Preferred Option Consultation St Mary Le Port/Castle Park
Response by Roger Mortimer 17/10/14
INTRODUCTION
It is agreed that the STMLP site is in a deplorable state and urgently needs redevelopment.
That restoring Mary Le Port Street to recreate the link from the Glass Arcade to the park, including improving the setting of the church tower, is essential. Also that extending the St
Nic’s Market activity and similar retailing into the redevelopment is sound, as is the use of the site to provide housing.
Detailed response to consultation document.
9.3.3 page 47. The overriding objectives for the area would be to safeguard and enhance
Castle Park, including its heritage assets, as a large, publicly accessible city centre open space.
Agreed.
9.3.4 Castle Park does not need regeneration. It has not failed.
It does need replacement of play facilities, improvements to historical interpretation, minor footpath alterations, repair to damage caused by use for major events, repair of retaining walls, overhaul of seating.
All the above were included in the joint community and officer review of the park. This was the basis of the Neighbourhood Partnership bid for Capital Stimulus Funding for which the
Neighbourhood Partnership was awarded £500,000, which has still to be expended.
The Park thus does not depend on regeneration .…through the redevelopment of the STMLP site. This would however incur additional costs to the park associated with the interface with development.
9.3.5 ‘Street pattern….’
Agreed.
Mary Le Port St can be reinvented as pedestrian street which connects to the existing footpath route in Castle Park which runs on the line of the former Mary Le Port St. Bridge St can be retained in present form.
__________________________________________________________________________
Policy BCAP37:
St Mary Le Port Suggested uses
Basically agreed.
An appropriately sized and well integrated extension of the St. Nicholas Market / Old City retail activity has the potential for success. It is thus important that a very wide range of retail type activity is encouraged, with the floor space flexibly let, realistically priced and actively managed. The extent of retail space implied by the Preferred Option would appear to be seriously optimistic and would further damage Broadmead and the old city traders.
Active ground floor uses. i.e. basically retail. Agreed, this is needed to frontages to
High/Wine Streets and in Mary Le Port St. Retail less realistic for frontages facing park due to poor footfall. Shops do not in any case provide much surveillance to parks, as they are closed at critical times. P1

Note. The issue of anti-social behaviour in Castle Park is overstated. There were issues in the remote children’s play area and behind Norwich Union. These basically relieved by CCTV to play castle area and new railings by tower. Residential use will be far more likely to provide surveillance. Residential use should a mix of types for social reasons and to maximise sources of funding. Live/work homes would be an appropriate component.
Other possible uses. If a hotel operator or other userr than retail/market and residential is interested this should be seriously considered and might alter the form of development while still meeting key considerations – for example remaking Mary Le Port street, providing active frontages, protecting trees and not taking park land.
High quality new built form etc . See detailed comments later.
____________________________________________________________
9.3.6
Questionnaire
Q. To bring forward a well-designed and viable scheme should the area proposed for development fall within the boundary indicated ?
A. No. For these reasons.
1. Loss of green park space.
The boundary shown includes substantial areas of Castle Park land which was not included in the development site as clearly defined in the previous planning consultations. The February
2012 Options Consultation. The park land in question includes is noted as Important Open
Space and Local Historic Parks and Garden. This park land makes up approximately 40% of the proposed site.
The previous Parks and Green Space Strategy noted a deficit of in such space in the Central area. Demand has grown since that date and is increasing due to additional residential use in the area, both new build and conversion of office buildings. Losing existing space to new development is unacceptable and contrary to Green Infrastructure policy. This is also in direct contravention of the cross party council agreement not to dispose of any more green spaces following the Area Green Space Plan consultation in 2010.
Further, the areas concerned are particularly valuable within Castle Park. They are almost entirely grass with some trees. They are very accessible to users, being close to the Wine St main entrance to the park and thus Broadmead.
The threatened area also includes one of the main park entrances, that from the south west
(Bristol Bridge ) This relatively small area, with its trees and grass has been identified, under the CSF study, for funding to improve the presentation of the park entrance, including additional public seating.
All these areas, which are linked by the diagonal cherry avenue are well used for casual relaxation, for example by local workers at lunchtime and shoppers at all times including weekends. Their loss to development is unacceptable.
They should be excluded from the development site for the above reason but also because if they are included then trees on them, which are valuable for landscape and environmental reasons would be at risk.
2. Financial viability. P2
The financial viability of is the reason given for increasing the development site area by use of park land. It is understood that a report by Retail Consultants concluded that development

