#Update 27 Site gets official legal protection
The St. Christopher’s School site has been awarded ‘Asset of Community Value’ status by Bristol City Council.
The title means the site has official legal protection and recognises the contribution the school made to the SEND community in Bristol and also recognises that the site could be a key part of any SEND provision in the future. It also means the land cannot be sold without the community being given a chance to bid for it.
The campaign was run by the SEND Alliance for St Christopher’s - a mix of SEND charity representatives, community leaders, local businesses and individuals from across Bristol - including local legend, Peter Lord from Aardman Animations as well as SCAN.
The group has been fighting for more than two years to achieve this special status. The bid was challenged by the owners of the site who claimed the school did not serve the community. But Bristol City Council has now rubber stamped the ACV status which lasts for five years. ACV status means that we now have a real chance to ensure this wonderful site returns to being a community asset so it can serve SEND families again.
There are currently no plans for the site, which is owned by a London-based investment firm, FORE. Those who’ve followed this campaign will know that an attempt to turn this community asset into luxury retirement flats was refused unanimously by councillors in August 2023.
What is an Asset of Community Value (ACV)?
ACVs are land or buildings that have brought social well being to communities and could do so again in the future.
Other ACVs in Bristol include Bristol Zoo Gardens, Redfield Cinema, the Ashton Gate Stadium, and the Jacob Wells Road Baths as well as medical centres, pubs and religious buildings.
Nationally, there are around 150 educational establishments that have been granted ACV status - some of them schools. This is the first time Bristol has recognised a school to be an ACV.
Once listed with the Local Authority, the status lasts for five years and gives community groups time to try to buy the asset in the event of any resale. The owner could, however, choose to sell the land to another buyer. ACV status must also be taken into account by the local planning authority when it considers any future planning applications for the site.
#Update 26 Reaction to the community’s success
Thank you to all the councillors across Bristol who supported us and to everyone in the community for never giving up community’s success - we had lots of reaction to the unanimous decision by city councillors to reject the plans by FORE - and the story was covered across the BBC and local press. Thanks to everyone for their involvement and support.
“Who wants to live in Costa Geriatrica?”
“Our community and city deserve so much better”
“It failed spectacularly to understand Bristol’s values, needs and priorities”
Click here to read what the Architect’s Journal says about the decision.
#Update 24 Planning Officers report is out
The council report is out ahead of next Wednesday’s crucial committee meeting - and planning officers are still recommending REFUSAL.
A quick round up of main points and then some info on what you can do to help your community.
The plans have not changed at all - they are the same as last time.
You can see the report in detail here. It remains highly critical of the scheme.
Officers say there are two main reasons for refusal: 1) overdevelopment and 2) unacceptable loss of trees. A 3rd reason regarding overheating and sustainability is still being debated.
Many of the complaints by the developers of ‘unfairness’, which delayed the decision last time, have been dismissed by council officers, who say that nothing changes their recommendation to refuse.
Our criticism of the scheme remains the same and we support the recommended refusal.
We continue to have concerns about road safety and parking.
We are deeply concerned to see that developers are being allowed to offer a derisory cash alternative in lieu of replacing any SEND provision onsite. This is a dangerous precedent regarding SEND funding and the planning process.
We also dispute the developers exaggerated claims of public benefit - this is nothing more than a luxury, gated complex with no guarantees of public access. In fact, the report now states that Grace House and the spa WILL NOT be open to the public.
Councillors will make their decision next Wednesday August 9th at 2pm at the council house.
Please show your support and get the message across to councillors. You can:
✍🏼 Write a short statement to councillors to tell them what you think. **They will read this the day before they make a decision! ** Email democratic.services@bristol.gov.uk referencing Planning Application 22/01221/F. The deadline is midday on Tuesday 8th August. It only needs to be a paragraph or two!
🗣 Register to speak at the meeting itself next week - indicate in your statement email that you’d like to be given a 1 minute slot
👏🏻 Support us from the public gallery at the Council House on Wednesday August 9th at 2pm - the more the merrier.
💻 Watch the meeting live: LINK TO LIVE BROADCAST
📱Follow us on social media for all updates Twitter and Instagram
So.... we’ve been here before but we have got everything crossed the developers don't pull out again at the last minute. They’ve mucked us all around enough.
We now hope & trust that those councillors sitting on the planning committee will follow the wise guidance from the experienced planning officers and reject this appalling application outright.
Then we can start to think about a kinder, better and wiser use of the site that brings genuine community & public benefit.
Click here to find out how the council meeting and decision making process works.
#Update 23 New committee date
St Christopher's plans due to go before councillors on August 9th at 2pm.
You may remember the developers pulled out of the last meeting in May - and complained about the report by planning officers which recommended refusal for their scheme.
We have gone through their complaints with a fine toothcomb and debunked their spurious claims. You can read what we said here. And what our planning consultant says here.
Some of it is inevitably quite technical but their complaints just do not stack up. In a nutshell - we maintain the developers are failing to provide the public benefit they claim. And they are certainly not solving Bristol’s housing crisis either. They seem to completely fail to understand the guidance of council policies on heritage, density, sustainability, trees, and parking.
