BATH HERITAGE WATCHDOG

Reminder

Our next meeting is on 5th January 2009, and we would like to take this opportunity to wish all our readers

A Happy New Year

Latest

Bailbrook House - Last updated 4th January 2009.

The remainder of the Bailbrook House planning applications been approved.  See the Bailbrook page for more information.

Oakwood, Bathwick Hill - Last updated 28th December 2008.

On 1st October, the Listed Building application was refused, but no decision has been made on the full application yet.  However, in the gap between October and now, the gardens have been listed Grade II, and the house has been upgraded to Grade II*.  These new listings have been used by both the Garden History Society and English Heritage who have now submitted comments.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Belushi's, corner of Green Street and Broad Street - Last updated 28th December 2008.

Following our report to Enforcements that Belushi's had carried out work to the building without planning consent, planning applications were raised, but only for the fascia lighting.  Both the listed building and full application were refused consent, and details have been added to the News Summary page.  This means that because the light fittings are already installed, getting them removed is a matter for Enforcement, as is the repainting of the shopfront which was done without planning permission.  We will monitor any further progress on our Enforcements page.

Lower Borough Walls - Last updated Last updated 28th December 2008.

Lloyds TSB had mixed fortunes with their applications for internal and external alterations to the Lower Borough Walls buildings.  The full application was refused but the listed building one was granted permission after the case officer negotiated changes.  See the News Summary page for information.

Warminster Road - Last updated 28th December 2008.

Despite its formal designation as an open space in the local plan, somebody wants to build on the field separating Bathampton from the Warminster Road.  On 23 December, planning permission was refused.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Old Orchard - Last updated 28th December 2008.

The planning decision for the new buildings has rather belatedly been followed by an application to demolish the existing buildings, which we believed should be refused.  It wasn't though!  See the News Summary page for more information.

Holburne - Last updated 21st December 2008.

Predictably, the DCC recommended approval of the Holburne applications (the decision has to be referred to the Secretary of State because it is a Grade I listed building).  Equally predictably, English Heritage failed to rewrite their comments, proving once again that they are prepared to ignore the law of the land under which they are required to operate. We have updated the Holburne page with our notes from the DCC.

Western Riverside - Last updated 21st December 2008.

The 17th December DCC was informed that negotiations are still ongoing.  More information is on the Western Riverside page.

St Marks Road - Last updated 21st December 2008.

Rather belatedly, we announce that the appeal against the planning refusal was dismissed on 26th November 2008.  The News Summary page has been updated accordingly.

Enforcements - Last updated 21st December 2008.

We have split the Enforcements page into two: still outstanding and considered complete, to make it easier to find the parts readers might be interested in.

We were told that one of our enforcements, Phase Eight in Broad Street, would not be actioned because a planning application was soon to be determined.  It now has been, and it doesn't solve the enforcement problem, see the Enforcements page.

Hayesfield School - Last updated 21st December 2008.

Watchdog was invited to a consultation meeting on 13th December to look at the current state of the plans.  There were some things that were better, and some that were worse, and one problem that we discussed with the architects last time that they have still not altered.  They are not yet ready to submit a formal planning application, so there is still time for further improvements. We have put a brief update on the Hayesfield page.

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.)

Southgate - Last updated 14th December 2008.

The Busometer rings are now being installed.  At the moment, they are unfinished, but we are beginning to doubt whether they match the drawings given planning permission.  Perhaps it will be something else to add to the rogues gallery of things that are not to plan that is building on the Southgate page.

Friends Meeting House - Last updated 7th December 2008.

When we met the UNESCO Mission to Bath, we warned them that once they have left the city, the planning application to effectively destroy the appearance of the Friends Meeting House would raised again with a few minor changes.  Our prediction has been proved right.  See the Friends page for more information.

Bath Press - Last updated 30th November 2008.

Those who went to one of the Public Exhibitions about the Bath Press Building will have seen the display boards and had an opportunity to make comments on the questionnaire form.  We have moved the Bath Press page out of the Dormant section and have updated it with our views of the exhibition.  There is also a questionnaire - please consider filling it in (before 15th December)

Newark Works - Last updated 30th November 2008.

Anybody walking past the Newark Works in the rain recently couldn't fail to notice that the gutter at the front is overflowing.  This week, we had somebody get in touch with us to say that there are a number of broken windows and pigeons are entering the building through them, and that pigeon droppings are corrosive so they need to be kept out.  We have been attempting to get the council to carry out the repairs necessary to preserve the fabric of the building since September, but so far nothing has happened.  If anyone feels that the council response is not good enough, feel free to join us in complaining:  the council officer responsible is Tom McBain, the Chief Property Officer.

