Millions of heritage buildings like pretty cottages, that are not listed but
are in protected areas, have fitted plastic windows despite the fact they
will only last 15 years and ruin the look of the buildings.
Solid wall insulation is also being fitted on older buildings, covering
ancient stone work.
In the long term climate change rules risk harming listed buildings as
landowners are unable to reach energy efficiency targets and will therefore
be prevented from setting up businesses.
The Energy Bill, currently going through Parliament, will only allow energy
efficient buildings to let out rooms, making it difficult for draughty
castles to become BBs or hotels.
Castles have also had to fit low energy light bulbs, that are difficult to get
hold of for certain fittings.
Jonathan Thompson, Heritage Adviser at the CLA, said green measures are all
based around modern buildings.
He called for reform of the rules to take account of the special needs of
historic buildings and encourage green measures that work, like converting a
water mill to generate energy or putting solar panels on a castle roof.
“Current climate change mitigation policy for existing buildings, based on
little more than insulation values, is proving ineffective and causing
unjustified harm, especially to heritage. Future policy must be based on
whole-life carbon impacts.”
William Worsley, President of the CLA, said it is a “myth” that heritage
“swallows public money”.
In fact archaeological sites, old factories and beautiful houses can make
money for councils, especially with the recent interest in television
programmes like Grand Designs and Restoration.
But at the moment it is so difficult to make changes to listed or heritage
buildings owners are discouraged from setting up businesses or even buying
ancient sites.
For example bat surveys slow down changes to buildings even on roofs where
there have never been any evidence of the mammals.
Another problem is planning rules that mean only farm buildings reached by
public transport are judged to be “sustainable development”.
Mr Worsley said there was no chance of more money to protect heritage or
provide the 1,000 extra conservation officers needed. But by reforming the
rules around planning, owners could be encouraged to raise more money to
protect their homes.
He said red tape should be redrawn so that only potentially harmful changes to
buildings have to be scrutinised for years.
“The public is interested in heritage but regulations need to be
prioritised. I think the belt and braces and overkill will do more to
destroy our heritage than preserve it because owners are disincentivised to
do anything so they just leave it to get worse or go ahead without consent.
“Building Preservation Trusts giving up rescuing heritage because it has
become just too difficult. All this is ever more dangerous for our
heritage,” he said.
“The CLA has analysed the real problems, such as the difficulty in getting
consent for sympathetic changes, and come up with solutions so that heritage
can be valued, used and relevant to the future.”
The Department for Communiites said new rules in the National Planning Policy
Framework will “hugely simplify” planning and building
regulations.