Our conclusion states:
“In our view, the applicant’s rebuttal is inaccurate, unbalanced and unfair - it is entirely without merit and nothing more than a desperate eleventh hour attack on hard working city council officers who have spent the best part of two years providing the applicant with wise and helpful advice on how to develop this site in a sensitive and appropriate way; advice that the applicant has chosen to ignore. The applicant has consistently failed to provide sufficient, accurate, up to date and detailed information when requested, and appears to be hell bent on maximising housing units and profit for shareholders over heritage, environment, sustainability and the delivery of social wellbeing to the community of Bristol. It is startling to see that the applicant has the audacity to claim this application will deliver ‘public benefit’ when the reverse is the case. In reality this application rides roughshod over a whole range of Bristol City Council policies, our community and our city.”
So we hope the officer's report will stick to their guns and continue to recommend refusal.
We appreciate lots of you may well be away in August (there seems to be a theme here doesn't there?....) but SCAN will be there in force and doing our best to get people’s voices heard.
We will update you as soon as we know more - and also provide you with more info about how to submit a statement to the meeting if you want to.
We very much hope the developers will not pull out of this next meeting and will face the committee and the community and hear what we have to say.
#Update 22 Developers pull the plans
At the eleventh hour, the developers have requested to pull their application from the committee meeting that would have decided the future of the site.
We are not sure what’s happening next - it may go to another council meeting later in the summer but nothing has been confirmed or explained. This is an unusual situation and it's simply not acceptable to mess everyone around at the eleventh hour with no explanation.
We haven't been told officially why it was withdrawn from the agenda, but we understand the developers didn't like the recommendation for refusal much or what was in the planning officers report!
We are not surprised.
The council report savaged their proposals on so many levels; officers called the scheme overdeveloped, harmful to heritage and the findings clearly discredited the developers ‘eco’ claims. The awful reality of this scheme was laid bare for all to see.
It would have been embarrassing for them to hear all that in public tomorrow.
No doubt there will be all kinds of desperate PR spin coming our way from a developer who doesn't like hearing the word no.
However no amount of expensive marketing jargon can hide the fact this is a poorly conceived, badly designed scheme that does nothing but harm. It just isn't appropriate for that site, our community or for Bristol as a whole.
If the developers thought we would tire of pushing for the right scheme for this site - they’re wrong and they've underestimated the community and what it stands for - again.
We are really sorry to all of you who made plans and rearranged their days to come down and support us in the council chamber. We appreciate your solidarity. And thank you to everyone who has rallied in these last few weeks as we thought we were heading toward the finish line.
Meanwhile, we wait, we ask questions and we try to find out what happens next.
Watch this space.
#Update 21
Report is out: Officers recommend REFUSAL
We can confirm that planning officers are recommending to REFUSE the St Christopher’s application on three main grounds
Overdevelopment/harm to heritage & conservation area- as we have said all along, it's way too big, too dense and too high.
Unacceptable tree & habitat loss - too many mature and valuable trees would be chopped down - and there simply isn't the space to plant replacements.
Unsustainable design - The buildings are so badly designed they don’t reach required standards to be either climate change future proof and would be detrimental to the quality of life for future residents. An embarrassing result for the developers whose main selling point was their purported sustainable eco credentials.
There are also concerns raised about parking and road safety - with officers accepting that the developers are not providing nearly enough parking spaces on site meaning there will be overspill on surrounding streets and that poses safety risks. This is not listed as a main reason for refusal and we are trying to understand why.
We are also concerned to see that developers are being allowed to offer a cash alternative in lieu of replacing any SEND provision onsite. This is a dangerous precedent regarding SEND funding and the planning process and we are looking into it.
Regarding affordable housing, after a legal review into planning class use, the council confirmed that under their current planning policy there is no obligation to provide affordable housing. SCAN still maintains that affordable housing should ideally be part of this scheme particularly against the backdrop of Bristol’s housing crisis.
You can read all the documents for yourself by going to this link:
https://democracy.bristol.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=10665
and there'll be more on our website.
So - we support the officers recommendation to refuse this application and we now place our trust in our elected councillors to agree with the findings and throw these plans out once and for all. Then we can start to think about a kinder, better and wiser use of the site that brings genuine community benefit.
What happens now?
The recommendation is just that - a recommendation from experienced planning officers. It's up to the 9 councillors - representing all the main parties on the planning committee to finally decide. They’ll be reading through the report over the next week to help them make an informed decision.
How does the meeting work?
The meeting will start with a Public Forum - this is a 30 minute slot where members of the public can make a one minute statement on the plans being discussed.
Councillors will debate the applications and ask questions if they have any. Planning officers will be present to answer or clarify. Then councillors then vote on the application which can be passed with a majority or unanimously.
The St Christopher’s application is in with two other large and controversial applications so the time will be divided up accordingly.
The meeting starts at 2pm, the public forum is likely to start around 2.15pm and the St Christopher's application is debated last - maybe around 4/4.30pm.
