cost – with options for reuse that would allow continued public access – there would be buyers. However, like many buildings, its cleared site could be worth much more. That’s why we have listed building legislation.’ Catherine Croft, director of the Twentieth Century Society, responding in Building Design to proposals to demolish the Commonwealth Institute in London. ‘English Heritage and the Twentieth Century Society are going to have to come to terms with the phenomenon of tightly designed, lightly constructed buildings which are unadaptable for re-use and incapable of coping with climate change. In the case of the Commonwealth Institute, should demolition be approved, it should first be fully recorded digitally… ‘Like many architects of my generation, my family and I enjoyed the Puffin Book Fairs held in the institute’s great hall in the 70s. But the echoing hall is flawed, the displays have long since vanished, the cinema’s distinctive décor has been lost, the innovative art gallery is mangled beyond redemption (it never worked well anyway), the route for school parties has been completely altered, and Sylvia Crowe’s simple but cheapskate landscape has been largely destroyed by Dutch Elm disease and overgrown tree roots. ‘Many hours of delving into the building’s history and collaborating with engineers and surveyors has convinced me that it would be kindest to record it and put it to sleep. Even the job architect, Roger Cunliffe, agrees.’ Peter Carolin, who reported on the building for the Commonwealth Institute in 2004, writing in Building Design. ‘Vigorous lobbying by a secretarygeneral determined to play the Africa card, by suggesting that the obscurantist efforts of conservationists are snatching the bread from the mouths of countless million orphans who have never seen inside a school, has persuaded two cabinet ministers to ignore the advice of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, and back a private act of Parliament to have the structure stripped of the protection of listing. It’s a process that is going to divert the Commonwealth’s precious resources into the hands of its lawyers rather than the poor. ‘The building is a reminder of an almost forgotten, but significant moment in Britain’s recent history, and its attempt to get to grips with its post-colonial future, presenting the Commonwealth as a viable contemporary alternative to the outdated concept of Empire. On those grounds alone, it is an important The Carnegie Building, a prominent landmark on Hartlepool’s Headland, has been re-opened following a £1 million restoration.The Grade II listed building, originally a public library and museum, was the gift of philanthropist Andrew Carnegie. RobWoodside, Nick Barnfield,Wilma Bouwmeester and Terence Quinn (left to right), students sponsored by Ecclesiastical before the five-year agreement, seen examining restoration work at Gloucester Cathedral.
C O N T E X T 9 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 6 When in Venice From John Fidler I read with interest Bob Kindred’s excellent review of Gianfranco Pertot’s book Venice: extraordinary maintenance (Context, March). But can I correct Bob’s statement that ICCROM (International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property) is based in Venice? In fact it has its base in Rome. Every two years or so ICCROM does run a specialist course in Venice on stone conservation, in association with the local university school of architecture IUAV and with funding from, among others, the UNESCO Venice office and the Venice in Peril Fund (see www.iccrom.org). John Fidler, conservation director, English Heritage, and vice president for programmes, ICCROM Council Letters An extract from Osbert Lancaster’s Draynflete Revealed, first published in 1949 Of the secular remains of medieval Drayneflete virtually nothing remains. Gone is the exquisite old Custard Cross where the market price of custards (or costards) was regularly fixed by the master of the Custard Makers’ Guild, and the memory of it survives only in a few rare seventeenth-century engravings; gone is the beautiful old Moot Hall, wantonly destroyed at the end of the seventeenth century to make way for a heavy and ill-proportioned building in the Renaissance style; gone the fine fourteenth-century hall of the Worshipful Company of Drumstretchers. Of the town walls, still standing in the eighteenth century, there remain a few traces of medieval masonry at the back of the cinema, miraculously laid bare by aerial bombardment and now carefully preserved; but of the North Gate, represented in many old prints, not one stone remains upon another. monument to preserve, in the same way that Berliners fought to save the former East German parliament building, or a younger generation of Muscovites are struggling to stop the demolition of all the relics of Stalinism by cowboy capitalist developers in league with the mayor.’ Deyan Sudjic writing in the Observer. ‘Many parts of the heritage, especially buildings and urban areas, are products of multiple phases of development and use. Judgement must be applied to determine which are the most characteristic elements in question... A text description of the extent of survival of the likely original or characteristic fabric should be given, along with a more general estimate based on a three-point scale: Poor, where less than 40 per cent remains; Moderate, where 40–70 per cent remains; Good, where over 70 per cent remains intact. From www.webtag.org.uk, the Department for Transport’s website providing guidance on the appraisal of transport projects. Context reader Robert Huxford comments: ‘On that basis the Baedeker raids would be regarded as Good, and the raid on Coventry would be classed as moderate. For a poor score it would appear you have to use a nuclear device.’ ‘It takes something serious for Britain’s fractious history community to come together. But last week saw the National Trust, English Heritage and a collection of leading historians unite for a remarkable campaign, History Matters: Pass It On. Launched with a brilliant speech by Stephen Fry, its aim is to raise awareness of history in everyday lives and encourage involvement in heritage. ‘Such aims might seem anodyne but, in an age devoid of organic connections to the past, they are increasingly important. Eric Hobsbawm has warned of the dangers of a “permanent present” with a generation growing up with no sense of history.Where once the past was inherited through religion, work or social class, today, a secular, mobile, individualist culture lacks obvious roots. Underlying History Matters is hard-edged politics. ‘At the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, power resides with the latter thanks to a secretary of state uninterested in heritage. Between 2001–2006, funding for sport increased by 91 per cent against 26 per cent for museums, libraries and archives. The result is collapsing museum acquisition rates, more buildings at risk and a shameful failure to address the scandal of Stonehenge and the A303. From a leading article in the Observer ‘We have been planning for the announced allocation of Lottery funds to the 2012 London Olympics for some time.While there will be a short-term impact on commitment levels, we see 2012 and its accompanying cultural festival as a tremendous showcase not just for sport, but also for culture and heritage. After all, our heritage has a vital role to play in making sure the UK is a really special place to visit and enjoy the 2012 experience, all around the UK.’ Dame Liz Forgan, chair of the Heritage Lottery Fund, welcoming the secretary of state’s announcement that the heritage share of Lottery good cause funding would be maintained, providing certainty for the sector for the next ten years. ‘In the high street of life, as it were, no one seems to look above the shopline. Today’s plastic signage at street level is the focus; yesterday’s pilasters, corbels and pediments above are neither noticed nor considered, save by what some would call cranks and conservationists.’ Stephen Fry at the launch of History Matters
C O N T E X T 9 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 6 Periodically… Reference was made in the previous column to the pre-eminence of the Association of PreservationTechnology in professional conservation in North America. Hugh Miller had explained the background to its evolution in the most recent issue of the Journal of Architectural Conservation. As part of a further extended overview of recent serial publications, this column is pleased to be able to include the content of APT Bulletin. For Context readers unfamiliar with the bulletin, the title alone might not convey its importance.There are three or four issues a year, running to over 60 pages of well-illustrated technical articles.These cover best practice, preservation education and conservation as a professional discipline to a very high standard probably not matched elsewhere. There has always been a difference of nomenclature between North America and Europe over ‘preservation’, undertaken by the former, and ‘conservation’, by the latter. It is widely accepted that the latter generally describes the activity also undertaken across the pond. By way of introduction, this column gives a brief overview of the content of the three issues from 2005 and the first of 2006 (Vol XXXVII, No 1).The range of articles last year covered a wide spectrum of interests.There was a clear bias towards North American issues, as might be expected. As is the case with those rare journals with a stated international remit, commonality of concerns, concepts and ideas often prompts reflection, stimulus and debate to encourage better solutions in the UK. The theme of the Spring 2005 issue was based around preservation engineering. Articles ranged from an introductory piece suggesting the increasing need for specialist training for engineers, and proposing that the practice of this specialism should require certification (in similar vein as the UK Institute of Civil Engineers’ recently introduced CARE accreditation); a suggested philosophy