CPO 2004 Enquiry - Documents Submitted by Bath & North East Somerset Council

1. NAME AND QUALIFICATION

My name is Rodney Carran

I hold a Diploma, with distinction, in Town Planning.

I am a Fellow of the Royal Town Planning Institute.

2. EXPERIENCE

2.1 In 1998 1 became a Consultant to Chapman Taylor, Chartered Architects and Planning Consultants at 96 Kensington High Street, London W8 4SG, having been a senior partner for many years. I have studied shopping schemes in the UK, North America, Australia, Europe and the Far East, which enables me to appreciate trends in design, both in terms of overall concept and of detailed design. I have been a speaker at both the British Council of Shopping Centres and the International Council of Shopping Centre Conferences.

2.2 Over the last 33 years I have been responsible for the design of many shopping centres, including several schemes which have won local authority competitions, such as:

The Pavilions, Birmingham ICSC Award

The Exchange, llford ICSC Award, BCSC Commendation

Harlequin Centre, Watford BCSC A ward-winner Established Centre

The Peacocks, Woking

Coppergate, York RTPl Award Planning Achievement; RlBA Architecture Commendation

Orchard Square, Sheffield BCSC Award

Royal Priors, Leamington Spa BCSG Award

The Glades, Bromley ICSC Commendation; BCSC A ward Established Centre

Royal Victoria Place, Tunbridge Wells ICSC Commendation; BCSC Award

Priory Meadow, Hastings

2.3 Current projects in the UK include Manchester Arndale Centre, Northgate Chester with Hopkins Architects, Grosvenor Centre in Northampton, Bracknell Regeneration with Richard Rogers Partnership, Glasgow Harbour, and Southgate Bath with Wilkinson Eyre Associates, which is the subject of this inquiry.

2.4 I was responsible for the preparation of an Urban Design Study in 2000 for Liverpool city's major development scheme for the Paradise Street area. Previously I undertook detailed planning studies for some 500 acres of Central London, including land held by the Church Commissioners, Crown Estate Commissioners and the Trustees of the Grosvenor Estate. I produced Conservation Area studies for the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea, and planning studies in Europe, in Singapore and in the United Arab Emirates. I designed the new City of Jebel Ali for the Ruler of Dubai. Together with Hopkins Architects I prepared the Masterplan for Hull. I have also been responsible for the production of mixed-use schemes in sensitive areas of London including the 27-acre redevelopment of the Crown Estate at Millbank, the street block fronting Bloomsbury Square, and the Civil Service Store in the Strand.

2.5 I have been involved in the design of three major out-of-town shopping centres: Lakeside Thurrock, Meadowhall Sheffield, and the Trafford Centre Manchester.

2.6 Chapman Taylor are Masterplanners, and are also architects for the whole or part of the mixed-use schemes at:

Bristol Broadmead

Tricorn, Portsmouth

Princesshay, Exeter

Grand Arcade, Cambridge

Coppergate Riverside, York

Whitefriars, Canterbury

Northgate, Chester

2.7  In 2004 our schemes won the following awardsEl Muelle de Santa Catalina, Las Palmas, Gran Canaria, Spain: ICSC European Awards, Specialist Centres.

Madrid Xanadu, Spain: ICSC European Awards - Special Innovation Award.

La Vaguada, Madrid, Spain: ICSC European Awards - Commendation Refurbishment and Extension.

Broadmead, Bristol, UK: International MAPlC Future Project Awards - commendation for Urban Design.

Madrid Xanadu, Spain: ISEGD 2004 Design Awards.

St Niklaas, Wassland, Belgium: CBLCC (Belgium Council of Shopping Centres) – Best Shopping Centre Refurbishment.

The Bullring, Birmingham, UK: RED (Retail Design) Awards - Best Shopping Centre.

The Liberty Centre, Romford, UK: Property Week Retail Awards - Best Shopping Centre Refurbishment.

NI, Islington, London, UK: RED (Retail Design) Awards - Commendation for Best Shopping Centre.

Madrid Xanadu, Spain: Spanish Council of Shopping Centres - Commendation for Best Large Centre.

La Vaguada, Madrid, Spain: Spanish Council of Shopping Centres - Best Refurbishment & Extension.

Plaza Mayor, Malaga, Spain: Spanish Council of Shopping Centres - Best Themed Shopping Centre.

3. SCOPE OF EVIDENCE

3.1 My firm was appointed as architects by CGNU for the proposed development of Southgate, Bath, in February 1996, Sir William Whitfield was appointed in May 1998 to advise the Council on architectural matters, and Wilkinson Eyre were later separately appointed by CGNU to develop the design of the transport interchange. I shall describe the development north of Dorchester Street, which includes the retail, residential and leisure part of the Scheme, leaving Keith Brownlie of Wilkinson Eyre to describe the transport interchange which lies to the south of Dorchester Street. Both areas are illustrated on the drawings before the inquiry. These drawings accord with:

• the Conservation Area Consent granted for the main body of the site on 10 May 2002 for the demolition of all unlisted buildings and structures within the site;
• the Listed Building Consent granted on 21 June 2002 for alterations to the railway station, the demolition of the former goods yard ramp, alteration to the station forecourts, external works to the curtilege of the station, erection of a new building on the former goods yard, works to the Argyll Hotel, the creation of a new public square on Dorchester Street and the relocation of telephone kiosks.
• the Main Scheme Planning Permission for the main body of the Scheme and the Southgate Footbridge Planning Permission including a staircase to the riverside walk and the provision of a landing stage, in the river, which lies to the south of the main planning permission site.

3.2 In producing this Scheme we worked in close collaboration with the following consultant team:

Wilkinson Eyre (Architect, Transport Interchange)

Livingston Eyre (Public Realm)

Buro Four (Project Manager)

Arup (MBE)

Arup Facade (Facade construction)

Beattie Watkinson (Structural Engineers)

Drivers Jonas (Planning)

Gardiner B Theobald (QS)

Tom Hassall (Archaeology)

Strutt & Parker (Leasing Agents)

WSP Development (Traffic)

Mace (Programme)

3.3 I begin in the next section of this evidence by reviewing current guidance by Government and the relevant non-governmental organisations on the planning of cities, with particular reference to major retail uses. In Section 5, 1 describe the site, its surrounding area, historical setting, the character of the Conservation Area and archaeology. In Section 6, 1 draw attention to features which were of particular relevance in producing the Scheme design. In Section 7, 1 describe how the Scheme evolved, then proceed in Sections 8, 9 & 10 to describe the Scheme in detail. In Section 11 the proposals are reviewed against CABE's Seven Objectives of Urban Design. Section 12 deals with phasing, and Section 13 explains the site boundaries and adjoining owners. Section 14 refers to the need for road and footpath closure orders to be confirmed; in Section 15 1 respond to the objections raised by landowners, and in Section 16 1 conclude.

3.3 In my evidence I have adopted the abbreviations and definitions set out in the Glossary of Key Terms submitted as CD 10.9.

