Műemlék lakóházak (Az Egri Nyári Egyetem előadásai 1994 Eger, 1994)

DARYL FLOWER: Living in Monuments, a British Perspective

DARYL FOWLER LIVING IN MONUMENTS, A BRITISH PERSPECTIVE As we are nearing the end of the twentieth century it has become more important than ever to ensure that the built cultural heritage that we all seek to preserve has an appropriate, beneficial and economic use. The key words of 'sustainable development' are now being applied to conservation. Is the use of the monument sustainable? Does it have an appropriate life that will ensure its future in an evermore competitive society. Ideally, we should spend part of today looking back at the reasons as to why we keep historic buildings, but I don't think time will permit more than a few passing references. Perhaps we can explore issues that are raised in the quiet moments afterwards. We have to remember that the Historic Buildings and Monuments, that we are all responsible for, are chosen to be preserved by society for very deliberate reasons. They represent either an aspect of a past culture or a development style, or maybe a period of life that in some way we wish to preserve for future generations to enjoy. However, it is only a very small number of buildings that can be preserved by the State in one form or another without some kind of return income. The special building, or ruin perhaps, only have a future in public care but this leaves many others. In the past, in centrally organised economies, not just from the former Communist Block, it has been possible to have a large State ownership of the heritage. Now these days are changing and every building needs to earn it's living. The principles that I want to illustrate today the those that are involved, when we start to adapt monuments togine them a new life. It is fine for the Charter of Venice to tell us about the ethics of restoration. Most peoples desire may simply be to have a toilet in the house. This is not unreasonable and it may be there are times when those ethics have to be compromised in order that the building can have a future. So what are the principals of adaptation? We are looking at using monuments for people. The major controlling factor nowadays are regulations and to obtain the best schemes we must understand the purpose behind the regulations. Almost all building regulations anywhere in the world are based on issues of human health and safety, but frequently there are serious conflicts with the preservation idea. This is perhaps best illustrated with mud brick which in tropical climates can house msects carrying disease (chaggás disease). We expect the building to protect us from cold and damp; we expect it to retain adequate warmth; providing reasonable energy conservation; we expect a reasonable standard of light; we expect headroom and structural reliability. We wish to avoid the dangers from fire; we wish to ensure the buildings have sanitation. Many regulations came into place because of overcrowding in the European Cities of the nineteenth century. This in turn affects the plot pattern, which then goes on to affect the character of our towns. By understanding these issues we can decide what aspects of change we can consider with our buildings, either large or small. Equally importantly what level of change the proposed user will have to make to his proposals. Good conservation is usually about compromise.