Memorandum by John R Buckler (HIS 03)
INQUIRY INTO THE ROLE OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS
IN URBAN REGENERATION
1. Although my response to the first Inquiry
notified in June 2002 still obtains, I must express concern that
the "New Inquiry" appears to set aside the significance
of Public Spaces. These spaces provide the setting of all buildings,
historic or otherwise and in some cases, though the buildings
will have their intrinsic merit, the spaces can be of even greater
value. An obvious example is the Church (which may be closed)
and the churchyard (which affords not only an urban lung but also
the place where good trees may safely be allowed to grow and pedestrians
rest).
2. Part of the down side in the undoubted
merit of emphasis on brown field sites for regeneration, can be
town cramming, of buildings unrelieved by strategic greenery. A
prospect without soul. Could it be that the economic redevelopment
of the urban squares of London and elsewhere, is being regarded
as a potential money spinner! If so there may be an urgent need
for Listed Building procedures to be mirrored by procedures to
designate and protect "Listed Spaces". If necessary
this may need public acquisition or legal constraints more secure
than Restrictive Covenants which can be expediently fragile in
the face of seductive promises of jobs and cash.
3. It is essential for politicians and professionals
to retain a keen sense of scale about urban regeneration. I handled
schemes of this nature and visited many more, such as Broadgate
in London, but cannot recall any cases than ran into irreconcilable
difficulties. Either the designer could work round the historic
building if it was sound and worth saving. It is possible that
some buildings were lost, but when practicable the site had to
be sacrificed but the building itself carefully dismantled and
perhaps erected elsewhere. An old Coaching Inn demolished for
road safety reasons in Shrewsbury, was re-erected at the Avoncroft
Museum near Bromsgrove.
4. There will be local and national records
of historic buildings lost or at risk, but one key question for
the Inquiry is not the buildings as such, but the extent they
may have compromised urban regeneration specifically. The outcome
of this Inquiry will be of wide interest.
John R Buckler FRTPI (Ret)
Dip T P Leeds
My experience in County and District Planning
from 1944 involved work with central and local government, new
town, the voluntary bodies (civic societies and CPRE) and as an
assessor of schemes of planning excellence that involved visits
nationwide including London, Belfast, Dundee etc and the whole
town renewal of Wirksworth (Derby).
This Inquiry perhaps implies that Historic Buildings
are a hindrance to urban regeneration. This in turn suggests that
instead of the more common practice of subtle, even slow, organic
local improvements and updating as a form of skillful surgery,
the urban butchery of the post war period may be revived. Surely
not. The student may be told to assume a totally cleared and uncompromised
site before preparing a regeneration scheme. The experienced professional
should not fight shy of dealing with the inevitable challenges
not just of historic buildings but also of the other impedimentia
that distinguish a "Brown Field" from a "Green
Field" site.
Land values, geology, old river beds, service
channels, forgotten cellars, mine shafts and derelict land (Telford
New Town had some 2000 pit shafts and 4000 acres of derelict land
within the designated area) and other unforeseen, or even unforeseeable
factors will be more widespread "obstacles to change"
than Historic Buildings to complicate urban renewal.
Perhaps even more important than finance economics
and profit (mainly to the respected land owner and property speculator)
is the magic that enables historic buildings and spaces to define
the unique character of a place and indeed a nation. Put in extremis,
in London a series of "Central Parks Neighbourhood Units"
may make money and reduce commuting (Hyde Park is larger in area
than Monaco), but are, it is hoped, totally unthinkable today.
In addition to the intrinsic and design value of historic buildings,
they have a tourist value that attracts people and monies from
abroad, feature more often than new buildings in tourist photographs
of the "wish you were here" variety, and should inspire
and complement designs for regeneration. The film industry has
long recognised this aspect.
Hopefully, the result of this Inquiry will confirm
the future safety of truly historic buildings and spaces. That
does not obviate the essential need to make sure of the competence
of listing standards and procedures, to ensure that safeguarded
properties fully merit the subsequent implications for maintenance,
use, and the hurdle to wider rebuild opportunities. These relatively
few designated national Historic Treasures may merit having up
to total national security of finance to guarantee their future,
particularly if no long term suitable future use is practicable.
Human errors and differing points of view in
differing location and time scales, are some of the variables
to be expected in the somewhat emotive area of listing historic
buildings. What must be recognised is that it would have been,
and still is, impracticable to try to fossilise the buildings
and spaces of Britain at any one point in our history. Many, perhaps
most, towns in Britain, have a very extended settlement history.
For example, under York can be seen evidence of both Viking and
Roman occupation both of which, even in today's climate of conservation,
could not totally have been preserved. On the other hand it would
be proper to give priority where a particular property has a unique
local significance sometimes described as the "last remaining
example of . . ."
Historic Buildings and Public Spaces contribute
to, and should be essential elements in schemes for urban regeneration.
But the system and responsible participants need to be of top
line quality, fully aware of the long term constraints of history
in an ever changing and evolving world, where neither the head
nor the heart can always be absolutely correct at all times.
In recent decades, media reports nationwide
have been mercifully free of examples of environmental insensitivity
on the scale that attracted the description of Any town Any Where.
Perhaps this could indicate the relative priority to be accorded
to overall environmental quality, compared with seeking perfection
in any one aspect.
Current practitioners will no doubt elaborate
on the detailed queries in this Inquiry.
7 June 2002
| 