What is SCAN doing?
SCAN is preparing a small number of statements to cover all the main points raised by you. The Westbury Park Community Association will also be making a statement along with other interested campaign groups. These will go directly to councillors before the meeting.
We are also permitted to speak in the meeting but speakers only get one minute each, and as the public forum is time pressured, we think it wise to only make one or two speeches. However, anyone is of course free to do as they wish.
What can I do?
You can submit a statement if you feel strongly - it's a great way to make sure councillors directly hear your concerns. Here’s how:
Each statement should be no longer than one A4 side of paper.
The statement should be e-mailed to the Democratic Services on democratic.services@bristol.gov.uk referencing the planning application you are commenting on: St Christopher’s School, Westbury Park, Bristol BS6 7JE (Planning Application 22/01221/F)
If you’d like to speak, you must indicate in the email that you'd like to do so. You will only get 60 seconds in the meeting to make a summary of your point.
The deadline for statements is Tuesday May 30th at midday.
2. You can watch the meeting broadcast live here:
3. You can follow us on social media for all updates
If you have any questions - please get in touch with us.
We will update you again to let you know the outcome of the meeting and we expect it to be covered by the local press too so keep an eye out.
We keep our fingers crossed that our elected councillors will follow the recommendation of their officers and reject this application outright.
Thank you for your patience and support.
#Update 20
The team at SCAN understands that the St Christopher's application will go before councillors on May 31st at 2pm and planning officers are expected to recommend REFUSAL.
We will be able to confirm this on Tuesday 23rd when the report is officially released and we can let you know more detail about the hows and whys.
You are very welcome to come along and support us when we attend and speak - the meeting will be held at the council house on College Green. More info to follow shortly - including how you can submit a written statement if you want to.
This provisional recommendation by officers is encouraging and we hope it addresses all the concerns that so many of you mentioned in your objections.
More very soon!
Update #19
What’s going on with the planning application?
If you’re short of time, the headline is we are still waiting for a date for the planning committee meeting.
But read on to find out why and also what you can to do help……
What's the delay?
Other big applications: We thought the plans would go to council at the end of April but the massive Bristol Zoo application superseded us and pushed us down the list. For those of you who haven't heard - plans for 200 flats on the old Zoo site were voted through despite huge opposition.
An old oak tree: Also what’s held things up is an argument over a 250 year old oak tree on the site. This oak is so old and precious it's considered to be a ‘veteran’ tree, meaning it gets special protection. The developers tried to argue it was not a ‘veteran’ tree and wanted to chop it down to build a spa. The council insisted it should be protected. The developers have now marginally reduced the size of the spa building although we are not sure how much this will affect the health of the tree. Sadly, there are still too many other protected trees they want to fell in other parts of the site.
When’s it likely to go before councillors?
The next scheduled planning committees are
May 31st at 2pm &
June 28th at 6pm.
We think we will be heard during one of these.
A week before these meetings, the decision by planning officers is made public - either to recommend or refuse the application. Then it’s up to the councillors on the committee called Development Control A to debate and finally decide.
We will let you know as soon as we hear anything.
What can I do to help?
Lots! Here are a few ways…
Come along and support us at the meeting. You can sit in the public gallery at the council and witness the decision process as well as support those who’ll be standing up to speak - some for the first time ever. We’d love you to be there with us!
You can speak yourself at the council meeting - don’t worry, we can let you know how and when.
You can submit a statement to the council meeting - it's a direct way of letting the councillors know what you think and can be very powerful. You can only do this in the few days before the meeting - again we will let you know when and how.
You can write to your local councillor and let them know how you feel.
You can be active on social media to get our messages out there - if you don't follow our twitter or instagram - join up now
Please let us know if you'd like to be involved in the meeting and we will support you. We would love a range of voices from across the community - so get in touch now.
As soon as we get advance notice of the date of the meeting we will let you know and also give more detail about submitting a statement if you wish to do so.
Thank you to all of you for your continued interest and support.
Update #18
Things are moving fast….
Hello everyone,
This week:
Record number of objections - more this time than last time - read on for final numbers
SCAN’s objection from our planning consultant is in - thanks to community crowdfunding
Get ready for the plans to go to council - what can you do?
Objections
A phenomenal response - and one that’s making the council sit up and take notice. Despite the cynically timed festive consultation period - more objections were submitted this time than last time. 1254 overall from the public alone - not counting the myriad objections from councillors, MPs, statutory bodies, heritage & environmental groups and local stakeholders. For those of you who like statistics - 97.4% of all comments were objections, and 1.3% were in support. Another 1.3% were neutral.
Thank you to each and everyone of you who wrote in.
Thank you to the team of leafletters who pounded the streets and put the word round in freezing conditions.
Thank you also to our street champions who keep everyone informed.
It’s all made a huge difference. The council can be in no doubt what we all think.