would not have sufficient critical mass without including more retail space i.e. on the grass park area adjoining Wine St.
There are no figures such as the required retail floor space or frontage to support the assertion concerning critical mass of retail. The type of use and quantum of (non- retail) upper floor space will be a major factor in the viability of the development. There is no information on this.
The inclusion of park land is not justified on viability grounds.
9.3.7
Q. To enable the narrowing of High and Wine Streets closer to their historic proportions should any existing street trees be removed and replaced elsewhere?
A . NO. For these reasons.
1. The urban design theory is flawed. a. Street pattern.
The narrowing of High Street and Wine Street to ‘recreate the lost quarter of the old city’ and
‘restore historic street pattern’ has been a key concept of planning briefs since 2001. In 13 years, including boom times for property, this policy has failed to secure a development.
This approach would have been achievable from 1945 until 1960, when the then Council
(despite massive public objection, including that of the Civic Society) granted leases to
Norwich Union and Bank of England, and also substantially widened High St and Wine St.
The option of retaining the street pattern and recreating the ‘historic’ elevations existed. This was done in some UK cities, but particularly in Europe, and was a valid planning approach. It was not adopted here.
In view of the dire development that was built here it is understandable that some people are attracted to the suggestion that this part of the historic heart of the city can still be recreated.
In practice the suggested narrowing of the streets would not achieve the aim of restoring, recreating or even celebrating the ‘lost quarter of the city.’ Only planners, architects and some historians might understand why these streets are where they are. Bristolians and visitors would be far more aware of the quality of the public space that they see and use than the obscure historical reference proposed.
Although there are no plans to support the preferred option enough can be deduced to see that alternative approaches, which could improve the public realm, should be considered. b. reinstatement of Dutch House and High Cross.
It is clearly impossible to do this on the historic sites. High St and Wine Street were only c. 10 m. wide at the Dutch House corner, not even within the enlarged site now being promoted. Any replacement would inevitably be differently sited, diminishing historic relevance. There is no justification for narrowing the streets to build artificial history and this approach is completely at odds with Bristol’s reputation as a modern creative city.
However it could be valid to reference the past by using oak frame, with modern oak construction techniques for a part of the redevelopment. It does not require narrowed streets to do this.
Similarly, the High Cross was located in the middle of the old crossroads. If some form of symbolic cross / sculpture is required paved space nearby or across the road could be the location for a modern landmark oak framed structure which celebrates the centre of the old city. Also, see later - 2. Creating new ‘public realm’.) P3

c. Impact of Traffic.
The damaging effect of unrestricted traffic on High St and much of Wine Street is not dealt with in this consultation. There is reference to priorities for pedestrians and cyclists, including possible shared surfaces, but no acknowledgement of the impact of vehicular traffic - let alone solutions. No new public transport or traffic plans have been tabled.
These streets are used by some 10 bus services, including some that have a 10 or 15 minute frequency, mainly serving east and south Bristol. The 2012 Movement Framework designates part of Wine Street as a bus interchange. In the absence of any alternative this public transport traffic will continue to have a major impact on the pedestrian environment.
It has to be assumed that even if private cars were banned ( adversely affecting access to the Galleries car park which underpins Broadmead) access to the businesses in Broad St, including a major hotel, requires two way traffic to continue. This will include buses, some double decker, taxis and some service vehicles. If these streets are narrowed it will force pedestrians to walk closer to traffic, in streets where the impact of pollution will be greater due the canyon effect of narrower streets, and with the pollution moderating effect of trees lost.
Some minor reduction of highway width and reduction of radius at the Corn St corner can probable be achieved, together with distinctive surfacing, but vehicular traffic will continue to be a major source of city centre pollution, air quality, noise in this location.
Impact of preferred option and alternative approach .
Preferred option
‘Narrowing’ implies that the new buildings will be built close to the back of pavement line existing highway. This would result in High St, for example, being about 15m. wide between building fronts, with pedestrians using standard pavements between buildings and traffic.
See Attachment A
This proposed narrowing to c. 15m. in High St and c.20m in Wine St would exaggerate the effect of pollution and noise, affecting both street level and upper floors, many of which are or will be residential.
(The preferred option indicates the removal of at least ten plane trees. See Green
Infrastructure below)
Alternative Approach – creating new public realm in High St and Wine St.
1. Building line.
Generally retaining the present building line giving a distance of 30m. between the upper floors buildings in High St. and 35m in Wine St. The much wider space would avoid the additional shadowing caused by the proposed street narrowing, particularly in the east/west orientated Wine St. It would also lessen the amount and effect of pollution and noise in both streets to the benefit of pedestrians and those living above the shops.
There are no existing trees in the lower part of High St, opposite St Nicholas St and Church.
Here new development could be built tight to the existing back of pavement, creating a narrowing here.
2. Creating new ‘public realm’.
New landscaped trading and social areas between new shop frontages and highway. This would allow pedestrians to circulate well away from traffic. P4

