Listed buildings – exteriors

Listed buildings — Exteriors

Introduction

A listed building is judged initially on its external appearance, which can clearly tell much about its history and development. Historic buildings are more impressive and have greater value, in all senses, if they are treated with sensitivity and understanding.

This leaflet contains advice to enable the appeal of listed buildings to be maintained, while allowing some of the aspirations of occupants to be satisfied. This leaflet on ‘Listed Building Exteriors’ complements the one published on ‘Listed Building Interiors’. The aim is to help listed building owners and their agents understand what needs listed building consent, and how the Planning Authority assesses applications. There is a list of references and useful contacts on the last page.

Listed Building Consent

Any alteration that affects the character or appearance of a listed building, whether internal or external, requires ‘listed building consent’ (referred to below as ‘consent’). Listed building control is applied equally to all listed buildings - Grades II (which accounts for over 95% of all listed buildings), II* and I. The beliefs that only the front or the exterior of a building, or the bits referred to in the official list description, are listed, are incorrect.

All of a building is listed, including anything attached to the building and most of the structures within its curtilage (see ‘Boundaries and Curtilage’). The official list descriptions are only aids to understanding and identification.

Occasionally a very minor work of alteration might not require consent, if there would be no effect on the historic or architectural interest of the building. It is for the Planning Authority, not the homeowner, to determine that. Therefore owners and occupants should always contact the Planning Authority before undertaking work.

The way in which applications should be submitted is covered in notes attached to the consent application forms. Existing/survey (‘before’) and proposed (‘after’) elevations and/or floorplans are needed (depending on the nature of the work), and photos may also be valuable. Plans must be accurate, explicit and fully annotated. It is not enough to show only what a proposal would look like, without accompanying information on construction and materials. The Planning Authority may require further information to be provided before a decision can be made. A continuing lack of information might even be a reason for refusal of an application.

Applications should include a Heritage Statement setting out the design principles adopted, and how the proposals have had regard to the development plan policies and other supplementary design guidance. The statement should also relate the proposals to the history and development of the structure, and explain how they respect and have had regard to that.

Extent of Control

It is easier to say what works do not require consent. Maintenance and limited repair does not require consent. Where restoration of the existing material is not practical, ‘repair’ includes replacement on a ‘like-for-like’ basis, i.e. the exact replication of all materials, features and details of the original, and not just new work bearing a superficial resemblance to the original.

However where repairs are very extensive, e.g. work comprising the repointing of entire elevations, remaking windows in entirety or replacement amounting to the rebuilding of walls or roof structures, consent is required, as the result is in effect new building work, and no longer repair. The use of different materials, e.g. plastic in place of timber, or cement mortar instead of lime mortar, or maybe a markedly different slate or clay tile, would require consent.

Building fabric that is very old, rare or historically valuable is irreplaceable, and should wherever possible be conserved and repaired.

Consent is not normally needed for

• patch repointing of specified or isolated joints, where the original mortar mix and the characteristics of the old joints are copied precisely (but see comments above and ‘Walls’ below),
• repainting of external walling and joinery, where the difference between the existing and proposed colours has no material effect on the building’s appearance (but see ‘Painting’ below),
• adding bells, letter-boxes, house names, and other such small-scale inconspicuous items,
• adding TV aerials, or connecting to the national network of telephone wires,
• gardening, planting and hard landscaping within the grounds, except where the surface itself is covered by listing. A small number of buildings have surrounding grounds and parklands that are on the register of historic parks and gardens, and notice must be given of intended changes to these estates. Also some earthmoving operations, depending on the context for the work, may constitute development, and therefore need planning permission.

Demolition within the grounds of a listed building of freestanding buildings built or deemed to have been built since 1948 will require consent. (Within a conservation area, demolition will need conservation area consent, if the building is in excess of 115 cu.m. or for demolition of a wall of one metre in height where abutting a highway or less than two metres high.)

If in any doubt about the need for consent, phone the Planning Authority. The Building Conservation Officer will look to give a quick answer, but may first need to visit to assess the impact of the proposal on the historic interest of the building.

Trees within the grounds of a listed building are not automatically protected, but they may be protected by Tree Preservation Orders, or if the land is within a conservation area. Checks should be made with the Planning Authority’s Tree Helpline: 02380 285330 (District) or 01590 646615 (Park).

Planning Permission and Changes of Use

In addition to consent, planning permission may be required. Anything defined in planning legislation as ‘development’ needs permission, but many categories of minor work on residential property are specifically then named as ‘permitted development’, where that necessity to obtain planning permission is set aside. The details of this area of planning control are liable to change over time, and the advice is always to enquire of the Planning Authority whether planning permission is needed.

Permission is often needed for a change of use. Changes of use may have no knock-on implications for the external elevations, but where they do, and they are extensive, it is possible that the listed building is not suited to the proposed use. Domestic buildings have severe limitations when retail use is planned, as the incorporation of shopfronts into domestic groundfloor frontages would usually be unacceptable. Also prominent signage and advertising would possibly not be acceptable on a building of domestic appearance.

Possible implications of changes of use for internal character are dealt with in the leaflet on ‘Listed Building Interiors’.

Building Regulations

A third type of approval that may be required is building regulations approval. This applies to many works to listed buildings, such as structural alterations, some changes of use, and all new building work (i.e. extensions). Repairs are not subject to their control. In many cases account has to be taken of the limitations imposed on what is acceptable by the special considerations of working with the historic fabric of listed buildings.

Sometimes the requirements for health and safety in the Building Regulations cannot be fully met in a historic building. Alternative solutions may be found, and compensating factors need to be taken into account. For example, new windows may be unable to achieve the specified thermal standards where they need to replicate existing construction and fabric. Similarly, the requirements for escape windows in loft conversions may conflict with aesthetic conservation considerations.

It is always advisable to contact the District Council’s Building Control section as early as possible in the planning process to highlight any possible conflicts between the Building Regulations and building conservation interests. Early consultation can address and probably resolve most such conflicts. This avoids the frustration and waste involved in discovering that a scheme negotiated with planners and the Conservation team cannot be implemented because of problems with the Building Regulations.

Local Planning Policy

Policies CP7 of the New Forest National Park and 6.3 of the New Forest District (outside the National Park) Core Strategies are designed to protect, maintain and enhance important features of the built environment.

Central Government guidance

The National Planning Policy Framework 2012 sets out the Government’s policy and guidance on the historic environment.

