heritage at risk: a strategy for the region’s assets

Heritage at Risk: A Strategy for the region’s assets

Trevor Mitchell, Yorkshire and the Humber Planning Director

Heritage at Risk in Yorkshire and the Humber

• The scale of HAR in Y&H• EH resources• New priorities• Collaborative working

The task seems daunting

• 29,212 Grade II LBs• 1,495 Grade II* LBs• 685 Grade I LBs• 2,663 SAMs • 122 Registered parks• 7 Battlefields• 892 conservation areas• 1365(?) listed churches

• 1300 GII BARs?

• 100 High-grade BARs • 734 SMARs• 11 PAGARs• 4 Battlefields @Risk• 46 CAARs• ? POWARs

Numbers of BAR register removals

• 10 in 1999• 23 in 2000• 15 in 2001• 15 in 2002• 18 in 2003• 12 in 2004• 14 in 2005• 2 in 2006• 8 in 2007• 5 in 2008• 7 in 2009• 7 in 2010, but 4 added

English Heritage Grants

• This year we have a grant programme worth around £4 million

• £2.7 million goes to POWAR

• £1.3 million is for secular HAR

• That is c.£50k pa per local authority district

CSR Settlement

• 34% cut

• 33% cut to grants budget

• “total funding for … grants for heritage at risk … are protected and have a cut of no more than 15% …” SoS.

“What are your priorities?”

• BARs• SMARs• PAGARs• Battlefields at Risk• CAARs• POWARs

Where is the HAR work?

Priority HAR Themes – the region’s distinctive Heritage at Risk

1. The industrial remains of the Dales

2. The ancient landscapes of Wolds and Moors

3. The textile industry of the West Riding

4. The metal trades of South Yorkshire

5. The city of Hull and the region’s fishing industry

6. The designed landscapes of South Yorkshire

1. Lead mining remains in the Dales

• The public and funders know about barns and walls and sheep

• 10 lead sites at risk

2. Ancient landscapes of the Wolds and Moors

• 185 SMARs in East Riding Council area• 184 SMARs in Ryedale• 49% of the region’s SMARs in 2 LAs• Another 13% (99) are in Scarborough• 112 round barrows at risk in the North York

Moors alone• and 2 castles

3. The West Riding textile industry

The textile industry

• 8 mill sites

• Elland

• Halifax town centre and Piece Hall

• Manningham

• First White Cloth Hall

4. The metal trades of South Yorkshire

Recent Success

Darnall Works

5. The City of Hull and the region’s Fishing Industry

• The Kasbah and Ice Factory, Grimsby Docks

• The smoke houses of Hull and the Fruit Market area

• Hull’s old Town

• Hull’s WW2 heritage

6. Parks and gardens of South Yorkshire

Rotunda, Wentworth Castle

• EH Grant• HLF Grant• LEADER Grant

Wentworth Woodhouse Stables

• EH development officer identified ERDF option• EH approached owner to encourage a bid• EH worked with client team to shape outputs

and budget to ERDF criteria

Working together on shared priorities

• There are few if any projects that any one party can complete on its own.

• English Heritage, local authorities and third sector organisations need to work together, to shared priorities, to deliver solutions.

• EH priorities begin with the Heritage at Risk Register, but narrow quickly to the six themes that we have identified.

• We are here to help bring sites back to life. But we have to be selective in what we support and look to partnership funding.

Case study – Nostell Estate Yard

• Open book development appraisal

• EH Grant £420k• EH support for enabling

development in green belt• RDPE Grant £100k• Private investment £1.9

million• Two monastic buildings

brought into sustainable new use

Case study – Bolton Percy Gatehouse

• Open book development appraisal

• EH grant £85k• Country Houses

Foundation grant £65k• RDPE grant £40k• AHF grant and loan £57k• Other grants £14k• Vivat Trust funds £8k• C16 property given

sustainable use as holiday let

Case study – Whitby Brewhouse

• EH grant towards project development costs £8k

• EH advice supporting re-roofing and adaptation

• Sustainable reuse of a decaying ruin as a private house

Working together on shared priorities

• We want to work with owners, developers and trusts, but need to engage early

Working together on shared priorities

• We need to agree shared HAR priorities with each local authority and work together on them

PPS5

• Policy HE2.1: LPAs should ensure that they have evidence about the HE and heritage assets in their area and that this is publicly documented…

• Policy HE2.3: LPAs should use the evidence to assess the type, numbers, distribution, significance and condition of heritage assets…

PPS5

• Policy HE3.1: LDFs should set out a positive, proactive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment in their area…

• Policy HE3.4: Plans at a local level are likely to consider investment in and enhancement of historic places … in more detail. They should include consideration of how best to conserve … heritage assets that are most at risk …

PPS5

• Policy HE5.1: LPAs should monitor the impact of their policies and decisions on the HE. They should pay particular attention to the degree to which heritage assets are at risk, how this will change and how they propose to respond.

Working together on shared priorities

• We need to harness all available resources – conservation, enforcement, development management, forward planning, museums, leisure, libraries

Working together on shared priorities

• If you are a local authority working up priorities for your increasingly stretched conservation team, come and see us so that we can build shared ambitions for your area

Let’s work together