3.4 In support of my evidence I produce the following illustrations, which are found in the accompanying Appendices:

Figure	Description	Planning Application Dwg Nos
Fig 1	Planning application and CPO areas	-
Fig 2	The site in 1886	-
Fig 3	The site in its city centre context	-
Figs 4-8	Scheme evolution	-
Fig 9	Masterplan	-
Fig 10	Roman road to main shopping street – evolution	-
Figs 11 & 11a	Ground floor plan – pedestrian circulation	742/SGB/701P
Fig 12	First floor plan	742/SGB/702P
Fig 13	Second floor plan	742/SGB/703P
Fig 14	Third floor plan	742/SGB/704P
Fig 15	Roof plan	742/SGB/705P
Fig 16	Basement level – 1	742/SGB/706P
Fig 17	Basement level – 2	742/SGB/707P
Fig 18	Basement level – 3	742/SGB/708P
Figs 19 & 20	Block A	742/SGB/713P, 742/SGB/714P
Fig 21-23	Block B	742/SGB/715P, 742/SGB/716P, 742/SGB/717P
Figs 24 & 25	Block C	742/SGB/718P, 742/SGB/719P
Figs 26 & 27	Block D	742/SGB/720P, 742/SGB/721P
Figs 28-30	Block F	742/SGB/722P, 742/SGB/723P 742/SGB/747P
Figs 31 & 32	Block G	742/SGB/724P, 742/SGB/725P
Figs 33-47	Phasing	-
Fig 48	Comparison of approved Scheme to existing layout	-
Illustrations
P1	Perspective – Evolution Scheme 2 – central square.
P2	Perspective – Approved Scheme – central square.
P3	Perspective – View from Beechen Cliff
P4	Aerial photograph – site as existing
P5	Model phhotograph – plan view
P6	Model photograph – view looking north Model photograph – view looking east
P7	Model photograph – view looking south Model photograph – view looking west

4. CURRENT PLANNING GUIDANCE

4.1 At the time the Scheme was being designed, PPG1 and PPG6 were the extant Government guidance documents. These have now been replaced by PPS1 and PPS6 respectively.

PPG 15: Planning and the Historic Environment (Revised 1994)

4.2 PPG 15 gives guidance on all aspects of listed building control, and conservation area designation and control.

4.3 With regard to development plans, it calls for such plans to set out clearly the conservation policies on which a planning authority's exercise of development control are to be based, and emphasises the difference between ordinary development control and the handling of applications for listed building consent and conservation area consent.

4.4 Planning authorities are urged to state clearly their policies for the preservation and enhancement of the historic environment, and the document touches on the need for careful consideration of the design of new buildings to stand alongside historic buildings, so that the latter "are not set apart, but are woven into the fabric of the living and working community". (para 2.14)

4.5 Indeed, attention is drawn to the need to have regard to the setting not only of listed buildings (para 2.16-1 7), but also of conservation areas. Para 4.1 4 states that The desirability of preserving or enhancing the (conservation) area should also, in the Secretary of State's view, be a material consideration in the planning authority's handling of development proposals which are outside the conservation area but would affect its setting, or views into and out of the area".

The Urban White Paper - Our Towns and Cities: The Future

4.6 The White Paper, published in November 2000, is an all-embracing examination of urban living and how to improve it. It thus deals with topics ranging from housing and health to waste management and the reuse of derelict land, within the context of economics, and outlines the Government's intentions for future measures. Its focus is far broader than the question of urban design, but it does generally endorse the findings of the Urban Task Force established in 1998 under the chairmanship of Lord Rogers.

4.7 The Task Force's report insists on the importance of mixed uses in city centres, and summarises, among other things (p.71) the need in new development for:

• Respect for social and physical context, and for integration.
• The quality of the public realm, and for a hierarchy of spaces to encourage a sense of safety and community.
• Permeability and good access.
• Optimisation of building density.
• Diversity of activity.
• Durability of construction, and sustainability.

By Design DETR 2000

4.8 In 2000 the newly constituted Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, having succeeded the old Royal Fine Art Commission with an expanded brief, fleshed out these concepts in a new document entitled "By Design". This suggests a 'Planning Toolkit', a kind of checklist against which to judge proposals for development. Constituents of the list are:

• Character: A place with its own identity.
• Continuity and Enclosure: A place where public and private spaces are clearly distinguished.
• Quality of the Public Realm: A place with attractive and successful outdoor areas.
• Ease of Movement: A place that is easy to get to and move through.
• Legibility: A place that has a clear image and is easy to understand.
• Adaptability: A place that can change easily.
• Diversity: A place with variety and choice.

PPSI: Delivering Sustainable Development

4.9 PPS1 establishes that the Government regards sustainable development as the core principle underpinning planning by:

• Making suitable land available for development in line with economic, social and environmental objectives to improve people's quality of life;
• Contributing to sustainable economic development;
• Protecting and enhancing the natural and historic environment, the quality and character of the countryside, and existing communities;
• Ensuring high quality development through good and inclusive design and the efficient use of resources; and
• Ensuring that development supports existing communities and contributes to the creation of safe, sustainable, liveable and mixed communities with good access to jobs and key services for all members of the community.

4.10 The emphasis on design IS further expressed in item 34 of PPS1 by the statement :ha:: "Planning authorities should plan positively for the achievement of high quality and inclusive design for all development, including individual buildings, public and private spaces and wider development schemes. Good design should contribute positively to making places better for people. Design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions should not be accepted."

4.1 1 The broad aim of PPS1 is to create "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs".

PPSG: Planning for Town Centres

4.12 In March 2005, the Government announced the publication of a new planning policy statement, PPSG: Planning for Town Centres, which aims to "drive the renaissance of towns and cities". Vibrant, thriving town centres are viewed as being critical to the Government's vision of sustainable communities.

4.1 3 The key messages of the statement are:

• Re-emphasising the need to promote the vitality and viability of town centres: existing centres should be promoted and enhanced, and development should be focussed here.
• Enhancing consumer choice: providing a wide choice of shopping, leisure and local services in town centres to meet the needs of the entire community and particularly socially excluded groups.
• Improving accessibility: ensuring that developments are accessible and well-served by a choice of means of transport.
• Encouraging investment in disadvantaged areas: regenerating deprived areas, creating more employment opportunities and combating social exclusion.
• Delivering more sustainable patterns of development: fully exploiting locations through high-density, mixed-use development and promoting sustainable transport.
• Promoting high quality and inclusive design: ensuring that town centres provide an attractive, accessible and safe environment for businesses, shoppers and residents.

The Sum of Published Guidance

4.14 The sequence of documents I have attempted to review contains a series of overriding themes, which in one publication after another are developed and strengthened, so that they constitute an unmistakable picture of objectives for urban renewal that emphasise the value of good design. The shift of emphasis from mid-20th century planning is unequivocal. These messages are concerned with humanity and the individual, with contextualism, diversification, and the nurture of a spirit of community.

4.15 It is all too easy in evaluating development proposals to be swayed by subjective considerations. The message in these documents can save us from this error. Indeed, their encapsulation in CABE's checklist of criteria for urban renewal is as objective as it could reasonably be, and it thus makes a straightforward framework within which the policies enumerated by the Council, as well as CGNU's response to them, can be fairly judged. The Scheme design was produced in the days of the Royal Fine Art Commission and approved in principle by them, but to review the Scheme against CABE's Seven Objectives of Urban Design is no less relevant. In Section 5.24 1 review the existing site against these key objectives, and in Section 11 I review the proposals against them.

4.16 Mr Roger Guy's evidence includes a review of the evolution of planning policy in the City of Bath, and has highlighted the relevant development plan policies in the Development Plan which support the Scheme.

