BATH HERITAGE WATCHDOG

Special Item

A newspaper's objective in reporting news is to print that which it hopes will encourage the public to buy the newspaper.  It does not have the space to quote everything that is said to a reporter, there is no indication of how well informed "a council spokesman" could be about private correspondence, and the final emphasis depends on the editing.  So we are taking the opportunity to describe things from our perspective.

The head of planning wrote and asked Watchdog to discontinue its current practice of naming his staff on this website.  (It was not "Council chiefs", and it wasn't a warning.)  We rang to get a clearer understanding of the problem, and after a good natured conversation with him, it was agreed that we would.  There was no suggestion that Watchdog should not analyse the work of the Planning Department and report our opinions, and we will continue to do that.  But when we reflected on the situation we recognised that it would be wrong to attribute to a specific person the work that might have involved others who were unnamed.  This update therefore removes all staff names and no more will be shown in future, though we will continue to identify elected councillors.

While doing the update, we took the opportunity to summarise what we were removing.  The statistics are interesting:

Simple identification (eg saying who to address correspondence to):   21%
Criticism for inaccurate or incomplete work:                          28%
Praise for thorough and accurate work:                                51%

If we discount the simple identification ones, the figures show that roughly two thirds of the other references on the website were appreciative.  But that fact wouldn't sell newspapers!

And on the World Heritage issue, what happens to Bath is in the hands of UNESCO.  It is pointless trying to predict the outcome, but we would be blinkered if we didn't recognise the risk.  We have been informed that UNESCO is currently taking a hard line on World Heritage, and you can read here what happened to Dresden, and why it was put on the "In Danger" list.  Note the approach being taken by UNESCO, with a finite limit to how long Dresden could remain on the "In Danger" list, and an automatic deletion from the World Heritage list if the problem is not resolved by then.  If Bath is put on the "In Danger" list, it is likely that the same approach would be taken.

Our apologies that the time taken to do all these changes has prevented the inclusion of all the new planning applications which we would have liked to bring to your attention.

Latest

After the council changed the method of presenting on-line documents we are finding it much less convenient.  Instead of grouping documents by type (Background papers, drawings, correspondence etc) and then in date order, they are now grouped by type and then in Description order.  This makes our job of tracking the latest updates twice as difficult, so we think it was a change for the worse.  Was that the intention, we wonder?  If you are also finding it inconvenient please let me know - my e-mail details are on the Contacts page.

Malthouse, Lower Bristol Road - Last updated 6th July 2008.

We have kept an eye on the " cow shed" that appeared in the curtilage of this listed building.

It looks as though it is almost finished now, but it looks nothing like the drawings that were given planning permission. We have updated the pictures on the Camden Mill page.

George Yeo Site - Last updated 6th July 2008.

The planning application 08/01554/LBA for works to allow Number 8 Charlton Buildings (the former Morris Minor Centre) to be used as a site office for the student accommodation development was given consent on 26th June 2008, subject to conditions which seem very sensible.

Previously, the planning application 07/03105/FUL for student accommodation on the former George Yeo site near Charlton Buildings on the Lower Bristol Road was discussed and approved at the 11th June DCC. 

You can read the details about both on the Charlton Buildings page.

Friends Meeting House - Last updated 6th July 2008.

The previous applications for this location were withdrawn.  A new Listed Building and New Construction application pair have been raised.  See the Friends page for more information.

Phillips Auction House, Old King St - Last updated 6th July 2008.

The architects refused to discuss with us the possibility of saving the text from the Magna Carta currently adorning the side wall.  Since then, one of the Mayor's Guides has e-mailed us to express concern.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Newark Works - Last updated 29th June 2008.

GOSW have now issued an "Article 14 Directive" for the full application and a "Holding Letter" for the listed building application.  See the Newark Works page for what this means, and for copies of the council's submission documents.

We have also been given permission by Private Eye to reproduce their criticism of the planning decision in full.  If you haven't read it before, take a look now.

Tesco, Upper Bristol Road - Last updated 29th June 2008.

We have had some enquiries following the Chronicle news item about Tesco opening on the Courthouse Garage site asking what planning permission was granted.  Planning application 06/00047/FUL gave permission for a "convenience store" which in planning terms could be any company's store, and Tesco want it to be theirs.  Planning permission was granted in June 2007, and there is nothing the public can do to change anything now.

Oldfield Park Methodist Church - Last updated 29th June 2008.

Planning permission was granted on 26th June. See the News Summary page for more information.

