Essay 4 - Project Implimentation

REHABILITATING THE PRISON: THE CASE OF ARMAGH GAOL Essay 4: Project Implementation M.Phil in Architecture & Urban Design

Chris Hamill

Between 1968 and 1999, over 35001 people lost their lives in Northern Ireland during a period of sectarian violence which came to be known as ‘the Troubles’. This essay is an exploration of the difficult role architects have to play in ‘post-ceasefire’ societies as curators of buildings and sites which have witnessed, or even participated in, unimaginable trauma. Whilst there are manifest dangers in such involvement, the unexplored potential of these places to help address grievances by rendering strife visible, and therefore unavoidable, could be an immense boon to Northern Irish society if diligently realised.

1

Dawson 2010, p.8

Front Cover Wrap-around Image: Aftermath of the killing of prison officer Agnes Fraser (40) outside Armagh Gaol. Thursday April 19 1979

The Armagh Guardian via Paul Dickinson. Used with permission.

.1

Fig. 1: Protesters outside Armagh Gaol campaigning for the release of Pauline McLauglin to hospital care on medical grounds. c.1980

REHABILITATING THE PRISON: THE CASE OF ARMAGH GAOL Essay 4: Project Implementation An essay submitted in par tial fulfillment of the requirements for the M.Phil in Architecture & Urban Design 2017-8

Chris Hamill Christ’s College 5092 words With thanks to: Barbara Campbell-Lange Ingrid Schröder Aram Mooradian .3 This essay is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except where specifically indicated in the text.

Note on ethics The author is originally from, and is currently resident in, Northern Ireland during the fieldwork period of this MPhil course.

Due to the sensitive nature of the site, and the fact that it is currently subject to a live project with vested and commercial interests, much of the information provided through informal interviews was given on condition of anonymity for the relevant parties. As such, generic titles have been used within the text to protect identities, and where material with a very limited circulation has been provided, its inclusion within this paper was conditional on attaining multiple sources, so that its disclosure cannot implicate any individual source by proxy.

It is relevant to declare that the author was formerly an employee of two conservation-accredited architectural offices currently practicing in Northern Ireland. The involvement of one of these practices, Hall Black Douglas Architects, in a previous proposal for the Armagh Gaol site is directly referenced in the text. This project significantly predates the author’s association with the practice and this association has in no way coloured the nature of the information disclosed.

All materials related to this scheme were freely and reputably attained from other archival sources including Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council Local Planning Office. The discussion of this scheme and its comparison to others within the text in no way benefits the author financially or otherwise, as a result of their previous involvement with this or any other practice.

Fig. 2: Map showing the position of Armagh in Ireland and its proximity to the international border.

On Brexit The United Kingdom’s referendum on leaving the EU on 26th June 2016 followed by the triggering of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty makes a change in the status of the Northern Ireland / Republic of Ireland border a realistic possibility by 2019.

Given the location of the chosen site (Fig.2), Armagh Gaol in proximity to the border, its historic associations with Irish Nationalism and Republicanism, and the author’s proposal that it may find new use as an ‘all-island’ centre for traditional construction skills training, any change in the status of the border would clearly impact upon the suggested scheme.

However, at time of writing, no concrete proposals regarding the international frontier have been submitted by UK or EU negotiators. Therefore, although the impending change is referenced in the text, definitive proposals for mitigating any potential negative impacts upon the author’s scheme have not been suggested.

.5

.7

Fig. 3: Armagh Gaol as it exists today

Part 1: Introduction & Essay Structure In the heart of the Northern Irish town of Armagh, the former gaol complex has lain derelict since its closure in 1988.

Closely associated with the divisive events and divergent narratives of ‘the Troubles’, previous attempts to recast the gaol in a more positive light through architectural intervention have failed, with the most recent effort, a plan to turn the site into a boutique hotel, currently stalled due to lack of funding.

The brief for the author’s design project is to propose a re-use strategy for the site which has the capacity to successfully navigate those issues that have derailed previous schemes, and to enhance them with its own ambitions. Underpinning this stated intent are two primary considerations: i. To preserve the historic gaol complex pursuant to its B+ listed status2 and its significant presence in the local and national ‘memoryscape’ of the NI conflict; and to do so in a manner which is appropriate, sympathetic and sustainable in the long term.

.8

ii. To carefully curate this contested heritage asset through a series of architectural and programmatic interventions which seek to explore its potential for re-engagement with the more divisive aspects of the recent past, and how the site might be reconfigured to act as a vehicle for increased contact and co-operation between divided communities.3 Sections 2 and 3 of this essay explore the political and technical issues likely to impact upon the author’s proposed scheme, viewed through the lens of the proposal by the Trevor Osborne Property Group to turn the former HM Prison Armagh into a hotel and spa.4 A critical investigation of that scheme will reveal not only the issues which were most problematic to resolve, but also aspects which, while successful in navigating policy requirements, are not viewed as ‘best practice’, or which might offer untapped potential which the author’s proposals will attempt to exploit.

The concluding part of this essay will then define the brief for a traditional skills training facility on the site in Section 4 before suggesting a realisable strategy for navigating the previously identified issues with regards to the design project in Section 5 (Fig. 4.).

2 Listing procedures in Northern Ireland differ from the rest of the UK in terminology for the classification of listed status. Grade B+, the intermediate grading for listed buildings in the province is broadly equivalent to Grade B in Scotland and Grade II* in England and Wales. Further information in Appendix i (DoE PPS 6 Annex C:9) 3 Contact between groups is determined by Gordon Allport (1992) to be an integral first step towards mutual respect and understanding.

Hewstone et al. (2006) describe this approach as ‘an essential part of any solution’ for dealing with the legacy of the Northern Ireland conflict on the mindsets of those living in the Province. Sternfeld (2011) adds to this suggestion by stating that ‘memorial sites’ associated with difficult histories can be a important venue for these inter-group contacts to occur.

4 These plans are taken to be those articulated through the 2012-13 Planning Application and subsequent 2017 Listed Building Consent Application, submitted on behalf of the TOPG by Krtierion Conservation Architects, in addition to supplementary material produced by the design team in aid of these applications. (See Appendix iii.3).

P.33

P.14 P.28 .9

P.21

Fig. 4: Essay Structure and Methodology; using the lens of the TOPG proposals for Armagh Gaol to examine and critique issues likely to arise in the author’s subsequent proposals.

Fig. 5: The position of Armagh Gaol (black) within the city. The boundary of the Armagh Conservation Area (as extended in 1991) is shown in red.

Timeline of Armagh Gaol 1780 - Three bays of Front Block of Armagh Gaol built to designs of Architect Thomas Cooley 1780

c. 1810 - 2-storey infirmary building constructed 1819 - Two additional bays in identical style to the existing Front Block are built on its southern end generating the 5 part facade seen today. Francis Johnston possibly architect.

1837-48 - William Murray prepares 5 separate schemes for the extension of the gaol to newly acquired land directly to the south in the manner of a Pentonville-style prison. None are built. Plans viewable at the Irish Architectural Archive, Dublin.

1845-52 - The Great Fammine ‘an Gorta Mór’ leads to widespread starvation, disease and emigration intensified by evictions and debt defaults caused by crop failure. Massive increase in itinerant population.

1819

1846 - 3-storey Cell Block ‘A’ is completed. William Murray is architect.

1837 1846 1852

The Great Fammine

1847 - 33 inmates reportedly died in Armagh Gaol in this year. c.1850 - Windows to Front Block are enlarged and decorative parapet added.

1852 - Additional 2-storey Cell Block ‘B’ is built on comission from the Armagh Grand Jury 1866 - The last public execution in Armagh - that of ‘a man named Barry’ was carried out in front of the gaol.

1904 - Dec 22 - Joseph Fee is the last person executed at Armagh Gaol 1920 - Armagh Gaol becomes a women’s prison

1866

1921 - Partition of Ireland. New state of Northern Ireland created within the UK c.1968-1998 - ‘The Troubles’ 1973-75 - 33 republican women are interned without trial in HM Prison Armagh during this period. c.1976 - Cell Block ‘C’ is constructed, reportedly to contain the Price sisters, Marian & Dolours for their accommodation in Armagh after transferral from HM Prison Durham.

1979 - April 19 - Prison Warden Agnes Wallace (40) is murdered in an INLA gun and grenade attack outside the prison. The attack also injures 3 colleagues. (see front cover image)

1904

1980 - 3 ‘ArmaghWomen’ take place in the 1980 hunger strike.

1981 - Nell McCafferty publishes ‘The Armagh Women’ drawing widespread attention to perceived abuses of prisoners by guards, included forced strip and cavity searches.

1920

1986 - HM Prison Armagh is decommissioned. BA takes over site. All remaining prisoners transferred to the newly opened HM Prison Maghaberry.

1988 - HM Prison Armagh closes. Site sold for development.

1988 - 11 Oct - Planning permission sought (and subsequently granted) for proposals to turn Armagh Gaol into a shopping centre. The proposals envisage demolishing all buildings on site except the boundary wall and Front Block. ref:O/1988/0707

1968

1988

‘The Troubles’

1979

1997 - Armagh City and District Council reacquire Armagh Gaol.

1998 - ‘Hard Time: Armagh Gaol 1971-1986’ is published by the former R.C. Chaplain to the gaol, Msnr.

Raymond Murray.

1998

1999 - 15 Jun - Hall Black Douglas and Alistair Coey Architects submit a planning and listed building consent application (O/1999/0500/1) for converting Armagh Gaol into office space and conference centre.

Permission is also requested to demolish the Troubles-era buildings on site including Cell-Block ‘C’.

2006

2000 - August - Above planning and listed building consents granted. Demolition of Cell-Block ‘C’ subsequently carried out.

2004 - September 06 - HRH Prince Charles writes to Northern Ireland Secretary Paul Murphy expressing his support for the redevelopment of Armagh Gaol 2006 - Emergency and holding repairs carried out on site

.11

.7

.8

.6

.5

.12

Fig. 6: Plan of Armagh Gaol as existing 21.07.17.

Areas hatched in grey are currently inaccesible due to structural instability. All levels above and below ground floor are likewise inaccessible.

.4

.3

.13

.1

.2

Part 2: Navigating the Political Context The former HM Prison Armagh could convincingly be classified, using Logan & Reeves’ terminology, as a ‘Place of Pain and Shame’ (2009, 1). Whilst many historic prisons leave difficult legacies to be navigated (Foucault 1991), the recency of the Northern Irish conflict, and this site’s intimate connection to the Troubles demands that its function and interpretation be the subject of continuing negotiation in the present. The impacts of these political discussions upon the author’s project could potentially be significant.

Why was Armagh Gaol seemingly less contentious than other similar projects?

Political issues arising from the reuse of buildings and sites related to the Troubles invariably invite comparison with the proposed reuse of another Troubles-era prison in NI; that of the high profile Maze/Long Kesh redevelopment (Appendix iii.1). The MLK project however displayed a much greater degree of visible contestation than was observed with Armagh Gaol. There are of course case-specific reasons which might account for these disparities (Mairs Dyer 2014, 163-75), however this essay will suggest that one of the most significant and hitherto unreported actions taken to neutralise this contested site is revealed in the planning statement submitted in support of the 1999 planning application: “It is considered that the 1970s cell block is not of architectural merit and should be demolished. All the other extraneous structures and buildings would [will] be removed from the site’ (ACD Council 1999, p.5. Correction in original).

.14

This cell block was built to hold the ‘Old Bailey Bombers’, Marian and Dolours Price, (Interviews 4&5)(Fig. 8) so the absence of the history of the buildings in question in the statement is striking. Admittedly, the stated reasoning is not disputed here; from the documentary evidence available, the 1970s cell blocks did not meet the definition of being ‘of special architectural interest’ (UK 2011, Part 4 Section 80). However, the listing process also makes consideration for buildings whose interest lies solely in historic significance, a definition which arguably should have been addressed in the demolition justification given the listed status of the complex (Appendix i).

It seems at least plausible that this demolition carried out under the auspices of protecting the aesthetic integrity of the site made subsequent redevelopment efforts less contentious.5 Nevertheless, the gaol in 2009 certainly still held the potential to become mired in sectarian politics due to its history (page 11), and so the strategies of public consultation adopted by the developer partnership warrant scrutiny as, on initial inspection, they seem to have been successful in negotiating a contested space and delivering the client’s desired outcome without significant public outcry or political dissent divided along party lines.

Whilst the 2012 application significantly predates the requirement within NI Planning Legislation to provide for pre-submission public consultation procedures for ‘major development’ (UK 2011),6 the almost £2M funding the scheme secured from the Heritage Lottery Fund, required the developer to help local people ‘to take an active part in and make decisions about heritage’ (HLF 2010, 3). The HLF ranks levels of community

5 As a comparison, the MLK was partially listed in 2005 despite being contemporaneous and architecturally very similar to Cell Block C at Armagh. However the MLK project reveals a catalogue of political pushback against the listing and re-use of prison buildings purpose-built to hold Troubles-era prisoners, fearing that they may become ‘shrines to terrorism’ (BBC News, 25 July 2007). It is also worth considering that the LBC in question in the case of Armagh was for an exemplar scheme, intended to attract developer interest, not to be built (Interview 4). It is certainly arguable that the removal of Cell Block C was a capital expenditure which was not urgent, especially considering that the other works on site concurrently were remedial works deemed necessary to the preservation of the historic gaol buildings.

6

Note that this legislation did not come into force until April 2015

Fig. 7: Aerial photograph of Armagh Gaol taken from British Army helicopter on 21 June 1975.

Note that Cell-Block ‘C’ has not yet been built.

.15

Fig. 8: Aerial photograph of Armagh Gaol taken shortly after closure in 1988.

Note Cell-Block ‘C’ highlighted. This block was demolished in the early 2000s as seen in Fig. 3

.16

Fig. 9: Heritage Lottery Fund matrix illustrating their five key methods of public engagement. Note distinction between ‘passive’ and ‘active’ approaches. For funding to be approved, the strategy adopted cannot consist solely of ‘passive’ solutions.

involvement and designates them as ‘passive’, or ‘active’ (Fig. 9), with the organisation viewing applications consisting solely of ‘passive’ actions as being insufficient to meet their participation aims (HLF 2010, 5).

