Exclusive: Developer eyes Dyson school site
A firm with a track record of bringing new life to old buildings across the UK could be interested in Bath's Newark Works site.
Businessman Sir James Dyson this week abandoned plans for a £56 million design school at the former Stothert and Pitt craneworks in Lower Bristol Road.
His scheme which had been four years in the planning would have preserved only the facade of the 1850s building.
But London-based Verve Properties - which has transformed the 12-acre Paintworks site in Bristol - says it would be interested in being approached over the council-owned building, which it would preserve in full.
The former factory designed by Thomas Fuller had been part of a business park housing small enterprises but these were evicted as part of a drive to find new uses for the location.
At one point, both the James Dyson Foundation and Bath Spa University were to share the riverside site, but the council and the South West Regional Development Agency - which helped the authority buy some of the land in the area - will now have to go back to the drawing board.
Verve, which prides itself on development with a social conscience, has been keeping an eye on the on-off saga of the various plans for the site.
Director Ashley Nicholson stressed that the nearest he had come to inspecting the listed building was a "second gear drive past".
But he said: "What we do is find new uses for old industrial complexes.
"We have been wanting to do something in Bath for some time."
The firm had been keen to acquire the old Bath Press building further along Lower Bristol Road which has now been bought by St James Investments.
Mr Nicholson said of the Newark Works: "It's certainly the kind of thing that we would look at. We are an unusual developer - we're a developer with a social conscience."
Verve's Paintworks development has turned an old paint factory into an acclaimed creative quarter with homes and offices, including the TV studios where Noel Edmonds's Deal or No Deal programme is made.
Sir James pulled the plug on his design and innovation school on Tuesday night after the twin blows of the loss of Government funding and the delay of a costly public inquiry sparked by fears that the site would flood.
It was the use of a site next to a river for educational purposes which rang alarm bells at the Environment Agency, despite the foundation's arguments that it and its Bath-based engineering consultants Buro Happold had proved these fears unfounded.
Any scheme which did not involve children would be less likely to fall foul of Government policy on flood prevention.
The council says it will now be discussing the future of the site with the regional development agency, although it looks unlikely to rush into any decisions.
It wants to ensure that any development at what it calls Bath Quays South fits in with its blueprint for the city - the Future Vision for Bath - and the Western Riverside scheme.
B&NES resources cabinet member Cllr Malcolm Hanney said today: "I do not believe the Bath Quays South site will be looked at in isolation from other potential developments in the city.
"When the council's direct and beneficial interest in Bath Quays South was acquired, there was a recognised potential for a significant riverside development incorporating land on both sides of the river, much of which land is in council ownership.
"The council will now consider on behalf of local residents, and as part of the Future Vision for Bath and in the context of its property and other interests, the various options available.
"There are currently no formal proposals and I expect a significant amount of work will need to be undertaken to explore potential options."
Cllr Hanney said he was disappointed that it had not been possible for Sir James to go ahead with his school scheme.
The businessman's architects this week joined Sir James's condemnation of the bureaucracy over the scheme.
Wilkinson Eyre associate director Sebastian Richard told Building Design: "The project has had to be abandoned because of lack of support. There's not much else to say; it's very sad for young people and education. When you're working with a charity the money should be invested in education, not planning inquiries."
Meanwhile, Sir James is considering funding design courses in existing schools and colleges and is also setting up a new website, intended to help young people get involved in design and engineering.
19 Comments
View all
by Evelyn, UK
Monday, October 13 2008, 9:53AM
“I wasn¿t aware anyone had claimed anything other than interest by Verve, which exists. As the building has never been marketed it¿s difficult for any would-be developer to have a fully thought through ¿plan¿ at this time. Verve has carried out many re-use developments, and I know Bristol well. I certainly don¿t ¿hate¿ the Paintworks, an excellent re-use scheme. Bath is a different issue, a listed building in a WHS. However, no doubt some ¿enabling¿ development can be carried out too ¿ it¿s a large site. There is in existence a number of developers with expertise in regeneration schemes which include historic buildings. Perhaps B&NES council could work with the Prince¿s Regeneration Trust in seeking a future?
There is no reason why a mixed use development could not be the future for the site, as it¿s only educational establishments which cannot be built on flood plains. The building could also return to its former use without any planning required. It has only been empty for two years; the council evicted the occupants in order that it could sell the land to the Dyson Foundation.
Local authorities are supposed to set an example and look after their own historic buildings, so hopefully B&NES council will very soon fix and secure the building so the pigeons aren¿t entering and the blocked guttering isn¿t overflowing and causing damage to the façade. It could possibly seek advice from Maintain our Heritage? It carried out its historic buildings maintenance pilot scheme in Bath I recall.
