twowheelsgood Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Guys, just a thought with reference to something both Dippy and Mark mention. It might be an idea to have sight of the originals title deeds of the Working Boys Home or any other docs relating to John Venn's bequest (technically his 'devise' as it relates to real property which includes physical property as opposed to personal items). These would probably be held at the Record's Office and no doubt may at present be packed up awaiting the move to the new premises but I am sure access to them could still be requested (or even demanded). It may come to nothing but if someone (or a few) had the time to see the deeds and any restrictions concerning the properties use after it passes out of control of the Council may be helpful. John Bothamley from the Civic Society says 'Have paid to see the land registry title and there appears to be no restrictive covenant.' I'd still be interested to know how the site came to be in the Council's possession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin James Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 John Bothamley from the Civic Society says 'Have paid to see the land registry title and there appears to be no restrictive covenant.' I'd still be interested to know how the site came to be in the Council's possession. Ditto, Council are good at giving land and buildings away and also equaly as good at acquiring them too by the seem of things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Harrington Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Thanks twowheels. Registration of the property, at some point in the past, would have been done by a Council/Corporation employee so it may still be worth seeking out the original deeds if someone was able to, to ensure all the relevant information was recorded.It is very possible something was missed or not included in the submission to the Land Registry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Harrington Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 And as you and Colin allude to, the Land Registry may state ownership of the property but may not include the details of the bequest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denise Lloyd Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 If the original docs are all packed away for moving to Rotherwas and are not available for scrutiny then surely no deal can/should be made. Well that is in a nice world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SON OF GRIDKNOCKER Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 @ Colin and John H: not exactly the perfect solution ("...so who are these guys accountable to?), I admit, but the Last Chance Saloon goes under the name of the Scrutiny & Overview Committee. One upon a time, it was a toothless watchdog, chared (I believe) either by Cllr Edwards or James. Then in one of John Jarvis's re-arrangements of the deckchairs on the SS Brockington (currently taking in water up on Hafod Road), Cllr Alan 'Mr Sensible' Seldon was appointed Chairman, with Cllr Liz Harvey as his deputy. They are a formidable duo I can tell you (using a technique against witnesses rather like the CID's old game of 'Mr Nice and Ms Nasty'). On one famous occasion, when the duo were checking Hereford Futures' accounts with a fine tooth comb, they very nearly reduced Brother Bretherton to tears! If the Cabinet does approve this crackpot deal, I suspect (though Mark can post otherwise if I'm miss-reading the runes?} the Overview & Scrutiny Committee will want to see and hear all the evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Harrington Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 That is at least of some reassurance Grid Knocker, very true. I have heard they are a tough and honest bunch, although I was disappointed that their grilling of HF didn't amount in the end to any sanctions or reprimands against Cllrs and members of the Hereford Futures board for failing to keep adequate notes/records of their activities. Still, that may have been beyond their remit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megilleland Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Denise Lloyd, on 28 Mar 2014 - 08:59 AM, said: If the original docs are all packed away for moving to Rotherwas and are not available for scrutiny then surely no deal can/should be made. Well that is in a nice world. MADDOX COURT RECORDS (Mostly Land Transactions & Will Settlements) ENGLAND & WALES 1700s Benjamin Maddox Herefordshire Record Office Records of Hereford Society for Aiding the Industrious 1670-1894 Deeds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambo Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 To be fair to mark smartieno he doesn't get paid a lot & he doesn't claim a lot of expensive. I've checked out HC website you can find out who gets wot & how much they claim! The thing is mark is fighting against a tidal surge & wot we need is people like him to stand for councillors so that they can fight back against the injustices that go on with local authorities. So I'm very happy to hear you will be standing in next yrs elections where I'm sure that both you & mark will find your an asset to one another should you not get elected which I hope you both will??!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambo Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Apologise slight error in last post supposed to say "I hope you both get elected" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dippyhippy Posted March 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Yes, I would like to second that. Mark Hubbard is an outstanding individual, and councillor. Praise where praise is due. There are too few people who go all out, to try to achieve what is best for this city and the folks who live here....Mark Hubbard is head and shoulders above the majority. We absolutely need more folk like him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dippyhippy Posted March 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Two Wheels, my quote thingy isn't working,(Well it probably is, but I can't get it to do what I want it to do!) but yes, absolutely agree with your post about the boys home, and what happened prior to it being transferred to the council. This appears to be a grey area. I honestly feel the devil could be in the detail with this one. Has anybody had any thoughts on challenging English Heritage's decision??