The partnership between the TOPG and the Prince’s Regeneration Trust allowed the design team to benefit from the PRT’s propriety ‘Enquiry by Design’ approach to public consultation (PRT 2009, 5). This took the form of a public open day held in June 2009 and attended by around 700 people, followed by a series of design workshops for ‘key stakeholders’ on the 24-25th of that month (PRT 2009). Although the stated intent of this procedure can be viewed as an example of good practice in this field,7 this paper will critically examine how it was implemented at Armagh Gaol, drawing particular attention to issues surrounding ‘consensus steering’ and stakeholder selection. It will then suggest how these critiques can be productively addressed in the author’s proposed alternative scheme for the site.

‘Consensus steering’ is a form of management strategy noted for leading of discussions towards a preconceived objective (Engberg and Bayer, 2001, 12) in order to ensure that the results of consultation are useful to those in decision-making positions. This does not necessarily mean that steered public consultation events are deliberately ‘railroaded’ to produce the most advantageous response for the developer, but over-zealous application of this approach can certainly lead to a perception amongst respondents that their opinions are being solicited merely to fulfil the requirements of a ‘tick-box exercise’ (Flynn 2011, 395) which will have little meaningful impact upon the project’s evolution (Murray et al. 2009, 563).

Additionally, this approach prioritises the avoidance of visible conflict described by Pløger as:‘…a way of avoiding turning questions of interests, representation, justice or power into political questions and community controversies, and a strategy that may help to limit these controversial questions to one of democracy and influence. Consensus steering can thus be seen as a way of ignoring antagonism or suppressing strife, because this form of governance prevents public disputes from unfolding and becoming important in planning politics.’ (2004, 78-9) Such an approach clearly has an impact on contested sites by giving managers the tools to move the focus of conversation away from those aspects of the site’s history which are most divisive. The feedback questionnaire handed out at the 2009 Open Evening at Armagh Gaol (PRT 2009) certainly exhibits the hallmarks of a consensus steering approach, with the none of the five questions asked8 pertaining to the community’s perception of the heritage value of the site, particularly in relation to its troubled history.

An alternative view suggests that accepting and managing the outcome of conflicts which result from public engagement allows for meaningful engagement both between individuals and the difficult histories under discussion, and critically, between groups who might otherwise have very few modes of communication (Sternfeld 2010) (Nagle 2009, 333).

This implies that public engagement exercises can be one of the most effective tools in the arsenal of the design team, not just to ensure that their proposals truly serve the needs of the communities in which they are based, but also in helping to re-position a contentious site as a source of meaningful debate rather than side-stepping difficult conversations for fear that they might derail the project. Thus the procedures implemented by the author in developing the proposed project and communicating it to the public may offer greater potential for conflict management than the spaces themselves once completed and in use. This however raises the issue of stakeholder selection.

7 ‘The EbD process is a key planning tool trademarked by the Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment, which involves stakeholders and the local community in shaping a vision for a place. It is an intensive process where every issue is tested by being drawn.The EbD process brings together key stakeholders to collaborate in articulating a vision for a site or place through an intensive workshop, facilitated by a multi-disciplinary design team.This is not just a means of informing the community about a planned development but actively engages it in the planning and design of their community, helping build up the confidence and collective enthusiasm to allow the vision to be taken forward after the workshop has been completed.’ (PRT 2009, 5.)

8 Q1: ‘What new Facilities would you like to see at the Gaol?’

Q2: ‘Are you supportive of a mixed use development which might include a hotel, restaurant, retail space and residential?’

Q3: ‘How often might you use these new facilities?’

Q4: ‘How would you like to see the access from the Gaol to the Mall made more pedestrian friendly?’

Q5: ‘Would you like to see other access points into the Gaol site from the City Centre?’

.17

Fig. 10: Typical consensus steering approach.

Dissenting groups kept separate with civil servants acting as middle-managers and mediators.

Perception that feedback to the public it is very limited.

Fig. 11: Risks of a Consensus Steering Approach.

Inability to engage with other groups and limited feedback provided from managers leads to perception of public consultation as a ‘tick-box exercise’ resulting in widespread apathy and disengagement.

.18

Fig. 12: Author’s proposed conflictual approach.

Opposing groups are able to use the structures of public consultation exercises as a venue for productive debate, with managers’ role to encourage dialogue and to prevent strife from developing into acrimonious conflict.

This allows the procurement process to become a valuable source of conflict mediation acting in concert with the intentions of design in contested spaces.

Fig. 13: Risks of a conflictual approach.

Architects and building professionals are not trained as debate managers. If a conflictual approach is mishandled by managers due to inexperience, this risks entrenching the very conflicts this method seeks to mediate.

The question of who the ‘public’ in ‘public consultation’ refers to is problematic for managers. Time and budgetary constraints limit the reach of such discussions and the challenge is often to ensure that the range of voices heard is truly representative of those affected by the proposals. There is a lively contemporary debate surrounding the issue of interest group curation in heritage projects generally, particularly the significant influence given to built-environment professionals over the designation of meaning and importance to heritage sites (i.e. Authorised Heritage Discourse). Parkinson et al. (2015) argue that such deference is unwarranted and actively excludes both widespread participation in heritage as well as the benefits that local knowledge can bring.

Such concerns over the relative weight given to various viewpoints are more keenly felt in negotiations over contested sites. Although the MLK project ultimately collapsed due to political infighting, Flynn (2011) identifies widespread dissatisfaction with the public portion of the decision making processes. The primary issues identified were: the clash between political and stakeholder priorities; issues resulting from a passive solicitation of responses which favour the ‘most organised and articulate’ groups with ‘the most developed – and perhaps then the least flexible – ideas’ (Flynn 2011, 394); and the perceived ‘gatekeeping’ which results from inviting organisations to participate, thus minimising the impact individual, dissenting opinions can have.

.19

Fig.14: TOPG Proposals for Armagh Gaol.

Note the relatively extensive internal demolitions in red.

Timeline of the TOPG Armagh Gaol Hotel Project Oct 08

2008 - Armagh Gaol placed on the market once again.

Jun 09

2008 - 27 Oct - Preferred bidder status given to the Trevor Osborne Property Group.

2009 - Jun 23 - Public Open Evening organised by the Prince’s Regeneration Trust on behalf of the TOPG is held.

11 month planning determination

2009 - Jun 24-5 - Community Consultation Workshop organised by the PRT. 2012 - Apr 27 - Prince Charles visits Armagh Gaol

.20

2012 - Aug 03 - Planning permission application lodged for the Armagh Gaol hotel project by Kriterion Conservation Architects on behalf of the TOPG. (ref. O/2012/0349/F) 2013 - Jul 25 - Planning permission granted with conditions.

2014 - July - BBC News reports that the TOPG will withdraw from the scheme if additional funding is not secured by September of that year 2017 - Feb 19 - Local paper, Armaghi, reports the TOPG will withdraw from the hotel project if an additional ÂŁ2m funding package cannot be secured from the NI Assembly by the end of the year.

Apr 12 Aug 12

Jul 13

Jul 14

Feb 17

2017 - Aug 07 - Listed Building Consent Application lodged by Kriterion for the TOPG. Decision Pending.

Aug 17

?

Part 3:The Technical Challenges Arising This section will highlight the technical difficulties apparent when conceiving and implementing a change of use project in an architectural form as derived as a historic gaol.

This is not to imply that technical aspects can be treated as apolitical. Rather this section is more productively considered as a exploration of how official statutes may be navigated, as a compliment to the previous section’s discussion on project structure and debate.

The Brief The first and perhaps most fundamental issue which any project within a historic building must address is its choice of programme(s). In the case of historic gaols; the massive, masonry construction of prison wings built from small cells branching from an axial, multi-storey atrium have limited the number of practical re-use options to which they have been subject. Change-of-use proposals tend to either preserve the site as a museum (Fig. 15) or covert it into a typology based around repetitive units, such as residential (Fig 16) or youth hostel schemes (Fig. 17). The apparent similarities of these programmes in plan is intended to minimise the amount of internal demolitions required. This not only preserves to a greater degree the site’s historic fabric,9 it also reduces construction costs, as the removal and propping of load-bearing walls entails significant financial burden for the client (Holborow 2015, 34). Interestingly however, in addition to legislative projection, it is this same structural robustness which demands repurposing strategies, as they are not easily demolished without significant financial cost (Galford & Gould Peek 2015, 95).

The current proposals to turn the former HM Prison Armagh into a boutique hotel fall firmly within this second category, but the choice of hospitality as the primary use for a site with such a troubled history as Armagh Gaol invariably leads to discussion of the site in relation to what has been referred to as ‘dark tourism’.

The term, coined by Foley and Lennon (1996) refers to tourist interest in sites and artefacts associated with death, destruction and misery. This connection is impossible to avoid in Armagh Gaol, with its history involving executions,10 murder,11 internment without trial and the incarceration of self-described ‘political prisoners’(McCafferty 1981)12. Whilst increased tourism may well bring benefits, especially in economic terms, many have objected to the monetisation of such a painful and recent part of the area’s history, whose effects are still being felt,13 (Murtagh et al. 2017), (Cochrane 2015) (McDowell 2008).

Perhaps a more objective criticism of the hotel proposal for Armagh Gaol, would be that it does little to help mend the societal wounds of the conflict. Scott (2012, 2116) for example writes, ‘The occasions for contact offered through tourism often do not result in improved perception or understanding of others, particularly in the case of traditional enemies and in some cases can result in a worsening or hardening of opinions.’

This ultimately poses questions over whether such a scheme benefits the local community beyond purely economic concerns.

9

SPAB Principles & Philosophy, Guiding Principles, No. 2

10 Condition 4 of the Grant of Limited Planning Permission for the TOPG proposal (DoE, 2013, 1) states that a full programme of archaeological works must be planned and executed on the site prior to any other development works taking place in accordance with PPS6, BH4 (DoE, 1999) due to the presence of unmarked graves on the site.

11 Prison Officer Agnes Wallace was targeted and murdered outside of HM Prison Armagh in 1979 in a gun and grenade attack carried out by members of the INLA which also injured three colleagues.

12 The use of ‘self styled’ here requires some clarification, as prior to 1976, those convicted of ‘Troubles related offences’ were officially given ‘Special Category Status (SCS)’, which was effective recognition of their professed political motivations. All crimes committed after 1976 were not deemed eligible for SCS, and in 1980 the UK government moved to completely abolish the separate status, resulting in a wave of hunger strikes in 1980 and again in 1981 in protest. (Melaugh, M. CAIN http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/) 13 In a interview with an individual connected to the project, it was stated that the unique and storied history of the place was in fact, a ‘unique selling point’ vital to the attraction of guests from far afield. (Interview 4).

.21

.22

Enabling Development The debate over ‘appropriateness’ must also contend with the fact that, despite the hotel scheme requiring the loss of less historic fabric than some alternative uses, proposed demolitions are still extensive (Fig.14). This sort of structural intervention can be very expensive. The partial remedy for this in Armagh Gaol and similar projects (Holborow 2015, 32), is a dense element of new build, whose profitability can offset the construction costs of the whole scheme.

These ares of new build are usually referred to as ‘enabling development’, defined as, ‘…a development proposal that is contrary to established planning policy and in its own right would not be permitted. Such a proposal may however be allowed where it will secure a proposal for the long term future of a significant place.’ (DoE, PPS23, 2014, 3.)

For the Armagh Gaol scheme, ‘enabling development’ takes the form of two, four-storey blocks of residential and commercial units on the inner face of the southern and western ranges of the existing perimeter wall.

In 2009, the conclusion of the Case Officer’s14 report to the Pre Application Discussion (PAD)15 held reservations over the scale and design of the new build elements, and stated ‘Any design proposed…should address the degree of additional ‘enabling development’ on the site, the height of the buildings, the layout of buildings on the site and the extent of any proposed demolition.’ (McCafferty 2010). However, the final report on the planning submission felt that the issue of massing and disposition of the new build had not been satisfactorily resolved. Despite these reservations, the officer recommended that the Department approve the proposals, being ultimately swayed by the potential alternative of forcing an important heritage asset into continued dereliction if planning permission were to be denied (Unknown - Consultation Response 2013).

.23 14 The current Historic Environment Division of the Department for Communities is an advisory body who are required by statute to be consulted for all works to a Listed Building in Northern Ireland. The case officers for the Division’s Heritage Buildings Branch are all accredited architects by requirement (Interview 11. Anne Menary).

15 Pre-Application Discussion takes the form of a formal and recorded meeting with Departmental staff in order to discuss solutions to potential and predicted problems which may disrupt the approval of planning permission. Pre-Application Community Consultations are also considered as part of this projects for larger schemes. The benefits of this approach are to save time in the passage of the final planning permission submission and to lower the risk of rejection by giving the client and their agent the opportunity to resolve issues which the Department finds potentially problematic prior to the formal application (DoE, 2014).

Fig. 15: Opposite Top Left Kilmainham Gaol, Dublin Museum & Visitor Attraction Fig. 16: Opposite Bottom City & Country’s Proposals for 230 homes on the site of Kingston Prison.

With Fielden Clegg Bradley Studios Fig. 17: Opposite Top Right Långholmen Hostel, Stockhol Youth Hostel

.24

However, the lack of clear policy guidance at the time16 17 potentially precluded a possible solution more in line with how this policy has typically been implemented in NI, whereby the elements of new build are remote from the main site, so as to minimise the impact on the heritage asset involved. If the developer could have been offered preferred bidder status for enabling development on another council owned site within the town, the residential portion of the new build might have been moved out of the gaol complex. Not only would this have massively reduced the height and visual impact of the proposals,18 it would also have served to alleviate some of the concerns over road traffic and safe access generated by an intensification of use in the congested, city-centre site.19 However, this could of course be seen as an additional public contribution to what is already a heavily subsidised proposal.

Funding The current level of government grant aid for the scheme amounts to £4m from ABC Council and a further £6-8m requested from the Executive Office via SIB out of a total projected budget of between £23-25m (Black 2016). Although the subsidy from central government had not yet been formally agreed by the collapse of the Northern Ireland Assembly on 16th January 2017, support in principle for the scheme was seen when debated in the NI Assembly between representatives of four of the major parties20 (Northern Ireland Assembly 2013).

This amount should be viewed in the context of the lack funding for the historic environment in NI generally, where grants available from the DfC fell from £4.4m in 2014-15 to only £500,000 (HED 2016) total for all of Northern Ireland under the current Historic Environment Fund (The Detail 2016).

