Step in to restore splendour of Clandon Park, ministers urged

One of two fireplaces by Rysbrack in the Marble Hall before the fire of 2015. Both fireplaces have survived the fire in good condition.

Jack Blackburn reports for The Times: Senior figures from the heritage sector have urged the government to intervene after the approval of the National Trust’s plans to keep Clandon Park as a preserved ruin. In a letter to The Times, figures including a former planning director from English Heritage, a former investigator of historic buildings, architects and professors said “something has gone badly wrong” with the trust’s decision not to restore the grade I listed mansion.

They added that parts of the interior, gutted by a fire in 2015, were “eminently restorable” and the National Trust’s now-approved plans to leave the house as a preserved ruin was “a betrayal of its core mission”. They called on the government to intervene on the planning application, which was unanimously approved by Guildford borough council earlier this month.

The National Trust is now working to keep the Surrey site as a ruin with a restored façade, while inside there will be “floating” walkways and other interventions designed to get the public close to the fabric of the site. It will be used for arts displays and performances, which the trust said would respect Clandon’s past while opening a chapter in which it would be a “welcoming, engaging and fully functional house”.

However, the signatories — who include the Earl of Onslow, whose ancestral home the house is — are backing a restoration plan that would attempt to recreate much of the Palladian masterpiece lost in the blaze. This would include the Marble Hall and most of the ground floor (piano nobile). The signatories suggested this was achievable and could bring about training opportunities in endangered crafts.

“Something has gone badly wrong when a great conservation body declines to repair one of its architectural masterpieces,” the letter reads. “We urge the government to call in the application for decision by the secretary of state.”

After Clandon burned down in an electrical fire, the trust originally intended to restore some ground-floor rooms but later decided the property was too damaged for this to be plausible. The earl, who has always opposed the trust’s alternative scheme, had been of the view that the house should be left as an unaltered ruin, previously saying: “I … don’t think it can be resuscitated in any way that’s either economically, practically or intellectually beneficial.”

However, the earl said he recognised that he was in the minority in his family and was happy to endorse a restoration as a second-choice option. He had been told a recreation of the plasterwork was achievable aesthetically and financially.

“It did make me think whether I have been a bit black-and-white, abrupt or not nuanced enough about it,” the earl said. “If they were to replicate it, it would be amazing. I could walk into that room and go, ‘This isn’t what I remember’, but it isn’t all about me.”

Francis Terry, a leading architect and another signatory of the letter, said it would not be necessary to rebuild the house but only to restore key elements such as the piano nobile, recreating Clandon’s much-missed decor. He argued that an example had been set by Castle Howard, which was badly damaged by fire in 1940 and partially reconstructed (most famously its dome) but retained elements that had not been restored. The letter also refers to Notre Dame and Windsor Castle as examples, although neither was subjected to the 90 per cent damage that Clandon received.

“We suffer in England with a belief which is that the stones themselves are the significant thing, not the form,” Terry said. “The thing that made Clandon memorable was not the Georgian brickwork, which is the thing that you’ll see from the walkways. It was the ornamental plasterwork.”

The plasterwork would require expert plasterers to restore it, presenting opportunities to train a new generation in that craft.

The trust said its plans had been drawn up in consultation with heritage bodies, architectural specialists, craftspeople, community organisations and local residents.

“Our vision is for a house that showcases the importance and beauty of what survived the fire — and celebrates the stories of the many people who made and crafted it over centuries,” a trust spokeswoman said.

“Our approach combines careful conservation, scholarly restoration and sensitive contemporary design. Public feedback has been overwhelmingly positive, recognising that our plans respect Clandon’s past and will create an exciting new chapter in its history.”

Reconstruction projects keep heritage crafts alive. A stuccadore works on the central boss of the Staircase Hall at Uppark, gutted by fire in 1989. Apart from one small piece of original plaster, the ceiling is entirely new.

The Times Letters 28 March 2025: Call in Clandon

Sir, Until the fire of 2015 Clandon House in Surrey boasted one of the most beautiful historic interiors in Europe. The National Trust’s decision to leave it as a conserved ruin with modern interventions is misguided and a betrayal of its core mission. The Marble Hall and the other fine interiors are eminently restorable.

