Ham and High Broadway: Comment: "Let’s conserve birthplace of television, warts and all"

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on November 17, 2014 at 21:56

Alan, I've attached a PDF of Jacob's article in last Thursday's Ham & High, with front page drawing attention to it (scroll down to the double-page spread). Please don't be afraid of forwarding to anyone you think might be interested ;-)

Attachments:

• H&H Let's Conserve Birthplace of Television, Warts and All.pdf, 3 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard Woods on November 21, 2014 at 16:37

Ally Pally is THE most important historical site in north London; it defines the area just as the Crystal Palace did on Norwood Hill. Not only must it be saved but preserved. I and a mate were ordered down from the TV mast in about 1955 by an irate policeman. My grandfather living within sight of the mast built all three of our families first televisions in the late 40s and the 50s using Practical Wireless plans. MMy otrher grandfather once played the organ there. I skated there, damaged a decent bike by trying to do BMX-ing down the hill before BMX, I successfully rolled from the foot of the steps (across the road) to the bottom beside the then racecourse and got a whack for spoiling my clothes, I had my first, er, well you know, experience there, I won and lost on the fairground, saw my first horse race there. And all the time the Palace was the icon that stood for HOME for us all. Hands off!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on November 25, 2014 at 9:09

Morning Richard, 

Ally Pally is our Trust, whose beneficiaries are the residents of north London. It is certainly the most important building in this Borough and one part especially, is of international importance.

Not only must it be saved but preserved.

Yes:

Saving

In 2007, the Save Ally Pally campaign – of which I was a small part – succeeded in saving Alexandra Palace. The Council promised in writing, permission for a Small Casino and had sold it to a former slum landlord. He and his company occupied our Charity's premises in 2007, from May to December. With taxpayer money, the Council heavily subsidised the occupation.

Thanks to High Court action by SAP, finally the buyer was evicted in early January 2008 and it is back in public control, albeit with the same Trustee (our local council). A former Council Leader was suspended for four months in connection with the infamous Licence to Firoka.

Preservation

Now we get to the tricky part, not quite a curate's egg. With wide support, the Council bid for Heritage Lottery Fund support to fix up the eastern side of the building. Genuine thanks to the Council's efforts, we succeeded in winning against great competition. I give credit to the Council Leader for her no small efforts in this.

The first tranche of a huge grant was used for detailed design work. For most of the time, this was described in broad brush, but it is only recently that actual plans have been produced. In my opinion, about 90% of them are fine, but I have reservations about what is intended to be done to the 1936 television studios.

The I.F.T.

There is so much emphasis on telling the story of television, that the place, walls, fabric and actual studios would be compromised. There's a conflict between restoring a Victorian building's facade, on the one hand, and preserving at least some of John Logie Baird's 1936 Studio. What wasn't made clear until recently, is that the council intends to demolish the room on the balcony that housed his hybrid system, the Intermediate Film Technique.

It's the only significant feature of the studio of the man – in the public mind – most associated with the development of television. I think visitors would expect to see just a little more original. What's proposed looks glossy and impressive – but the smart modern rooms proposed could be, and might as well be, anywhere in London.

"Consultation"

There has been a want of independent input in the process. Yesterday, the council notified a selected few of the planning application now up for more 'consultation'. The Council – the Trustee – will give itself a Conservation okay.

For a site of international importance – in our Charitable Trust's Grade II Listed Building – the Trustee (Council) applies to itself for Planning Permission and Listed Building Consent. The same process is used that applies for a new house. Any comments are required by the Council's planning department, by 19 December. The way in which this Application differs from a new house, is the mountain – perhaps blizzard – of documentation.

Anyone wishing to either to comment or to see the material expected to be rubber-stamped, can view the following applications:

HGY/2014/3122         comprising 195 documents

HGY/2014/3291         comprising 158 documents

here :  View Applications 

(copy and paste one of the above references into the first field ("Reference number").

The Council-controlled Trust Board once hoped (well, Minuted, actually) to seek for the south east wing (with Studios), UN World Heritage status. Taking all these points together, in respect of the studios: is this a fair or reasonable process?

