Civic Society Comments

Details of BCS Response to some of the Applications about the Avon Gorge Hotel. 29th March 2006

The Society wishes to make the following comments on the 8 applications for planning permission or related consents presently on the register.

06/00525/F/C and 00532/LA/C - Mansard addition to 11 and 12 Princes Buildings

We understand this change is supported by Clifton and Hotwells Improvement Society but not by English Heritage. We agree with English Heritage; the key consideration is to enhance and not diminish the very special character of Princes Buildings and the proposal does not achieve this.

06/00529/F/C and 00533/LA/C - Construction of new pavilion above the ballroom
etc.

The proposed function building and pavilion look to be a neat architectural approach to restoration of the ballroom. However, there are problems of impact both on the conservation area and the setting of the suspension bridge and on the amenity of surrounding occupiers, this relates not only to car parking which has already attracted much criticism.

In terms of conservation area impact, in the first place the open view westwards down Caledonia Place and across the site is important, an example of the open spaces which are part of the texture of the Clifton Conservation Area (see the Enhancement Statement 1993, p.20, para.8 and p.24, para.20). The function building would largely remove this outlook to the countryside of Somerset. It is possible that the gap over the ballroom creating this important outward view was deliberately engineered when the hotel was built. Whether this proves to be so or not, the townscape importance of the gap is much the same.

The second conservation impact to be considered is the effect of the ballroom alterations on the emerging view towards the suspension bridge as one travels north along Princes Buildings and then Sion Hill. This is difficult to assess without any illustration and the applicant or the Council should provide this now, as well as the information mentioned about Caledonia Place.
In terms of loss of amenity for the local area, the conversion of the ballroom roof to a viewing deck for people attending functions is almost bound to create problems which we believe represent valid planning objections. The deck will be a highly attractive platform from which patrons will be able to enjoy views over the Avon Gorge and south Bristol in one direction, and the suspension bridge together with Clifton Down in the other. However, this will be at the expense of the privacy and general amenity of people living and walking nearby, because of the low level and lack of screening of the viewing deck.

During the daytime there will also be a limited impact on southward views from the near end of Clifton Down and from around the Look-Out; this is likely to intensify in the evenings with lighting and increased noise from the deck and the two glazed roof structures having a significant impact on the surroundings.

06/00496/LAJC and 00500/F/C - New conservatory and restaurant etc.

The last two paragraphs regarding the ballroom proposals apply with even more force to the intrusion of the expanded restaurant project around the main hotel terrace. Although the comments about local intrusion caused particularly by the way the function accommodation is set just above the street do not apply, the overall visual impact of the restaurant facilities will probably be worse because these reach further towards the gorge. We trust the Council will be taking up these questions with the applicants and, for example, arranging some demonstration of the effects under evening lighting.

Because of the scanty information supplied to enable visual impact to be judged, we can only say at present that the sum total of
amenity impact from this application and the one discussed above appears to justify refusal of both, even before considering the Princes Lane car parking, the treatment of the landscaped terraces and the general traffic objections.

06/00489/F/C - Car park at Princes Lane and terraces below.

This development involves a change from the sporadic parking there at present, and engineering works to widen the lane.
Potential development pressure is noted in the Enhancement Statement 1993, p.23, para.(g)(i). Our understanding is that the hotel buildings fronting the lane should form the lower boundary of development on this side of the gorge, in order to retain its wild character going northwards from Windsor Terrace.

The main viewpoints would be from the Look-Out and the entrance to Princes Lane, the suspension bridge itself, and the towpath on the Somerset side of the river. The changes would produce a discordant note. The slight alleviation of parking problems from 19 new spaces would not begin to justify such an intrusion.

The treatment of the landscaped terraces is almost as problematic. The terraces would be partly gardens and partly grassed areas, all perhaps for outdoor use by guests from various parts of the complex, and perhaps the public as well. It will be difficult to control changes to the arrangements and opening the terraces to the public would lead to pressure to provide for alfresco drinking. Even without this, the introduction of lawns and gardens would make for a dreadful suburbanisation of the area which is most visible from the bridge.

In our opinion, any opening up of these terraces, which run nearly to the foot of the gorge, to significant numbers of people will entirely alter the character of these parts of the gorge slopes and should be resisted, leaving the details of planting to be separately negotiated. Your directorate will be aware of the 1971 public inquiry and the Inspector's comments when the last major development was proposed in the Avon Gorge by the then Grand Spa Hotel.

06/00439/F/C - Conversion of houses in Princes Lane.

We have no comment on this application.

Traffic and Parking

We have not specifically mentioned matters of great local concern, namely, the present parking difficulties and friction between patrons and local residents, with the near-certainty that implementing the major elements of he hotel development proposals will make matters worse. We support these apprehensions and believe the prospective problems make for a valid planning objection. In essence, the hotel complex is handicapped by its site and the very features with which it seeks to draw people to it. We ask for all the applications to be withdrawn as a preliminary to a more up-to-date neighbourhood involvement exercise.

Gordon Tucker.