From stately mansions to Victorian terraced flats, historic buildings are part of the UK’s cultural fabric. England has approximately 350,000 listed buildings and 2.8 million houses in conservation areas (areas of special historic or architectural interest).
Conscious regeneration projects, which preserve original character while upgrading buildings for the modern age, can help preserve our built heritage, while reducing carbon emissions, lowering energy bills and boosting economic growth. It is estimated that the refurbishment of the UK’s historic buildings could generate £35bn of economic output per year. In April, a roundtable held by London-based international property group Grosvenor explored the obstacles these regeneration projects face and how they can be overcome through policy change and sectoral co-operation. Held in the fitting surroundings of the refurbished Royal United Services Institute building in Westminster, the roundtable marked the beginning of Grosvenor’s new related report Retrofit or Destroy.
Chaired by Grosvenor’s head of sustainability, Tor Burrows, the roundtable had 15 cross-sector participants, including representatives from the Wellcome Trust, Whitbread, National Trust, Historic England, Octopus Energy, Greene King and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, among others. There was consensus that overcoming the barriers to renovating listed buildings is a must for their longevity. “We think it’s really important that historic buildings adapt and continue to be seen as attractive places to live and work, and that means making sure they can continue to be developed to meet modern standards,” said Ian Morrison, director of policy and evidence at Historic England. “We need to find ways to make it easier and simpler to make our historic buildings more energy efficient, because we don’t want them to be obsolete.”
Improvement of the planning system
A consistent thread was the amount of bureaucracy in the planning application process, which significantly hampers progress on regeneration projects.
James Wickham, partner at property adviser Newmark, highlighted how property developers still need planning permission from the local authority to proceed with projects, even when they have already been granted listed building consent. Improving this process could be an “easy solution for the government”, he said.
In his report, Grosvenor set out two key policy recommendations to streamline the process: a new National Listed Building Consent Order (NLBCO), which would remove the need for individual listed building consent applications and provide consent for low-risk refurbishment measures on a national scale; and a new national model local development order (LDO), which could be adapted by local authorities and would remove the need for individual planning consent applications in conservation areas, providing consent for low-risk regeneration measures on a national scale.
Data from Historic England would suggest that making the process more straightforward would benefit homeowners and free up local authorities, with 93 per cent of listed building consent applications for renovation works given the green light, yet only a third are approved in the required eight-week period. Grosvenor is already implementing this proposed ‘blanket’ approach locally in Westminster, where London’s largest residential square,
Eaton Square is now subject to a Listed Building Consent Order (LLBCO), allowing large-scale improvements to windows, awnings and solar panel installations that could reduce residents’ annual carbon emissions by 19 per cent.
It was noted that many historic buildings in England are formwork, such as terraced houses. Having a set of design guidelines for these “simpler, more repetitive buildings” would be “invaluable,” argued Cordula Zeidler, head of placemaking and heritage at conservation architecture firm Donald Insall Associates.
Consistency in local authorities
Another issue that arose was the lack of clarity from local government, with a confusing lack of consistency between – and sometimes within – local authorities on planning permissions. The Wellcome Trust has a property portfolio of £3 billion, centered on an estate in South Kensington, London. Tracey Hartley, head of asset management, said the trust had faced major hurdles in upgrading its properties with technologies such as heat pumps or insulation. In one building, the local authority was told to replace them with “heavy floor-length curtains and decorative fabric walls”.
“We’ve had various challenges around installing heat pumps … and we’ve had quite conflicting advice,” she said. “We’ve had a planning officer say one thing, and then heritage comes along and says something else. “We think the problem is not so much the planning system itself as the uncertainty about how it’s interpreted and applied.” Lizzy Carlyle, head of climate and environment at the National Trust, said the organization has successfully installed heat pumps and fabric insulation in historic buildings, including Osterley House in Isleworth, which has had damp problems eradicated and But she agreed that “inconsistency between planning authorities erodes that trust and makes it harder to build on our teams”.
The lack of skills in heritage renewal was discussed, which has led to a cultural problem of avoidance and lack of trust in local government. But attendees also acknowledged that local authorities are under-resourced and lack the capacity to move away from case-by-case decision-making and adopt a more strategic approach. In his report, Grosvenor recommends grant funding for a skills upgrading programme, providing local planning authorities with access to training and conservation specialists.
Given how difficult it is for local authorities, understanding planning procedures as a landlord can be even more complex. Morrison highlighted how Historic England has a tool on its website called Your Home which provides useful advice and guidance on living in, maintaining and improving old buildings. More public awareness campaigns like this would help people navigate the system.
The need for government focus
Property owners, including Whitbread and Greene King, agreed that the current system makes redeveloping listed buildings particularly challenging, with high costs, complex planning requirements and limited government impetus often pushing investment towards easier-to-handle assets. Attendees felt that more government investment is needed. Matthew Blades, director of the built environment at Oxford Street Development Corporation, suggested that a nationally funded program could help test LBCOs on different types of streets, then apply them more widely.
Emma Fletcher, director of low-carbon homes at Octopus Energy, added that the sector should lobby the government for ring-fenced funding within the Warm Homes Fund, which offers free energy efficiency upgrades to low-income households. Many listed buildings are not on track to meet the government’s Energy Performance Certification (EPC) requirements by 2030. She pointed to the prevalence of listed properties in rural communities and said there was a perception problem: those who live in high-value or historically significant buildings are not necessarily rich themselves. Those present agreed that historic buildings have not been a priority. “There is a lot of pressure on planning,” said Andrew Short, head of development management policy at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. “One of the challenges that heritage has is … it’s only a small element of the housing stock.”
Historic buildings account for approximately a quarter of all UK homes and a third of all commercial buildings. Despite this, upgrading historic buildings will be crucial to helping the UK reach its net zero targets, given that buildings are the second highest carbon emitting sector in the UK. But the conservation of these precious buildings has other purposes – not least to provide growth, and to rebuild civic pride and cohesion, at a time of increasing social and economic division.
Read on Retrofit or Ruin: Planning for the Future of Heritage here
