CONSERVATION LOGCASEWORK NOTES OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2013
The GHS conservation team received 349 new cases in England and 11 new cases in Wales between October and December (inclusive), inaddition to ongoing work on previously logged cases. Written responses were submitted by GHS and/or CGTs for the following cases. In addition to the responses below,3‘No Comment’ responses were lodged by GCTs in response to planning applications included in the weekly lists.
Site / County / GHS ref / Reg grade / Proposal / Written responseKings Weston / Avon / E13/0407 / II / PLANNING APPLICATION Outline application for 990sqm of Enterprise Units, Karakai, Penpole Lane, BS11 0EA / [CGT WRITTEN RESPONSE]
The Avon Gardens Trust would like to register its strong objections to this proposal which would cause serious harm to the designated heritage assets of Kings Weston, contrary to national and local planning policies.
Formed in 1987, the Avon Gardens Trust is one of the earliest county gardens trusts to have been established. One of its roles is to help safeguard the heritage of historic, designed landscapes within the former County of Avonby advising local planning authorities on statutory and non-statutory parks, gardens and designed landscapes of importance.
From its inception the Trust has been interested and concerned about the historic landscape of Kings Weston, first publishing an article about the Park in 1988 (which English Heritage used as a reference when designating Kings Weston as a Historic Park and Garden of Special Historic Interest).
The AvonGardens Trust is now working in partnership with The Garden History Society in responding to planning proposals. The Garden History Society is the statutory consultee for proposals affecting historic landscapes on English Heritage’s Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest.
This new working structure allows us to utilise our detailed local knowledge and expertise, together with the support of The Garden History Society, to ensure that your Council, as the local planning authority, receives authoritative specialist advice on planning and conservation matters regarding applications affecting historic parks and gardens and their settings.
The Trust considered this planning application at a recent Committee meeting, and asks you to take the following into account.
Planning History
Within the application site and in a different ownership is a converted reservoir building which
has permission for a Class B8 Storage or Distribution Use with three adjacent parking spaces and a right of access to Penpole Lane. This warehouse is occupied by Karakol.
A football changing room/social club known as Fairways was previously sited between the Karakol warehouse and Penpole Lane. In 1992 outline permission was given for its replacement on the same site by a single storey public house. The Fairways building was then demolished.
Subsequently English Heritage extended the registered Kings Weston Park to include the whole parkland associated with Kings Weston, bringing the application site within its boundary.
The Government published Planning Policy Guidance 15 which advised local authorities to “protect registered parks and gardens in preparing development plans and in determining planning applications”.
The Bristol Local Plan was adopted in 1997 which accorded with this Government advice by containing
Policy NE9 “Historic parks and gardens and other designed landscapes of national and local importance defined on the Proposals Map and described in the Appendix will be protected. Development which would adversely affect the character or appearance of historic landscapes, and in the case of nationally important sites, their settings will not be permitted.”
and Policy NE10 “…Priority will be given to pursuing restoration of the following historic landscapes (iii) Kingsweston House grounds”
In view of these changed material considerations, in 1997 the Council refused the renewal of the outline permission for the public house due to its harmful effect upon the Grade II registered Kings Weston Park, the setting of the Grade I listed Kings Weston House and the Kings Weston and Trym Valley Conservation Area.
An appeal against this decision was dismissed in 1998 (see attached). The Inspector concluded that:
“4. The buildings on the site have been demolished…..In Iddendum v SSE [1972]WCR 1433 it was held that a use cannot survive if the buildings necessary to sustain it are removed. It follows that any use rights, associated with the former public house, have been lost in planning terms.
11. The appeal site is in a prominent position near to Shirehampton Road. The proposed development would introduce buildings and commercial activity into the heart of the registered KingswestonPark. In my view the development would seriously intrude into, and harm, the spacious open parkland appearance and natural landscape character of KingswestonPark contrary to Policy NE9 of the adopted Local Plan and national policy advice in paragraph 2.24 of PPG15. It would also harm the setting of Kingsweston House, a Grade I listed building, insofar as Kingsweston Park provides a fine and appropriate setting for the House, contrary to the aims of Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
12. I reach these conclusions notwithstanding the presence of nearby buildings to which you refer, in particular the converted reservoir building (contained by the appeal site) and the two-storey pavilion to the west. These buildings detract from the appearance and character of KingswestonPark. Nevertheless the proposed development would considerably add to the harm caused by built development even though it would screen these buildings to some extent. Moreover it would run counter to Policy NE10 of the adopted Local Plan under which the Council would well bring forward proposals for the removal of existing inappropriate buildings in “Kingsweston House Grounds”, such as the existing buildings referred to above.
