APPENDIX 55
Memorandum submitted by English Heritage
INTRODUCTION
1. English Heritage is the Government's
adviser on all aspects of the historic environment in England.
It was established by the National Heritage Act in 1983 and is
sponsored by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.
2. English Heritage's work falls into three
main categories:
— Increasing knowledge and understanding
of the historic environment
— Using grants and planning advice
to encourage managed change and conservation of the historic environment
— Broadening people's access to and
understanding of their built and archaeological heritage, principally
by presenting 409 historic properties and sites to the public
Listing
3. Within English Heritage's wider duty
to increase knowledge and understanding of the historic environment,
we work to identify buildings, monuments, sites and landscapes
of historical, architectural and archaeological significance meriting
protection. Buildings identified as significant are recommended
to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport for inclusion
on the List of Buildings of Special Architectural or Historic
Interest.
4. The List currently contains approximately
370,000 entries divided into three grades to reflect relative
architectural and historic interest:
| Grade I | —
| buildings of exceptional interest (2 per cent of entries)
|
| Grade II* | — | particularly important buildings of more than special interest (4 per cent of the entries)
|
| Grade II | — | buildings of special interest (94 per cent of the entries)
|
5. In 2000-01 English Heritage made approximately 2,500
listing recommendations to the DCMS, including advice both to
list and not to list. 99 per cent of those recommendations were
accepted by the Secretary of State. Recommendations are based
on a range of factors, including age, rarity, architectural merit,
method of construction and historical importance and association.
THE ROYAL
SHAKESPEARE THEATRE,
STRATFORD ON
AVON
History
6. The riverside sites of the Royal Shakespeare Theatre
complex were assembled in the late 19th century by Charles Edward
Flower and given to the Governors of the Shakespeare Memorial
Theatre. The first Shakespeare Memorial Theatre was built in 1879
and followed by the Art Gallery and Library (1881) and Lecture
Theatre (1886).
7. In 1926 the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre was largely
destroyed by fire, although the Library and Art Gallery were saved.
The theatre was replaced by Elizabeth Scott's Shakespeare Memorial
Theatre building in 1932, which was renamed the Royal Shakespeare
Theatre (RST) in 1961.
8. In 1986, after decades of use as a conference venue,
scenery store and rehearsal room, the shell of the 1879 theatre
was re-converted into the Swan Theatre.
Significance and listing history
9. The remains of the first Shakespeare Memorial Theatre
of 1879 were listed grade II* in 1971 along with the 1881 Library
and Art Gallery. Elizabeth Scott's Theatre was added to the listing
in 1980 at grade II. Both these items were amalgamated as a single
entry at grade II* in 1987.
10. There can be little doubt that the Royal Shakespeare
Company, as a cultural entity, is of real national importance.
The second Shakespeare Memorial Theatre, built after an international
competition in 1927, was thought at the time to be of equal national
importance. For example, when this building was completed in 1932
a whole edition of the Architectural Review was devoted to it,
as the most important new theatre to be designed and built in
England since the Great War and as one of the most important new
buildings to result from a public competition.
11. The winning design for the new theatre was produced
by Elizabeth Scott, a recent graduate of the Architectural Association.
It was unanimously chosen from amongst 72 competition entries.
The building was the first important public building to be designed
in Britain by a woman, a very significant historical aspect of
the building's design. Scott became a partner in the firm she
worked for — Scott, Chesterton & Shepherd — in
order to carry out the design. The building cost just over £175,000
to build and was opened by the Prince of Wales on 23 April 1932.
12. This building is not primarily listed at grade II*
because of its historic importance as the first important building
built by a woman, nor is it listed as the most important new theatre
building built in England in the inter-war period but as a very
fine and early example of a Modern-style public building. Unlike
the old Gothic Revival-style Shakespeare Memorial Theatre, which
had been destroyed by fire in 1926, the new theatre adopted the
best modern municipal style of architecture being developed on
the continent at the time, especially in the work of W M Dudok
at Hilversum and Michel de Klerk in Amsterdam. The various functional
blocks of this building, like the auditorium, the fly tower and
the foyer are all differentiated individually on the exterior
and each is clearly recognisable from outside. These blocks are
then integrated together in a harmonious relationship to form
the basic shape of the theatre. Its dramatically curved entrance
was given the most elaborate sculptural decoration, especially
the three brick relief carvings by Eric Kennington above the main
windows. The monumental block of the fly tower with its stepped
top contrasts with the even simpler auditorium block. The best
view of the theatre was always seen to be the terrace front which
faced the river, and allowed audiences to parade here in the intervals.
