Listed Building consent and planning

[gtr-gaz]

We are seriously looking at buying a Grade 2 listed cottage needing renovation and would value any advice from people who have carried out any works to similar properties.

I know it's not a good time to buy but, if you factor in prices to drop further, then why not?

I have been in contact with the local conservation officer by email. He has been very helpful to date and has agreed to meet us on site later next week but, I would like to know roughly what I need to ask!

They have no problems with us demolishing the old conservatory and building something "more sympathetic", or converting the Out buildings into living space.
Our problem is the main house. We will not be able to alter it much. As with most old properties the 3 bedrooms lead from one to the other, which is not how people live these days.

Any suggestions?

Ta.

[Benny Saltstein]

Our family gaff is a grade 2 listed property in a conservation area and it sounds like you're doing all the right things by running your plans past the local conservation officer.

Any major works have to get listed buildings consent, and for internal modifications I think it is required where you're wanting to change the core structure of the house, ie. removing an internal wall but not replacing the bathroom suite.

The conservation officer's main interest is in preserving the architectural heritage of the area and generally their main concern is with the external appearance of a property. Internally, they usually want to ensure that any special features of interest are preserved although they can be moved to a different location.

Our planning office are happy for us to remove an internal (non load bearing) wall but we must retain the timber frame behind the plaster. It kind of defeated the object of removing the wall but you get the idea.

I think its in everyone's interest that you work together and the dialogue we've had has been sympathetic. I certainly wouldn't be put off buying a listed building although you should go in with your eyes open regarding costs of maintenance and upkeep.

[gtr-gaz]

Thanks for your input.
I'm looking forward to the challenge

I shall go along with whatever they suggest. As you rightly said, it is also in their interest that the property is renovated. At present it is just a mess.

I'm also aware that costs will be at least double that of a normal house!

[Slagathore]

Sounds interesting!

Email Channel4 and get 'em to film it for Grand Designs I saw one the other day that said to conctact them if you're planning your own grand design.

[Pupp]

Whoah... ANY changes affecting the fabric, character or setting of a listed building require listed building consent, whether inside or out. Like for like repairs using matching materials and methods are permitted but tread carefully as unauthorised work is a criminal offence (ie no modern cementious plaster on horsehair walls etc). Always good practice to consult with the conservation officers of the council and get them to ok stuff in writing.

In respect of bathroom suites etc, I have just this week served a listed building enforcement notice on someone for installing an ensuite (amongst other things)... the waste pipe install involved holes in floorboards and plaster/lath ceilings and removal of the ensuite is formally required along with making good of the 'damage'.

[jules_s]

Pupp said:

In respect of bathroom suites etc, I have just this week served a listed building enforcement notice on someone for installing an ensuite (amongst other things)... the waste pipe install involved holes in floorboards and plaster/lath ceilings and removal of the ensuite is formally required along with making good of the 'damage'.

What was the buildings listing though?

[Pupp]

jules_s said:

Pupp said:

In respect of bathroom suites etc, I have just this week served a listed building enforcement notice on someone for installing an ensuite (amongst other things)... the waste pipe install involved holes in floorboards and plaster/lath ceilings and removal of the ensuite is formally required along with making good of the 'damage'.

What was the buildings listing though?

It doesn't matter. The list only includes those details that were apparent at the time the listing was compiled. 'Though you would hope all significant features are noted and recorded, they aren't necessarily and it's not unusual for only external features to be mentioned because access inside could not be obtained by the listing officer.

Section 7 of the relevant Act states 'no person shall execute or cause to be executed any works for the demolition of a listed building or for its alteration or extension in any manner which would affect its character as a building of special architectural or historic interest, unless the works are authorised...'; it doesn't reference those features actually included in the list and the entirety of the building, to its curtilege, is protected. Obviously. affecting its character...' can be a subjective judgment but this is a very technical area and it just isn't worth taking a flier as fines are potentially unlimited and imprisonment is possible.

[alc]

Our property is Grade 2 listed - was once a working saw mill and grain mill - it was then developed into a hotel and is now self-contained cottages! My understanding of what's happened here is that they will agree to almost anything in the interior but want the outside to remain sympathetic. We haven't had any problems except for delays because you have to get ordinary planning permission first, then Listed Building permission.

We had to buy a particular kind of slate when we re-roofed one building. Replacement windows have to be all the same and painted white. We applied to have PVC windows in the indoor swimming pool as wooden ones were rotting, and they agreed, as long as we had them specially made to look like the originals. Funnily enough, the main problem we had was when we applied to put a flagpole up - they said definitely not, until we found an old photo showing a flagpole!

We deal with just one Listed Building officer - I guess a lot depends on who you get and if he's a Jobsworth! Good luck with yours if you go ahead!

