Cheltenham Civic Society (CCS) has submitted very strong objections to both planning proposals to erect permanent structures on the forecourts of 125-133 Promenade.
“In planning, it’s often possible to add relatively large rear extensions without needing planning permission, but a general rule is that you can’t add much more than a porch to the front of a typical house without submitting a detailed planning application,” said Civic Society Chair, Andrew Booton. “This is to preserve the character and appearance of the area. In this case, we are dealing with three of Cheltenham’s architectural treasures in the Central Conservation Area, with plans for large, freestanding pavilions in front of them. Either of the proposed structures would have a much greater negative impact on these three Grade II* Regency villas than any small domestic extension ever could.”
The Civic Society’s objections centre around the pavilions causing huge damage to the setting and appearance of three exceptionally fine buildings. Those structures would be completely out of place in Imperial Square, a highly sensitive part of the town’s Central Conservation Area. Grade II* buildings are particularly important buildings of more than special interest – which places them in the top 6% of all listed buildings.
The Civic Society believes that the proposals should not be judged on whether or not they are better than the temporary tents that are there at present. These should have been removed after the failure of the previous two planning applications and the lost planning appeal, and their retention is therefore unlawful. The proper starting point should be with the setting and appearance of the three villas as they were before the Covid-19 pandemic, without any tents present.
Furthermore, the economic impact statement submitted in support of the planning applications is wholly unconvincing because it is not much more than an estimate of the financial benefits the tents currently generate for 131.
The Society recognises the excellent work that the owners have done in the past to restore these buildings and, while implacably opposed to the applications, it has suggested an alternative to 131 – which is to erect a pavilion at the rear of the site.
If elegantly designed, such a development would protect their business model and respect the heritage setting. It would also free up the forecourts to return to their pre-Covid use for tables and small parasols for light refreshments.
During peak periods like the race week and our town’s many festivals, that forecourt space could also make use of temporary structures allowed under Class BB of the General Development Order issued by the government after the pandemic. Class BB allows temporary structures on the site of listed buildings up to 3m high, covering the lesser of a floor area of 50 sqm or 50% of the host building’s floor area, for up to 120 days a year.
“What these proposals say is that 131 likes looking out onto the attractions of Imperial Square but does not care what its own buildings look like for its neighbours and passers-by,” said Andrew Booton. “We have suggested a perfectly feasible alternative which could, if well designed, both complement their existing buildings and fulfil their business ambitions.
“The Council needs to stand by its previous two planning decisions and the planning appeal that 131 lost, and turn down these applications. If they are permitted, they will blight the Conservation Area and the setting of Imperial Square, and also set an unwelcome precedent for heritage and conservation area management for the foreseeable future.
The Civic Society’s objections were drawn up by its Planning Forum, which includes among its eleven members, several architects, planners and surveyors, as well as individuals who have held senior posts in public administration and academia. The comments were unanimously agreed by all members.