Meeting the Requirements of the Granada Convention: : A Review of Policy for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage in the Republic of Ireland

Citation

Pickard, R. (1999), "Meeting the Requirements of the Granada Convention: : A Review of Policy for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage in the Republic of Ireland", Property Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 112-114. https://doi.org/10.1108/pm.1999.17.1.112.1

This publication is a useful addition to the literature on real estate matters in the Republic of Ireland that has appeared with greater frequency in the UK in the last few years in the wake of the growing awareness of the success of the “Green Tiger” economy. As a recent item in Estates Gazette put it: “While much of the world’s economy is on a downward spiral, Dublin is bucking the trend and experiencing another boom” (Pilkington, 1998).

The paper comprises a study supported by the RICS Education Trust which examines the present position regarding the protection of the Republic’s Architectural Heritage against the Council of Europe’s framework set out in the Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe ‐ the “Granada Convention”.

It is an overlooked fact that, as Pickard reminds us, the origins of building conservation legislation in both the UK and Ireland lie in the same parliamentary measure, the Ancient Monuments Act 1882. However, as controls over archaeological remains and both individual structures and whole areas of architectural and/or historical significance have become more extensive in the UK, currently culminating in the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979, the Town and Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act) 1990 and supporting planning policy guidance, those in Ireland are less well‐developed. Although the latter’s National Monuments legislation provides a means of protecting any architectural and ancient monument regardless of age, Pickard points to both the bias towards pre‐1700 structures under these provisions and the patchy implementation and policing of the discretionary listing system for later buildings available to local authorities under general planning legislation.

This situation has existed against the backdrop of the Granada Convention, which was agreed in 1985. This seeks to promote agreement and unity of application with regard to the legal and practical protection of the built heritage. Unusually for a measure intended to encourage a common approach across Europe (albeit not directly controlled by the EU), the UK was one of the first countries to ratify the convention (in 1987). In contrast, although an initial signatory alongside the UK, the Republic of Ireland did not ratify its provisions until 1997. It is with the approach to developing a statutory framework in Ireland that is in keeping with the principles of the Granada Convention that Pickard’s study is concerned.

Thus regard is had to the evolution of law and policy generally in Ireland before turning to a critical evaluation of conservation policy and practice in Dublin. The Irish capital has been the focus of considerable international attention as part of the country’s economic boom; inevitably there will be tensions as in any major city, between protecting intrinsic ambience and providing modern infrastructure. Pickard outlines the approach taken to listing through the vehicle of successive city development plans since 1971. Whereas in the UK gradings represent different degrees of architectural or historical significance, in Dublin each of the city’s four lists has a different function ‐ buildings to be preserved, buildings to be protected, buildings in public ownership and buildings with important interior features.

The implementation of this system in practice is evaluated, showing that, while its effectiveness has begun to improve, the level of statutory protection does not yet match the ambitions of the Granada Convention. Pickard also considers controls to protect unlisted historic properties, the impact of safety and fire regulations, Dublin Corporation’s approach to establishing conservation areas in the absence of national statutory provisions and, finally, a case study of the Temple Bar designated area.

Attention has been paid to Temple Bar by other UK sources (e.g. Solomons, 1993 and Tiesdell et al., 1996) and it is one of the exemplar projects identified by the recently‐launched “Regeneration through Heritage” initiative fostered by the Heritage Lottery Fund and Business in the Community (1998). Legal, financial and fiscal powers have enabled the revitalisation since 1991 of a historically‐interesting but run‐down area of some 80ha immediately south of the River Liffey in the centre of the city. Tiesdell et al. note that the area’s “varied historical and cultural heritage has left a rich urban fabric and streetscape of short, narrow winding streets with few alterations to the physical fabric since the nineteenth century” (p. 89). Through the medium of two statutorily‐created companies (Temple Bar Renewal Ltd and Temple Bar Properties Ltd) an energetic programme of “cultural regeneration” has been implemented, with a strong emphasis on restaurants, bars and other informal leisure facilities. A similar outcome has been sought in the Castlefields district of Manchester and, on a smaller scale, in the Mill Lane area of central Cardiff.

The achievements in Temple Bar can be held out as a good example of what can be achieved by a single‐purpose organisation in the area of (in this case tourism‐ or leisure‐led) urban renewal. However, Pickard draws on a number of critiques from within Ireland in suggesting that despite Temple Bar’s historical significance, conservation objectives have not been at the forefront of the regeneration programme and sometimes have been too readily disregarded.

Nonetheless, Pickard notes that Dublin Corporation has been one of the bodies that have lobbied the Irish Government to rectify the legal and administrative shortcomings of the present system for protecting the Republic’s architectural heritage. He summarises the steps that have been taken in this respect since 1994, including the passing of the Heritage Act in 1995, and the deliberations of an interdepartmental working group set up by the Government. The latter’s recommendations include the establishment of a more systematic approach to listing, controlling works to such properties and providing financial incentives, together with suggestions regarding a full National Inventory of Architecture and improvements to the present system of training, education and advisory services.

Pickard concludes that while these developments are welcome, they need to be translated into a comprehensive set of statutory tools if historic properties are to be properly protected. Importantly, rather than relying on a straight export of the UK approach, he notes additional examples of good practice from elsewhere in Europe which may also prove helpful in enabling Ireland to match the aspirations of the Granada Convention, which are likely to remain the benchmark for the foreseeable future.

References

Heritage Lottery Fund/Business in the Community (1998), Regeneration through Heritage, www. bitc.org.uk/rth

Pilkington, L. (1998), “Magnetic charm”, Estates Gazette, 7 November, p. 82.

Solomons, M. (1993), “Bohemian remedy”, Estates Gazette, 21 August, pp. 58‐9.

Tiesdell. S., Oc, T. and Heath, T. (1996), Revitalizing Historic Urban Quarters, Architectural Press, London, pp. 88‐96.