Fortunately Elizabeth Scott chose to clad the building in brick
rather than painted stucco or concrete, and this has mellowed
over the years, allowing the building to harmonize with the brick
architecture of the town. This theatre compares well with other
significant inter-war buildings such as Battersea Power Station
and Cambridge University Library, both designed by Scott's cousin
Giles Gilbert Scott. The Architectural Review makes it clear that
it was the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre, not the better known
RIBA Building on Portland Place that first attempted a synthesis
of architecture and all the applied arts. This was an important
concept [gesamkunstwerk] in the buildings of the 1930s and 1950s,
one which derived ultimately from Scandinavia and Northern Europe
where new concert halls and a few new theatres were beginning
to be produced.
13. The interior was equally new and uncluttered. The
auditorium has been fairly comprehensively altered over the years,
but the well preserved foyer and shop sections show how effectively
the original Art Deco inspired interior decorations worked. The
seating and staging arrangements with raking stalls and single
balcony behind are obviously based on recent cinema design and
on a desire to allow the audience an uninterrupted view of the
stage. While the auditorium has today been superseded, by the
rapid pace of change in theatrical production since the 1950s,
it was originally based on the best and most up-to-date ideas
about theatre planning then available. Elizabeth Scott specifically
visited most of the contemporary theatres in Europe and the earnestness
of her research is reflected in the paper that she wrote on the
history of theatre planning for the Architectural Review.
14. There can be absolutely no doubt about the importance
and correct grading of this nationally significant building. It
is worth mentioning that since the Second World War no other theatre,
except perhaps the Royal Court Theatre on Sloane Square, has seen
the production of so many ground breaking and significant theatrical
productions and this extra historical importance must reinforce
all these arguments.
ENGLISH HERITAGE'S
ROLE AT
THE RST
What is English Heritage's role with regard to the RST. What
powers and responsibilities does it have? What are the significant
levers available to you?
15. English Heritage has three principal roles in relation
to the proposed redevelopment of the Royal Shakespeare Theatre.
(a) Provision of informal advice to the RSC and the local
planning authority
16. English Heritage has an informal role in pre-planning
application discussions with the RSC and the local authorities,
advising on the conservation issues which need to be taken into
account in any redevelopment proposals. We have been engaged in
such discussions for several years, and most particularly over
the last 12 months during the preparation of the RSC's Feasibility
Study. As well as regular meetings attended by staff in Stratford
with the RSC, its professional advisers and the local authorities,
the theatre company has made a presentation in London to our Historic
Built Environment Advisory Committee. Some members of the Committee
have also visited Stratford to see the theatre and the issues
involved at first hand. English Heritage fully expects this constructive
dialogue to continue as the RSC and its advisers translate the
aspirations of the Feasibility Study into architectural form and
prepare submissions for planning permission and listed building
consent.
(b) Formal consultee and adviser to the local planning
authority
17. Stratford on Avon District Council has a statutory
duty to notify English Heritage of planning applications including
any of the following:
— Proposals to undertake works to a grade I or grade
II* listed building.
— Proposals involving total demolition of a grade
II listed building, or demolition of a principal external wall
of such a building, or demolition of all or a substantial part
of the interior.
— Proposals affecting the setting of a grade I or
II* listed building.
— Proposals for new development in a conservation
area where the area of ground to be developed exceeds 1,000 square
metres or the new development is more than 20 metres high.
18. The RST is grade II* and located in a conservation
area and therefore English Heritage will have the opportunity
to comment formally on any proposals to alter or demolish the
building, as well as on plans for a new building on the site.
The Council will have a duty to consider English Heritage's views,
along with those of any other consultees, when reaching its decision
about whether to approve relevant planning applications.
