Memorandum by Dr Tanya Spilsbury (HIS
30)
"THE SUSTAINABLE RE-USE OF LISTED BUILDINGS
IN THE CONTEXT OF URBAN REGENERATION"
1. SUMMARY OF
RESEARCH FINDINGS
The main findings of the research are:
Sustainable development and conservation
The concept of sustainable conservation is integrated
at a strategic and policy level but has not fully impacted ways
of working at the project level. Conservation is still viewed
by developers and some departments in local authorities as an
obstacle to the progress of urban development. Regeneration, mixed
use development and conservation policies can be mutually supportive
but, in practice, local authorities prioritise one policy over
the others.
Understanding of the extent of the Buildings at
Risk issue
Generally, local authorities have a poor understanding
of the problem of Buildings at Risk ("BARs") (ie those
listed buildings with recognised acute problems of re-use and
repair). They see BARs registers as a chore not as a tool. The
tendency is to focus on individual buildings rather than a BARs
strategy. The result is a piecemeal, fire-fighting approach to
conservation rather than a co-ordinated, pro-active approach.
Causes of BARs and obstacles to their re-use
The main causes of a listed building falling
at risk are:
— the obsolescence of the building
relative to its current or former use; and
— the costs of repair and re-use relative
to new build costs which deter owner action.
Local authorities believe that the main obstacles
to re-use are:
— breaking the apathy or stalemate
of the owner's attitude to the property; and
— subsidising the costs of repairs.
The private sector believe that the main obstacles
to re-use are:
— the process of negotiating conservation
requirements with the local authority and English Heritage;
— the costs of repairs for which the
current owner/developer might not be accountable and yet is now
responsible (similar to the costs incurred when taking on contaminated
land); and
— the lack of incentives to compensate
the owners/developers for the costs of conservation.
Maintenance support
The current system is focused on the repair
of BARs rather than the maintenance that would prevent them from
falling at risk in the first place.
Planning authority support for owners/developers
The current planning process fails to account
for the private costs of conservation relative to the social benefits.
The research reveals that owners/developers would like local authorities
to compensate them for the costs of conservation projects in appreciation
of the social benefits that result from conservation.
In terms of conservation funding, there have
been the following problems:
— uncertainty of sources of funding;
— gaps in funding (such as for Grade
II properties and maintenance works as opposed to repairs);
— conflicts with other policies (including
the European Community's ruling on the legality of Partnership
Investment Programme funding ("PIP"), and CPO costs
conflicting with other funding requirements of the councils);
and
— delays over introducing other forms
of funding such as Urban Regeneration Companies ("URCs").
In terms of conservation grants, the Conservation
Area Partnership ("CAP") scheme (and its replacement
Heritage Economic Regeneration Scheme ("HERS")) has
had measurable success in achieving the conservation of historic
buildings and the regeneration of surrounding areas. These types
of schemes do remove the barrier to development of having unaccountable
repair costs from former owners.
In terms of regeneration grants and their impact
on conservation, Single Regeneration Budget ("SRB")
grants have supported the environment for conservation but have
not usually directly targeted conservation projects.
Use of statutory powers
Local authorities are not making use of their
statutory powers to force action by owners to repair and re-use
buildings at risk. The powers would be used more by the authorities
if they could be reassured that they would not be left to foot
the bill at the end of the enforcement process.
Demand-side policies
There is too little understanding of the re-use
potential of listed buildings in terms of the demand for historic
properties and the suitability of listed buildings to new uses.
Demand changes have stimulated interest in conservation projects
in all three case study cities.
Integration of conservation and urban regeneration
policies
The link between conservation and urban regeneration
at the national policy level is not mirrored at the local authority
level. The integration of conservation and urban regeneration
has started at policy level only in a minority of authorities,
and even in these authorities, there is not always an integrated
approach in practice. Conflicts of interest arise between the
conservation and regeneration officers in local authorities.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE
RESEARCH
The section below discusses proposals for further
research or policy-making. The proposals respond to the findings
as summarised above.
Recommendation 1: Widen the understanding of the
role of conservation in sustainable development
English Heritage, the Department for Transport,
Local Government and the Regions ("DTLR") and the local
authorities need to undertake further work to publicise the benefits
of conservation and the role it can play in urban regeneration
and sustainable development.
Recommendation 2: Improve the availability of
information about BARs
BARs registers
The type, ease of updating and usefulness of
BARs registers need to be re-assessed. They need to be made into
working tools, perhaps by being integrated with Conservation Officers'
contact management systems.
Marketing
There is a need to develop automatic processes
by which local authorities follow up an owner's failure to act
to ensure the maintenance of a listed building or link marketing
activities with Compulsory Purchase Order ("CPO") possibilities
(and back-to-back deals with potential new owners).
Recommendation 3: Support repair works but re-focus
system on maintenance issues
The single most effective action that could
be implemented to reduce the numbers of Buildings at Risk would
be to introduce a maintenance-focused system of advice and funding.
English Heritage has not yet committed financial resources for
the set-up of such a system (although it has shown cautious interest
and support). Instead, they have suggested a private sector approach.
Further commitment from English Heritage is expected as evidence
is gathered to demonstrate the potential repair grants savings
to English Heritage in the future if a maintenance-focused system
was introduced.
The proposal to mirror the Dutch Monumentenwacht
system is being promoted by Maintain our Heritage ("Maintain"),
a pressure group set up by the University of the West of England,
SAVE Britain's Heritage and various individuals (SAVE's "Grand
ideas for the nation's heritage"). The Monumentenwacht
scheme was established in 1973. It encourages owners to undertake
regular maintenance to prevent decay: in return for a small annual
subscription and low hourly fees, the owner receives an initial
survey visit from a builder or surveyor who gives advice on preventative
maintenance and necessary repairs. They will also perform small
acts of maintenance while they are surveying the property, such
as clearing leaves from drainpipes. The subscription covers an
annual re-inspection, first-aid repairs and any necessary revisions
to the maintenance plan (Dann & Worthing, 1998, p.41).
The advantage of regular maintenance is that,
even if a building then became vacant, the repair bill would not
be so prohibitive as to deter potential purchasers and the delay
in its re-use would be minimised.
English Heritage could devise a low rate loan system
for listed building owners to cover maintenance works and feasibility
studies to be repaid on re-use (similar to the Architectural Heritage
Fund's loan scheme for Building Preservation Trusts).
Recommendation 4: Design policies and undertake
research to address market and use issues
A use to suit the building
Conservation policy needs to re-focus on demand
issues to achieve re-use. In cases where the former or original
use is no longer in demand, the analysis of the type of function
that occurred in a building is useful in highlighting the types
of new uses that might be appropriate. However, there is no point
finding a use that will work at the time if it is not going to
be sustainable and contribute to the future maintenance of the
building.
To encourage re-use, publications of information
about the types and means of re-use are required. Some publications
exist (Latham, 2000) but locally targeted publications
are also needed to target people and organisations who are interested
in local buildings: this means pro-active marketing by the local
authority.
Clear planning strategy for the area
Re-use of historic buildings will be more sustainable
if the support services and infrastructure for the new use are
in place: this needs to be the aim of new funding schemes and
urban policies. The local authority also needs to show commitment
to the regeneration of an area by resolving blight issues and
façade retention conflicts. Requirements regarding the
resolution of any conflicts of uses in mixed use developments
need to be clarified.
Sustainable conservation in the context of successful
urban regeneration will progress more smoothly if there is a consistent
approach between the officers in the conservation and regeneration
teams. A clear vision will clarify to developers what is appropriate
for schemes in the area and also demonstrates commitment from
the Council to the area's future.
A use to suit the area
Re-use is more likely if the new use suits the
area. Local authorities need to produce use proposals for different
areas to clarify use issues for potential schemes.
Right time
One of the key factors for achieving the right
new use for a listed building is timing. Sometimes, it may be
appropriate to "mothball" a building that is suitable
for a certain use until the time for that new use arrives.
Alternatively, short term uses for a property
can be accommodated with enough flexibility to ensure that conversion
to a more permanent new use at a later date is not prevented by
being either too difficult from a construction point of view or
too costly.
Right person
Often the inspiration for finding the right
use for a building at the right time comes from an individual
with entrepreneurial flair, a passion for ensuring the survival
of the building and a belief in its future. If an owner fails
to act to conserve a listed building, statutory processes can
be used to transfer the ownership of the building to an active
and financially able owner.
Recommendation 5: Make local authorities more
pro-active and supportive of conservation
Planning support and funding strategy
The key to successful conservation is finding
the right balance between conservation and other benefits and
costs. To assess the impact of supportive conservation policies,
further research is required to:
— measure defined social costs and
benefits of the re-use of historic buildings;
— assess different energy uses in historic
buildings and new developments, particularly in the construction
and operation stages; and
— measure the life cycle costs of historic
buildings relative to new developments.
Planning authority acknowledgement of the private
costs and social benefits of conservation does not have to be
in the form of direct funds but could take the form of:
— more flexible planning gain;
— more flexible conservation requirements;
— more relaxed use restrictions; and
— fast-track processing of Listed Building
Consent applications.
The key funding issues are to develop a clear
funding structure; provide a one-stop shop for funding sources
and information; and, in the long term, re-focus on maintenance
assistance rather than repairs.
Ownership problems & local authorities' use
of statutory powers
Local authorities need to use their statutory
powers to encourage action by the existing owners of Buildings
at Risk or promote the sale of the properties to new owners.