The trust’s approach is at odds with the spectacular restoration of many historic buildings in the UK and Europe such as Windsor Castle, Notre Dame cathedral and, by the National Trust itself, at Uppark. Restoration would create training opportunities in endangered crafts, and would use sustainable traditional materials rather than the energy-hungry plate glass, steel, concrete and plastic required for the proposed scheme. Something has gone badly wrong when a great conservation body declines to repair one of its architectural masterpieces. We urge the government to call in the application for decision by the secretary of state.
Philip Davies, former planning and development director, English Heritage; the Earl of Onslow; Will Palin, CEO, Barts Heritage; Roger White, former secretary of the Georgian Group; Sir Timothy Clifford, former director of the National Galleries of Scotland; Francis Terry, architect; Michael Bevington; Nicholas Boys-Smith; Georgia Cristea; Alexander Echlin; Robin Moore Ede; Dr Celina Fox; Philip Gaches; Dr Anthony Geraghty; Julian Gibbs; Jeffrey Haworth; Richard Hewlings; Michael Hill; James Holloway; Tim Jones; Dr Tessa Murdoch; Michael Parsons; Hugh Petter; Alan Powers; Dr.John Martin Robinson; John Simpson; Dr Mark Stocker; Patrick Streeter; Russell Taylor;Tim Whittaker; Mark Wilson-Jones; Lucy Wood

The Times Letters 29 March 2025: Restoring Clandon

Sir, While a laudable sentiment, the assertion by Philip Davies et al (letter, Mar 28) that the fire-ravaged historic interiors of Clandon House in Surrey are “eminently restorable” is not altogether true. There is certainly no shortage of architectural expertise or craft skills to enable this to happen, but that is actually the easy bit. The insuperable difficulty, I suspect, is finding the enormous amount of money required to pay for such an ambitious proposal, while proving to potential funders that it not only represents a viable long-term proposition but also satisfies the multitude of non-architectural conditions that are imposed by grant-awarding bodies in order to gain their financial support.
Andy Davey Riba, Rias
Peebles

Sir, There is no evidence that the National Trust’s proposals to leave Clandon House as a ruin have wide-ranging public support. The trust asserts that it has taken 75,000 people around the site, yet only 176 wrote in to support the planning and listed buildings applications, while 361 people wrote to object. Further, a local poll found that 84 per cent wanted one of the restoration options.
Trevor Standen
Wigginton, Herts

The Times Letters 31 March 2025: Clandon repair bill

Sir, Andy Davey (letter, Mar 29) acknowledges that an authentic reconstruction of the magnificent interior of Clandon House is technically feasible, but asks how it would be funded. The National Trust received about £66 million from the insurer and has said that all that and more would be spent on the proposed scheme to conserve the charred shell and install unsympathetic interventions. This is a sad waste of money that could create beauty and promote endangered heritage crafts. A restored interior could bring in revenue and create jobs. The burnt brick shell is less likely to be viable. If the National Trust really wanted to bring the glorious 18th-century interiors back to life as it said it did in 2016, then whatever extra money was needed would be found. The task of buying and restoring Tyntesfield was taken on in 2002 with far less money in the bank, but the members, the public and the Heritage Lottery Fund rallied round. We look to the National Trust for leadership in looking after historic buildings. When it has a crisis of confidence, the nation loses.
Cornelia van der Poll
Morecambe, Lancs

The Times Letters 2 April 2025: Restoring Clandon

Sir, Cornelia van der Poll is right that “we look to the National Trust for leadership in looking after historic buildings” (letter, Mar 31). The trust owns few buildings by major British architects. Blenheim (by Vanbrugh), Chatsworth (partly by William Talman and Thomas Archer), and Robert Adam’s Syon House, for instance, are all in private hands. But by chance the trust does own two major buildings by Giacomo Leoni, the other being Lyme Park near Stockport. Leoni was notably one of the originators of the Palladian style through his edition of Antonio Palladio’s great treatise. Many of his fine buildings have unluckily been demolished, and until 2015 Clandon Park was his chief surviving work. The trust surely has a moral duty to present it as far as possible as it was built. Its present proposal most certainly doesn’t do that.
Tim Hudson
Chichester