This have been attributed by some to an apparent government strategy ‘that prioritises short-term profit over longterm sustainable regeneration,’ especially in relation to the historic environment (Harkin 2015, 147).

The impact on the author’s proposals is that funding from central government cannot be counted upon, and therefore as wide a range of potential funders as possible will need to be solicited (Fig. 27).

.25 16 It should be noted that while referred to as ‘enabling development’ within early project documents (PRT 2009), these proposals in fact predate the term becoming embedded in NI policy. Considering the TOPG’s previous involvement with enabling development at Oxford Castle & Gaol, it seems probable that their use and understanding of the term comes from the definition used by (the former) English Heritage: ‘Enabling development is development that would be unacceptable in planning terms but for the fact that it would bring public benefits sufficient to justify it being carried out, and which could not otherwise be achieved.’ English Heritage. 2008. Enabling development and the conservation of significant places. [online resource] p.8 17 In NI, legislation for the protection of the historic built environment has previously lagged behind the rest of the UK. Northern Ireland did not have a legislative mandate for listing and preserving buildings of historic interest until 1972, compared to 1947 for the rest of the UK. 18 It is conceivable that the residential units on the ground floor of the proposal could have remained in such as amendment, as they would have been shielded from view by the boundary wall (Fig. 18) 19 PPS 3 Policy AMP 6 requires that a Transport Assessment be submitted in support of a planning application when requested by the Department, citing PPS 3 Policy AMP 2 ‘Planning permission will only be granted for a development proposal involving direct access, or the intensification of the use of an existing access, onto a public road where…such access will not prejudice road safety or significantly inconvenience the flow of traffic’ (DoE 2005, 20).

Such an assessment was submitted in support of the 1999 application by Hall Black Douglas, but was deemed insufficient to satisfy the Department’s requirements, as evidenced by Condition 2 of the subsequent grant of planning permission which requests a further assessment be submitted for review prior to any works being carried out on site. The Armagh City Centre Masterplan (2009, 72) makes provision for the re-ordering of the A3 road to the south of the Mall, but at time of writing, these works have yet to be carried out, placing the same requirements under the Planning Policy Statements on to the TOPG. 20

MLAs from Sinn Féin, SDLP, UUP and DUP were present.

Fig. 18: Below Opposite TOPG Proposals for Armagh Gaol modified to reflect the author’s suggestion that the enabling development could be relocated elsewhere to reduce the impact of the proposals on the historic gaol.

Fig. 19: Above Opposite TOPG Proposals for Armagh Gaol with extensive enabling development along the rear prison walls.

Liability & Statutory Obligations Interestingly, ABC council still maintain ownership of the Gaol demense; with TOPG leasing the site (Interview 5) (Interview 7). While the owner typically does not have a statutory obligation to maintain a listed building (NIAO 2016, 22), as the local authority, the Council must ensure the preservation of the character of the conservation area,21 within which the site is situated (Fig. 5). The fact that Armagh Gaol remains on the Built Heritage at Risk Northern Ireland (BHARNI) Register22 maintained by the UAHS on behalf of the Department for Communities (DoE Date Unknown), in addition to a visual inspection carried out by the author on 21.07.17, evidences that large sections of the historic gaol are in an advanced state of dereliction. Comparison with the Interior Heritage Features Report (Kriterion 2012) reveals that much of this decay has taken place in the interim, and thus it can be concluded that the Council’s maintenance obligations have not been acted upon.

The continued deterioration of the buildings on site is certain to have an impact on project costs, especially when combined with inflationary pressures between 2012 and time of writing. Whether increased funding or even compensation will be sought from the local authority for remedial works remains to be seen.

Repair

.26

The observed dereliction of much of the historic fabric of the Gaol poses a challenge to any redevelopment project, not merely due to the associated financial burden, but also because of the technical challenges arising.

The most recent significant instance of holding repairs was carried out on roofs and rainwater goods by the Council in 2006 (PRT 2009), although small-scale works have been observed on site more recently (Site Visits; 21.07.17; 21.09.17). These were intended to weatherproof the building and to halt the damage to the interior resulting. The widespread incidence of dry-rot within the building in 2017, and the resultant structural collapse which this has caused,23 suggests either that these repairs were insufficient or that an ongoing maintenance regime was not pursued. One particular challenge for the author’s project is the repair of stonework.

Visual inspection of the front block of the Gaol complex24 reveals that the stonework has regrettably been repointed at a previous date with a hard, cementitious mortar. The front range is primarily constructed from Drumarg Conglomerate, which is much softer than the Portland cement based mortar used in the repair.

When mortars are harder and less permeable than the surrounding stone, water passing from inside the wall to the outer face, follows the path of least resistance, entering into and saturating the building stone. This has a marked effect on the deterioration of the material (Fig. 20). A series of remedial works will therefore be necessary to repoint the facade in a breathable lime-based render25 and repair damaged stonework (DoE 1990).26 21

Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011. Part 4, Chapter 1, Section 104, Subsection (11)

22 Harkin (2015, 155) noted that 33 out of 466 buildings on the BHARNI Register were owned by central or local government at time of writing. Further, an Northern Ireland Audit Office report from 2011 found, ‘the public sector has not fulfilled its responsibilities for reporting on the condition of its listed buildings and there is inconsistency in the procedures employed in maintaining and disposing of publicly owned listed buildings.’ (NIAO 2016, 6) 23 Interviewee 5 told of how several weeks before the site visit on 21.07.17, a film scout working on the first floor chapel in the central hinge block had fallen through a compromised section of flooring, narrowly avoiding serious injury. This floor was observed to have been subsequently propped, and all access to the first and second floors of the buildings on site, as well as large portions of the ground floor had been declared unsafe for access as a result.

24

This is the oldest portion of the Gaol dating from 1780 and its distinctive Georgian form is attributed to the architect, Thomas Cooley.

25 stone.

This will however be dependent on whether removal of the previous pointing can be carried out without further damage to the surrounding

26 This may be difficult as its distinctive red conglomerate limestone from which the Gaol is built came only from two local quarries (Curran et al. 2010, 84), both of which are now inactive, with one having been built over (www.habitas.org.uk). This poses a problem for proposed splicing, or complete replacement of existing stone blocks, as it precludes ‘like-for-like’ repair and instead, a strategy of ‘best-fit match’ must be adopted.

Moreover, in Ireland, such issues have historically been politically contentious. After the burning of the Customs House in Dublin during the Irish War

The human element of technical repairs is also relevant given the findings of the National Heritage Training Group in their most recent report on conservation and traditional building skills in Ireland (NHTG 2009).

The report, in addition to commentary from industry professionals (Harkin in NIEL 2009, 14)(Stelfox in NIEL 2009, 10) lends credence to the widespread view that there is a significant and growing shortage of the specialist skills required in repair and restoration works on historic buildings on both sides of the Irish border.

The report’s proposed strategies for dealing with this growing problem include, ‘…improv[ing] the training infrastructure to meet current and future workforce demand’ (NHTG 2009, 122), and ‘build[ing] upon existing crossborder cooperation to ensure that Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland exploit the potential for both economies through a suitably skilled heritage sector workforce ’ (Ibid. 13).

.27

Fig. 20: Evidence of inappropriate hard-cement repointing of the facade of the Georgian Front Block.

Note the resultant decay of the soft, red limestone and the exposure and prominence of the mortar this has caused.

This section is not intended to be an exhaustive list of the technical challenges which will be faced and it is acknowledged that given the current status of the proposals,27 many of the above issues will not have been fully resolved by the TOPG’s design team. However, all will need to be addressed in due course if this, or any scheme on the site, is to succeed.

of Independence (1919-1921) a fierce debate erupted as to whether the building should be repaired with the original English Portland stone, or whether the new nation should exclusively use local materials in public works (Usher 2015, 120).

27 The project is currently stalled due to lack of funding, however, the nature of the drawings submitted in support of the Listed Building Consent application (LA08/2017/1103/LBC) submitted in August 2017 (consultations issued: decision pending) by the Client’s agent evidences that instruction has been given to proceed to RIBA Work Stage 4.

Part 4:The Brief The brief for the author’s alternative scheme for Armagh Gaol is to ensure the site’s preservation by using it as the centrepiece of a proposed school for construction and traditional building skills.

As noted in previously, the TOPG’s hospitality scheme is problematic and other potential uses such as student accommodation are precluded by Armagh’s distance to the nearest university in Belfast. The site’s contentious nature is likely to take a considerable length of time to recede from the public consciousness, (Dawson 2010, 300) opening up a broader range of redevelopment options as it does so.28 Unfortunately, buildings do not survive well over long periods when left derelict in a wet, Atlantic climate.29 Simply mothballing30 the gaol in order to extend its longevity is not deemed to be an efficient or viable option given the previously observed maintenance failures of the building’s owners to date and the lack of benefit which can be drawn from a building held in stasis.

The suggested programme for the site is thus an ‘interim use’ of sorts, which both promotes funding for the preservation of the site in the mean-time and moreover, uses the rolling, long-term maintenance and repair programmes demanded as the basis for skills training for local young people and professionals working on the national level alike. The project would seek to position itself as a local equivalent to the HES’s recently opened Engine Shed training and outreach facility in Stirling (Appendix iii.6). Additionally, by using the fabric of the gaol as a training opportunity, repair costs are lowered and additional funding streams become available. For this purpose a partnership with the Southern Regional College is envisaged, allowing the site to act in part as a satellite campus responsible for their construction training courses.

.28

28 The United Nations recognises time as the critical factor in ensuring the success for reconciliatory actions stating, ‘There is no quick-fix to reconciliation. It takes time. And it takes its own time: its pace cannot be dictated.’ (UN 1.2.2 p.14) 29 Alistair Rowan refers to the harshness of the Irish climate in particular on disused historic buildings as, ‘the practical prejudice that operated against all things old in a wet climate and devastated land.’ (in UHCT 2012, 7) 30 Mothballing’ refers to the continued maintenance of buildings of historic significance but no practical contemporary use, so that they might be preserved until a suitable use can be found. An interesting example of this can be found in the work of the Norwich Historic Churches Trust which manages 23 historic churches in the city which are otherwise ineligible for statutory protection and preservation by national and local authorities. The trust ensures the structural stability and weather-tightness of its assets through an ongoing regimen of works whilst simultaneously seeking clients to propose suitable uses for the buildings which might form the basis of a more significant package of architectural modifications.

Prosaically, this would help to address the skills shortage noted in the previous section, but such a programme is also intend to aid in cross-community reconciliation.

The specific benefits of engaging young people with disputed heritage as a vehicle for increased communication and mutual understanding will be explored in detail in the final thesis. At this juncture is it important to note merely that technical education in NI31 is a rare example of formally integrated learning in the province.32 Whilst the specific effects of integrated vocational training are absent from the relevant literature, there is an existing body of work on the benefits of proximity and contact between traditionally oppositional groups for wider society (Hayes, McAllister & Dowds 2007). Furthermore by encouraging the sort of teamwork such training exercises require in the presence of a contested heritage asset, there is evidence to suggest that respectful and productive debate about the more divisive aspects of the recent past can be encouraged (Sternfeld 2011).

The proposal is not envisaged as a definitive answer to the gaol’s contested heritage, and indeed its phased progression through the site is likely to open up opportunities for an additional series of small scale intervention and reuse projects. Therefore steps must be taken to ensure that other subsequent or contemporaneous uses are not precluded and can be incorporated within the scheme as and when they arise.

.29

Fig. 21: Interim uses for the site which will help generate revenue for the client/owner as repair works progress will be important.

Proposal for an open-air market outside the gaol shown here.

31 The main providers of vocational skills training in Northern Ireland are the 6 Further Education (FE) colleges. The Southern Regional College’s Armagh Campus is located at the opposite end of the Mall from the gaol site.

32 Integrated education in the NI context refers to primary and secondary schools which are specifically dedicated to ensuring a mixed student body from all demographic backgrounds and which are not religiously selective in their admissions policy. Currently, these schools make up only a small percentage of total education numbers for the province, with the vast majority of young people educated in schools primarily comprising students and teachers from the same religious background.

Phase 0 Initial period of holding repairs and stabalisation works carried out by Council appointed contractor.

Works to include: removal of vegetation; cleaning and repair of rainwater goods; propping and structural repairs; roof repairs and re-shelling in corrugated sheet metal; installation of access scaffolding; and removal of dry-rot-infested timber and plaster.

HLF Application Upon foundation, the BPT will be required to seek HLF funding for the project as a major source of finance. This will involve appointing a design team to progress the project up to and including RIBA Work Stage 3.

Phase 1

.31

Primary works during this phase include; the construction of new-build workshop facilities against the exterior retaining wall in Yard A to replace existing steel propping (Fig. 6.8); refurbishment of infirmary building as office space and teaching facilities; and stabalisation/repair works to Cell Block ‘B’.

Phase 2 Repair of Georgian Front Block including repointing in lime mortar, stone cleaning and repair as appropriate.

Block to be repurposed as Council Offices and teaching classrooms for the SRC. Phase 3 Repair and refurbishment of Cell Block ‘A’ for archival use. Additional repair of external wall in preparation for Phase 4.

Phase 4 Repair and refurbishment of remaining ancillary structures on site.

Upon completion of works to listed, historic structures, additional 1-2 story new build elements may be constructed along the boundary wall as deemed necessary.

Fig. 22: Project Phasing

.33

Fig. 23: BBC News - Armagh Jail project developer pulls out.

Part 5:The Proposals Convincing the TOPG to relinquish the site As the local authority still retains ownership of the site, the simplest solution for securing development rights would envisage the TOPG not requesting a renewal of their current leasing agreement after their current planning consent expires in August 2018. The proposed Trust would then be in a position to convince the Council to enter into a partnership arrangement for disposal of the site.

If however the TOPG wish to renew their lease, the proposed scheme must be prepared to suggest how control of the site might be most effectively procured.

A solution may lie in the local authority’s five year tourism plan, which makes provision for the gaol redevelopment being abandoned by the TOPG. The report references pursing ‘alternative uses’ for the Gaol complex, including ‘relocation of the council offices from the Archbishop’s Palace and release of same for alternative uses’ (ABC 2017 in Armaghi 2017) (Fig. 24). The Palace would arguably be a much easier building to convert to a hospitality use; both politically and technically. There is certainly potential that the transferal of preferred developer status to the former council offices, coupled with a relocation of the enabling development component of the current proposals, might be sufficient to circumvent a costly and acrimonious legal battle.33 34 The author’s proposals will therefore make provision for the Council’s proposed alternative use of the Gaol so as to help facilitate a working partnership .

