Ministerial guidelines
Architectural Heritage Protection: Guidelines for Planning Authorities
Protected structures, architectural conservation areas, curtilage, and works to historic buildings.
Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht · 2011 · 267 pages
Ask this document
Answers come only from the text of Architectural Heritage Protection: Guidelines for Planning Authorities, each claim linked to its page. They are not advice; check the page itself.
Free, with a daily limit.
- Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning Authorities 129 8.4.5 Later, more elaborate, uses of render included the formation of imitation rustication, cornices, string courses, window and door surrounds and shopfronts. Although often not original to the building, render embellishments can be of great interest and form part of the character of a building. 8.4.6 Pebble-dash is another form of render coating usually dating from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Also known as dry-dash, this finish is achieved when natural or artificial pebbles are pushed or thrown onto wet render and left exposed. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS AFFECTING RENDERS Proposals to remove plain or roughcast render 8.4.7 Early or original, plain or roughcast render contributes to the character of a protected structure and should generally not be removed. The strippingoff of existing render, merely to expose rubble or brick walls that were not originally intended to be seen, should generally not be permitted. Not only does the stripping-off of the original finish greatly diminish the architectural quality and character of the building, it also seriously threatens the watertightness of the entire fabric. Removing the original finish also eradicates part of the history of the building, making it impossible thereafter to determine the material or mix of the original coat and any paint history of the applied finish. 8.4.8 It can be sometimes proved, using old photographs or similar, that a coating is a later addition to the structure. However, in such cases it should be borne in mind that the coating may have been added in order to cover up alterations, damage or decay in the original wall surfaces, which it may not be desirable to re-expose. 8.4.9 Where it is permitted to strip off and replace a plain or roughcast render finish, the planning authority should require as a condition that any evidence of the history of the building or structure, revealed by stripping off plain or roughcast render coatings, be carefully recorded before the application of the new finish. Where it is permitted to remove a lime-based roughcast, the planning authority should normally make it a condition that it is replaced on a like-forlike basis and not with a cement-based coating. The specification, mix and finish should be approved by the planning authority before any work commences. CHAPTER 8 WALLS AND OTHER STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS Embellishments in render were popular as a cheap alternative to cut-stone decoration; some craftsmen took the form to its creative epitome, notably the McAuliffe family of Listowel, active in the early twentieth century at the height of the Celtic Revival The removal of render from surfaces originally rendered not only significantly alters the architectural character of the structure but removes the weathering layer provided by the render. In most cases the rubble stone or stone-and-brick mix, now exposed, was never meant to be visible. In this example, the removal of external render has also affected the visual integrity of the entire row of buildings Hard cement-based render can cause lasting damage due to its impermeability. Any cracks and gaps which develop in the render allow moisture into the fabric behind, which cannot then easily escape, so saturating the wall. In the case of this mediaeval window surround, moisture, and the salts carried by it, is forced to evaporate through the historic stone so setting up conditions for decay. It can often be difficult to remove cement render without causing damage to the underlying masonry
- CHAPTER 8 WALLS AND OTHER STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning Authorities 130 8.4.10 Where a building is covered with an inappropriate cementitious render, which is causing damage to the fabric beneath, the opportunity could be taken to use a more appropriate replacement coating. However, where the removal of a later render is likely to cause damage to the material below, it may be better to leave it in place. Testing and assessment should be carried out and decisions made based on this information. Proposals to apply plain or roughcast render to buildings not currently rendered 8.4.11 Walls should not normally be rendered unless the surface was originally finished in this way. Permission should not be given for such surfaces to be faced with new cosmetic treatments which would be difficult or damaging to remove, such as cement render, stone facing, Tyrolean render, dry or pebble-dashing or cement-based paints. 8.4.12 In cases where the original walling is of a very poor weathering quality and a severe degree of decay has occurred, it could be appropriate to permit the application of plain or roughcast render when the only alternative would be to reface the structure completely. Permission should only be granted after careful consideration of all the implications. Repairing plain or roughcast render finishes 8.4.13 Most old renderings fail from problems associated with water penetration, either from lack of maintenance, inadequate protection from the elements, salt contamination from the backing material or because of poor materials or techniques employed in the original application. 8.4.14 Where the coating has separated from its backing, only the loose material should normally be removed. The sound areas of coating should be retained and patched with new material which matches in terms of colour, material, texture and strength of the original finish. The number and thickness of coats should also be matched. 