Plan to protect Norwich’s finest buildings may involve selling off historic properties

Norwich Cathedral was 900 years old in 1996.  Picture by Mike Page shows :- Norwich cathedral and castle aerial. Norwich Cathedral was 900 years old in 1996. Picture by Mike Page shows :- Norwich cathedral and castle aerial.

Kim Briscoe
Wednesday, April 9, 2014
2:23 PM

A strategy to repair, invest in, or sell off, more than 370 of Norwich’s historic buildings has been rubber-stamped by their owner – Norwich City Council.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

Topping out ceremony at the Britons Arms, Elm Hill, Norwich to celebrate the new thatch and progress of the renovation. Photo: Steve AdamsTopping out ceremony at the Britons Arms, Elm Hill, Norwich to celebrate the new thatch and progress of the renovation. Photo: Steve Adams

The Heritage Investment Strategy has been put together so that funding can be found to maintain some of the 376 heritage properties which the council owns, such as Norwich Castle and St Andrew’s and Blackfriars Hall.

However, the strategy’s aim is to also reduce how much the council may have to pay out in repairs for these buildings in the coming years and acknowledges that some of the less important properties may have to be sold at some point in the future.

While no decisions have been taken on what could be sold off, the strategy does separate the assets into two classes, with the 118 that are most important to the city being identified as “stewardship properties”, which would only be sold in special circumstances.

However, concerns have been raised that the strategy gives the green light for the remaining 258 buildings to be sold off.

10 priority projects

In the strategy, the council has outlined 10 projects to be treated as a priority, either due to deadlines for funding opportunities or because there are urgent problems to address.

These include:

1) Castle Gardens and Lodges 
The lodges are unused and in need of repair, and there is also a need for the restoration and enhancement of the Victorian gardens.

2) Chapelfield Gardens 
Works to improve entrances, lighting and paths.

3) Magpie Printers site and City Walls 
The site became vacant following the demolition of the former Magpie Printer’s building. The medieval city walls have been repaired and there are now plans to landscape the area in front of the walls facing Magpie road.

4) Ninhams Court, Bethel Street 
This grade II* listed house was gifted to the council and as such must remain in its ownership. It has been empty for a number of years. The council has been developing a scheme with a building preservation trust, which may take on a lease and carry out repairs for use as a holiday home.

5) St Andrews and Blackfriars Halls 
Owned by the council since the dissolution of the monasteries. It is expensive to maintain, with a backlog in the repairs programme. A feasibility study is needed to establish the role of the halls in the future, the extent of repairs required and potential future projects to improve the effectiveness and appearance of the halls.

6) War Memorial Gardens undercroft 
This grade II listed structure was recently repaired but the undercroft remains empty and only occasionally used.

It has potential to provide an arts facility in the city centre.

7) Tombland Toilets 
The concrete underground toilets were closed in April 2012 due to anti-social behaviour, poor access and the cost of keeping them open. The council would like to see this unattractive feature removed.

8) Mile Cross Gardens and pavilions 
Improvements are required as it is currently on the Heritage at Risk Register. The park and its pavilions are underused and some of the historic structures are damaged.

9) Mousehold Heath 
Funding has been awarded by Natural England to the Mousehold Conservators for the heath and one of the main aims is the restoration of the heathland.

10) Waterloo Park Pavilion 
Currently empty and there have been problems with a leaking roof. It has the potential to be used as a social space for weddings and other gatherings, but there is a lack of adequate car parking. A business case is being developed to repair and upgrade the facilities associated with promotion of the pavilion for suitable events and additional car parking.

Council leaders maintain there are enough safeguards in place so there would be proper scrutiny of any sales of these heritage assets, which include Anglia House (formerly Agricultural Hall), The Waterfront music venue, New Mills Yard pumping station and many rented homes, such as those in Elm Hill.

GRAPHIC: What can be found in the city council’s area

The strategy says: “Despite its relatively tightly drawn boundaries, the council owns more than 195 listed buildings and scheduled monuments, plus numerous locally listed buildings and nine registered parks and gardens. The properties range from high status buildings such as the castle, museums and churches, to Georgian town houses, council housing, statues and bridges. This impressive portfolio is of great benefit to the city, but a financial liability to the council.”

Norwich City Council says the strategy, which it hopes to have in place by March 2015, is needed to help it secure funding to maintain historic buildings.

But its main aim is to reduce how much the council may have to pay out in repairs for these buildings in the coming years.

