1-13 St Paul Street, Bristol
Royal Aircraft Establishment, Farnborough
General Market, Smithfield, London
Former Teacher Training College, Clarence Street, Liverpool
Casework News, April 1999
Casework News, February 1999
113-119 Borough Rd & 125-132 London Rd, (St George's Circus), Southwark, London
Now dilapidated these late Georgian buildings are all that remain of a grand scheme initially designed for the Corporation of London by George Dance Jr in the 1770s. The Circus and its arterial roads were laid out on lands given to the City for the upkeep of London Bridge and were developed following the completion of Blackfriars Bridge in 1769.
Although Dance was responsible for the planning, the surviving buildings were actually deigned by his successor as the City Surveyor, William Montague. The buildings, including the Duke of Clarence pub on the Circus, were erected from c.1820-1828 and though undeniably modest they are believed to be largely as built above the ground floor. There have been a number of attempts to get them listed, but so far without success - they have been deemed to be of insufficient group interest despite there history and to be insufficiently complete. We, and many others, would beg to differ.
Though some have been virtually derelict for many years, the houses have only recently come under direct threat of demolition. They are now owned by the South Bank University, which has been drawing up plans with architects BDP to demolish them and replace them with new lecture, library and sporting facilities. These proposals have greatly alarmed both SAVE and the Georgian Group and we have sought an urgent meeting with Southwark Borough Council. Clearly these are not buildings of outstanding quality but they are honest, basically intact and the only survivors of an important bit of Georgian town planning which still defines the layout of Southwark today. Moreover, they clearly have a market value, even despite their current condition, because of their excellent central location.
Southwark has recently put back the original 1771 obelisk at the centre of the Circus, yet it seems prepared to let the remaining Georgian buildings around it be pulled down. Meanwhile it is attracting great praise for its ambitious redevelopment plans for the Elephant and Castle just down the road. We are determined to persuade it that regeneration must mean not only such massive redevelopment but also, and hand in hand, the more modest reuse of honest historic buildings such as these.
Return to the top of the page
You may recognise this terrace of Georgian houses from our buildings at risk register. 1-13 St Paul Street have been at risk for well over a decade and are in a state of acute disrepair. Now it seems that their fate has been sealed in a manner which is, sadly, typical of Bristol's attitude towards conservation.
These fine buildings are about to be gutted so that new flats can be inserted behind their facades. The development of this site will undoubtedly be good for the street as a whole, but SAVE and the Georgian Group objected to the planning application on the grounds that there was no evidence to support the need for facadism. Section 3.17 of PPG15 (Planning Policy Guidance: Planning and the Historic Environment - the conservation bible) states that consent should not be given for 'the total or substantial demolition of any listed building without clear and convincing evidence that all reasonable efforts have been made to sustain existing uses or to find viable new uses, and these efforts have failed'. We were far from convinced that every effort had been made to save the buildings in the past and because the applicant's engineers report not only failed to explain why such drastic action was structurally necessary but also contained such errors as to call into doubt the engineers experience with historic buildings. SAVE felt that this had quite clearly not been demonstrated.
Then, at the last moment, the Spitalfields Trust - saviour of dozens of Georgian houses in East London - stepped forward and offered to buy the buildings at a price reflecting their condition, repair them and bring them back into use in their entirety. Tragically, the Trust's intervention came too late and failed to convince the City Council that it would indeed restore the buildings. SAVE called for consideration of the applications to be deferred to allow the Trust time to submit alternative plans, but the council dismissed this and approved the applications.
SAVE understands the council's anxiety to see the blight caused by the dereliction of these buildings removed and agrees that the reuse of the buildings is a high priority for the successful regeneration of the whole area. We also understand that the Spitalfields Trust's offer came at the very last minute. However, the approved scheme can hardly be said to conserve the buildings (rather, little more than two walls) and, given that the buildings had been rotting for over a decade, granting the Trust just a few more months to produce a scheme was surely not an awful lot to ask to save a lovely terrace.
Instead, yet more of Bristol's irreplaceable Georgian inheritance will be reduced to banal facadism.
Slough Estates has recently acquired 180 acres of the RAE site at the Farnborough airfield in Hampshire from the MoD. Amongst this land is 4 acres that form the historic core of the site and constitute one of the most remarkable monuments to British scientific and engineering achievement anywhere.
From the establishment of the Balloon School in 1892, Farnborough has played a central role in the development aircraft in the UK, developing technology like arrestor wires for aircraft carriers and liquid cooled flying suits used in the Apollo moon missions, that led the world. In recognition of this many of the key structures have been listed, including the stupendous 24ft wind tunnel dating from 1935 and the massive concrete and steel Transonic wind tunnel (though most were down-graded by the Government, anxious no doubt not to damage receipts from the sale of the site). A volunteer group, the Farnborough Air Sciences Trust (FAST) has heroically saved for the nation an extraordinary collection of thousands of models, documents, prototype equipment, films etc. (including, for example, over 200 experimental flying suites). Many were literally salvaged from skips - the MoD appeared to have little interest in them, despite their obvious and remarkable historical importance. FAST has also produced detailed and costed proposals for the restoration and public opening of the main historic buildings to tell the history of scientific achievement on the site, exhibit the artefacts and inspire a new generation to go into science and take up a career in technology. These are entirely feasible proposals and would undoubtedly create a unique and fascinating attraction. However, for them to be realised the new landlord is going to have to take an interest, and so far Slough has shown a marked reluctance to discuss the future of the listed buildings, despite the added value the FAST ideas would bring to its development. Admittedly, it has yet to submit planning applications, but at the very least its indicative phasing for the massive site indicates that the historic core would not be developed for possibly a decade. What condition would the buildings be in by then? SAVE is committed to working with FAST to get all interested parties around a table to thrash out a future for this remarkable site.
