Cambo

When the hospital was built it was to small there were never going to be enough beds where as before we had two hospitals & a eye hospital now we have one. but yet we have a growing population & a ageing one,not to mention all the new house there talking about building how's the NHS going to cope in the future if there struggling now? I'd say not very well!

Wot about someone from English heritage?

Are there people on the voice who have sent in objections to the planning application but there names are not on the representations list? If so can you please let me know ASAP? 263 people have now signed petition!!

No not yet will chase it up thou

Sarah Lowe she is the conservation officer

Bravo the conservation dept & well done Denise for posting it! I've emailed the planning officer to ask him how many objections he has received so far to date?as I don't think the amount that are listed under representations is correct? As I know some people who have objected are not on the list?

That would not surprise me now mr Cardin if he did get commissioned to do some work here in Hereford…by an old friend returning a favour? But if that does happen? then I think we the people of Hereford should make him feel most unwelcome!!

He's a nice chap isn't he.…got real attitude obviously has something to hide?

A guy from Hereford visions has set up a petition on this issue if anyone is interested in signing? http://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/save-the-old-boys-home

This video by Hereford visions highlights the traffic congestion along bath street & outside the old boys home.

Cllr jones why am I not surprised!…fancy falling asleep?! I wonder how much he will be claiming in expensive for that little nap??!!

Yes well done that man I can honestly say I've never bought a copy but I think that I will go & get this issue!

It is very interesting & hopefully something good will come of it? So keeping my fingers crossed & praying that common sense will prevail in the end?!

Has anyone been reading the correspondence between the planning officer & the agents acting for HWFRS?

Yes well done bobby & the grid knocker for putting on a fab night in aid of rose tinted rags as it takes a lot to put on a charity event so you should feel proud in yourselves guys & I'm sure the folks down @ RTR appreciate wot you did!!

I think he trying to draw attention to the process of how it's decide to go to war in times of crises? Not that I feel we are in a crises mind you although Iraq is!

I think Jessie has boxed clever here? he was making a point on the process on why they were voting. I think he voted no safe in the knowledge that his no vote would not affect the overall outcome of the result?

[quote name="Chris Chappell" post="16358" timestamp=" You will not be surprised that the answer is No. Harry seems to be rather bad tempered recently, do't know why! I wonder if Harry has seen English Heritage's objection?

He makes me laugh does old Harry bramer the snake! Does he seriously believe that we are going to swallow anything he says? The fire service are the lead on this project… pushed by the hand of Harry more like!! The decision was reached long before April too as we all know he just had to get his mates to agree to it. Fancy trying to justify his ridiculous decision by saying it demonstrates the best possible location! Yet he doesn't seem to know wot other sites HWFRS investigated?! did he not read there feasibility report? If he didn't? then he should of & if he did? he must be lying as to not knowing the location of the other sites?