St Marks Road - Last updated 29th June 2008.

The case officer refused planning permission, but just four days after another document became available, and with little attention paid to the details provided in the public comments.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Prior Park Road - Last updated 29th June 2008.

There are a new pair of planning applications for a listed building in Prior Park Road.  See the News Summary page for more information.

New applications

There has been a lot of new applications recently, which has given us insufficient time to study them and make recommendations.  If you want to have a look at them ahead of us, they are on the Applications page marked with

We are getting increasingly concerned about the planning office attempting to redesign the plans put forward. One (but by no means the only) example is the application in Bathwick Street, where the applicant has opted for a modern concept (a pair of double fronted semi-detatched houses from the street scene, but with four flats behind that facade), but retaining the classical style elements of symmetry and "golden ratio" proportions so that it shares the group value of the street without attempting to copy any particular building.  Yet the Urban design comments include a preference for "A contemporary building design that considers the context in terms of scale, height, proportions, roofscape and materials would be more appropriate."  Elsewhere in that document is the accusation that the design is not a sufficiently Georgian pastiche, which clearly overlooks the fact that it wasn't meant to be Georgian, but nevertheless be designed along Palladian lines.  So we reproduce below an extract from the Government guidelines in PPS1:
Local planning authorities should not attempt to impose architectural styles or particular tastes and they should not stifle innovation, originality or initiative through unsubstantiated requirements to conform to certain development forms or styles. It is, however, proper to seek to promote or reinforce local distinctiveness particularly where this is supported by clear plan policies or supplementary planning documents on design.
Planning Office, take note: the local distinctiveness is Classical proportions, not Georgian style!.

Recent Headlines

(Application links here go to other pages where more information is given, plus a link to the planning documents. Entries are listed with the most recent updates at the top.)

 

Westleigh Farm - Last updated 22nd June 2008.

Planning application 08/01012/FUL sought to build a new complex dwelling in place of a small dwelling and sheds housing a vehicle repair and scrap yard business (Previous 04/03608/FUL).  Westleigh Farm is on the side of Little Solsbury Hill.  The planning application went to the Development Control Committee on 11th June, where it was refused.  See the News Summary page for information.

Holburne - Last updated 15th June 2008.

Our alternative design for an extension to the Holburne went before the Development Control Committee on 11th June and they liked it. See the Holburne page for more information.

Sustainability - Last updated 15th June 2008.

Whilst exploring the complex network of links spreading from the Congress of New Urbanism movement in America's website, we found a speech given by the Prince of Wales at the National Building Museum in Washington DC. In it there is a lot of good old fashioned common sense about the need for sustainability in the built environment, and designing for the benefit of the occupants.  It is quite a long speech, but it is well worth persevering with it.  You can read it here.  It rather puts the mistakes of the Western Riverside design into perspective.

Bath Press - Last updated 15th June 2008.

There was some differences of opinion about the value of preserving the Bath Press frontage in the Chronicle's on-line discussions.  We have now been sent a graphical image of what it would look like cleaned up. See it on the Bath Press page.

Victoria Park - Last updated 8th June 2008.

Watchdog's Bouquets section seems to have had a wide audience.  BBC Bristol got in touch and asked if they could use some of our pictures for a new item.  We agreed, and you can see the result on the BBC website.

St George's Place - Last updated 8th June 2008.

A revised noise assessment now been submitted.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Old Orchard - Last updated 8th June 2008.

Old Orchard is off Walcot Street, and there are new documents lodged on this planning application to replace workshops with a gym and health centre.  They do not remove our objections. See the News Summary page for more information.

Hampton Row - Last updated 1st June 2008.

On 29th May, we met the developer and had a very useful exchange of views.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Shop Fronts and Signs - Shaftesbury Road - Last updated 1st June 2008.

Two applications covering illuminated signs in conjunction with a change of use of a shop in Shaftsbury Road to a tanning salon have been lodged.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Bathwick Street - Last updated 1st June 2008.

Revised drawings have been lodged which could possibly invalidate comments made before 2nd May, and if that includes you, you should comment again.  See the News Summary page for information.

Canal Bridge - Last updated 1st June 2008.

The documents for  planning application 08/01598/CA for the demolition of Numbers 1-4 Canal Bridge, Pulteney Road are now on-line. They are to be read in conjunction with a previously rejected application which is now subject to appeal.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Southgate - Last updated 1st June 2008.

We have also been taking pictures of the Southgate stone cladding.  See the Southgate page for information.

New Bond Street - Last updated 25th May 2008.