for preservation engineers; the use of the latest global positioning system technologies for measuring structural displacement; cathodic protection against the natural degradation of iron and steel components (using British examples); cutting-edge, laser-scanning techniques to locate plaster de-lamination in wall paintings at the US Capitol; and the special considerations required to repair built-up timber trusses commonly found in late 19th and early 20th century buildings (marking the technical transition between heavy-timbered trusses and engineered trusses). The summer 2005 issue (Nos 2–3) focuses on the repair of 20th century structures and finishes, bringing together an eclectic range of topics and discussing successes and failures of some cutting-edge testing and reproduction methods.There is a most interesting discussion about the diagnosis and repair of thin-shell concrete structures, including fascinating well-captioned photographs of the roof of the Kresege Auditorium, Cambridge, Massachusetts, under construction in 1954, where the genesis of its eventual failure could be seen clearly. It is rare that conservation processes are so well documented to permit the wisdom of hindsight. Other articles include the use of 3D laser scanning to improve measured drawing documentation of existing structures for historical purposes, using a iconic, redundant 1891 prairie grain elevator in Brownwood,Texas, as an example; and the digital reproduction of 25 historic wallpapers in a small, modestly funded house museum in Ohio which resulted in a cost saving of 90 per cent over traditional custom-reproduction methods.The project, which received a 2005 Preservation Commendation from the Victorian Society of America, illustrates that it is possible to reproduce wallpapers that had previously been prohibitively expensive. The winter 2005 issue dealt with environmental sustainability, addressing both the practical and theoretical aspects that are shared with the evolving greenbuilding movement.This is reflected in subject matter covering the possible benefits and likely pitfalls surrounding whether walls of historic buildings should be insulated; capturing energy-efficiency opportunities in historic houses; the nature and importance of embodiedenergy assessments; and the real cost of replacing historic windows (a parallel take on an ever-present UK problem). Turning to the current year, the Spring 2006 issue begins with: ‘Prefabrication in the Gold Rush Era: California, Australia and the Pacific’.The origin of many of these buildings lay in Britain, especially in the factories of Liverpool and Birkenhead. Another aspect of conservation now becoming more neglected by many British readers is the importance of drawing and measuring historic buildings as an essential component of understanding and an essential perquisite of repair.The article makes many good points about recording as a catalyst for reuse. It suggests that recording can do far more than capture the appearance of the building: it can encapsulate its spirit. There is also a well-illustrated piece on the significance of dense, decorative pressed bricks used in late 19th century fireproof construction, and a review of recently emerging trends in the application of scientific principles and the use of novel techniques to define emerging philosophies of conservation (many of these the work of the US National Parks Service). Another recent addition to the canon of reviews in these pages is the excellent Newsletter of the Twentieth Century Society.This 44-page A4 publication treats its subjects in depth.TheWinter 2005–6 edition begins with remarks by the society’s director Catherine Croft
C O N T E X T 9 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 6 about beginning 2006 as a fully fledged amenity society needing statutorily to be consulted on applications for listed building consent involving demolition (or part demolition) of listed buildings from 1914 onwards. Croft goes on to quote a recent remark of Sir Nicholas Serota.When asked why people should join the society, Serota said it ‘has opened our eyes to the qualities of architecture of our own century. Dogged research and advocacy, combined with a constructive response to the need to find new uses for buildings designed for an earlier age, have ensured many fine buildings now survive to win appreciation and admiration from a new generation.’ The issue celebrates the recent substantial refurbishment by MJP Architects of that important national institution the art deco BBC Broadcasting House (1932). On a more modest scale it records the travails involved in the careful refurbishment of 77 Addington Road, a ‘moderne’ in Bromley by Leslie, Kemp andTasker. ‘The Sensation of Olympia 1934!’ is described.This is an almost exact reproduction of a design created as a show house in the ‘Village of Tomorrow’ display at the Daily Mail’s 1934 Ideal Home Exhibition.The death of the elderly owners had caused concern about the building which at the time was not listed (but now is). But the interior had survived intact, including streamlined window pelmets in the lounge and all the original chrome door fittings. Other articles cover an eclectic mix of issues surrounding on the one hand 20th century icons, such as the battles leading to the restoration of the De LaWarr Pavilion, Bexhill, and on the other, less well known examples: the future facing the Cranbrook Estate, Bethnal Green by Berthold Lubetkin (a very bold example of 1960s social housing which the society believes is under threat from unsympathetic developers); Loughton Station towards the eastern end of the Central Line (listed Grade II), celebrated as a ‘unique station to be treasured as a fine architectural solution to station design’; and the 56 hardened cold war aircraft shelters at Upper Heyford Airbase, undertaken by the Americans from 1965 and under consideration for scheduling. The current issue of the newsletter (Spring 2006) expresses particular concern about the disappearance of postwar commercial architecture. It highlights in particular the fate of Fortress House, 23 Savile Row, byWA Curtis Green, completed 1949-50 and until very recently the home of English Heritage. The building is now under threat, having been the subject of a certificate of immunity against listing. The society comments that ‘it is a bitter irony that “the statutory advisor on the built heritage” did not object to the intended demolition of this building with which they have been so closely associated’. Other articles include an extended interview with Christopher Wilk, who has curated the recent major ‘Modernism’ exhibition at the V&A Museum. As perhaps might be expected from the organisation behind the seminal manifesto, the newsletter of the SPAB, Cornerstone (Vol 27, No 1, 2006), gives some prominence to the publication of the draft English Heritage Conservation Principles, and reproduces the seven without further comment. It will be interesting to see the reaction from those brought up with the concepts ofWilliam Morris. Of particular interest is the first of a series of debates giving conflicting viewpoints about approaches to aspects of practical conservation.Tim Ratcliffe stands up for re-rendering as the best way to remain faithful to traditional practice, while Matthew Saunders argues that leaving stone bare is best for aesthetics and nature alike.This is well worth reading, well illustrated and a promising exploration of issues presently not often appearing in print. Much interest will be generated if the series entitled Podium is developed. The society also highlights a worrying recent and growing trend in thatch fires, and the part destruction by a digger of a 16th century house in Apperley, near Tewkesbury.The district council described this as ‘the most blatant act of vandalism against a listed building the council had ever seen’.The owner, Ruth Greenshield, denied all knowledge but prosecution is under consideration. Items about lime caught the eye in recent issues of Natural Stone Specialist. The March 2006 issue referred to a project to produce lime mortars and putties on the Haddon Estate in Derbyshire from its own quarries, with backing from the Peak District Sustainable Development Fund, financed by Defra.The initial success has prompted the estate to set up a permanent lime kiln with help from the Peak National Park Authority. The April issue offers potential solutions to the failure of grouted granite road surface construction. Research has shown that mortar joints need to be made compatible with the stone used to form a continuous surface layer so that adequate bond adhesion is achieved. In turn the surface layer has to bond with the supporting structure through the use of bond adhesive agents at the upper and lower interfaces of the laying course. The key layer, therefore, is the bonding layer between the brittle surface and the strong base. It has to tie them together into a composite construction that works effectively. The May issue describes a proposed 20-fold increase in production of hydraulic lime by Singleton Birch, with the aim to take half the UK market. St Astier of France currently supplies most of the 25,000 tonnes of lime used each year for conservation and new construction. It is claimed that the ambitious growth proposed in Lincolnshire will be accompanied by more competitive pricing. Furthermore, the range of limes will grow from weak NHL2 lines to encompass NHL3.5 by the end of the year and the much stronger NHL5 in due course.These developments have prompted Singleton Birch to buy a smaller kiln than their Maertz pure lime kilns especially to produce hydraulic lime. Finally, this reviewer does not generally assess websites but recommends looking at a major essay found on the site of the International Network for Traditional Building, Architecture and Urbanism (INTBAU) by Michael Putzet of ICOMOS Germany: ‘Principles of Preservation: an introduction to the international charters for conservation and restoration, 40 years after the Venice Charter’. It is well worth reading but be prepared to download about 40 pages. It can be found at http://www.icomos. de/publication/einfuehrung.htm. Bob Kindred MBE