(c) Conservation adviser to the Secretary of State
19. If Stratford on Avon District Council is minded to
approve any proposals for alteration, extension or demolition
of the RST they must first notify the Secretary of State for Transport,
Local Government and the Regions of their intention. The Secretary
of State will decide whether he wishes to call the application
in for his own determination. In coming to this decision he will
refer the application to English Heritage and seek our advice
on the proposals.
20. Although English Heritage is a statutory consultee
in the planning process, it is not a decision-maker. Our role
is to advise the local authority on what we consider to be the
most appropriate response to any planning proposal; we are equally
able to advise the Secretary of State on whether any application
should be called in or approved without call-in. We have no "levers
of power" as such but rely on our reputation for professional
excellence in influencing the decision-making bodies.
What other organisations have a role?
21. The RSC has voluntarily engaged the Twentieth Century
Society (the lead national amenity society for modern buildings)
and the Theatres Trust (an expert voluntary body which must by
statute be consulted over planning proposals for works to theatres)
in discussions prior to preparation of the Feasibility Study.
22. If the RSC applies for total or partial demolition
of the listed theatre, Stratford On Avon District Council will
be statutorily obliged to consult the Twentieth Century Society
and other national amenity societies (Georgian Group, Victorian
Society, etc). The applications must also be advertised on site
and in the local press, giving both the local community and any
other parties with an interest in the future of the RST an opportunity
to comment on the proposals. If the Council is minded to approve
the applications the tenor, weight and authority of these third
party representations may well influence the decision of the Secretary
of State on whether or not to call in the application for decision.
23. Other organisations with a role will include the
Environment Agency (a statutory consultee because of the proximity
of the site to the River Avon flood plain); the local highway
authority (impact on the road system) and potentially CABE (advice
on the merits of the replacement building in the event of total
demolition).
WHAT SCOPE
IS THERE
FOR COMPROMISE
BETWEEN THE
MERITORIOUS ELEMENTS
OF THE
LISTED BUILDING
AND THE
RSC'S IDENTIFIED
NEEDS AND
PLANS?
24. English Heritage concurs with the assessment of the
RSC's Conservation Plan that the most significant surviving elements
of the 1932 building are the foyer area and the front elevation,
and the riverside elevation. We also agree with their assessment
of the historic significance of the Swan Theatre and the desirability
of retaining that virtually intact in any redevelopment. English
Heritage is also conscious of the architectural and historic significance
of the external form of the building overall as the expression
of a particular school of Art Deco design.
25. English Heritage recognises the shortcomings of the
present building for both audiences and performers; namely inadequate
backstage and front of house facilities; and the shortcomings
of the auditorium. The auditorium has been substantially altered
over the years and, with the exception of a few Art Deco doors,
retains no features of historic significance. The backstage area
retains some items of industrial archaeological interest, viz
the understage lift and the remains of the original 1932 rolling
stage. Both of these features have long been redundant and could
be safeguarded by careful recording and possible relocation to
a museum. None of the remaining features in either the auditorium
or the backstage area are seen as a constraint to any redevelopment.
26. In the light of this analysis English Heritage has
consistently advised the RSC over recent months that it would
wish to see the historically significant parts of the listed building
retained but that it sees scope for considerable remodelling of
the auditorium and backstage areas to create the facilities and
amenities which the RSC are seeking. The possibility of enlarging
the shell of the building by extending the least significant elevation
(that towards Waterside Road) has not been discounted, nor has
the possibility of increasing the height of the present building
to accommodate a new fly tower.
27. In offering this advice English Heritage has been
mindful of government guidance set out in Planning Policy Guidance
Note 15 Planning and the Historic Environment (PPG15). PPG15 expresses
a policy presumption against the demolition of listed buildings
unless a wholly exceptional case can be made, and stresses the
need for any alteration to or intervention in a listed building
to respect its special character and interest. We have emphasised
that any work to the RST should be of the highest architectural
standard consistent with its grade II* listing. An architectural
"fudge" or other design compromise would not be acceptable
to English Heritage.
