# Listed buildings... A blessing, ### And a curse! [Greg Penn](https://substack.com/@manwithahammer) Apr 15, 2026 _A free post for everyone to enjoy as I’m sure it’s one lots of you have opinions on, and as ever - I’m keen to hear them! If you’re not already subscribed for free I’d hugely appreciate you joining me here, and there’s a paid option too for anyone that would like access to all my waffle! Thank you! Please note, this article is too long for your email, so you’ll need to open it up separately in the app or on their website on your phone or computer to read it all!_ Well folks, I’d rather like to think, if you’d been following me for any length of time somewhere - you will know, or at least I hope you do - that I am passionate about old buildings and their restoration… and I want to caveat this by saying this isn’t aimed at anyone in particular, is certainly not designed to upset anyone, and that I am, of course, not any kind of expert in these matters - please consider them the ravings of a madman… as I know this is potentially a controversial topic, and one over which passions run very highly indeed, on all sides of the fence. The word restoration, means different things to different people… it’s open to significant interpretation and peoples ideas on what they think is ‘best’, with one side of the fence wanting to preserve the building in some kind of time warp, doing the bare minimum to modernise, use traditional materials, techniques, tools with nary a nod to comfort, convenience or how we live today - or cost sometimes! The other end I suppose would be people that don’t care a fig - an unsympathetic developer for example, that’s purely there to maximise profits… and will, without hesitation, remove every shred of age, character and bit of beauty from a building to maximise the number of flats, or shops, or whatever it might be, in a particular building. Myself, well - I’m more of the former than the latter, that’s for sure - but am also pragmatic, and thoroughly enjoy modern conveniences and comforts… I’m also someone that truly would rather see buildings loved, lived in, used, and have some purpose, than stood empty - in any condition. In the UK (I think there’s similar in other parts of the world too - but how effective it is I’ve no idea), we have something called listed building status, managed by local councils but Historic England oversees the national list. Listing means it is a building of special architectural or historic interest and it began in the 1940’s and there’s around 400,000 listings in the UK. It doesn’t just have to be buildings though - there’s an old letter box on the site of Admirals that has its own 2\* listing… nor does it have to be a very old building to be listed (though almost all built before 1700 are listed) - the Civic centre in Plymouth for example - a 14 storey tower block opened in 1962 has 2\* listing (higher than Admirals) for it’s excellent example of 1960’s post war architecture. In England there’s 3 types of listing. - **Grade 1.** Only 2.5% of listed buildings occupy this spot. It’s the highest grade, for buildings of exceptional interest - and it comes with the most severe restrictions on what you can do to them - likely very little. - **Grade 2\*.** Somewhere between 1 and 2. - **Grade 2.** Around 92% of listed buildings are a grade 2, being of the least interest and with the least likely restrictions. Contrary to popular belief, the listing, at any grade, covers everything within the building… There seems to be a common misconception, that it’s only the outside, or the facade, or even just one particular element that might be listed. It isn’t. It’s not only the building, but also the curtilage… e.g. the gardens/walls/outbuildings… and the listing applies to the building at the point of listing, so if your beautiful stone Georgian house has a naff 1970’s extension, and was listed in the 1980’s, with the extension there… your naff extension is also listed! Yey! So… as a lover of old buildings, I am _theoretically_ wholeheartedly in favour of listing… it is, an effort at least, to respect and retain our built heritage. I do however, have some issues around it… For context - the punishment of breaching the listed building protections, is a criminal offence… unlike normal planning breaches. So, do something you shouldn’t with a listed building, and you could end up with a criminal record. Serious stuff. So… so far, it all sounds pretty sensible. Where do the issues come in? Well, the listing is managed locally rather than by one single, central organisation. That means there’s pretty massive inconsistencies in the way the listed building process and planning appears to be managed. In some areas people seem to get away with what they want (for good or ill) - in others, you can’t seem to do a thing. In fact even within the same area there appears to be an element of luck - or perhaps someone knowing the process or people involved etc. because again there’s some pretty major differences between what some do and others aren’t allowed to do. And whilst I’m sure the vast majority of conservation officers are people who, like me, have a genuine passion for these buildings… they are spread very thinly. Obviously this can be incredibly frustrating for people. Indeed our very own Plymouth City Council recently breached listed building regulations by doing works to a grade 2 pier, without consent - following neglect leading to urgent work being required. Admirals had a hole in the roof - an enormous hole about 3 feet across - and the rest of the roof had plenty of leaks and issues - so understandably, needed re-roofing… and by reroofing, I mean carefully taking all the old slates off, adding new felt, making good any issues, and putting the old slates back on - with any new slates needed, going in areas that can’t be seen, and made of the same material etc… there were no changes being made to anything beyond that - and this was absolutely urgent work required, to save the building from further damage. In a non listed building, no planning permission would be required - you’d just get on with it, and make the building watertight. Job done. Alas, this was not my experience… and it took over 6 months to be granted permission to go ahead with the works - 6 months of further damage being caused by the system that’s designed to stop these buildings being damaged. To give an idea of some of the frustrations within that process, I had to produce architects drawings