Application by Barnsley Council to knock down a pub they have bought: https://wwwapplications.barnsley.gov.uk/PlanningExplorerMVC/Home/ApplicationDetails?planningApplicationNumber=2021%2F0959#summary
If its not the brewery cashing in, or a volume housebuilder picking up recently closed pubs, then it turns out your Local Authority will knock your pub down for you. Barnsley Council purchased this pub with part of the £23.1m Towns Fund stipend it received from Central Government. An odd use of money considering there are derelict brownfield sites throughout the district that could be acquired via CPO much more economically. It is public money after all.
Goldthorpe has seen its centre carved out over the last few years, in spite of regeneration money pouring in and replacing the serviceable pavements with what appear to be stone bar codes. Demolishing the local is apparently the next step in this regeneration.
Although still trading in 2019, the pub has already gone such is the swiftness of an application to The Council by The Council. I really hate seeing pubs disappear at this rate.
Dilapidated north-light mill complex in Leeds to be cleared:
These are the demolitions that hurt the most, because as soon as I see the notice go into the planning portal, I know there is no hope. A messy, composite industrial building, in an area of low value, outside of any regeneration framework. The odds are firmly against buildings like these.
The frontage above which seamlessly transitions from domestic architecture to the end of the northlight factory floor is the stuff of dreams for the purveyors of industrial-chic, such as Urban Splash. If I was the planner I’d make sure this fade was retained and some high quality public realm secured to the front of this elevation to complement it.
Most people think these forges and factories are dirty old Leeds, that need to be expunged. I see a robustly designed building that maximises the industrial output of such a small plot, and creates a frontage to the road that is geometrically absurd, and unique. The shapes and textures you see above will never be replicated in industrial architecture again.
For years this factory operated as Blakeys Iron Works, producing boot potectors, of all things. Amazingly these ‘segs’ (as they are known) continue to me manufactured in Walsall. I’m sure Armley is still full of the workers who would have passed through these gates each day. Go have a wander down there before February 9th, before its gone.
Back Brade Farm, passed a bat inspection, and is about to be torn down – https://portal.calderdale.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=R5WJW3DW0CF00&activeTab=summary
Hopefully the two aerial images above show what has happened in this green belt area between Brighouse and Elland in the highly sought after M62 lands of West Yorkshire.
A farmhouse remains as an island in the midst of ground preparation for the arrival of 267 houses. The open countryside that has been sacrificed (along with a number of farm buildings already) can be seen to the aerial image on the right.
Plans for this volume housing estate excluded the farmhouse, and it looked as though the developer could see value in retaining Back Brade Farm from which I imagine the avenues, closes, drives, crescents, that emerge will all derive their quaint names. Alas no, they were just waiting for the bats to bugger off before tearing it down via permitted development. I’m sure they can squeeze in a couple more ‘products’ there you see.
Everything that is wrong with modern planning and housing delivery can be witnessed here. Indeed, there is no planning at all. This is delivery in full of exactly what the market would provide regardless. Cheap crass housing types perfect for brochures, each one a palatial statement of your individuality, each house isolated with no regard for context or history. The local planning authority may as well not exist.
Yes I understand we need housing, and that some of our green pastures must be sacrificed, but there are better ways. You can start by retaining some of what was previously there – the boundaries, the paths, the farm buildings, the topography, even perhaps some of the trees. Write a new chapter, not a new book.
An application for prior approval of the demolition of a series of High Street buildings in the town of Starbeck near Harrogate:
Built as Harper’s Grocery (a name still embossed in the stone), this building has stood derelict since a fire in 2018, which destroyed the roof and left the structure beyond repair, at least in the words of the developer.
The Conservation Officer in this instance has his hands tied by the fact that the building sits just outside the conservation area, albeit next door to a listed church. He has urged the reuse of the historic facade, but the plans show the building being replaced:
The building appears to be of a high quality, taking cues from the current structure. A good planner would manage to get the impressive facade retained, with any new development built of matching stone. The pre-application dialogue, not being a matter of public record, probably has established the outcome of this site already.
The redevelopment is supported with suspicious alacrity by the Ward Councillor. Fires, irreparable roofs, and zealous politicians always ring alarms bells with me. I’ll say no more…
UPDATE, THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN HOWEVER A RESUBMISSION MAY STILL BE MADE
Application to clear the site of Arlington Road primitive methodist chapel in Redcar and Cleveland:
A classic Wesleyan Church in ceremonial North Yorkshire is to be dropped to make way for housing, following an application made by the Council, to the Council.
Loftus is an (almost) coastal market town in Cleveland, and is a hidden gem of heritage.
This building represents the end of the high street and offers a landmark building to round-off the coherent street frontage of the town. Its loss will have a major impact on the townscape.
The church is in the conservation area and contributes immensely to it. The heritage statement argues that because the church is not mentioned directy, it is ‘of little heritage significance’. However the very purpose of a conservation area is a blanket protection, without the need to reference individual buildings, which are usually too numerous to detail but contribute to a heritage townscape.
The usual rhetoric of the building becoming an ‘eyesore’ and a ‘public health and safety concern’ is also present. The statement even argues that the flattened empty plot and close board hoardings would ensure ‘the appearance of the conservation area would be enhanced’
This is a good example of the democratic planning process being flouted. How can the Council determine an application submitted by The Council dispassionately? Is there any value in objecting when this is clearly a decision that was made behind closed doors a long time ago?
Plans to demolish and redevelop the former Debenhams building in Harrogate:
It was bound to happen. The collapse of Debenhams has left a vacuum of listless retail space in every high street across the country. Asset managers know they can’t find another department store tenant in the age of Amazon, and so we are going to see more and more of these Victorian/Edwardian department store buildings purged.
