Conservation survey

Building works on Great Pulteney Street

 As an architecture student two of my main interests were environmental sustainability and architectural history.

However, the needs to conserve both energy and historic buildings are often in conflict. This is frequently demonstrated by the single-glazed window, which has been at the centre of a regulatory struggle between English Herritage and Building Control for decades.

The Bath Preservation Trust and the Centre for Sustainable Energy have collaborated to produce a survey about this balance. The value judgements are very difficult, but please do spend five minutes completing it.

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2KK6NMF

B&NES Masterplan

Nicholas Coombes and David Martin at St. John’s Field

With the coalition government devolving more power to local people, B&NES Council has been able to revise its growth plan. The Labour government had insisted on thousands of extra houses which would need to have been built on the edge of the city. The council has changed its ‘Core Strategy’ document to reflect local needs, but it is still not perfect.

Cllr Nicholas Coombes said “Council has passed this plan for public consultation before it is signed off. I am pleased with the overall direction of the strategy, but there are some key details which need to be looked at again. I shall be responding to the consultation and urge interested residents to do likewise.”

You can access the consultation online here ; there is a lot of reading and less than a month to go.

Purchasers pay attention to old school site

Lime Grove School

In the three years since it closed, the old school site at Lime Grove has been seriously considered as both student accomodation and a wet-house for the homeless. To the relief of nearby residents, both proposals were aborted after many months of investigation.

B&NES put the site up for sale again in May; the property department say:

“We’ve had an enormous amount of interest in the site and now have all of the bids in. We are looking at several bids in more detail and have requested further information from the developers. We expect to establish the front runner shortly.”

Regardless of the purchaser, any development will need planning permission, which will be assessed against the impact which the school had on the community.

Lime Grove for sale

Lime Grove School

Lime Grove special school is now on the open market. If you want to buy it, the details are here (but there agents don’t reveal the price!).

This is perhaps the best proof available that the council have given up plans to continue using the site, including as a possible location for a wet-house. Last week when I met the Conservative cabinet member responsible in a council corridor, he confirmed that there were no plans for a wet-house, or even an experimental wet-house, on the site. He protested that a recent Chronicle article had misrepresented his plans.

However, with the history of secrecy surrounding previous plans for the site, many residents remain concerned and do not trust the Conservative cabinet on this matter.

Application for larger phone mast on The Avenue

Phone mast on The Avenue

As a member of the council planning committee, I try not to take a view on planning applications  incase they come to our committee and I am asked to make an impartial judgement on them. That said, many residents will be interested in an application to increase the size of the phone mast on The Avenue.

The current mast, hidden largely by trees, has one major drawback in that the signal is also hidden by trees, especially in the wet. The application is for a much taller mast which will project beyond the tree canopy at 24m.

Comments can be made to the council in writing or on-line (although today the council website appears to be broken) quoting the reference 10/01230/FUL.

When I’m 64

On Wednesday morning, the UK Climate Change Committee issued a report saying that if aviation maintained its current levels of Carbon Dioxide emissions, all other sources in the UK must be cut by 90% by 2050 to avert catastrophic climate change.

On Wednesday afternoon I was asked to judge an application for the expansion of Bristol airport, in which CO2 emissions would more than double.

I will be 64 in 2050; I won’t have reached retirement age. Within my working life, my generation must cut greenhouse gas emissions by 90%, while aviation remains as it is. If we can meet this daunting challenge, then the earth will ‘only’ warm by 2 degrees. Climate will change, but we will be able to cope. If say, we don’t manage to make 90% cuts, or if aircraft emissions rise, then temperature will rise by above 2 degrees, the ice-caps will begin to melt and the planet will be locked into a reinforcing pattern of catastrohpic change.

To save the planet in this model, all airports need to do is not expand. The irresponsibility of Bristol International Airport management is incomprehensible.

The BIA planning application will be decided by North Somerset council, but Bristol City and BathNES Councils have been asked to make recommendations. The expansions plans are to double the size of the airport terminal building, to provide 16,000 car parking spaces and build capacity for 10,000,000 passengers per year. This would result in CO2 emissions of 948,680 tonnes per year; an increase of 125% on current levels. The entire of Bath and North East Somerset is responsible for 1,072,000 tonnes per year. Bristol airport wishes to expand to a level at which it will emit almost as much CO2 as 170,000 people in 72,000 homes; 77,000 cars on 690 miles of road; 7,400 businesses and 220 sq miles of land.

