The main aim of HERE was to give a new, sustainable future to valuable historic buildings that have lost their traditional use in modern European society.

The partners wanted to improve the marketing of the regeneration of historic buildings and the ability of organisations and communities to reuse and regenerate historic buildings. All partners of HERE aimed to learn more about the approaches of different organisations to heritage building regeneration, share their own learning on heritage building regeneration and build a sustainable business model to enable long term stability for the activity in the heritage building.

To achieve these aims, the objectives were to build up expertise within the different stages of a regeneration project and learn from each other’s experience – through cross site visits, regeneration working groups and sharing of learning and problem solving.

An objective was to achieve joint implementation of best practices (through the development of business plans and construction investment). Also building up resources with which to include in a standard transferable methodology that would cover the different stages of a regeneration project, and place it in an accessible medium (e.g. awareness raising events, online, translated hard copies etc), and help begin the process of sharing best-practice between heritage organizations in the 2 Seas area, specifically on finding new uses.

Finally, deliver pilot projects that will improve accessibility, developing and diversifying tourism products and promote heritage as an economic driver.

Activity 1 – in activity 1 the partners examined the expertise each partner brings to the overall implementation of the project. It explores the specific problems and obstacles the partners face in their own sectors during the regeneration processes of the different subprojects (cf. Activity 2).

Each partner input their specialisation of the stages of regeneration, and shared and discussed learning at established international working groups, which were successfully held at each of the partner sites throughout the project. The outcome of the project is based on results from actual project sites making it practice-oriented proving the project's value in the heritage field.

The framework developed provided an overview of the current approach of regeneration projects based on partner’s expertise, such as a report of accessibility, and the development of a business plan toolkit for volunteer and community led heritage projects.

Activity 2 - the partners drew up a business plan and/or implemented a phase or aspect of regeneration at each site

St Lawrence, Norwich: an options appraisal was carried out to find a suitable reuse for the site, followed by a concept development of the preferred option (The Common Room).

St Nicholas, King’s Lynn: the implementation of the BPT by the friends group to form a draft of their business plan for the site.

Ursuline Institute, OLV-Waver: an options appraisal was carried out as part of the masterplan for the domain. For the church an energy audit was carried out as part of the sustainability aspect of the masterplan.

Fort, Duffel: the reuse of the fort as a museum, café and nature hub was put against accessibility measures for visitors.

SMAQ, Ipswich: with PP3 successfully deliver the first phase of regenerating the church into a wellbeing heritage centre, by beginning the capital works to restore and conserve the historic roof. A report on accessibility was also carried out.

An accessibility study as part of the methodology. The accessibility study focuses on how accessibility and heritage can be united and a win-win can be achieved. Starting from a theoretical background the problems the five sites have to deal with are analysed, with a focus on solutions for fort Duffel.

A sustainability study as part of the methodology. Here also there is a theoretical part on sustainability and heritage and differences between the two countries (BE/UK). Starting from that solutions are analysed for the five sites with focus on the Ursuline Institute.

A developed and tested Business Plan Toolkit as part of the methodology. The toolkit is developed together with external partners and can be used freely. Promotion and use of the toolkit by volunteer and community led heritage projects as is proven with the St-Nicholas church as best practice.

A full options appraisal report and a piloted concept development of the preferred options ‘The Common Room’. This option has been positively taken up by the local community, has increased the use of the church by them and has begun the next stages of the regeneration project .

An options appraisal as part of a large masterplan for the pilot project Ursuline Institute. The masterplan puts all juridical, practical, … information on the site together and summarises all the desires of the partners on site. Possible evolutions for the future of the domain are presented.

Successful first phase of capital works on St Mary at the Quay to regenerate it into a wellbeing heritage centre.

Successful investment works related to accessibility in the end phase of the restoration works at fort Duffel, that is open to the public since 2014.

The target group are the administrators of historic buildings and domains (local and regional governments, non-profit organisations, umbrella associations, experts, etc.)

The accessibility and sustainability study as part of the methodology are mostly aimed to reach administrators of historic buildings that deal with similar problems as the cases of HERE.

The business plan toolkit for heritage sites was very successful in engaging a range of beneficiaries from the heritage sector in England. This was through the document itself and also through the events we delivered to promote it. This will be a long standing benefit of the project and it should assist with long term sustainability for heritage sites. The business tool kit has already been useful to other people associated with the project in Suffolk – for example a community in Felixstowe, Suffolk renovating a Martello Tower.

The options appraisal for the Common Room was beneficial to PP2 and its partner organisations, as it provide an evidence base to carry the project forward to the next stages. It will also be beneficial to the users of the Common Room, being local residence and the community, charities, community enterprises and local organisations. The method of developing the options appraisal should be beneficial to the wider programme territory as it gives a guide as to how options appraisals can be developed for other sites.