[wiffmaster]

My parents had a Grade II listed house for 17 years. They said they would never, ever own one again under any circumstances. Complete hassle to get permission for anything (burglar alarm, extension, garage, new windows, etc). The council instantly claim any plans are "not in keeping with the surrounding area" despite all of the plans being well thought out and very sympathetically done with the help of English Heritage.

If the jobsworth on the Council didn't want you to have something (and invariably jealousy and small mindedness meant they didn't) then 'listed building' was the excuse.

Complete hassle to change anything, extremely high maintenance (both in terms of time and money), cost a fortune to heat (no double glazing allowed) and countless other problems. We sold a couple of years ago and the guy who bought off us has just sold again (I imagine taking at least a £250k hit) as it was too much work for him. Don't be seduced by the character and charm; I now see them as complete money pits with which I want nothing to do with...

...there, that should add some balance to the comments so far!

Edited by wiffmaster on Friday 16th January 21:29

[skeggysteve]

gtr-gaz,

We live in a Grade 2 listed house and it would appear that there is very little real control over what you do unless you either tell the LA about it our they notice the changes.

O/T Pupp you will have mail.

[jules_s]

The problem here is that conservation officers are indeed rather anal/jobsworth, and giving a little power to somebody who is fervent in their beliefs is (IMO) a very bad thing.

As Pupp said earlier, it is now apparent he has near unending powers to dictate what you do with your property. I'm almost happy with that in terms of external materials/detailing, but when that ideal is forced on a property owner in his/her choice of internal alterations in a grade II listed building I lose the will to live.

I'll give you a couple of many examples:

You have a listed building with lead pipework supplying the water to it, the water authority insist you replace the pipework with plastics...the conservation people insist that every flagstone outside the place are listed. So no digging them up without consent/sourcing new flagstones

Another classic was re-roofing a listed barn with a certain roofing material, then to be told that a curtilaged building wouldn't be accepted with the same material.

I have to say I don't agree with people like Pupp.

[Pupp]

jules_s said:

I have to say I don't agree with people like Pupp.

Well, there's a thing... tell you what, lets slap a placcie conservatory on every 16th Century building that remains, plaster up timber framed walls so they no longer breathe and rot in 5 years like they haven't in 300, cover all thatches in sculpted pheasants made out of reed where there used to be plain straw with butts and ears randomly aligned, and when you're left with a pastiche of what was there lets discuss it again.

I cited an example to try and help someone avoid having problems and I didn't make the rules (but I do agree with them having seen some of the ignorant vanadlism that's done to our common heritage)

[wiffmaster]

Pupp said:

jules_s said:

I have to say I don't agree with people like Pupp.

Well, there's a thing... tell you what, lets slap a placcie conservatory on every 16th Century building that remains, plaster up timber framed walls so they no longer breathe and rot in 5 years like they haven't in 300, cover all thatches in sculpted pheasants made out of reed where there used to be plain straw with butts and ears randomly aligned, and when you're left with a pastiche of what was there lets discuss it again.

I cited an example to try and help someone avoid having problems and I didn't make the rules (but I do agree with them having seen some of the ignorant vanadlism that's done to our common heritage)

I for one agree with you on this point; there should be controls and people shouldn't be able to ruin historical buildings. But in our experience, most people we dealt with who were given 'the power' weren't interested in maintaining the character of the building - they just like having a stupid amount of power and control.

You know that when English Heritage disagrees with certain council decisions, that those decisions haven't been made for the right reasons. We restored out house 'money not object' (even though it was an object at the time) and some of the hoops we had to jump through were ridiculous and it was a constant uphill battle. There needs to be a compromise between maintaining character and adapting to 21st century living and most councils are failing to strike this balance. I'm not even talking about real 'character changing' stuff - even a Sky dish and burglar alarm were a battle to get permission for, despite the fact they were only visible from our own property and could be removed in minutes.

To the OP: As for costs, take whatever you would expect to spend on a normal house, and allow at least double. An example; when re-roofing we had to source 16th century roof tiles. Whilst I agree with their decision in this case, it proves bloody expensive. It's all like that - rotting windows must be replaced with individually tailored, custom built units. If you want an extension you have to source original style bricks. Go into it with your eyes open and deep pockets...

Edited by wiffmaster on Friday 16th January 23:16

[Pupp]

wiffmaster said:

Pupp said:

jules_s said:

I have to say I don't agree with people like Pupp.

Well, there's a thing... tell you what, lets slap a placcie conservatory on every 16th Century building that remains, plaster up timber framed walls so they no longer breathe and rot in 5 years like they haven't in 300, cover all thatches in sculpted pheasants made out of reed where there used to be plain straw with butts and ears randomly aligned, and when you're left with a pastiche of what was there lets discuss it again.