At the planning committee meeting, I moved that: “Bath and North East Somerset considers the causes and effects of climate change to be the principal consideration in a development of this nature and recommends that North Somerset refuse the application on these grounds.”

Those who have watched me will know that I am a vigorous public speaker; I’m rather gratified by this review: “I just wanted to write personally to congratulate you on your speech on climate change at yesterday’s DCC meeting. It as good to hear a graduate of this University express himself so well and so much to the point. It set the tone for the debate at a level from which it hardly ever slipped.”

All Liberal Democrat and Labour councillors voted with me, as did two Conservatives, to prevent the expansion of the airport. The motion was passed 8 to 4; the objection of BathNES council will be sent to North Somerset.

However, with the Conservatives running BathNES council, it is very worrying that the majority of Tory councillors voted against the motion, for airport expansion. Conservative policy on airport expansion is ‘mixed’ at best. While the party leadership claims to be against a third runway at Heathrow, the Telegraph quotes a Conservative shadow cabinet member who expects the policy to be “revisited” after the general election. As is often the case, Cameron and the PR people say one thing, but Conservative MPs and councillors (such as ours in BathNES) do another.

As reported in the Bath Chronicle, the airport bosses are not pleased: “The discussion at the B&NES council meeting centred on emotional arguments relating to aviation’s contribution to climate change… We are confident that North Somerset will put much more weight on the employment, economic and tourism benefits generated by the airport.”

In response, I would argue that climate change is the greatest long-term challenge facing the world today (as does the UK government) and it was quite right that the debate centred on this; that’s why I wrote the motion as I did. Naturally, the potential destruction of our civilization within my lifetime does give rise to some emotional arguments, but these are no less compelling than the warnings presented by the world’s scientists. Suggesting that climate change is an emotional issue rather than a matter of science fact is not something I can agree with.

Then there are the percieved short-term employment, economic and tourism benefits of the airport. So far as jobs go, there is direct employment for cleaners, car park attendants, baggage handlers, shop assistants, caterers… the list of badly paid, low skilled jobs at anti-social hours is varied, but, given the shift to budget airlines, quite short. We are told that during the recession, the airport will keep Bath in business, but the development won’t be ready for several years and actually, Bath is doing quite well in this recession.

The supposed benefits to tourism are the real irony here, with over 80% of all BIA flights taking UK residents on holiday away from the region. The residents of Biarritz, Kefalonia, Venice, Faro and Tenerife do not welcome direct flights so that they can visit Bristol. Each of the airport’s 16,000 car park spaces represents a family leaving the South West to spend their money elsewhere.

Interestingly, there are some attempts to mitigate the environmental impact of the airport. BIA will attempt to double the proportion of passengers using public transport to reach the airport, from 8% now to 15% in 2019. In the best case scenario 8,500,000 people would drive to the airport each year. 12 wind turbines would be erected which would resuce the airports CO2 emissions by 48,000 tonnes, leaving only to 948,680 tonnes emitted per year. Finally, there is a suggestion that expanding Bristol will reduce the demand on other airports. This doesn’t really work considering that Heathrow are planning a third runway anyhow.

In conclusion, this is my website and I can write a long rant if I want to. Climate change is the most serious problem facing our civilization; it angers me when airport bosses and Conservative councillors place economic gain ahead of “emotional arguments” about the environment. I am proud of the Development Control committee this week; we have taken positive action now to reduce climate change.

I trust that when Bathwick elected a Liberal Democrat they knew that they were getting an environmentalist!

Nursery at Miles House

Miles House

Miles House, on Bathwick Hill by the canal, has finally been sold by the Avon & Wiltshire Mental Health Trust and bought by a childcare nursery chain.

Chris Dawson at the Bathwick Hill site got the scoop, although in my defence I had found out through Freedom of Information requests but was then not allowed to publish! Now there’s a big banner out the front and an advert at Bath Spa station, the cat is probably out tof the bag.

In planning terms, some minor altertaions are being made, but it is unlikely that any change of use application is needed. Buildings are classified within ‘use class orders’ allowing for changes within the class. Mile House has historically beeen ‘D1 Health Care’; child care is also classified as D1.

To conclude, we welcome Childbase to Bathwick and expect them to act as good neighbours.

Public footpath enquiry

Footpath AQ78 from Claverton to Coombe Downs

A long running footpath dispute will be settled by public enquiry next month.