SCAN’s Objection
Thanks to some amazing community fundraising we were able to pay for the expert consultant services of Mike Orr from Rapleys who has now submitted our objection. You can see it here or if you just want a summary then click here. We believe he’s provided us with multiple robust reasons for refusal, grounded in Bristol City council planning policy.
Overall he has demonstrated that this application is a woeful overdevelopment that is wholly inappropriate for this site due to ;
loss of heritage
loss of SEND provision
risk to road safety
damage to trees and the environment
unjustified absence of affordable housing
false claims about community benefits.
The developer has failed to respond adequately to significant concerns from council, community and expert consultees - and the recent minor amendments in no way alter the overbearing and insensitive nature of the scheme.
If anyone wants to contribute to SCAN’s fighting fund then please donate here.
Thank you to the hundreds of you who gave so generously despite it being a really tough time of year.
What next?
We understand the plans will go to the city council planning committee possibly as early as March 15th. Anyone can submit a statement of opinion for councillors to read before the meeting. We will let you know how to do this nearer the time if you wish to. Anyone can also register to speak at this meeting in what is called a Public Forum - you get a one minute slot. This is a fantastic chance to make your points openly and freely - direct to councillors.
Is there anybody out there who would like to get involved with the council meeting? Do email us back and let us know and we will help you with the process.
That’s it for now. We will be back in touch as soon as we know more.
Stay warm!
The Team at SCAN
Update #17
January 2nd 2023
HUNDREDS OF US HAVE ACTED - HAVE YOU?
Urgent Action is now needed from everyone….!!
We all need to comment AGAIN on the revised plans for St Christopher's - and we only have a few more days.
If we don’t submit our thoughts, we risk the Council assuming that we all accept a scheme that will blight our community forever.
So, even though the amendments are superficial and don't change the overwhelming bulk and mass of the proposals, we’ve been advised by planning experts that we ALL need to respond.
Click here to view the revised plans in full and make a comment - you don't need to write much. The deadline is this Thursday, 5th Jan. It’s a shame that the developers have timed this consultation over the festive period but there's nothing we can do about it. Sorry.
SCAN’s original concerns regarding overdevelopment, road safety, and the loss of trees, heritage & Special Educational Needs provision still apply.
The developers are spending £££ to persuade you their plans have changed significantly….but let’s have a closer look at what they are claiming…
They say: Fewer homes.
The reality: Just 6 fewer. There would still be 116 housing units. Mostly two-bedroomed. And still no affordable housing.
They say: ‘Improved’ parking ratio.
The reality: Still only 65 spaces for 116 luxury homes- not forgetting all the staff, carers, visitors, deliveries. Overspill is inevitable.
They say: The revised scheme is smaller & less visible.
The reality: One block lowered by the height of a ruler - that’s just 30 cm or less than one foot! Although another block has been reduced by a single storey, there would still be 4 huge apartment buildings - up to 5 storeys high - overwhelming the listed Grace House, nearby homes and the Downs. The council's own Conservation Panel ‘strongly’ objects to these revised plans saying they will cause ‘significant damage’.
They say: The revised scheme would retain more trees.
The reality: Still too many protected, mature trees will be felled - including a wonderful old oak tree. It will take decades for any new saplings to provide the same benefit to nature and wildlife.
They say: They’ll create an “Urban Village Hall” - with possible use by children with special education needs (SEN).
The reality: Vague offer of a shared-use space or room. Experts tell us this arrangement won't work from a safeguarding aspect. The proposal doesn’t come close to addressing the desperate need for SEN school places and doesn’t compensate for the loss of St Christopher's, a much valued community asset for 70+ years.
If we can get these plans rejected, we believe it's entirely possible for this site to be developed in a far more sensitive and sustainable way - providing much needed housing in Bristol (including affordable housing).
But we can only get to that point if enough of us register our comments NOW!
Please tell the council what you think - click here. A few sentences are fine and it should only take a few minutes. All comments are anonymous.
Thank you for your continued support - and happy new year!
Reminder:
Click here for the link to the revised applications so you can see for yourself
Click here to go straight to the comments page when you can start typing
Click here to read a more detailed summary of the minor changes with input from our colleagues at the Westbury Park Community Association.
Update #16
December 12th 2022
We are very sorry to be the bearers of bad tidings this festive season but unfortunately, we will all need to officially respond to the revised plans and submit our comments AGAIN on the planning portal!
Even if you have already done so, it's important that if you don't like the overall proposals - you let the council know.
(And if you haven't commented yet then now is the perfect time to have your say!)
We agree, it's incredibly disappointing that the developer has deliberately chosen to release their amendments over the Christmas & New Year period. Some might argue it’s a deliberate ploy to avoid any scrutiny and put us all off commenting.
Sadly, the amendments are minor and mostly cosmetic - and don’t significantly alter this overbearing, insensitive and inappropriate scheme. It appears developers have ignored the community and the huge number of fundamental objections from individuals, independent experts and council departments. So if you still don't like what you see then you need to act now!
But don't panic - you don't need to write much to have a massive impact.
5 minutes is all you need and you can be back to your Christmas preparations in no time.
