Saving farm buildings

[Nemesis]

Letter and picture:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article3817758.ece

From The TimesApril 26, 2008

Rural treasures under threat
We must save this brick granary


Sir, Decades of campaigning have brought us to the point where it is difficult for key historic architectural landmarks to be demolished. The unique character of our landscape depends on more than its important landmarks, however. Across the country are fine vernacular buildings that we should value both for their intrinsic quality and for what they tell us of our history and way of life. Away from the national spotlight, these can all too often fall victim to neglect or inappropriate development, their loss changing irreparably the character of the area where for centuries they have stood.

One such case is this delightful, listed 18th-century brick granary at Barford Park, near Salisbury, which sits within a picturesque group of farm buildings, five of which are also listed. It is a building that most of us would cherish, but the current owners have now secured permission for its demolition — its death warrant was signed recently by the local authority in spite of strong protests by heritage bodies.

What message does this send to the thousands of owners across the country who are struggling against the odds to maintain the lesser historic farm buildings that help to define the special character of our rural landscapes?

William Palin
Secretary, Save Britain’s Heritage

Times today:

Saving farm buildings
Farm buildings constitute the biggest category of buildings at risk
Sir, William Palin does us all a service (“Rural treasures under threat”, letter, April 26) in pointing out the importance and the plight of redundant historic farm buildings, and the struggles of their owners to maintain them on, in many cases, very low farm incomes. The case he mentions is an extreme one, and controversial, and consent for demolition of listed farm buildings is very unusual.

All too common, however, is the sight of traditional farm buildings, unusable in modern agriculture, in decay. They are the biggest category of buildings at risk. They are expensive to repair, but a crucial part of our landscape. They deserve to be saved. The answer is often conversion: English Heritage and Cadw have produced good guidance and many architects are now proficient at this, though planners sometimes need to be flexible, not condemning conversions as “unsustainable” if they are not on a bus route. But sometimes there is no access, or no market demand, and some buildings are too significant or fragile to be converted.

Historic building grants are hardly ever available: the money available to English Heritage for grants has been cut by half, measured against building costs, since 1997. The main answer is agri-environment funding, which needs to remember (though EU directives do not) that maximising the number of butterfly species is of limited point if barns and walls are collapsing all around them.

These buildings can have a future, but only if we all appreciate the scale of the problem and work flexibly together. They will not fix themselves.

Henry Aubrey-Fletcher

President, Country Land & Business Association

 

[Gareth Hughes]

The answer is often conversion:

Hmmmm...(just playing devil's advocate).

 

[Nemesis]

Ooooh tasty - love the balcony...

Actually I would love the granary if it could be removed! But the stones will fetch a good price as garden ornaments. They will even be able to be SALVO accredited ... grrrrrrr.




[Open Image] [Hosted by PhotoGalaxy.com]


I have to confess to the collapse of two ancient timber and asbestos chicken sheds, but the neglect was set in long before us, although we are gradually repairing both our cart shed and gighouse/bothy. The bothy itself was converted many years ago to an office, which did the structure little good as a large window was inserted, and a door, (used to be accessed by ladder) without any thought as to tying the building together. Hence the picturesque lean.

The chicken sheds will hopefully one day be replaced by wood and crinkly tin storage buildings, and we are planning (plotting?) very soon to build a new timber and tin potting shed.

Our attached barn is already partially converted (before we arrived) but I will seek further inspiration from your collection of pics Gareth...

 

[chuckey]

Round here, barns fall down all the time. The amount of grant is such that it would cost the farmer £16k+ to end up with an unwanted building. The Parks Authority does not like conversions to barns, because of the extranous domestic impedimetia, such as patios, coal bunkers, washing lines, gardens etc, turning an isolated barn into something else. I think therein lies the predicament, these barns are only loved by visitors because they add to the landscape.

If the Parks people truly loved them and regarded them as an intrinsic part of the landscape such as waterfalls and hills, then they should pay for the whole cost of the restoration or swallow their pride and put up with domestic conversions which would bring some much needed cash into the Dales. And more to the point a building that is still there could have yet another life as a barn once, it is flattened its gone forever.

There is a dire shortage of cheap housing in the Dales so the second option could easily be deemed socially neccessary. My personal feelings are that every barn within 1/4 mile of a road should be converted into a domestic dwelling. Its such a shame that there are good buildings with a desultery number of calves in them, while there is a shortage of cheap housing.

There are the Parks Authority with no money and loads of rules.
There are farmers with loads of land and dilapedated buildings and no money.
There are potential holiday home buyers with loads of money.
There are local and prospective workers with no money, no buildings, no land.

Looking at the above data, it would seem that a very good compromise could be that, barns should be allowed full conversion permission in pairs, so that the holiday home purchaser funds a second conversion for a rented house for a local worker. The rent going to the Farmer. The only loser in the above scenario would be the 17th century landscape, but this is going to be a loser anyway as all the old barns fall down.
Frank

 

[Flyfisher]

these barns are only loved by visitors because they add to the landscape.

Odd how old, dilapidated or derelict barns can be regarded as being part of the landscape and worthy of protection while wind turbines are (widely) regarded as a blot on the landscape. Eye of the beholder I suppose or is it 'old-is-good-new-is-bad' dogma?