Basic Principles

• Leave undisturbed as much original detail and material as possible, including material that has only decorative purpose.
• Where possible, repair rather than replace historic fabric and materials. The relative costs often make sense, even if more work and greater skill is involved in repair.
• When replacing historic fabric, still use the original material to maintain the historic interest and authenticity of the building.
• During the life of an old house with work of many periods, previous owners may have made changes or additions, now themselves considered historically valuable parts of the building. Taking a house back to an earlier point in time – whether documented or conjectural - is rarely appropriate and should be avoided, unless it involves the removal of poor-quality or misguided recent additions.
• Old material need not be removed just because it is old. The aim of repair is to make good, not to make new.
• Avoid being tempted to standardise or unify external appearance and treatment where the building clearly is of several historic phases and styles.
• When planning a change, consider not just its usefulness to you, but also its structural impact, and its effect on the visual balance of the entire building.
• If a building has not significantly altered since it was built, leave it alone. Now is not the time to start. An unaltered listed building is a rare survival.

Extensions

This leaflet does not give comprehensive advice on extensions to listed buildings. Such is the range of buildings and circumstances that useful general advice is very limited. Each case must be considered on its merits.

There is no right to extend a listed building. The general planning restriction of extensions in rural areas to 30% of the cubic capacity of the building does not indicate an entitlement to extend listed buildings up to that limit. Some buildings remain so original and unaltered that any extension would damage their special historic interest. Others have been much altered over time, and a further sympathetic extension may indeed be just another contribution to the developing architectural interest of the building. An extension can also tidy up or rationalise earlier poorly designed or constructed additions to a building.

Extending a listed building sympathetically depends on a thorough understanding of its history and layout. Extensions must be clearly subservient to the original building, and their design should complement what exists, without necessarily just copying it. You are strongly advised to make early contact with the Building Conservation section of the Planning Authority when planning an extension to a listed building.

Roof Structures

Character of roofspaces

Often the most original and untouched historic fabric in a building is in the roofspace, which may have altered little, and can provide insights into the history and occupancy of the building. Attics have often only been used for storage, with accommodation limited to occasional or inferior sleeping quarters. Here you may find the broadest and oldest floorboards, lath and plaster, wattle and daub panels, historic paint traces, and the original exposed timbers with their carpenter’s marks. Within such an unspoilt interior conversion to more formalised accommodation might entail too much upgrading and loss of fabric for a grant of consent to be recommended. It may also be impractical, in terms of access, reasonable levels of incoming light (and air), means of escape, and serviceable surfaces to the rooms, to achieve more intensive use.

Integrity of roof structure

In attics it is usual to see trusses and purlins, as well as rafters, exposed. The principal structural members must not be disturbed in conversion work. For example, the bottom chords of trusses might impede movement through an attic, and purlins might block the intended positions of new windows. In all such cases applications for consent to cut through the roof structure would be strongly resisted. Provided that a roof structure is tight and sound, the irregularities in roof lines revealed in the shapes of purlins and ridge pieces should be retained when roof coverings are renewed, rather than making the line of the roof square and ‘neat’.

Light sources

For discussion on new light sources, see ‘Dormers and Rooflights’.

Means of escape

Providing means of escape from fire is a real concern. Providing this through the roof or via openings in the end gable walls may be a poor and impractical safety option, and undesirable in conservation terms, necessitating large openings in the roof. Providing a protected means of escape internally down to an outer door is highly desirable but again may entail destructive internal works (upgrading doors etc.) and thus be unacceptable. A narrow winding stairs to an attic may itself also have value and be a feature that shouldn’t be removed. If satisfactory means of escape cannot be provided without damaging the building’s conservation interest, then this may preclude consent for the more intensive use of an attic being recommended.

Repair versus replacement

Roof structures should always be repaired where possible rather than replaced. Deterioration occurs for various reasons, leading to one of a number of common problems. Rain will get in through defective roof coverings, leading to decay and weakness in main timbers. Where the configuration of the roof is unsound there may be roof spread, and joints that were tight may open up. It is however extremely rare for deterioration to be so advanced that repair is not feasible (even if a particular engineer advocates that the roof should be rebuilt or replaced by a new structure).

Consent would always be resisted for an entirely new system of structural support substituting the original structure. Consent would often not be requested for new and appropriate timber repairs or the addition of steel plates, brackets, shoes or tie-rods to give structural strength or to arrest movement. It becomes a question of extent and degree whether the work is so extensive and of such a nature that the work should be controlled by consent.

Certainly replacing an entire roof structure would always need consent.

Roof shape

There is a rich variety of historic roof shapes, each appropriate to the type of building and the locality. Consent would not be recommended on any building to replace the original and authentic roof shape with a roof of a different shape, i.e. turning a hipped end into a gable, or creating a fake mansard roof in order to increase accommodation space.

Roof coverings

Types

Roofs covered with handmade clay tiles, slates and thatch are common throughout the New Forest area. The material covering the roof of a listed building is one of its most defining characteristics. Most listed buildings retain the original roof material, and consent is not often sought for changes. Occasionally other materials are found on roofs. Pan tiles are not typical of the area, and are only found on a few agricultural buildings. Shingles are found on a few churches, and as a lightweight material on near vertical surfaces. ‘Tin’ or corrugated iron, although not common, has a long history on outbuildings and on farms, and this ‘temporary’ material is often thought of as a vernacular building material.

Repair and maintenance

Repairs involving complete stripping and recovering do not require consent, on condition that the roof material is reused and a very good - new or salvaged - matching material is found to make up any deficit.

In most cases rebattening and felting are taken to be constituent parts of repair. Where insulation is laid or packed between or over the top of rafters, character certainly changes and consent would be required. On buildings such as barns with fine battens and tiles visible on the underside of the roof historic integrity would be compromised by felting and consent would be required.

Slates and clay tiles

Proposals to reinstate clay tiles in place of slate on the roof of an early building would not usually be supported. Until about 150 years ago slate was not available, and to that extent is not a locally typical material. However its widespread use since then on buildings of all periods makes it now no more or less acceptable on most roofs than natural clay tiles.

Slate will often have become the established roof covering in that time. The pitch of a roof largely determines what is and looks acceptable. Steeply pitched roofs look better with tiles, while roofs of shallow pitch suit slates better. Also a case for change could be made where there are several adjacent roofs on a group of similar properties, and uniformity of materials is worth pursuing in the interests of the townscape and the unity of the composition.