5. THE SITE AND ITS LOCATION

Site (Fig 1 Planning application and CPO areas)

5.1 The Southgate redevelopment area embraces about five hectares of the city centre on land bounded to the north by New Orchard Street and Henry Street (the line of the city wall), to the east by Manvers Street, to the south by the railway station and the River Avon, including Widcome Bridge and Southgate pedestrian bridges, and to the west by Southgate, St James's Parade and Churchill Bridge.

5.2 The site is at present occupied by the Southgate Centre, a 1970s shopping development, the Ham Gardens car park, the railway station and car park, the bus station, the Argyll Hotel building, the former Co-op Dairy, and the partly vacant and under-utilised buildings fronting Dorchester Street and backing onto the River Avon, Churchill House, a small surface car park, and a number of high-voltage electrical transformers serving the city centre.

5.3 The site lies within a Conservation Area, a World Heritage Site and a small area at the north end of Kingston Road at its intersection with Henry Street is designated a Scheduled Ancient Monument.

The Site and its Historic Setting (Fig 2 The site in 1886)

5.4 The site lies outside the roman and medieval city of Bath, on the water meadow between the city wall and the River Avon. Southgate, the site's western boundary, is of great antiquity, approximating to the Roman route from the city to the river bridge and was built up in the Middle Ages. The massive 18th century expansion of Bath exploited the land to the north of the centre rather than to the south, which left the site undeveloped, although John Wood envisaged a grand formal layout along Manvers Street, which was only completed as far south as South Parade.

5.5 In the 19th century Philip Street and Newark Street were laid out from north to south, roughly bisecting the site. At its north end Philip Street linked to St James's Church and thence to Abbey Green, providing a direct route to the centre of the city. Between Philip Street and Manvers Street a rectangular grid of streets was laid out.

5.6 Construction of the railway effectively cut off the south-eastern boundary of the site from the river.

5.7 The demolition of St James's Church after war damage, and the subsequent development of the Marks & Spencer/Clinton Cards block across the line of St James's Street, severed the north/south route and destroyed the rationale of the Victorian street pattern.

Archaeology

5.8 In archaeological terms the site may be divided into four principal zones.

a. The northern boundary, the line of the city wall and ditch. Two previous excavations carried out in the 1960s have confirmed parts of the line of the ditch, as well as a bridge across it from a gateway some way to the east of Southgate.

b. The strip along the western boundary, fronting onto Southgate and known to be continuously occupied by houses and their backyards and gardens since the 14th century.

c. A subsidiary course of the River Avon flowing diagonally across the southern part of the site, in the bed of which it is presumed there are no significant deposits.

d. The area north of this river bed, known to have remained undeveloped throughout the medieval period and up to the early/mid 19th century. This area has hardly been investigated, and there is no evidence to indicate that it was the site of Roman occupation outside the city walls. It includes a small area adjacent to the north-east corner of the site in Kingston Road, which is a Scheduled Ancient Monument.

The depth of deposits across the site appears to vary considerably, from 2% metres at the northern end to 4 metres at the southern.

5.9 The archaeological assessment of the site, prepared under the overall direction of the Bath Archaeological Trust, contains four main elements:

a. Desk-top Assessment by Bath Archaeological Trust, dated 20 November 1996.

b. Report on Industrial Archaeology prepared by Structural Perspectives, dated February 1997.

c. Field Evaluation by Bath Archaeological Trust, dated 29 October 1997 - a report on trial excavations carried out on the site in spring 1997.

d. Survey of Information derived from extant maps of the area, together with details of concurrent land ownerships etc (topographical development maps), compiled by Jane Root, dated January 1997.

In addition, a Pilot Ground-Penetrating Radar Survey was carried out by the Museum of London, dated February 1997.

5.10 The information revealed by these studies has been taken into account in preparing the development proposals, in particular:

a. The confirmation of the substantial levels of landfill deposited in the 18th century over the site supports the proposal to locate a service area in the basement at its southern end, with its vehicle approach ramped down from north to south.

b. The establishment of the location of the Bum Ditch east of Southgate's medieval tenements, and an enhanced view of its significance, led to the curtailing of the car park and basement service area to avoid, as far as possible, encroachment on that part of the site known to be of the greatest archaeological sensitivity.

5.11 The 1997 study of industrial archaeology, whilst it established the chronology, history and rationale of three standing structures of interest, as well as one buried survival, did not produce compelling arguments for their retention, but the need for adequately recording all four will be responded to in the pre-development programme.

5.12 The structural investigation which has preceded the submission has included a study of the feasibility of reusing the piled foundations of existing buildings on the site. It has found that

a. The existing structural grid is incompatible with that required by the new development.

b. The existing piles were not designed to accept the level of loading which will be required.

5.13 Re-use of the existing piling system would therefore require not only the provision of additional piling, but also the linking of new and old pile-caps by an extensive network of ground beams.  In consequence the disturbance below ground would be greater than if it were bypassed by a new system.

Existing Buildings within the Site (Fig 1)

5.14 The site contains a mixture of commercial uses within four distinct zones:

a. Southgate shopping centre and multi-storey car park (Northern Zone)

A chiefly single-level covered shopping centre with servicing at roof level. Built in the 1970s, in form, massing and materials it sits uncomfortably within its setting. The retail units no longer meet the needs of those key retailers that Bath needs to attract. The development, including the ramps to the roof servicing area, is visually unattractive.  Changes in level are met by steps and ramps that hamper east-west movement, and overnight closure means that a large area between the historic city and the transport interchange is impermeable at night. The adjoining car park is arranged on six levels in a block form typical of its period, providing some 654 spaces, and today appears monolithic and intrusive, especially when viewed from Beechen Cliff.

Part of Newark Street survives, giving access to the bus station and car park

b. Bus station, dairy and Argyll Hotel (Central Zone)

The bus station links Dorchester Street and Manvers Street, forming part of a one-way system. The listed Argyll building is isolated but, together with the hotel opposite, forms an important gateway into the city core along Manvers Street.

The bus station, built as part of the 1970s development, is especially unfortunate in terms of function and form. Congestion at the junction of Dorchester Street and Manvers Street which effectively separates the station from the city centre has led to traffic being diverted along Newark Street, Railway Street and back into Manvers Street so that bus traffic, ring road traffic, pedestrians and passengers, are in conflict. Large signs warn of 'Serious pedestrian danger'. The railway station is for many their point of arrival to this World Heritage City, yet their first introduction is that of a 1970s bus station that fragments the historic fabric and is an unworthy 'gateway' to the historic city.

The old dairy building is industrial in form, including its distinctive chimney, and remains an unrelated fragment from a previous development period.

c. Bath Spa Railway Station (South-East Zone)

At the south-east corner Brunel's listed railway station of about 1840 forms a symmetrical set-piece, with the two hotels to the north referred to above. The old goods yard and approach ramp accommodates 100 car spaces for rail users.

d. Churchill House and electricity substation (South-West Zone)

Located on the river bank adjacent to the location of the old bridge. Churchill House is a neo-classical building which, with a strong Doric order over a tall rusticated ground-storey base, suffers from a degree of duality in its design.

