The unlikely saviour of this beautiful ruin

Trawsfynydd (image: Roy Trappe)

SO, this “beautiful ruin” is to be saved – for now at least. The two nuclear reactor towers at Trawsfynydd, designed by world-renowned architect Sir Basil Spence, will be spared the bulldozers and the wrecking ball. This bold, uncompromising, modernist building, which juxtaposes perfectly against the drama of the Snowdonia landscape, will stand tall for years to come.

But the saviour of this glorious building is not the officials or the politicians whose job it is to preserve examples of the country’s best architecture. No. Trawsfynydd is granted a long stay of execution thanks to Britain’s “casino banks” that have delivered us the biggest public sector spending deficit for a lifetime.

The story began last October. An article in WalesHome.org made the case for a fresh look at this 1960s’ brutalist structure before work began to chop the two 55 metre high towers in half in an ill-judged bid to lessen their impact on the surrounding landscape.

Designed by one of Britain’s most celebrated post-war architects the article argued that the society’s view of Trawsfynydd had become contaminated by the radioactive material within. It proposed that that once gone, people would eventually regret this act of architectural vandalism; Trawsfynydd should be granted listed building status, to save it from ourselves.

The article sparked a wide-ranging debate. The 20th Century Society, which campaigns for the preservation of high quality post-war buildings, supported calls for to be re-examined. So did some locals, including the internationally-renowned abstract painter Sonja Benskin Mesher, who, inspired by the article, assembled and exhibited a series of paintings of Trawsfynydd. Others, of course, disagreed – including some residents who, through the pages of this website, intelligently articulated their views. Other weren’t quite so measured. Meirionnydd Nant Conwy MP Elfyn Llwyd drew on nationalistic rhetoric to express his view. “That bonkers man from London,” is how he described me.

The debate morphed into a “campaign” once it was reported by the national media (covered by the BBC radio and online, the Guardian’s architecture pages, the Sunday Times, the Western Mail and Golwg). For the first time in more than a decade, a proper debate was taking place about the future of the building that has dominated the skyline of north Wales and so many people’s lives. Encouraged by this article, many people contacted Wales’ historic buildings authority Cadw to ask for Trawsfynydd to be considered for listing. And, after a faltering start, Cadw launched an enquiry to determine whether the building warranted listed status.

Cadw unearthed some interesting nuggets about Trawsfynydd. Spence’s original design philosophy for Trawsfynydd was that the reactor blocks should “grow straight out of the landscape”. His choice of pre-cast concrete with local aggregate as the cladding material was an attempt to reinforce a connection to the landscape of the National Park. This was in addition to Sir Basil Spence’s guiding question when designing the structure: “Will it make a beautiful ruin?”

Cadw’s decision was handed to Wales Heritage Minister Alun Ffred Jones and late last week he announced that the building would not be listed. According to the detail of the decision, which has been passed to this author, there are two main reasons for the rejection. Firstly, that some of the building’s industrial merit has already been lost, noticeably the turbine hall that was ripped out during first stages of decommissioning. This had, apparently, irreparably compromised the building, albeit its interior.

The second reason is more difficult to fathom; that in the opinion of Cadw the building is too big. Or to use its exact words: “The brutalistic aesthetic that informed [the two towers] has been put to more amenable use elsewhere in Wales on a smaller scale.” This argument seems a little odd. It’s like saying that St Paul’s Cathedral should not be listed because there is already a much smaller scale example of Sir Christopher Wren’s work – a chapel in Cambridge, for example.

But Cadw, which has in the past been criticised for ignoring Wales’ post-war architecture and heritage, has for the first time recognised Trawsfynydd’s importance. “There is a need to acknowledge the impact of the nuclear industry and of Trawsfynydd in particular on the landscape, economy and culture of the area in the later twentieth century,” it says. To this end it has contacted the Museums Archives and Libraries division of the Wales Welsh Assembly Government, Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments in Wales and site owner Magnox North, to devise a “heritage strategy” for. Trawsfynydd.

Exactly what this so-called strategy will mean is unclear. Cadw says that it will include “a programme… to document the way in which the power station has shaped the lives and experience of those living in the area… to create a lasting cultural legacy at Trawsfynydd”. WalesHome.org will be asking for more details to establish whether this is a serious attempt to recognise Trawsfynydd or empty words to sweeten the pill of listing rejection.

But what of the two towers at Trawsfynydd; how are they saved from demolition?

Overall responsibility for the site rests with a quango called the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which is responsible for the UK’s nuclear facilities. It was the NDA that was to provide the £140m to site owner Magnox North to carry out the demolition works.

However, the severe constraints on public spending – caused in large measure by the public bailout of the banks that were overexposed to debt financing in the US – has forced the NDA to shelve the project at Trawsfynydd.

Readers will be hard pressed to find any official announcement. Perhaps the NDA and Magnox North are a little embarrassed by this. But buried deep within the NDA’s latest business plan is a bullet point that confirms that the project will be reviewed as the NDA’s focus will be on dealing with radioactive waste rather than attempting to make Trawsfynydd look pretty. Tony Fountain, Chief Executive of the NDA, says: “Whilst there is so much that we would like to get on with, the implication of operating in a funding constrained environment means that we just can’t do everything.” It is understood that the demolition plans could be postponed for up to 10 years.

After what has been a healthy and vigorous debate about modern architecture and our industrial heritage – in contrast to the original, ill-attended public meetings to determine Trawsfynydd’s future – Sir Basil Spence’s Welsh masterpiece is ultimately saved by the mistakes of bankers. But in the case of Trawsfynydd the ends more than justify the means.