Reinstating an attached greenhouse

[Schweiz]

We have a Grade 2* listed property which includes a detached stable. Attached to the stable are the brick floor and foundation of a greenhouse, and the associated shards of glass are to be found all over our vegetable patch. The outline of the greenhouse roofline is clearly visible on the stable wall. The original bricks from the waist-high walls are available.

The greenhouse is evident on the 1878 OS map and all maps subsequently until the early 1970s when the house was derelict for a period of 18 months. The house was listed in 1949. There is a photo from the 1950s where the ridgeline of the greenhouse is visible, so the exact footprint and style are clear.

I would like to reinstate the greenhouse in the same manner (style, material, footprint) as the original, using the same bricks. You can probably guess that my question concerns planning consent and LBC.

I suppose that I must reluctantly accept that the planners will want their say on the design and materials, but do they have any grounds to question to refuse the reconstruction in principle, considering that the building was present in 1949 when listed, that there was no permission sought to remove the building and that it is Victorian structure rather than an asbestos shed? The house is Tudor and the stable mid-C18 so I am certain that a "green-field" application would be refused outright, however our situation is obviously different. Any advice and/or opinions?

 

[TheSpid]

bump

 

[Flyfisher]

It would be interesting to see the listing description and what it says about the greenhouse. You say the greenhouse was present when listed in 1949 but was gone, albeit leaving traces, a few years later. Perhaps the greenhouse was already very dilapidated and simply fell down or perhaps it was actively demolished, which would of course be an offence without permission.

It seems to me there are two options. The correct one would be to contact the conservation officer and discuss your proposal to ‘repair’ the greenhouse using the original bricks (and any other available materials), the original footprint and the original design. As you probably know, ‘repairs’ to a listed building do not require consent though I suspect that principle is being stretched in the case of rebuilding a completely destroyed structure, hence the discussion with the CO.

Alternatively, if you are confident about the previous form of the greenhouse you could just go ahead with the ‘repair’ anyway, using as much original material as possible and using appropriate new materials to replace those that have been lost. You’d be wise to first rehearse your arguments for doing such work without consent - ie, just repairing an existing and already listed structure, collating all the relevant documents including any old photos etc - just in case you are challenged. But really, if you can make such a good case in the first place then discussing things first with the CO shouldn’t be a problem.

We had a similar situation with a dilapidated lean-to boiler house on one of our gable walls (we’re also G2*). The foot print remained clearly visible plus where the structure had attached to the wall. In our case, we wanted to build an oak-framed open lean-to (Loggia?) in its place and had no problem obtaining LBC after discussion with our CO. It was a different structure to the original boiler house, so not an exact parallel with your situation, but it was a definite improvement which is probably why there was no problem obtaining consent.

Bear in mind that being G2* any LBC application will also involve English Heritage (or is it Natural England now?). This sounds like additional bureaucracy but my experience of three LBC applications is that if the CO is already supportive and the proposed works are not unreasonable then the EH/NE involvement is usually limited to ‘no objection’ so is little more than a rubber stamp exercise. From what you have described, I’d argue that you are simple restoring part of the property to its original state at the time of listing, which should hopefully be non-contentious. But I would still involve the CO all the same, just for the record.

 

[Schweiz]

Thank you Flyfisher. Your thoughts mirror mine.

Curtilages of listed buildings were only officially protected in 1969 but the protection was retroactively applied to earlier listings such as “mine”. As you see in the picture above, it’s a simple and unremarkable structure. I’m certain that it fell into disrepair in 1970-1971 and was subsequently removed.

I’m going to argue my case that reinstatement does not require LBC.

 

[Kearn]

A bit off topic, but it struck me that your greenhouse is presumably south-(ish) facing? But there doesn't appear any evidence of windows on the entire gable end?

 

[a twig]

A bit off topic, but it struck me that your greenhouse is presumably south-(ish) facing? But there doesn't appear any evidence of windows on the entire gable end?

Isn't it a structural thing?

Back on topic, I'd reinstate and crack on

 

[Schweiz]

Thanks again for the feedback.

The ex-greenhouse is south west facing. The building onto which it was adjoined is a stable and it's normal that there are no windows on the sunny sides of such buildings to help keep them cool. The lady who lived in the house from 1910 until 1960 was a race horse breeder. She had larger stables adjacent to paddocks a few hundred metres from the house, but kept her favourite 2 horses in this old stable. All the internal fittings survive but these days it's been relegated to a potting shed.

 

[Kearn]

A bit off topic, but it struck me that your greenhouse is presumably south-(ish) facing? But there doesn't appear any evidence of windows on the entire gable end?

Isn't it a structural thing?

Back on topic, I'd reinstate and crack on

I've got a very early Georgian, gable end that would say otherwise. Windows and doors shouldn't remove the structural integrity of a wall.

 

[Kearn]

Thanks again for the feedback.

The ex-greenhouse is south west facing. The building onto which it was adjoined is a stable and it's normal that there are no windows on the sunny sides of such buildings to help keep them cool. The lady who lived in the house from 1910 until 1960 was a race horse breeder. She had larger stables adjacent to paddocks a few hundred metres from the house, but kept her favourite 2 horses in this old stable. All the internal fittings survive but these days it's been relegated to a potting shed.

Ah, I'd skimmed past the bit that mentioned its use - makes perfect sense now!