33 This negotiating flexibility is a relatively recent option for the council due to the decentralisation of planning powers as part of the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 which came into force in April 2015.

34 The benefits of precursor schemes must also be recognised. For example, HED will have difficulty in not recommending a subsequent scheme for a site for which the extent of demolitions is not greater than a previously approved application (Interview 11: Anne Menary).

Fig. 24: Former Archbishop’s Palace, Armagh.

Now offices for ABC Council.

.34

.34

Fig. 25: eTendersNI - Appointment of design consultancy team for conservation architectural and engineering services on the former Gaol, Armagh

Setting up a managing consortium Prior to the appointment of a design team, the client body must be established. With ABC Council indicating a willingness to engage with alternative proposals for the site, it is suggested that a local building preservation trust should be established and enter into a partnership agreement with the local authority to act as joint client and ensure community representation and input into the evolving project.

A BPT is typically a Registered Charity founded to lobby and seek funding for re-use projects for buildings at risk. Funding for the establishment of a BPT is available from the Architectural Heritage Fund and the Pilgrims Trust. These organisations offer enabling grants to allow organisations to work towards HLF Round 1. Subsequently, it is expected that organisations seek and receive a HLF Development Grant as part of the Round 1 application, allowing them to proceed to Round 235, at which point they would be required to tender for and appoint a design team to produce the RIBA Stage 3 drawings required by the HLF.36 With the shortcomings of previous community engagement initiatives highlighted in Section 2, a BPT whose membership is rooted in the local community offers a client/developer-model which is more responsive to local needs, and is better positioned to ensure widespread and broad representation of dissenting opinions.

However, such a body, whose membership is self-selecting, is vulnerable to unduly privileging those who shout loudest.

In order to avoid the pitfalls of consensus based design, such an organisation will require a clear hierarchy of decision making authority (Figs. 10-13), both to help build capacity in marginal groups to articulate their views in challenge to more established stakeholder interests, and to ensure that conflicts are carefully managed so that they are neither suppressed as in the TOPG approach, but neither are allowed to become mired, intractable and of a scale likely to attract party political interests outside the control of the consortium.

Therefore, a central core of around 7-8 trustees will need to be assembled for a project of this scale. In interview, the former head of the Association of Building Preservation Trusts, advised that this core group should ideally feature a conservation-accredited architect,37 engineer, lawyer, archaeologist, planner, local entrepreneur and quantity surveyor as a minimum (Interview 14: Primrose Wilson). Fortunately, the city of Armagh has no shortage of heritage experience (Wilson in McKinstry 1992, ix) and several active local history groups from whom it is envisaged that trustees might be found and courted. It is important to note that those building professionals on the board of trustees would not generally be considered as eligible to tender for works resulting from the group’s activities, due to the conflicts of interest arising.

35 HLF Round 1 applications are outline submissions intended to seek advisement as to whether a project is eligible for more significant funding granted by Round 2. Round 1 submissions must also contain a detailed plan for the subsequent development phase of the project leading to a Round 2 proposal if successful. Grant aid is available for this development phase. Round 2 applications must contain detailed proposals including full costings, activity plans, a complete business plan and architectural drawings up to and including RIBA work stage 3. On the basis of this information, a decision on whether to grant full funding is made (locally if under £2m and in the HLF’s central headquarters if over that amount). (HLF 2017, 9) 36 Any HLF grant over £10k compels the grantee to issue at least 3 competitive tenders for an works resulting. Additionally, the BPT/Council partnership would be bound by restrictions on procurement placed on Local Authorities and other public bodies to advertise publicly any invitations to tender works over the value of £30k. In the case of ABC Council, this is done both in the Belfast Telegraph newspaper and using the eTendersNI online portal (https://etendersni.gov.uk/). Additionally, for design works exceeding a cost of £164,176, and for material works over £4,104,394, EU law dictates that the invitation must also be listed in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) and open to responses from all member states.

37 Unlike Scotland, Northern Ireland does not have a devolved system of conservation accreditation for architects. The RSUA facilitates members in joining the RIBA’s central Conservation Register which has 3 grades of increasing experience; Registrant, Conservation Architect and Specialist Conservation Architect. The UAHS makes those who have attained at least the level of Conservation Architect available to view on its online Directory of Traditional Building Skills (https://www.uahs.org.uk/built-heritage-at-risk-register-northern-ireland/traditional-skills-directory/). It is envisaged that the author’s proposed scheme would require the appointment of a conservation-accredited practice as the lead designer, or alternatively, the BPT/Council might make this position contingent on the presence of an accredited architect as a sub-consultant within the design team in the invitation to tender.

.35

.36

Fig. 26: Letter from ABC Council to Kate McKillop, AGPS

However, the scale of the Armagh Gaol project is much larger than that which a BPT would usually take on.

Fundamentally this becomes an issue of experience, and lack of assets.38 A BPT can draw capital from willing trustees, and can also re-invest previous profits from successful schemes into new projects, but since the proposed BPT for Armagh Gaol would be a start up organisation, funding from this source is not an option.

Therefore a close working partnership and goodwill from ABC Council would be necessary, as significant ongoing funding would be required from this source.

The benefits to the Council of involving a BPT are primarily; a sharing of workload; broader community representation in the scheme; increased scope of funding opportunities; and the relevant private-sector experience of the group’s members.

Liability Due to the BPT’s lack of initial assets, liability for damages and injury of site would need to remain with council due to insurance costs. This would be especially pertinent if a partnership with the SRC is established, given the increased insurance requirements of bringing students and apprentices onto a live construction site in a deteriorated building.

In principle, an approach similar approach to that adopted between Glasgow City Council and the Glasgow Building Preservation Trust at Westmuir Street School my be an option. This saw the Council hold liability for the derelict building through the initial stabilisation works and until the start of the primary works package, at which point the ownership of the building was transferred to the Trust (Appendix iii.5).

38 Primrose Wilson (Interview 14) advises that prior assets amounting to 50% of total project costs would be a prudent minimum for BPTs taking on new work.

.37

.38

Fig. 27: AGPS internal email.

Potential sources of funding.

Funding The proposed scheme aims to make itself a realistic financial possibility by appealing to as broad a range of potential funding bodies as possible (Fig. 27 above). A clear and achievable business strategy is a prerequisite for investment and will need to be actioned as part of the initial start-up grant expected from the AHF.

.39

Fig. 28: Armaghi - Armagh Gaol project awarded ÂŁ3.3m in National Lottery Funding

Project Structure & Phasing In addition to maximising potential funding streams, the project also requires attention to be paid to cost reduction without a commensurate decline in design and build quality.

The proposal for a construction skills training facility suggests that the restoration of the derelict gaol buildings on site could be treated as a live training exercise for the students and apprentices engaged such as was done at Penicuik House (Appendix iii.8).39 Furthermore, this approach necessitates a phased approach to the restoration of the gaol (Fig. 22). After an initial series of stabilisation works and construction of site facilities carried out by externally contracted professionals to ensure safety of access, a long term conservation plan would be put into place whereby the students would assist in restoring parts of the building in a sequential manner over a period of several years. This would have an inflationary impact on project timescale, but due to the contested nature of this particular site, such a stretching of the programme is not deemed to be negative.

Moreover, this would distribute project costs over the increased period of time required, thus reducing the problematic burden of initial assets and funding on the local authority and the BPT. It is assumed that after the majority of works to the gaol have been carried out, this aspect of the scheme might reduce in scale and scope, allowing the former facilities built and the parts of the building restored to be turned over to alternative uses as and when they become available. In the interim, stabilised and weatherproofed buildings might be put to ‘low-spec’ uses such as storing materials for the construction school and later, archival and office purposes for the Council. These proposals could keep the cell blocks intact negating the need for costly demolitions and the resultant, large-scale enabling development of the sort seen with the TOPG scheme.

.40 39 One of the HLF’s project aims (and therefore requirements for successful funding applications) is that, at the point of completion; ‘Individuals will have gained skills relevant to ensuring heritage is better looked after, managed, understood or shared (including, among others, conservation, maintenance, digital and project management skills, or skills required to retrofit a historic building or site to improve its energy efficiency)’ HLF 2013, 24). The author’s proposed scheme and in particular the engagement and training of young people through the repair programme can therefore also be a valuable means of securing funding for the scheme, especially via the HLF’s Heritage Enterprise Grant Programme which offers funding up to £5m.

Fig. 29: Opposite Page 13 from Hamill-Baxter bid document for Armagh Gaol restoration project 2020.*

.41

NB - A Management Contracting procurement approach has been illustrated here as this approach is deemed to offer some benefits to the proposed project over the main alternative for this scheme; traditional procurement. Whilst management contracting places a higher degree of liability on the client, which is sub-optimal in this case, the benefits of bringing in a construction expert into the project team at an early stage would produce a considerable benefit to a project which prioritises repair and refurbishment works as a training exercise for local youths.

Concluding Comments The absence of a facility for traditional building skills training in a region with such a diversity and wealth of historic buildings as the island of Ireland is striking, however it is firmly the author’s belief that such a project would be both sustainable and incredibly useful to the preservation of Irish architectural heritage if realised.

In terms of the transferability of the suggested approach, it is accepted that not all buildings with difficult histories can be transformed into schools of construction in ensure their preservation. The salient observation which this approach seeks to critique is that, often, contested heritage sites are seen as problems to be disposed of as quickly as possible by the relevant authority, least they continue to drain financial resources or pose political problems. In the context of limited budgets and widespread austerity, it is not difficult to see the attraction of dealing with these sites promptly by disposing of them onto the private market.

The contention of this paper is fundamentally that such a rush to deal with difficult sites in the immediate aftermath of traumatic events is flawed, and often precludes truly successful and meaningful results in the architecture produced.

Northern Ireland is now almost 20 years beyond the Good Friday Agreement which largely ended the bloodshed, but it would be presumptive and frankly wrong to assume that two decades is enough time to salve the wounds the conflict inflicted on society.

Proposals such as the one put forward in this paper, for interim uses in contested sites, allow these places to be maintained through the financial and societal returns generated; and as a result prolonging their lifespan into a unknown future where they might come to be seen as potential places of dialogue, reflection and meaningful engagement with the darkest aspects of the recent past.

Fig. 30: Opposite Appointment letter to Hamill-Baxter Architects for Armagh Gaol Redevelopment Scheme

.43

Abbreviations & Glossary* ABC Council: Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council (from 2015). Formed from the former Armagh City and District Council, Banbridge District Council and Craigavon Borough Councils as part of a NI-wide local authority rearrangement and merger in 2015. ABC Council currently owns the Armagh Gaol site and leases it to the TOPG. This body will be a key stakeholder for any proposed project on the Gaol site.

ACD Council: Armagh City and District Council (until 2015). The former local authority for the Armagh Area. This council was responsible for the purchase of the Gaol site in 1997 and for the appointment of the TOPG as Preferred Bidder for the recent proposal to turn the Gaol into a boutique hotel.

AHD: Authorised Heritage Discourse. Coined by Smith (2006), this term refers to the filtering of ‘value factors’ through the perceptions of importance from heritage professionals. It is typically used to highlight the lack of public influence over discussions on heritage value.

AHF: Architectural Heritage Fund. The AHF is a charitable organisation offering advice and funding to communities and groups seeking to establish a conservation project based around a local building of architectural significance or local importance. The loans and grants offered are typically small scale and are intended to be used to form charitable groups and establish a business plan which can be subsequently used to apply for more comprehensive funding packages.

Alliance Party (of Northern Ireland): A non-unionist, non-nationalist party within the Northern Ireland Assembly emphasising the importance of nonsectarian party politics. To this end, the party disputes the division of executive powers between the two largest parties mandated by the Good Friday Agreement as entrenching division.

BA: British Army. The British Army were brought into Northern Ireland as a peacekeeping and auxiliary police force under Operation Banner, lasting from 1969 to 2007, making it the longest continuous deployment in its history. Initially welcomed by the nationalist community as a neutral force, relationships with the force rapidly deteriorated after incidents such as the implementation of internment without trial in 1971 and Bloody Sunday 1972. 297 deaths are attributed to the BA, and 502 of its personnel are known to have died during the Troubles.

BHARNI: Built Heritage at Risk Northern Ireland [Register]. The BHARNI register is funded by the Department for Communities and maintained by the UAHS and is intended to catalogue and raise awareness for the nearly 500 buildings in Northern Ireland deemed at imminent risk of collapse and dereliction if urgent works are not undertaken. The register was formerly held on the Department of the Environment’s website, but was removed for over a year before reporting from the Detail newspaper prompted the department to restore it for public viewing. Armagh Gaol remains on the register despite the grant of planning permission for a reuse scheme in 2013 (see Appendix i).

Boyd Partnership: A Belfast-based architecture practice who were the only other organisation recorded to have applied for Preferred Bidder status for the Armagh Gaol Redevelopment project. After receiving submissions from the TOPG and the Boyd Partnership on 27.10.08, ACD Council unanimously awarded this status to the TOPG. BPT: Building Preservation Trust. A community based charity formed in order to seek funding for, and ultimately manage the repair and restoration of a local building of significance. There are over 200 BPTs in the UK. A BPT in partnership with ABC Council has been deemed to be the best option for developing funding sources for the author’s proposals, despite the larger-than-typical scale of the Armagh Gaol project.

Brexit: Contraction of ‘British Exit’. Refers to the process of the UK leaving the EU following the 2016 referendum and subsequent passing of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty by the UK Parliament in 2017.

Conservation Area: Official statutory recognition of an area’s historic and/or architectural character beyond that of any individual building. A higher degree of planning scrutiny is given to building proposals within a designated conservation area. Demolitions of structures and removal of trees within the area is prohibited without express permission from the departmental authority concerned, as if dealing with a listed structure or a tree protection order. The front block of Armagh Gaol, dating from the late 1700s lies within the Armagh Conservation Area (1991) but the rest of the site does not.

Cumann na mBan: Irish ‘The Irishwomen's Council’. The primary woman’s republican organisation active during the Troubles in Northern Ireland. It was subsumed into the PIRA in 1976. Cumann na mBan denounced the move by Sinn Féin to engage with parliamentary tactics and members have aligned themselves with dissident groups. Several members of the group were imprisoned in HM Prison Armagh during the Troubles, including the Sinn Féin vicepresident, Máire Drumm, later assassinated in the Mater Hospital, Belfast.