13. The Kingsweston and Trym Valley Conservation Area comprises the prominent ridge of land linking the villages of Shirehampton and Henbury, and contains the former estates of Kingsweston House and BlaiseCastle House. Almost all the registered KingswestonPark falls within the Conservation Area. KingswestonPark makes a significant contribution to the fine quality of the landscape in the Conservation Area. Harming the character and appearance of KingswestonPark would seriously harm the character and appearance of the Conservation Area contrary to the aims of Section 72(1) and Policy B13 of the adopted Local Plan
14. In summary the proposed development is contrary to policy in the development plan, contrary to the requirements of section 72(1), and contrary to national policy advice…
15. There have been significant changes in material circumstances since the outline planning permission was granted in 1992. These changes fully justify a counter decision on this occasion.
16. For the above reasons, and in exercise of the powers transferred to me, I dismiss your client’s appeal.”
In 2010 Application No.10/01531/P was submitted for outline permission for the siting and means of access to 11,000 sq ft of Use Class BI and B8 “enterprise units”. Design, external appearance and landscaping were reserved for future approval One building was to be sited alongside the eastern boundary, with a rear elevation backing onto the Park of 54m (175 ft), and the second building was to be sited alongside the boundary to Penpole Lane in front of the Karakol warehouse. Both buildings were sited under the canopies of two avenue trees to Penpole Lane. 42 car parking spaces were proposed.
Objections to this proposal were made by English Heritage, the Garden History Society, the Council’s Conservation Advisory Panel, the Kings Weston Action Group, the Avon Gardens Trust, the Oasis Academy, the Shirehampton Cricket Club and members of the public.
English Heritage wrote :
“Whilst we fully acknowledge that this area of the King’s Weston park is already degraded and compromised by the existing development, it nevertheless still constitutes the designed setting of the grade I-listed King’s Weston House, regardless of whether the site is visible from the primary heritage asset or not.
Any proposal to increase the level of development within the designed landscape would only serve to further erode its integrity, and to further harm the significance of the heritage asset and, we would suggest, be in conflict with government guidance as laid out in P.P.S.5, particularly Policy HE10.”
The Council refused the application for the reason:
1. The proposed development, by reason of the combination of its excessive scale and character would be detrimental to the function, historic interest and visual amenity of the Grade 2 listed Parkland of the Kingsweston Estate in particular and the Kingsweston and Trym Valley Conservation Area in general. Proposals would fail to either preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Kingweston and Trym Valley Conservation Area. For the reasons given the proposals are contrary to policies, NE9 and B22 of the Bristol Local Plan (December 1997) together with policies BCS21 and BCS22 of the Bristol Development Framework Core Strategy
(April 2011); SPD 7 Archaeology and Development (March 2006) and PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment March 2010).
In 2011 the Kings Weston Action Group was formed to promote the conservation and enhancement of the historic Kings Weston Park. The Group has been working closely with Council officers, the National Trust and English Heritage, as a result of which the Council has produced a Draft Conservation Management Plan which is at the consultation stage. The Group has tirelessly championed the Park undertaking physical restoration work, making new discoveries through their research, and holding exhibitions, tours and talks.
As a result, the interest in the history of the Park and support for the future restoration of its key features is now huge.
Current application
This is an outline application, reserving all five matters for future approval, for 11,000 sq ft of Use Class B1 and B8 “enterprise units.”
Illustrative plans have been submitted showing one possible scheme that could be sought permission for at the reserved matters stage. These show the building which was located alongside Penpole Lane in the previous application now sited behind the Karakol warehouse, the buildings sunk into the ground and with curved, ‘green’ roofs. They also show proposed works on the adjoining Council-owned parkland (screen planting, removing tennis courts and car parking, and relocating the war memorial), but these are outside the application site and not the subject of a Section 106 Agreement, and so are not part of the application.