of the building before and after the work. Of course - there were no changes - at all… so I submitted the same drawing, twice - one with ‘before’ and one with ‘after’ on. I did these myself (after a bit of cajoling) because they wanted me to pay an architect to do them - which seemed ridiculous to me given there were no changes. Because there’s not the manpower needed to staff these departments adequately, it also means there’s issues around enforcement, and because of this - there’s plenty that fly under the radar, doing as they wish without permission, potentially causing issues to these buildings… but those of us wanting to do the right thing, and follow the rules, feel like the ones that are penalised. Indeed there’s very little in the way of punishment, if you own a listed building, and want to allow it to deteriorate to the point it’ll collapse, or certainly become unviable for anyone, ever to repair it. Another example close to home, is The Palace Theatre and Hotel a 2\* listed building that would once have been the jewel in Plymouths crown and the place to be seen of an evening, once hosting the likes of Harry Houdini, Charlie Chaplain and Laurel and Hardy played their last ever show there. From the heyday of the theatre it then became a nightclub, eventually closing in 2006 following a drugs raid and the arrest of the owner. But if you want to knock down that awful 70’s extension… well, there’s going to be a lengthy process to follow, with lots of hurdles, significant expense, and there’s no guarantee you’ll be able to do any or all of what you want to. Whilst there’s a part of me that thinks - well, these are listed buildings, and you know what you’re getting when you take them on so… tough! It also makes me a bit sad. Because when things stop making sense, you’re left with a few options that might come to pass… 1. Listed buildings get bought by people that don’t care… rules will be broken knowing they’re unlikely to be caught, and even if they are, they’re unlikely to be harshly enforced once the work has been done - less possible with exterior stuff, but certainly possible internally… a downward spiral ensues. 2. Listed buildings become the preserve only of the wealthy who can either afford to suffer the consequences, or afford to pay the experts, architects and planners etc. to get what they want through (London and the various changes made to some incredible buildings, with equally varied tastes, granted permission, springs to mind and yet I’ve seen someone have issues over a very handsome, and in my opinion thoroughly in keeping garden gate they installed). This, theoretically might be OK in areas where there’s wealth, and those people feel they’re buying into something worth investing in - but it won’t work for places like Plymouth. It also doesn’t sit entirely comfortably with me that these wonderful buildings should only be the preserve of the wealthy too. 3. Listed buildings become abandoned and derelict. I firmly believe Admirals was right on the cusp… this is exacerbated by the area - Plymouth is not a very wealthy place, and house prices have a very low ceiling. In London, Admirals would likely be worth 20 times what it’s worth here, but the work maybe would only cost 1.5x the cost here… it would certainly be a house worth restoring for profit in a London or Bath or leafy Cotswold village. In a Plymouth, or a Hull - far less so - hence the price I paid for it! There’s probably more too that I’ve missed - but you get the idea… Of course people buying listed buildings should absolutely be aware of all this… and the advice I always give, when I’m asked (and it’s quite frequent), is that if you can’t make the changes you want to (assuming they do), would you still want/love it? If the answer is no, think long and hard about buying it as there’s no guarantee you’ll get the permission to do the work. And as for why are some changes needed anyway some might ask - especially those who’d like them to remain a time capsule. Well… obviously there’s the 70’s extension element - but that’s pretty obvious. The rest - well, some - is because of how we live/the world we live in. We’re constantly facing rises in energy costs, and should certainly all be more conscious of our energy use from an environmental perspective and these buildings are rarely energy efficient… and so two lives have changed. Admirals would have once had an army of staff to run it… and for most people, even those far better off than I, that’s just not the case. We cook for ourselves (a notion that would I’m sure have horrified the original officer living here!) - originally the kitchen would have been in the lower ground - dark and isolated from the rest of the house… Then it was moved up to the ground floor - but again in a small room tucked away. I’m fortunate with Admirals that it’s big enough for me to make things work, without needing to make any changes to the structure/fabric of the building and everything I’ve done - can be undone easily and the whole place would be back to how it was… but assuming most people don’t have an 8,200 sq ft, 30 roomed mansion to make things work - and that occasionally a wall might need to come down or an extension required etc. in order to create a comfortable, practical home well, I’m all for it. It then allows what might become something hard to live in, and therefore unloved and possibly left to rot or not well kept, become a very, very beloved home indeed and one that people will look after, love and cherish. In an ideal world I’d redo it… and were it not listed, it’s something I’d tackle… and whilst the listing doesn’t mean I couldn’t sort it - it certainly means it’s beyond my budget to even explore it - so, I’ll simply do my best to make it as good as I can - and certainly as a compromise, it’s fine - I wouldn’t have bought the house otherwise. I do however, wish the process was more transparent, more straightforward and with clearer rules and guidelines that were more easily understood and followed (on all sides!). Because more than anything, I want these buildings to be lived in, and loved… I truly and passionately believe that’s what will keep our built heritage alive and in the best overall state, by having them used, loved and turning their owners into advocates, by allowing them to fall in love with their homes, without feeling like there’s a constant source or worry, concern or a millstone grinding them down… by having a sensible process, nationally, that’s followed by all.