C O N T E X T 9 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 6 Ironbridge conference on world heritage The conference World Heritage: global challenges and local solutions, organised by Ironbridge Institute and Ironbridge Gorge MuseumTrust in cooperation with English Heritage and ICOMOS‑UK, heard presentations from some two dozen speakers representing a diversity of research concepts and management strategies for cultural and natural sites around the world.1 Among other objectives, the conference sought to inspire debate about the value of the evolving world heritage ‘brand’ in promoting and managing cultural and natural heritage sites, including the relationship to the interests of the local communities in which they are situated. DavidWright MP for Telford and chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group onWorld Heritage Sites, described the 1972World Heritage Convention as perhaps the most successful of international conventions. He reminded his audience both of the commitment that State Parties (of which there are now 182) make to protect cultural and natural heritage throughout their national territories and the opportunity the convention affords to nominate world heritage sites. Wright is lobbying for greater public awareness and official recognition for world heritage sites in the designation hierarchy, and dedicated central government funding to resource their management. He spoke of current threats: the scale and design quality of major developments in the setting of city centre sites – such as the Tower of London at home and Cologne abroad; and land instability and flooding – including in Ironbridge Gorge itself. Wright also spoke of the opportunities afforded by world heritage site status, as an engine both for local economies and for engaging with the cross-section of the local community – especially with young people through the school curriculum. He cited in particular the role that interactive museums such as Enginuity at Ironbridge can perform in linking the history of technology to people’s present-day experience of it, and to global issues such as climate change and sustainability. In none of the United Kingdom’s inscribed sites has the world heritage brand been as pivotal a force in the regeneration of the local economy and revival of community pride as the socio-economically depressed, broken landscape of Blaenavon in SouthWales. John Rodger, Blaenavon project director, illustrated the visually compelling corporate identity that has been developed to promote awareness and appreciation of the disparate elements of this complex industrial site. He spoke of the increasing attention that is being given to the distinctive local, social and cultural traditions associated with coal mining, chapel, music and rugby. The increasing recognition of the importance of intangible (human) cultural heritage values compared to tangible (material) values was a theme that recurred throughout the conference. Chiara Bortolotto of Università IULM, Milan, and research institutes in Paris, spoke of the relationship between The values of world heritage Abraham Darby III’s iron bridge (1777–81), a symbol of the industrial revolution in England
C O N T E X T 9 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 6 the 1972World Heritage Convention (which the UK signed in 1984) and the 2003 UNESCOConvention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Heritage (which the UK has not yet signed), and of the importance that is now attached to an anthropological approach to the understanding of cultural heritage. As part of UNESCO’s global strategy aimed at achieving a more representative world heritage list, the focus of new nominations has moved from the early bias in favour of the European, Christian, monumental aesthetic towards the diversity of human cultural values and traditions. On the international stage, this is a complex subject that integrates place with people, associates cultural diversity with biodiversity, and takes account of the dynamic and evolutionary nature of cultural heritage – a process of continuous creativity that is the essence of the successful transmission of heritage values. Bortolotto spoke of the challenge that this change of emphasis posed to the definition of authenticity, a concept that underscores the nomination and management of all world heritage sites. The shift in perspective towards the intangible heritage is reflected in the UNESCO-driven – and UK-adopted – concept of cultural landscape, in which cultural, natural and intangible heritage are taken out of their separate ‘boxes’ and perceived as the inter-linked parts of a whole. Chris Pound, consultant, represented that the city of Bath, inscribed as a world heritage site in 1987 under criteria that reflected its architecture and archaeology, would now be perceived as a cultural landscape, with far more attention being paid, for example, to the city’s landscape setting, and the social