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambo Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 I'm not sure if that's pos? dippy as I think HCS appeal the decision & it was rejected by the minster for sport culture & media i can't remember his name? who's job it was to review case. I know this as I did ring up english heritage & spoke to a lovely lady Danielle lipscombe (who is in charge of the west of England) who told me any new info should be put in writing & sent to the minster of sports & things! She also sent me a report on why it was rejected by them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambo Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 13 February 2014 Dear Mr Hayes, Former Working Boys' Home, Bath Street, Hereford, Herefordshire I am writing to inform you that we have carried out an initial assessment to consider whether the above building should be added to the List of Buildings of Special Architectural or Historic Interest. The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport has asked us to consider this application in our role as the Government’s statutory adviser on the historic environment with responsibility for listing. We have now considered the application and completed an assessment of the building based on the material provided. The Secretary of State has decided not to add The Boys Home, Bath Street, Hereford to the List at this time. The reasons for this decision are set out in the attached report. If you consider that this decision has been wrongly made you may contact the Department for Culture, Media and Sport within 28 days of the date of this letter to request that the Secretary of State review the decision. An example of a decision made wrongly would be where there was a factual error or an irregularity in the process which affected the outcome. You may also ask the Secretary of State to review the decision if you have any significant evidence relating to the special architectural or historic interest of the building which was not previously considered. Further details of the review criteria and process and how to request a review are contained in the annex to this letter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ubique Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Dippy , that's the lady I am dealing with in relation to the Listing of that War Memorial we spoke about , i do have her tel number if you want to discuss it with her ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dippyhippy Posted March 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 So! Do we have any "significant evidence relating to the special architectural or historic interest of the building which was not previously considered"???? For my part, I think they have absolutely made the wrong decision. According to Cambo's post, we need to bring something else to the party.....do we have anything concrete we can challenge them with?? Ubique, my friend, I will have that telephone number....I think its worth having a conversation about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambo Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 She is very helpful & did tell me not to hesitate to contact her if I need any more assistance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambo Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Annex 1 Review Criteria and Process A review will only be carried out in the following circumstances: (1) there is evidence that the original decision has been made wrongly. Examples would include: - where there was a factual error, eg. the wrong building was listed; or - where there has been some irregularity in the process which has affected the outcome, eg. relevant English Heritage (Designation) Reject at Initial Assessment Report 13 February 2014 Application Name: Number: Type: Heritage Category: Address: The Boys Home, Bath Street, Hereford 482958 New Listing Council Offices,,The Boys Home,,Bath Street,Hereford Council Offices,,Bath Street,Hereford County District District Type County of Herefordshire Unitary Authority Recommendation: Reject Assessment Parish Hereford Context and background: we have been asked to consider the Council Offices, formerly the Working Boys’ Home, in Hereford for designation. The building has been used as council offices since 1934 but no longer meets the council’s requirements. It is soon to become redundant, and consideration is being given to the re-use of the building or the re-development of the site. The building lies within the Central Hereford Conservation Area. History and Details: during the second half of the C19 there was a drive towards finding means to remove children from the workhouse, initially by philanthropists, and later among a wider constituency. The idea was to allow children to escape the cycle of poverty by moving them to a more usual domestic life and thus better fulfil their potential. A variety of approaches were promoted, including cottage homes, where groups of houses were constructed in rural locations to provide self-contained settlements for cared-for children; boarding-out within individual foster-families; emigration; and scattered homes within the community. Working boys’ homes were established to provide boys, typically from cottage homes, with training in a skill or trade. The boys would be encouraged to gain employment whilst at the home and a proportion of their salary would pay for their board. Typically, boys stayed at the home until they were settled in an apprenticeship or other work, or until they reached the age of eighteen. Working boys’ homes were largely considered to be successful establishments and continued to be used until the 1970s. The Working Boys’ Home in Hereford was established in 1874 by Arthur Grenville Levason when two destitute boys were given a home in a rented cottage. In the same year the Hereford Society for Aiding the Industrious, a philanthropic organisation established in 1841 by the Reverend John Venn, sold their land on Bath Street (which was being used to provide allotments) to enable a purpose-built working boys’ home to be erected for boys aged nine to fourteen. Rev’d Venn continued to have an active involvement in the running of the home until his death in 1890. The Hereford architect George Haddon, a prolific architect Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dippyhippy Posted March 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Hi there Cambo, thanks for your post.....honestly, I was unaware that HCS HAD appealed the decision! Grid Knocker, were you aware of this...???? Oh Lordy....I have so much information on this, I am losing track! I am not complaining - over 4,500 views, and 280 plus comments is fabulous! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambo Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 English Heritage (Designation) Reject at Initial Assessment Report 13 February 2014 who both restored and designed a number of buildings including Redwood House, formerly Malvern Rural Hospital in 1868 (Grade II), designed the building in an English Domestic Revival style to appear as a family home. It was opened in 1877 and the two-storey, three-bay home is constructed of local red brick with blue-brick dressings and a slate tile roof. The tall, brick chimney stacks have been truncated and the rooflight has been removed and replaced with dormer windows to the side elevations. The sash windows are beneath cambered heads with alternating red and blue brick voussoirs and dressed stone springers. The moulded brick jambs have stepped bricks at the cill and impost. The outer windows to the first floor have been widened. The former gabled entrance has been altered to form a bay window with a lean-to roof. The building now forms the central wing of a larger complex. The building was extended to the rear (east) in 1886 to form a two-storey cross wing comprising a school room to the ground floor and a dormitory to the first floor. The cross wing was designed by William Chick (later known as Cheiake) who also added a block to the north which included an infirmary, laundry (with associated chimney) and workshops. Both additions match the architectural style of the central wing and the chimney to the laundry survives. Chick was the Country Surveyor (1862-1892) and is well-known for his church restorations and his additions to E W Pugin’s Convent of Our Lady of Charity, Bartestree (Grade II). In 1895, the south wing, designed by G H Godsell, was added and formed the Meadows Memorial Hall and its architectural style reflects that of the late-C19 board schools. Its principal elevation (west) has double-height, stone mullion and transom windows with leaded lights and cambered heads. Above the windows is a decorative stone scroll with ‘The Meadows Memorial’ in raised lettering. This is partially missing due to spalled stone. There are two lateral brick stacks to its north elevation and a square cupola with arcading to the ridge of the roof. To the south elevation are three stone mullion and transom windows beneath gables which rise above the eaves line. The windows are separated by offset buttresses with stone caps. In 1902 further alterations were undertaken including the Palladian-style link building between the central and north wings which included a carriage entrance that has been glazed, and extensions to the north wing. The Working Boys’ Home was closed in 1933 and in 1934 it was converted to council offices. The conversion included alterations to the plan form and some extension to the north wing. Internally, the plan form and circulation of the building has been altered by the relocation of the entrance and the re-ordering of the internal spaces to form offices. The double-height memorial hall has had a floor inserted to the east end but its timber-boarded roof, supported on stone corbels, is extant. There is some survival of internal joinery but much has been removed, as well as the fireplaces. Criteria/Assessment: with reference to the Principles of Selection for Listing Buildings (2010) and the English Heritage Selection Guide for Health and Welfare Buildings (April 2011) when assessing children’s homes for designation consideration should be given to date, rarity, architectural quality, overall planning and degree of intactness. The Council Offices, formerly the Working Boys’ Home is not recommended for designation, for the following principal reasons: * Architectural quality: although the building is designed by well-known local architects and exhibits architectural quality, the original building has been altered and significantly extended, and despite attempts to unify the buildings through the use of matching materials and details, the 1902 additions are Palladian rather than Domestic Revival in style and contrast with the earlier buildings, and there are some insensitive mid-C20 additions to the rear; * Planning interest: the building has evolved over time and it lacks cohesion; * Alteration: whilst it has claims to historic interest as a former working boys’ home, evidence of how the building functioned has been eroded by later alteration, particularly to the interior where the original plan form and circulation are no longer legible and the function of the different elements has been lost. Conclusion: the local architectural and historic interest of the former Working Boys’ Home in Hereford is recognised by its inclusion in a conservation area. However, the building is not sufficiently intact or of sufficient architectural quality to merit statutory designation. Page 2 of 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambo Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 English Heritage (Designation) Reject at Initial Assessment Report 13 February 2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twowheelsgood Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 To be fair to mark smartieno he doesn't get paid a lot & he doesn't claim a lot of expensive. I've checked out HC website you can find out who gets wot & how much they claim! The thing is mark is fighting against a tidal surge & wot we need is people like him to stand for councillors so that they can fight back against the injustices that go on with local authorities. So I'm very happy to hear you will be standing in next yrs elections where I'm sure that both you & mark will find your an asset to one another should you not get elected which I hope you both will??!! I (think I) recall that Cllr Hubbard said a little while ago that he was going to stand down at the next election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ubique Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Dippy , details sent to you via message. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambo Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 No worries I prob should have posted this info earlier? I think there was something in Hereford times a couple of wks ago about the appeal but not 100% sure on that?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambo Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Yes twowheelsgood I did hear a rumour about that maybe he should run for Westminster instead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twowheelsgood Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Just posting this again, because since megilleland posted it at the start of this thread, a lot has been said, but the application for Listing by the Woolhope Naturalists’ Field Club has only been viewed 10 times! It behoves us all to read this thorough and fascinating report on the history of this building and why it must be saved somehow. How English Heritage can say it has no historic interest is baffling. Woolhope Listed Boys Home appn.doc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambo Posted March 28, 2014 Report Share Posted March 28, 2014 Oh I do have sum good news thou mr Harry bramer has agreed to meet me on Wednesday @ brockington so that I can give him a written request to consider the bus station as an alternative site stating reason as to why it is a better location than bath street. Which was written by the mighty grid knockers pen!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dippyhippy Posted March 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 29, 2014 Fantabulous! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guests Guest smartieno1 Posted March 29, 2014 Guests Report Share Posted March 29, 2014 In the interests of keeping this topic on track...I would like to apologise if I have unfairly criticised Cllr Hubbard.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SON OF GRIDKNOCKER Posted March 29, 2014 Report Share Posted March 29, 2014 @ Cambo: congrats on setting up a Brockington meet with Cllr Bramer next Wednesday. The very best of luck (but don't say 'bleedin' - that's a swear word you know!). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.