What happened to concerns over hotel?

Hundreds of people in and around Bath, if not thousands, will have been saddened by the news of the acceptance by the planning committee of the Fragrance Group proposal to turn the Mineral Water Hospital into a hotel with a massive extension on the back. The extension is an imposition on the neighbouring residents and destroys the garden of the hospital.

Most disturbing was the spectacle of the committee councillors being taken in by the claims of the developers that they had “listened” to the objections last time and made a very different proposal this time. The truth is that now the extension is merely four bedrooms less and at the nearest point where it will tower over the nearest neighbours’ windows and patios, it is 1.3 metres further back – an insignificant amount added to 2.5 metres gap for a four-storey building. For the residents that extension will steal their only view of the sky. What happened to the councillors’ concern last time that the residents would have to crane their necks out of their windows to see the sky? This is virtually unchanged by 1.3 metres and a roof garden which replaces the four bedrooms.

Worst of all, the councillors were blissfully unaware that there were no substantive changes in the new plan. One admitted that she only looked briefly at the new proposal. Isn’t it her job to be properly prepared? The sunlight reaching the surrounding flats will be greatly reduced, even if now compliant with the very minimal industry standards.

Shouldn’t the councillors on the planning committee know what these standards signify? What happened to their concerns about the loss of reflected sunlight off the south of the Min being a large part of the light that reaches the local residents’ windows? That will still be lost with this greedy extension.

How is it that Listed Buildings appears willing to agree one rule regarding “significant harm” for big business and another for the ordinary owner-occupier of a listed building? How is it that trees with trunks larger than 7.5cm, in a conservation area, cannot legally be removed yet Fragrance will be allowed to destroy them with the council’s approval? Green and undeveloped spaces in the urban landscape “need to be preserved” says the Character Appraisal guidance and planning decisions must conform but Councillors claim the Appraisal is a draft still being worked on. However, having declared a Climate and an Ecological Emergency, could they water down the strongest requirement to “preserve” green spaces in a final version?

The planned extension to the Min is 27 bedrooms. With a willingness to control such greed and a bit more respect of the local residents and a valuing of the garden with its wealth of mature trees, plants, birds and bats, then a more civilised, decent compromise could have been reached and not merely four bedrooms less, whilst abusing every regulation possible.

Margaret Townley

by email