Listed Building Consent

[Nero]

I live in a flat in a Grade II listed building and have tried for over 2 years to replace 6 wooden sashwindows with new hardwood windows including double glazing. Several precedents exist in my flat and in the building. My application for Listed Building Consent, (LBC), was refused by my local Planning Authority and dismissed on appeal be the Planning Inspectorate as alleged historic fabric might be lost and the windows might be repairable. Repair quotations exceed that for replacement.

I believe that listed building legislation and LBC procedures need radical overhaul. What do others think?

 

[a twig]

I would like them to be more definitive and objective and less dependent on the whims of your local Conservation Officer, but I don’t have a problem with the general thrust of them to be honest.

Sash window repair is eminently DIYable as shown on many threads here so in your case that could be considered as an option?

 

[Flyfisher]

I live in a flat in a Grade II listed building and have tried for over 2 years to replace 6 wooden sashwindows with new hardwood windows including double glazing. Several precedents exist in my flat and in the building. My application for Listed Building Consent, (LBC), was refused by my local Planning Authority and dismissed on appeal be the Planning Inspectorate as alleged historic fabric might be lost and the windows might be repairable. Repair quotations exceed that for replacement.

I believe that listed building legislation and LBC procedures need radical overhaul. What do others think?

It would be interresting to know more about the precedents mentioned in the building. Are they directly replated to these windows?

When it comes to preserving historic fabric, repair costs are not really a consideration. This is understandable if you consider that, say, a large sash window might be completely rotten around its base and cill yet this only comprises, say, 10-20% of the window and the remainder is in good condition. Thus, repairing 10-20% of the window effectively preserves the remaining 80-90% of historic fabric instead of destroying 100% and replacing it with brand new, even if like-for-like. It's easy to put a cost on the repairs but not so easy to put a value on the historic fabric.

Even when a window genuinely needs complete replacement, some don't really lend themselves to DG, in particular those with narrow glazing bars, whereas other designs are more amenable. I've repaired and replaced a number of very different window designs in my house and was able to get LBC for DG in some windows but not in others, because of their narrow (18mm) glazing bars.

As for overhauling the listed building legislation, I'm sure we can all suggest things we'd like to see changed. The difficulty is finding things to change that everyone would agree on! Personally, I'd vote for zero-rated VAT on the repair and maintenance of listed buildings. We all appreciate that we're the custodians of our historic homes and we all know that maintaining them can be expensive, so it would be nice if the country could give us a bit of a helping hand along the way.

 

[malcolm]

If the windows are original or 100 years old I can see their point. Trying to preserve stuff like that is why they listed buildings in the first place. When the same rules apply to badly made modern replacement windows it can all seem a bit silly but you are more likely to be allowed to replace them with something of higher quality.

From an economical point of view I'm not listed but am very keen to preserve the few remaining original windows. I've got one window that is about 200 years old. Can't see any off the shelf replacement window lasting another 200 years.

 

[Nero]

Taking the points raised in order:

1. Legislation is replete with subjective terms like "Character", "Significance"etc., the interpretation of which is at the whims of Conservation Officers. I am 84 years old so my DIY days are long past. The refurbishment work is likely to be substantial.

2. There are precedents in my flat where 2 almost identical windows were replaced with new hardwood windows with double glazing. There are several similar precedents in the building. While the glazing bars are slim, 4/6/4 DG is possible.

3. There is no clear Historic Environment Record for my windows. At least one was replaced when the building was converted to flats in the 1990s.

4. I have difficulty in understanding the desire to preserve historic fabric, regardless of cost. Would this not be better done in a museum? What about Beyond Economic Repair?

5. My view is that buildings are listed in the public interest. The average member of the public will be most concerned with external appearance. That is what should be protected, at least for Grade II property .

6. I realise that there are different views on this. But what is clear is that the present regime has led to spiralling insurance and upkeep costs for listed property with no sign of any government help forthcoming.
This often leads to deterioration rather than conservation.

 

[Nero]

As mentioned, I've obtained several quotes for refurbishment of my windows but these often exceed the cost of replacement, (new hardwood with DG around £2K per window). If this is a reasonable DIY job, why are refurbishment quotes so costly? Perhaps someone could indicate a fair price for refurbishing an average sash window based on experience of time spent and materials required. It would also be helpful if anyone could suggest tradesmen in the Portsmouth area who might do the work at reasonable cost, including painting, glazing etc..

 

[Flyfisher]

DIY jobs usually trade time for money. Refurbishing windows (for example) is usually a fiddly and time-consuming job, whether done by a professional or a DIYer and time equals money when it comes to using a professional to do the work. Without seeing the windows in question it's pretty much impossible to say what would be a fair price for the work, but for a rough guide imagine doing the work yourself for, say, £250/day and estimate how long it would take. Then, if you want a fixed price, add whatever 'contingency' you think is reasonable to allow for the fact that the job might be more difficult or extensive than can be judged from an external assessment.

A careful and methodical DIYer would very likely be able to achieve the same end result as a good professional but, of course, they will likely take much longer, might need to invest in some specialist tools if they don't already have them and will also likely spend a fair bit of time researching what to do and how to do it. Taking all these things into account can make paying a professional better value for money than it might first appear, so much depends on how you value your own time and/or the satisfaction gained from DIY.

My experience over the past 15 years of my own project is that I've gained immense satisfaction from proving that I'm capable of learning and doing most jobs as well as a professional and I've also saved a great deal of money by doing things myself. I've also learned that I could not make a good living from the skills I've learned along the way because I'm too slow, so it all boils down to a trade-off between spending my time or spending money on a job and wel all have our own views on how to value the trade-offs involved. The good news, as far as our period properties are involved, is that it's the end result that really matters, not how much time spent on achieving that result (within reason!). Our properties have mostly been standing for 100s of years and are generally more forgiving about the speed of repairs than their occupants.

 

[Nero]

Thank you for your reply. I can only assume that quotations received for refurbishment are reasonable in terms of time spent and risk involved. Why then are my windows not deemed as BER? Because present legislation and Historic England advice require preservation of alleged historic fabric at any cost. I can only hope that the present review of the planning system and Select Committee work will bring some much needed common sense. The result of the present system is that I am left with draughty, rotting windows, adversely affecting the appearance of the building, my health and the company which would have replaced my windows.

 

[mardinor]

Bluntly, the purpose of listing is to protect our nation's built heritage from owners. The building come before your needs. Economics is secondary to preservation, which you must have known when buying a listed building?

 

[Nero]

Protecting the nation's heritage in my case has resulted in deterioration of the building as well as the other adverse effects. Another Grade II listed building adjacent to mine has been derelict for 20 years because of the same difficulty in complying with current LBC rules. These are not isolated examples. Buildings are listed in the public interest. What do you imagine the average member of the public would think? For Grade II property, they would be concerned with external appearance, not historic fabric, (often invisible or alleged). I have no difficulty with the present regime being rigidly applied to stately homes and major historic buildings. But for residential Grade II property, change is needed. Yes, I was aware of some of this when I purchased my flat but that does not mean I should not seek change. Everyone in my building feels the same. Why should ardent conservationists impose their views on us?

 

[a twig]

98% of UK property is not listed and fair chunk of those listed properties are non-residential so it’s hardly an oppressed majority you are referring to!

In all honesty given the nature of this community you probably won’t find an overly sympathetic ear - almost all of us will have sunk more money, time and effort than is entirely sensible into maintaining and preserving period property and trying to do the “right” thing for our properties irrespective of listed status.

While there are things about the LBC process that certainly could be improved as outlined above, most can be overcome one way or another, ultimately with the nuclear solution of finding an alternative home if it turns out that living in a period property isn’t for you.

 

[Flyfisher]

It's a tricky issue because of the subjectivity involved. What I find interesting, though, is how long can 'historic' fabric actually last? Obviously it depends on the nature of the material, after all, Stongehenge is still going strong after 5000 years or so, but I'm thinking more of, say, a 600 year old Tudor timber framed house. I don't know how long the building materials involved might actually last (and I assume much will depend on the integrity of the building over the years), but it surely can't be 'forever'. Any property built from predominatly organic materials must surely suffer from decay of some sort so 'historic fabric' must surely have a finite lifetime, after which it will need to be replaced. Sure, it can (most likely) be replaced with like-for-like materials but the 'historic fabric' is lost. Taken to its logical conclusion, the end result must be a facsimile of the original. An accurate one, yes, but a facsimile nevertheless. 'Triggers Broom' as it were.

Perhaps the conservation movement has not existed long enough for this to be a significant issue, but fast-forward a few hundred years . . . will our listed properties really still be standing with all their historic fabric in place? We already see this situation with thatched properties; I'd bet there are very few thatched properties in the country that have any of the original thatch still in place, which is hardly surprising when the lifetime of thatch is measured in decades rather than centuries. But thatched properties still retain their individual charm even when the thatch is completely renewed, so perhaps 'historic fabric' is less important that historic design and technique?

As I said, it's a tricky issue.

 

[Lacan07]

DIY jobs usually trade time for money. Refurbishing windows (for example) is usually a fiddly and time-consuming job, whether done by a professional or a DIYer and time equals money when it comes to using a professional to do the work. Without seeing the windows in question it's pretty much impossible to say what would be a fair price for the work, but for a rough guide imagine doing the work yourself for, say, £250/day and estimate how long it would take. Then, if you want a fixed price, add whatever 'contingency' you think is reasonable to allow for the fact that the job might be more difficult or extensive than can be judged from an external assessment.

A careful and methodical DIYer would very likely be able to achieve the same end result as a good professional but, of course, they will likely take much longer, might need to invest in some specialist tools if they don't already have them and will also likely spend a fair bit of time researching what to do and how to do it. Taking all these things into account can make paying a professional better value for money than it might first appear, so much depends on how you value your own time and/or the satisfaction gained from DIY.

My experience over the past 15 years of my own project is that I've gained immense satisfaction from proving that I'm capable of learning and doing most jobs as well as a professional and I've also saved a great deal of money by doing things myself. I've also learned that I could not make a good living from the skills I've learned along the way because I'm too slow, so it all boils down to a trade-off between spending my time or spending money on a job and wel all have our own views on how to value the trade-offs involved. The good news, as far as our period properties are involved, is that it's the end result that really matters, not how much time spent on achieving that result (within reason!). Our properties have mostly been standing for 100s of years and are generally more forgiving about the speed of repairs than their occupants.

Spot on Flyfisher

 

[Nero]

Regarding comments made by a twig:

Is this forum mainly used by owners who are happy with spiralling insurance and upkeep costs and therefore accept current legislation and the LBC process?

Don't Grade II residential owners comprise the majority?

What suggestions have been made to improve the LBC process?

I agree with most of what Flyfisher says. I assume that "Trigger's Broom" is equivalent to the story of the old axe, 1000 years old, in which time it has has 4 new shafts and 2 new blades. Appearance and Provenance are what really matter.

 

[a twig]

Is this forum mainly used by owners who are happy with spiralling insurance and upkeep costs and therefore accept current legislation and the LBC process?

Spiralling insurance isn’t specific to listed buildings so I think the whole country agrees that the insurance industry is getting a bit out of hand!

Likewise - spiralling upkeep costs are a national trend irrelevant of listed status. Conservation has always had a premium attached to it, often due to requirements for less common skills, traditional materials and increased complexity.

I would posit that for period owners things have got significantly better over the last 10-15 years. There has been a revival of traditional skills like lime plastering, stone masonry etc (although sadly the revival doesn’t seem to have made much improvement to the number of thatchers).

There has also been a marked increase in the awareness and availability of traditional materials, as their sustainability benefits have been recognised.

Don't Grade II residential owners comprise the majority?

The vast majority of period properties aren’t listed at all, and as the many stories on this forum illustrate they are subject to repairs and modifications that use modern techniques and materials which have a negative impact on the function and fabric of those buildings.

What suggestions have been made to improve the LBC process?

I’m not going to summarise the entire thread but as an example the first two replies were me saying I would like LBC to be more objective and less subject to the whims of the local Conservation Officer and then Flyfisher suggesting VAT changes to mitigate the additional costs, as a recognition of the wider benefits of conservation.

 

[Nero]

Thanks for your reply.
I agree that all insurance has risen but I believe that listing adds significant cost. In the case of flats in my building, the cost per flat of buildings insurance is several times that of comparable non-listed property.
I believe that within all listed property, the majority is Grade II residential and that only compatible, modern materials should be used if they bring economic or other benefits.
I agree that subjective terms in legislation should be better defined and less subject to the whims of COs.
VAT relief on repairs was removed some time ago and attempts by the Listed Property Owner's Club to reinstate this have been unsuccessful.

 

[alexander]

all older properties are generally money pits as all the materials used in there repair are a sometimes harder to find & lot more expensive than there modern equivalent the skills required to complete repairs are slowly being lost as tradesmen retire or die,
modern materials do not work well on older properties & cause major damage to older property's the biggest problem with listed property's is people buy them then think they can be treated like modern houses, then they get upset when they find out they cant , your living in a property that was built many years ago and has stood the test of time,
perhaps if you want all this shiny new materials in your flat you have made a major mistake and should buy a shiny new flat to suite your taste.
one other thing to look at in your new flat in 20 - 25yrs time when its falling down through rot & decay maybe then you will understand
good luck & have a pleasant day

 

[Nero]

I have no desire to move to a modern flat so I would appreciate it if others stopped suggesting this. After I lost my wife and decided to downsize, I had a reservation on a modern flat. The devious builder failed to produce any clear specification, made significant errors in build and finally cancelled my reservation, as someone had offered more. I then bought the flat I am in by on-line auction. This turned out to be a blessing in disguise as my flat is much larger, with a lovely sea view, large rooms and more storage space. It was also about half the price of the modern flat. The location is less desirable but more convenient. So I am generally happy here.

This does not mean that I should simply accept the legislation and LBC rules that currently exist. Changing my windows would only improve the look of the building and public perception of it. It is quite wrong that COs and Planning Inspectors blindly follow flawed, existing legislation in assessing supposed harm. This is abuse of power and authority.

I did say compatible, modern materials which would not damage an older building.

 

[alexander]

listing do not blindly follow perceived harm on older building by todays cowboys, it is a fact that more damage is done to older building by todays bad owners & builders, you cannot possibly get 100yrs old wood that is a fact, most modern wood is rubbish. English oak has not been available in this country for at least 20+yrs, it is better to preserve something than this modern disease of a throw away society.
you new what you were buying so stop moaning and get on with it

 

[Nero]

I don't respond to rudeness. Perhaps the admins would like to intervene.