and cultural traditions associated with the hot springs and healing.2 Stonehenge and Avebury, inscribed in the world heritage list in 1986 as an archaeological site, is likewise now perceived as a cultural landscape. On the subject of management plans for world heritage sites, Chris Blandford, consultant, spoke of the limited guidance that is available through the Operational and Management Guidelines (published by UNESCO and ICCROM respectively) and international charters and declarations, and the importance of an integrated, multi-disciplinary approach that is site-specific, the product of clarity in the definition of core values and of consensus. ChristopherYoung, head of world heritage and international policy at English Heritage, focused on perhaps the least exotic, weakest, but most crucial aspect of site management, namely continuous monitoring, evaluation and feedback: to pre-empt problems rather than to be forever on the back foot, fire-fighting. In summing up the conference, Susan Denyer, ICOMOS world heritage adviser and secretary of ICOMOS-UK, spoke of the challenge that the evolving concept of cultural heritage posed to the hitherto seeming simplicity of the process of nominating world heritage sites. On the subjects of ‘outstanding universal value’ (the interpretation of which can be both contrived and political) and of authenticity, she spoke of the need to be clearer about what could and could not change in a site – given the needs and expectations of today’s and tomorrow’s communities, the big issues surrounding development pressures, and the reality that the management plans for individual world heritage sites did not tend to be rooted in the wider planning framework. Denyer concluded by positing that world heritage sites should act as exemplars for how other sites were managed. By way of a final challenge, and harking back to DavidWright’s opening remark about the general commitment made by State Parties when they sign the convention, John Carman of Birmingham University, lead organiser of the conference, posed two questions. First: do we need world heritage sites? Second: should we not be focusing on the issues? Dennis Rodwell, architect-planner, cultural heritage consultant, is based in south-east Scotland. References 1 The conference proceedings are due to be published in November 2006 as a volume in the British Archaeological Reports International Series (editors John Carman and Roger White). 2 A critique of the management plans for the city of Bath, and the Old and NewTowns of Edinburgh world heritage sites appears in the Journal of Architectural Conservation, Donhead Publishing, Vol 12, No 2, July 2006. Lansdown Crescent (1789–93; John Palmer, architect), represents the apogee of the harmonious integration of architecture and landscape in 18th century Bath.
C O N T E X T 9 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 6 improve your qua l i ty of l i g h t . . . How to preserve and enhance the conservation environment Sponsors of the RIBA Conservation Awards Figure 2 – the Conservation Rooflight® Figure 1 - Traditional cast-iron rooflight Characteristics of a Victorian cast-iron rooflight • Very low in profile - nominally flush to the roof tiles • Single-glazed panels divided into narrow strips by real glazing bars • Fine lines and relatively deep modeling of the putty to the glazing bars and edges • No overtly modern materials used - traditional flashings/soakers • Poor insulation and weather-tightness performance combined with condensation and maintenance problems Characteristics of • Very low in profile - nominally flush to the roof tiles • Double-glazed panels divided into narrow strips by real glazing bars, but with appearance of single-glazing at the cill • Fine lines and relatively deep modeling of silicone replicating the putty to the glazing bars and edges • No overtly modern materials used - traditional flashings/soakers • No condensation problems due to patented Thermoliner® - thermal lining incorporating drainage channels • Proven performance – exceeds BS6375: Part 1:1989 (weathertightness), U Value of 1.7W/m2 K, BS Kite marked glazing • Wide range of ironmongery and glazing options including ActivTM self-cleaning glass Figure 1 is an original Victorian cast-iron rooflight. In order to preserve and enhance a traditional or historic property the visual characteristics of new or replacement rooflights should closely match the original cast-iron ones. In addition modern standards of insulation and weather tightness must be provided. Often modern conservation-style rooflights meet performance criteria, but most fail to match the details of the original cast-iron models due to their broad sections, aluminium fronting and mock glazing bars. The Conservation Rooflight® from the Rooflight Company offers the largest size range in the UK as well as a bespoke design service, which means that any size or shape can be accommodated. For detailed case studies, visit www.therooflightcompany.co.uk or contact 01993 833108 or email [email protected] for a brochure.