There are so many variants of both clay tiles and natural slates that a consent application would be sought for roof materials that are markedly different in colour, size or texture. (It is the appearance of the tile or slate on the roof that determines whether consent is required, and not the source or origin of the material). Some roof coverings are more sophisticated, and consent would be required, and may be resisted, to alter such roofs. For example, some slate roofs have graduated courses with diminishing gauges of slates as the courses rise towards the ridge, and some clay tile roofs contain differently shaped ornamental tiles such as diamonds and clubs used in occasional courses and other patterns.

Artificial materials

Artificial materials are not appropriate or acceptable on listed buildings, and grant of consent for their use would be resisted. Where the existing roof covering is artificial, a change to a more sympathetic natural material would always be supported.

Change to thatch

In the past there were many more thatched roofs than there are now. Consent would never be recommended for the removal of thatch from a listed building in favour of some other covering. Consent might be recommended on a roof with a steep enough pitch for a return to thatch where there is evidence that a building with an inappropriate modern roof covering was once thatched. However where a roof has long been appropriately covered in clay tiles, there is much less cause to take those off and replace them with thatch.

Types of thatch

Consent is required for a change from one type of thatch (wheat or water reed) to another, or for a change in the manner of use of a material (i.e. wheat used either as combed wheat reed or in the longstraw tradition). It is also required for the introduction of one of a number of imported materials such as veldt grass, or for a significant change to the roof’s detail, such as a different form of ridge. This advice is in line with national guidance from English Heritage. See also the leaflet, ‘Thatch and Thatching’.

Flat roofs and lead

Flat roofs are not a common feature of listed buildings, except for some representing 20th century design movements that used flat roofs as integral elements of the design thinking (e.g. Modern Movement). It is not appropriate now to introduce flat roofs on other listed buildings. Where a small area of flat roof is an element of a listed building, lead is the only appropriate lining material, and no sort of felt is acceptable. This applies also to the valleys around roofs or behind parapets. Lead is also used to cover very shallowly pitched roofs, known as ‘crown flats’.

Ridges

A natural clay tile or slate roof is properly finished with either a ridge of natural clay or lead. The colour of clay can range from deep slate-blue to full red, and the shapes include angled tiles on the ridges and rounded bonnet tiles on the leading edges of hipped roofs. Again, artificial ridge tiles are not acceptable on listed buildings. Decorative detail on ridges, including cresting and finials, should not be removed, or indeed be introduced where inappropriate, and removal or introduction would require consent.

Corrugated iron

This has gradually come to be regarded as an agricultural vernacular building material.

Ventilation

Ventilation of roofs can be done more or less subtly, and would require consent if the items could in any way appear obtrusive.

Dormers and Rooflights

Principles

Attics were most frequently lit by small iron rooflights or by small windows in the end gable walls, and also sometimes by one or two small dormers. Whatever the source of light, the level of light into an attic was always low. These are valuable historic features, but their use is not always necessarily appropriate in every historic building. Dormers especially may not be suitable in many roofs.

The provision of increased accommodation in attics usually brings a need for more or larger sources of natural light, and for increased ventilation. Whether consent is recommended for new dormers and rooflights depends on the impact on external appearance, on an assessment of the internal historic character of the space, and on what would be lost in the process of alteration (see ‘Roof Structures’). The main considerations are the form, size, number and positioning of dormers and rooflights. Limitations on the amount of acceptable new sources of daylight could be a major constraint on the potential for increased use.

Form

Traditional dormers most often had conventionally pitched roofs with hipped or gabled ends, and either clay tiled or slated roofs, with tile-hung or lead-lined cheeks. Another common type - more likely to be found in larger and more formally composed 19th century buildings - has a shallow segmental section to a lead-lined roof, and lead-lined cheeks also. Sliding sashes and side-hung casement windows are both common, and the style of building will determine which is appropriate.

Construction

New dormers should replicate the appearance and construction of older dormers. A crude appearance to new dormers is all too common with deep fascias and flat boards at the corners in place of properly moulded timbers. There is usually little cause to run guttering round the eaves of small dormer roofs; rainwater can usually drain into the main eaves guttering. New work will be controlled by obtaining from the applicant drawings in section through the proposed construction.

Size and proportion

The size of dormers should relate to and be smaller than the size of window openings in the wall below. There is a proper sequence of reducing dimensions of window openings from the ground floor up through the storeys to the dormers. Rarely should dormers be wider than two narrow casements side by side, or larger than is needed to house a correctly composed small 3-over-3, 3-over-6 or 6-over-3 sash arrangement. Ideally the height of the face of the dormer should be greater than its width, although roof pitch affects this. The steeper the pitch, the more the dormer height can be accentuated.

Positioning

The positioning of the dormers in the roof is important. Viewed from inside, dormers must not cause purlins or principal members of the roof structure to be cut, and should disturb as few rafters as possible. Viewed from outside, the highest part of the dormer must be significantly below the level of the roof’s ridge. Dormers at the level of the main ridge would not be recommended for grant of consent.

Dormers rising through the eaves as a continuation in the same vertical plane of the front wall are not generally typical, and are best avoided. However they are more common on buildings of the later 19th century, and on estate cottages of one and a half storeys.

Lateral positioning also needs care. Where there is formality in the disposition of window openings in the wall below, dormers either need to align with the bays below, or else be fewer in number and symmetrically arranged between the bays.

Unacceptable dormers

There is no reason to depart from the range of traditional dormer types in old buildings. Consent would hardly ever be recommended for flat-roofed dormers, and dormers that are three lights wide, or clearly wider than they are high, would also be resisted. ‘Catslide’ dormers are not typical of the area, and should not be used.

Rooflights

Rooflights may be an alternative way of getting natural light into attics. Typically rooflights admit more light into a greater proportion of a room than do dormers. Most rooflights used in older buildings now replicate the traditional cast-iron skylights, split vertically by one or more dividing bars. Use of the once ubiquitous brownish ‘Velux’ type without subdivision will not be recommended for grant of consent. Rooflights should be fitted so that, when closed, their outer surface lies flush with the plane of the surrounding roof covering, rather than standing proud. This makes a big difference especially when looking at a roof at an oblique angle.

Rooflights may be more appropriate on rear slopes or facing valleys, but their size should be modest and no greater than that of the face of an acceptable dormer. A vertical emphasis is preferable. Irrespective of location on a building, there should not be too many of them.

Dormers or rooflights?