28. English Heritage believes that it would be possible
to remodel parts of the Elizabeth Scott building to create a high
quality modern theatre. Whether this would meet all the aspirations
of the RSC remains to be seen but we are keen to enter dialogue
with them on this subject. No substantive discussions have been
held on the matter yet. We are aware that the RSC have themselves
looked at the issue in the Feasibility Study in the context of
achieving their optimum solution for a new theatre and concluded
that it would not be possible. The RSC have in the last few weeks
engaged consultants independent of the main design team to explore
the possibilities of adapting the present theatre to meet their
brief and to address other criteria which the Secretary of State
would expect to see examined in the event of an application for
listed building consent being submitted (a PPG15 Study). Staff
have held a preliminary meeting with the consultants and further
meetings are to be arranged.
WHAT DISCUSSIONS/CONSULTATIONS
HAVE TAKEN
PLACE TO
DATE AND
WHAT IS
ENGLISH HERITAGE'S
POSITION NOW
IN REACTION
TO THE
RSC'S FEASIBILITY
STUDY?
29. English Heritage was originally involved in discussions
with the RSC over their redevelopment proposals in 1996-97. Since
January 2001 staff have been engaged in monthly "Planning"
meetings with the RSC, its architectural and planning advisers,
and officers from Stratford on Avon District Council and Warwickshire
County Council. These discussions have reviewed the implications
of locating a new theatre on 14 sites in Stratford; the process
and likely timetable for any planning and listed building consents
associated with the RSC's redevelopment proposals; the linkages
with the separate Public Realm working parties; and the heritage
implications of erecting a new build theatre, as opposed to retention
and remodelling of the present listed building. The progress of
these discussions has been reported regularly to English Heritage's
Historic Built Environment Advisory Committee, which has received
a presentation from the RSC's Development Team. Some members of
the Committee, including its chairman, have visited Stratford
to see the theatre at first hand.
30. English Heritage formally communicated the views
of the Advisory Committee (ie that we recognise the shortcomings
of the present building; accept in principle the need for change;
draw attention to the need for this to be considered against the
policies of PPG15; and strongly suggest the RSC consider how the
present building might be adapted) to the RSC in September 2001
prior to the completion and publication of the Feasibility Study.
31. English Heritage has read the Feasibility Study carefully
and is conscious that it is a statement of aspirations. We were
considerably surprised in the light of our previous discussions
to read that the full demolition of the 1932 theatre is considered
unavoidable in order to create a new principal playhouse. While
the Study rehearses the case for demolition, as opposed to remodelling
the existing building, neither English Heritage nor the local
planning authority have had an opportunity to test the strength
of the arguments with the RSC. The Feasibility Study does not
take proper account of English Heritage views, or the Government's
planning policies as set out in PPG15. In the absence of a PPG15
study, we do not consider that a case for demolition has been
adequately made and we are not able to accept the Feasibility
Study proposals as they stand. At the request of our Commission,
the Acting Chief Executive has communicated this view to the Arts
Council for England.
WHAT PROCESSES
DOES ENGLISH
HERITAGE SEE
AS APPLICABLE
GOING FORWARD?
32. English Heritage has expressed its wish to continue
in dialogue with the RSC and its consultants as its proposals
evolve and understand that this desire is reciprocated by the
theatre company. We shall continue to liaise with the local authority
for whom the scheme is both a potential flagship development,
and also in their role as development control authority.
33. Most of this work will be delegated to staff but
it is anticipated that regular reports will be made to our Advisory
Committee at key stages in the evolution of the project (eg the
completion of the PPG15 study and as architectural drawings are
produced for the new facilities whether new build or remodelling).
34. It is understood that the local authority has made
contact with CABE (Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment)
and that they will be invited to comment on any emerging proposals
in so far as they impact on the townscape of Stratford.
35. Because of the high profile of the project it is
likely that the final view of English Heritage on any development
proposals (either remodelling or new build) will be taken by its
Commission.
THE SOUTH
BANK CENTRE,
LONDON
36. The South Bank Centre (SBC) comprises the Royal Festival
Hall and, in a separate complex of buildings, the Queen Elizabeth
Hall, the Purcell Room and the Hayward Gallery. Taken with the
Royal National Theatre and the National Film Theatre, it is an
integral part of one of Europe's premier arts centres.
