A lot of the Grade 1 listed buildings repurposed into homes have glass and metal additions that clearly delineate between old and new for this reason. They can be incredibly expensive jobs though due to all the permitting and oversight. This looks like someone on a budget or who ran out of money and couldn’t afford a more aesthetically pleasing addition. If it’s being lived in though, they will stop it from deteriorating and it will help to preserve it, which is the only reason it’s allowed in the first place.
It seems that constant maintenance and repair is the effort, here.
But while we all can agree plumbing in some modern power and modern plumbing and modern non-lead water pipes is probably verboten, where’s the line between repair and addition? Are residents allowed to rebuild damaged portions as per the old appearance using new stone and the old methods? Or must they maintain “the South wall, near collapse from damage with those other people, kept in its teetering state for the sake of preservation as it was on this arbitrary date” or something equally bonkers? What’s the arbitrary target they are to repair and maintain towards?
There’s a show that was on the BBC called The Restoration Man where they showcase people repurposing listed buildings into homes that gets into a lot of the permitting and permission detail. Some people have to fund archeological digs before they can even get started.
While I can see the twisted chain of logic that gets us to where Dave and Betty are funding archaelogical digs, that’s just not viable for most of us. It’s insane!
I see a lot of “buy this remote villa in scotland that dates back to the 1800s” and I just know there’s some heritage envelope of pain over the whole thing.
A lot of the Grade 1 listed buildings repurposed into homes have glass and metal additions that clearly delineate between old and new for this reason. They can be incredibly expensive jobs though due to all the permitting and oversight. This looks like someone on a budget or who ran out of money and couldn’t afford a more aesthetically pleasing addition. If it’s being lived in though, they will stop it from deteriorating and it will help to preserve it, which is the only reason it’s allowed in the first place.
It seems that constant maintenance and repair is the effort, here.
But while we all can agree plumbing in some modern power and modern plumbing and modern non-lead water pipes is probably verboten, where’s the line between repair and addition? Are residents allowed to rebuild damaged portions as per the old appearance using new stone and the old methods? Or must they maintain “the South wall, near collapse from damage with those other people, kept in its teetering state for the sake of preservation as it was on this arbitrary date” or something equally bonkers? What’s the arbitrary target they are to repair and maintain towards?
There’s a show that was on the BBC called The Restoration Man where they showcase people repurposing listed buildings into homes that gets into a lot of the permitting and permission detail. Some people have to fund archeological digs before they can even get started.
While I can see the twisted chain of logic that gets us to where Dave and Betty are funding archaelogical digs, that’s just not viable for most of us. It’s insane!
I see a lot of “buy this remote villa in scotland that dates back to the 1800s” and I just know there’s some heritage envelope of pain over the whole thing.