3. SPECIFIC TASKS
FOR DIFFERENT
ORGANISATIONS TO
IMPLEMENT THE
POLICY AND
PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS
This section sets out the specific tasks that
need to be undertaken by different organisations to implement
the policy and practice recommendations of the research. The tasks
are listed under each of the five broad recommendations.
Widen the understanding of the role of conservation
in sustainable development
DTLR, English Heritage, Commission for Architecture
and the Built Environment ("CABE"): Publicise the benefits
of conservation and the role it can play in urban regeneration
and sustainable development. Expand joint initiatives.
DTLR: Integrate sustainable development and
conservation issues into the implementation proposals of the Urban
White Paper.
Local authorities: Integrate conservation and
regeneration staff in area-based planning teams or Urban Regeneration
Companies.
Improve the availability of information about
BARs
English Heritage: Support the automation of
information about BARs on a locally editable and nationally accessible
database.
Local authorities: Integrate the Buildings at
Risk register process with Conservation Officers' contact management
systems.
Local authorities: Introduce automatic publicity
processes by which local authorities follow up an owner's failure
to act to ensure the maintenance of a listed building and link
marketing activities to potential new owners with CPO possibilities.
Support repair works but re-focus system on maintenance
issues
National government, English Heritage: Support
Maintain our Heritage's initiative to introduce a maintenance-focused
system of advice and funding based on the Dutch Monumentenwacht
system.
English Heritage, Architectural Heritage Fund:
Extend low rate loan system to non-charity listed building owners.
Research and policy development to address market
& use issues
Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors ("RICS"):
Further research is required to measure defined costs and benefits
and also to assess life cycle social costs and benefits in order
to account for the long and short term effects of alternatives
to conservation.
English Heritage, RICS: Produce information
about the types and means of re-use of different types of historic
buildings.
English Heritage, Local authorities: Produce
locally targeted publications that target people and organisations
who are interested in local buildings.
Local authorities: Produce use proposals for
different areas to clarify use issues for potential schemes.
Local authorities: Where it is appropriate,
"mothball" a building until the time for a new suitable
use arrives or investigate temporary use proposals to facilitate
maintenance in the short term.
Local authorities: Encourage uses that will
be sustainable and contribute to the future maintenance of the
building.
Local authorities: Introduce area plans to deal
with potential conflicts between new uses in mixed use areas.
National government: Introduce a system such
as Tax Incremental Financing to help local authorities to raise
cash for investment in local infrastructure and support services
and attract new uses to the area. Back such a scheme with other
urban policies such as Urban Priority Areas (as proposed in the
Urban Task Force report (1999)).
Make local authorities more pro-active and supportive
English Heritage, Regional Development Agencies
(RDAs): Clarify the funding sources for conservation and regeneration
projects.
Local authorities, English Heritage: Continue
with HERS grants scheme to remove the barrier to development of
having unaccountable repair costs from former owners.
Local authorities, RDAs: To ensure more success
in obtaining SRB funds for conservation work, define the reduction
of BARs or the re-use of listed buildings as a specific SRB objective.
Local authorities: Demonstrate local authority
commitment to an area by producing detailed conservation and regeneration
strategies; introducing targeted funding programmes; undertaking
physical activities, such as cleaning graffiti; and dealing with
market blight issues.
Local authorities: Decide a strategy for streets
where the retention of the façade of a property is desired
for the conservation of the building or the streetscape.
Local authorities: Use their statutory powers
to force action by recalcitrant owners.
National government: Underwrite expenditure
incurred by the local authority in carrying out their statutory
powers (in case it is irrecoverable from the owner). Back up CPO
procedures with a local or regional CPO fund to encourage local
authorities to use their statutory powers.
National government: Allow local authorities
to have a higher stake in URCs (currently limited to 20% by the
Local Government Act) to facilitate the progress of sites owned
by a local authority. Consider the issues of revenue funding as
well as capital funding in the set-up of the new Urban Regeneration
Companies proposed in the White Paper.
National government: Design funding schemes
for the purpose of public works, one-off repairs, maintenance
or complementary services/infrastructure.
National government: Change the VAT rates to
encourage maintenance and repairs of listed buildings.
Bibliography of references in this summary paper
Dann, Nigel & Worthing, Derek (1998): "How
to ensure conservation through good maintenance", in Chartered
Surveyor Monthly, March 1998, pp.40-41.
Latham, D. (2000): Creative re-use of buildings,
Volumes One and Two, Donhead Publishing Ltd., Shaftesbury.
SAVE Britain's Heritage (2000): Grand ideas
for the nation's heritage, SAVE Britain's Heritage, London
(published on the SAVE website: www.savebritainsheritage.org.uk).
Urban Task Force (1999): Towards an Urban
Renaissance: Final report of the Urban Task Force, chaired by
Lord Rogers of Riverside, E & FN Spon, London.
| 