5.15 The existing floorspace and car parking within the Southgate area is set out in Appendix 1.

Adjoining Buildings and the Setting of the Site (Fig 1)

5.16 Southgate is lined on its west side north of St James's Parade by a continuous range of modern three-storey stone buildings with ground floor shops. To the north lies the Marks & Spencer building, three major storeys in height, a somewhat unconvincing essay in neoclassicism which uses Bath stone and classical mouldings without seeking to explore relevant systems of proportion. Adjacent to this is Cambridge House/Ham Gardens House, a contemporary plainly treated Bath stone building of five storeys. The site is bounded on the east side by the modern five-storey Lewis House and the backs of nos. 5-1 3 Manvers Street, a terrace of substantial 19th century houses truncated by the bus station. On the east side of Manvers Street, alongside a sequence of undistinguished modern buildings including the police station, is the attractive and distinctly unclassical cross-gabled former post office building.

5.17 Despite the concentration of listed buildings at the south-east corner of the site, the architectural character of the area as a whole is understated and inconsistent. Significant views are limited: the view along Southgate to Beechen Cliffs is a reminder, typical of Bath, of its wooded surroundings, but apart from this there are no significant focal points for viewers from within the site. Building heights vary somewhat, buildings being predominantly of three storeys, with parapet heights of up to 10-1 1 metres. The use of Bath stone is universal, mostly in ashlar work, and roofs are generally of slate.

5.18 The steeply rising, wooded, Beechen Cliff south of the river, though well beyond the site, is a major topographical determinant of the development, for two reasons. First, because it affords wooded views to the south from within and around the site; second, because its height allows the site to be overlooked, and increases the importance of providing a roofscape appropriate to central Bath. Other viewpoints are less important. A roofscape solution acceptable from Beechen Cliff will in general satisfy other viewpoints. The view south along Stall Street to Beechen Cliff is of importance.

Character of the Conservation Area (Fig 3 The site in its city-centre context)

5.19 Bath is a city constrained, as much as any in England, by its social and architectural history.  The design of any major new development within this World Heritage Site has to take into account the obvious architectural constraints of its context, but must also enhance the existing pattern of use, and stimulate new uses where these are desirable, in order to respond to the social and civic aspirations of the population.

5.20 Bath was largely developed in the 18th century for a use which has since vanished. The social framework of the 18th century city, based on the therapeutic quality of the spa waters but also involving formal rituals of social intercourse and the conspicuous display of wealth, resulted not only in a unique mix of buildings, with in addition to the various public rooms a preponderance of substantial town houses, but also in the stratification of society into three distinct classes, the served, the servers and the entrepreneurs.

5.21 Successive cycles of use have overlaid and largely obliterated this division. Two, quite different changes, may be noted: first the introduction of industrial uses in the mid-19th century, which has left a wasteland of redundant buildings, second the massive invasion of the city by Admiralty personnel relocated from London in the Second World War, the effects of which have only recently subsided.

5.22 Two other distinct factors shape the character of the city. The first is topographical; the constraints of the meander of the river and the enclosing hills result in a form of development quite different from the common outward spread from an ancient centre. Decay and regeneration does not follow the familiar annular pattern but is strongly linear. Second, Bath is close enough to Bristol to be always in danger of being dominated by the larger city, in terms of both work and the provision of services. In this context, the impact of tourism must be seen as at the same time enormously significant in economic terms, and a severe hindrance to the quiet enjoyment of their city by the residents of Bath.

5.23 Thus the people of Bath must view their city with a mixture of pride and frustration. They take great pride in the architecture of the city and its unique social history - there can be few who do not know that Bath is a World Heritage Site. At the same time they are frustrated by the constraints imposed on them by the sheer quality of the architecture - a huge proportion of buildings in the city centre is listed, and the whole centre a Conservation Area - as well as by the present limitations on the provision of services, especially in the field of retail shopping, cultural and leisure activities. In both these fields of activity outside competition within an easy distance of Bath becomes ever stronger. For example, planning permission has been granted for the 90,000 m2 retail and leisure scheme at Broadmead Bristol, which is due to open in 2009.

Existing Site Reviewed against CABE'S Seven Objectives of Urban Design (By Design May 2000)

5.24 The site reviewed against CABE's design criteria falls woefully short:

Character - A place with its own identity

The existing 20th century buildings ignore the history, form and scale of the city, in terms of massing and style, and thus detract from its character and introduce alien elements into the skyline. The poor quality of design and materials, and lack of a focus, contribute an inimical and unworthy gateway to the city.

Continuity and Enclosure - A place where public and private spaces are clearly distinguished

There are no clearly defined public spaces; the bus station is a restless place with little comfort for the traveller whilst Southgate, although provided with planting and seating, is too busy a thoroughfare to be a place to relax. There are no private spaces.

Quality of the Public Realm - A place with attractive and successful outdoor areas

Poor design of both buildings and surfaces severely compromises the quality of the open spaces, all of which are merely through-routes. The increased width of Southgate has diminished its spatial quality. Planting is minimal.

Ease of Movement - A place that is easy to get to and move through

The site layout allows for north-south pedestrian movement, but east-west movement through the shopping centre is confined to shopping hours. Links with Stall Street to the north and the station to the south are unclear, the latter hazardous through severe traffic conflicts. Level differences between Southgate and the centre of the site are poorly resolved, with a system of stairs and ramps at the east end of the shopping centre. David Hunter-Yeats's proof, item 2.1.18, details the problems of access and movement across the site today.

Legibility - A place that has a clear image and is easy to understand

Division of the site between shopping centre car park and bus station resents a confusing image. There are no landmarks to guide the pedestrian through the site, the route from station to city is particularly poorly signalled.

Adaptability - A place that can change easily

Division of the site into three large components - shopping centre, car park and bus station - coupled with the intrusive heavily-trafficked street pattern and the use of roof-top servicing militates against change by alteration.

Diversity - A place with variety and choice

There is limited diversity of use, and unimaginative architectural treatment and uniformly poor use of materials results in an aesthetically monotonous area.

SUMMARY

5.25 Piecemeal development of the site cannot solve any of the fundamental issues which must be addressed on a comprehensive basis to deliver the sustainable regeneration that above all would contribute to the city's retail offer and night-time economy. The Scheme will provide a worthy transport interchange, new homes, leisure use and a legible street network.

6. DESIGN GUIDES ARISING FROM SITE ANALYSIS (Fig 3)

6.1 The complete redevelopment of the site offers the best opportunity to address both the pride and the frustration of the people of Bath. This must cater for their aspirations by providing retail, residential, transport and leisure facilities which are truly contemporary in their standard and scope within an architectural envelope which responds to the exacting standards of the historic city. The following physical characteristics need to be taken into account:

a. Topography The contrast between level and hilly sites contributes significantly to the street pattern, the treatment of individual blocks of building, and views in and out of the area.

b. Development Patterns. A series of factors influences the pattern of development, resulting in a lively interaction between formal and informal layouts. These include:

c. Continuity. The continuity of development from the 1730s to the mid-1 9th century, whilst not even in its progress, overwhelms earlier survivals, and stamps on Bath a strong architectural character.

d. Architecture as Spectacle. There are numerous instances of groups of buildings composed in streets, squares, crescents etc to produce deliberate and controlled visual effects.

e. Materials. The predominant use of local stone in building is so marked as to produce an unusual degree of consistency, though in the city centre there are many examples of painted buildings, often painted over the stone rather than on stucco. The recent use of self-coloured renders composed of local stone aggregate has proved encouragingly successful for minor elevations.

f. Architectural idioms. Within an overall stylistic canon, a number of characteristic architectural devices and idioms strengthen the local character. Some derive from stone technology, others not, for example:

g. Scale. The buildings are predominantly 3-4 storeys, with substantial domestic storey heights, and slated roofs concealed behind parapets. Uniformity is enlivened by local variations in height. Plot widths reflect the domestic origins of most buildings in the city centre. Within this matrix, major public buildings adopt a larger scale, and the importance of residential terraces is artificially emphasised by their composition into single buildings.

h. Incident. Incident and interest are introduced in a wide variety of ways.