Discussion about dormers or rooflights presupposes that one or the other will be acceptable in principle. Sometimes the unbroken sweep of a long roof slope is its most important characteristic, and neither would be acceptable. Where the principle is acceptable, the issue is whether to use dormers or rooflights, especially on prominent front elevations. To an extent established local practice in similar buildings is a guide, but also new natural light sources will often be steered towards a rear, rather than a front, roof slope. In a front-facing slope, dormers that, through their form and appearance, extend the architectural expression of the elevation above eaves level may be preferable. However they can look awkward in smaller roofs and roofs of modest pitch. Rooflights are often associated more with service rooms, stairwells and secondary parts of a building.

Building Control might suggest that dormer windows or rooflights should be able to serve as escape routes, with a consequent implication for the size of opening, but conservation considerations often mean that such large openings are unacceptable in historic buildings.

Chimneys

Demolition

Demolition of chimneys is usually unacceptable, and grant of consent would be resisted. Even if a flue is redundant, that is no cause to remove such a major element of a listed building. In later architecturally designed buildings, tall and decorative chimneys are often part of the special attraction of the building. It may occasionally be acceptable to remove a later stack, especially where the brick is poor and the stack has been added to the detriment of the building’s appearance. The removal of simple but appropriate brick stacks in favour of more ornate but unsuitable chimneystacks would be resisted.

Rebuilding

Sometimes there is pressure to rebuild a stack simply because it has no tray to impede the downward passage of moisture into the walls below. However, unless this is evidently causing a serious problem, old chimneys should not automatically be dismantled for that reason. Rebuilt stacks do not gain the patina of real age for many years. Despite the inaccessibility of chimneys, accounting for their frequent neglect, maintaining pointing and flashings is very important, usually avoiding the need for more drastic action later.

There may be pressure to raise the height of some chimneys, especially on thatched roofs to take sparks clear of the area of greatest incendiary risk, but also to improve the draught of a flue. This would affect the proportions of a building, and is unlikely to be acceptable.

Rendering

Rendering a brick chimneystack, which tends to conceal its sharp and detailed profile, requires consent and would normally be resisted, even where weathering has eroded the brickwork. Piecemeal replacement of very damaged bricks and appropriate repointing is the correct solution. Even rebuilding would be preferable where the courses of brickwork are exploding.

Pots

Chimneystacks are completed with chimneypots, and their removal, which significantly affects roofscapes, would require consent and would be resisted. Few pots are so important that consent would be needed for them to be replaced by others, the exception being tall Elizabethan or similar Victorian twisted and embossed pots. This kind of more ornate pot is not an appropriate addition to most listed buildings.

Flues

There are several techniques and proprietary systems for lining flues. Some cause lasting and irretrievable harm to old building fabric, and consent would be needed for certain methods, especially those that coat the inside of the flue with material that cannot be removed later. Prominent filters to flues on top of chimneystacks would also need consent.

New stacks

Reinstating chimneystacks removed years before would normally be supported. A new stack might be incorporated into the design of an extension, and new flues and stacks might be allowed on old buildings, depending on the effect on internal fabric and layout and external appearance. False stacks (i.e. with no flue below) should not be placed on old parts of listed buildings.

Eaves, Verges and Rainwater Goods

This section deals with the junctions of walls and roofs, and the disposal of surface rainwater from the building. Even on historic buildings, traditional construction and best practice is too often disregarded, in favour of cheap and utilitarian alternatives. Historic practice should be maintained, and in most cases continued where listed buildings are being extended.

Verges

Verges are at the edge of a sloping roof overhanging a gable and most commonly show tiles or slates, pointed up in mortar and laid so as to overhang the head of the gable wall. The exposed ends of purlins may also show. The overhang assists weathering, and thatched roofs overhang much more.

Bargeboards came into use in the mid 19th century, becoming a focus for ornamentation, with mouldings, fretwork and shaped edges, and are often a major part of the appeal of buildings of this period. Bargeboards on earlier buildings are usually unsuitable, and should be avoided. Plastic bargeboards will always be resisted.

Parapets

Some verges contain the roof within brick parapets standing up higher at the head of the gable walls. Weathering the junction between parapet and roof covering usually involves letting lead into a joint on the inside of the parapet and dressing it down over the covering. Parapets are coped in brick or stone and may have ‘kneelers’ at the junction with the eaves. Parapets should never be rendered to avoid subsequent maintenance, for the crisp and detailed profile of the parapet is invariably lost in this way.

Parapet verges often coincide with steeply pitched roofs. Some thatched roofs locally have upstand parapets, and it is likely that many early buildings with steep pitches and such parapets were at one time thatched.

Eaves

Traditionally eaves were open, not ‘boxed’. Typically the rafter feet were visible. Not until the early-to-mid 19th century did closed eaves with soffits and fascias appear as a refinement on some buildings, usually in conjunction with increased projection of the roofs beyond the walls. The overhang did not make a roof construction with boxed eaves look much deeper. That unfortunately is often the effect of modern boxed eaves with deep fascia boards, especially when they and the soffits are then painted a light or bright colour to make them stand out. Plastic fascias and soffits will always be resisted.

The interests of energy efficiency demand that roofs, even in older buildings, are effectively insulated in order to reduce heat loss. ‘Warm’ roofs with insulating material placed above the rafters results in deeper roofs which tend to be concealed by correspondingly deep fascia boards. Insulation placed between the rafters can however reduce the depth needed for ventilation and insulation above the rafters.

Rainwater goods

Gutters, downpipes and hopper heads are often important decorative features to be kept and repaired as necessary. Traditionally guttering was in cast iron, with some very early ones being in wood lined with lead, and some parts of downpipes and hoppers were in lead. The use of any other material on listed buildings would always be resisted. Grant of consent will never be recommended for plastic gutters and downpipes. The most common profile of guttering is ‘half round’, and this is the norm on most buildings. Ogee-profiled gutters were used as a more refined item on finer buildings, but are not better than the half round type. Guttering and downpipes on traditional buildings can perfectly well be attached directly to the walling with iron brackets and plates, and without fascia boards, or strapped to the rafter ends by hangers.

There is no reason why downpipes should be painted in a way that makes them stand out. They are often located in corners, or recesses, or in the shadow of more important features. Also, when punctuating an eaves-line with a number of dormers, it should be remembered that this will probably cause unattractive downpipes to proliferate.

Walls

Range of materials

Most walls are of brick (painted or unpainted), and many are rendered. Significant numbers have exposed or concealed timber framing, or are built of cob (either chalk cob or clay cob). Tile (and slate) hanging occurs sporadically, but is not widespread. A very few buildings are clad with mathematical tiles, affixed and then pointed up to resemble proper brickwork. Weatherboarding (both vertical and horizontal) is a rural material, commonly used in agricultural buildings and on outbuildings and extensions to country cottages.

