Looking Beyond the Paint: Conservation Case Study of Whighams Inn, Sanquhar

Why Understanding Historic Masonry Should Always Come Before Cleaning

History deserves some care, not some coverings.

Sometimes it is hidden beneath decades of repairs, protective coatings and successive layers of paint. Before any conservation work can begin, those layers need to be understood—not simply removed.

Stone Clean Scotland was recently commissioned by a local enterprise company to undertake a specialist survey of the external façade of Whighams Inn, a prominent traditional sandstone building within the historic town of Sanquhar. The objective was not simply to recommend a method of paint removal, but to determine the safest and most conservation-conscious approach to the future treatment of the building's exterior. At the time of our inspection, sections of paint had already been removed using dry ice blasting, while substantial areas of coating remained intact.

What initially appeared to be a straightforward paint removal project soon revealed itself to be a far more complex investigation into historic repairs, incompatible materials, moisture movement and the long-term conservation of traditional sandstone masonry.

The building has accumulated a patch work of coverings. How best to move forward and create a good finish?

Conservation Begins with Questions, Not Equipment

One of the most common misconceptions surrounding stone cleaning is that selecting the right cleaning method is the first step in any project.

In reality, the first step should always be understanding the building itself.

Historic masonry evolves over centuries. Original construction materials become concealed beneath later repairs, decorative finishes and maintenance campaigns. Every intervention changes the way a building behaves, particularly in relation to moisture movement and weathering.

Cleaning a historic façade without understanding those changes can unintentionally accelerate decay rather than preserve the structure.

For this reason, our inspection focused on identifying:

• The original masonry substrate.

• Previous repair materials.

• Existing coating systems.

• Evidence of structural or environmental deterioration.

• Potential hazardous materials.

• The implications of any future cleaning programme.

Only once these questions had been answered could an appropriate conservation strategy begin to emerge.

Initial Site Observations

During our survey it became immediately apparent that the remaining paint had not been applied directly to the sandstone.

Evidence of cement render.

Instead, much of the façade had previously received a cementitious wash or thin render, which had subsequently been coated with numerous decorative paint

systems over many decades.

This distinction fundamentally altered the nature of the project.

Removing paint from natural sandstone presents one set of conservation challenges.

Removing paint from a dense cement-based coating bonded to sandstone presents another entirely.

Across the building we observed significant variation in the condition of this cementitious layer. Some areas remained firmly adhered to the underlying masonry, while others had begun to detach as large sheets, exposing the original sandstone beneath.

These failures provided valuable evidence regarding both the condition of the building and the likely causes of deterioration.

Revealing the Original Sandstone

Perhaps the most significant discovery during our inspection was the condition of the original sandstone revealed beneath failed areas of cement coating.

The exposed masonry displayed a warm blonde sandstone typical of many traditional buildings throughout south-west Scotland.

However, it also showed clear evidence that the stone surface had become heavily weathered.

The original protective face of the stone had been lost in many areas, leaving an open, granular surface with pronounced pitting. Rather than revealing a pristine historic façade, complete removal of the cement coating would expose sandstone already in a compromised condition.

Where the cement had failed. Damaged sandstone was apparent. Likely due to the moisture retention of the cement render.

This finding was extremely important.

It meant that the client's long-term objective needed to be carefully defined before any further cleaning could be recommended.

If the intention was simply to remove remaining paint while retaining the existing cementitious coating, one strategy would be appropriate.

If the ambition was to expose the original sandstone across the entire façade, then the cement coating itself would also require removal. That approach would inevitably lead to a substantial programme of conservation repairs to stabilise and restore the underlying masonry.

Understanding this distinction prevented the project from progressing down a potentially costly and inappropriate route.

Understanding Incompatible Repairs

Buildings of this age were originally designed to breathe.

Traditional sandstone and lime mortar work together as a permeable construction system, allowing moisture to enter and evaporate naturally.

Modern cement-based materials behave very differently.

Dense cement coatings restrict moisture movement. Instead of allowing water to evaporate freely through the wall, they can trap moisture within the masonry. As seasonal wetting and drying cycles continue, trapped moisture increases internal stresses within the stone and often contributes to accelerated surface deterioration.

The pattern of failure observed across the Whighams Inn façade was entirely consistent with this behaviour.

Areas where the cement coating had detached revealed underlying sandstone affected by prolonged moisture retention and surface erosion.

While no single defect can ever be attributed to one cause alone, the relationship between dense cement coatings and moisture-related deterioration is well recognised within building conservation.