However, it is worth noting that, with some obvious exceptions, above the level of the shopfronts there is a degree of restraint in the embellishment n! commercial buildings, and visual interest is maintained as much by variations in storey heights, window pattern and minor elements of decoration as by the use of giant orders, enriched cornices and the like.

7. EVOLUTION OF THE SCHEME (Figs 4 to 8)

7.1 The Statement of Case (items 6.5 to 6.1 5) sets out the sequence of events that over some twenty years have led to the approved Scheme. The highlights of this period may be summarised as follows:

a. The former Council produced guidelines for the redevelopment of the Southgate area in a report entitled Bath City Council Objectives, 1998 which, as Roger Guy says, was then reflected in local plan policy.

b. In 1995 CGNU acquired the leasehold interest from the Prudential, who had failed to produce an acceptable scheme over some ten years of endeavour - a decision that may have been partially influenced by their out-of-town sub-regional shopping centre at Cribbs Causeway being granted planning permission.

c. In 1996 and 1997 site analysis took place, including trenches and trial holes, to establish the nature and extent of the archaeology. Design options were also developed with a view to reaching agreement on the location of main elements such as the bus station and department store. Chapman Taylor produced an Evolution Document in April 1997 which appraised the site and its setting, summarised planning issues and produced options for the site's comprehensive redevelopment. The document was proposed in close discussion with officers and the city's advisor CB Hillier Parker, and was approved by the Planning Transportation & Environmental Property Committees on 22 May 1997 (Core Document 10.7) as planning guidance for the Southgate area.

d. Between 1997 and June 2001, the proposals gradually evolved,~ working closely with council officers and their architectural adviser Sir William Whitfield. Public exhibitions were held in December 97 and October 98 and discussions took place with the Royal Fine Arts Commission, Bath Preservation Trust, the Bath Society, Bath Chamber of Commerce, Bath Chapter of Architects, local residents' associations and The Georgian Group. A representative of English Heritage attended many of the team meetings held with the Council and presentations were made to the English Heritage Urban Panel.

e. Figures 4 to 8 illustrate and summarise the five major modifications to the design that resulted in the submission of revisions to the original November 1997 Planning Application as follows:

1. Scheme One November 1997 (Fig 4)

The Scheme realigned Dorchester Street to alongside the River Avon, formed a new bus station north of Dorchester Street and relocated the SWEB transformer station north of Dorchester Street. A two-level shopping sheet was fashioned on either side of a central street. Car parking was at roof level and servicing was from a basement.

Criticism included the bus station being too far from the railway station; inadequate housing and open space; the degree of demolition of the railway station vaults required to realign Dorchester Street and the high-level car parking was regarded as too bulky.

2. Scheme Two October 1998 (Fig 5)

The proposals relocated the bus station south of Dorchester Street to link with the railway station, allowing the diagonal shopping route to be introduced. Part of Churchill House was retained for bus station facilities. The station vaults and ramp were retained, a central square and more housing added, and car parking was at basement level.

Criticism included inadequate integration between bus and rail stations, inadequate bus capacity, housing still inadequate and central space too far south.

3. Scheme Three October 1999 (Fig 6)

Station vaults and ramp and Churchill House demolished to form larger bus station and greater integration between bus and rail. Central square moved further north and housing increased.

The committee supported the application subject to the resolution of five issues but English Heritage objected to the loss of the vaults and ramp.

4. Scheme Four June 2000 (Fig 7

Bus station confined to area west of station vaults and ramp reconfigured to form improved linkage between rail and bus stations. Health club substituted for cinema following planning permission being granted for a multiplex cinema on competing site. Housing increased.

The committee welcomed the proposals but deferred consideration pending further consultation to provide an integrated transport interchange.

5. Scheme Five June 2001 (Fig 8)

Transport interchange redesigned by Wilkinson Eyre including 'lightweight' ramp to save former goods yard. Public realm space designed by Livingston Eyre and residential increased.

The Scheme was further refined, including the decision not to provide the 'lightweight' ramp in preference for a major public realm space connecting the rail and bus stations. The removal of the existing ramp opened up the railway vaults as a backdrop to the space. allowing restaurants to be provided. Planning permission was granted on 25 September 2003 for the Scheme which is described in detail in my and Keith Brownlie's proofs of evidence.

f. During the Scheme's evolution, the size and location of the retail units were constantly reviewed, and discussions took place with key retailers to ensure that it remained fit for purpose.

g. Discussions were held on the appropriate architectural style in this historic setting, recognising that while Bath, unlike the New Town in Edinburgh, is not a wholly planned city. An architectural coherence pervades the city that derives not from uniformity but from design compatibility and the use of a limited range of building materials. Most agreed that a new development that failed to recognise this cohesive character would be likely to be doubly damaging because regardless of intrinsic merit, it might become visually detached from its surroundings and disturb the composure of a whole area, like the existing Southgate Centre. It was also agreed that Southgate, though lying on the outer edge of the central area of architectural cohesion, should become attached to and integrated with it.

h. With the strengthening of the design team by the introduction of Wilkinson Eyre as architects for the Transport Interchange, it was agreed that the appropriate style of the new part of the interchange should be contemporary to best express innovative structural techniques and to give an impression of vitality appropriate to transport movement. For the remainder of the Scheme the preference from the client and the design team was to maintain a 'historicist' design approach to fit within an overall architectural discipline.  Recognising also that the success of this approach lay not only in the form and details of the building but also in the spaces - the public realm - lying between them. Livingston Eyre, landscape architects, were appointed to develop the design of the public realm for the entire development both north and south of Dorchester Street, to ensure continuity of approach.

7.2 The Scheme's gestation (summarised in Figs 4 to 8) has been long and the result is worthy of this World Heritage City. It will repair serious 1970s townscape damage and create a new 'front door' to people visiting the city, especially by public transport.

8. CONCEPT - MASTERPLAN (Fig 9 Masterplan)

8.1 The need for an improvement in the quality and quantity of shopping and other amenities in the Southgate area has been identified in the Bath Shopping Needs Study and the Adopted Local Plan and confirmed in the Economic Assessment by Drivers Jonas.  The city suffers in that because of its historic form, few existing shops are of the size needed to fulfil modern retailers' requirements and the quality of much of the existing built form militates against redevelopment. The site therefore provides a unique opportunity to combine the meeting of this retail need with the regeneration of the unsatisfactory 20th century buildings within the site to provide a mixed-used development sensitively integrated with the rest of the city, thereby healing the townscape damage caused by the 1970s development.  The railway station is given a new setting as part of a new coordinated public transport interchange.

8.2 Car parking and some servicing is re-accommodated at basement level in an area dictated by the need to protect the important archaeology fronting Dorchester Street. An additional retail level together with restaurants is provided at first floor level, with predominantly residential and leisure at second and third floors.