Dissident: Term used to distinguish splinter groups from the main Republican paramilitary organisations who reject the Good Friday Agreement and who continue to pose a threat to security forces in the present day.

DfC: Department for Communities. (Northern Ireland). Founded in 2016, the DfC represents a merging of several functions from the former Departments of Social Development (DSD); Environment (DoE); Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL); and Employment and Learning (DEL). The historic environment, listed buildings and buildings at risk functions of the former DoE have been subsumed into the new department’s remit.

DfE: Department for the Economy. (Northern Ireland). The Department with responsibility for Further and Higher Education within Northern Ireland, including the Regional colleges and the SRC. The DfE would therefore be a key source of funding for the author’s scheme is a partnership arrangement for provision of construction training courses could be arranged with the SRC. DoCHG: Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht (Republic of Ireland). The Department in the RoI with the remit for maintaining and funding that country’s historic environment in the form of protected structures and national monuments DoE: Department of the Environment (until 2016) (Northern Ireland). The former department responsible for advising on Listed Building Consents (via the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA)) and maintaining the BHARNI register. These functions are now undertaken by the DfC since 2016.

DE: Department of Education (Northern Ireland). The Department responsible for primary, post-primary and special education in Northern Ireland as of 2016.

DUP: Democratic Unionist Party. Currently the largest party in the NI Assembly and the largest unionist party in Ireland, the DUP, led by its founder Ian Paisley opposed the 1998 Good Friday Agreement and campaigned against its passage. Following the 2006 St Andrews Agreement, the party agreed to enter into a power sharing executive in the Assembly. Currently, the DUP are also involved in supporting the minority Conservative Westminster government and therefore have a considerable influence on the ongoing Brexit negotiations.

*

Casualty figures are obtained from the Sutton Index on the University of Ulster’s Coflict Archive on the Internet (http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/index.html)

EU: European Union. Trading and extra-national political bloc comprising 28 member states. The UK and RoI acceded to the then European Communities in 1973. The EU is a key guarantor of the post-Good Friday Agreement peace settlement in NI and is a major funder of community reconciliation and infrastructural programmes in the region. Following the decision of the UK to leave the EU in 2016-7, the 303 mile border between NI and the RoI will form the only land border between the EU and the UK. Debates around the status of this border and potential special status for Northern Ireland are unresolved and ongoing and time of writing.

FE Colleges: Further Education Colleges. The 6 regional further education colleges in NI provide full and part-time vocational and skills training as well as a variety of higher education courses. Many students join one of the colleges after leaving post-primary education around age 16, and they are, unlike the majority of primary and post-primary schools in the region, fully non-selective on religious grounds.

GBPT: Glasgow Building Preservation Trust. Client organisation for the Westmuir Street School restoration project (see Appendix iii.5) GCC: Glasgow City Council Hall Black Douglas: Belfast-based conservation-accredited architecture practice. Former project architects to Armagh Gaol for the 1999 planning application and subsequently special advisor to ACD Council for the TOPG scheme.

Hearth: Hearth is the largest Building Preservation Trust in NI and was set up jointly by the National Trust and the UAHS. It currently comprises two arms; dedicated to restoring historic buildings for social housing and other uses respectively.

HED: Historic Environment Division [of the Department for Communities]. HED is a subsidiary body of the DfC and is a statutory consultee for all projects involving works carried out to listed buildings. HED also helps fund traditional building skills training in NI and currently carries some limited skills development at its Moira depot.

HES: Historic Environment Scotland. The equivalent Scottish body to HED, HES is substantially differentiated from its Northern Ireland counterpart in that it is a non-departmental body with an executive function, and therefore has a much greater degree of independence. This can arguably be seen in HES recently opening an £11m training and public engagement facility in Stirling. (see Appendix iii.6) HLF: Heritage Lottery Fund. The largest single funding body for historic building projects in the UK, the HLF is a subsidiary charity within the National Lottery from which it draws its funding. The HLF offers non-repayable grants from £3000 to £5m in order to carry out restoration and reuse projects within the historic environment. The HLF has been identified as a key source of funding both the TOPG proposals for Armagh Gaol and the author’s proposal for a construction skills training facility. To date, the HLF has invested £6.05m in Armagh, not including the £178,300 committed to the now stalled TOPG project.

IGS: Irish Georgian Society. The IGS is the primary architectural and decorative arts preservation society in the RoI. In this role, it is broadly equivalent to the UAHS in NI. Despite its title, the society is engaged in preservation works for buildings from a variety of eras, however, the front block of Armagh Gaol dates to the 1780s and would certainly fall under the group’s interest for this reason alone. The group have been identified as an importance source of support and advocacy for ensuring the proposed traditional building skills training facility is able to source interest and potentially funding from south of the border.

IHBC: Institute of Historic Building Conservation. The IHBC is a Registered Charity and the recognised professional institute for conservation-accredited building professionals in the UK and Ireland. Its primary duties include contributing to research in the field, facilitating dialogue between conservation professionals and advancing the professions it covers through public outreach programmes. The current chair of the IHBC in Ireland is Dr Andrew McClelland of Maynooth University.

INLA: Irish National Liberation Army (proscribed). The INLA is the paramilitary wing of the Irish Republican Socialist Party and is typically distinguished from other Republican groups by its Marxist/Socialist ideology. On 19 April 1979, and INLA bomb and grenade attack outside HM Prison Armagh killed prison guard Agnes Wallace (40) and injured three colleagues. The INLA declared its ceasefire in 1998 and began to decommission weapons in 2009. 113 deaths are ascribed to INLA activity.

IRA: Irish Republican Army (proscribed). For the time period under discussion in this essay, the term can be taken to mean the Provisional IRA. The PIRA were the largest and most active paramilitary organisation for the republican cause during the Troubles. Emerging in 1969 after a split from the Official IRA, the group waged a bombing and shooting campaign resulting in the deaths of 1705 soldiers, civilians and security personnel before a final ceasefire in 1997 and ultimate decommissioning of all weapons in 2005. In 1976, the woman’s Republican wing, Cumann na mBan, was formally integrated into the organisation.

Kriterion Conservation Architects: Belfast-based conservation-accredited architecture practice. Agent for the TOPG in their Armagh Gaol project.

Listed Building: Typically a building, structure or group of buildings protected by statute due to its outstanding architectural or historical significance. In NI the Department for Communities is responsible for adding and removing buildings from the official listing. For further information on listing classifications see Appendix i. Armagh Gaol was listed in 1975.

Loyalist: Term applied to those who seek the preservation of Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom. In common parlance, ‘loyalist’ is used distinctly from ‘unionist’ to mean those who are prepared to use and support violent means of achieving this goal.

MLA: Member of the Legislative Assembly. A elected representative and member of the Northern Ireland Assembly at Stormont.

MLK: Maze/Long Kesh. Her Majesty’s Prison Maze was formed in 1976 on the site of the Long Kesh Detention Centre. The prison was the scene of two hunger strikes, in 1980 and 1981, the second of which resulted in the deaths by starvation of 10 republican prisoners. One of those who died was the MP for Fermanagh and South Tyrone Bobby Sands. These hunger strikes were in protest at the ending of Special Category Status (SCS) by the UK government. The prison was emptied following the amnesty negotiated within the Good Friday Agreement and was closed in 2000. The prison subsequently became the largest redevelopment site in OFMDFM ownership and proposals to transform the site into an International Centre for Conflict Resolution and a National Stadium for football, rugby and gaelic games were brought forward before ultimately collapsing amidst political infighting due to the contested history of the site. The joint name, ‘Maze/Long Kesh’ represents the preference within nationalist communities to refer to the prison as Long Kesh which is more closely associated with internment without trial; whereas unionist communities prefer to call the site Maze as it was following the ending of SCS. Mothball: Term used to describe the preservation of an object or building and its ongoing maintenance even though it serves no useful purpose in the present.

This is done so that the object or building might be put back into use at some point in the future. This concept is the starting point for the author’s proposals for dealing with of Armagh Gaol, whose contested heritage makes it extremely difficult to dispose to a community function in the present day. However, the author suggests that interim uses on the site, such as using the maintenance and repair of the historic gaol buildings for the purposes of construction skills training are a practical solution to the difficulties in justifying ongoing costs without a guarantee of financial return while the buildings are vacant.

Nationalist: Term applied to those who seek unification between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. In common parlance, ‘nationalist’ is used

distinctly from ‘republican’ to mean those who seek this goal through democratic means and reject violence as a legitimate method.

NHTG: The National Heritage Training Group. This group offers training, advocacy and advice to those seeking access to traditional building skills training. The group also offers bursaries to prospective students and has been identified as a key partner for the author’s proposed scheme.

NI: Northern Ireland NIAO: Northern Ireland Audit Office. The office responsible for distribution of finance to government bodies in Northern Ireland. The office is also responsible for auditing these departments and ensuring value for money is attained in all public expenditure.

NIO: Northern Ireland Office. The NIO is a ministerial office within the UK government responsible for managing the relationship between the central Westminster government and the devolved NI administration as well as NI affairs on behalf of the wider UK. Northern Ireland Assembly: The devolved government of Northern Ireland put into place following the 1998 Goof Friday Agreement and restored in 2007 following the 2006 St Andrews Agreement. Due to the collapse of the Assembly and Executive Office in January 2017, the legislature is currently vacant.

OFMDFM: Office of First and Deputy First Minister [for Northern Ireland] (renamed Executive Office in 2016). The executive branch of the devolved Northern Irish Government consisting of the First and Deputy First Ministers, who have broadly equal powers and are drawn from the two largest parties in the NI assembly as a tacit guarantee that one each of the positions will be filled by a Nationalist and a Unionist politician. The executive also consists of a cabinet of ministers drawn from all of the major parties in NI. At time of writing the Executive Office is currently vacant as part of the ongoing impasse between Sinn Féin and the DUP regarding the restoration of the NI Assembly.

OJEU: Official Journal of the European Union. OJEU is an EU publication which advertises invitations to tender and other relevant information notices across the member states, ensuring that organisations based elsewhere have an equal opportunity to bid for work in other EU countries. Above a certain project cost, invitations to tender must by EU law be submitted to OJEU for advertisement.

OPW: Office of Public Works (Republic of Ireland). The OPW operates as a services manager to the Irish government with respect to its property portfolio. It therefore has a responsibility for the distribution of funding to built heritage projects and, if cross-border co-operation for the author’s proposed scheme can be secured, may be a valuable source of finance for the project.

PAD: Pre [Planning] Application Discussion. Formal, non-binding discussions between an applicant (or their agent) and the local planning authority prior to submission of a full planning application. These discussions are intended to speed up the decision process on the final application and lower the risk of it being rejected by creating an opportunity for issues to be discussed and resolved at an early stage.

Paramilitary: A non-state armed force, which bases itself on the military structure of national armies, but is not the primary defence force for sovereign countries.

Phoenix Trust: The precursor to the Prince’s Regeneration Trust until 2006. In 2004, the Prince of Wales offered the support of the Phoenix Trust to the NIO in helping to preserve Armagh Gaol.

PPS: Planning Policy Statement. PPSs set out Departmental guidance on planning policy and are the primary material source for planners’ reference in determining planning applications.

PRT: Prince’s Regeneration Trust. The PRT is an advocacy group presided over by the Prince of Wales which seeks to ensure the preservation and conservation of historic buildings in economically deprived areas throughout the UK. The PRT were engaged as partners with the TOPG in their proposals to turn Armagh Gaol into a boutique hotel and were responsible for the organisation of a series of public consultation events in 2009.

PSNI: Police Service of Northern Ireland. The successor organisation to the RUC, reformed in 2001 on the recommendation of the Patten report in part to build trust and support in the police within the nationalist community following the Good Friday Agreement. As of the 2007 St Andrews Agreement, the PSNI is accepted as the legitimate policing authority in Northern Ireland by all major parties including Sinn Féin.

Registered Charity: A not-for-profit organisation founded for the advancing of one of the thirteen, government-sanctioned charitable purposed and in receipt of an approved registration from the Charity Commission.

Republican: Term applied to those who seek unification between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. In common parlance, ‘republican’ is used distinctly from ‘nationalist’ to mean those who are prepared to use and support violent means of achieving this goal.

RIAI: Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland. The professional body for architects and architectural technologists in Ireland, responsible for promoting the profession and protecting the consumer. The body accredits architects partitioning within the RoI as well as granting conservation accredited status.

RIAS: Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland. The professional body for architects in Scotland. The body accredits conservation architects in Scotland.

RIBA: Royal Institute of British Architects. The professional body for architects in the UK. The Institute is also responsible for regulating architectural education in the UK and accrediting conservation architects. RIBA also publishes widely on a range of professional, contractual and business-related topics, including the 2013 Plan of Work for project structure and management.

RoI: Republic of Ireland RSUA: Royal Society of Ulster Architects. The professional body for architects practicing in Northern Ireland. Conservation accreditation for those working in NI is however granted by the RIBA. RUC: Royal Ulster Constabulary (Reorganised as the PSNI in 2001). The police service active in Northern Ireland during the Troubles until its reformation into the PSNI in 2001. 319 officers and former officers were killed during the violence. 55 deaths are attributed to the RUC, with further rumours and findings of collusion between officers and Loyalist paramilitaries leading to widespread distrust of the organisation from the Nationalist community, who were significantly underrepresented in its ranks.

SDLP: Social Democratic and Labour Party. A major nationalist party in Northern Ireland, and the most popular during the Troubles. The SDLP seeks Irish unification and rejects violent means of doing so. The SDLP has lost electoral ground to Sinn Féin following the Good Friday Agreement, and currently does not have any representation in the Westminster parliament. The SDLP has links with the British and Irish Labour Parties.