Four planning applications have been lodged for Number 20 New Bond Street.  See the News Summary page for information.

Carr's Mill (aka Twerton Mill) - Last updated 25th May 2008.

The development application 08/00485/FUL was refused on 16th May 2008, quite correctly in our view.  Subsequently application 08/00490/CA which seeks approval to demolish the existing buildings was withdrawn.  There is an update on the Carr's Mill page.

Thornbank Place - Last updated 24th May 2008.

Planning application 08/01165/FUL which was to build a couple of infill houses in a highly visible location has been refused. We think that was a sound decision.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Beau Nash - Last updated 24th May 2008.

We have received a reassuring e-mail confirming that the balcony above the front entrance is to stay.  See the News Summary page for information.

Western Riverside - Last updated 18th May 2008.

The planning application 07/00449/FUL for the access lane behind Victoria Buildings has been approved.  And we have found yet more news in the press that might affect the Western Riverside. See the Western Riverside page for more information.

The Oval - Last updated 18th May 2008.

This application 08/01155/FUL is for the erection of pair of semi-detached dwellings on land adjacent to 133 The Oval. To do so, an existing garage is to be demolished, and it is almost impossible to park in The Oval already.  We think this is an over-development of the site and inadequate arrangements for parking.

Bloomfield Avenue 

This application 08/01302/FUL is to relocate a stone gatepost in front of Number 66 and pave the lawn to provide off-street parking.  We will look closer at this one, but our first impressions are that we think this is an ill-conceived design which will set an unwelcome precedent for the rest of the street.

Wellsway - Last updated 4th May 2008.

New drawings have been supplied, so if you have already objected, you must do so again. See the News Summary page for more information.

Monmouth Street - Last updated 4th May 2008.

There is an application for a truly awful set of advertising signs on a listed building in Monmouth Street. See the News Summary page for more information.

Moravian Church - Last updated 4th May 2008.

There is a new application replacing the earlier one that was withdrawn, that still fails to appreciate the character of the Coronation Avenue site. See the News Summary page for more information.

Belvoir Castle - Last updated 19th April 2008.

The planning applications (both listed building and new development) have been withdrawn. See the News Summary page for more information.  However, we are told that the applicants regard opposition to applications to close pubs as normal.  But they say that in most cases, once the pub is saved its trade tails off, and it becomes obvious a few months later that it is not a viable business.  They will be watching the level of trade of the Belvoir Castle now that they have withdrawn their planning applications, and if the level of trade drops below what they think is viable, they will reapply, and that second application will not be withdrawn, no matter what level of protest there is.  So the message is: Use it or lose it.  So here is a shameless advert: The landlord is looking for Summer League Skittles teams who want to use his alley.

We have discovered that the question of whether Bath should be put on the UNESCO World Heritage In Danger list has been placed on the agenda of UNESCO's World Heritage Committee when it meets in July.  UNESCO will expect DCMS to explain, on behalf of the UK Government, how the failure of stewardship of Bath as a World Heritage site occurred, and what DCMS intend to do to restore the Outstanding Universal Value of Bath.  We plan to provide a background brief covering the legal minefield surrounding approval, which we outlined on the Western Riverside page.

We have had our attention drawn to the Congress of New Urbanism movement in America.  They are at the forefront of a growing backlash against "modern" glass and steel buildings scarring old-style urban centres in America, and they campaign to preserve reusable heritage and have new developments that blend into their neighbourhoods.  We are told that some members of the Congress are frequent visitors to London and Rome and they are starting to take an interest in what is happening in Bath.  We will be trying to open a dialogue with them when the opportunity arises.

Other Snippets

Holloway
We have found planning application 08/01024/FUL where it looks as though the council is preparing to sell of a piece of land in Holloway, specifically introduced into the Holloway streetscape to provide some soft landscaping amongst the tall buildings and placed there for the enjoyment of all, just so one resident (at Number 21) who already has a garage can park a car on it.  We note that the Highways Officer dismissed the concerns of a number of parents who walk past this location daily with their children on the way to the Nursery in St Marks Church, but luckily it no longer matters who is right.  The planning application was refused on the 12 June by the case officer on the grounds of the impact on the Conservation Area, and we think that it was a sound decision.

[11/5/08]planning application 08/01437/FUL has just been lodged, for the conversion of 9 Holloway into flats. A previous application, 07/02863/FUL, was rejected. We think the basement studio flat is awful, with hardly any natural light and a kitchen right outside the toilet.  The case officer clearly thought along the same lines, and his decision dated 16 June 2008 on the grounds of lack of internal and external amenities is on the council's on-line system, but not his report which would explain how he arrived at that.