The edge of these new trading areas, next to the highway, would mark the narrower street pattern at ground level, using kiosks, market stalls, screen walls, planters etc. to define and partially screen the new trading and social areas.
This would provide an opportunity for imaginative and extensive historic interpretation, which could really show why this historic crossroads is so important. This could conveying far more information than ‘narrowed’ streets. The major presence of market stalls, kiosk shops etc, and the activity that these generate could be seen as a reference to life in this part of medieval Bristol.
The new public realm areas would be re-paved and landscaped, including dealing with the distorted cobbled areas around the trees. It would be designed to accommodate public seating, tables and planting, public art, historical interpretation etc. Kiosks, locations for market stalls, designated areas for outdoor seating for cafes etc.
All taking place under the retained plane trees, which would be managed to ensure their health and appropriate shape and canopy size etc. and which would continue to provide shade in summer and help with improving the air quality in the Old City area .
The new market scene created in this way could provide an atmosphere that equalled the quality that helps to sustain the present Corn St and Old City market areas.
The new trading and social areas would extend from where the trees start in High St round into Wine St as far as the junction with Castle Park. The new areas would need to be actively managed, perhaps as an extension of St N market regime.
3. Approaching the new spaces.
From Corn St, Broad St the retained trees and new trading spaces would be a far more enticing prospect than the narrowed treeless streets of the preferred option. Looking up High
St towards Christchurch the trees and market stalls would continue to attract. From the Glass
Arcade archway, trees would frame to entrance to the recreated Mary Le Port St.
Green infrastructure
Preferred option
This does not accord with the Council’s policy over green issues in general and the trees in
High St and Wine St in particular. The 2012 Central Area Action Plan and Public Realm &
Movement Framework. Policy OC2 states, ‘the few street trees in the area have great
visual significance providing focal points and softening the tight urban environment’. Also,
‘the line of mature trees flanking High Street and Wine Street provide a visual link to
Broadmead’. (Agreed - in other words the trees are an asset, not something that gets in the way of a debatable urban design theory).
The trees do not just provide a visual link to Broadmead, but also tie into Castle Park.
Together with the existing trees fronting the southern corner they create a park-like setting, within which the buildings sit. This accords with today’s public support for parks and greenery. New buildings should also be designed to sit in the park setting, not destroy it.
The proposal to fell 40 year old plane trees to enable the narrowing of High St and Wine St is completely contrary to approved policy and would dishonour Bristol’s Green Capital status. It would have damaging environmental consequences. The contribution of trees to health, wellbeing and amenity is particularly important in these busy streets in the heart of Bristol, where the present canopy has an on-going major role in providing the good micro-climate needed. *
See footnote. (P5)
The proposal to mitigate loss of tree canopy with replacement tree planting elsewhere cannot compensate for loss of these trees, which stand in hard surfacing adjacent to traffic and are thus able to deliver maximum environmental benefit. Castle Park itself does not need

additional trees. It is difficult to see where say 100 new trees (using the mitigation multiplier) could be planted, in hard surface, any way near the site. Further, it would be up to 20 years before the new tree cover equalled that lost.
Footnote - Environmental and climate change benefits of urban trees
- absorption of rainfall and reduction of run-off to sewers/flooding risk
- improved air quality by removal of pollution/particulates
- maintain urban bio-diversity
- mitigate effect of street temperature increase by providing summer shade
- reduced need for air conditioning, and thus energy consumption
- visual and psychological benefits, including softening the impact of buildings
Attachment
A Diagrammatic sections comparing ‘preferred option’ with possible alternative.
B Diagrammatic plan showing possible option creating trading/social areas and preserving trees. TO FOLLOW
Roger Mortimer, 30 Elmgrove Rd BS6 6AJ 0117 924 0136 rogermortimer@jwmmail.net

Attachment A