Kingston Road remains a service area, giving access to a ground-level service bay and a service ramp down to basement level. Existing properties fronting Manvers Street will continue to be serviced from Kingston Road.

Pedestrian Flow

8.5 Bath's principal shopping area is arranged to either side of the north-south linear interconnecting streets of Milsom Street, Union Street and Stall Street, which lead directly to Southgate. The view down Stall Street from the Pump Room creates the opportunity for a landmark entrance to the Scheme. The existing Marks & Spencer store at the entrance forms the southern anchor to the existing principal shopping area and the northern anchor to the Scheme. (Fig 10 Roman road to main shopping street - evolution)

8.6 To continue this strong pedestrian movement, the major department store is placed by the railway station in the south-east corner to form the main commercial magnet, drawing people to and through the area while flanking a direct route to the public transport interchange.  (Fig 11 Pedestrian circulation)

8.7 This diagonal shopping route, reflecting the orientation of nearby St James's Parade, is bisected by a new east-west route linking Southgate to Manvers Street. A new north-south route recreating Newark Street runs from Dorchester Street to New Orchard Street, where the Marks & Spencer passage links to Abbey Green. At the centre where these routes meet, a central square is formed (Perspective P2) and a second north-south route runs along the western face of the department store to Southgate street and the transport interchange.  These streets divide the site into six building blocks appropriate in size to historic Bath.

8.8 Having established good pedestrian movement through the Scheme, the other design objective is to produce a shopping layout with as much frontage as possible since, subject to depth, this allows more good shops to be provided, thereby increasing the viability, variety and attraction of the area.

8.9 Further anchor units (MSU1 & MSU2) are located in the south-west corner of the Scheme, with frontages to Southgate and Dorchester Streets, which allows an additional shopping street, but in the form of an arcade, to link between MSUs 1 & 2 and the department store. A pedestrian circuit is thus created within the Scheme between the arcade and the  central square.

8.10 To complete the retail picture, smaller shop units are provided on Southgate which is narrowed back to the street frontage that existed before the 1970s redevelopment.

8.11 Unlike the existing centre, all but service streets have living frontages at ground level.

8.12 The pedestrian network dovetails into the surrounding streets and provides direct routes to the transport interchange. A colonnade gives weather protection for passengers using buses along Dorchester Street and also along Manvers Street.

8.13 The design is simple but varied; the streets follow 'natural' routes formed by the location of anchor destinations. It will create the right feeling of space for browsing, for eating, for leisure, for socialising, for living and, above all, for shopping. The framework of streets will focus on the two new public realm spaces north and south of Dorchester Street. The latter forms a major element of improvement of the public transport facilities which is described by Keith Brownlie of Wilkinson Eyre.

Architectural interpretation

8.14 Having determined on the adoption of a neo-classical style of architecture, the principal classical characteristics which have guided this design are as follows:

a. Axiality and the symmetry both of major compositions and of individual elements

b. The modulation of symmetry to accommodate irregularities in the shape of the site, and to stimulate visual interest.

c. The introduction of vertical hierarchy; each building has a base and an "order" - though the orders are seldom expressed - and most have attic storeys.

d. Concentration of architectural emphasis - the giant order of columns, a common Bath idiom, is used only once in the whole Scheme.

8.15 Because Bath, more than any other English city, exhibits "architecture as spectacle", with many set-piece sequences and compositions, such devices have been used to create a formal sequence of visual experience which reaches a deliberate climax in the centre of the Scheme.  At the same time, building heights and articulations are varied so that buildings on the perimeter respond as far as possible to the local context of scale and massing.

9. THE SCHEME

9.1 The Scheme is illustrated by the photographs of the model in the Appendices. The model has been on public display for over a year and is now displayed at this inquiry.

9.2 The re-establishment of active street frontages, through the formation of a series of streets and squares, will create a high quality pedestrian environment, while providing a size of retail units which respond to the demands of those good retailers that Bath today lacks, without compromising any historic area. In addition to retail, the component parts of this mixed-use Scheme are as follows. (For ease of identification each block is identified by a letter. Blocks E & F were amalgamated during the design evolution so Block E is no longer referred to.)  A Schedule of Areas is given in Appendix 1.

Residential (Figs 13 & 14)

9.3 Some 91 residential units are provided above the shopping in Blocks A-D, with frontages to surrounding streets and onto internal landscaped courts. 23 dwellings will be affordable housing. Entrances at ground level are conveniently positioned. The rhythm of the residential units follows the retail below and reflects that of a typical Bath two-window terraced house. No residential car parking is allowed for but storage for bicycles is located at garden court level.

Leisure (Fig 13)

9.4 A major restaurant court is formed at first floor (within Block F). An open balcony faces onto the central square and access is gained via escalators, lifts and stairs from ground floor and from a central arcade linking the variety stores in the west to the department store in the east (Perspective P2).

9.5 Tables and chairs will be encouraged to spill out into the central square to give added colour and life at ground level. Tables at first floor balcony level will overlook the square.

9.6 Above the restaurant court is an extensive health centre which again has a balcony overlooking the square, the central focus being the pools with elegant rooflights over. Access is by a continuation of the lifts and stairs serving the restaurant court.

Management, toilet facilities and shopmobility (Figs 11 & 13)

9.7 The centre management off ice including the security control centre is located at second floor (within Block C). Public toilets which include facilities for disabled and baby-changing are provided just off the central square (Block D), on the street that links into Manvers Street.  Public toilets are located at ground level, with disabled persons' toilets and facilities for baby changing and nursing mothers. Toilets will also be located within the department store, variety stores, the restaurant court and within the leisure centre. The shopmobility centre is also located on this link street, where restricted service traffic will be allowed, enabling people to be dropped off by car immediately outside.

Bus facilities (Fig 11)

9.8 As part of the public transport interchange, buses will stop in lay-bys on the north side of Dorchester Street and the west side of Manvers Street, where a generous colonnade with glass screens will afford shelter for passengers.

Car parking (Figs 16, 17 & 18)

9.9 A 724-space public car park including 32 spaces for disabled persons is provided in a three level basement with car access from Dorchester Street. Pedestrians can exit from four locations around the central square. Cycle storage and lockers are also shown within the car park. Displaced railway parking of 130 spaces is allocated within Level -3 (Fig 18), with a direct lift/staircase core leading to the colonnade fronting Dorchester Street and diagonally opposite the railway station.

Pedestrian accessibility

9.10 The entirety of the Scheme has been designed with regard to 24-hour access to all public areas, whether by wheelchair-user or parent with pram and small children.

Servicing (Figs 11 & 17)

9.11 Two servicing areas are provided, one at basement level that will serve the department store, the variety store and the central block housing the restaurant court and leisure centre (Blocks C, F & G) - all direct from goods lifts located at basement level. (Block B is served by a first floor bridge from Block C which links into a service corridor.)

9.12 Blocks A & D are serviced from a ground-level service area in Block D and linked to Kingston Road, which serves existing properties fronting Manvers Street.

10. THE SCHEME IN DETAIL

Urban Form

10.1 The subdivision of buildings into separate blocks gives the opportunity for variations in building height, elevational treatment and roofscape. Each building relates to its function, for example the department and variety stores are expressed as individual buildings which highlight their retail purpose. The emphasised end-pavilions of Blocks A and B announce the Scheme from Stall Street, and the facades to Southgate and New Orchard Street echo the traditional domestic scale of much of the city. The Dorchester Street colonnade, while giving protection to bus passengers, repeats the idiom of Bath Street and Arlington House. First floor pedestrian bridges borrow a theme from the Pump Room, whilst the strongest architectural treatment is reserved for building frontages flanking the central square.