10 C O N T E X T 9 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 6 It is obvious that, in many cases, there will be a number of objects of interest and subsidiary buildings associated with a building of special interest. Thus, for example, a fine mansion house from the 18th century will invariably have been listed by the secretary of state as a building of special architectural or historic interest. But do the protection and the restrictions imposed by the listing extend to the stables block next to it, or the gate piers at the bottom of the drive? And what about the gardener’s cottage some way from the main house, or the modern potting shed just beyond the stables? Inside the mansion, while the removal of the main staircase would no doubt be subject to some form of control, what about replacing a chandelier? It is therefore important to know just what is comprised within the listing of a building, principally because this will help to determine whether or not listed building consent is needed for any works proposed. If a farmhouse were listed in 1965, and a new roof is to be put on a barn nearby that has recently been converted to separate residential use, does the listing of the house extend to the barn? If it does not, work can proceed without any consent at all; but if it does, listed building consent is needed, and failure to obtain it may lead to enforcement or even criminal prosecution. It will also have various other consequences, such as in relation to the procedures to be adopted in processing planning applications. It has also been held in the leading case on this point that, once the extent of the listing has been determined under the planning Acts, this will also apply in considering any other statutory code, such as those governing the payment of VAT and non-domestic rates, which refer to listed buildings – although caution is needed, particularly in relation to VAT (as explained in a previous issue of Context). These difficulties also occur in other areas of law, such as landlord and tenant (at the end of a tenancy, which items can be removed by the tenant and which go with the building); conveyancing (what passes with the property, and what can be removed by the vendor); inheritance (what items are part of the property, what are chattels); mortgages; and insurance. This is therefore not a new problem; and the statutory controls governing listed buildings need to be seen in this light, building on to provisions of the common law that have been evolving for centuries. It might at first sight seem to be desirable that those selecting buildings for special protection should specifically list all the associated items that are also to be protected. But a moment’s thought will make it clear that that is impractical. It would be relatively straightforward to show the curtilage of a listed building on a map, but it would not be feasible to catalogue all the subsidiary structures within that curtilage that are to come within the listing, and even less so all the items worthy of protection inside the building. The solution, however tiresome it may be in practice, therefore has to be a statutory formula prescribing in general what is to be included and what, by inference, is outside the scope of protection. The relevant statutory provisions The key provision in relation to England and Wales is section 1(5) of the Listed Buildings Act, which states as follows: ‘In this Act, “listed building” means a building which is for the time being included in a list compiled or approved by the secretary of state under this section; and for the purposes of this Act: a) any object or structure fixed to the building; and b) any object or structure within the curtilage of the building which, although not fixed to the building, forms part of the land and has done so since before LEGAL BRIEFING The extent of listing: part 1 In an extract from his new book, Charles Mynors summarises the current position on what is included when a building is listed – an old question that continues to give problems.
