12 th November 2013
Response to the planning application - 13/04006/F - The Salvation Army Citadel 6 Ashley
Road
Proposal
Demolition of an existing corner building (the Building) fronting Brigstocke Road and Ashley
Road and is replacement by a community building linking with the Citadel on Ashley Road.
Introduction
KCG responds to planning applications that border on its conservation area. KCG sympathises with the applicant’s aspirations but regrets that it cannot support the planning application in its current form. KCG supports the objections made to this application by the
Montpelier Conservation Group.
Planning background
The development site lies within the St. Paul’s Conservation Area. Although the Building is unlisted, if the Council had adopted a Conservation Area Character Appraisal for the conservation area we are confident that it would have described the Building as an ‘unlisted building of merit’. KCG applied to the Council to include the Building in its local list of
Heritage Assets when the applicants first published their development proposals.
Appraisal of the current building
KCG regrets that the applicants’ ‘Heritage Statement’ fails to consider whether the Building has any architectural value or historic significance. The Building is a sophisticated contribution to the townscape. It occupies the corner site with authority and ease. It is well built in engineering brick, has an unusual crow step gable and other good detailing, particularly the fenestration. In the last few years, the physical appearance of Stokes Croft and Ashley Road has steadily improved. The Council will promote further improvement in this formerly run down area with the redevelopment of Westmoreland House and the
Carriageworks. The Building adds immeasurably to the visual interest of the area.
Furthermore, the Building has great historical and social value. The Building dates from early in the history of the Salvation movement in Bristol. The Building demonstrates its founders’ self-confidence in their mission, which the ‘Heritage Statement’ justifiably proclaims.

Appraisal of the proposed replacement building
KCG accepts that the applicants’ assessment that the Building fails to meet their current needs. That said the exterior of the proposed replacement building offers nothing to the public realm. This could be an ‘anywhere’ building. Both the Brigstocke Road and Ashley
Road frontages are undistinguished. Both elevations are composed of large areas of glass set within coloured render panels. The Brigstocke Road elevation contains a large roller shutter that would create a negative feature in the street. The massing, design and materials of the Ashley Road elevation do not acknowledge the elevation of the Citadel and create visual confusion. Coloured render is an inferior material to the current brick elevation. KCG submits that the appearance of the proposed replacement building from the public realm is inferior to the Building, which the applicants propose to demolish.
Planning policy
Bristol Local Plan 1997 (Local Plan) policy B2 requires that design should have regard to local context and B5 that development should seek to reinforce local identity.
Bristol Development Framework Core Strategy 2011 (Core Strategy) policy BCS21 broadly requires high quality urban design and BCS22 requires that heritage assets and the character and setting of areas of acknowledged importance are safeguarded or enhanced. These two policies must be interpreted together. In the historic environment setting of the Building, the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act requires that the local planning authority should have special regard to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the setting of listed buildings or (Section 66) and in Section 72, the character or appearance of conservation areas.
The area has a mixed character, but the appeal site is in a highly sensitive position. The neighbouring buildings on the north side of Ashley Road are mostly listed. The unlisted houses on the south side of Ashley Road and in Brigstocke Road are valuable 19 th century housing stock. These houses have carefully designed street elevations in various historic styles constructed with traditional building materials. Paragraph 132 of the National
Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) requires that great weight should be given to the conservation of heritage assets. The boundaries chosen for the conservation character areas indicate the different character areas to be found in the Building’s vicinity.
Key Issue – would the replacement building conserve, enhance or harm the conservation area?
For the reasons given, the quality of the elevations of the replacement building would fall well short of good design that the Framework, Section 7 requires particularly because it would fail to respond to local character and history (paragraph 58). The Building would fail to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the St. Paul’s Conservation Area and it would harm the conservation area. The Building would fail to provide good quality design as required by the Framework and it would fail the broad requirements of the development plan policies. The Council should refuse the planning application for the replacement building. The collateral effect would be that without a planning permission for a replacement building the applicants could have no permission to demolish the current building. The loss of the Building would be a considerable and harmful loss to the character of this part of the conservation area.

KCG respectfully reminds the Council of the decision in relation to the nearby planning application 12/04120/F in respect of 7 Ashley Road. On the 1 st August 2013, a Planning
Inspector refused an appeal against the Planning Committee’s refusal of planning permission. KCG acknowledges that every planning application must be decided on its own merits but some of the reasons for refusal are relevant to the current application. They were that the proposal would detract from and harm the setting of the nearby listed buildings and it would represent an incongruous feature in the streetscene harming the character and appearance of this part of the Conservation Area. KCG respectfully suggests that the planning officer seeks internal advice from the Urban Planning Team.
KCG is sensitive to the applicants’ requirement to have a building suitable for their current needs. KCG would not object to the demolition of the Building if redevelopment were to be constructed behind the preserved street elevations