Bude-Stratton Town Council has once again objected to the planning application to build a 70-bed Travelodge in the centre of Bude.
At the council’s planning committee meeting on Thursday, January 9, the voting members unanimously rejected the national budget hotel to be developed. Plans also include a bar and cafe, with associated car park and access works.
The site would be located at the former Hookways coach depot on Lansdown Road.
The former building has been demolished and the hotel chain is hoping to build there.
This was the third time an application has been brought before Bude-Stratton Town Council’s planning committee, following their previous rejections and requests of modification.
Members of the public in attendance at the meeting were also unanimous that they do not want to see a new national budget hotel within the town.
One of the attending members said: “Bude has its own unique aura, people don’t want to come here if we have multi-national chains in place.
“We run a small holiday let and have noticed since Premier Inn has been erected, our winter bookings have dropped off, as this is when they do their cheaper deals.”
Premier Inn opened along the Strand at the end of January, 2018, with a 67-bedroom hotel and restaurant.
Alongside Travelodge’s ability to offer low cost overnight stays, many residents of Bude were against the architecture and size of the building.
One said: “I am objecting, as I don’t see how the building fits in with the BSTC Neighbourhood Plan, which started to keep the character of Bude. I don’t see how this building fits in with that or resolved the shadowing issues previously brought up.”
Similarly, another member of the public said: “I do feel it doesn’t fit into the neighbourhood plans, it’s still going to be this huge lump of concrete. It will tower over everything and will only be to the detriment of Bude if it does go ahead.”
Another added: “It’s too big a structure for the site, Bude definitely doesn’t need another multi-national budget hotel, also think of the increased traffic and pollution to the area.”
It was town councillor Tony Gibbs that was first to address the matter on behalf of the council and he was keen to emphasise the reoccurring theme from the public.
He said: “I think our overall concern is scale and mass and appropriate size and nature of the building. It’s evident from the public here today that there is concern, I think there has been some cosmetic tinkering which has done nothing to the scale or the size.
“I still feel very much the location is inappropriate. I think the building being there isn’t a massive issue, I think it needs to meet the needs of the town and it is a conservation area, therefore I am against it.”
Cllr Gibbs explained that the transport plan claims the traffic would be similar to when the site was used as a bus depot — it has been decommissioned for that purpose since 2006.
He added: “They’re saying that the traffic would be the same as the bus station of 14 years ago, it doesn’t bring in the fact that the town has increased and they haven’t taken into account additional homes and the growth of the area.”
Cllr Peter La Broy addressed the structure of the build, adding: “I think our job as councillors is to listen to what you have brought into the room. We are not planning experts by any means. They have told us outright, that the usage for that site for a hotel is acceptable. Whether it’s a Travelodge or something else, the use of it is important, but the real problem is that it’s just too big.
“Their interest is what is on the inside of the building, ours is on the outside.”
Cllr La Broy also mentioned that in previous meetings with the development company, they themselves have been asking what they could do to improve the proposal.
“We have had two to three meetings where the developers have said ‘how can we make it more palatable?’ You might have heard the term ‘false coins’ earlier this morning.”
He continued: “They have listened, but they haven’t listened to our key concerns which is the mass and scale of the project.”
While the town councillors were discussing how to relay their decision back to Cornwall Council’s planning committee, a member of the public interjected in the conversation to say: “Well that’s all fine, if you want the town to become like Newquay, with the class of people it would bring.”
Chair of the meeting, mayor Cllr Bob Willingham responded: “Things like class of people or we don’t want it etc., we can’t take that into consideration. We are not against you in this decision, but we are trying to get the best out of that piece of land. It would be lovely to have a park or some open space there, but it’s having the money to do it.
“We as a town council tried, we put in a bid but didn’t have the money to do so, this development company did.”
Cllr Willingham explained that it is a matter for Cornwall Council, who are taking the considerations seriously, as a planner had recently visited Bude to talk through the proposal with town councillors.
He added: “We asked you here as we want your comments, we are tied as Cornwall Council are tied in what we can actually do. The points you brought forward, we cannot act on them.”
To try and keep the building to fit in with the surrounding architecture, BSTC has been keen to push for a pitched roof. Despite the plans incorporating a pitched element, Cllr Robert Uhlig was disappointed that there are still flat parts of it.
He said: “I find it extraordinary after consultation that there is a flat roof end of it, if something could be done for that it would improve the design.
“There is no building with a flat roof in the entire area, so it would be setting a precedence, if someone else knocks a building down nearby then could use this as an example to have a flat roof.”
Cllr Willingham agreed that this could be a future issue.
As the committee put together their resolution for Cornwall Council, Cllr Willingham asked whether they should include the Section 106 — money towards a new cycle path.
Cllr La Broy said: “A section 106 can improve local facilities from money from developers.
“We have been looking at ways of creating a new cycle path and have been clutching at straws to fund the part between Summerleaze Downs and Nanny Moores Bridge, we have estimated the cost to be around £100,000 — which could be funded by the Section 106 from this development.”
Following a short discussion, of how to amend the town council’s previous objection to the proposed build, the planning committee’s unanimous resolution was that: BSTC maintain their previous objection.
In this they noted: This application contravenes Policy 15 and Policy 23 of the Bude NDP and Policy 12 and Policy 24 of the CLP. The application does not enhance the area with its scale and mass and is not in keeping within the conservation area. The roof design is out of keeping (pitches to shallow, needs possible double pitch). BSTC have concerns regarding the high impact of increased traffic in the area especially during the high season, therefore request an up to date highways impact study. BSTC also have concerns with regard to the impact of this development on the immediate community.
The council also ask that a s106 negotiation for £100,000 for a cycle path link between Summerleaze Downs and Nanny Moores Bridge be sought and paid before building works begin.
BSTC request that any final application incorporate the ‘Bude Green 5’ be incorporated, rainwater harvesting and grey water recycling be incorporated; PV Generation with Diverter linked to an electric car charging point be incorporated; local sustainable building materials be used where possible; any hard standing to be of permeable materials; and renewable source of heating ie: ground source heat pump be used.
The final decision is expected to be made by Cornwall Council’s plans committee.