37. Within the South Bank's estate, the Royal Festival
Hall is very much seen as the focus of the South Bank Centre and,
in heritage terms, it is the most important building both architecturally
and historically. Designed and built in the remarkably short space
of two years, it opened to become the centrepiece of the Festival
of Britain held in 1951 to celebrate the centenary of the first
international exhibition held in the Crystal Palace in Hyde Park.
It was designed by a group of London County Council architects
under the direction of the London County Council Architect, (Sir)
Robert Matthew. To lead the design team, Robert Matthew brought
in (Sir) Leslie Martin, an architect with a reputation as an intellectual
modernist. It was Leslie Martin who is credited with coming up
with the concept of the "egg in the box", the device
by which the auditorium is raised above the principal foyer spaces
to insulate it from external noise and make maximum use of the
extremely tight site.
38. Pevsner's The Buildings of England — London
2: South rightly identifies the Royal Festival Hall as "the
first major British Public building designed in the contemporary
style of architecture". It was listed grade I on 29 March
1988 and was in the first tranche of post-war buildings to be
added to the List of Buildings of Special Architectural or Historic
Interest.
39. The Royal Festival Hall was extended in 1964 under
Leslie Martin's direction as part of the creation of the South
Bank Arts Centre. This included the construction of the Queen
Elizabeth Hall, the Purcell Room and the Hayward Gallery, all
of which are connected within one building complex and linked
to the Royal Festival Hall by elevated walkways that link, in
turn, with Waterloo Bridge (listed grade II*) and the Hungerford
footbridge. The design of the new complex reflected the then current
vogue for Brutalist architecture with pre-cast concrete panels
and exposed board-marked concrete being the primary facing materials.
40. The Queen Elizabeth Hall complex has been nominated
for listing by English Heritage on more than one occasion but
this recommendation has not been accepted by Ministers and the
building remains unlisted.
41. The whole of the South Bank Centre is at the heart
of the South Bank Conservation Area which also includes the South
Bank Centre's immediate neighbours, Sir Denys Lasdun's Royal National
Theatre (listed grade II*) and the former home of the LCC—and,
later, the GLC—Ralph Knott's County Hall (also listed grade
II*).
ENGLISH HERITAGE
ROLE AT
THE SBC
42. As in Stratford, English Heritage performs a number
of roles in relation to the SBC:
(a) Provision of informal advice to the SBC and the local
planning authority
43. English Heritage has an informal role in pre-application
discussions with the SBC and the local authority, advising on
the conservation issues which need to be taken into account in
any redevelopment proposals. English Heritage staff have been
intimately involved in the development of the current Rick Mather
masterplan for the South Bank.
(b) Formal consultee and adviser to the local planning
authority
44. English Heritage's powers in London differ from those
it holds outside the capital. London local authorities have a
statutory duty to notify English Heritage of planning applications
including any of the following:
— Proposals to undertake works to a grade I or grade
II* listed building
— Proposals involving demolition of a grade II listed
building, or demolition of a principal external wall of such a
building, or the demolition of all or substantial part of the
interior.
— Proposals involving grade II listed railway stations,
theatres, cinemas or bridges across the Thames.
— Proposals affecting a listed building owned by
a local authority in its area where application is by a third
party.
— Proposals affecting the setting of a grade I or
II* listed building.
— Proposals in the curtilage of a grade II listed
building affecting its setting where the area of ground to be
developed exceeds 1,000 square metres or the new development is
more than 20 metres high.
— Proposals not in the curtilage which affect the
setting of a listed building.
— Proposals for new development in a conservation
area where the area of ground to be developed exceeds 1,000 square
metres or the new development is more than 20 metres high.
45. In addition, London councils are obliged to inform
English Heritage of proposals involving total or substantial demolition
of buildings in conservation areas.
46. In the case of proposals which require Listed Building
Consent, English Heritage retains full powers of direction. This
means that whilst a London local authority can refuse Listed Building
Consent without reference to English Heritage, it may not grant
consent without English Heritage authorisation. Therefore any
alterations to the Royal Festival Hall would need the approval
of English Heritage. In addition, English Heritage would have
the opportunity to comment on any proposals for demolition of
any unlisted structures in the South Bank Conservation Area, or
for development that would affect the setting of the listed Royal
Festival Hall, Royal National Theatre and Waterloo Bridge.
