Appendix A: Heritage Technical Detail

Full technical data from the 2025 Heritage Conservation Framework — significance ratings, health & safety requirements, thermal upgrading trials, and key professionals.

This appendix supports The Heritage Crisis executive briefing. Return to the executive briefing for the summary.

Significance by Area

AreaSignificanceConditionConversion Approach
Compound D
(Huts 61–91)
Highest — the only near-complete PoW compound in the UKMostly poorHeritage-sensitive premium conversion. External appearance preserved exactly. “Museum-quality luxury.”
Compound C
(Huts 41–60)
High — 60% of compound survivesPoor to very poorSensitive conversion. Some huts (41, 44, 48) may be replaceable with new Nissen hutting on same footprints.
Escort Camp
(Huts 21–39)
High — Phase 3 additions (1946–47)Fair (29–39 recently repaired)Huts 29–39 already converted to self-catering. The proven template for full luxury rollout.
Admin Area
(Huts 1–20)
High — includes Detention Block, Camp ReceptionMixedOfficers' Mess venue, reception, museum, spa. Heritage interpretation hub.
Compounds A & B
(cleared by MOD)
Archaeological interest onlyN/A (cleared)New-build Nissen huts on original footprints. Additional capacity. Requires HES agreement.

Health & Safety — Pre-Conversion Requirements

IssueStatusAction Required
AsbestosPresent in Hut 20 roof, insulation, fire equipment, various locationsReview and update Asbestos Management Plan. Survey all huts before conversion works begin.
UFFI insulationDeteriorating in many huts. Pieces blowing around site. Health risk.Maintain register. Prepare removal method statement. Budget for controlled removal during conversion.
LPG gasInstallations throughout camp. No historic value.Framework recommends decommissioning and removal. Replace with modern heating in conversion.
ElectricalAgeing installations. Unclear responsibility.Full EICR for all huts. Mandatory for self-catering from 2023. Budget £2K/year ongoing.
Flood riskNE corner: high risk from surface waterFactor into conversion phasing. Prioritise Escort Camp and Admin Area (lower risk).

Thermal Upgrading

Nissen huts were designed as an improvement on tents. Thermal performance is a known challenge. The framework notes two upgrade approaches already trialled:

The framework recommends monitoring performance of both methods before replicating. Roger Curtis, Head of Technical Resources at HES, may support monitoring as part of their historic buildings research programme.

The framework also suggests considering low-cost renewable energy as an alternative or complement to fabric insulation — directly supporting the solar micro-grid strategy.

Key Professionals Identified

ProfessionalRoleRelevance
James F Stephens & Partners (Glamis)Conservation-accredited architectsDesigned Huts 29–39 conversion. The obvious choice for wider conversion brief.
Onecall Ltd (Perth)ContractorDeveloped Nissen hut repair skills on Huts 29–39.
John Gilbert Architects (Glasgow)Thermal upgrade specialistsInsulation trials on Hut 1. In-situ monitoring expertise.
Roger Curtis (HES)Head of Technical ResourcesMay support thermal monitoring as part of HES research programme.
Jody Blake (PKC)Conservation OfficerContact for Conservation Area designation discussion.
Gareth Pugh Steel Framed BuildingsModern Nissen hut manufacturer£7,650/hut (9-bay kit). Option for replacing worst huts or infilling Compound B.

Conservation Area Designation

The framework notes that PKC is open to discussing whether Cultybraggan should become a Conservation Area. Benefits:

This should be pursued alongside the luxury conversion — it strengthens every funding application.

Analysis based on Cultybraggan Camp Heritage Conservation Framework 2025 (Section A). Full document held by CDT. Framework remains the intellectual property of its authors and should not be reproduced without permission.

← Return to The Heritage Crisis