Clive Carter
Councillor
One of 57 Trustees

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lynne on December 17, 2014 at 18:00

Dear All,

Pls spare a minute to have your say by putting in a response into planning by the 19th Dec.
Planning application HGY/2014/3122 and HGY/2014/3291.

This is to preserve the layout of the 1936 BBC TV Studios internally and externally. The Studios are part of London's heritage and should be preserved for future generations.

Pls consider raising your concerns to the part of the planning application relating to the Studios.

Wishing all the best of the season,

Lynne

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Omotn on December 18, 2014 at 11:19

Well, this is all very interesting, about who invented what where, but meantime the BBC studios will be demolished if the plans go ahead. I was convinced before reading the APCAAC assessment, that the bricking in should remain and the historic studios not be replaced by a multimedia experience. So far, of about 25 responses to the application 20 of them are unthinking acceptance of the whole lot. One of the objectors to the BBC studio demolition is Robin Lustig, a broadcaster and local resident who writes:

I should like to fully endorse the points made in response to this application by the Alexandra Park
& Palace Conservation Area Advisory
Committee.
The importance of the heritage aspects of the original TV studios cannot be over-estimated, so I
would urge rejection of this part of the current application.

So, if the APCAAC has convinced you too, then let the planners know. It will only take a moment.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Colin Marr on December 20, 2014 at 11:40

I write as chairman of the committee responsible for the submission that is referred to by Omotn. While it is gratifying to see support for the views of the Alexandra Park and Palace Conservation Area Committee, the submission itself is barely readable in the link given. I encourage members of this forum to read it in the form given in the attached PDF.

It is also gratifying to see the similar comments now being posted on the Haringey Planning website. Despite the earlier claim that the deadline for submission of views on this planning application was 19 December, in fact submissions will still be received during January and right up to the meeting of the Planning Committee that will decide on this proposal. So, it is not too late for further submissions!

Colin

Attachments:

• APsubmit171214.pdf, 384 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on December 20, 2014 at 13:30

Colin thank you for posting the attachment of the initial views of the Conservation Committee that you chair.

Last night I made my own comments to the Planning Department about the Ally Pally proposals, and in the first line of which, I endorse the views of the Committee.

My comments should appear on the Council's Planning Department portal in due course; meanwhile, here they are:

=====================================================

HGY/2014/3122

 

(1)   As one of the 57 Trustees of our Charitable Trust, I wish to endorse the initial comments made by the Alexandra Park & Palace Conservation Area Advisory Committee.

___________________________________________________

(2)   I have no issue with the plans for the East side of AP, but important Conservation aspects of the South East wing have been neglected or disregarded (further below): this needs to be fixed before its acceptable.

___________________________________________________

(3)   Background:

In 2007 the Council attempted to sell the whole palace building to Firoka Ltd. and the studios were earmarked as “Office [-space]”. Then, most of the concerns raised in the Public Consultation of the Charity Commission, were about the fate of the BBC studios:

Of 328 responses:

4 in favour (of sale), but with

“186 individual representations about the site of the original TV studios”
(quote from Charity Commission).

That Consultation was ruled unlawful in the High Court and the sale was quashed.

___________________________________________________

(4)   The North East wing

I have no problem with the plans for the north-east wing, where the lion’s share of cost, care and attention has gone. This contains the Victorian Theatre. It would be unfair to dub this the Luvvies’ Corner, but it does appear that this has held the focus of most interest.

___________________________________________________

(5)   The Ice Rink Lobby

… but the interest begins to dwindle across the big ice rink lobby about which I have no comment.

___________________________________________________

(6)   The South-East wing

However, the interest, resources and attention appear to run out roughly half-way across the Studio wing, whose plans could be characterised as half-baked.

Most apparent: two large, immediately-adjacent areas do not figure at all. i.e. the whole northern side of the studio wing, containing the grand Victorian staircase and the not small matter of the six-storey BBC tower. These relevant, Studio-related areas are disregarded and appear not to have been considered.

Sadly, this evinces a general lack of interest in the history of the actual studios. Except for experiencing it in a stylised, synthesised fashion, it may also reflect a lack of respect for invention, technology and engineering – including the febrile circumstances of the inception of television: the rush, the chaos, the competition and the experimentation.