SIB: Strategic Investment Board. A public advisory body responsible for the implementation of the executive’s investment strategy and for the delivery of major programmes of public works. Any investment from central government into a project such as the re-use of Armagh Gaol would need to be instructed by the executive and its business case approved by the SIB. Sinn Féin: Irish ‘We Ourselves’. Currently the largest nationalist party in Northern Ireland, Sinn Féin draws its historic roots from prior to the 1916 Easter Rising and its refusal to sit in the UK parliament following its gain of 73 of 105 Irish seats in the 1919 UK General Election (A policy the current day party maintains). The modern party is known as being the political arm of the IRA during the Troubles, but has since rejected violence and is currently the second largest party in the NI Assembly after the DUP. SPAB: Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings. Founded by Phillip Webb and William Morris in 1877, the SPAB works to promote what they view as best practice in the repair and maintenance of historic buildings. The group also fund and co-ordinate skills training for building and construction professionals specialising in traditional crafts. In 2017, the SPAB opened an Irish branch in order to increase their outreach both in NI and the RoI. Support from the SPAB has been identified as a key component of the author’s project and in the text of this paper, the SPAB’s published guidance and principles has been selected as the definition of ‘best practice’ when referred to in the text.

SRC: Southern Regional College. The further education college serving the ABC Council region. The SRC’s Armagh Campus is located at the opposite end of the Mall from the former Gaol.

Stakeholder: Defined as ‘groups and individuals ‘who can affect and are affected by the achievement of an organisation’s purpose’’ (Freeman 2010, 54; in Flynn 2011, 393).

The Good Friday / Belfast Agreement: The 1998 agreement which is usually seen as the end of the Troubles through the establishment of a devolved Northern Irish government and the stipulation that the province may be unified with the Republic of Ireland in the future if there is majority support for such an action, combined with the retraction of the RoI government’s claim of sovereignty over the whole of Ireland until such times as a border poll is successful.

‘The Province’: Term used to refer to Northern Ireland via its commonly used proxy ‘Ulster’. Ulster is one of the four historic provinces of Ireland.

‘The Troubles’: A period of ethno-nationalist, sectarian violence which occurred in Northern Ireland in the later half of the 20th Century, as well as spilling over on occasion to the rest of the UK, RoI and Europe. Commonly defined as lasting between the period 1968-1998, the conflict claimed over 3500 lives, the majority of whom were civilians. The conflict was fought ostensibly over the constitutional status of NI as part of either the UK or the RoI, although many instances of ‘score settling’ and non-political murders were committed by members of the paramilitary organisations fighting. The violence of the Troubles largely abated following the 1998 Good Friday Agreement and the subsequent decommissioning of paramilitary weapons in the first decade of the 2000s, although disaffected splinter groups remain an active, albeit much-reduced threat.

TOPG: Trevor Osborne Property Group. Property Developer based in England, awarded preferred bidder status on the Armagh Gaol project in 2008 by ACD Council following their successful refurbishment of the former Oxford Castle and Gaol as a mixed retail and hospitality scheme. The TOPG were awarded planning permission in 2013 for a similar proposal to transform Armagh Gaol into a boutique hotel with additional commercial and residential new build on the site. Progress on this project seems to have stalled as of 2017, however, the submission of an application for Listed Building Consent for the site in August of this year suggests that the project may be again moving forwards. Section 5 of the main essay discusses strategies for repossessing the site from the TOPG in order to facilitate the author’s proposals.

UAHS: Ulster Architectural Heritage Society. The primary architectural heritage advocacy group in NI, also responsible for maintaining the BHARNI Register on behalf of the DfC. The UAHS would be a group of particular interest to the author’s proposals due to the publicity and relevant skills they could bring to the project.

UDA: Ulster Defence Association (proscribed). The largest loyalist paramilitary group active throughout the Troubles with the primary aim of combating Republicanism in Northern Ireland. Founded in 1971, the group and its subsidiary wind the Ulster Freedom Fighters (UFF) were responsible for 260 deaths during the Troubles.

UDR: Ulster Defence Regiment. Former regiment within the British Army founded in 1970 and recruiting exclusively from Northern Ireland, with a significant part-time element. Used as an auxiliary force to the main British Army presence in Northern Ireland, the regiment was excused some of the policing type roles of their comrades due to the risk of inflaming sectarian tensions. 8 known deaths are attributed to the UDR and, like the RUC, rumours of collusion give it a continued divisive legacy within the Nationalist community. The regiment suffered 196 deaths among its ranks before the regiment was amalgamated in 1992.

UK: United Kingdom [of Great Britain and Northern Ireland] Ulster: One of the four historic provinces of Ireland. Commonly used as a synonym for Northern Ireland, despite the presence of three of its constituent counties (Cavan, Donegal & Monaghan) in the Republic of Ireland.

UNESCO: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organi[s]ation Unionist: Term applied to those who seek the preservation of Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom. In common parlance, ‘unionist’ is used distinctly from ‘loyalist’ to mean those who seek this goal through democratic means and reject violence as a legitimate method.

UUP: Ulster Unionist Party. The second largest unionist party in the NI Assembly, and the most prominent in Northern Ireland throughout the Troubles. Much like the SDLP, the UUP lost parliamentary and assembly seats following the Good Friday Agreement, in this case to the DUP. UVF: Ulster Volunteer Force (proscribed). A loyalist paramilitary group active throughout the Troubles with the primary aim of combating republicanism in Northern Ireland. Emerging in 1966, the group was responsible for 428 deaths before ceasefire in 1994.

Vocational: Training and education dedicated to a specific occupation or select range of occupations. In Northern Ireland, the main supplier of vocational courses are the regional further education colleges.

List of Interviews 1. Cahal McLaughlin - 13.04.17 Professor;The Senator George J Mitchell Institute for Global Peace, Security and Justice QUB Director;The Prisons Memory Archive 2. Cormac Campbell - 05.05.17 Reporter; the Detail 3. John Savage - 05.06.17 Associate; Consarc Design Group - Stone Conservation Services 4. Interview 4 - 05.06.17 Individual connected to the 1999 planning application 5. Interview 5 - 21.07.17 ABC Council Employee 6. Karen Latimer OBE [Services to Architectural Heritage] - 28.07.17 Former Chairman; Hearth Housing Association & Revolving Fund Honorary Member; Royal Society of Ulster Architects 7. Interview 7 - 28.07.17 Individual connected to the 2012-3 planning application 8. Dorothy Hoskins - 11.08.17 Technical Outreach and Education Manager;The Engine Shed, Historic Environment Scotland 9. Andrew McClelland - 18.08.17 Chairman; Institute of Historic Buildings Conservation (NI) 10. Nora Landkammer - 18.08.17 Lecturer; University of the Arts, ZurichResearcher;TRACES CP01 11. Anne Menary - 05.09.17 Senior Area Architect; Historic Environment Division, Department for Communities 12. Rita Harkin - 07.09.17 Northern Ireland Support Officer; Architectural Heritage Fund 13. Sean Barden - 21.09.17 Head Curator; Armagh County Museum 14. Primrose Wilson CBE - 27.09.17 President; Ulster Architectural Heritage Society Vice-Chair; IGF Chair; Association of Preservation Trusts (NI); Chair; Follies Trust; Board member; Hearth

Bibliography Allport, G. W. The Nature of Prejudice; Introduction by Kenneth Clark; Foreword by Thomas Pettigrew. 25th Anniversary ed. Reading, Mass.: Perseus, 1992.

Armagh City and District Council. Appendix A. Report of Proceedings of a Special Meeting of the EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. 27 October 2008 Armagh City and District Council with Hall Black Douglas and Alistair Coey Architects. Armagh Gaol: A New Future - A Planning Statement.

1999. Retrieved from the Archives: Armagh County Museum, Armagh BBC News, ‘“Maze 'will not be terror shrine’” 25 July 2007 BBC News, ‘Armagh Jail project under threat’ 22 July 2014 BBC News, ‘Prince Charles' NIO letter about Armagh Jail’ 13 May 2015 Belfast Evening Telegraph. “Fee Hanged. Execution of the Clones Murderer. Culprit’s Last Moments. Scenes and Incidents at Armagh Jail” 22 December 1904 Black, R. “Armagh gaol developer exasperated over 10-year delay to hotel plan” Belfast Telegraph, September 21, 2016. http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/ business/news/armagh-gaol-developer-exasperated-over-10year-delay-to-hotel-plan-35065018.html Britain Thinks. February 2015. 20Years of Lottery Funding of Heritage in Local Areas: Armagh, Heritage Lottery Fund (Online Resource) Accessed from: https://www.hlf.org.uk/about-us/research-evaluation/20-years-heritage/places/armagh British Standards Institution. BS 7913:2013 Guide to the conservation of historic buildings. 2013. Accessed from http://www.standardsuk.com/ Campbell, C. “£500,000 fund for Northern Ireland's historic buildings” The Detail, 15 September, 2016. http://www.thedetail.tv/articles/500-000-fundfor-northern-ireland-s-historic-buildings Campbell, C. “Building on the past: Is government doing enough to protect historic sites?” The Detail, 09 November, 2015. http://www.thedetail.tv/ articles/building-on-the-past-is-government-doing-enough-to-protect-valuable-historic-sites Carey, J. & Grant, C. “The Treatment of Dry Rot in Historic Buildings” in The Building Conservation Directory, 1999. Accessed from: http://www. buildingconservation.com/articles/rot/rot.html Cochrane, F. “The Paradox of Conflict Tourism: The Commodification of War or Conflict Transformation in Practice”, The Brown Journal ofWorld Affairs. Vol. XXII Issue 1. 2015.

Curran, J., Warke, P., Stelfox, D., Smith, B. & Savage, J. Stone by stone: a guide to building stone in the Northern Ireland environment. Belfast: Appletree Press, 2010 Dawson, G. Making Peace with the Past? : Memory,Trauma and the Irish Troubles. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2010.

Doyle, S. “Omagh shared education school campus to cost £60m extra” The Irish News. 05 December, 2016 Engberg, L. and Bayer, S. ‘The Two Faces of Consensus-steering’, paper presented at Danish Building & Urban Research/EURA Conference on ‘Area-based Initiatives in Contemporary Urban Policy’, Copenhagen, 17–19 May 2001, cited in Pløger, J. ‘Strife: Urban Planning and Agonism.’ Planning Theory 3, no. 1 2004 p.78 English Heritage. Enabling development and the conservation of significant places. 2008. (online resource) Accessed from: https://historicengland.org.uk/ images-books/publications/enabling-development-and-the-conservation-of-significant-places/ Flynn, M.K. ‘Decision-making and Contested Heritage in Northern Ireland: The Former Maze Prison/Long Kesh', Irish Political Studies, 26:3, 2001. 383401, DOI: 10.1080/07907184.2011.593741 Foley, M. & Lennon, J.J. "JFK and Dark Tourism: Heart of Darkness," Journal of International Heritage Studies 2, no. 4. 1996.

Foucault, M. Discipline and Punish:The Birth of the Prison. trans. Sheridan, A. London: Penguin, 1991 Galford, G. & Gould Peek, G. “Locked up in lockdown: historic prisons and asylums as alternative housing with adaptive re-use challenges.” Housing and Society, Vol. 42, No. 1,2015. pp. 85–97.

Harkin, R. “Anything Goes: Architectural destruction in Northern Ireland after ‘the Troubles.’” In Architecture and Armed Conflict:The Politics of Destruction edited by Mancini, J. M. & Bresnahan, K., 147-163. Oxon: Routledge, 2015.

Harkin, R. “Honing Skills.” In A Future for Northern Ireland’s Built Heritage, edited by Sue Christie for the Northern Ireland Environment Link (NIEL), p.14, 2009.

Hayes, B. C., McAllister, I., Dowds, L. “Integrated Education, Intergroup Relations, and Political Identities in Northern Ireland.” Social Problems, Vol. 54, No. 4. November 2007. pp. 454-482 Heritage Lottery Fund. Heritage Enterprise - Grants from £100,000 to £5million: Application Guidance. January 2017. Accessed from https://www.hlf.org.uk/ looking-funding/our-grant-programmes/heritage-enterprise Heritage Lottery Fund. Thinking about… Community participation. November 2010. Accessed from https://www.hlf.org.uk/community-participation [25.09.17]

Hewstone, M, Cairns, E, Voci, A, Hamberger, J & Niens, U. 'Intergroup contact, forgiveness, and experience of The Troubles in Northern Ireland’. Journal of Social Issues, vol 62(1), no. 1, 2006. pp. 99-120.

Holborow, W. “The creative re-use of historic prisons.” IHBC Context (150). 2017. pp. 31-34 Kriterion Conservation Architects. Redevelopment of Armagh Gaol, Armagh: Interior Heritage Features. 30th November 2012. Accessed from: http:// epicdocs.planningni.gov.uk/ShowCaseFile.aspx?guid=0f46e52e-b0c4-4045-8c24-8c7fc81a0874 Logan, W. S., and Reeves, K. Places of Pain and Shame: Dealing with 'difficult Heritage'. Key Issues in Cultural Heritage. New York: Routledge 2009.

McCafferty, C. Armagh Gaol Redevelopment. Conservation Officers Consultation Response. (not published) 26 January 2010.

McCafferty, N. The ArmaghWomen. Focus Ireland. Dublin: Co-op Books, 1981.

McDowell, S. “Selling Conflict Heritage through Tourism in Peacetime Northern Ireland: Transforming Conflict or Exacerbating Difference?”, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 14:5, 2008. 405-421, DOI: 10.1080/13527250802284859 McKenna, M. “Armagh Gaol hotel millions secured this year or project may be scrapped” Armaghi, February 19, 2017. http://armaghi.com/news/armaghgaol-hotel-millions-secured-this-year-or-project-may-be-scrapped/45265 McKinstry, R. The Buildings of Armagh. Belfast: Ulster Architectural Heritage Society, 1992.

Murray, M., Fagan, G. H. & McCusker, P. Measuring horizontal governance: a review of public consultation by the Northern Ireland government between 2000 and 2004, Policy and Politics, 37(4), 2009. pp. 553–571.