I cited an example to try and help someone avoid having problems and I didn't make the rules (but I do agree with them having seen some of the ignorant vanadlism that's done to our common heritage)

I for one agree with you on this point; there should be controls and people shouldn't be able to ruin historical buildings. But in our experience, most people in power aren't interested in maintaining the character of the building - they just like having a stupid amount of power and control. You know that when English Heritage disagrees with certain council decisions, that those decisions haven't been made for the right reasons. We restored out house 'money not object' (even though it was an object at the time) and some of the hoops we had to jump through were ridiculous. There needs to be a compromise between maintaining character and adapting to 21st century living and most councils are failing to strike this balance. I'm not even talking about real 'character changing' stuff - even a Sky dish and burglar alarm are a battle to get permission for.

To the OP: As for costs, take whatever you would expect to spend on a normal house, and allow at least double. An example; when re-roofing we had to source 16th century roof tiles. Whilst I agree with their decision in this case, it proves bloody expensive. It's all like that - rotting windows must be replaced with individually tailored, custom built units. If you want an extension you have to source original style bricks. Go into it with your eyes open and deep pockets...

Like I mentioned earlier, an awful lot of this stuff is subjective and turns on the judgment of individuals. I've certainly come across differences between officers of EH and councils, but when they're similarly qualified/experienced it's a difficult one to balance. Equally, and thatching is a great example of this, there's as many opinions (it often seems) of 'correct' methodology as there are practioners of the particular trade concerned. It is an imperfect system and I have immense sympathy for owners who are simply trying to do the right thing in most cases, but there is no shortage of chancers and who either just don't care or can't be bothered to find out and do it anyway. Once it's gone, it's lost...

[Darkslider]

How do you find out if a building is listed or not? Does any building over a certain age qualify or does it depend on the area and surroundings?

[Pupp]

Darkslider said:

How do you find out if a building is listed or not? Does any building over a certain age qualify or does it depend on the area and surroundings?

Rule of thumb is anything pre 1700, and most pre 1845 are likely to be listed if anything like in their original state, after that it's on architectural/historical merit with post 1945 buildings being most rigourously assessed for exceptional grounds. The local planning authority keeps records and will confirm (typically your district council, or London Borough etc)

[Darkslider]

Pupp said:

Darkslider said:

How do you find out if a building is listed or not? Does any building over a certain age qualify or does it depend on the area and surroundings?

Rule of thumb is anything pre 1700, and most pre 1845 are likely to be listed if anything like in their original state, after that it's on architectural/historical merit with post 1945 buildings being most rigourously assessed for exceptional grounds. The local planning authority keeps records and will confirm (typically your district council, or London Borough etc)

So if your building is most certainly pre 1700 without a doubt, yet there's no record of it anywhere then you're not subject to some of these frankly, daft rules?

[Pupp]

Darkslider said:

Pupp said:

Darkslider said:

How do you find out if a building is listed or not? Does any building over a certain age qualify or does it depend on the area and surroundings?

Rule of thumb is anything pre 1700, and most pre 1845 are likely to be listed if anything like in their original state, after that it's on architectural/historical merit with post 1945 buildings being most rigourously assessed for exceptional grounds. The local planning authority keeps records and will confirm (typically your district council, or London Borough etc)

So if your building is most certainly pre 1700 without a doubt, yet there's no record of it anywhere then you're not subject to some of these frankly, daft rules?

If it's not on the list then it's not listed; and your local planning authority will be able to confim. Of course, it might be capable of being brought on to the list now if of sufficient merit/age etc...

It might also be in a conservation area with another set or rules!

[gtr-gaz]

Well, had a very fruitful meeting with the senoir conservation officer on site this morning. The fact he drives a rather tasty Subaru Impreza was a good start!!

It looks like we can renovate it pretty much as planned, which is a relief.
There are certain things which may present a slight problem but, nothing major.

However, damp proofing the walls and floors is a no-no according to him. Apparently, if the walls are allowed to breathe naturally, which means removing all the old wallpaper etc, then they should not be damp Hmmm, we'll have to suck that one and see!

So, thanks for all your imput people. We are going ahead with the purchase as planned.

ETA The cottage was built around 1850 which, in conservation terms is almost new build!

Edited by gtr-gaz on Wednesday 21st January 15:51

[phillvr6]

Apologies for the hijack but here goes. We've put an offer in on a grade 2 listed house. It was built in the 70s off the back of a farm house which must date from the 1700's.

Its effectively a modern brick building but as it is attached to the old farmhouse its still listed.

Is there anything I need to be aware of?

Thanks,

Phill