A government inspector has been appointed to rule on the width of AQ78 – the footpath from Combe Down to the top of Widcombe Hill. Local councillor Nicholas Coombes pushed the issue at the B&NES footpath committee, proposing that the full width be enforced.

A fence has been erected in recent years reducing the width of the footpath, leaving a dark and narrow muddy track alongside the fence.

“It is important that the original width be reinstated,” says local resident Dr David Martin. “At full width this could also be a safe and convenient cycle route for pupils at Ralph Allen school and Bath University students.”

The enquiry will be on 25th August from 10am in the Claverton Down Community Hall. Cllr Coombes would like to hear from any long term residents who remember using the path before the dence was erected, or have other evidence of its original width. Already one resident has come forward who remembers walking the path, four alongside, with his family in the 1930s!

Committee controversy

In light of this week’s Chronicle I thought I’d better write a little about Development Control Committee, or ‘planning’.

Normally I try to keep this blog to mostly interesting local news items, with occasional mention mentions of council meetings – the Regulatory (Access) Committee is as fun as it sounds. To test this , I have set up a running poll to the left hand side of this page, just below the links. Kindly vote for ‘more’ or fewer’ committee stories, so that I don’t waste anyone’s time with long meeting minutes in the future.

However, last month’s planning meeting has spilt considerably into the news realm, with accusations of coersion, dishonesty and impropriety over the park and ride applications.

I voted to support two park and ride proposals, at Lansdown and Odd Down (although I am quite proud to have voted against this at a previous meeting). However, I could not support the third – an application to concrete over the river-side meadow at Bathampton for a 1,400 space car park (yes, I do know the Joni Mitchell song; by apparent co-incidence I returned home after the seven hour planning meeting to hear Big Yellow Taxi on the sterio). Given the level of congestion on the London Road and suppressed demand, the traffic report showed that the scheme would allow 1,400 extra car drivers into the city centre, without any reduction in congestion or pollution. This I assessed as particularly small gain, far outweighed by the huge inherent cost of paving an alluvial meadow in such an idyllic spot.

However, others did not agree with me, indeed two Liberal Democrats voted for the scheme, demonstrating an entirely split party vote. However, all six of the Conservative panel members backed the Conservative Cabinet’s scheme. Quasi-judicial committees such as planning should not operate a party whip system. It is entirely possible that the Conservative members, all being men of similar ages and backgrounds, chose by chance to vote in the same manner. I trust that this will be investigated by the standards board in course. However, the Liberal Democrats do not operate a party whip system on planning, or indeed any other meeting. At council meetings, we tend to vote together because we agree with each other!

The Newbridge Park and Ride and associated bus road application was not determined by the planning committee. Instead, the committee deferred the application as it felt that not enough evidence had been provided to support the scheme. Certainly, I felt the the transport justification was insubstantial, and voted to wait until more information was provided.

A government minister has now suspended the planning application while he decides whether to let the council decide it, or whether he will send it to a government inspector to decide. If it does come back to BathNES, it will come before my committee again, so at this point -to avoid impropriety – I should stop typing.

Sydney Gardens rail fence consultation

Railway track in Sydney Gardens 

Network rail are inviting your opinions on the difficult balance between safety and history.

Brunel’s railway line through Sydney Gardens is one of the least protected in the UK and the Railways Inspector is now insisting that Network Rail take action against trespass. Network Rail managers have commited funding to a solution, but as many residents will know, previous plans have stopped in their tracks (run out of steam/gone off the rails/been sidelined/hit the buffers…).

Network Rail will be exhibiting three posible solutions in Bath Library next week. I met with a representative this morning to discuss the plans; as they will not be available on-line, here is a summary:

1 – a fence to be fixed on top of the existing stone wall – this may look suitable, but may not be practical

2 – a fence placed in front of the stone wall – this is less attractive but more effective

3 – a ditch, with a fence in the centre, disguised with a hedge, in front of the wall – a slightly better option than it sounds, introduces a wide and deep hedge between the public and the trains.

All of the options will be on public display on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday (17th-19th Feb) between 10am and 6pm. Network Rail staff will be available in the library to explain the options. Plans can be sent out to those unavailable to see them during working hours.

I am glad of the opportunity for the public to examine the plans before they are implemented; Network Rail have had a poor reputation with consultation, so please do take this chance to get involved. Any solution will be controversial given the nature and protections of the park. I am also trying to make sure that this work ties in fully with plans to renovate Sydney Gardens to get the best value for money and best solution.