Jump to content

Did anyone know this was happening???


Bazj
 Share

Recommended Posts

When you say flyers posted on traffic signs do you mean 'for sale ones' PJ or ones notifying people that new developent is/was taking place ?

 

Last thing I remember hearing/reading about Bewsey Old Hall was from last year when it caught fire and was decribed as being 'gutted'. Think they were treating it as arson at the time but guess it must have since been fixed up and developed then or am I thinking of the wrong Bewsey (old) Hall :unsure:

 

If it's the same building then seems a bit odd that the 'homes' are now up for sale as I thought there was still a lot of opposition and no decision had actually been made (which is why many were suspicious when it suddenly caught fire)

 

I guess in short what I mean is ..... 'NO Baz I didn't know anything about it.' :oops::unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems a bit odd. It was supposed to have been burned beyond repair in a fire somewhat recently. And when was electrickery installed? Why would such a notorious building be displayed for sale on posters attached to traffic signs? A totally unprofessional way of advertising it. Someone having a lark maybe? :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's definatley not someone having a lark Cleo as per Baz's original post link to the well know property search site. Infact 'Urby Splish-splash' themselves are showing the appartments as being up for sale on their own website as of October 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Simples' ring the phone number on the Rightmove page, looks a bit dodgy to me though, electric trunking running up to metal cased industrial type switches and sockets mounted on bare unplastered walls - I dont think so!. Has Baz been busy on Photoshop I ask myself?. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well there may be a bit of touching up on the pics of the outside but urban splash are advertising the flats at around £200,000. Also show the plans for the rest of the development "Phase 2" Strange that the only pictures on their sight that have not been "cleaned up a bit" is a long distance view of the hall and one of the "entrance" http://www.urbansplash.co.uk/residential/bewsey-old-hall

 

Hope this link does not upset the advertising rules of this site if so sorry :roll:

 

 

edited to add that i did not know that they had already got so far with this even though with a well thrown half brick i could probably hit the place from my house. Just goes to show what can go on unawares right under your nose :oops:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say flyers posted on traffic signs do you mean 'for sale ones' PJ or ones notifying people that new developent is/was taking place ?

 

Last thing I remember hearing/reading about Bewsey Old Hall was from last year when it caught fire and was decribed as being 'gutted'. Think they were treating it as arson at the time but guess it must have since been fixed up and developed then or am I thinking of the wrong Bewsey (old) Hall :unsure:

 

If it's the same building then seems a bit odd that the 'homes' are now up for sale as I thought there was still a lot of opposition and no decision had actually been made (which is why many were suspicious when it suddenly caught fire)

 

I guess in short what I mean is ..... 'NO Baz I didn't know anything about it.' :oops::unsure:

 

It's certainly no wind up. There was a fire which gutted part of the building, an annex being used by the Rangers. It was arson but the culprits have not been apprehended. Suspicion as to the positive benefits of the fire were raised on this forum last year I think. You need to go there and read for more info. Following the fire modified plans were drawn up and the work has now been completed on the Old Hall. The estate agent held a "come and see" session several weeks ago.

 

There was lots of opposition to the development, not particularly to the rehab of the Old Hall, but to the enabling development of 48 apartments to be built in adjacent woodland. It went to a Govt Inquiry in 2009 which went against WBC and cost ratepayers £65,000. Contributing to the rejection of WBC's appeal was the fact that they were using out of date legislation. That's also mentioned elsewhere in the forum and also in Warrington Guardian. When the project is complete it will be another large chunk out of Sankey Valley Park and an additional burden on traffic issuing on to the Old Hall Road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe there was ever any intention by WBC (Lib/Con at the time) to preserve Bewsey Old Hall for the public. Some individual members of the planning committee may have been genuinely interested in saving BOH other members may have been merely 'politically posturing'.

There was certainly no real fight made at the public inquiry. The lack of an alternative project to preserve the hall was the deciding factor and the inspector clearly asked WBC if they would be prepared to allocate any funding, to which the answer was "No".

It had been hoped that the hall could be included in the Sankey Valley project funded via the NWDA but these plans were not available at the time of the inquiry (they were released very shortly after the inspectors decision!)

Even an offer to pay the maintenance costs of circa £5,000 per year (which is far below the misleading quote of £30,000 given at the inquiry) until funding was found could have saved Bewsey Old Hall for the people of Warrington. An amount of £65,000 the costs for not acting to save the hall could have paid maintenance for 7 years. (Incidentally, does anyone know who exactly paid those costs?)

 

When the Labour group took over there was talk that the hall might yet be saved for the public through negotiating a few additional units of enabling development (also to be of a more sympathetic design to the historical setting than the boxes on leg type design that had been proposed).

Obviously this has not happened - It seems none of the political groups in Warrington have any real appetite for our town's heritage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the situation from a pragmatic point of view, the building was in a poor condition and in a state of decay, one ex. councillor that I asked as to why the hall had been turned into apartments stated that as money was not available to rescue the building they had decided that the only practical solution was to sell it of as apartments, hard to argue against really. What other options were open. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well saving the £750,000 due to be wasted on 20mph speed limits and using that would have been a good start....

 

 

the £5,000 spent on the mayors back-slapping party would have paid one years maintenance costs by the looks of things....

 

 

plenty of money about when you look for it, just doesn't tick the right boxes with the incompetants in the Town Hall unfortunately

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to mention the £30,000 spent "improving" the traffic flow across bridge foot :angry:

 

 

 

The list of money used on pointless improvements is endless, the Manchester Rd/Kingsway alterations on the traffic lights (or was this last year), paving over Cairo St, on Poplars Ave the council were taking out perfectly good double glazing replacing it with new windows, on North Way they provided drives for all the residents yet the bus still stops in the middle off the road stopping all traffic behind it.

 

Yet if public money was used to save the building for the public would it not be equal waste of money, it might be Warrington's oldest building but it is nothing special as it stands today. Of course it had to be saved and it is a shame it did not become a pub, restaurant and a venue center for weddings and so on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the situation from a pragmatic point of view, the building was in a poor condition and in a state of decay, one ex. councillor that I asked as to why the hall had been turned into apartments stated that as money was not available to rescue the building they had decided that the only practical solution was to sell it of as apartments, hard to argue against really. What other options were open. :unsure:

 

Actually money could very easily have been available!

Money had already been allocated by the NWDA for a Sankey Valley regeneration project. But unsurprisingly the proposed regeneration had failed to include the preservation of Bewsey Old Hall. The NWDA/WBC regeneration proposals seemed to be focused more on being complementary to Gulliver's world's expansion plans.

The Hall at the time of the Inquiry was still 'owned' by English Partnership, originally in their hands as part of the New Town acquisitions - and originally intended to be preserved as a heritage centre.

(Another of the 'public benefits' the New Town Development was intended - but failed to deliver).

 

What is really annoying is that the NWDA, WBC and English Partnerships are supposed to be guardians of public funds, property and assets.

In the disposal of New Town assets 'public benefit' should be paramount.

The two options EP considered for Bewsey Old Hall were;-

a) The Urban Splash proposal.

or B) The proposal from Arena housing to build some social housing in the grounds with the Old Hall preserved as a heritage centre (the popular public choice).

Personally I can't see why the Urban Splash proposal was even considered when the Arena proposal was so obviously the one which would provide the most 'public benefit'. I also think that if selling the hall to a developer was to be the chosen option then it should have gone to the highest bidder.

And isn't it ironic that EP - who were disposing of public assets and moving on to take up the role of 'Homes and Communities Agency' should choose a developer in preference to a Housing Association?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...