There has been a market at Smithfield ("smoothfield"), just north of the City of London, for nine centuries. In the nineteenth century a public outcry about the conditions of the livestock market and its associated trades led to its removal to Highbury Fields and Sir Horace Jones, architect and surveyor to the City, won a competition to build a complex of four market buildings for the selling of meat, poultry, fish and other produce on the site. The Poultry Market was bombed during the war, but the Meat Market is listed Grade II and has recently been the subject of a £70m refurbishment designed to meet modern hygiene standards and ensure that Smithfield remains London's main meat market for the foreseeable future.
With the completion of this refurbishment the two surviving Jones buildings, the General Market and the Annex Market, are surplus to requirements. They are also unlisted, though they are typically attractive, well built and well detailed civic buildings of the 1880s. In particular the General Market has a fine glazed market hall, with a central dome. Rumours about their future are rife because the Corporation of London, their owners, are notoriously secretive, and the site is undoubtedly worth an absolute fortune as one of the few development opportunities in the City offering large unhindered floorplates.
However, SAVE is opposed to any such redevelopment. The buildings are attractive in their own right and important as part of the largest and most historic market complex in the country. We have applied for them to be spot listed and expect a decision soon. The population of the City, Smithfield and nearby Clerkenwell is expanding rapidly, whilst more and more businesses are locating in the area. The General and Annex Market buildings could fulfil the role that Spitalfield market currently occupies in the East of the city, as a public focus for life in the area, filled with cafes, shops, restaurants, offices and workshops and market stalls once more. That would offer a far more humane, balanced and vital solution than yet another corporate monolith.
SAVE's alternative scheme by Kevin Shield
When SAVE went to the High Court over the former Clarence Street Pupil Teacher College in Liverpool and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport was ordered to reconsider his decision not to list the building it seemed we had achieved a major coup. It was to turn out that we had won the battle but lost the war.
The College was built in 1897 in free Dutch renaissance style to the designs of Thomas Mellard Reade, architect to the Liverpool School Board. Apart from being possibly unique as a purpose built pupil teacher college, the building was robust and handsome with a scarcely altered interior and many good decorative features. Sadly this was not enough to save it.
The plight of the building was brought to SAVE's attention by Florence Gerston of "Save Our City" who attempted to get the building spot listed when she learnt of the application to demolish the building. The site was owned by the Liverpool Community College which wanted to replace the Victorian building and its less attractive 1960s neighbour with a new purpose built block, whose design was heavily criticised.
Both English Heritage and the Victorian Society recommended that the building be listed. The English Heritage inspector described it as "nationally significant", "clearly listable" and "a most remarkable building of very fine architectural quality and also great historic interest". However, the Secretary of State refused to list it stating simply that it did "not meet the listing criteria".
Permission for demolition was granted by Liverpool City Council and Florence Gerston turned to SAVE for help. Recalling a similar case involving the Jubilee Hall, Covent Garden in 1983, we instructed our lawyers, Gouldens, to seek Judicial Review of the Minister's decision. However scaffolding had already been erected and, unwilling to risk a potentially crippling injunction, we had to watch as attractive tiles and doors were stripped from the building.
Then our luck seemed to change. The Secretary of State submitted without contest to the judgement of the Honourable Mr Justice Scott Baker that "the decision of the Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport…. be quashed on the grounds that the Secretary of State was under a duty to give reasons for his decision and failed to do so". This was an unprecedented victory. As all the evidence pointed unequivocally towards listing it meant that the Department had to give reasons for not listing the building.
An English Heritage inspector was immediately dispatched to make another assessment of the building. Again the recommendation for listing was unequivocal, stating that despite the loss of details, "the special architectural interest of the building . .[is] . . undiminished . . . in addition, the special historical significance of the building remains unaltered".
Demolition was halted and all interested parties were given two weeks to make their representations. The two weeks were extended again and again whilst the College commissioned Donald Insall Associates to carry out an independent assessment of the architectural value of the building. This report was far from dismissive about the quality of the building and even went as far as remarking that it was "surprising that the building was not listed". However, the Minister again refused to list it though this time fulfilling the requirements of the High Court by giving reasons, albeit highly flawed and inadequate, for his decision.
It was clear that chances for the building were now running out. With the aid of local architectural graduate Kevin Shield, SAVE produced a scheme demonstrating how the existing building could be adapted with a dynamic extension to fulfil the colleges requirements. The college replied that "time is of an essence and the delay we have suffered because of SAVE's intervention has not helped... the Clarence Street project is already over budget and behind schedule...and our ability to make modifications to our current plans is therefore dependent on costs and time". The building was demolished.
What is saddest about this case was that demolition was allowed in the first place. Despite the building's unlisted status it was undoubtedly of considerable merit and made a positive contribution to the street as a whole. But, without listed status the architectural merit and historical significance of the building was effectively ignored and in the end this is perhaps equally scandalous was the decision by the Minister not to list it. The legislation is explicit that listing decisions should be made solely on the basis of the historical and architectural merit of the building in question. In this case, the weight of expert opinion was such that the Minister could not have based his decision on these statutory criteria.
The building may now be lost but the case has provided the conservation world with some ammunition. The judgement of the High Court that the Minister has to give reasons for his decision not to list a builidng could in future lead to greater transparency in the listing process.