8.4.15 Where the wall has an undulating surface, as with rubble stonework or earth, it could be a requirement that no attempt be made to dub out the surface in order to achieve a flat mechanical finish, unless there is evidence that this was so originally. Original details at corners and at openings should usually be replicated. Where render has been lined out in imitation of ashlar, care should be taken in setting out so that the original pattern is replicated. The lining of window arches should be set out from a centre-point or points and window and door openings should be detailed so that blocks or half-blocks rather than closers appear at the architraves. 8.4.16 Where areas of pebble-dashing are to be repaired or replicated, the type, size, shape and colour of the exposed stones should blend with the original while allowing it to be clear on close inspection that the work is not original. Cut-stone details 8.4.17 Where stone quoins, string courses, cornices, or other architectural details were originally left exposed, permission should not normally be given for these to be covered over by new coatings except shelter-coating. Painted façades IDENTIFYING SPECIAL FEATURES FOR PROTECTION 8.4.18 Decorative or other painted façades, which contribute to the character of a protected structure or of an ACA, should be identified and protected. 8.4.19 Limewash was the traditional finish for lime-based roughcast or renders and a variety of traditional building materials. It was usually applied in multiple coats and reapplied on a regular basis to maintain the fabric. Where there is evidence of limewash on surfaces, these surfaces should preferably continue Localised re-rendering should be carefully specified to match the existing material. In this example, while the strength and texture may be adequate, the unmatched colouring of several patches is visually obtrusive The way that limewashed render weathers contributes greatly to the patina of age: as it rubs away layers of different colours may be exposed. New coats of limewash can be applied as necessary without removing the existing layers
- Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning Authorities 131 to be maintained with limewash and the use of alternative paint systems discouraged, particularly where they would have an adverse effect of the substrate by limiting the porosity of the wall. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS AFFECTING PAINTED FACADES 8.4.20 Proposals to paint façades not previously painted should be carefully scrutinised. Permission should not normally be given for previously unpainted walls of protected structures to be painted over (except for the addition of shelter-coating). The use of cement-based or other waterproof and hard gloss paints should not be permitted on surfaces covered with traditional render, as they will cause damage to the historic fabric. Similarly, the partial painting of brick or stone façades around shopfronts or to display advertising material should be avoided. 8.4.21 Plain render was often left unpainted with a greybrown self-coloured finish, but over the years paint finishes have tended to be applied to such render. Where these are not harming the fabric, for example by restricting the porosity of the wall, no issue should arise. Metal cladding IDENTIFYING SPECIAL FEATURES FOR PROTECTION 8.4.22 Many nineteenth and twentieth-century structures incorporate metal sheeting or metal-faced panels in various materials including iron, steel, lead, copper and zinc. Corrugated-iron sheeting (in fact, generally made of steel) has been used as a cladding for many vernacular buildings such as barns and outbuildings, and even churches, since the eighteenfifties. Where this material exists on a protected structure, the profile of the corrugations should be noted and the type and colour of the finish used. Good examples of corrugated-iron-sheeted structures should be identified and protected. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS AFFECTING METAL CLADDING 8.4.23 Existing metal cladding should be repaired rather than replaced. Where works are proposed to a corrugated-iron structure or any metal-clad structure, any proposed new sheeting should match the existing in terms of weight, profile and finish. Existing details should be replicated, except where the original cladding had inherent faults which led to failure, such as the use of overlarge metal sheets or incorrect fixings that caused cracking of the cladding. Where there was an inherent design fault, the metal cladding will require replacement to an improved design. Cracks should not be repaired with solder or with sealant, as these repairs will often cause further problems at a later stage. Terracotta, faïence, Coade stone and ceramic tiling IDENTIFYING SPECIAL FEATURES FOR PROTECTION 8.4.24 The external use of terracotta and faïence cladding on buildings in Ireland generally dates from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Good quality design and craftsmanship and examples of decorative detailing may be suitable for protection. 8.4.25 Coade stone is a proprietary fired-clay material used for the production of architectural ornament such as plaques, friezes, statues etc. This highly durable material was produced at a factory in Lambeth, in south London between c.1770 and c.1840. Where this type of ornament exists on a protected structure, it is a feature that should be identified and protected. CHAPTER 8 WALLS AND OTHER STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS Applying impermeable paint to render or masonry can inhibit the necessary passage of moisture through the fabric. Unsuitable paints may peel off, sometimes shortly after application Metal sheeting consisting of flat or corrugated panels of iron, steel, lead, copper or zinc was used to clad many types of buildings, including places of worship such as this small church. Early metal sheeting is often of technical interest and should be identified and, where necessary, repaired, unless an inherent design fault requires its replacement to an improved specification Coade stone, a proprietary fired clay, was used for fine decorative detailing. It generally makes a significant contribution to the character of the structure it adorns