Shop Fronts and Signs - Broad Street - Last updated 23rd November 2008.

After we asked Enforcement to investigate the new shop front and signs for Phase Eight in Broad Streeet, a planning application for the sign has been lodged, although without describing it as retrospective, and on the News Summary page we say why objections are appropriate.

Gloucester Road - Last updated 16th November 2008.

The planning applications to demolish the former Harvester buildings and to replace them with four blocks of flats have been withdrawn.  See the News Summary page for information.

Penn Hill Road - Last updated 16th November 2008.

Plans that were lodged for an additional building in the grounds of a listed building have been given consent.  See the  News Summary page for more information.

Church Street, Upper Weston - Last updated 16th November 2008.

A planning application to demolish four existing flats and replace them with another four has now been granted permission, a respectable interval after some minor revisions were lodged.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Prior Park Road - Last updated 16th November 2008.

After the first application was refused by the case officers without giving the public the opportunity to examine some modified drawings, the applicants submitted an application for a revised scheme of only two stories.  That full application was given consent in October, but a decision on the listed building application was only made some time afterwards, when consent was given.  See the News Summary page for more information.

UNESCO Visit - Last updated 9th November 2008.

We always knew that a 20 minute conversation would not be sufficient to bring to the attention of the Mission those things that we thought they should know, so we prepared a written brief for them to take away and study.  In it were photo montages of future developments as seen from a number of locations, examples of planning permissions granted contrary to National and Local Plan policies, examples of neglect of listed buildings, and concerns about the impact of future strategies.

This left us free to converse on the issues that the Mission was particularly interested in.  We started by asking them what they had seen and what they thought of them.  They said that they had been taken round Bath and looked at it from a tourist's viewpoint, and they thought that the things they had seen were well kept and well worth visiting.  We agreed with that, and said that what we wanted them to think about was what isn't yet built, and what it was like to be a resident rather than a tourist.  

This led to a discussion of Southgate, where they thought the shopping centre was incorrect from a trained architect's perspective but as an example of modern buildings that looked right in Bath to the untrained member of the general public, it was very good.  However, they hated the Busometer with a passion, and were concerned to hear that so little thought had gone into selecting the right street furniture in the shopping area because these little things make a lot of difference.

"Bathness" was a concept first proposed by Stephen Marks in a letter to the Chronicle. He suggested that if somebody arrived by helicopter wearing a blindfold so that they had no idea where they were, and the first thing they saw when the blindfold was removed was a building, would Bath be one of the places they thought they might be.  If so, then that building has "Bathness" and is acceptable in the location.

This led naturally to a conversation on "Bathness", which they liked as a rule of thumb, and a discussion on the necessity for compromise between 'ideal for purpose' and 'ideal for location', to end up with something usable and inoffensive.  They thought our montages of the student accommodation on the George Yeo site was a good example of this.

For the rest of our interview, we talked of future plans, and they were horrified to discover that despite the legislation protecting Green Belt land, neither the Government nor the Local Authority treated it as sacrosanct or inviolable.  Up until that point in the discussion that had believed that Bath did not need a Buffer Zone because it was surrounded by Green Belt and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  The fact that housing schemes, park and ride extensions, and University expansion could eat into Green Belt land almost unchecked, they found unbelievable and wanted to take away to follow up.

We left them with a large print copy of one of Crest Nicholson's montages of the Western Riverside which they asked to borrow.  It was clear from the closing minutes of our interview that they thought it didn't have "Bathness", nor did it have the scale, form or density that they would have expected from a development that respected the Outstanding Universal Value of the City of Bath.  The Dyson building they thought was even worse.

At the end of the meeting, they complemented us on our approach and encouraged us to keep doing the same things because the democratic process needed groups like ours.

We would have liked longer - there was plenty more we could have said - but we think what we covered gave them plenty to think about.

In The Scotsman on 15th November was a long column by Joyce McMillan, their Social and Political columnist, part of which examined the attitudes towards the UNESCO Mission to Edinburgh.  By extracting that bit, changing "Edinburgh" to "Bath" and substituting local landmarks, it is every bit as relevant to Bath.  Read it in the second window.

 

Brougham Hayes - Last updated 26th October 2008.