Here’s a simple 3 step guide to how to comment - quickly - and some guidelines about what you might want to bear in mind.
1. It doesn’t need to be long:
If you objected before, then you only need to write a short paragraph confirming the reasons for your previous objections still stand. E.g. ‘The objection I submitted to the original planning application still applies to this proposal. I continue to believe that this planning application should be refused for the reasons I stated before’.
2. Outline your main concerns:
If you've got time, you may want to briefly list a few of your reasons. You can refer to our review of the revised plans here. Or you can look at our summary here for a more detailed breakdown of all the issues. But the main areas that SCAN objected to before, still stand:
Overdevelopment - still too big, too dense & too high
Loss of Trees and Wildlife - still too many trees being chopped down
Traffic - not enough parking spaces leading to overspill and road safety hazards
Loss of SEND provision - derisory offer of shared use of a room is an insult to the 70 years legacy of special needs education on this site
Harm to Heritage - the scheme is totally out of character with our neighbourhood and disregards the fact that this is a designated Conservation Area.
3. Click HERE to go straight to the comments page:
The deadline is January 5th. The Council will accept any comments received after this deadline but if possible, people are asked to respond within the set period. Don't forget you can write your objection beforehand andn then copy and paste on the council's website.
Wouldn't it be great to give the developers a sack full of objections to open on Christmas Day?
We apologise again that we have to ask you to do this at this time of year when we know everyone is busy. Sadly we’ve been forced to do so by the developers’ timings.
So - please make your views known - every comment counts.
Thank you and wishing you all a very merry Christmas.
From the team at SCAN
Update #15
The developers have just submitted revised plans for the St Christopher's site.
We really hoped that, having heard the concerns of HUNDREDS of local people, independent experts and national bodies, the developers would completely rethink their approach to the site and deliver radical and meaningful changes.
Sadly, that does not appear to have happened.
From their headline claims, it seems there are no substantial alterations and only a few minor tweaks:
Only one block has been reduced by a storey. There will still be four huge blocks of flats, completely out of character with a conservation area.
No increase in parking spaces - and we all know the huge impact that will have on traffic and safety in surrounding streets.
Overall number of housing units only reduced from 122 to 116 - that’s just six fewer! The scheme remains overwhelming, overbearing and densely populated.
We can see no mention of affordable housing. It remains a luxury housing development.
No commitment to honouring the site’s Special Educational Needs legacy - just a vague mention which amounts to occasional use of a room rather than any significant SEND provision which Bristol desperately needs.
Despite some concessions, we remain very concerned about the overall environmental impact and loss of key trees and biodiversity.
We’re relieved the developers have finally accepted that there should be no vehicular access on Etloe Road near the nursery. But we know many people will be dismayed by plans to create a new road into the site via the Glen.
All the new documents went on the council’s planning portal this morning. Rest assured, the team at SCAN will be reading every single one of them to fully understand the implications.
We will give you our thoughts as soon as we can.
What happens now?
The whole consultation process starts again! If you want to influence the decision-making, you will need to have your say via Bristol City Council’s planning portal again - even if you did it last time. Have a look at the plans here - you can register a comment right now if you wish.
It’s a shame this new consultation period falls over the Christmas and the New Year period - when we should all be enjoying the festive season - but it’s crucial that the community finds time to respond to these ‘revised’ plans. You don't have to write much - just a few bullet points is enough. We will let you know the closing date for comments and be in touch as soon as we know more.
Thank you all for your ongoing support.
Spot the difference between the old plans and the so called new plans.
Can you tell which one is which??
Update #14
November 27th 2022
Yet more council experts have slammed proposals to turn St Christopher’s into a luxury retirement complex - calling them “inappropriate, unacceptable and overbearing”.
Two new reports add to the growing list of council departments and others across the city, criticising the insensitive scheme put forward for the former special school site in Westbury Park.
Firstly - Bristol City Council’s Conservation Panel has objected to the proposals and lists a catalogue of problems with the design, layout height and mass of the proposed development. Developers Fore & Socius have been told they haven't listened to previous advice or concerns.
Among many other issues, the report maintains the various proposed blocks of flats are too high and too close together - calling the buildings “overbearing” and saying there’s so little space between them it’ll impact tree growth due to lack of light.
They call for a landscape-led setting and say the very high tree loss is “concerning’ and the replacement tree plan is completely inadequate.
In addition, they have concerns about the setting of Grace House , the Grade 2 listed building at the centre of the site built to Steiner principles with “architectural and historic significance” and designed to be “open verdant green parkland-style setting”. The new multi storey blocks of flats are uncomfortably close and will lead to “an overcrowding and overbearing impact on Grace house”
They conclude that the plans are “unacceptable in their current form” and “inappropriate” for the character of the Conservation area.
This chimes with everything we at SCAN, as well as our friends and colleagues at the WPCA (Westbury Park Community Association), have been saying right from the start!
Secondly - Bristol city council’s Education department record a litany of ‘serious errors ‘ in response to a report by the developers behind the scheme.