- CHAPTER 8 WALLS AND OTHER STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning Authorities 132 8.4.26 The external use of glazed ceramic tiling, faïence or glazed terracotta is generally associated in Ireland with shopfronts, although there are examples of glazed brick used as external facing. Where examples of tiling contribute to the character of a protected structure or an ACA, they should be retained. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS AFFECTING SUCH CLADDING 8.4.27 These products are generally long lasting provided water penetration can be prevented. If the fireskin of a fired clay unit is breached, there can be a rapid deterioration of the weaker underbody of the element. The fireskin or the glazing can be defective due to poor original firing, but they will also be damaged by aggressive cleaning methods such as grit-blasting. 8.4.28 Repairs or cleaning of fire clay products, where necessary, should be carried out only by specialist conservators. Painting of these elements or their replacement in alternative materials should not normally be permitted. Large-scale repairs with mortar are not appropriate nor is the facing-up of damaged terracotta with mortar followed by overall painting, as this will materially alter the character of the building and may cause further damage and deterioration to the fabric. Slate-hanging 8.4.29 Slate-hanging was often applied to exposed external walls and chimney stacks to provide extra protection from the weather. Where slate-hanging exists it should be preserved and carefully repaired. Particular care should be taken to identify and protect any slates that are of decorative shape or carved with dates or initials. Arts-and-Crafts wall cladding 8.4.30 Late nineteenth and early twentieth century buildings of the Arts and Crafts style experimented with a variety of cladding materials and methods. These included clay tile-hanging, exposed timber framing, pebble-dashing, timber weather-boarding and others. These finishes are essential to the character of these buildings and all original materials and their detailing should be identified, and retained. Materials such as terracotta and faïence tend to be very durable. However, they can be damaged by aggressive cleaning methods. In this case, a later paint finish, together with the original fireskin of the terracotta, have been removed, exposing mortar repairs and old defects and leaving the ceramic vulnerable to future accelerated weathering Slate-hanging should be carefully repaired where necessary using slates of a matching size and colour, with additions such as downpipes and vents carefully sited and fixed in order not to cause damage Terracotta, faïence and glazed ceramic tiles are all used to good visual effect in cladding or decorating the walls of buildings Cladding walls with slate was often done to protect structures, or parts of structures, on elevations exposed to prevailing winds. Slate-hanging often includes decoratively-cut slates or banding using fishscale patterns. Its use may be a regional characteristic
- Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning Authorities 133 8.4.31 Where repairs are necessary to such cladding materials they should be carried out in accordance with the relevant section of these guidance notes. 8.5 Exterior Fixtures and Features 8.5.1 Protection includes all fixtures and features which form part of the exterior of a protected structure and contribute to its special interest. In some cases it may be difficult to establish whether or not a particular object or feature is a fixture. Although not defined in the Act, the term ‘fixture’ implies a degree of physical annexation together with indications that the annexation was carried out with the intention of making the object an integral part of the structure. However, free-standing objects may be considered fixtures if they were placed in position as part of an overall architectural design. For example, the external walls of a public building may contain statues or other carvings within niches which, while they may or may not be physically fixed to the building, were designed or made to fit a specific space to form part of the design. In some cases, the planning authority may need to take expert advice on assessing the contribution of the object to the character of the protected structure where there are proposals to alter or remove that object. IDENTIFYING EXISTING FIXTURES AND FEATURES FOR PROTECTION 8.5.2 Exterior fixtures and features of architectural metalwork on walls such as railings, cresting, balustrades and anchor plates are usually an essential part of the character of a protected structure. 8.5.3 Balconies and verandas can be important original architectural fixtures and features on many buildings, usually dating from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. They may also be additions to earlier buildings. Where these are original features or additions of quality, they should be retained. Because fixtures and features such as balconies by definition tend to be exposed elements, they often give rise to maintenance problems and, as a result, have been removed. Surviving features are therefore increasingly rare and should be preserved, where possible. 8.5.4 Other fixtures and features such as date-stones, fire insurance plaques, commemorative plaques and carvings, statues, inscriptions, coats of arms etc. are equally part of the history of a building, even where they are later additions, and should be retained in situ. Old lettering and shop signs may be more difficult to retain when premises change ownership, but efforts should be made to identify and retain examples that are of particular interest or quality. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS AFFECTING FIXTURES AND FEATURES Existing exterior fixtures and features 8.5.5 The appearance of a protected structure or any other historic building will be materially altered by the removal of architectural features from walls such as balustrades, string courses, brackets and others. The removal of such features would be detrimental to the character of the building. Where works to a structure require the temporary removal of a feature or fixture, it should be replaced in its former position within a time frame specified by the planning authority. 8.5.6 The removal of elements such as balconies, balconettes and verandas should not be permitted without careful consideration of the potential effects CHAPTER 8 WALLS AND OTHER STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS Arts and Crafts style cladding can feature a variety of materials and cladding types. As shown here, materials such as brick, half-timbering and tiles are juxtaposed to form visually attractive patterns Exterior fixtures and features vary widely in size, function and materials. Some, such as the lead gas lamp illustrated here, have been adapted to electric light and continue in use. But, even where redundant, such fixtures and features are often important to the character of a structure or area, in addition to being well-crafted items in themselves Carved stone plaques are found most often on the walls of public buildings such as schools and churches – as with this wall monument - but many domestic buildings also have datestones. Whether or not the structure has changed use or the carving is now illegible, efforts should be made to retain interesting plaques or monuments in situ