After we featured the new planning documents last week, the architects have been in contact, pointing out that the planning system requires that they submit elevation drawings, but those drawings don't help people to visualise what it will look like.  They have supplied some photo montage views which we have put on the website.  See the  News Summary page for more information.

Shop Fronts and Signs - Shaftesbury Road - Last updated 26th October 2008.

Some of the proposed signs on the Scala in Oldfield Park were granted planning permission, but the one we really objected to has been refused permission.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Somerset Place - Last updated 19th October 2008.

One more of the Listed Building planning applications has been given consent on 14th October.  See the Somerset Place page for more information.

Parade Gardens - Last updated 19th October 2008.

The council raised its own planning application to erect an existing statue of King Baldud (currently held in the council's store) in the Parade Gardens.  We supported the idea of placing this statue on public view, but questioned whether the location chosen is appropriate.  It was subsequently confirmed that the plans are to place the statue beside the river, facing Grand Parade.  We did not object formally, but did suggest that a better location within the gardens should be chosen instead.  On 24th September, planning permission was granted.  We still have our reservations about the wisdom of placing a valuable statue under trees where it is likely to collect a large amount of bird droppings.

Green Park - Last updated 12th October 2008.

Watchdog went along to the public consultation, looked at the scheme and chatted to the architect.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Hampton Row - Last updated 12th October 2008.

We have added the reference information for the new Listed Building application that was lodged for Hampton Row, with our apologies for the delay.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Herman Miller Building, Lower Bristol Road - Last updated 12th October 2008.

On 29th September Listed Building consent was given for the alterations to this building.  See the News Summary page for information.

New Bond Street - Last updated 12th October 2008.

A replacement planning applications was lodged for Number 20 New Bond Street in place of the application for air conditioning condensers which had been withdrawn, and on 7th October it was approved with conditions.  See the News Summary page for information.

Somerset Buildings - Last updated 5th October 2008.

There is a new planning application to demolish the current TR Hayes building in front of Hedgemead Park and to replace it with a larger two storey building  See the News Summary page for more information.

George Yeo Site - Last updated 28th September 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, though it wasn't until 25 September 2008 that a S106 agreement was in place and planning permission was formally given. 

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

Westgate Buildings - Last updated 21st September 2008.

After the decision was made on the planning application for Numbers 11-12 Westgate Buildings, to build an extension to the rear of the Cork and Bottle, a number of consultation responses from council officers were made available on-line.  This makes the premature decision without allowing time for public consultation even more reprehensible.  See the News Summary page for information.

Rockery Tea Gardens - Last updated 21st September 2008.

A planning application for two houses and 9 apartments for this site has been lodged. See the News Summary page for more information.

Lyncombe Vale Road - Last updated 21st September 2008.

A new planning application to add a an extension onto an existing dwelling and to replace an existing garage with a much larger one has been lodged.  On 15th September 2008, planning permission was refused.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Phillips Auction House, Old King St - Last updated 17th August 2008.

The planning application to add a penthouse flat to the top of the building has been refused permission.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Thornbank Place - Last updated 17th August 2008.

A new planning application to build two dwellings in Thornbank Place has been lodged, hot on the heels of the previous one that was refused permission in May.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Former Hayesfield Playing Field - Last updated 3rd August 2008.

In a previous update we noted that the Chronicle published an article on the emerging plans for the former Hayesfield Playing Field at Odd Down and announced a public exhibition.  Some Watchdog members went, so we can now bring you some details of what the exhibition covered.

At first sight, these plans are compatible with the mixed use constraint in the council's Local Plan "Land is allocated for retail development (use class A1) ... For convenience shopping only: ... Hayesfield School playing fields at Odd Down as part of a mixed use development".

Watchdog welcomes the approach of consulting before finalising plans and has provided feedback to the exhibitors.

Wellsway (Oldfield Park Motors) - Last updated 3rd August 2008.

The case officer refused planning permission, and we support that decision.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Monmouth Street - Last updated 3rd August 2008.

The first application for a truly awful set of advertising signs on a listed building in Monmouth Street has been withdrawn, only to be replace by another that is nearly as bad. See the News Summary page for more information.

Malthouse, Lower Bristol Road - Last updated 13th 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Consultations

Bath Transportation Package

Under the title STOP GRIDLOCK there was a public exhibition showing Bath and North East Somerset Council’s plans for expanded and new Park and Ride sites and the Bus Rapid Transit route, so we went along.  What a waste of time that was!

The exhibition in the Brunswick Room at the Guildhall consisted of a leaflet and questionnaire given to those who went in, some sketches in a folder on each table, and a row of display boards set out by somebody who has no idea what it is like to look through bifocal spectacles.