To give you some context, as part of the planning process, the developers commissioned a review into whether the former school site was suitable to return to use as a place for children with special education needs.
Their report concluded that “there is a multiplicity of provision to meet their needs across the area and only a small proportion of children need a special school place” and that in the future “the overall needs within the City are likely to have been met”. In other words, there was no need for replacement provision on site as there were plenty of places elsewhere.
The council has now said it completely disagrees. Elements of the report are “wholly inaccurate,'' says the council and show a “limited understanding” of Special Education Needs & Disablities provision. The council’s response goes on to explain that there are in fact a rising number of children within Bristol who need special school places and to say there will be a surplus is simply wrong. There will in fact be a shortfall of places and funding in the near future.
This shows how little the developers are concerned with replacing crucial SEND provision on this site. We are calling again for SEND to be top of the list of priorities for any development on this site to honour the legacy of more than 70 years caring for our city's vulnerable children.
The plans are still being considered by planning officers. And we are waiting for it to be sent to committee - that probably won't happen now until well into next year. We will of course keep you updated.
But the weight of expert and public opinion continues to mount up against the proposals. And it’s clear this development needs to be thrown out.
We are calling for a complete rethink into how we protect & enhance this valuable location at the heart of our community.
Update #13
St Christopher's plans are 'unsafe' and scheme should be thrown out say road & traffic experts
Lots of you have been asking - what’s happening with the St Christopher’s development…it’s all gone very quiet?
Well, SCAN is still here - campaigning and advocating - and we want to keep you up to date with where things stand and what to expect over the coming months. There’s a few things to tell you.
What’s happening with the application?
It’s still being considered by planning officers. We are waiting for a number of key reports on the scheme to be published, like education for example. It’s a complex application and unfortunately that means a rather long drawn out process. The reports from both within the council and other external groups have so far been largely extremely negative about the proposals. From Historic England calling it a ‘harmful’ scheme to objections from local councillors and DarrenJones, MP to deep concern from nature conservation charities, among many others. Add to that the 600 or so objections from you - and others across the city - and it forms a very loud voice speaking out against the development.
Did anything happen over the summer?
Yes - one of the most important reports from the traffic and road safety experts at the council was published....their verdict? The scheme is a road safety risk and should be refused. The report highlighted particular worries over car parking spaces and overspill in an already congested area and also called the proposed entrance next to the Daisy Chain nursery in Etloe Road "unacceptable”.
You can read more in this article in the Voice newspaper.
The Council’s experts findings chimed exactly with what we and many of you have said - parking is a nightmare around here, road safety is getting worse and the area couldn't cope with a huge development. The highways department referred to SCANs detailed research and surveys carried out on our local roads - which painted a very detailed picture indeed. Thanks to everyone who contributed to this amazing piece of work.
And just in case you missed it, the developers also released their financial viability report which SCAN analysed closely - and we believe contained ‘significant flaws’. None of their calculations justify the lack of any affordable housing provision or the excessive number of units that they want to build. You can see a summary of our analysis here.
So… what’s next?
We will keep an eye on the planning portal for any updates and continue to push for information about our key areas of concern. We are looking out for those key reports - from education, regarding replacement SEND provision, as well as comments from the city’s design panel. At some point we will find out what the planning officer is recommending to councillors - either to recommend for approval or to refuse it. Then councillors will then sit on a committee and make a final decision. That could be still weeks or months away.
The other option is that the scheme will be withdrawn by the developers because there are too many negative reports and therefore too many obstacles to overcome. They may well go back to the drawing board and come up with something else.
But we know this isn't a scheme that needs a few tweaks to make it acceptable - it needs a complete rethink to ensure it's both sensitive and appropriate and genuinely benefits our neighbourhood and the wider Bristol community.
We will be in touch as soon as we know anything.
Thanks for your continued support and interest. What an amazing community we live in!
All the best from the team at SCAN
Update #12
‘Significant flaws’ in financial report
A quick update on one crucial element of the planning process.
After months of waiting, the developers finally released their Financial Viability Assessment - a report which estimates how much their scheme for St Christopher’s will cost - and how much profit they'll make.
And it's an interesting read.
SCAN believes there are significant flaws in this report and that the conclusion does not justify either the developer’s failure to provide affordable housing or unwillingness to reduce the size of the scheme.
The developers argue they're not making enough profit on the scheme to enable them to provide affordable housing. SCAN’s detailed analysis contradicts this. Our revised models suggest that it should be perfectly possible for the developer to not only provide affordable housing on the site, but also substantially reduce the number of flats and still make a commercially acceptable profit.
If you've got time, you can read the developer’s financial viability report here.
And you can read our full response here - it's all now on the Bristol City Council website.
But if you only have a moment - here’s a brief rundown on why we question their calculations and why it’s so important to understand the financial aspect of the proposals.
What are the developers claiming?
Stay with us because this is a bit complicated for those of us who aren't experts in development accounting….essentially, it all comes down to ‘financial viability’.
Establishing whether a scheme is viable or not, is important because if it can be shown that a scheme is ‘unviable’, the obligation to provide affordable housing could be removed.