Murtagh, B. Boland, P. & Shirlow, P. ‘Contested heritages and cultural tourism’, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 23:6, 2017. 506-520, DOI: 10.1080/13527258.2017.1287118 Nagle, J. "Sites of Social Centrality and Segregation: Lefebvre in Belfast, a “Divided City”." Antipode 41, no. 2. 2009: 333 Northern Ireland Assembly. ‘Armagh Gaol’ Adjournment – at 6:00 pm on 22nd October 2013.Accessed from: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/ ni/?id=2013-10-22.5.1#g5.2 Northern Ireland Audit Office. Safeguarding Northern Ireland’s Listed Buildings: Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General for Northern Ireland, March 2011 Northern Ireland, Department for Communities, Historic Environment Division. Historic Environment Fund: FRAMEWORK OF SUPPORT, Edition 2. 2017. Accessed from: https://www.communities-ni.gov.uk/publications/historic-environment-fund-overview Northern Ireland, Department for Communities, Historic Environment Division. The Listing Process. 2015. Accessed from: https://www. communities-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/doe/built-information-listing-process.PDF Northern Ireland. Department of the Environment, Environment & Heritage Service. TECHNICAL NOTE No. 39: Stonework Repairs. 1990 (updated 2006). Accessed from: https://www.communities-ni.gov.uk/publications/11%2B14/11%2B14/type/guidance/topic/10295?search=technical Northern Ireland. Department of the Environment. Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning, Archaeology and The Built Heritage. 1999. Accessed from: https://www.planningni.gov.uk/index/policy/planning_statements_and_supplementary_planning_guidance/pps06.htm Northern Ireland, Department of the Environment. Grant of Planning Permission with Conditions Ref: O/1999/0501 (not published). 1999. Available for viewing upon request atArmagh City, Banbridge & Craigavon Borough Council Local Planning Office, Marlborough House, Craigavon. Viewed 05.09.2017 Northern Ireland, Department of the Environment. Grant of Planning Permission with Conditions Ref: O/2012/0349/F (not published) , 2013.

Available for viewing upon request atArmagh City, Banbridge & Craigavon Borough Council Local Planning Office, Marlborough House, Craigavon. Viewed 05.09.2017 Northern Ireland. Department of the Environment,. Information Leaflet 14: Guidance on Pre– application Discussions. 2014. Accessed from: https:// www.planningni.gov.uk/index/advice/advice_leaflets/pads_guidance_-_march_2014_-_amended-6.pdf Northern Ireland. Department of the Environment. Planning Policy Statement 3:‘Access, Movement and Parking’. 2005. Accessed from: https://www. planningni.gov.uk/index/policy/ Northern Ireland. Department of the Environment, Planning Policy Statement 23:‘Enabling Development for the Conservation of Significant Places’. 2014.

Accessed from: https://www.planningni.gov.uk/index/policy/planning_statements_and_supplementary_planning_guidance/pps_23_final.htm Northern Ireland. Department of the Environment, Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland (SPPS) Planning for Sustainable Development.

2015. Accessed from: https://www.planningni.gov.uk/index/policy/spps_28_september_2015-3.pdf Northern Ireland Office. ‘HRH The Prince of Wales Visits Armagh Gaol’. 27 April 2012. Accessed from: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hrhthe-prince-of-wales-visits-armagh-gaol Paterson, T. G. F., “Proposals for a University at Armagh”, Ulster Journal of Archaeology, Third Series, Vol. 8. 1945. pp. 5-13 Parkinson, A., Scott, M. & Redmond, D. ‘Competing discourses of built heritage: lay values in Irish conservation planning’, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 22:3, 2016. pp.261-273, DOI: 10.1080/13527258.2015.1121404

Pløger, J. ‘Strife: Urban Planning and Agonism.’ Planning Theory 3, no. 1 2004 Scott, J. “Tourism, Civil Society and Peace in Cyprus.” Annals of Tourism Research 39 (4). 2012.: 2114–2132.

Smith, L. Uses of Heritage. London: Routledge. 2006.

Stelfox, D. “Conservation in Practice .” In A Future for Northern Ireland’s Built Heritage, edited by Sue Christie for the Northern Ireland Environment Link (NIEL), p.10, 2009.

Sternfeld, N. Memorial Sites as Contact Zones: Cultures of Memory in a Shared/Divided Present [online resource]. Trans. Aileen Derieg. (European Institute for Progressive Cultural Politics. 2011.

The Atlantic Philanthropies. The Atlantic Philanthropies in Northern Ireland (1991-2014). 2015 The National Archives. ‘IRELAND. The Price sisters (Marian and Dolours), convicted of terrorist offences: hunger strike in Brixton Prison; transfer from Durham Prison to Armagh Prison in Northern Ireland’. 1974 May 23 - 1975 Mar 18. Ref: PREM 16/526 The National Heritage Training Group. Traditional Building Craft Skills research, skill needs analysis of the built heritage sector in Ireland NHTG Report. 2009.

Accessed from: https://www.the-nhtg.org.uk/resources/research-reports-and-policies/ The Paul Hogarth Company, for the Department for Social Development and Armagh City and District Council, Armagh City Centre Masterplan. 2009. Accessed from: https://www.communities-ni.gov.uk/publications/armagh-city-centre-masterplan The Prince’s Regeneration Trust. Armagh Gaol Public Open Evening: Feedback Report. July 2009The Prince’s Regeneration Trust. Armagh County Gaol: Community Consultation Report. September 2009 The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, PRINCIPLES AND PHILOSOPHY, 2009. Accessed from: https://www.spab.org.uk/what-isspab-/spab-s-purpose/ Ulster Historic Churches Trust. New Life for Churches in Ireland: Good Practice in Conservation and Reuse. UHCT: Belfast. 2012.

United Kingdom. Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011. 2011.

United Kingdom. Planning (Northern Ireland) Order 1972. 1972 United Kingdom. The Planning (Listed Buildings) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2015. 2015 United Kingdom. The Planning (Northern Ireland) Order 1991. 1991 United Nations. Reconciliation afterViolent Conflict: A Handbook Unknown. Case Officer’s Report (not published) 2013. Available for viewing upon request at Armagh City, Banbridge & Craigavon Borough Council Local Planning Office, Marlborough House, Craigavon. Viewed 05.09.2017 Unknown, Drumarg Quarry Database.[online resource] http://www.habitas.org.uk/escr/summary.asp?item=1196 Usher, R. “Dublin and its Georgian Legacy: The Battle for Iconoclasm” In Architecture and Armed Conflict:The Politics of Destruction edited by Mancini, J. M. & Bresnahan, K., 116-128. Oxon: Routledge, 2015.

Wahidin, A. Ex-Combatants, Gender and Peace in Northern Ireland:Women: Political Protest and the Prison Experience. Springer. 2016.

Wilson, P. “Northern Ireland’s Building Preservation Trusts.” In A Future for Northern Ireland’s Built Heritage, edited by Sue Christie for the Northern Ireland Environment Link (NIEL), p.16, 2009.

Women Against Imperialism. Women Protest for Political Status in Armagh Gaol. 1980.

Image Sources Front Cover - The Armagh Guardian via Paul Dickinson. Used with permission of photographer’s estate.

Fig.1 - From: Women Protest for Political Status in Armagh Gaol. Report by Women Against Imperialism Fig.2 - Author’s Own Fig.3 - http://www.armaghgaoltours.com/gallery.html [Accessed 08.10.17] Fig.4 - Author’s Own Fig.5 - Author’s Own Fig.6 - Author’s Own (Including Site Photography) Fig.7 - Image Scan. From Armagh County Museum. “L(25) BVRDET ARMY 1056 21JUN75 5=1320Z 24in 1500/4000ft RD RESTRICTED”

Fig.8 - From Interviewee 4.

Fig.9 - From HLF: Thinking about… Community participation. November 2010. p.9. [Accessed 08.10.17] Fig.10 - Author’s Own Fig.11 - Author’s Own Fig.12 - Author’s Own Fig.13 - Author’s Own Fig.14 - Kriterion Conservation Architects. Accessed from: http://epicpublic.planningni.gov.uk/publicaccess/ [Accessed 08.10.17] Fig.15 - https://www.fleethoteltemplebar.com/upload/slide_images/kilmainham-gaol.jpg [Accessed 08.10.17] Fig.16 - http://lichfields.uk/blog/2016/october/7/pros-and-no-cons-unlocking-new-homes-at-kingston-prison/ [Accessed 08.10.17] Fig. 17 - http://blog.hihostels.com/2011/05/fancy-spending-time-in-a-prison-2/ [Accessed 08.10.17] Fig.18 - Image Scan. From Interviewee 7.

Fig.19 - Image Scan. From Interviewee 7. With Author’s Modifications Fig.20 - Author’s Own Fig.21 - Author’s Own Fig.22 - Author’s Own Fig.23 - Author’s Own Fig.24 - http://lordbelmontinnorthernireland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/armagh-palace.html [Accessed 08.10.17] Fig.25 - Author’s Own Fig.26 - Author’s Own Fig.27 - Author’s Own Fig.28 - Author’s Own Fig.29 - Author’s Own Fig.30 - Author’s Own Appendix iii: .1 - http://www.irishnews.com/news/2015/06/01/news/maze-long-kesh-prison-site-requests-ignored--131591/ [Accessed 08.10.17] .2 - Author’s Own .3 - Image Scan. From Interviewee 7. .4 - http://www.buildingsofireland.ie/Surveys/Buildings/BuildingoftheMonth/Archive/Name,3083,en.html [Accessed 08.10.17] .5 - http://gbpt.org/news/gcc_celebrates_parkhead/ [Accessed 08.10.17] .6 - http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/stirling-landmark-set-open-public-10715248 [Accessed 08.10.17] [Accessed 08.10.17] .7 - http://mmasarchitects.com/ [Accessed 08.10.17] .8 - http://midlothiansciencefestival.com/venue/penicuik-house/ [Accessed 08.10.17] .9 - https://hiveminer.com/Tags/college%2Cletterfrack [Accessed 08.10.17]

Appendix i Heritage Appraisals of Armagh Gaol: Armagh Gaol Listing HB Ref No: HB15/17/016 Extent of Listing: 3 storey front block, front boundary wall and railings, hinge block, 3 storey cell block, 2 storey cell block, 2 storey infirmary, main boundary wall Date of Construction: 1780 - 1799 Address: ARMAGH GAOL ARMAGH PRISON GAOL SQUARE ARMAGH Survey 1*: B+** Date of Listing: 30/04/1975 00:00:00 Former Use: PRISON Conservation Area: Yes BHARNI Listing HB Ref No: HB15/17/016 Address: FRONT BLOCK OF ARMAGH PRISON GAOL SQUARE ARMAGH Status: Currently at Risk Listing Grade: B+ BARNI Number: BARNI 15/17/001 Conservation Area: Yes Condition: Fair Occupancy: Vacant Degree of Risk: Moderate Description: Featured in the popular BBC2 Restoration series, it is not through want of trying that this extremely important listed building, which helps to frame the historic Mall, has not yet been sensitively converted. Described in the Buildings of Armagh as “a handsome three-storey fourteen-bay building of coursed conglomerate with rusticated limestone quoins”, the Gaol was built on the site of the old barracks to the designs of Thomas Cooley, who was responsible for several other prominent buildings in the area. It has been added to over the years, most notably by William Murray in 1846, and it ceased to function as a prison in 1988. It has been

Survey 1 here refers to the first NI building survey conducted after the statutory listing of buildings began in 1974. The first survey took over 20 years. The DfC is currently overseeing the Second survey which has been in progress since 1997. *

**

Northern Ireland Listing Classifications are taken from PPS 6: Planning, Archaeology and The Built Heritage: Annex C: Grading of Listed Buildings

‘C9 Buildings listed by the Department are divided into three grades; A, B+ and B to give an indication of their relative importance.The gradings are not statutory but they are used by the Department as a management tool to help in administering levels of grant to owners of listed buildings.The categories contained within the list can be briefly defined as follows: Grade A : buildings of greatest importance to Northern Ireland including both outstanding architectural set-pieces and the least altered examples of each representative style, period and grouping.There are 193 buildings in this category (June 1997).

Grade B+ : buildings which might have merited grade A status but for detracting features such as an incomplete design, lower quality additions or alterations. Also included are buildings that because of exceptional features, interiors or environmental qualities are clearly above the general standard set by grade B buildings. A building may merit listing as grade B+ where its historic importance is greater than a similar building listed as grade B.There are 388 buildings listed in this category (June 1997).

Grade B : buildings of local importance and good examples of a particular period or style. A degree of alteration or imperfection of design may be acceptable.There are 7,439 buildings in this category (June 1997). Since 1987 the Department has been banding Grade B buildings into two groups namely B1 and B2.

C10 Generally B1 is chosen for buildings that qualify for listing by virtue of a relatively wide selection of attributes. Usually these will include interior features or where one or more features are of exceptional quality and/or interest. B2 is chosen for buildings that qualify for listing by virtue of only a few attributes. An example would be a building sited within a conservation area where the quality of its architectural appearance raises it appreciably above the general standard of buildings within the conservation area.’

vacant ever since. Holding repairs have been carried out in anticipation of an appropriate scheme for its reuse.

As much as possible of the original fabric of the building should be retained, as it is an imposing and atmospheric structure. The building appears to be in limbo at present with a project headed by the Prince’s Regeneration Trust, however on last visit a repair maintenance programme seemed to be taking shape on the building. Refs: UAHS, The Buildings of Armagh, 1992, p. 141 UAHS Description “The Gaol: A. (1780/1819/1840/1852) Architects Thomas Cooley, William Murray and possibly Francis Johnston.

The Gaol was built on the site of the old barracks erected in 1736. A handsome three-storey fourteen-bay building of course conglomerate with rusticated limestone quoins. The ground floor has two advanced entrance bays with blocked ashlar stonework. There are semi-circular windows with semi-circular recesses and springing string courses between arches stretching the full length of the front. The first and second floor windows have segmental heads with stone quoins and keystones.

The entrance doorways have semi-circular headed fanlights and side lights. Above it on the first floor there is a tripartite segmental headed window and on the second floor a triple arched window with keystone. The advanced entrance bays are pedimented - the ashlar cornice with block parapet having bare pedestals. The chimneys are an important part of the composition. The doorway to the left of the main block has a primitive pediment, on the right hand side the entrance gate has an elliptical arch. In front there is a low wall with original railings. High walls contain the prison on the three other sides.

The main block of the gaol was built in two stages. Firstly, in 1780, with Thomas Cooley as architect, the southmost entrance bay with four bays on each side (male prisoners on one side, female on the other) was built.

Then in 1819 a second pedimented entrance bay (governor’s house) together with a third four bay block, both identical to the original, was added to the north end. This created a new central axis between the two entrance bays and no longer in line with the central axis of the Courthouse. The gaol in 1819 comprised the front block as now. This was organised into three separate prisons - on the left women, in the centre debtors and on the right felons. There was a guard house at the end of the terrace in Gaol Square, other buildings including the solitary block, treadmill and engine house. Contemporary with the front block a small free-standing hip-roofed four-bay two storey infirmary in excellent ashlar limestone. Francis Johnston, who was architect for the Board of Works 1805-27 was possibly the architect.

