BATH HERITAGE WATCHDOG

STOP PRESS

The Belvoir Castle has been closed - for redecoration we have been told - so until we know when, or even whether, we will be able to meet there again, we will be holding our meetings in the Royal Oak on the Lower Bristol Road opposite the Windsor Bridge, in the small bar leading to the garden.

Latest

UNESCO Visit - Last updated 28th June 2009.

Earlier this year, the council received a copy of the report from the UNESCO Mission to Bath.  It has now reached the time when it will be discussed by the World Heritage Committee in Seville, and the press embargo on it has been lifted.  It covers a number of issues, but for convenience we have put all our commentary on the Western Riverside page.

Meanwhile, in the latest news from Seville, Baku in Azerbijan has been removed from the "in Danger" list because a new and effective management plan removes the risk of nearby developments, while the Belize Barrier Reef has been added to the "in Danger" list because of Mangrove clearance for excessive developments, and Columbia's Los Katos National Park has been put on the "in Danger" list because of excessive illegal logging.

In Britain, Thomas Telford's Pontcysylte aqueduct (which carries the Llangollen canal over the River Dee) has been made a new World Heritage Site.  In May 2007, the World Heritage Committee asked State Parties to consider a thematic approach to nominations to the Tentative List and thence to the Committee, and the inscription of the aqueduct is a clear indication that Victorian transport systems are considered to be of merit, so it is time that Brunel's Great Western Railway is put forward, while so much of it remains intact.

Southgate - Last updated 28th June 2009.

We are in dispute with the Chronicle over the way they reported our piece on the shopfronts guide for Southgate on our Southgate page, which has now been updated with the latest position.

Watchdog continues to watch the new bus station, with no bendy bus in sight (but plenty of litter - see our Southgate page).  We are told that there will be timetable changes in the autumn, so we will be patient, but we still believe that despite the insistence by both First and the council that Churchill House had to be demolished because that was the only way that the bendy buses that had to get into the bus station could gain access, no scheduled bendy-bus service will use it.

Beau Street, Gainsborough Building - Last updated 28th June 2009.

The wire mesh protective fencing around the site has been replaced by timber barriers with viewing windows, which has allowed Bilbury Lane to be reopened.  We hope that this indicates that work will restart soon on the site, but it hasn't so far.

University Field Trip - Last updated 21st June 2009.

We have been informed that the exhibition material from the Bath Society Meeting Room has been transferred to the Timothy Richards Gallery where it will be placed on display as soon as time permits.  We will give a further update when the exhibition is once again available for public viewing.

Park and Rides - Last updated 21st June 2009.

The Park and Ride controversy continues, and has now outgrown the News Summary page where we originally put it, so we have moved it to its own page.  There we have added news of the latest developments - look for recent dates in the index.

Enforcements - Last updated 21st June 2009.

We have have reported yet more unauthorised work taking place in the Grade II listed The Rummer without planning permission.

We have also reported Sunglasses Hut.  See our Enforcements page for information.

Old Orchard - Last updated 14th June 2009.

Since last week, a number of pieces of correspondence have appeared on the planning file.  Clearly the planning officers are digging a deeper and deeper hole for themselves every time they try to fob off the legitimate complaints from the owners of the wall.  If any decision other than complete refusal is the outcome, we would expect the decision to be challenged in court.  See the News Summary page for Watchdog's assessment of the planning application.

Green Park - Last updated 17th May 2009.

Watchdog went along to the public consultation in October 2008, looked at the scheme and chatted to the architect.  We have now had sight of the latest ideas, and they are not an improvement.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Brougham Hayes - Last updated 10th May 2009.

It looks as though work is about to start on the Brougham Hayes development, because some notices have been erected.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Wells Road - Last updated 10th May 2009.

The planning application to build a prefabricated dwelling on land behind 54 Wells Road has been refused permission.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Stall Street - Last updated 10th May 2009.

A planning application to amend an existing permission for outside tables and chairs has been submitted.  See the News Summary page for more information.

World Heritage Day - Last updated 26th April 2009

Various members reported back their experiences of the events they attended on 18th April.