Multiple Generations of Paint

Close inspection of the remaining coating system identified numerous historic paint campaigns.

Different colours and coating types could be seen within the exposed cross-sections, illustrating how the building had been repeatedly redecorated throughout its life.

This layering provides an important reminder that historic buildings rarely consist of one simple material.

Instead, they represent decades of maintenance decisions.

Each additional coating changes the behaviour of the surface beneath.

Each repair influences the next.

From a conservation perspective, understanding these layers is often as important as removing them.

Lead Testing and Hazard Identification

As part of our investigation, lead testing was undertaken across representative areas of the existing coating system.

A basic lead test confirmed the presence of lead. Further laboratory testing will be necessary to determine exact concentration.

Testing indicated the presence of lead associated with the painted cementitious surface. However, field testing alone could not determine precisely which individual layer contained the lead or establish its concentration. Laboratory analysis would be required before definitive conclusions could be drawn.

Although further laboratory testing was recommended, these findings immediately influenced the conservation strategy.

Potential lead-containing coatings require careful consideration with regard to:

• Worker safety.

• Dust suppression.

• Waste classification.

• Environmental protection.

• Selection of cleaning methodology.

Ignoring these considerations at the quotation stage could expose contractors and clients to unnecessary risks and significant additional costs.

Mortar Repairs and Previous Alterations

The survey also identified a combination of traditional lime pointing alongside later cement skim repairs applied over both masonry and joints.

Many of these interventions were beginning to fail simultaneously, resulting in widespread localised deterioration across the façade.

Importantly, these failures should not be viewed in isolation.

Stone, mortar, coatings and moisture operate together as one system.

Replacing or removing one component without understanding the others frequently creates new conservation problems rather than resolving existing ones.

This holistic approach forms the basis of responsible heritage conservation.

Why We Did Not Recommend Immediate Paint Removal

Clients are sometimes surprised when the first recommendation from a specialist contractor is not to begin cleaning.

In reality, delaying intervention can often be the most responsible professional advice.

Our survey concluded that before further paint removal proceeded, the desired finished appearance of the building needed to be established.

If the cementitious coating was to remain, only the remaining paint would require treatment.

If restoration of the original sandstone was considered the preferred conservation outcome, then removal of the cement layer would become an integral part of the project.

Only after this strategic decision had been made could an appropriate cleaning methodology be selected.

This approach ensures that conservation objectives determine the cleaning process—not the other way around.

A near by building after DIY paint & render removal. However the sandstone is very pitted & compromised. Not a preferred result.

A Conservation-Led Recommendation

Based on the evidence gathered during our inspection, we recommended that the project should first establish the desired long-term appearance and performance of the building before committing to further paint removal.

Should restoration of the sandstone become the preferred option, we anticipate that the project would likely include:

• Careful removal of incompatible cementitious coatings.

• Comprehensive mortar repairs using traditional lime-based materials.

• Localised stone repairs where erosion has compromised the original masonry.

• Specialist Lithomex repairs where architectural details require reinstatement.

• Involvement of experienced conservation-accredited stonemasons for the principal masonry repair works.

Importantly, cleaning would represent only one stage of a broader conservation programme aimed at protecting the building for future generations.

The Importance of Specialist Surveys

Projects such as Whighams Inn demonstrate why conservation surveys are often the most valuable investment a client can make before any physical work begins.

Without careful investigation, the project could easily have proceeded as a straightforward paint removal exercise.

Instead, the survey identified incompatible repair materials, evidence of moisture-related deterioration, potential lead-containing coatings, widespread mortar defects and the need for a carefully considered conservation strategy.

By understanding the building first, clients gain the information needed to make informed decisions, avoid unnecessary expenditure and reduce the risk of irreversible damage to historic fabric.

Stone Clean Scotland's Conservation Philosophy

Historic buildings deserve more than an off-the-shelf cleaning solution.

Every façade carries evidence of its construction, repair history and environmental exposure. Our role is not simply to remove coatings, but to understand the materials beneath them and recommend interventions that respect the building's significance.

Whether we are advising on graffiti removal, paint removal, DOFF steam cleaning or broader conservation projects, our approach remains consistent.

We investigate before we intervene.

We identify risks before recommending methods.

And we ensure that every cleaning decision contributes to the long-term preservation of Scotland's architectural heritage rather than its gradual loss.

For clients responsible for listed buildings, traditional sandstone structures and historically significant properties, this philosophy provides confidence that every recommendation is guided not by convenience, but by conservation.