___________________________________________________

(7)   The basic conflict

The disregard for the real history of the studio outline appears to be caused by questionable judgment over the relevant importance of:

     (a) restoring the (exterior) façade at the time of the Victorian tea rooms;

     ~ versus ~

     (b) the birthplace of television (with one or two qualifications)

The latter factor ought to outweigh the former.

The approach to refurbishing the studio fabric is misconceived. It’s insensitive and unsympathetic to the actual history and what actually happened there!

___________________________________________________

(8)   Telling a story vs. respecting the place

The approach begins with an intention to tell the story of television. This story could be told anywhere (in particular, but incidentally, if that were the sole goal, it could be done better in a building that was begun from scratch).

In the current plans, there’s over-much emphasis on telling this general story of TV and too little attention on conserving what is left or what – with only a little effort – could be partly restored.

Instead, the existing studios would be rinsed of remaining evidence and expression of television production. It would be sanitised and adapted to the current needs of modern multi-media displays.

The fact this is the birthplace of television becomes incidental to the method of telling the story. The impression given, is that is almost regrettable and embarrassing that the BBC altered the tea rooms in the first place – we’ll try to make your visit nice and comfortable, despite the BBC’s earlier rude intrusion!

There’s been a want of imagination to exploit the actual history that took place. The design treatment has been to create big modern rooms that at first glance, appear impressive: but they could be – and might as well be – anywhere in London. It is astonishing that so little advantage is taken of the fact that this is where the studios were!

Instead, the application seeks to foist a fashionable style on the area, in the same way that a developer might wish to stamp on any nondescript, brown-field site. Rather than any attempt at conservation, the approach would be been to remove and change irreversibly. It’s crass.

Apart from the good view – that anyway can be had from many points – visitors would not feel they are coming to something that is markedly different from any other smart, modern, purpose-built museum. It would disappoint anyone with a knowledge of the history of the place.

The AP manager claimed in the press that “The Studios will be restored …” This is inaccurate if not untrue. It would be less inaccurate to say that the Tea Rooms would be restored. The external façade might be restored, but far less weight should be attached to this superficial consideration, than to the remaining expressions of the actual studios, that are of world importance.

___________________________________________________

(9)   John Logie Baird’s studio

The Baird Studio is retained in name only. No effort has been made to conserve any part of it, especially the room that housed his Intermediate Film Technique (IFT).

Such lack of regard to Conservation is surprising in a Grade II-listed building, where the Trustee is the Local Authority. In respect of part of which, the Trust Board has already formally agreed that a long-term goal should be the seeking of UN World Heritage Site status.

However, if at least some of the currently bricked-in arches were retained, at least the possibility of a life-size model of Baird’s IFT apparatus would be possible. In situ. But it seems there is no will to even try!

___________________________________________________

(10) The UN Heritage Proposal is placed in jeopardy

Unless the plans for the BBC studios are modified, the formal goal of a UNESCO World Heritage gift of inscription – adopted only 34 months ago – would be abandoned. Not explicitly, but tacitly.

This would be a huge opportunity missed, not just for Haringey Borough, but for London and the UK. This goal is endorsed by:

• The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson
• Media Historian, Iain Logie Baird
• The International Committee for the Conservation of the Industrial Heritage (TICCIH)
• UNESCO World Heritage site: the 1924 radio station at Grimeton, Varberg, Sweden CEO: Dr. Lars Johansson
• IET – Institution of Engineering and Technology (contact: Alan Berry)
• The local MPs: Lynne Featherstone (Hornsey & Wood Green, Government Minister) and David Lammy, (Tottenham & former Heritage Minister)
• Former BBC Director-General Greg Dyke
• Former BBC Chairmen: Lord Grade CBE and Gavyn Davies OBE
• Lord Tim Clement-Jones CBE
• Hornsey Historical Society, Chair: Keith Fawkes
• AP Television Group, Chair: John Thompson; British Heritage Television Group, Chair: Martin Allen AP Television Society, Chair: Simon Vaughan

 

Clive Carter
Councillor

2014-xii-19

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page