Pointing

A limited amount of repointing can be classed as repair, provided that the type of mortar and the characteristics of the joints are replicated. More comprehensive work, including the repointing of entire elevations, is taken to be new work that could change the character of buildings, and requires consent. Such extensive work is almost always unnecessary, being done for purely cosmetic reasons to obtain a uniform appearance even though much of the pointing may be performing perfectly well. Examples of practices the Planning Authority will seek to prevent include the use of cement mortar in place of lime mortar, broad and ugly strap pointing, and the damaging use of angle grinders to extract old mortar from joints.

Painting

Painting walls is dealt with under ‘Painting’ below.

Render

Rendering a brick wall would always require consent, and would almost always be unacceptable. Even where brickwork is very eroded, or disfigured by a lot of poor repairs or badly matching bricks, tile (or in some areas slate) hanging may be a preferable option. Otherwise replacement of the most eroded bricks is needed, but rendering the wall is hardly ever a solution. Most cob buildings are rendered, and periodically the reapplication of a lime-based render topcoat will be necessary. To render a cob building that has not previously been rendered would require consent, and a reasoned justification for that course of action would need to be provided.

Render should not be removed, other than when inappropriate hard cement render is being replaced by a traditional lime render. The face of newly exposed brickwork is usually poor, both visually but also in terms of its ability to sustain weathering, if the fired face of the bricks has been pulled off by the render removal. Thus render removal, even where it is a potentially damaging cementitious mix, may be ill advised, unless the render is already beginning not to adhere to the backing brickwork, and letting water in behind as a consequence.

Parapets

As on roofs, upstand parapet walls should not be rendered over to hide problems of erosion and weathering. Careful dismantling is a possibility, reinstating all features such as open panels containing balusters in the reconstruction. Completely dismantling a parapet would require consent.

Timber frames

There are more buildings with timber frames than is at first apparent, as many frames are concealed behind either contemporary or later outer skins in other materials. Consent would not be recommended for any proposal to cut through any part of a timber frame. Proposals to substitute a modern alternative means of structural support - usually involving lots of steelwork - in place of the timber frame would be resisted.

Timber walling

Traditionally, weatherboarding could be either vertical with cover strips or horizontal. Consent is likely to be resisted if new boarding is too narrow, or is waney-edged, or is shiplapped.

Stone

Stone is not a typical building material in most of the New Forest, other than in the downland area centred on Martin, or where stone from monastic foundations was raided for use in domestic buildings (e.g. Beaulieu and Breamore). Buildings that reused stone from monastic foundations have historic as well as architectural interest, and consent sought to remove or conceal such areas of exposed stonework would always be resisted. Applicants would be dissuaded from building extensions in stone that does not accurately match the old material, or in locations where stone has not traditionally been used.

Cob

The New Forest is towards the eastern edge of a region where cob has been a widespread and traditional building material. Both chalk and clay cob feature in the area. Cob derives its strength from being formed in unbroken, three-dimensional ‘cells’, undisturbed but for a few relatively small door and window openings. Proposals that jeopardise the structural integrity of cob buildings by cutting through walls or making openings that are too large would be resisted. The face of cob walls sometimes erodes alarmingly, and the only sound solution is to pack out the cob to return it to its original face plane. Also it is preferable to stitch vertical fractures in cob in preference to any more drastic intervention.

Structural repair

Walls sometimes develop cracks or bulges, and structural repair becomes a priority. A sophisticated assessment of the nature of the structural problem is the first requirement, and particularly whether the problem is a current or a historic, but now inactive one. There is usually more than one solution, some involving quite subtle and limited interventions, and others being rather more drastic and far reaching.

Consent would often not be required for the repair. However, extensive work involving significant dismantling and rebuilding would normally require consent, in part to be able to control the implementation of the work, but also to give opportunity to consider whether a preferable and less drastic solution is available.

Damp-proof courses

Some older buildings have some sort of damp-proof course, frequently a physical barrier such as a horizontal course of slate. Others, especially those built of cob, do not, and the insertion now of a damp-proof course could be very harmful. There is residual moisture in the solid walls of older buildings, and disturbing a settled equilibrium by trying to ‘dry the walls out’ could affect structural stability. Excessive moisture in lower walls should be tackled first by investigating external ground conditions, and by ensuring that the outer surfaces of the walls are able to absorb and expel moisture efficiently. Damp proof courses (dpc) do not normally require consent, although associated works may, e.g. removing the lowest metre of plaster and replacing it with a cementitious, ‘waterproof’ material. Cutting in a physical barrier into a solid wall would require consent.

Decorative features

Where walls have decorative features - raised bands, string courses, ornately dentillated eaves, cornices, patterned brickwork, quoins, ventilation holes, projecting plinths – their removal would always be resisted. When decorative detail, that was once an integral commonplace element in the design of buildings, becomes worn and needs repair, it should not then be considered redundant and removed as a pragmatic response to its condition. Removal would in any event require consent.

Doors and Door Openings

Types of traditional doors

Doors to listed buildings should be in keeping with the period and character of the house. Plank and boarded doors, strengthened by ledges and braces, suit a lot of early cottage properties. From the late 1600’s the panelled door became more common and evolved over centuries to have variations that suited both large and small, and both grand and plain, properties. A few later doors were made to incorporate glazed panels, but more often solid doors have been modified during their lives to take glazing.

Change of type

Original historic doors should be retained and repaired. Consent would always be required for a change of type of door. The original door, or a copy of that, or an appropriate period door is always better than a poor modern approximation of a traditional style. Particularly inappropriate, and certain to be resisted on all occasions, is the aptly nicknamed, modern ‘Kentucky Fried Georgian’ door incorporating a fanlight within the door. Equally, plastic doors are always inappropriate and will be opposed. Replacing inserted modern doors with more appropriate traditional doors would always be supported. Stable doors with independently opening upper and lower halves were once in vogue, and can suit some cottages, although even then they look better at the rears than as front doors.

Widening doorways

The most likely reason to want to widen an old doorway would be to allow access for the disabled. Such access may often be conveniently allowed at a secondary doorway with less harm to historic fabric. Otherwise, there is seldom a justification for widening a doorway. Remember that the width of doors is related to the width of the detail at the head of the doorway. There is also often valuable moulded or contrasting material down the jambs of an older doorway. Altering a doorway or the detail of a surrounding doorcase requires consent.

Doors and natural light

There is often a desire to let light into internal hallways through, above or alongside the doorway. Originally this was achieved in two ways. Fanlights of many styles and shapes were placed above the door, but still within the frame of the doorway. Occasionally a separate window opening was placed alongside but close to the door, small enough not to disturb the rhythm of the external elevation. Letting glazing into a solid door is a relatively recent idea, most examples being later modifications of panelled doors. Six- or eight-panelled doors may be altered in this way while still retaining their essential character. However, the greater the area of glazing, the less appropriate it appears, and introducing glazing down to the level of the lock rail would not be suitable. Modifying a door in this way requires consent.

Steps and thresholds

Stone steps between street and threshold levels should always be kept, and their removal or obliteration under a permanent ramp would be resisted. There is an implication for the disabled, and generally solutions would be sought that involve either a temporary, removable ramp, or access via a secondary doorway. Old railings rising alongside steps should always be kept, as should items like footscrapers and lamps. Where evidence exists of former features, reinstatement would be encouraged.

Closing doorways

Accepting that old doorways are important elements of facades, it is hardly ever acceptable to block up a doorway externally, and consent is always required. It may very occasionally be acceptable to turn a doorway into a window opening without making the façade imbalanced, by blocking up the lower part below a new cill and leaving the elements of any substantial framing to a doorway in place. Generally, though, redundancy of an opening is not in itself justification for change, and the best solution is simply not to use that door. Internal blocking of a doorway is possible, but this must be done so as to be easily reversible without lasting damage to historic fabric around the door. Internal blocking needs consent.

New doorways

New doorways in old buildings, which always require consent, can easily throw out the balance of an elevation, even when achieved by dropping an existing window cill to ground level. New doorways should be appropriately framed, detailed and set into the wall, to avoid looking like items planted on its surface or like unadorned holes in the wall. Secondary doors and doorways should not look like principal entrance doors in the wrong location, and should be less ornate and more simply detailed. There may be pressure for new doorways when change of use is proposed involving vertical subdivision of a building that was formerly a single unit, and the visual and physical harm this can cause would count against such proposals.

Windows and Window Openings

Window styles

Windows are the ‘eyes’ of a building, and window style more than anything else determines its character and the impression it makes. Casement windows typically open outwards and are side-hung, and sash windows slide vertically or, rarely in this area, horizontally. There are occasional instances in agricultural and other non-domestic buildings of bottom-hinged hopper lights, and in dormers or windows near the apex of a gable of centrally pivoted ‘tilt-and-turn’ windows. There is hardly any justification for any other opening style in an older building.

Closing or modifying existing openings and opening new ones requires consent, as does change in the style or the detail of existing windows. Replacing a window, where repair is not feasible, does not require consent, but this assumes that the replacement window is an exact replica of the previous window in all parts, including its materials, sections, opening style and reveals. It should be noted that new windows, if they materially affect external appearance, might need planning permission also.

New window openings

Proposals to make a new window opening on a principal elevation would normally be resisted. At times in the past some openings were blocked for a variety of reasons, and it may be acceptable to reopen these. However if the building was built with blind or dummy window openings, that is how they should remain. It may be more acceptable to place new openings in secondary, rear or flank elevations where openings were fewer, smaller, and more randomly or less formally placed. For a new opening to be acceptable, the location, size and surrounding detailing (cill, jambs and traditional lintel) all have to be appropriate.

Alterations to window openings

Consent would not be recommended for the relocation of or for any change in dimensions to established window openings. (An occasional case might be made for dropping the cill of a window to ground level to form a new doorway).

Support would be given for change of modern and unsuitably shaped openings to more appropriately proportioned openings. This may repeat types found elsewhere on the elevation, or may be determined by windowheads still visible in the surrounding brickwork.

Reveals and depth of openings

Windows have deeper or shallower reveals, related to the construction of the building – no reveals in timber-framed construction and reveals of varying depths in solid and cavity brickwork and in cob buildings. The depth of recess from the plane of the wall determines how three-dimensional the window opening looks.

Cills, heads and jambs

The detail of cills, jambs and heads of window openings complement the windows themselves. There is never a cause to remove and discard original detailing and removal would require consent. Commonly cills or lintels in poor condition have been replaced in the past by pre-cast concrete items or similar, and consent would be recommended for the reinstatement of the appropriate original detailing. Where original fabric has deteriorated, although still performing well structurally, e.g. brick or terracotta that has lost the detail of its carved surface, that is no reason to remove it entirely.

Change of window style and material

There is sometimes pressure to change the type of windows in listed buildings, but the existing windows will, with few exceptions, be the ones that properly belong there. Where however change involves reverting to a historic type of window in place of modern, non-traditional windows, such changes would be supported, although consent is still required.

Many modern varieties of window are inappropriate in listed buildings, including those that are top-hung (including ‘quarter lights’), bottom-hung (except for old hopper lights), inward-opening, centre-pivoted, or ‘tilt-and-turn’. Windows should not be stormproofed, i.e. where the opening casements or fixed subframes project forward from and overlap the surrounding window frame. Consent would also not, other than in exceptional circumstances, be recommended for PVCu (plastic) or aluminium windows on any part of a listed building or on any extension.

Double and secondary glazing

Double glazed window units are not acceptable in the older - say, pre-1950 - parts of a listed building. In more recent extensions double glazing is still not acceptable in windows replicating the style of older windows in the property, but might be acceptable in some other openings or in clearly modern extensions, depending entirely on its visual impact, and how elegant or clumsy the windows appear.

Secondary glazing can normally be inserted within an opening without the need for consent, on the basis that its visual impact is often very limited, and it can be installed, and then removed, without damage being caused to the fabric of the listed building. Care should be taken that, when closed, the junction between the panels of the secondary glazing aligns with one of the fixed lines of the sash or casement windows.

Iron casements and leaded lights

These are less common, tending to be found on cottages and older houses, and in concentrations related to a particular estate or the output of a particular forge. They should not be lost or replaced by timber windows. They offer no opportunity for being double glazed, but secondary glazing might be appropriate. It is not an acceptable treatment to ‘restore’ leaded lights by placing a large single sheet of glass with ‘stick-on’ cames within an old iron casement.

Glass

The amount of old glass left in historic buildings is diminishing, and its retention is of great importance. The impurities and inconsistencies in old crown glass give a more characterful and interesting appearance than do the undifferentiated expanses of modern sheet glass. If a window has to be restored, with glazing bars or lead cames replaced, old glass should be set aside for reuse. Removing original, old glass requires consent to be obtained.