According to their calculations, the developers claim the St Christopher’s scheme will be ‘financially unviable’. And this is why they say they can't provide affordable housing.
However - a theoretical lack of financial viability does not mean that they would make a loss. In fact, they have already built a healthy profit into their calculations, which is sufficient for them to continue with the scheme – but they claim any further requirements from Bristol City Council (such as affordable housing) would be unaffordable. This argument could also be used to justify the extraordinarily high density of development that they have proposed.
What SCAN think…
We think the developers have overestimated their costs and underestimated their revenue.
And we believe a few MINOR adjustments in some key areas would make a MAJOR difference to their profit margins.
Working out the correct profit margins is important because if final calculations show the project is both viable AND in profit, it’s harder for developers to argue against affordable housing provision or a reduction in units.
The three main flaws in their calculations:
1.Failure to include other future income from the scheme: Developers have not included long term income streams from the development - e.g. profit from care provision, community facilities, land rent, resale/exit fees and more - which could make them a lot of money over the next few years. This is income that, according to Government and Bristol City Council guidelines, SHOULD be included when calculating any profit and determining viability.
2.Overestimated development costs/Underestimated sales revenue: They’ve worked everything out assuming costs are at the high end of the scale and sales are at the low end. Even a minor shift in these costs/revenues by as little as 2% would make sufficient difference for the model to be financially viable. Don't forget there's been a rise in house prices since their calculations were prepared earlier this year.
3.Developers return: The developers have stated they want a profit of 20% of sales revenue, but, even by slightly adjusting that to 17.5%, the scheme would make a more than healthy return for its shareholders and would STILL be viable enough to honour the affordable housing obligation.
Small adjustments to any one of these aspects would show the model to be financially viable. Adjusting all three together would be likely to indicate a very substantial profit, millions of pounds greater than suggested in their model – or alternatively would allow them to reduce the number of units quite substantially while still making an acceptable profit.
To sum up:
Our calculations indicate that a scheme with far fewer new housing units could be completely viable. That viability would mean that developers are duty bound to provide affordable housing in line with Bristol City Council policy.
Instead, the developers appear to be presenting highly conservative calculations in an attempt to evade such obligations. The developers readily acknowledge the housing need in our city and claim this scheme will help solve Bristol's housing crisis, so it would seem incongruent that affordable housing is not an integral part of this scheme.
What happens next?
Bristol City Council planners and financial experts will now conduct an assessment of the developer’s Financial Viability Assessment and come up with their own conclusions.
Remember, as well as assessing the financial viability arguments, Bristol’s city planners are now in the process of reviewing over 600 objections to the scheme submitted by citizens earlier.
We will as ever keep you informed of the timescale of all their decisions.
Meanwhile, thanks for your continued support. And special thanks to an eagle-eyed and expert core team at SCAN and within the wider community, for all their research and efforts to write our comments on this report.
Update #11
As things stand tonight - there are....
504 objections on the planning portal and just 4 comments in support.
The community has well and truly spoken. Massive thanks to everyone who has taken the time to tell the council what you think.
Objections have come in from Historic England, The Civic Society, the 20th Century Society, the Henleaze Society, all three local councillors - Geoff Gollop, Sharon Scott and Steve Smith, the Westbury Park Community Association, the Friends of the Downs and Avon Gorge (FoDAG), the Bristol Tree Forum, SEND charities, the Nature Conservation officer, and the Crime Reduction Unit. An impressive collection!
You still have a chance to add your voice to this growing number.
The deadline for comments is TOMORROW - Wednesday May 18th
Click here to go straight through to the council website and have your say.
The next step is for planning officers to read all those comments and recommend the plans for refusal or permission. We don’t know when that will be - but we will keep you informed.
Thank you to everyone in Westbury Park and across Bristol for their support - what a community!
Update #10
Last few days to have your say
Act now before it's too late!
You have only a few more days to make a comment to the council about the unacceptable plans for St. Christopher's.
Every comment counts - and numbers really do matter.
So, if you haven't done it yet - please spare a few minutes to protect your community from massive overdevelopment, potential parking chaos and tree & wildlife loss.
Tell the council what you think.
Click here to go straight through to the council website.
Keep it short - and stick to planning issues.
Here are some things you can consider, taken from SCAN's objection by our planning consultant:
Damage to Heritage: The proposals amount to severe overdevelopment in a conservation area. The proposed scale, mass and bulk are inappropriate within the sensitive heritage context of Westbury Park and the listed Grace House, and the scheme will give rise to unacceptable impacts on the townscape.
Damage to the Environment: There will be too many trees lost and a detrimental impact on nature & wildlife, losing high quality specimens that make a valued contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
Road Safety, Traffic & Parking: The proposal is not appropriate in transport and highway terms, owing to insufficient on-site parking provision and inappropriate access/egress arrangements, which will increase the road safety risks in an area where this is already a significant concern.
Lack of Affordable Housing: The proposal includes no affordable housing and is not supported by any evidence to justify such lack of provision.