The final beneficiaries of the results of HERE are tourists, residents, the community (in cultural, social and economic terms) and organisations using the sites concerned generally. For them, cases like the reuse of fort Duffel that went from privately owned ruin to publicly open heritage asset in no more than 4 years -partially thanks to the 2 seas programme- is a huge benefit.

Only through close cooperation throughout the project and by gathering and enhancing the existing expertise, an ideal approach can be defined, which will serve as a basis for advise towards heritage management and heritage members within the programme area for a long period.

The outcomes of our project are more longer term, but we expect that the outputs we have delivered will result in increased well-being (emotional and physical) for people using and enjoying our buildings and the development of projects and services that benefit a number of key outcomes for people e.g. learning and employment.

The examined aspects of regeneration of heritage buildings tap into specific subjects in modern society, like the reuse of buildings and materials in contrast to consumption behaviour and waste problems. Via the HERE project we want to show people the potential of reuse and beauty of heritage in relation to everyday building development. This also relates to the sustainable aspect of reuse of heritage. Sustainability is not only energy efficiency on which heritage often scores low, but also means use of local materials and labour, on which heritage often scores quite high.

The HERE project and case studies are inspiring – they will inspire others to think differently about their buildings and bring more heritage back into the life for local communities. Doing so the HERE project envisages to change policy on all levels to invest in the past to create a more beautiful future.

Understanding of common themes, challenges and solutions has emerged from the project. This would not have been the case if we had not been a part of the project. The opportunity to go and find out about other projects and how they are approaching similar sites provided an invaluable opportunity for reflection and discussion.
Due to the fact that other projects in the same region are bound to the same legislation, mindset, traditions and politics, it can be refreshing to learn how partners across the border have their own way of dealing with problems and an own way towards solutions. Thanks to that fresh look on things you get from cross border partners, you are able to shed a new light on a project that might be stuck for a long time. Only by really letting the partner get acquainted with the project (not by info on a website or folder) this cross border learning takes place, but you have to invest time in the projects of other partners and make time to do the same across the border.

We have developed partnerships with the Future for Religious Heritage (FRH), a pan European organisation that has helped to distribute the learning from the project across Europe. This network is a very thankful way to learn about similar projects around entire Europe and also present your own results.

PP1 is active in several EU funded projects and doing so, we learn from those projects internally. For instance PP1 has learned on historic forts thanks to the 2 seas project Walls and Gardens, which was useful for the case of Fort Duffel. Also the Maxigreen project with partners in the region was a good way to learn about other items that sometimes have link with your own project like HERE.

Many of the challenges facing heritage sites are similar across the programme region and Europe. Projects like Heritage Recycled should be more common-place, to help develop partnerships and develop practice to tackle these challenges.

Starting from a theoretical background with work on different methodology items, it’s essential for such projects to invest time into the site visits and cross border learning at other partners. It’s by digging deep and not superficially into the problems of the case studies that the best solutions are found. Thanks to the case studies as results not only the professional target group is addressed, but also the public has more visual return from their contribution to Europe.

The results of the project will be stored, promoted and added up via the HERE website.The business plan toolkit provides a guide for lots of community groups on how to develop business plans for heritage sites. Some of the methodology e.g. the accessibility report will provide a guide to approaching the issue of accessibility in heritage sites.

The project sites, who have had various stages on the regeneration process funded through the programme will continue develop. SMAQ will be further restored and reused as heritage wellbeing centre by PP3. When SMAQ finished the capital phase, we can monitor and evaluate how the reuse will benefit the community and add to the body of evidence in favour of restoring and regenerating historic buildings. PP1 as owner of fort Duffel will continue its reuse now it’s open to the public. The Ursuline Institute will continue work on its new legal structure and long term future. The options appraisal will provide a long term way forward for St Laurence’s.

We continue to inform each other of our work and look for opportunities to work together. The project has provided the basis of a long term partnership between PP1 and PP2. Thanks to the HERE project both partners meet each other at mutual conferences like that of FRH every year. There is now a solid partnership and we have good contacts to turn to when we have questions on the HERE topics.
There have also been valuable connections made with other European partners, that will set the basis of applying together in future Interreg and possible other programmes, so expand and develop the work of the HERE project.

We are hoping to develop a future follow on bid, so that we can develop future regeneration stages at some of the project sites, and continue to add knowledge and learning to the methodology. PP1 and PP2 have the intention to write a follow-up project with EU partners, bringing together heritage care and the new priorities set out by the EU, like sustainability.

Regeneration is the core business of both partners PP1 and PP2 and will always be a part of their work. Both partners will always be needing external funding from several institutions to realise the turn-over of a heritage site. Once the turn-over has been done projects are more self-reliant (like SMAQ and fort Duffel) and won’t need the same amount of subsidies as before. Those last two cases won’t be a part of a follow-up project but other cases like St-Laurence or the Ursuline Institute are still in need of external funding.