¿While regular maintenance may not be glamorous, it is essential and of course common sense: appropriate, regular maintenance (helps) avoid costly, wasteful and unnecessary later repairs¿
HRH The Prince of Wales”
by Matt, Bath
Sunday, October 12 2008, 6:52PM
“Ah - so the much vaunted Verve alternative turns out to be a red herring - the developer has driven past in second gear......well thats a plan then. Here's what will happen: nothing. The building will sit there rotting away for another couple of decades - especially given the current economic climate. I suppose it doesn't really matter because we all know that in the not too distant future it will be inundated with floodwater. I suppose that might help clean the currently very grubby stonework.
Incidentally those proponents of Verve might actually care to visit the Paintwork's site (its in Bristol Evelyn which is a large city 13 miles west of Bath) where you will find that they have incorporated modern building techniques and materials into the old brick buildings - you'll hate it Evelyn. It is also what is called a mixed development incorporating housing as well as business and retail units and there is no way they will get permission to do that at Newark because - its in a flood zone!! I think we should let nature take its course don't you? Wash away the dreary old place.”
by Alastair Steel, Great Pulteney Street
Friday, October 10 2008, 12:06PM
“I have to comment on what James said. the reason people keep asking for a concert hall is because the "fantastic buildings" he quotes are not at all ideal or even in some cases appropriate for concerts, particularly if you want to attract an orchestra. Bath is in fact incredibly short of spaces that can accommodate a reasonably sized performance and an audience to pay for it at the same time. During the dot.com boom I was aware of many emerging organisation keen to hold conferences in Bath but there was nowhere to accommodate either the conference or the deleates. A combined conference and concert venue tied to a large hotel would have been a far better vision for the Western riverside (maybe with water taxis to a from the wier) than a load of flats aimed at people for whom there are no jobs in Bath”
by Duncan, Bath
Friday, October 10 2008, 12:05PM
“Hi Evelyn
You've been very outspoken with what you think should not happen to the site. May I ask what you think could be done with it??”
by Alastair Steel, Great Pulteney Street
Friday, October 10 2008, 12:05PM
“I have to comment on what James said: The reason people keep asking for a concert hall is because the "fantastic buildings" he quotes are not at all ideal or even in some cases appropriate for concerts, particularly if you want to attract an orchestra. Bath is in fact incredibly short of spaces that can accommodate a reasonably sized performance and an audience to pay for it at the same time. During the dot.com boom I was aware of many emerging organisation keen to hold conferences in Bath but there was nowhere to accommodate either the conference or the deleates. A combined conference and concert venue tied to a large hotel would have been a far better vision for the Western riverside (maybe with water taxis to a from the wier) than a load of flats aimed at people for whom there are no jobs in Bath”
by Minor, Bath
Friday, October 10 2008, 12:04PM
“Whilst i appreciate bath being a world heritage site and an area of historic importance. Lets not forget times and areas also need to move on. We cannot keep bath in the 17th century forever and Dysons vision for what is a scruffy old site would have been a massive benefit for Bath. But i supposed the self opiniated do-gooders like the Bath Heritage Watchdog will be sleeping tight in the knowledge this plan has fallen by the wayside”
by Evelyn, UK
Friday, October 10 2008, 11:44AM
“I note the editorial virtual eraser has been at work, striking out some posts thus making my response to another poster dangle in the air rather! :)”
by Evelyn, UK
Friday, October 10 2008, 11:34AM
“Well, Verve has done other things - at times with listed and at times unlisted buildings. The Newark Works is listed and that should restrict some of what can be done, retaining parts which made it worthy of listing, although naturally listing doesn't mean it has to be set in aspic, but I'm sure that a future can be found for it which will enhance the area and be viable.
George Ferguson's Tobacco Factory is another re-use worth looking at regarding what can be done to convert rather than bulldoze former industrial buildings.”
by PW, Bath
Friday, October 10 2008, 11:18AM
“Poor old Dyson and Evelyn! They both seem to prompt negative comments! I used to work at Paintworks, and whilst I'm not sure I'd user the word 'sympathetic' to describe the way they've modernised some of the buildings there, they certainly have turned a near derelict area into a vibrant and exciting area with a new lease of life. This can only be good news surely?”
by Evelyn, UK
Friday, October 10 2008, 11:09AM
“I think on many occasions people have been ill-informed. it's perfectly permissible to point this out...
With regard to your comments:
Verve is an excellent business. I have already said so. Indeed, I think I pointed out yesterday that it was interested, glad this paper has picked up on that. The building remains on the SAVE Buildings at Risk Register.
The article additionally points out that the flooding was an issue - I have added that it was not the only issue which prompted the call-in (and quoted the letter from the Secretary of State to back this up).
And I didn't like Dyson's plans for the Grade II Listed Newark Works, nor his plans for an academy, and I think he has been very badly advised throughout this whole affair (and possibly should have heeded warnings long before over three mill was wasted but it's his foundation's cash to waste) I think he should put his cash (as stated in the article above) into other educational aims.
Those are the issues I think?”