10.2 Treatment of the Scheme as separate blocks also creates a number of public open spaces. At the junction of the two principal streets, Southgate and New Orchard Street, a small formal space marks the entrance to the Scheme and provides a reminder of the location of the Roman Southgate. The central square is major space, asymmetrically shaped, whilst a further square is provided as an open foyer to the transport interchange. The provision of restaurants fronting the open spaces will reinforce their activity as natural meeting places.

10.3 The new and remodelled streets and public spaces will contain new hard and soft landscaping, full access for people with disabilities, cycle parking, seats, opportunities for public art, signage, and access to public conveniences and baby changing areas. These works extend from Dorchester Street and the railway forecourts (both north and south of the station), Southgate pedestrian bridge and the connection between the riverside footpath and Widcome Bridge, the southern end of Manvers Street, the new streets and public square within the Southgate area, Southgate street, New Orchard Street and Henry Street, including the junction with Stall Street, as well as Kingston Road.

10.4 Roof design meets three townscape requirements, the screening of plant, the expression of the individual buildings, and a scale that responds to that of existing buildings. This results in a variety of roof treatments, including separate hipped slate roofs behind parapets to the big stores, conventional mansards to the flats, a flat roof with additional pavilions to the arcade building (Perspective P3).

10.5 The Scheme thus provides a series of blocks which are described as follows:

1. The Six Building Blocks - Location, Use and Design

10.6 Block A (Figs 19 & 20) forms the north-west corner of the Scheme, facing the existing Marks & Spencer block across New Orchard Street. Triangular in plan form it is three storeys in height, with flats in the top storey, over two storeys of shops. It is of stone construction with continuous shopfronts on the principal facades, and with a slate roof behind a parapet. On the New Orchard Street front the roof is mansarded at second floor level, to reduce the scale of the building on this side. Plain in design, the block has corners treated as pavilions with raised parapets, and blind arches at first floor level accommodating triple windows.

10.7 Block B (Figs 21 to 23) responds to Block A across the diagonal street leading to the centre of the Scheme, with a facade of identical architectural treatment and with shopping concentrated on ground and first floors. Towards the central open space the elevation is larger in scale, its composition loosely based on that of the Guildhall. Three storeys high, it has a slightly projecting rusticated three-bay centre, echoed by the corner pilasters. The wings are framed by thin pilaster strips and have blind arches around their first floor windows. This treatment, finished in painted stucco, is carried round onto the south side, where it meets the architectural treatment of the Southgate facade. This is smaller in scale, with shopfronts surmounted by two storeys of ashlar containing sash windows, designed to replicate the appearance of a typical Bath terrace of houses, and stepped down the street to follow the fall in the ground at this point.

10.8 Block C (Figs 24 & 25) containing Boots' rebuilt premises and the food store, with an additional shop unit (637) at first floor, is three storeys in height, the ground storey of rusticated stonework, the upper floors of natural aggregate render with stone bands, quoins etc. The south side incorporates a colonnade which provides waiting space for bus passengers, and at the south-west corner a triple arch gives access to the car park. The facades are plainly treated, but with prominent corner towers on the main elevations. The west elevation, which provides a stop to the vista along St James's Parade, has its central range divided into two 'loggias' at second floor, that to the left giving onto the residential court, and that to the right fenestrated for Boots' ancillary offices. On the east and north sides, where flats occupy the second and third floors, there are set-backs to break up the length of the block, and the slate roof is mansarded.

10.9 Block D (Figs 26 & 27) is three storeys in height, with an added mansard towards the public space, four storeys high at the rear. The upper two storeys are devoted to flats over two storeys of shops. The principal elevation again takes the form of a traditional terrace, of stone construction over continuous shopfronts. Centre and terminal bays are emphasised by rusticated strip pilasters. On the west side a tower accommodates the main residential entrance, stairs and lifts, whilst to the rear the same architectural theme, somewhat simplified, encompasses the colonnaded basement service ramp, the loading bays and the enclosed shop plant area at first floor level. On these subsidiary elevations there is extensive use of natural aggregate render.

10.10 A service yard is provided to the rear of Block D, accessed from Kingston Road, which is adapted to form the access and egress to the basement service area.

10.11 Block F (Figs 28 to 30)has three main components: at ground floor shops and restaurants fronting the new square, Dorchester Street and a covered arcade running east to west through the building; at first floor level restaurants overlooking the square and the arcade; and at second floor a health & fitness centre including gymnasium, dance studio and swimming pool, and other facilities. This building is the focal building in the Scheme, running between the central public space and Dorchester Street. It is of stone, three storeys high, with shopfronts to the north and a pedestrian colonnade to the south. Mostly plain in treatment, it is articulated by a series of projecting bays having blind elliptical arches at first floor level, with moulded architraves to the windows. On the south side the central bays are surmounted by twin turrets which mask the large riser duct at this point as well as enhancing the visual containment of the new public open space outside the station vaults. On the north side, tiered balconies contained within a Giant order overlook the main open space.

10.12 Block G (Figs 31 & 32), three storeys high, which houses the department store, is of natural aggregate rendered finish above a stone ground floor colonnaded on both the south and east sides. Its ruling architectural motifs, of Greek revival origin, are derived from the Argyll building which it adjoins on these two sides, and include giant Ionic antae, architraves and corniced window surrounds, and elliptical arched triple windows for architectural emphasis. Its west side has an added mansard roof storey. It has principal shopping frontages to the central square and main north-south route, and to Manvers Street.

10.13 Blocks C, F and G (Fig 29 Section F2)are linked by covered bridges connected to the central arcade at first floor. These are of stone with low-pitched lead-covered roofs, supported by entirely plain open colonnades of square shafts, over 3-centre arches. Between Blocks B and C are two further bridges, narrower and providing service links. These are of painted render, supported by rusticated, keyed stone arches, and are enclosed, lit by a single architraved window on each side.

11. SCHEME REVIEWED AGAINST CABE'S Seven Objectives of Urban Design

11.l Having reviewed the existing site against CABE's objectives and described the Scheme in detail, it is now relevant to review the proposals against the objectives.

Character - A place with its own identity

The history, form and scale of the city were carefully analysed, providing the basis for use of a common classical architectural style to produce a design at the same time sympathetic to its surroundings and of its time. The reproduction of typical street widths and building heights leading to a generous central square, gives the development its own character.

Continuity and Enclosure - A place where public and private spaces are clearly distinguished

The central square, of informal shape, forms a strong focus for the Scheme, whilst the square outside the station, given a sense of enclosure by buildings north of Dorchester Street and by the surviving projecting vault to the west, binds together the elements of the transport interchange. Flats are clustered around secluded courts at high level, not publicly accessible.  Continuous colonnading along Dorchester Street, and the bus station concourse, provide protection for travellers.

Quality of the Public Realm - A place with attractive and successful outdoor areas

Redevelopment gives the opportunity for contrast and variety of open spaces, with good quality materials and carefully designed planting, accessible to all including the disabled and elderly.