Charlotte Street [24/5/08]
Here is one that is nice to see. A planning application for Number 7, 08/01528/LBA to replace the relatively modern sash windows in a town house with the six over six style that the building would have had originally.  We support this.

For another property, Number 15, an application 08/01262/LBA seeks to improve the residents amenity space by waterproofing one of the vaults and creating a roof garden above the cellars at the rear, with an access staircase from the Lower Ground Floor.  At first sight this looks sympathetic to the building and provided we don't see any snags when we examine the drawings in detail, we will support it.

Lambridge Mews  [1/6/08]
In spite of the design being unsuitable for its location planning permission was granted on 30 May 2008.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Southgate  
Some of you may have noticed the article in the April 10th issue of the Chronicle, which had an illustration of the new transport interchange.  It was misleading.  The bus station and "Busometer" were shown undersized.  We have asked our graphics artist if it is possible to produce a more realistic image.  
[19/4/08]  Our artist prefers to start with a photograph and superimpose any new structures on it. And that is how we discovered that the picture is a fake.  It is not possible to put a camera in any position where the railway station is in the photograph, and where the buildings in the distance are in the positions shown. So the picture is a figment of somebody's imagination, and they imagined the layout wrongly. 

Farmers Market  [19/4/08]
The last definite news was simply that the fate of the Farmers Market was deferred until after Christmas, but the lack of any information since is not good news.  Our enquiries last Saturday revealed that the stallholders we spoke to had no updates, but they also confirmed that the takeover bid by Envolve had not been withdrawn either.  There is a limit to how long such an impasse can carry on, so we are making an offer that if supporters of the market decide to mount another demonstration, we will publicise it on this website if they contact us and request it.

Bailbrook House [4/4/08]
Bailbrook House is Grade II* listed and there were two planning applications lodged to demolish the 1970s extensions and build a new extension to extend the hotel accommodation.  A third application has now been added, covering the work affecting the house itself.  See the Bailbrook page for more information.

Lyncombe Vale  [23/2/08]
We have now considered the planning application 08/00321/FUL for Skara Brae. It is inappropriate for the location, and just because it is to be built next to a similarly inappropriate existing building doesn't make it acceptable.  We will object.

The Hollow   [11/5/08]
Planning application 08/00518/FUL for 30 "social housing" properties near Bath City Farm. At first sight, the principle of additional housing seems a good idea, but this is designated a visually important hillside and the design does not look compatible with that status, and we objected.  On 30 April 2008, at the applicants request, this application was withdrawn.  We will keep watchful for any re-submission.

Camden Mill  [6/7/08]
We have been out with a camera as the work progresses.  See the Camden Mill page for more information.

Shop Fronts and Signs
We have been taking a closer look at this issue.  There seems to be a complete lack of consistency when the council consider such applications.
Ladbrokes in Westgate Street ([16/3/08] now approved) and the latest application for Westgate Buildings are examples of how to get it right.
[16/3/08] Jolly's application for unacceptable shop signs has been refused.
[10/5/08] New signs for the Grade II* listed Huntsman in Terrace Walk are also inappropriate, and the advertising application might possibly have been approved in error.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Somerset Place
[16/3/08] Some of the planning applications have now been given consent.  We are happy with this.

[28/1/08]  Planning permission 07/03555/LBA for the demolition of the wall acting as a buttress to Number 6 Charlton Buildings was granted on 2nd January.  This was in spite of the application not complying with planning law.  More information is on the Charlton Buildings page.
It looks as though applications for demolitions are being granted as soon as the public consultation period expires (as in the case of the Widcombe toilet block too) so if you want to comment on such applications, you must get them in quickly.

We have decided to offer a definition that those who take an interest in planning applications might find helpful.  Whenever a planning application refers to a "Landmark Building" you can assume that it is too tall, and deliberately ugly so that it sticks out like a sore thumb.  We recommend that as a matter of principle you lodge an objection to every landmark building in every planning application you find one in.

The tendency to pass "desirable" planning applications regardless of planning policy and guidelines appears to be nationwide, so a press release has been sent to the national dailies bringing attention to the issues and the new Downing Street petition. You can read a copy of the press release here. The Chronicle has printed it.

Now that the Better Bath Forum has been established, and that group has shown that it can devote more attention to the local strategy than we have been able to, we have discontinued our Strategy section.