ENGLISH HERITAGE'S
INVOLVEMENT TO
DATE
47. Over the years, a number of masterplans have been
prepared which have sought to update and enhance the existing
facilities of the South Bank Centre but none has so far progressed
beyond the planning stage. The architect Rick Mather has drawn
up the latest masterplan and English Heritage has been intimately
involved in the process of his selection and the drawing up of
his proposals.
48. We have advised on what role the Queen Elizabeth
Hall and Hayward Gallery complex might have in the long-term future
of the south bank arts complex and have advocated retention of
these buildings. We have also been advising on the future of Jubilee
Gardens. This is a key area of public open space within the South
Bank Conservation Area and is designated Metropolitan Open Land.
The Mather masterplan identifies the Gardens as a potential development
site, suggesting that they could be raised and inclined providing
space underneath to accommodate the British Film Institute and
other arts related organisations. English Heritage is broadly
supportive of the Mather masterplan. We do however have concerns
regarding the "blade" buildings proposed for each end
of the South Bank arts complex because of their potential impact
on the setting of the Royal Festival Hall, Waterloo Bridge and
views up and down the Thames.
49. The Mather masterplan clearly presents an exciting
prospect that may be achievable within the heritage constraints
that exist. However, the proposal to develop on Metropolitan Open
Land has attracted considerable local criticism and the future
of the masterplan proposals remains far from assured.
50. In the shorter term, the architects Allies and Morrison
have drawn up proposals for the repair and refurbishment of the
Royal Festival Hall. Their proposals are guided by a comprehensive
Conservation Plan prepared by the architects five years ago and
accepted by English Heritage as being a model of its kind. Perhaps
the most controversial part of Allies and Morrison's plans, however,
is the construction of a new building that has come to be known
as the "Liner Building". Constructed in the narrow gap
between the walkway that skirts the south fac"ade of the
Hall and the southern approach viaduct to Hungerford Bridge, the
proposed building would provide much needed office accommodation
for the South Bank Centre's staff. This new accommodation (which,
for sound management reasons, needs to be an integral part of
the South Bank Centre) will allow former public spaces within
the Royal Festival Hall, requisitioned over the years for office
use, to be returned to public use. What makes it so contentious
is that it relocates the service road to the Hall to the south
side of Hungerford viaduct and takes up a small area of Metropolitan
Open Land currently used as the SBC's car park. This is being
strongly resisted by local residents groups and other parties
and a decision by Lambeth Council on the applications for planning
permission and listed building consent is keenly awaited.
51. English Heritage has made it clear that it welcomes
Allies and Morrison's proposals as being fully in accordance with
the emerging masterplan and the Conservation Plan. The works to
the Festival Hall itself will improve disabled access throughout
the building and will do much to recapture the "clarity"
and architectural integrity of the building as envisaged by the
building's original designers. An integral part of this process
is returning "lost" spaces back to public use and, for
this reason, we accept the case for the "Liner Building".
CONCLUSION
52. English Heritage is the Government's lead body for
the historic environment. Our role in the planning system is designed
to make us an effective advocate for England's built heritage.
Our duty is to use that role to ensure that the assets of the
past are properly considered; that, where possible, historic buildings
are adapted or sensitively re-used; and that new architecture
is designed to the highest quality. We do not stand against change,
but instead work to ensure considered and managed change to England's
historic environment.
53. Both at Stratford and the South Bank English Heritage
staff have worked flexibly and openly with others from the earliest
stages of planning discussions to highlight important conservation
issues and to explore options for resolving them. In the case
of the RST we have been quick to recognise the problems of the
building and to identify the extensive scope for re-modelling.
We have also been fair and open in our communication of Government
policy that demolition of listed buildings rightly demands full
consideration, as well as a persuasive case made about the exceptional
circumstances meriting demolition. In the absence of a PPG15 study,
or any architectural designs for the proposed new theatre, neither
of these elements is in place. English Heritage looks forward
to continuing its close cooperation with the RSC and to the development
of a mutually acceptable plan for the theatre's future.
February 2002
| 
