![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Heritage conservation and adaptive reuses of textile mills are not only tasks for planners, architects, and conservationists in practice, but are also framed by policies, inspired by initiatives, and promoted by real estate companies. Forty years of experience in Northwest England, and practices in the Rhine region of Germany provide reflections on good practice in heritage conservation and adaptive reuse. The article considers case studies of smaller cities and towns neighbouring these two industrial regions. Our main findings are: first, best practice criteria for heritage conservation of textile mills differ slightly between England and Germany. The discussion in England pays more attention to long-term use and effective management, and we also recognise the influence of powerful stakeholders with economic interests. Second, heritage conservation and adaptive reuse of textile mills is an important task for regional mills, smaller textile towns and within areas of deprivation. Furthermore, such areas provide examples of good practice. Third, a ‘one size fits all’ approach is not appropriate: instead, such projects require a variety of motivations, stakeholders, and concepts. Most important is the key role of heritage conservation in awareness-building, research, listing of heritage, and consultancy in the planning and construction processes.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the German Research Foundation (Grant number to be added after peer-review to avoid identification)
Declaration of Interests statement
The authors report no potential conflicts of interest.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1. Cossons, Sustaining England’s Industrial Heritage; Oevermann and Mieg, Transforming Industrial Heritage Sites, pp3–11; Historic England, Engines of Prosperity.
2. Oevermann and Mieg, Transforming Industrial Heritage and Professional Practice, pp3–25; Ripp and Rodwell, Governance of Urban Heritage.
3. Soane, Agreeing to differ?
4. Glendinning, The conservation moment.
5. Examples of good practice is the term mainly used in German, whereas the English discussion refers to best practice.
6. Oevermann, Urban textile mills. The research project was funded by the German Research Foundation, Number 338,539,858.
7. Phelps et al, The Textile Mills of Lancashire The Legacy, p6.
8. Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England, Greater Manchester Textile Mills Survey, 1991.
9. Historic England, Engines of Prosperity, New Uses for Old Mills (North West), pp13-22.
10. BDP, A Heritage Topic Paper, p34.
11. Ibid 10, p36.
12. Havard, Contemporary Property Development, pp84–132.
13. Bratchford, Visualising Gentrification in Ancoats, pp141–175.
14. https//archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/16,056,443-83d5-34a5-8fc6-5f65909a185f
15. Lancashire County Council, area and population density, 2016.
16. Pennine Lancashire, Heritage Investment Strategy, 2015–2020 draft, p15.
17. Miller, Lancashire Textile Mills – Stage 2 Survey, Buildings at Risk Assessment Final Report, pp7–9.
18. Ibid 15.
19. Ibid 16.
20. Ibid 10, pp1–3.
21. Mason, Be Interested and Be Aware Joining Economic Value and Heritage Conservation, p306.
22. Pendlebury and Veldpaus, Heritage as a Vehicle for Development, p5.
23. Ibid 9, p25.
24. English Heritage, Constructive Conservation in Practice, 2008.
25. Cf. Kierdorf and Hassler, Denkmale des Industriezeitalters.
26. Cf. Deutsche Stiftung Denkmalschutz Neuer Nutzen in Industriebauten; INIK, Industriebau als Ressource.
27. Cf. LVR, Schall und Rauch; Bogner et al., Monument-Patrimony-Heritage, pp16–35.; Oevermann, Konversion historischer Textilindustriekomplexe, pp233–240.
28. Giles, Ditherington Mill and the Industrial Revolution, 2015
29. Rose et al, Ancoats Cradle of Industrialisation, pp13–32.
30. Historic England, Enabling Development and Heritage Assets, p3.
31. Ibid 15, p7.
32. Ibid 15, pp9–11.
33. Buschmann, Industriekultur Series.
34. Oevermann, Konversion historischer Textilindustriekomplexe.
35. Cf. Series Buschmann, Industriekultur Rheinland; personal site visits between 2016–2020.
36. Cf. for the discussion and critics Edelhoff, Die Viersener Textilindustrie; Schürings Vom Industrieschloss bis zum Werk im Grünen; Oevermann, Urban Textile Mills, pp9–24.
37. Stender, Vom Schandfleck zum Charme der Vergangenheit.
38. Edelhoff, Die Viersener Textilindustrie.
39. Ribble Valley Council, An economic strategy, p5.
40. Holmes Mill, Archaeological Building Investigation, Oxford Archaeology North, 2014.
41. See above 23., p16.
42. Dowd, Adrian email correspondence between principal planning officer and head of planning, Ribble Valley Council, January 2016.
43. See above 23., p15.
44. Ibid., p15.
45. Ibid., p16.
46. Ibid 41.
47. Ibid 7, p6.
48. Burrows, Heritage Impact Assessment, Brierfield Mill, p9–16.
49. Ibid 47.
50. Ibid 47, p37.
51. Ibid., p52
52. UK, Government, English Indices of Deprivation, MHCLG, p11.
53. Information from newspaper (Lancashire Telegraph, 19 March 2015).
54. NJL Consulting, Planning and Regeneration Statement, pp9–12.
55. Ibid 47.
56. Ibid 53, p32.
57. It was not until 1879 that any of the Krefeld mills first utilised a mechanical weaving loom to produce velvet (Doppelsamtwebstuhl), whereas other companies in the region were more advanced and had used this technology since 1877; cf. Rouette, Seide & Samt, pp137–139.
58. Feinendegen and Vogt, Krefeld, pp. 415, 420.
59. Traxler, Die alte Samtweberei.
60. Stadt Krefeld, Liste der Baudenkmäler in Krefeld.
61. Information from newspaper (Westdeutsche Zeitung, 25 January 1950).
62. Beierlorzer, Nachbarschaft Samtweberei.
63. Beierlorzer, Nachbarschaft Samtweberei; site visit and interview with Robert Ambrée, March, 2016.
64. Krause Vom behutsamen Umgang; Schwingeler, Grundlagen.
65. Schwingeler, Grundlagen.
66. Stender, Vom Schandfleck zum Charme.
67. Archive of the planning documents and applications for building permission, City of Euskirchen.
68. Zanger, Investitionen in anspruchsvolle Planung.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Heike Oevermann
Prof Dr Heike Oevermann is based at the Otto-Friedrich-Universität Bamberg as Professor for Heritage Conservation (Professorship in Substituion). She has worked on industrial heritage conservation for several years (see for example Oevermann & Mieg: Industrial Heritage Sites in Transformation, Routledge, 2015) and on urban heritage (see for example Oevermann & Gantner, Securing Urban Heritage: Agents, Access, and Securitization).
Paul Jones
Dr Paul Jones is based in the North West of England and has acted as development manager in the successful completion of urban heritage regeneration projects, including textile mill complexes, for over 15 years. In 2020, Paul founded Jones URC to provide consultancy services to not for profit organisations involved in the delivery of urban heritage regeneration projects, and to provide lecturing services, on a part time basis, to higher education institutions on the subjects of urban regeneration and examining the environmental impact of real estate activity.