Those who attended the Better Bath Forum found it well attended and interesting.  The notes of the meeting are available on-line and we are pleased to see that specific councillors have been tasked with taking the conclusions forward.
Those who attended the Cotswold Way Walk were left stranded when the guide decided that the numbers were not sufficient to make it worthwhile.  We disagree.  It was a scheduled event and it should have taken place, even if only one person wanted to go (the actual attendance was rather more than that).
On one of the walks the Mayor's Guides took, the guide was badly briefed and conveyed wrong information.  No such criticism was levelled at the others that members attended, so this appears to have been a one-off.
One of the Abbey Tower Tours had been cancelled, and the Watchdog members who had booked it had to go back for a later one.

Watchdog members reported that apart from the Better Bath Forum, the numbers attending the events were disappointingly low considering that the weather was fine, and we wonder if the council's events should have been given greater publicity.

The Cornmarket - Last updated 26th April 2009.

The Cornmarket in Walcot Street is a listed building in a fragile state, affected by subsidence and held up by scaffolding.  So it is with some surprise that despite the announcement of plans for the building in The Chronicle, the only planning application lodged is for change of use.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Granville Road - Last updated 26th April 2009.

The decision on the demolition of Ensleigh Lodge and its replacement with a mixed use property was taken by the 21 January 2009 DCC meeting.  They came to a rather complicated decision that is a departure from the Development Plan, so the agreement of the Secretary of State would be needed.  However, the applicant refused to accept the conditions proposed, so the application was returned to the April DCC for a new decision, and that decision was to refuse permission.

Western Riverside - Last updated 26th April 2009.

After lying dormant for nearly two years, the application for the site by the Windsor Bridge occupied by the BMW garage has been revised. We think the applicant has been badly advised.  More information is on the Western Riverside page.

Southgate - Last updated 19th April 2009.

On a recent visit to Beechen Cliff we noticed that the trees and shrubs that had been blocking many of the views from the viewing point have been cleared away.  Many thanks to whoever it was in the council who arranged that.  A clear view of the Southgate development is now available from there.  Meanwhile, we have been looking more closely at the latest additions to Southgate.  Pictures and comments on both the long and short range views are on the Southgate page.

GWR through Bath - Last updated 19th April 2009.

Watchdog has not been provided with a schedule of repairs to the historic fabric of Brunel's GWR, so each piece of work completed is a pleasant surprise when we spot it.  We report our latest discovery on the Brunel's GWR page.

Englishcombe Inn - Last updated 19th April 2009.

Revised drawings were submitted on 23 March, and these nearly (but not quite) cover all the changes discussed at the meeting with the residents.  Despite these, on 7 April 2009, planning permission was refused.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Hayesfield School - Last updated 19th April 2009.

Watchdog made a quick assessment when the planning application was first lodged, but now we have had the time to study the main application in detail. We have updated our original "first impressions" on the Hayesfield page.

Herman Miller Building, Lower Bristol Road - Last updated 19th April 2009.

On 9th April 2009 the planning application was refused.  See the News Summary page for information.

Prior Park Road - Last updated 19th April 2009.

The appeal that was lodged against the refusal of the three storey extension has reached a decision, and planning permission has been granted.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Holburne - Last updated 5th April 2009.

The historic Lucombe Oak behind the Holburne, that in all the previous applications was in sound condition and worth saving, but in the most recent application was added to the list of trees to be lost with no real justification, has been felled.

RIP a rare oak tree variant Quercus x hispanica 'Lucombeana'.  The breed dates from 1762, and true Lucombe Oaks are clones of that original tree.  It is disappointing that a museum took so little interest in the history that was in their own grounds.

Policy Consequences

Watchdog believes that small independent businesses are the life-blood of Bath because the "High Street, Anywhere" multiples do not require anybody to visit Bath to obtain their goods and services.

We have therefore been using a local independent shop for our computing needs for the preparation of this website.  That shop has now closed and has relocated to Bristol.  We e-mailed the shop owner and asked why he left Bath.  His reply below is a spontaneous condemnation of the Council's disregard of the needs of small businesses.

