context

C O N T E X T 1 7 9 : M A R C H 2 0 2 4 9 government, such as seems to have hobbled the efforts of those who attempted to influence the present arrangements. But from where, and from whom, might there come a realistic dose of dispassionate common sense such as might facilitate a properly equitable management of inevitable decline? Henry M Duckett Getting our wagons in a circle From John Preston I vividly recall Sir Neil Cossons, when chair of English Heritage, telling the heritage sector at the 2002 Oxford Planning and the Historic Environment Conference ‘An Agenda for the 21st Century’ that in the face of threats the sector needed to form its wagons into a defensive circle. That could not be more relevant now. There is no holistic consideration of heritage in sustainability assessments at strategic and building levels. Take Cambridge, whose world-renowned significance is severely threatened by current growth, let alone Michael Gove’s announcement of ‘north of 150,000’ new homes, which would double its size with impacts on the capacity of the historic city, its medieval market town streets and its setting disregarded. Nationally, building owners cannot get the skills they need, a self-interested industry does not understand old buildings, government and press push a deregulation agenda, local government is in crisis and we face a forthcoming general election in which parties bandy retrofit targets with no mention of traditional buildings. The government’s long-delayed report on planning barriers to energy efficiency in historic homes focuses on low-carbon heating (heat pumps and solar) as well as energy-efficiency measures, and on listed building consent orders. Unhelpfully, this report was published just after the end of the consultation period for Historic England’s draft historic environment advice note (HEAN) which, it is now clear, reflected discussions not shared with the wider sector. Neither the report nor the draft HEAN highlights the need for appropriate repairs before retrofit. Both are oblivious to traditional buildings not listed or in conservation areas (so missing a vital scale argument in pressing for industry change), and crucially both ignore Part L, PAS 2035, PAS 2038, BS 7913 and BS EN 16883, and the principles and processes for balancing energy efficiency and heritage they contain. BS EN 16883, if freely available, could be an answer at strategic and building scales to John Fidler’s query (Letter, ‘Risks of fast adoption’, Context 177): ‘where is the detailed published weaponry for conservation officers in balancing heritage harm versus other socio-economic benefits?’ This building standard (regrettably overlooked by Historic England in both the King’s College case and the HEAN) sets out a model process and, crucially, puts culture on an equal footing with the social, economic and environmental components of sustainability. (See also the STBA’s ‘From Retrofit to Regeneration: a blueprint for post-Covid recovery’.) That is an urgent message to get across to politicians and the public. John Preston Looking down on photo-voltaics From Robin Uff An important aspect of the impact of the over-cladding of the lead roof of King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, with obtrusive black photo-voltaic panels was overlooked and rather glossed over in John Preston’s article (‘A world- wide precedent for solar panels?’ Context 176, June 2023) and John Fidler’s follow-up letter (‘Risks of fast adoption’, Context 177, September 2023). At the committee meeting and in the statements supporting the panels, much was made of the relative difficulty of any really clear views to the roof surface beyond the parapets. It was generally accepted that from most ground- level or vantage points from buildings it was possible only to glimpse some parts of the lead roof. This discounts the fact that, increasingly, views from above are widespread and commonplace. The aerial view on King’s College’s own website is one example. It must be difficult to conclude that there can be no seriously damaging impact and harm to the character, appearance and significance of the pale tones of the historic lead roof and limestone walling, and to the architectural detail of the chapel in itself and its wider setting. It is a great shame that Cambridge City Council’s recommendation to refuse the application was not upheld. This could have opened informed discussion and judgements for an appeal decision beneficially and a ruling on where a balance lies, with public benefits being assessed fully. Robin Uff