Loss of SEND provision: In the context of an increasing need for SEND accommodation in Bristol, the developers have failed to comply with council policies that seek to safeguard community facilities.
Let’s send a strong message to the council about these inappropriate and insensitive plans for our community. Thank you to everyone who has already taken the time to write in.
We are heading for 500 comments which is AMAZING.
Can we get to 500? Only if YOU act now.
Helpful things to remember:
When you go online, there’s a time limit for writing your submission on the form, so we recommend writing it in your own document first, then copy and paste.
You can tick either ‘Object’ ‘Support’ or ‘Neutral’.
Every comment counts - you do not need to make your comment very long or complex but make it clear what you think. Even a few sentences are better than nothing!
The more personal you can make your comments, the better. Please include your own examples and experiences where appropriate.
Please note the Council will consider comments on the following planning issues: loss of light or privacy, overshadowing of neighbouring buildings, highway safety, traffic and parking issues, noise, amenity (this means the quality or character of an area and elements that contribute to the overall enjoyment), wildlife, historic buildings, conservation, design and appearance.
The Council cannot consider other issues such as: loss of views, effect on property values, privacy rights, and construction noise.
The application number is: 22/01221/F
THIS IS THE LAST CHANCE TO HAVE YOUR SAY BEFORE IT IS CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING OFFICERS!
Let's Protect Westbury Park!
Update #9
Council planning website still offline….
If you’ve been trying to submit a comment over the weekend and discovered the council planning portal is still offline..... then please don't give up!
We are on it - and will be contacting the council to find out when it will be back up and running again.
The council website has been very much off and on over the last month.
We appreciate this is really frustrating as the official deadline for comments is only three days away!
But please don’t let this put you off having your say!
Meanwhile you could still write your comment and then save it to copy and paste it when you're able to.
This is the link for future reference. We anticipate that because of this delay in being able to submit comments, they will be accepted beyond this Wednesday's deadline. So don't panic!
Please go to our main page here if you want some information and inspiration before you write - and remember it doesn't have to be a long comment.
We understand the damage to the heritage of Westbury Park and the lack of affordable housing are likely to be key issues for the council.
Keep an eye out on our social channels as we will let you know AS SOON as the website is back in action.
Thank you all for your continued support!
Amazing support across Westbury Park for the campaign against the overdevelopment of St Christopher’s. Thank you to everyone who has put a poster and taken the time to comment. You’re all amazing!
Update #8
“Deeply disappointing” final plans have been submitted
No major changes - the developers have not listened to the community!
Final designs for the St Christopher’s school site in Westbury Park have now been lodged with Bristol City Council. They are deeply disappointing.
SCAN (St Christopher’s Action Network) feels the developers have completely failed to address the community’s main concerns.
Watch this space to find out how and when you can have your say and formally object to this scheme should you wish to..
Despite the enormous volume of feedback submitted by Westbury Park residents during the public consultation period, the developers are still pushing ahead with insensitive and inappropriate plans. They have largely ignored our pleas.
You can see the plans on the Council’s website here.
We will be going through all the 127 planning documents submitted to the City Council over the next few weeks, and will let you know about the key details that emerge.
But for now, here is a quick summary of what we know.
● The community gave a clear message that the scheme was far too big for the site and we asked for far fewer new housing units.
■ BUT the developers have now INCREASED the number of flats and houses from 121 to 122!
● The community gave a clear message that we didn't want any overwhelming blocks of flats that were out of keeping in the Downs Conservation Area.
■ BUT the developers have retained FOUR multi-storey blocks. One of them will be SIX storeys high! Only one building has been reduced in height – and by just one storey.
● The community gave a clear message that we are worried about the impact on road safety, traffic and parking.
■ BUT the developers have REDUCED the number of on-site parking spaces from 120 to just 65. That’s 65 spaces for all the residents (approx 200), plus staff, visitors, delivery and service vehicles. Guess where everyone is going to park?
● The community gave a clear message that we did not want a vehicle entrance near the nursery on Bayswater Avenue or a pedestrian access on The Glen.
■ BUT the developers have kept both these inappropriate access routes in their plans.
● The community asked how much access local schoolchildren and the wider public would get to the small landscaped gardens and new on-site facilities such as swimming pool, café etc.
■ BUT the developers have only given vague aspirations – with no clear guarantees or commitments.
It will soon be time to tell the Council what you think of the plans. SCAN will be objecting as strongly as possible. After seeing the plans, the Westbury Park Community Association (WPCA) have also said they are “unacceptable, particularly on the grounds of overdevelopment and the scale, mass and height of the proposed new villas”.
BUT PLEASE DON’T CONTACT THE COUNCIL JUST YET. If you submit your views now, they might not count. We will let you know when the official period opens for sending in your views and objections . It is likely to be in the next few weeks.
In the meantime, here are some pictures from the developers' plans that give an indication of how the new buildings might look..
Proposed view from Royal Albert Road
Proposed view from St Helena Road
Proposed view from The Glen
Proposed view of the six storey block of flats from the Downs