Top Ten Lichfield Listed Building Advisers

Who is advising on Lichfield’s listed buildings?

The ten most active advisers identified in applications from 2024 to 2026

Work on a listed building calls for a particular kind of judgement. Seemingly modest changes—altering a window, moving an internal wall or introducing new services—can affect the character that makes a building significant. They may also require Listed Building Consent.

We reviewed 90 Listed Building Consent applications submitted across Lichfield District during the period covered by our research. The records identify a wide range of architects, planning agents and specialist advisers, but a relatively small group appears repeatedly.

The ten most active organisations were associated with 36 applications, or 40% of the total reviewed. That does not in itself measure the quality of their work or the outcome of an application. It does, however, offer a useful picture of which practices have been most active in this part of the local planning system.

Where firms have the same number of applications, their position in the list should not be read as a performance ranking.

10. CTD — 2 applications

Burntwood-based CTD was associated with two applications in the period reviewed.

One concerned The Wagon House at Marsh Barn Farm in Handsacre, a curtilage-listed former agricultural building. The proposals included changing its external colour, omitting non-original windows, replacing uPVC units with black hardwood-framed windows and adding conservation rooflights.

The application illustrates a recurring issue in historic-building work: how to reverse or improve upon later alterations while adapting a building for present-day use.

9. Purcell Architecture Ltd — 2 applications

Purcell Architecture also appeared on two applications. The practice works nationally in conservation and the adaptation of historic buildings, bringing specialist heritage experience to projects involving sensitive fabric and settings.

Its inclusion here reflects the mix of local and national practices working within Lichfield District.

8. Canal & River Trust — 2 applications

The Canal & River Trust was associated with two applications. It differs from the architectural practices on this list, but its role reflects the importance of Lichfield’s canal and industrial heritage.

Work to historic waterways can involve listed bridges, locks and other structures, where repair and alteration must respond both to operational needs and to heritage significance.

7. Alrewas Architecture Ltd — 2 applications

Alrewas Architecture was named in two applications, both involving the adaptation of historic homes.

At 37 Mill End Lane in Alrewas, the proposals related to a 17th-century thatched cottage with timber framing and plaster infill panels. Work to a building of this kind requires careful consideration of the relationship between any extension and the scale, materials and form of the original house.

A second application, at 66 Park Road, involved converting two first-floor cupboards into an en-suite bathroom. It is a good example of how relatively small internal changes can still require close attention in a listed building.

6. Co-Arch — 3 applications

Birmingham-based Co-Arch was associated with three applications.

Its work at 29–33 Levetts Fields involved proposals to convert former commercial space for residential use. The scheme included removing non-original elements, altering a second-floor ceiling and introducing a split mezzanine to create vaulted spaces within the new homes.

Projects of this kind need to balance a viable new use with the retention of the building’s significant form and fabric.

5. Paul Gaughan Building Consultants Ltd — 3 applications

Paul Gaughan Building Consultants appeared on three applications, including work connected with Netherstowe House.

The supporting material for that site extended beyond the building itself, taking in matters such as flood risk and the effect of development on trees. This is a reminder that heritage projects are rarely considered in isolation: landscape, setting and wider planning constraints may all form part of the assessment.

The consultancy was also named in applications involving corporate property interests, including Rotala Shared Services.

4. St Paul’s Associates Ltd — 3 applications

St Paul’s Associates was associated with three applications.

One concerned The Piggery on Mill Lane in Stonnall, where an oak-framed canopy was proposed for an existing barn conversion. The relationship with the Grade II-listed Stonnall House Farmhouse, opposite the site across a shared drive, formed part of the heritage context.

The case shows why even a modest addition may need to be assessed not only against the building to which it is attached, but also against nearby listed buildings and their setting.

3. ADC Ltd — 4 applications

Sutton Coldfield-based ADC Ltd appeared on four applications, including proposals for external works and boundary treatments.

At Minster House, the firm was associated with a part-retrospective application involving the erection and repair of a boundary wall. The location is particularly sensitive, close to Minster Pool, the Garden of Remembrance and Lichfield Cathedral.

In such a setting, boundary features can contribute materially to the character of the surrounding historic environment.

2. Egon Hansen Architects — 5 applications

Egon Hansen Architects was associated with five applications, several of them connected with the conversion of 20 St John Street.

The Grade II*-listed early 18th-century townhouse presented substantial structural and conservation challenges. The applications included steelwork to support failing timber elements, roof repairs, replacement of later dormer windows and alterations to internal partitions as part of its conversion to apartments.

The sequence of applications demonstrates how work to a complex historic building may be divided into several related stages as its condition is investigated and the design develops.

1. BHB Architects — 10 applications

BHB Architects was the most frequently named practice in the records reviewed, with ten applications—just over 11% of the total dataset.

The projects varied considerably in scale and type. At 23 Lombard Street, proposals were made to install seven photovoltaic panels on the rear roof slopes of a Grade II-listed 19th-century house. At the Corn Exchange on Conduit Street, the work involved internal alterations to the Heritage Bar & Grill within a building noted for features including jack arches and a hammer-beam roof.

The practice was also associated with restoration work at Sandfields House, a Gothic-style building with an unusual history as an early 19th-century private asylum.

Together, these cases show the range of questions now encountered in listed-building work—from repair and reuse to energy efficiency and the introduction of modern services.

What the figures tell us

Application numbers are not a league table of design quality, nor do they indicate whether consent was granted. Some properties also generate more than one application, particularly where work is complex or carried out in phases.

What the figures do show is which organisations appeared most often in Lichfield District’s Listed Building Consent records during the period reviewed. For owners considering alterations to a historic property, relevant listed-building experience is an important factor—but it should be considered alongside the nature of the proposed work, the adviser’s experience with comparable buildings and the quality of their previous conservation approach.

Before appointing anyone, it is sensible to discuss the building’s listing, the likely need for consent and the scope of supporting information with the local planning authority and suitably qualified professionals.