Decoration

In almost all cases window joinery should be painted. The Planning Authority often does not control change of paint colour through the consent process, although control will be exercised, and consent required, in the following circumstances:

• where uniformity of treatment is required throughout all the buildings of a formal architectural composition, such as a terrace, a square or a crescent,
• where a single large historic building is subdivided into several flats, but nonetheless expression of individual colour preference on the exterior of each flat has to be secondary to the need to keep a unified external appearance for the listed building,
• where the change in colour would give the building a radically different appearance or character.

A trend has developed for external joinery to be woodstained, although almost all windows have been painted since the start of the 18th century. There may be rare occasions when staining timber with a white or similar stain could be acceptable if it would be unreasonably impractical to gain future access to the windows for maintenance, although in other instances paint should be used, and not stain. Also stain itself needs to be reapplied periodically. Consent would never be recommended for wood-staining external joinery, although leaving oak joinery unstained on early cottages may be acceptable.

Shutters

Internal shutters are of great value and interest, and must be kept. Removing them would require consent. Original external shutters do exist, but many modern additions, including some that are permanently fixed, are fanciful but historically inappropriate. Shutters on earlier buildings were solid planked boards, whereas later shutters became finer and framed. Louvred shutters or ‘jalousies’ belong properly on elegant, refined Regency buildings. Removing modern shutters added in error to otherwise fine elevations would be a good service to some listed buildings.

Verandahs and balconies

The last years of the 18th century and the whole of the 19th century, especially in the Regency period, was when decorative ironwork, both cast and wrought, was in greatest use. Consent would never be recommended for the removal of verandahs, balconies and railings from this period. Fine ironwork of this period is an original feature that contributes to the building’s character.

Porches

Porches range in style, as do the buildings they attach to, from classically accurate architectural compositions, through solid and simple brick structures, to rustic pole and trellis constructions. Their purpose is normally to provide shelter outside the door, but may also be added to enhance the building’s appearance.

Often the Planning Authority would be able to agree to a porch being added to a listed building, dependent on size and style. However, on some buildings the original design of a principal entrance elevation incorporated elaborate doorcases or a doorhood with supporting console, and the addition of a porch concealing such detail would never be appropriate.

Most porches are open, with a pitched roof supported at the front on posts. Some have closed sides, maybe with a small window or opening. In those cases it is usual also for the walls to return initially on the front elevation up to a central, broad but open arched entrance. It is rare for traditional porches to have doors at the outer entrance, effectively creating a small outer room, and present-day attempts to do just that, and pass it off as a ‘porch’, are ill-advised and would normally be resisted. The eye needs to be able still to read the continuous line of the original front elevation, onto which a fairly lightweight porch construction may have been added.

A common mistake is to take a typical ‘bolt-on’ design from modern housing estates, and transfer it onto an older house. Particularly porches with mono-pitch roofs leaning forward off the wall have no place on old buildings in the New Forest. Porch roofs should have a simple double pitch, and clay tiles or slates will be acceptable for the roof covering. Porch constructions need to be carried down to ground level, and it is not acceptable to support any construction more substantial than a flat canopy on brackets running back into the wall.

Thatched porches on buildings with thatched roofs may be acceptable. Proposals to sweep thatch down from the main roof without break onto the roof of the porch only work where the eaves are low, and it would be difficult otherwise to separate the two areas of thatch.

Elaborate porches in front of secondary entrance doors, which lead to confusion about the hierarchy of entrances to a historic building, should be avoided. Porches over secondary doors, if permissible, should be correspondingly modest and simple in style.

Foundations

Although unseen at most times, work to the foundations of a listed building may require consent. This would usually be underpinning work to arrest structural movement caused by ground conditions. The requirement for consent gives an opportunity to examine whether the proposed works would be beneficial or would themselves cause further problems. For example many older buildings, especially forest dwellings and cob hovels, have shallow or even negligible foundations. In such cases providing a substantial engineering foundation under a part only could set up differential resistance to movement which could itself make the building begin to fracture.

Proposals to reduce internal floor level always require consent, and when this threatens to undermine shallow foundations in cob or similar buildings, grant of consent would be resisted. Also such proposals that might destabilise a timber-framed structure would not be supported.

Modern Technology

People seek to attach a wide range of technical equipment to the external fabric of old buildings. Some are associated with the public utilities (meter boxes), some with a way of life (satellite dishes), some with energy efficiency aims (solar panels), and some are connected to internal facilities (heating and cooling ducts and extracts).

External meter boxes can be very disfiguring. The desire of the utility companies for easy access to boxes should not override visual and conservation interests. (Technology is developing now to allow digitised reading of internal meters from outside). Fire and burglar alarms need to be visible outside to have a deterrent effect, and are rarely so conspicuous, if appropriately located, as to be unacceptable, and consent would not normally be asked for.

Satellite dishes and small antennae should where possible be located on secondary elevations, or in hidden roof valleys, or mounted on poles in the grounds, or placed on outbuildings. Where proposed on or affecting a principal or important elevation consent would often be resisted.

Domestic heating and cooling extracts and vents can be quite modest and, if positioned subtly, might not require consent. The Planning Authority needs to know what is proposed before deciding whether consent is needed. Long runs of external ducting would require consent, and would be resisted.

Solar panels are becoming more efficient, but their type and design has altered little. Their size means that consent is required for their installation. Placing solar panels on the prominent roofs of older buildings would usually be unsympathetic to historic character. The view taken might be different when installation is proposed on inner roof slopes, although it is still better to try to site panels on the roofs of suitable outbuildings, or as freestanding installations not attached to any building.

Disabled Access

The Planning Authorities take the needs of disabled people very seriously, and are also committed to protecting the character of their historic buildings. At times the two interests are in conflict. Government guidance also points to the importance of providing dignified and easy access to and within listed buildings, but acknowledges that this must be achieved without compromising the special interest of buildings. For advice, look at English Heritage’s ‘Easy Access to Historic Buildings,’ 2004.

Access for those with mobility problems can be provided into most listed buildings, if necessary with removable ramps, although this may be better provided at a secondary entrance door. It might be possible to widen a side doorway having little historic value to allow wheelchair access. The removal or obliteration under a permanent ramp of front steps that form a major part of a principal entrance would not be acceptable.

Where the insertion of a liftshaft causes alteration to the external roofline, that would make this type of provision unacceptable.

Painting

Painting unpainted walls will always require consent, and that is unlikely to be granted where the brickwork is in fair or good condition, and uses traditional hand-made or attractive bricks. Painting is not a good solution where the condition of brickwork is poor, and will not remedy its defects. Where there is an unsightly lack of unity in the appearance of brickwork as a result of many repairs, painting may on rare occasions be acceptable.