We have shut the Bath shop after 10 years, It just wasn't making money any more,  Our rent went up £100 pm,  Our new rates were double that of last year, and when the council put zone parking all around, new customers were just few and far between.  Our neighbouring shops are both gone too, which just goes to show how much the council care about small businesses.  I know its a shame but the council finally sunk us with their brilliant idea of zone parking and charging for permits for our cars and with non-permit holders banned.

So we decided to open a new shop in the Bristol suburbs.  We are opposite and next door to some very popular shops doing good business.  We have got 2 car spaces outside our new shop and 1000's of people pass our new door every week. So instead of sticking our heads in the sand and eventually go bust, we decided to move to a better location.  A sad day when we left Bath but you have got to do what you can in this day and age.

The message is that if the council get greedy and try to maximise their income, there will be companies who can't afford it.  In this case, instead of extra income, they have ended up with an empty shop.  Our guess is that it will stay empty for a long time, because the problems that drove this shopkeeper away will also deter any new business considering the premises.

Consultation

Public Realm and Movement Strategy

The council was inviting public comment on this strategy by February 20th.  It is a very substantial document, of about 130 pages, so it takes a lot of reading and understanding. It is supported by other documents of similar length.

There was a public display at Green Park Station on 24th January, and Watchdog spoke to the event organisers who were there.  We were told that public involvement was important and that they wanted to have as much input from the public as possible.  We were told that there was to be a public presentation of the Strategy but they would arrange for Watchdog to have a separate presentation.  So we wrote and formally asked for an extension to the 20th February deadline because the documents were a lot to read, understand and comment on by the date set.  This request was refused.  We didn't attend the public presentation because we waited to hear when and where the presentation to the Watchdog would take place.  We are still waiting!  It makes one wonder whether the stated desire for public involvement was just hot air.  We can only hope that poorly run consultation is not indicative of the contempt that might be shown to the comments that were submitted.

Because of the tight deadline within which Watchdog members had to study the texts, evaluate the proposals and write their comments, there was no time left to report interim progress on the website.  But an agreed view was reached and submitted by the (immoveable) deadline, and you can read it here.  Hopefully, other members of the public also provided some input.

New Ombudsman Ruling

The Institute of Historic Building Conservation has been in touch, bringing to our attention a recent ruling by the Local Government Ombudsman against Darlington Borough Council.  Although the particular case has no exact parallels in Bath there are similarities, so it is worth reporting the positions being taken.

The Institute of Historic Building Conservation welcomed the conclusion by England's Local Government Ombudsman that a planning authority's failure in conservation could amount to "Injustice", as a timely reminder that a planning authority must be fair to all interests in our historic places.

The Ombudsman’s investigation found that Darlington's Council officers "did not seem to understand the description of the buildings in the listing; did not apply the legal definition of a listed building ... did not address themselves to the appropriate national planning policies and guidance".

This last point was later clarified as a duty "to explain the general presumption in favour of preserving listed buildings; and to clearly explain the proper tests for the committee to apply as set out in national Planning Policy Guidance 15 and confirmed by case law, i.e. will the proposed works significantly harm the listed building or its setting."  In the Darlington case this hinged on a building that is an important component part of a group of buildings that "possess, in my assessment, considerable group value.  They belong to a group…this group provides an important focal point within the village with the appearance of each building reflecting its origin and function…"

The main thrust of the complaint lodged was that the council  "failed properly to consider objections to the Listed Building Consent application and unreasonably granted such consent."

The Ombudsman's finding was one of Maladministration causing injustice, because  "The Council acted with maladministration as the multiple and various failings by the planning officers meant that the Planning Area Committee was not properly advised and not able to take all relevant factors into account when reaching its decisions.

Furthermore "The Ombudsman urges [the council] to also ensure that all staff involved in dealing with development control decisions are properly trained in the law and [the council's] own policies and procedures relating to listed buildings."