C O N T E X T 9 5 : J U LY 2 0 0 6 11 July 1, 1948 shall be treated as part of the building.’ This was introduced by the Town and Country Planning Act 1968. Prior to that, the 1947 and 1962 Acts merely indicated that protection could be given to ‘a building’, without elaborating further. Section 1(4) of the Scottish Listed Buildings Act is in identical terms. Article 42(7) of the Northern Ireland Order is similar, save that the date in paragraph (b) is 1 October 1973. Bearing in mind that the curtilage of a building may be small or may be quite extensive, it is clear that a ‘listed building’, as defined by the Act, is not simply an actual physical building that happens to be of special interest and has been recognised as such. It is, rather, a legal concept, and may extend so as to encompass a whole range of objects and structures, of which some may themselves be buildings. The extent of listing is also significant in the light of the decision of the House of Lords in 1996 (in Shimizu [UK] Ltd vWestminster City Council) that the phrase ‘listed building’ effectively means the whole of the building, including, presumably, all the objects and structures referred to in section 1(5). This series of articles in Context looks in more detail at each element of that definition in turn, to see what is at issue: what is encompassed in respect of the actual building in the list; what is meant by ‘objects and structures’ in principle, and in particular at the principles laid down in the key cases of Calderdale and Debenhams. The next article (Context 96, September 2006) will look at more recent decisions applying those principles cases; and considers what is meant by ‘objects fixed to a building in the list’.The third article (Context 97, November 2006) will look in more detail at objects in the curtilage of a listed building. To aid the comprehension of the reports of the cases, plans have been included highlighting the principal features referred to. In each case, the building included in the list is shown with an asterisk. The building in the list The first element in the definition is the building that is itself included in the list. The secretary of state can list a ‘building’, and a ‘building’ is defined to include any structure or erection, and any part of any building as so defined. That means that it is possible to list a whole building or structure or (in theory at least) part of one; but once the favoured item has been selected, every part of it is in law equally ‘listed’. This means in particular that the interior is thus just as much listed as the exterior, whether or not it is in itself of any interest, and regardless of the grade of the listing. And all the features on the exterior of the building are equally listed. Listed, too, would be any unattractive later additions to an old building; and modern replacement windows and doors. Statements that, for example, the exterior of a building, or a particularly fine Victorian shopfront, are listed mean nothing. The exterior, or the shopfront, may be the reason why the building has been included in the list; but either the whole building is listed, including the interior, or none of it. Clearly, the building or structure that is being included in the list is the one that exists at the date of listing, even though that will normally include work from a number of different dates. So, for example, the nasty 1930s extension at the back of the Georgian mansion is just as much listed as the remainder (although of course it may well be much easier to obtain consent to remove it). Further, it would seem that where a building is altered or extended, with or without consent, after it has been listed, the new work is generally included in the listing just as much as the old. This has been confirmed in the 1999 decision Richardson Developments Ltd v Birmingham City Council. Any other conclusion would be unworkable. But that will not always be the case. One exception is where an extension to a listed building is on such a scale that it dwarfs the original building, as happened in Richardson.The case concerned a complex known as St Chad’s Court in Edgbaston. At the time of the listing, in 1982, this comprised a central core, built in the 18th century, and two wings built in the 1930s (which were expressly excluded from the listing). In 1994, the two wings had been demolished and replaced with modern office blocks.The council now sought payment of nondomestic rates for the office blocks on the basis that, since the office accommodation was more substantial in size than the listed structure, and capable of occupation independent of the latter, it could not be said to attract the listing of the principal building. While Dyson J rejected the proposition that only such extensions as were constructed at the date of listing fell within the confines of section 1(5)(a), he equally resisted the argument that any extension to a listed building of whatever size automatically attracts the listing of the original building. Extensions, too, as with any other ‘object or structure’ attached to a building in the list, must be subsidiary to it if they are to share in the protection afforded by listing. Occasionally, only part of a building is listed.Where that happens, the remainder of the building may be included in the listing where, for example, one half of a structure straddling a local authority boundary is included in the list on a routine resurvey, it is likely that the unlisted half would be considered a structure fixed to it or in its curtilage. But where a deliberate decision is made to list only part of a much larger structure, it is likely that the remainder will not be included. Were it otherwise, the listed tail would be wagging the affixed dog. The list description In virtually all statutory lists, a description is provided for each item included. This is purely to aid identification, and does not mean that any feature not noted is of no importance. It would be possible to write a substantial book on each of the larger listed buildings (a cathedral, for instance), without
www.ihbc.org.ukRkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=