The display boards showed extensions to the existing park and ride sites and a layout of the Bathampton Meadows site, announcing under each that the council knew they were on Green Belt land.  Yet the questionnaire didn't ask what the public thought of the principle of the expansions, it asked trivial things like what was thought of the parking arrangements and lighting.  And even then, as there was no information given about operating hours, no real indication of the impact of the lighting was possible.

There was a chart showing a time line which indicated that the consultation period has stretched from 2005 to 2008 and that the plans had been approved by the Government Department two years ago and funding allocated.  So nobody from the council is going to go back to the Government and say "thank you for allocating the money but some of the public have suggested changes so we would like to revise our plans".  It isn't going to happen except under extreme pressure.

There was a chart showing the showcase bus routes, promising more information on waiting times, level access, and more bus shelters.  As one of the routes is the Number 17 through Oldfield Park, it is obvious that this route is chosen from a map and not from somebody examining the streets.  Most of the streets are too narrow to widen pavements and several of the bends are too steep for the larger "low floor" buses to navigate, so the only way that level access is going to be possible is by building ramps on the pavements to the height of the current bus floor;  and given the pavements are very narrow, that would severely inconvenience the residents who regularly use these pavements in their Motability scooters.  And is an hourly service outside peak times actually sufficient to be described as a showcase?  Some of the other routes are similarly suspect for at least part of their route.

The route for the rapid transit bus only showed the details from Newbridge to the Western Riverside.  The sketches on the tables showed the route west of Green Park.  Nowhere was there any information about how these monster buses are going to get through the city centre and out to Bathampton Meadows.  Nor was there anything to confirm or deny the rumours that even the smaller bendy-buses will be unable to use the new bus station, so the Rapid Transit buses stand no chance.  And given that the "unavoidable" reason that Churchill House had to be demolished was to gain enough clearance to allow the Rapid Transit buses in and out, if those monsters don't go into the new bus station the public will know that they were told a pack of lies about why Churchill House had to be demolished.

We wonder too whether there might be other knock-on effects if the Rapid Transport buses can't use the new bus station.  The council qualified for a Government grant because they were building a "Transport Interchange" rather than a bus station.  If one or more forms of transport is unable to use it, then the Government would be perfectly entitled to ask for their money back, in our view. 

Nowhere in any of the things to read in the exhibition was there any "Transport Package" that would actually tackle congestion.  There are suggestions for restricting access to other roads, which will just move the traffic that would have used them into traffic jams elsewhere, and over longer routes from A to B so that congestion and pollution just get worse.  Nowhere does it recognise that if a journey has to be made, the vehicle concerned will start to produce pollution at the beginning of the journey and stop doing so at its destination, so anything that delays the journey or increases the distance will simply add to the minimum level of pollution that vehicle will produce.  Nowhere does it consider reducing hold ups to progress.  Nowhere does it acknowledge that Bath has a steadily growing number of elderly people who are likely to become infirm enough to need Disabled Parking permits, and who won't stand out in bad weather for buses, even if a bus shelter is provided.  It is pointless assuming that cycle routes will solve that problem, and because the elderly with cars have a significant amount of disposable income, the Bath centre shops will suffer if it becomes too difficult to drive to them.  The Bath shops will also suffer from the loss of trade from those who have done the arithmetic and discovered that travelling by bus costs more than driving into Bath, even if it is necessary to pay for an hour's parking as well; and those who drive to Trowbridge or Cribbs Causeway to shop are comfortably in profit because then they park at no cost.

This was a pathetic exhibition of just a small part of a set of ill conceived ideas that might look good from an ivory tower but have so few practical benefits on the ground that they will be a total waste of taxpayers' money.  A waste of time going round it, in our view.

If you didn't get to the public exhibition, details of the Bath Transportation Package can be read online on the Council's website.

Other Snippets

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.

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, although there is no excuse for the listed building being approved.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Tailpiece

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.

We have spotted a couple of interesting properties for sale:  54 Wells Road and 2 Lambridge Buildings Mews.  Both were the subject of repeated planning applications until eventually the Case Officer granted permission even though both should have been refused as over-developments of the sites.  And now both are up for sale.

We wonder if there was no real intention to build what the planning applications described, it was just a business expense necessary to sell a property with planning permission that was bought without it, and thus make a bit of profit.  We hope that case officers learn from this, and pay more attention to what is right for the location rather than whether they can accommodate the applicant's aspirations.