 

[plumbers mate]

It isn't just the visuals of the buildings/structures but the spaces created around and between them.
See Ptolemy Deans new book "Britain's Buildings - Places and Spaces". He can explain it better.
The book is full of some of hgis paitings - a bit over wriggly (to my eyes) when viewed close up but lovely sketches and water colour. He includes some barns but also signal boxes, bridges, streets and pill boxes. It's a bit south-east heavy but isn't he a south east resident?
It costs £20 but is available from a well known on-line book/music/everything else seller for £11. Yet I think that I would have paid full price with no quibble.

 

[plumbers mate]

Apologies - Read something through and still not notice stupid typos .....
"hgis paitings" is of course "his paintings"

 

[Penners]

Thank you for posting that picture. Believe it or not, it's the first time I've ever see a building standing on staddle stones, despite knowing about the principle for as long as I can remember. It's great to see it 'in action'.

 

[Penners]

"hgis paitings" is of course "his paintings"

I just thought you'd got a cold.

 

[jocelyn plummer]

Many old farm buildings in North Norfolk still being converted for the 'SHO' people!

 

[Gareth Hughes]

Thank you for posting that picture. Believe it or not, it's the first time I've ever see a building standing on staddle stones, despite knowing about the principle for as long as I can remember. It's great to see it 'in action'.

Went to the Weald and Downland Open Air Museum yesterday for the first time (on the way back from my brother's wedding). Loads of staddle stones and intermediate structures - very, very highly recommended (they were having a food festival there too, fabulous pig products etc etc).

And you've never understood quite what the inoffensive-sounding "smoke blackened timbers" really means until you've seen the all-over floor-to-ceiling tarring of their Bayleaf farmhouse.View attachment 1

 

[Penners]

the Weald and Downland Open Air Museum

That place has been on my "must visit" list for decades, yet I've never been.

I shall renew my efforts.

Your bottom photograph... I shall rephrase that... your lowest photograph shows a little building with posts resting on staddle stones that have no "mushroom" cap on top. From the look of it, it wouldn't take much to push or blow the posts off the stones. Are there metal pins inside to prevent this?

 

[chuckey]

The Weald and Downland Open Air Museum, If you visit it on a bank holiday, the chanches are that there will, real baking on open fires, lead working, ploughing with horses. antique sheep and pig breeds, its great!, highly recomended for children as there is(was?) only one cafe(discretely hidden)/seller of ice creams so you don't get pestered all the time.
FWIW there is a nice walk E to W across the north of Chandlers Ford that gets back to the road at a little hamlet of Ladwell, you actually have to sidle around a barn standing on staddle stones - path about 2' wide at this point!
Frank

 

[Gareth Hughes]

the Weald and Downland Open Air Museum

That place has been on my "must visit" list for decades, yet I've never been.

I shall renew my efforts.

Your bottom photograph... I shall rephrase that... your lowest photograph shows a little building with posts resting on staddle stones that have no "mushroom" cap on top. From the look of it, it wouldn't take much to push or blow the posts off the stones. Are there metal pins inside to prevent this?

Have to confess I didn't look, and we have barns not unlike that in this district - I think I've always assumed they're held up by the woodworm.

Part of Weald and Downland's splendid brickwork display (must confess on Monday the food festival was all over the site so I was a bit distrcted by free samples of everything and didn't pay as much attention to the conservation stuff as I should):

 

[Nemesis]

Here's another - no idea if it's still standing:

http://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/Gateway/Results_Single.aspx?uid=45883&resourceID=3

I understood the purpose of the mushroom stones was to deter rats.

 

[Penners]

I understood the purpose of the mushroom stones was to deter rats.

That certainly appears to be the accepted wisdom, although presumably the idea of raising the building above ground was also an anti-damp technique.

 

[Nemesis]

Yes - however, the mushroom shape was supposed to prevent rats climbing and gnawing into the building. They can go up but not upside down.

 

[Penners]

Which presumably makes this the ultimate rat deterrence technique.

 

[Nemesis]

I've found them to be determined little b*ggers when food is available though!

 

[Nemesis]

From SALON today:

Save Britain’s Heritage is campaigning to protect a ‘delightful, listed eighteenth-century brick granary’ at Barford Park, near Salisbury, which is facing demolition. In a letter to The Times, SAVE’s Secretary, William Palin, deplores the fact that ‘its death warrant was signed recently by the local authority in spite of strong protests by heritage bodies’, and asks ‘What message does this send to the thousands of owners across the country who are struggling against the odds to maintain the lesser historic farm buildings that help to define the special character of our rural landscapes?’ For the letter in full, and a picture, see the Times Online.


William Palin’s letter was followed up by another from Richard Deane, Chairman, Salisbury Conservation Advisory Panel (see the Times Online), asking why English Heritage had not called in the case for review or public inquiry. ‘For government officers to fail to demonstrate the unacceptability in principle of demolishing listed buildings, thereby sending out the message to less committed owners that the simplest way out of a maintenance problem may simply be to pull the building down, is deeply worrying. Our stock of traditional farm buildings is a finite heritage, and the loss of any of them can only devalue what we should be appreciating as a unique national asset’, he wrote.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article3876042.ece


Some rather unfortunate comments under the Times letter...