In the 1840s William Murray prepared five different schemes for further extensions, mostly on new land acquired at the back, and consisting of a series of up to five cell blocks fanning out from a central service area. In the end only one central corridor block, set on the diagonal was built. They datestone on the rear door of B-wing reads ‘R.C./Builder 1846’ and the datestone on the front door of that wing reads ‘W.M. Architect/1846’. In 1852 William George Murray was architect for a second block, a replica of the first, the builder was R. Clarke. About this time all the windows on the front were enlarged and a stone cornice blocking course added. All the buildings described above still exist but complex layout of segregated exercise yards behind the high perimeter walls have gone. So have the stone breaking sheds and privies which were here formerly and much of the space is taken up by temporary buildings.

G.H. Bassett visited the gaol in 1888 and commented that ‘the cells in both wards are maintained in perfect condition, the most sensitive nose failing to perceive the faintest trace of that odour expected to be found with bolts and bars. There are two tiers of cells, one at each side of a ward. An iron gallery surrounds the upper tier, and a substantial rope netting covers the open space, as a precaution against suicide. There are good bathing facilities and the sanitary arrangements throughout are excellent. A well filled bookcase in the central hall supplies material for improving the mind. During the first month of confinement the prisoner has an opportunity to become acquainted with the ‘plank bed’ - a bare board. If he takes to it philosophically, he can earn two good conduct marks a day and rise triumphant from the ‘plank’ to a mattress in thirty days. The cells are each twelve feet by seven, and nine feet high and high-air flues. The buildings and premises include three and a half acres.

Prisoners are received from the whole or Armagh, Cavan and Monaghan, and from a portion of Down and a portion of Fermanagh.’ In 1920 the entire building became a women’s prison which was closed in 1988.”

Mckinstry, R. et al for UAHS 1992, 141-2

Appendix ii Planning & Listed Building Consent Applications for Armagh Gaol:

O/1988/0707 Full Planning Application Application Received: Tue 11 Oct 1988 SITE INCLUDING FORMER ARMAGH PRISON AND NO 6 GAOL SQUARE, THE MALL, ARMAGH Change Of Use FromVacant Prison Site To Provide Retail Development And Adaptation Of Premises For Civic,Craft, Restaurant,Retail And Ancillary Uses Permission Granted Applicant not recorded O/1995/0630 Listed Building Consent Application Application Received: Mon 14 Aug 1995 ARMAGH GAOL, THE MALL, ARMAGH Conversion and extension of former Armagh Gaol to facilitate the change of use to hotel and shopping mall with associated parking and services Application Withdrawn Applicant not recorded O/1995/0631 Outline Planning Application Application Received: Mon 14 Aug 1995 ARMAGH GAOL, THE MALL, ARMAGH Conversion and extension of former Armagh Gaol to facilitate the change of use to hotel and shopping mall with associated parking and services Application Withdrawn Applicant not recorded O/1999/0500 Listed Building Consent Application Application Received: Tue 15 Jun 1999 Armagh Gaol, Gaol Square, Armagh Alterations, extensions and demolitions to form offices, conference facilities and associated residential accommodation and museum Permission Granted Hall Black Douglas Architects

O/1999/0501 Full Planning Application Application Received: Tue 15 Jun 1999 Armagh Gaol, Gaol Square, Armagh Alterations, extensions and demolitions to form offices, conference facilities and associated residential accommodation and museum Permission Granted Hall Black Douglas Architects O/2012/0350/LBC Listed Building Consent Application Application Received: Fri 03 Aug 2012 Armagh Gaol, Gaol Square, Armagh, BT60 1AQ Redevelopment of Armagh Gaol to include a change of use and extension to existing buildings to a hotel and spa, erection of 7 retail units, erection of 32 apartments and refurbishment of number 6 Gaol Square, split between residential/office. Scheme to reconfigure road junctions at Goal Square and the layout to the front of the Gaol. (amended layout to accommodate coach access received) Application Withdrawn Kriterion Conservation Architects O/2012/0349/F Full Planning Application Application Received: Fri 03 Aug 2012 Armagh Gaol, Gaol Square, Armagh, BT60 1AQ Redevelopment of Armagh Gaol to include a change of use and extension to existing buildings to a hotel and spa, erection of 7 retail units, erection of 32 apartments and refurbishment of number 6 Gaol Square, spilt between residential/office. Scheme to reconfigure road junctions at Goal Square and the layout to the front of the Gaol.

Permission Granted Authority Decision Date: Thu 25 Jul 2013 Kriterion Conservation Architects LA08/2017/1103/LBC Listed Building Consent Application Application Received: Mon 07 Aug 2017 Armagh Gaol, Gaol Square, Armagh, BT60 1AQ Redevelopment of Armagh Gaol to include a change of use and extension to existing buildings to a hotel and spa, erection of 7 no. retail units, erection of 32 no. apartments and refurbishment of no.

6 Gaol Square, split between residential/office.The scheme includes reconfiguring the layout to the front of the Gaol.

Consultations Issued Authority Decision Date: PENDING Kriterion Conservation Architects

Appendix iii Case Studies: 1. The Maze/Long Kesh Redevelopment: Date: 2002-2013 Location: Former HM Prison Maze, Lisburn, Northern Ireland Architect: Consarc Design Group; Studio Libeskind (from 2012); HOK (now rebranded as POPULOUS) Client: Office of First and Deputy First Minister; later the Maze Redevelopment Corporation Status: Partially Listed; Partially Demolished. Redevelopment Proposals Unbuilt Description: HM Prison Maze was the largest prison holding paramilitary members during the Troubles between 1971 and its closure in 2000. Perhaps most famous as the site of the 1981 hunger strikes which resulted in the deaths of 10 republican prisoners. Part of the site was listed in 2005, including the hospital block where the hunger strikers died; the rest being demolished in 2006. As the largest publicly owned redevelopment site in Northern Ireland, the remnants of the Maze complex were intended to be turned into a International Centre for Conflict Transformation, with the rest of the site to see a cross-community sports stadium built.

Both aspects turned out to be incredibly divisive. The suggestion that the ‘Peace Centre’ would incorporate the remaining prison buildings prompted accusations that the site was to be a publicly funded ‘shrine to terrorism’ and to the IRA in particular, especially from unionists. Meanwhile the sports stadium proposal fell afoul of politically rivalry between the unionist dominated councils of Lisburn and Belfast, who each wanted the stadium to be built in their own constituencies.

Today the largely empty site plays host to the annual Royal Ulster Agricultural Society’s Balmoral Show, while the listed buildings on site are closed to the public.

The Maze is a powerful warning of the potential impasse which can be created when contentious heritage projects in Northern Ireland become of a scale which draws in the major political parties in the Assembly.

2. ACD Council/HBD Proposals for Armagh Gaol: Date: 1999 - 2006 Location: Former HM Prison Armagh, Armagh, Northern Ireland Architect: Hall Black Douglas with Alistair Coey Client: Armagh City and District Council Status: Proposals Unbuilt; Holding Repairs and Demolitions carried out.

Description: With the reacquisition of Armagh Gaol in 1997, ACD Council appointed HBD and Alistair Coey to propose an exemplar scheme for the site in order to attract developer interest. These proposals also sought and received listed building consent for repairs and demolitions on site. The architects suggested that the site could be transformed into offices, conference facilities, residential and museum uses. Suggestion was made that the gaol site would be ideal for the newly formed North South Joint Ministerial Council due to its defensive architecture and the fear that in the aftermath of the Good Friday Agreement that such a facility would be a target for dissident groups. This scheme is primary notable for the demolition of Cell Block ‘C’ which held the Price Sisters in the 1970s. This was done for stated architectural rather than historic reasons.

3. TOPG/Kriterion Proposals for Armagh Gaol: Date: 2008-Present Location: Former HM Prison Armagh, Armagh, Northern Ireland Architect: Kriterion Conservation Architects Client: The Trevor Osborne Property Group Status: Stalled / In Progress Description: Proposals to redevelop Armagh Gaol as a boutique and hotel and spa with additional elements of new-build residential and commercial units. Granted planning permission in 2013, the scheme has not progressed past applying for listed building consent in 2017, the decision on which is pending. Further information within the body text of this essay.

4. Kilmainham Gaol Restoration: Date: c.1958-71 & c.1990 Location: Dublin, Ireland Architect: N/A Client: Kilmainham Gaol Restoration Society Status: Redeveloped as museum Description: Kilmainham Gaol has been dubbed ‘the Irish Bastille’ and plays a prominent role in the national narrative of Ireland in relation to its struggle for independence from Britain (1916-1921) and subsequent Civil War (1922-3). Famously, the leaders of the 1916 Easter Rising were imprisoned in the gaol, 14 of whom were executed by firing squad in the prison’s Stonebreakers’Yard. A prominent symbol of Irish Nationalism, the gaol was closed in 1924, and by the mid 1950s was in a state of dereliction, reportedly prompting the Office of Public Works to seek tenders for its demolition. A group of interested and motivated nationalists formed the Kilmainham Gaol Restoration Society which, through use of voluntary labour and donated materials, restored the gaol in the period between 1960 and 1971. A museum was built adjacent to the former gatehouse c.1990 and today the whole site is a museum of Irish Nationalism and the Civil War. This scheme is of interest to the author’s proposals both because it demonstrates that former prisons can potentially be restored using unskilled labour who train on the job and because its existence makes a similar proposal at Armagh Gaol extremely unlikely; given the nationalist symbolism such a museum would entail through its connection with Kilmainham.

5. Westmuir Street School: Date: 2014-Present Location: Glasgow, Scotland Architect: Purcell Miller Tritton Client: Glasgow Building Preservation Trust with Glasgow City Council Status: On Site Description: The redevelopment of this former school in Glasgow’s Parkhead area into an IT training facility and low-rent subsidised office space for start-up businesses was carried out by a partnership between the Glasgow Building Preservation Trust and the local Council. Prompted by the parlous state of the building and the danger it posed to the public due to falling masonry, the Council agreed to the purchase of the site by the GBPT on condition that the Council would maintain ownership and thereby liability for damages resulting up until the completion of holding repairs and the start of the redevelopment on site. Such a model is of interest to the author’s proposed scheme at Armagh Gaol and a similar client partnership model seems credible.

6. The Engine Shed: Date: 2013-2017 Location: Stirling, Scotland Architect: Reiach and Hall Architects Client: Historic Environment Scotland Status: Complete Description: Historic Environment Scotland opened their new training, conference and public outreach centre dedicated tot he advancement of traditional building skills education in 2017. Comprising a mix of historic built elements and significant new build, the centre, which received funding from the HLF, provides training to apprentices in traditional building skills, research facilities to an in-house team of conservation scientists, an education and outreach complex and conference spaces to heritage professionals. However, it is noted that the building and restoration of the facilities themselves were not used as a training opportunity for local apprentices - the author’s proposals suggest that such an incorporation would be economically and educationally beneficial.

7. Interface to Place – a process of transforming a ‘Peace Wall’: Date: 2017 Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland Architect: MMAS Client: RIBA Status: Competition Won. Workshops Complete. Exhibition Ongoing.

Description: Belfast based studio MMAS entered and won the RIBA’s ‘Beyond Borders’ competition in 2017 with their proposals for modifying a Peace Wall barrier in the city into a gate and element of public realm. Unable to build their proposals for the exhibition in London due to its site specific nature, the studio instead engaged with a local youth group in a series of workshops in order to design a public park on the site of one of the barriers. The architects acted as ‘facilitators’ of the young people’s design ambitions, working them into realisable proposals for the area. The workshop based approach to community-led design is an interesting example of how architects can use their particular skills to engage with local residents in order to resolve issues over potentially contentious sites.

8. Penicuik House: Date: 1985-Present Location: Midlothian, Scotland Architect: Scottish Lime Centre Trust Client: Penicuik House Preservation Trust Status: Repairs Ongoing Description: After being destroyed by fire in 1899, the ruins of the Palladian Penicuik House outside Edinburgh was acquired by the Penicuik House Preservation Trust in 1985. Masonry repairs continue on site facilitated by the Scottish Lime Centre which uses the site as the basis for its courses; ‘Making and Using Traditional Mortars’, and ‘Repairing Traditional Masonry’. Funding for these training schemes is provided by the HLF and Historic Environment Scotland.

9. Letterfrack Furniture College: Date: 2001 Location: Co. Galway, Ireland Architect: O’Donnell + Tuomey Client: Connemara West Status: Complete Description: The former Industrial school at Letterfrack has left a savage legacy on the history of the Irish Republic. A site of horrendous child abuse and institutionalised penal labour, the school since its closure in 1973 has emerged as a place of pain and shame both for those confined within its walls as well as for the wider society of Ireland.

The challenge for architects O’Donnell + Tuomey was, in their own words, to perform, ‘a kind of architectural exorcism, a project of redemption’. Interestingly, the current owner of the site, Connemara West, a community-owned rural development initiative, decided to return the campus to an educational use with the provision of new workshop facilities for a furniture college, library, radio studio and farmers’ cooperative.

The new additions and the interventions in the existing fabric break the oppressive symmetry of the former school buildings, and through means such as the lowering of window cills and the careful choice of materials, help to return the buildings to a much less intimidating, human scale.

.1

.2

.6

.7

.3

.8

.4

.9

.5

Appendix iv Relevant Policy Documents: Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011.

Part 4 Additional planning control Chapter 1 Listed buildings and conservation areas The Planning (Listed Buildings) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2015.

Shaping Our Future - Regional Development Strategy for Northern Ireland 2025 Armagh Area Plan 2004 Armagh Area Plan 2018: Issues Paper PPS 3 Policy AMP 2 Access to Public Roads PPS3 Policy AMP 6 Transport Assessment PPS3 Policy AMP 7 Car Parking and Servicing Arrangements PPS6 Policy BH7 Change of use of a listed building PPS6 Policy BH8 Extension or Alteration of a Listed Building PPS6 Policy BH11 Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building PPS 6 Policy BH12 New Development in a Conservation Area PPS 23 ED 1 Enabling Development Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland (SPPS) Planning for Sustainable Development British Standard - BS 7913:2013 Guide to the conservation of historic buildings

Photo Credit:The Armagh Guardian via Paul Dickinson. Used with permission.