- CHAPTER 8 WALLS AND OTHER STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning Authorities 134 on the character of the building. Where these elements are later additions to a structure and they cut across or conceal work of a higher architectural quality, a judgement will have to be made on whether or not to remove the later work. In such cases, where the addition is relatively recent and of little architectural merit, it may be acceptable to permit careful removal. Proposals to glaze in balconies, verandas and the like, where they were originally intended to be open, should be treated with caution as this may adversely affect the appearance of a protected structure or the character of an ACA. New items fixed to the exterior of the building 8.5.7 Careful consideration needs to be given to proposals to fix new items to the exterior of a protected structure. Permission should usually only be given for fixtures that respect the architectural design of the structure and do not detract from its appearance. Examples of types of fixtures which may be proposed could include floodlighting, entry phones, name plates or signboards, information plaques, alarm boxes, satellite dishes, windowcleaning eyes, or plastic utility boxes such as gas and electricity meters. 8.5.8 The applicant should be able to satisfy the planning authority that matters such as the location of fixtures, associated cable runs, light fittings and so on have been properly considered and would not detract from the appearance of the protected structure, the setting of other protected structures or the character of an ACA. Consideration should be given to the effect the methods of fixing proposed may have. Many fixing methods will cause damage by staining or fracturing the material into which they are fixed. The presence of a fixture which requires painting, cleaning or lubrication will usually result in splashing or staining of the adjacent building fabric. If the fixture is changed or removed, holes left may remain visible even after careful repair. Fixing should be carried out in a manner that minimises the visual impact upon the building and avoids physical damage to the fabric. Fixing into existing joints or holes may be acceptable. 8.5.9 Automatic teller machines, where their installation is permitted, should be accommodated within existing openings wherever possible. Proposals to create new openings for such machines should be discouraged. Those which cut through important architectural features or disturb elevational symmetry, should be refused permission. The use by major retailers or commercial organisations of Fixtures or features fitted without thought as to their visual impact can adversely affect the character of a structure or area. The removal – or resiting – of such items should be encouraged whenever possible. The method of fixing should be reversible and, on stone or brick façades in particular, made into existing joints rather than through the masonry to avoid scarring The removal of signs may cause or exacerbate existing problems. In this case rusticated masonry was cut out to recess the sign. Now that the sign has been removed, the damaging consequences of the work are all too obvious
- Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning Authorities 135 corporate colours and lettering on the walls of a protected structure is not appropriate in most instances and should be discouraged. External plumbing, flues, vents and cabling 8.5.10 The appearance of many historic buildings will be marred by the addition of external plumbing, especially where it cuts through or across architectural features or disturbs the symmetry of an elevation. Planning applications for works to protected structures or buildings within ACAs should include on the drawings the location of all proposed external plumbing, flues, vents and cabling to allow for a complete assessment of the proposals. The planning authority should be aware that some proposed changes of use will require additional flues and pipework. 8.5.11 Change of use or upgrading can lead to a proliferation of pipework associated with new kitchens or bathrooms. Every effort should be made to avoid the introduction of new external pipework or cabling, particularly on the primary elevations. Proposals that include kitchens and bathrooms on these elevations should therefore be discouraged, if the pipework cannot be satisfactorily accommodated internally. 8.5.12 The addition of external flues should be avoided wherever possible and not be allowed to interrupt important elevations. Vent pipes should not generally be permitted on the roofs of principal elevations. In cases where new external pipework or flues are agreed, the additions should be painted to blend in with the wall surfaces so as to minimise their visual impact. 8.5.13 Where the opportunity arises, the removal or rationalisation of any existing added pipework and cabling that disrupts architectural features or elevations should be considered. The use of extruded aluminium or plastic drainage and rainwater goods and their associated fittings on a protected structure is rarely appropriate and should generally not be permitted. CHAPTER 8 WALLS AND OTHER STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS The ill-considered fixing of new items such as pipework to the principal elevations of structures can adversely affect their architectural quality and cause physical and irreversible damage, as has happened in this case where a fine architectural element has been cut through to facilitate the location of a new pipe
No text on this page — it is probably a drawing, a map, a photograph or a scanned page. See it in the PDF.
- Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning Authorities 137 CHAPTER 9 ROOFS 9.1 Introduction 9.1.1 In many buildings, the roof is a major element that gives the building its distinctive profile. The aspects of a roof, which may contribute to the special interest of a protected structure or a structure within an ACA, include the profile and structure of the roof, the cladding materials used and other details associated with the roof. Specialist advice may be needed in order to identify the special characteristics of a roof. 9.1.2 To help assess the potential contribution of a roof or its components to the special character of the structure, several questions may be considered: a) Is the roof structure, or any of its component parts, original to the building? b) If not original, is the roof structure nevertheless of architectural merit or of other interest? c) If not of interest in itself, does it contribute to or detract from the perception or appreciation of other, more important, parts of the structure? d) Is there the possibility of an earlier structure existing below later alterations? e) What are the existing cladding materials? Do these contribute to the character of the building? f ) Are the details such as dormer windows, chimney stacks etc. original to the building? Are they part of a later remodelling? Do they contribute to the interest of the building? The character of a roof relates to its profile and pitch, whether gabled or hipped; the cladding materials; use or not of dormers; the style, materials, siting and number of stacks; the use of decorative bargeboards or rainwater goods; and the way all of these together contribute to the overall character of the structure or area
- CHAPTER 9 ROOFS Architectural Heritage Protection Guidelines for Planning Authorities 138 g) Where it is proposed to upgrade the thermal insulation of an existing timber roof, what effect would this have on the appearance of the roof? How is it proposed to ventilate the roof? Where are proposed vents to be located? Would their size, shape or location adversely affect the appearance of the building? 9.2 Profile and Structure IDENTIFYING SPECIAL FEATURES FOR PROTECTION 9.2.1 When identifying the special characteristics of the profile of a roof it should be considered whether or not the roof retains its original profile and structure. If the present profile is not likely to be the original, then it should be decided whether the present roof profile is of any architectural or other interest or is a later alteration which detracts from the appearance of more important elements of the building. 9.2.2 The structural elements of the roof should be examined. The roof structure should, wherever possible, be viewed from within the roof space and evidence of any part of an earlier structure noted. Structural elements are of importance when they are original to the building, are evidence of earlier alterations or are examples of unusual or innovative design. Wrought and cast-iron roof structures, particularly those with applied decoration, are also of importance. Early mass or reinforced-concrete roofs are of interest as examples of civil engineering design. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS TO ALTER A ROOF STRUCTURE 9.2.3 Unevenness and undulations of a roof surface are often part of the character of an old building. Where they exist, it should be established whether or not they affect the watertightness or structural integrity of the building, if it is proposed to replace the roof. 9.2.4 The unnecessary removal of a roof, or part of a roof, in order to replace it in replica, should not generally be permitted. Where this is proposed, the applicant should be required to demonstrate the necessity for the proposed works. 9.2.5 Roofs of structural interest should generally not be altered. Any original, or early, roof structure or structural members should be retained. In cases where the construction of a new roof is unavoidable, the planning authority could make it a condition that the earlier roof construction is retained below the new roof. Undulations and previous repairs of good quality may all contribute to the character of a roof. Any necessary works should leave intact original detailing such as this raised archway roof, as it provides definition to the entrance bay Old roof timbers should not be routinely stripped out as this can lead to a loss of character and the destruction of important historic elements. In this case, a roof structure, dated to the 1580s using dendrochronology, remains intact and, although no longer capable of taking the weight of cladding, is preserved beneath a new metal structure The structural components of a roof may contribute to its character. Here a seventeenth-century pegged oak roof structure survives largely intact, with the carpenter’s numbers visible on some timbers
Source Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht: Architectural Heritage Protection: Guidelines for Planning Authorities (2011) · Licence the publisher's termsText read from the publisher’s PDF; tables, maps and drawings do not survive as text, and page numbers are the PDF’s (its first page is 1). Check the original before relying on a passage.