Where walls are already painted, consent is needed when a change of colour would result in a materially different appearance, i.e. cream to orange (or, indeed, orange to cream), but not cream to beige (or similar). Clarification should always be obtained from the Building Officer. Likewise, repainting external joinery and rainwater goods requires consent on the same basis.

The choice of colours that are acceptable on listed buildings depends on the architectural style of the building, the material to be painted, and to an extent also on the location. Walls in this area, whether rendered or of exposed brick, have customarily used a colour from a very restricted palette containing whites, creams, beiges, fawns and similar earthy or neutral shades. More adventurous colour schemes may in some instances successfully use colours based on pigments traditionally used on old buildings, although not commonly in this area, such as madder, ochre or sage green. Other more modern colours have no such historical precedent, and may look forever harsh and discordant. The Planning Authority will always try to judge the appropriateness of a colour on academic or historical grounds, rather than on grounds of taste.

The same considerations apply to external joinery, although here established precedent over a century or more has resulted in a much wider range of colour being used even on listed buildings. Some colours will still be unsuitable, and this will be determined by the impact the colour has on the building’s character, judged on the extent and prominence of its use.

Control of change of colour is especially necessary in formal urban architectural compositions (terraces, squares and similar) featuring identical properties where unity of decorative treatment is important, and in single large houses, subdivided into flats, where the house must continue to appear to be a single dwelling. In most cases porous and breathable paints should be used on old walls. Consent would be required (and resisted) for the use of a paint likely to be damaging to historic fabric, such as the thick plasticised paint that, being unable to ‘breathe’, traps moisture in walls.

Cleaning

It is very rare in this area that brick walls become so soiled that they need cleaning in order to preserve the building. Cleaning proposals are usually rather a response to aesthetic concerns about cosmetic appearance. Cleaning usually requires consent, not only because the external appearance can change so markedly, but also because unsuitable processes can seriously damage historic fabric. The Planning Authority will want to ensure that cleaning is both necessary and that it will also be entirely beneficial.

Any cleaning method can cause damage if mishandled, and not just harsh techniques that erode old building fabric such as water hosing under high pressure, or mechanical and abrasive methods like grit blasting and carborundum discs. More favoured is water cleaning under low or intermittent pressure, and chemical cleaning using weak acid solutions can sometimes be effective.

Some soft brickwork of high porosity cannot take any type of cleaning at all. Also the time of year will affect the outcome of any cleaning attempt. More information on cleaning is contained in the leaflet on Brickwork.

Outbuildings

The range of detached outbuildings in the grounds of listed buildings may include stables, carriage-houses and garden buildings. Farmhouses will often comprise within their curtilages a range of farmbuildings.

Listed building control is exercised, both externally and internally, over all outbuildings within the curtilage of a listed building except for any freestanding building built or believed to have been built since 1948. The quality of the outbuilding determines whether it is only the effect of works on the setting of the principal building (the building described in the statutory list) that is of concern, or whether its interior merits close attention and protection in its own right.

Occupants may consider extending the residential accommodation of the house into outbuildings. It is important that the typical detailing and distinctive character of the outbuildings, that may be different from the domestic detailing and character of the main building, is retained. The constraints of outbuildings in terms of their internal layout, when pressed into service as residential accommodation, should be recognised and accepted. Proposals such as this would always require planning permission, as well as consent.

Boundaries and Curtilage

In planning terms ‘curtilage’ is defined as the land immediately surrounding the building and required to support it. Curtilages of historic listed buildings can be defined to include areas (i.e. walled gardens or even parkland areas) at some distance from the principal listed building. Control is exercised over all buildings or structures within such a curtilage, except for freestanding buildings built or deemed to have been built since 1948.

In most dwelling houses, definition of curtilage is not a problem, being the boundary of the garden, including any garages and other outbuildings within its grounds. In the case of larger properties standing in more land, there are tests to determine whether other areas and buildings are within the curtilage. In each case the answer depends on the circumstances and facts relating to a particular site. The tests, all of which have to be satisfied if a building is to be a curtilage building, relate to:

• the ownership of the buildings now and at the time of listing,
• the use and function of the building, and whether it is ancillary and subordinate to the listed building,
• the historical independence of the building,
• the physical layout of the land surrounding the listed building at the date of listing and whether the building/structure forms part of the land (therefore some degree of physical annexation).

Surviving original boundary railings, walls and gates to listed buildings must be retained. Consent is required to remove, add to or alter railings, walls, gates and fences, irrespective of height, that date from before 1948.

(In addition, planning permission will be required if the wall etc. exceeds 2m in height, or 1m next to a highway).

Removing old front boundaries to open up access to and from the street is not acceptable. Many modern boundary treatments are also unsuitable. The best advice is to follow historic local practice on similar sites, making the boundary suit the property. For example, picket fences are not appropriate fronting a Georgian town house, nor spear-tipped iron railings fronting a thatched forest hovel. (Some walls and railings are so special and valuable - unusual, intact, old and in sound condition - that they are listed in their own right, and not just protected as curtilage structures).

Planting, removing and maintaining hedges, which are often the typical and most appropriate boundary treatment in rural and Forest areas, does not require consent. Some hedges are protected by The Hedgerows Regulations; further information can be obtained from the Planning Authority’s Tree Helpline: 023 8028 5330 (District) or 01590 646615 (Park).

Further Information

If you require further information about any of the issues raised in this leaflet or any other building conservation matters, please contact the Building Conservation Officer at:

Other useful contacts:

• English Heritage — Tel: 0207 973 3000 — www.english-heritage.org.uk
• Hampshire County Records Office — Tel: 01962 846154 — www.hants.gov.uk/archives
• Historic buildings register (Hampshire)
• Ancient Monuments Society — Tel: 0207 236 3934 — office@ancientmonumentssociety.co.uk — www.ancientmonumentssociety.org.uk
• Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB) — Tel: 0207 377 1644 — info@spab.org.uk — www.spab.org.uk
• Victorian Society — Tel: 0208 994 1019 — admin@victoriansociety.org.uk — www.victoriansociety.org.uk
• Georgian Group — Tel: 0207 7529 8920 — office@georgiangroup.org.uk — www.georgiangroup.org.uk
• Twentieth Century Society — Tel: 0207 250 3857 — caseworker@c20society.org.uk — www.c20society.org.uk

Leaflet reference: NPA 00148, December 2013.