I hope so to ubique

​25 September 2014 ​ Dear Mr Thomas Notifications under Circular 01/2001, Circular 08/2009 & T&CP (Development Management Procedure) Order 2010 HEREFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL OFFICES, BATH STREET, HEREFORD, HR1 2HQ Application No P142554/F Thank you for your letter of 29 August 2014 notifying English Heritage of the above application. Summary The council offices on Bath Street were originally constructed as the Hereford and district working boys home and industrial school. The school represents an important part of the social history of 19th century Hereford and is a standing reminder of the local philanthropic movement of this period. This architecturally pleasing building is of local architectural interest. The proposal will see the total loss of the former boys home and see its replacement with a new fire station. The building is unlisted, but is situated within the Hereford Central Area conservation area, a designated heritage asset. English Heritage objects to this application that would see the total loss of an undesignated heritage asset, which makes as positive contribution to the significance of the conservation area. The loss of this building would cause harm to the designated heritage asset. We remain unconvinced that a clear and convincing justification has been put forward to justify the proposals and it is our view that an alternative site would be able to provide the public benefits proposed by the applicant. As a building of local architectural and historic interest we believe it is worthy of preservation through adaptation to a suitable alternative use. English Heritage Advice The council offices on Bath Street were originally constructed as the Hereford and district working boys home and industrial school. The boys home was established in 1874 by Arthur Grenville Levason. The school moved to the purpose-built building on land, sold for that purpose, by the Hereford Society for Aiding the Industrious, which had been founded by the Reverend John Venn. The school was constructed and developed in three phases; the central block being first, constructed in 1876 to the designs of George Haddon. The school was then extended to the rear and east in 1886 to from a two-storey cross wing, north block, infirmary and laundry designed by William Chick (later Cheiake). Further additions were added and in 1895 a south wing was created to form the Meadows Memorial Hall and in 1902 a link building between the central and north wings that included a carriage entrance. The later additions were designed by G H Godsell in late-C19 board school and Palladian style respectively. The school was closed in 1933 and converted in 1934 to council offices and was used as such until the Council’s departure from the site. The school represents an important part of the social history of 19th century Hereford and is a standing reminder of the local philanthropic movement of this period. This architecturally pleasing building is of local architectural interest having been designed by three well-known local 19th century architects and is of an architectural quality that contributes to the townscape of the city. The proposal will see the total loss of the former boys home and see its replacement with a new fire station. The building is unlisted, but is situated within the Hereford Central Area conservation area, a designated heritage asset. English Heritage is concerned by the proposed loss of the former boys home and objects to the application for the following reasons; The former boys home, although not sufficiently intact or unaltered as to be granted listed status, is still clearly of local architectural and historic interest and as such we consider it to be an undesignated heritage asset in its own right. The building occupies a prominent site on Bath Street set back from the road, with its fine square cupola appearing in central view upon turning from the A438 into Bath Street. Its mixture of roof lines, gabled windows, dormers and brickwork detailing, provides an aesthetically pleasing architectural landmark to Bath Street and to this part of the city beyond the medieval city walls which in no doubt forms part of the townscape making a positive contribution to this part of the conservation area. The applicant provides no information or evidence of the building having been openly marketed and we are not aware of any attempt to try and secure a suitable alternative use for the building that will enable its conservation. It is our view that the building is capable of sensitive adaption to a variety of uses that could secure the buildings future and see it retained with the potential to enhance the appearance of the conservation area. Whist we are sympathetic to and understand that there are valid practical and functional reasons that determine a fire station’s appearance. We do not however accept that the proposed building either preserves or enhances the character or appearance of the conservation area and we therefore believe this demonstrates the former boys home is not the most suitable site for the proposed new fire station. We are also unconvinced that the search for alternative sites within the city and surrounding area has been exhaustive and we urge the applicant to undertake further investigations, in consultation with the local authority, to identify and re-evaluate possible locations for a new fire station. As the application affects a conservation area, the statutory requirement to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation area (s.72, 1990 Act) must be taken into account by your authority when making its decision. Under the NPPF it is a core planning principle to conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of this and future generations (para.17 NPPF). When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification (para.132, NPPF). The onus is therefore on you to rigorously test the necessity of any harmful works. The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighting applications that affect directly or indirectly non designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset (para.135 NPPF). Loss of a building (or other element) which makes a positive contribution to the significance of a conservation area should be treated either as substantial harm or less than substantial harm under paragraphs 133 and 134 of the NPPF as appropriate, taking into account the relative significance of the element affected and its contribution to the significance of the Conservation Area as a whole (para.138 NPPF). Permission should be refused because of concerns about incompatibility of development with an existing townscape, where the concern relates to a designated heritage asset and the impact would cause material harm to the asset or its setting which is not outweighed by the proposal’s economic, social and environmental benefits (para.65 NPPF). Recommendation English Heritage objects to this application as it would see the total loss of an undesignated heritage asset, a building which makes a positive contribution to the significance of the conservation area. The loss of this building would cause harm to the significance of this part of the conservation area. We remain unconvinced that a clear and convincing justification has been put forward to warrant the proposals and it is our view that an alternative site would be able to provide the public benefits as proposed by the applicant. English Heritage therefore recommends that the application is refused and encourages the council to market the site in order to find a suitable alternative use that will enable the retention of a building of local architectural and historic interest. We would welcome the opportunity of advising further. Please consult us again if any additional information or amendments are submitted. If, notwithstanding our advice, you propose to approve the scheme in its present form, please advise us of the date of the committee and send us a copy of your report at the earliest opportunity. Yours sincerely Ross Brazier Assistant Inspector of Historic Buildings and Areas E-mail: ross.brazier@english-heritage.org.uk

I spoke with a guy from the new university earlier & I ask him wot buildings had the council offered them?…his reply was they have said they can have the franklin barns building no other building has been offered?…even more reason why the old boys home should not be demolished as it would be fantastic to have that as a uni building?!

Unfortunately I can't not make tomorrow as I have to work so thank you Chris it is very much appreciated!

Bobby I will be there so I hope others will be to?as this is a great cause to support & deserve to be supported!!!!

Tomorrow is the 25th of September which is the last day of consultation on the planning application. which has me wondering how many of us on the voice have actually lodge a objection to it?? Are there many or just a couple or have people just simple given up & not bother?? This is not the time for apathy if we want to stop this crazy idea? as the more object lodged the better chance we have of getting it thrown out? So come on guys! if you've not done so already nows as good a time to do so as any!! http://tinyurl.com/n25s7ub