Advice on redundant chimney breast removal

[Drrjparkes]

We are in the process of acquiring a Grade II listed Georgian terrace in Islington London. We have plans to make significant investment to restore the property. However, we are coming up against reluctance from the conservation officer to allowing us to remove a redundant chimney breast from the lower floors (living room/Kitchen). This cannot be restored as the full chimney stack has been removed in its totality in the upper floors (prior to listing) and is currently simply a bricked up wall impinging on space in both these rooms. The chimney breast also has no decorative value. There is already a functioning fireplace in the living room and we cannot see how the change we are proposing can in any way detract from the properties architectural attractiveness. The removal would also not cause any structural concerns. Is there anything we can do to challenge this decision and are you aware of what precedent there is in such a situation?

 

[Roger H]

Hi Drrjparkes,

It may be that the CO considers that removal of the chimney breast may make even less likely any future possibility that the full chimney might be reinstated by future owners.

 

[Flyfisher]

You can, of course, challenge the decision but it's difficult to think of good reasons. By 'good' I mean why would the removal be good for the house rather than why it is good for your own personal preferences. Remember that the CO's responsibility is towards the house and not the current, temporary, occupants.

Also, given that most period properties are unique, it may not be easy to argue on the basis of precedent because such decisions are always made within the individual context of the specific property. If, perhaps, a row of similar properties had all been granted consent for their chimney removals then you might have a case, although even in that hypothetical case the fact that you have one of the few remaining chimneys would make the property even more unique and even more worthy of preservation.

I would learn to love the chimney breast and enjoy not having a large flat expanse of wall.

 

[Matt Green]

It can be restored: you could reinstate the chimney stack and chimney breasts on the upper floors. Ask the Conservation Officer about doing that. I bet they would go for it.

The fact it impinges on space is irrelevant, as is the fact that view it to be of no decorative value. You are asking to remove something from a listed building making it harder to return to the way it was built. The Conservation Officer's role is to protect buildings judged to be of particular value and act as the building's advocate. The removal of the chimney breast is not in the best interests of the building.

 

[Penners]

The removal of the chimney breast is not in the best interests of the building.

And that's the nub of the thing. The Conservation Officer's job is not to ensure that you can do what you want to the building, it's to ensure that what you do will not further change the character of the building. Regardless of what others may have done before you, he/she will almost certainly wish to ensure that no further destruction of its original fabric takes place.

 

[Nigel Watts]

impinging on space in both these rooms. The chimney breast also has no decorative value

Listed building consent is required for any alteration, inside or out, which changes the character of the building. Removing a chimney breast significantly changes the character of any room and a Georgian or Victorian room looks completely wrong without one. Although you clearly don't see things that way, I am with the CO on this one.

In the basement of my Grade II listed house in Islington are two chimney breasts, neither of which had a working fireplace when we bought the house. The one at the front would have been for the servants' hall (now my dining room) and the one at the back would have contained the kitchen range. I was allowed to increase the height of the openings from about three or four feet to about six. This allowed to me to use the space for a fitted sideboard in the dining room and to install a gas hob with cupboard above where the range would have been. A proposal along these lines may find more favour than complete removal.

 

[Drrjparkes]

I love the way you are all getting so high and mighty about this. The upper chimney stack was removed probably 50 years ago and it would be impossible to reinstate it without destroying the property, as it would run through plumbing in the upper floors. None of you have even considered to ask about the property or the situation at all. if i thought this defunct piece of brickwork in any way added character to the house i would restore it. You're responses suggest my fears about the ludicrous nature of this arbitrary decision making process were correct. Clearly no consideration to the basic principles of the listed buildings act are really adhered too which allow for development that maintains the character of the property and area. It's a very small house and today people don't need fireplaces in every room. At the time this was built the house was a slum. It's not a beautiful ornate fireplace. What I am talking about its just a brick wall. It will NEVER be restored to its former inglorious state. As the law states changes can't be made that would detract from the listing status of the building. I believe all of the other properties on the street have the stack fully removed rather than partially. I fail to believe that one of theses houses would have been less likely to have been deemed of special status just because it doesn't have said structure I pinging on th living space.

 

[Penners]

If you didn't want our opinions, why did you ask the question?

The clue to the enthusiasms and passions of people on this forum is in its title. We treasure period property as a precious part of this country's heritage, and try wherever possible to conserve its structure and character. Those principles apply regardless of the status or size of the building. And just because somebody else has partly vandalised it in the past, that's no reason to continue the process.

 

[Nigel Watts]

None of you have even considered to ask about the property or the situation at all

Perhaps you would like to provide some more detail. All you said originally was that the house is Georgian and listed Grade II. This suggests that it is of some interest and worth protecting. If you don't like the planning laws I suggest you write to your MP.

There are some nice modern flats going up nearby up the King's Cross area. Have you thought of buying one of these instead?

 

[plasticpigeon]

I do agree that the process looks arbitrary. An enormous number of very significant and beautiful buildings have been lost or changed to their detriment over the years, especially since the middle of last century, and in my area at least this destruction continues. It does seem strange that a conservation officer would grumble about half a chimney stack when there are obviously greater ills occurring. It is also strange that I pay more tax than Philip Green, but that doesn't make it wrong for me to pay tax. I don't find your arguments very convincing as it sounds like you just don't want the chimney breast there. What if the whole stack still existed, would you want to remove it as you want more living space and a fireplace is not necessary these days? Why is the original status of the house relevant? Why is what the neighbours have done relevant? It's only your opinion that it isn't an important feature, which doesn't mean the opposing point of view is wrong. Maybe it is obviously very ugly and very intrusive and buildings have to be useable. How about putting up a picture of the offending structure?