This is a particularly egregious example. Harrogate prides itself on its heritage. This is a Victorian spa town, and thousands flock there each year to see this charm. If you demolish it, then you will slowly lose that pull, and Harrogate will become irrelevant. Enough of the town was already lost to the concrete before the planners realised how precious Harrogate is.
This is a genuinely stunning example of Edwardian commercial architecture, with the striking wall end gables well suited to a highly prominent corner plot.
The building is quite clearly robust and has operated as a retail premise since the very recent collapse of Debenhams. There is absolutely no need to redevelop this site from the ground up. The only justification cited is the split levels and the nuanced space designed for retail. I am not familiar with the interior layout, but if it was operating as a modern department store in recent history, then surely it is still fit for purpose? Architects are supposed to be able to offer solutions to this kind of thing aren’t they?
This reason alone can not justify the loss of such a landmark building, which is in a conservation area and surrounded by listed buildings. If this building is lost, Harrogate Council will have proven that commercial interests trump heritage designation. There is no clearer example of when a planning authority needs to say no.
It is very sad to see that Heritage England, and the Harrogate Civic society are both supportive of the demolition. The County Council also appears confused, and has declined to comment because it is ‘a change in use’. How odd.
The heritage assesment that will ultimately condemn the building is by Woodhall Planning & Conservation. It must have been a strain to write up a report that recommends demolishing such a building. Describing this as a ‘redundant and tired building’ and claiming that the new introduction will bring ‘vitality to the conservation area around the clock’ is laughable. How do you sleep?
I urge any readers to get their comments into the Council as soon as possible.
Application to see off the last of the Hoyl Ing mills in Huddersfield:
Operating until 2007, this was one of West Yorkshire’s most persistent textile companies. Still in use for storage until 2013, much of the mill buildings were demolished following a fire, however the chimney and two of the 3 story buildings have somehow made it to 2022.
Being in a conservation area, the Council should be engaging with the developer to secure as much of the heritage asset as possible, as the industrial buildings in proximity to the residential terraces are the defining characteristic of Linthwaite’s conservation area. If this character is not respected and upheld, I fail to see the point of such a designation.
Further frustration in this instance comes from the knowledge that in 2014 far superior scheme was granted permission (shown below), which retained as much of the mill as possible, including the chimney, and generally respected the principle of the Conservation Area. The Council should therefore be in a position to refuse this new application as there is a principle of development contingent on preservation already in place. To give consent at this stage would be an inconsistency in their decision making.
The map and aerial image below show how the site has changed since 1900.
A converted 19th-century mansion house, now a Best Western hotel, is to be flattened for 50 homes:
This proposal comes much to the chagrin of local residents who have overwhelmingly objected to the idea. The original mansion is still visible behind the later additions, and a detailed history of the property is available here courtesy of research by Margaret McGlashan.
The hotel closed during the Covid-19 pandemic and did not reopen. I suppose the owners realised housing was the way to go. So this Victorian Manor, possibly the historic seat of Willerby, will be lost because of the lockdown. That’s important. We will slowly see this happen more as large property owners apply the guillotine to the risky elements of their portfolios. This is what happens when ownership is not local.
The historic map above shows the original manor house in isolation before it was consumed by the hotel complex. The distance between the village and the house on the maps provides so much narrative of the social history of East Yorkshire. When it’s not there anymore, neither is Willerby’s story.
Demolition of a stunning listed ecclesiastical building:
Another shocking application to denude Bradford of her history. This is the former Sunday school to the rear of Most Holy Trinity & Our Lady of Pochaiv Church in Manningham, and it is a stunning building, which cumulatively with the church forms an almost abbey size Catholic campus in the city.
The plan is to knock it down and get ten houses in there. Needless to say the housing crisis will be cited by the applicant as justification, when the building could clearly accommodate that many flats, with much lower carbon expenditure required.
A YouTube video here does a brilliant walk-around of the building. The structure appears to be sound. Granted, the windows are boarded up and someone has tagged the shutters, but the masonry looks as fresh as the day it was built. The roof also appears to be in order, particularly for a building that hasn’t been in full use for ten years. Then again, churches are built to last. I mean really last – beyond the market forces and council housing strategies of the moment.
There is no reason to demolish this building other than the fact that it would make more money as developable land. But when a building is listed, and in a conservation area, and immediately adjacent the setting of a church, and is consecrated ground (I could go on…) the economic imperative is second to its heritage significance.
How annoying that the Council is being emotionally blackmailed by the notion of enabling development that would subsidise the main church building. I need only mention that the Catholic Church is rolling in it, and doesn’t need subsidising at the expense of a crime against heritage.
I’m also saddened to see the Ukrainian Church supportive of the proposal. I mean no disrespect, but the congregation should not have the final say as putative owners. It may be their church now, but it wasn’t always. This was built for the people of Yorkshire long before and it remains our history.
A retrospective application (ie. its already happened) to demolish a pub South of Sheffield:
What an egregious way to manipulate the planning system. Tear down a local pub knowing that the law states you need permission for this and then ask for it retrospectively. What can they do? Say no and tell you to rebuild the thing? I highly doubt it.
It means a lot to see the high volume of public comments on the application, also exasperated with this criminal activity. A resident notes that the pub closed during lockdown, and this is grounds for it being described as an unviable business. There was a pandemic I seem to remember.
I would love to see the swines being made to build it back, brick by brick, to specifications set out by a heritage professional. And if their business goes under so be it. You broke the law and you deserve it.
That won’t happen. Despite the public ire the planning officer will want to avoid an appeal and the developer will get their 6 houses built out before the end of 2022.