Watchdog is trying to obtain the full transcript of the case because there are a number of parallels with recent decisions.  There was no presumption to preserve in the case of the Friends Meeting House or the Station Ramp.  There was no consideration of the Group Value in granting consent for the changes to No.2 Broad Street (Phase Eight).  There was no proper assessment of the setting of the Holburne extension in the Grade II listed Sydney Gardens.  There was no proper assessment of the setting of the listed buildings in Southgate when permission was given for the demolition of Churchill House.  A number of other decisions have failed to recognise clauses in the Local Plan Policies which should have been taken into account: It is not sufficient to list the policies that are relevant, they should also be evaluated against the application being considered.  So Watchdog wants to study the case in detail, because the way the Ombudsman evaluated the Darlington case might indicate whether B&NES has been responsible for a similar level of "Maladministration causing injustice".

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.)

Rear of 12-14 Great Bedford Street - Last updated 22nd March 2009.

This application was for the erection of a new surgery annexe, which was decided at the 18th March Development Control Committee meeting.  The committee granted consent.  Yet on 11th March, the same day that the report to committee was dated, a new drawing was lodged.  In order for the Government guidelines on public consultation to be met, the case officer should have alerted the committee of the date of the last update to the planning documents, and the committee should have deferred their decision to allow the public to consider the significance of the changes.  Neither happened.

Belushi's, corner of Green Street and Broad Street - Last updated 22nd March 2009.

On 16th March, the planning application for listed building consent for the external illumination plus the repainting of the shopfront (which was done without planning permission), was refused consent.  We have therefore moved the case back to our Enforcements page.  The second, full planning application has not yet been determined, so we have also left the entry on the News Summary page.

Marjorie Whimster House - Last updated 22nd March 2009.

PPG15 is very clear that demolition of a building in a Conservation Area should not be given permission ahead of deciding the quality of the replacement.  The exact words are: Consent for demolition should not be given unless there are acceptable and detailed plans for any redevelopment.  The case officer's own report, referring to the replacement, says:  The negotiations regarding the replacement building are still ongoing hence no comments can be made as the proposal is subject to change.  Yet he granted consent to demolish the existing building on 13 March 2009.

Phillips Auction House, Old King St - 8th March 2009.

Watchdog acknowledges that the planning permission will stand, even though it was an appallingly bad decision, and we notice that only after that decision was made are the revised drawings now available on the public website (look for the eight drawings dated 29 January 2009).  Two things stand out:  There is enough surviving wall space to have retained at least part of the Magna Carta if only the case officer had conditioned it; and the structure on the roof which has previously been refused planning permission because it is inappropriate for the conservation area has been sneaked back in and approved.  Watchdog recommends that everybody who objected to the planning application should formally complain to the council (see the News Summary page for more information) about the failure of the planning office to give you the opportunity to comment on the revisions.

Bath Press - Last updated 22nd February 2009.

Since the workshops about the Bath Press site revealed a considerable amount of support for retaining the front of the building, a crack has appeared at one end.  See the Bath Press page for more information.

Newark Works - Last updated 22nd February 2009.

We have been out with a camera now and again, keeping an eye on the progress of the emergency repairs and we now believe that all the necessary emergency repairs have been completed.  We have added our last  photo on the Newark Works page along with our thanks to the council officers involved.

Oakwood, Bathwick Hill - Last updated 22nd February 2009.

On 1st October, the Listed Building application was refused, but no decision was made on the full application at that time.  The full application has now also been refused.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Hampton Row - Last updated 8th February 2009.

Both the new development and listed building applications have been refused permission.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Thornbank Place - Last updated 8th February 2009.

The planning application to build two dwellings in Thornbank Place has been refused permission.  See the News Summary page for more information.

Guildhall, Bath - Last updated 8th February 2009.

The council's plans to replace the Victorian woodwork and service windows in the Guildhall with cheap and tacky mass-produced furniture that gives so little protection to the staff that they will then need panic alarms has been recommended by the case officer for approval by the Secretary of State.  We think this is another nail in the coffin of quality:  an indication that this council really does not think of Bath as special.  More details are on the News Summary page.

Friends Meeting House - Last updated 1st February 2009.

Following the write-up of the committee meeting in last weeks update, we received an e-mail from a member of the public who had also attended the meeting, letting us know that we had missed the significance of something that happened.  On reflection we agree, and we have added a new comment  ^[12], renumbering those that follow.  See the Friends page for what we added.

Bailbrook House - Last updated 4th January 2009.

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

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 wanted 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.