Ease of Movement - A place that is easy to get to and move through

A street pattern of strong identify has been derived from local precedent; in particular the diagonal street leading to the central square reflects the alignment of St James's Parade to the west, and establishes a clear route from the station to the city through the heart of the site.  This and the east-west route are open 24 hours a day. On the west boundary the development follows the existing topography of Southgate.

Legibility - A place that has a clear image and is easy to understand

The various uses are disposed around a pattern of streets and squares reflecting the historic grain of the city, and providing good visual awareness. Key buildings are distinguished by increased scale and detailed treatment, and occupy landmark locations, the department store entrance, for example, terminating the south-east vista along the square. The important route from station to city is the main artery of the Scheme.

Adaptability - A place that can change easily

Division of the site into six blocks, and relocation of the Existing Bus Station, facilitates modification to meet changing requirements.

Diversity - A place with variety and choice

The strong mix of uses provides activity and diversity. The retail component exhibits a wide variety of choice, with a department store and high fashion on the main route, smaller and local or speciality shops in Southgate. The architectural precedents of the city are exploited in various forms to provide visual diversity.

12. PHASING

12.1 The phasing of the Scheme is necessary to ensure continuity of key elements such as the bus station, switchgear to the substation and operational railway car parking, and the need to have regard to prior archaeological excavation. The overall build period is estimated at four and a half years, which underlines the complexity of the construction, though there will be earlier wins with the opening of the bus station after one year and five months, and the first phase of the retail (Blocks A & B) after two years and seven months.

12.2 Every reasonable endeavour is being made to ensure that Southgate Street retains a living frontage for as long as possible; the area north of Marchants Passage remains in retail use for the first seven months of the building contract, and the shops south of Marchants Passage remain trading for twelve months.

12.3 A detailed description of the 14 key development stages is set out in graphic form within the plan folio (Figs 33 to 47) and the phasing programme is summarised as follows;.

Phase One (Stages 1 to 5) 17 months

12.4 The proposed Bus Station is built; Blocks A & B in progress; new switchroom to substation operational; archaeological dig continues as buildings are demolished and Dorchester Street realigned in part.

Phase Two (Stages 6 to 9) 18 to 30 months

12.5 Dorchester Street realigned to form two-way traffic route; basement excavation and main piling completed; Blocks A & B handed over for tenant fit-out.

Phase Three (Stages 10 to 12) 31 to 42 months

12.6 Blocks A & B finished and trading, and served from temporary loading bay (Stage 10, 31-34 months); basement car park open; Block C complete and trading; remaining blocks well under construction and station car park on former goods station and ramp closed in month 42, with railway parking transferred to new basement car park.

Phase Four (Stages 13 to 14) 48 to 54 months

12.7 Project complete and fully trading.

13. SITE BOUNDARIES (to be updated following discussions with third parties)

13.1 The extent of the main site has remained constant throughout the design period and relates to the existing Southgate Centre, the bus station and the area south of Dorchester Street to the river. A small area including Southgate footbridge was added at a later stage under a separate planning application to provide for improved pedestrian movement.

13.2 The Scheme, having regard to its size, has very little impact on adjoining properties as illustrated in Fig 48 and its effect on them is as follows:

13.3 North Boundary

a. Cambridge House and Ham Gardens House

Cambridge House is not affected by the proposals. A new scissor service lift is formed on the south side of Ham Gardens House to link with Iceland's existing service dock.

b. New Church

Plot 7 provides access to New Church.

c. Blenheim House

Amendments to the car parking and service area to Lewis House are proposed to an agreed design.

d. Lewis House (Comet)

Alterations to the line of Kingston Road require the servicing1 car parking area used by Comet to be reconfigured to an agreed arrangement.

13.4 East Boundary

e. Nos. 5-13 Manvers Street

These properties lie outside the Order Land and planning sites. The decision to change Kingston road from 2-way to a 1-way south road will have a slight impact on their access arrangements.

d. Argyll former hotel building

A new open light well is provided to be rear of the building. Development will once more embrace the west and north party walls and the frontage will be cleaned and repaired to fit well with its new neighbours.

14. ROAD AND FOOTPATH CLOSURE ORDERS

14.1 The closure of the roads and footpaths set out in the plan folio is essential to the Scheme. It will allow a much-needed shopping centre together with the associated residential, leisure and transport facilities to be created, including a major improvement to the pedestrian circulation pattern within this part of the town centre. The City Council will become the freehold owner of the entire site, granting a long lease to CGNU. Full 24-hour public access to the Scheme will be achieved through a walkway agreement, except for the arcade which will close at, say, 12pm.

14.2 The development will ensure that adequate means of escape are provided from existing properties. Alternative rear service access is provided. While there is some loss to firms or individuals, this is more than balanced by the overall gain to the centre.

15. RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS

Plot 46 Objection from Rosebys (No5 Railway Street)

Rosebys currently occupy the shop on the corner of Railway Street and Newark Street, forming part of the ground floor retail uses below the Ham Gardens multi-storey car park. The unit's retention would block the main pedestrian route along the diagonal street anchored by the department store, which is a fundamental part of the design concept.

Plot 46 is sited above the proposed three-level car park and the unit could not be economically retained in isolation (even if it were practical to do so) during construction works. All services feeding the unit would be severed and the demolition of the rest of the site would leave his unit without means of access. The retention of this unit would prevent the demolition of the multi-storey car park on health and safety grounds, unless the unit was closed and substantially rebuilt following demolition.

Walker Morris's letter of objection refers to their client demonstrating that "alternative layouts could be devised which will enable them to remain in situ while achieving the general planning objectives". No such layouts have so far been produced. I will comment on any alternative layouts when they are produced for examination.

My proof sets out the gradual evolution of the Scheme over a twenty-year period (item 7). The retention of Plot 46 which is located at the very centre of the Scheme's main public realm space -the very focus of the whole proposal - would invalidate the entire Scheme. Its compulsory purchase is therefore necessary.

16. CONCLUSION

16.1 The Scheme, which responds to the Council's brief, has evolved over a period of years in close consultation with officers and members of the City and other stakeholders. During this time presentations and discussions took place with the Royal Fine Arts Commission, English Heritage, Bath Preservation Trust, Bath Society and others, resulting in a proposal that will bring harmony to an area devastated in townscape terms by a 1970s retail development that is now functionally obsolete.

16.2 The comprehensive approach of the Scheme avoids disjointed development of the Southgate site, which resulted in poor cohesion and pedestrian orientation with few active frontages, contributing to the lifeless and outworn character of the environment.

16.3 In contrast, the proposals create a new network of open streets and squares, and provide a greater permeability throughout this part of the city centre. Buildings have been designed to respect the pedestrian, with active frontages and retail activity combining to ensure a vibrancy linked to the heart of Bath. The Scheme through its comprehensive approach proposes a rich mix of uses, including residential, leisure, and a major Transport Interchange, and it creates two major civic spaces.

16.4 The Scheme will transform this important sector of the city in a way that will strengthen the whole central area. But since it does not absorb all the potential retail demand it does not preclude further development in the city centre. While some relocation will be inevitable when the centre opens, as key retailers seek accommodation that is ideal for their business, the attraction of Bath and the pent-up demand for space will ensure that the entire retail core area will remain healthy.

16.5 Great care has been taken to safeguard the important archaeological remains so that the proposals protect the past while enhancing the future.