Assessment of the proposal
Lack of detailed plans
With all five matters reserved for future approval, insufficient information has been submitted to fully assess the proposal and its effect on the heritage assets. An outline permission should not be granted without knowledge of the number of the proposed buildings and their siting, height and appearance, and where vehicle parking, turning areas and any landscaped areas would be. Without these essential details, the outline application should be refused.
Insufficient understanding of the heritage assets
The National Planning Policy Framework states in paragraph 128
“In determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary. Where a site on which development is proposed includes or has the potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation.”
Contrary to this, the application makes no reference to the Council’s Draft Conservation Management Plan, nor does it include a Heritage Statement or any archaeological assessment or field evaluation of the application site and its historical context. The Management Plan refers to a mid 18th century building on or near the south-east corner of the site, which is likely to be endangered by the proposed building works and needs to be investigated.
Furthermore, the Design and Access Statement p 13 Impact on Historic Landscapes says
“Although the site technically lies within the boundary of the RegisteredPark it is not classified as Historic Landscape, unlike the parkland itself. The boundary controls areas which could impact on the public park; this site is not a part of the park as enjoyed or perceived today.”
And p.11 Bristol local plan says
“The site is not allocated for any particular use in the Adopted Bristol Local Plan, but it is omitted from the surrounding ’open space’ classification”
This is not the case. Being within English Heritage’s boundary of the registered Park, the application site is clearly part of this heritage asset and classified as historic landscape, and it is hatched as “Historic Landscapes NE9” and within the “Historic Landscape Restoration Sites NE10” on the Proposals Map of the Bristol Local Plan.
Harm to the heritage assets
As the Planning Inspector concluded in 1998, when dismissing the appeal for the much smaller public house located between the warehouse and the Lane, a development here would have a harmful effect upon
1. The Grade II registered, Kings Weston House Park, a historic landscape of national importance described as “A mid to late C18 park, laid out with advice from Lancelot Brown, containing the remains of a formal layout dating from Sir John Vanbrugh’s early C18 redevelopment of an earlier site”. The Park is the designed setting of the Sir John Vanbrugh-designed Grade I listed House. It contains three other buildings designed by Sir John Vanbrugh which are also Grade I listed (the Loggia, Brewhouse and Echo), two Grade II* listed buildings designed by Robert Mylne (the Stables, and the two lodges, pool and walled garden) and twelve Grade II listed buildings (eg the five Lodges to the Park and the ice house). Apart from the application site and the Karakol warehouse which are private ownership, the 220 acres of the Park are owned either by the Council or (south of Shirehampton Road) the National Trust, and are accessible to the public either as a public park or by using public footpaths.
2. The Grade I Listed Kings Weston House, designed by Sir John Vanbrugh forEdward Southwell and built in 1712-19. Grade I Listed Buildings areof “exceptional interest, sometimes considered to be internationally important. Just 2.5% of Listed Buildings are Grade I” (English Heritage). The House is accessible to the public through its use for corporate and private events (such as weddings) and as a café, and is currently undergoing further restoration of its fabric.
3. The Kingsweston and Trym Valley Conservation Area, which covers the historic parklands of the Kings Weston and Blaise Castle Houses which provide an area of quasi-rural character within the urban area of Bristol.
Paragraphs 132 and 133 of the National Planning Policy Framework state that
“When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification.”
“Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss…”
The Gardens Trust considers that the proposed development would seriously harm the designated heritage assets, far more than the public house regarded as unacceptable by the Planning Inspector in 1998. It would have no public benefits which would outweigh that harm.
The introduction of industrial and warehousing uses would bring an alien commercial activity into the heart of the registered Park, harming the character and appearance of this historic landscape, the designed setting of the Kings Weston House and the Conservation Area. The manoeuvring of considerable numbers of heavy vehicles, vans and cars into and out of the development would be visually intrusive, noisy and disturbing. Unsympathetic highway works would also be necessary. For the previous application the Council’s Traffic Management Team said a footway along Penpole Lane should be provided, setting back the boundary hedge, as well as an island at the junction with Shirehampton Road. “The developer should be asked to provide the above footway, island and lighting (in the area near the site access). “Access for large trucks appears very tight, and an alternative entrance further down Penpole Lane should be considered if there is any prospect of large vehicles entering.” Security fencing and signage would also be likely.