By March 2018, the council wants to have thorough condition surveys in place for every listed building and scheduled monument, which will then be updated every five years.

The strategy says: “The sale of some heritage assets can bring benefits to the council in terms of income generation and a reduced longer-term maintenance and repair liability, as well as bringing benefits to the assets themselves. Funds raised through asset sales improve the financial position of the council and thus increase the ability to invest in the remaining assets.”

The strategy was originally approved by the council’s cabinet at the end of March, however, several councillors asked for it to go before the scrutiny committee as they had concerns over how consultation with partner organisations such as the Norwich Society and the Norwich Historic Churches Trust had been handled.

One of those councillors, the Green Party’s Lucy Galvin, said that while the strategy was “excellent in most parts” she feared there were not adequate checks and balances in place for the future – for example if one day gung-ho officers decided to hold a fire sale of heritage.

At a meeting last night, the committee was told how the sale of heritage buildings not listed as stewardship properties would be subject to the same checks and balances as when the council wants to dispose of its other assets.

Brenda Arthur, leader of the council, said: “This document does not give cabinet the licence to sell off any heritage property.”

She added that councillors would still be informed if an asset was proposed to be sold, and there were measures that could be taken to delay any sale, such as applying to get a building registered as an asset of community value.

Vicky Manthorpe, of the Norwich Society, told the meeting she welcomed the strategy and the chance to be consulted as a stakeholder, but was concerned the organisation did not receive a final copy of the document they had helped to shape before it was approved and adopted by the council.

She said: “We were particularly concerned about the clear definition of criteria of non-stewardship and stewardship properties and would have like to have been involved in the process of nominations.” The scrutiny committee voted not to refer the strategy back to the cabinet and instead decided to make some recommendations for future learning.

8 comments

  • if any of these properties such as mentioned the lodges in the castle are to be repaired and protected, could these not be letout to residency which would also ensure a bit of security Me feel Norwqich City Cpouncil is trying to doa quick deal somewhat. What has happened to any monies from Blackfriars hall etc which has been used for functions or has this been wasted. the same goes for the waterfront, leased to theUnion of Students UEA they have had use of it for years, where has this money gone. This City Council seems to waste money hand over foot as does Norfolk County Council over the loss of the incinerator cash expense. It all beggars beleif

    Report this comment

    edifir

    Wednesday, April 9, 2014

  • Outbloodyrageuos, how dare they, well they won't get away with it this time. A bunch of nincompoops with no ethics at all.

    Report this comment

    Gina

    Wednesday, April 9, 2014

  • Since the late 1960's, the City Council has spent most of its time either knocking down, or running down, those buildings which, despite the Baedeker Raids, made Norwich one of the best-preserved and wonderful historic cities in the Kingdom. Having cut a swathe of destruction through the City, either my neglect or demolition, this unfit bunch of "custodians" now draw up a nebulous and deceitful plan which enables them to offload the dirty work of destruction on to someone else by flogging the "family silver". A through disgrace, but one which is inevitable from what used to be City Fathers, but who now more closely resemble a destructive bunch of yobs.

    Report this comment

    T Doff

    Wednesday, April 9, 2014

  • Bulldoze the lot, who needs history hey NCC?

    Report this comment

    Piranha24

    Wednesday, April 9, 2014

  • those who moved in did not destroy Georgian terraces in Ber Street or burned down the properties in Magdalen Street now occupied by Anglia square, but party politicians in cohouts with the 40 thiefs ofr Norwich.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Wednesday, April 9, 2014

  • What T Doff said x any number you like. One could blame those who have moved in and have no affinity with or love for Norwich, but the old councils in the days of Red Norwich were as bad if not worse. Terrible times for the city. Lynn is wrecked, no end of its medieaval buildings lost, Yarmouth the same-what the bombs spared the councillors razed for car parks and roads-the rows within the Walls could have been an incredible historic site. We know they were looking for solutions to problems more serious than economic, but short sightedness lost us our history. We risk that now in Norwich

    Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Wednesday, April 9, 2014

  • Brenda Arthur is an Ancient Relic of Norwich, totally worthless, and in need of Demolition.

    Report this comment

    che bramley

    Wednesday, April 9, 2014

  • Add the Castle Mall

    Report this comment

    norwichlad23

    Thursday, April 10, 2014

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Norfolk Weather

Partly Cloudy

Partly Cloudy

max temp: 17°C

min temp: 10°C

Five-day forecast

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT