Agenda item

Councillor Kemp has requested that this item be added to the Agenda as follows:

“In a recent Lynn News poll, 80% of the public want this important heritage asset saved but the owner has been in dereliction of its duty and has now signed a Demolition Order.  The owner is the Borough Council.  There are important questions to answer, why the Borough –

-        Allowed a heritage listed asset, protected under Planning Law, to fall into disrepair

-        Requested its delisting without proper public consultation

-        Has now signed a Demolition Order

-        Failed to consider the need to preserve heritage assets in deprived areas and provide proper access to it

Its artistic and literary significance as the same, or only surviving, local example of the innovative South Lynn Brick Kiln painted by local artist Henry Baines, to be the subject of a Lynn Museum exhibition next year, built by the Bardell family, whose son is commemorated in All Saints Church.

How it can be restored, placed on the Heritage Day List of events and used as an educational asset and promotional aid to the Enterprise Zone?”

For information, Historic England have provided a detailed assessment setting out why they felt the building did not meet the criteria for inclusion on the Statutory List.  Which states:  “The kiln was first listed in 2003 on the basis of what was then known about its date, type and context.  Since that time, detailed information on the significance of a widerange of historic building types, including those which form parts of integrated or multi-component sites such as brick and tile works or textile factories has been produced by Historic England in the form of Listing Selection Guides which offer guidance on designation assessments.  In instances where we believe sufficient justification exists for a different evaluation of special interest – as in this instance, in respect of the dating of the kiln, the incompleteness of the site and the relative significance of the kiln type in a national context – Historic England will make a recommendation to the Secretary of State which reflects that changed evaluation.”

Councillor Kemp had requested that this item be considered by the Panel and was invited to address the Panel.

She commented that heritage was very important.  She explained that the brick kiln had been de-listed, and formed part of the Heritage Action Zone site.  She felt that the Heritage Action Zone was the perfect place to showcase this historic asset but was concerned that there was no report available on how the brick kiln could be restored.

Councillor Kemp suggested that a competition for local companies to restore the brick kiln could be held and that the asset should not be lost as heritage was important in an industrial area.

She explained that there was funding available to restore historic buildings and this building should not be lost as once it was gone it was gone and there would be no way of getting it back.

Councillor Joyce addressed the Panel under Standing Order 34.  He asked why the Civic Society had not been made aware of the decision to de-list the building and why there had been no Councillor consultation on the demolition order.  He stated that there was a live planning application on the site, and he was aware of one developer that wanted to incorporate the brick kiln as a feature on the site.

The Executive Director for Development provided the Panel with the history of the site.  He explained that in 1996 it had been reported that the building was dilapidated, over grown, crumbling and likely to collapse.  A report had been produced in 2007 by Morston Assets in support of an application for a supermarket which sought to demolish the kiln.  He explained that the report referred to a structural report which stated that there were cracks, missing bricks and the building was deteriorating.  It also stated that the roof was likely to collapse if the plant growth was removed.  The Executive Director explained that the building had been in a poor condition for a significant amount of time.

The Executive Director referred to the report from Historic England.  The report included comments from the Civic Society which proved that they had been consulted as part of the de-listing process.  The Executive Director clarified that there was not a live planning application on the site, the application had been determined over a year ago.

The THI Project Officer provided the Panel with information on the de-listing process.  He explained that, as part of the Heritage Action Zone project, listings had to be updated, therefore a review had been carried out.  This had resulted in some buildings being delisted, some being downgraded and some being added to the list.

Councillor de Whalley commented that the purpose of the Heritage Action Zone was to breathe life into new areas by combining development with heritage.  He felt that demolishing the brick kiln was counter intuitive to the project aims.

Councillor Ryves addressed the Panel under Standing Order 34.  He explained that he had been in touch with a professional expert who had provided reasons as to why the building should be retained and actions which could be progressed to determine the condition of the building including how it could be restored.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Long, stated that in the past there had been a planning application on the site, but development had not taken place.  Then there was the millennium community project which had proposed housing, a new College campus and commercial premises on the site, but that development had stalled, until recently, and now there was housing on the site and the site had started to be regenerated.

He appreciated concerns raised but asked Members not to be misled by the information Councillor Kemp had provided, which had been circulated with the Agenda and stated that a Lynn News poll had resulted in 80% of respondents wanting the brick kiln saved.  Councillor Long referred to a poll on the Lynn News website which said that 49% of respondents would prefer a new supermarket instead, 19% had no idea it even existed and 32% cared about the brick kiln.  He felt that people would generally rather see commercial development which would benefit the town.

Councillor Kemp stated that the 80% figure which she had reported had been provided to her by the Lynn News and was accurate when she had submitted her request for the item to be considered.

Councillor Long reminded the Panel that the Planning Committee had agreed the methodology for demolition and he hoped that the Panel would support the process.  He stated that it was a dangerous structure and he would be accountable should anyone get hurt on the site.  He reminded the Panel that reports from a number of years ago had highlighted that the structure was dangerous and could collapse.  He suggested that the bricks from the brick kiln could be used as a feature in future development, along with an interpretation board which outlined the history of the site so that it could be remembered.

Councillor Bambridge informed the Panel that she had been contacted by constituents regarding this and she commented that, in the past, the Council had demolished structures, which could now be considered historically important and the Council needed to consider carefully if this would be something that they would regret in the future.

Councillor Lowe referred to the Lynn News poll and stated that it only had received 132 votes.

Councillor Patel commented that he agreed with the comments made by Councillor Long.  He asked if the responsibility for any accidents on the site lied with any other Councillor would they feel the same way about retaining the structure when they knew that it was dangerous and could collapse.

The Vice Chair, Councillor Parish commented that Historic England had determined that the brick kiln was not of ancient interest.  He felt that there were other buildings which were much more worthy of retention.  He agreed with the Leader in that an artefact or monument to the structure should be incorporated into any future development on the site.

Councillor Jones suggested that the demolition be delayed and the public be consulted to see if there was public interest in saving the site.

The Chief Executive reminded the Panel that officers had explained the de-listing process and the planning process and the correct processes had been followed in the same way as any developer would have to.  He explained that the land that the brick kiln was on was an employment site for NORA and it was important to bring this site forward for development.  He acknowledged that previous development had been designed around it, but this had not happened and the brick kiln currently limited the development options on the site and made it less attractive to potential purchasers.  The Chief Executive asked the Panel to look to the future and the opportunities for this gateway site to King’s Lynn.  He stated that Historic England were the experts and had come to a view that the building was not worthy of Listed Building status.  He asked the Panel to consider where it would be best to direct the Councils limited resources with regards to historic buildings, especially as there were so many in King’s Lynn. 

Councillor Ryves addressed the Panel under Standing Order 34.  He referred to the action plan that had been sent to him by a professional expert and hoped that the Panel would give it a chance.

RESOLVED: The Panel supported the demolition of the brick kiln, which had been de-listed and was not considered by Historic England to be of historical importance.  This would enable much needed development to take place on the Heritage Action Zone site resulting in employment and economic benefits to King’s Lynn.  The Panel suggest that any development on the site should include a clearly visible and potentially useful artefact made of brick (preferably sourced from the brick oven or bricks made in it).