 

[vicky whitworth]

Since opinion was sought I feel free to voice it...
I have always wondered in these situations whether someone buys a Grade II listed Georgian place and is simply ignorant about what that means legally and doesn't bother to find out before signing the contract, or whether they do know what it means and think they can buck the law. Ignorance or arrogance. It's hard to see any other options. Have I missed some?

 

[Moo]

it would be impossible to reinstate it without destroying the property, as it would run through plumbing in the upper floors

It wouldn't, actually. A bit more expensive, because of having to re-route the plumbing, but not impossible.

 

[Lime]

I wonder if the stack is still in place.
I've seen several houses that have had breasts removed but the chimney has been left dangling on a few bricks in the loft.

 

[Matt Green]

It will NEVER be restored to its former inglorious state.

By you. (Nice use of capitals by the way- did you stamp your foot when you wrote that?)

The house will likely be standing long after your death, by which time we may well be burning things in fireplaces again. Who knows, someone might look at your house in 70 or 80 years time and think: "Well, at least we've only got to put in half a chimney stack and the CO will probably let us, not like those poor saps that bought a listed late 20th century building...".

You knew what "grade II listed" meant when you bought the place. Put up some pictures, state your case in a logical fashion, consider alternatives and take advice.

 

[skier-hughes]

The farmer who owned our house before us decided nobody would want chimney's, so when hje felt they were unsafe he took them down, not with central heating and all that!!
Luckily it's not been too much hard work to rebuild the chimeny's and have fires burning again.

 

[Drrjparkes]

I am perfectly aware of the law and what owning a listed building means. Our plan is to lovingly and sympathetically restore the house. However, all I have received so far on this forum is patronising sneering. There is no chimney stack and all that is left is some redundant brickwork in the corner of a room that already has restored functioning fireplace. I fail to see that this adds the the architectural interest of the building. i also don't believe anyone would want to rip out the plumbing in a dwelling that functions as a home to build back a chimney stack in order to put a second fireplace in a room that is 6mx3m. I also cant believe this would not cause more harm to the structure of the building than it would do "good" for its architectural interest. To believe this is possible is just ludicrous in my view. I would post photos but frankly given some of the responses here I can no longer see the point. Thanks for all your kind advice and insight.

 

[Sonyaclegg]

We are 10 months into our huge project and I have learnt an enormous amount about older buildings during this time. We have learnt to love features that we talked of changing. I have forged a constructive relationship with the CO and have had sensible discussions about changes. There has been give and take on both sides. Most of all, I have a willingness to listen to advice from experienced posters on this site whom have a wealth of experience.

Regarding your bricked up fireplace, I would be tempted to reveal it and make a feature of the inside and recess shelving to each side. It would be helpful if you posted photos. I have a few fireplaces and would love to recess shelving to each side but this isn't possible with mine. Forgive the passion you have been met with. It's well intentioned and once you start posting pictures, you will receive some excellent opinions which you can take on board or disregard as you wish.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

A late comer to this. The fact that the room has another functioning fireplace sounds odd (and potentially of interest) - are both original to the building?
If you want to remove the redundant chimney breast, you'll have to come up with a reasoned explanation as to why, which could be a combination of factors ranging from the degree to which it has or doesn't have special interest in the context of the house, the extent to which it provides evidence of a former (or the earliest) layout and function of the building, the advantages or otherwise for the house (structurally and functionally) of removing it, and so on.

I'm a CO, I have in the past both permitted the removal of redundant chimney breasts, and insisted on their reinstatement after they were illegally removed. This isn't abitrary decision making, but based on the facts of each individual case.

"I don't like it and I want to get rid of it" is not a reasoned explanation.

 

[Flyfisher]

I am perfectly aware of the law and what owning a listed building means. Our plan is to lovingly and sympathetically restore the house. However, all I have received so far on this forum is patronising sneering.

I think you may have started the sneering, others were merely giving you their advice as you requested, but no matter.

As you are quickly learning, one person's 'loving and sympathetic restoration' is another person's idea of destruction. It's the very difficult nature of the territory. The good news for you is that none of our opinions really matter because it is ultimately up to the relevant CO, though presumably permission has already been refused for your proposed changes, which is why you're considering an appeal. I must say that citing the presence of some modern plumbing as a reason why the chimney will never be reinstated seems a rather weak case to me. Perhaps you should consider some better reasons?

 

[TheForge]

We have been through many of the issues discussed so far.

A previous owner removed one of a pair of opposing hearths in our forge, leaving the stack not on a few bricks but just a piece of 2x4 nailed between a couple of rafters!

The opposite twin hearthed forge survived, one side fuelled by an electric fan and the other by hand bellows.

The weight of the stack is pulling the gable it sits within inwards and causing the weak roof structure to rack badly. We are in the process of rebuilding the hearth both as a decorative feature and to act as a buttress tied in to the gable.

In order to do this we need to reroute our main incoming mains water pipe, reinforce the remaining 'foundations' of the hearth and source appropriately sized hand made bricks which were previously made in a brickworks on site. They are on average about 9" x 2"x 6" but seem to be a selection of broken rejects built in no recognisable bond! Not easy to find but it can all certainly be done.