Baths vital facelift sunk after it becomes listed buiding

Daily Echo: Lymington seawater baths Lymington seawater baths

CIVIC chiefs say plans to transform Lymington’s famous seawater baths have been wrecked by the decision to make it a listed building.

The Government has agreed to give it extra protection, sparking fears that proposals to carry out major improvements will have to be ditched.

The baths, which celebrate their 180th anniversary later this year, are owned by Lymington and Pennington Town Council, which had hoped to reduce the size of the pool, build new facilities and use the revenue generated to modernise the site.

But it fears the plans will be thrown into disarray by the decision to make the pool a Grade II listed building.

Daily Echo:

 

Cllr John Olliff-Cooper, chairman of the amenities committee, told the annual town meeting: “At first glance it may seem that an accolade has been awarded to the town and the listing will certainly be regarded by a few activists as a victory.

“Sadly, it is likely that this will prove to be an extremely negative and expensive event.

“A year ago we published a paper outlining a three-phase programme to upgrade the seawater baths area. In the longterm that development might have provided an outstanding and attractive outdoor environment.

That plan is effectively scuppered. We will now look at what can be done with what we have.”

But the decision to list the site was welcomed by former town councillor Tony Swain, exchairman of the seawater baths sub-committee.

He said: “This is good news. It will guarantee that any future development will be carried out in a sensitive and sympathetic manner.”

Culture secretary and Basingstoke MP Maria Miller, below,  has listed the baths on the advice of English Heritage.

Daily Echo:

It means that the building’s new status will have to be taken into account if any planning applications to alter the site are submitted to New Forest District Council.

Members will consider the views of the council’s conservation officers before making a decision.

An English Heritage spokesman said: “Just because the building has been listed doesn’t mean that sensitive changes can’t be made, but that’s a matter for the district council.”

  • The baths are due to reopen on May 1.

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:38am Fri 22 Mar 13

Saintly says...

Vital facelift or hidden agenda?

Depends on who you believe.

It seems this particular council representatives are intent on ruffling as many feathers as possible - Cricket Club, Sea Water Baths, High Street parking....

All we hear are long standing local councillors being sidelined or bypassed in favour of a closed shop.

If there was transparency in the first place, there wouldn't be dissenters.

Quite easy when you think about it....
Vital facelift or hidden agenda? Depends on who you believe. It seems this particular council representatives are intent on ruffling as many feathers as possible - Cricket Club, Sea Water Baths, High Street parking.... All we hear are long standing local councillors being sidelined or bypassed in favour of a closed shop. If there was transparency in the first place, there wouldn't be dissenters. Quite easy when you think about it.... Saintly
  • Score: 0

9:30am Fri 22 Mar 13

southy says...

Saintly Thats why the SP runs an open book.
In away I glad it as happened its being listed as a grade 2 building, I think this is the oldest sea baths in the UK.
Saintly Thats why the SP runs an open book. In away I glad it as happened its being listed as a grade 2 building, I think this is the oldest sea baths in the UK. southy
  • Score: 0

9:35am Fri 22 Mar 13

sotonboy84 says...

Don't worry about the listing status, you only have to look to Southampton City Council for that.

The Civic Centre is grade II* listed but they have managed to convert the old courts and remove the grand stone steps to put in a lift and fit two huge modern glass light boxes on the roof!
Don't worry about the listing status, you only have to look to Southampton City Council for that. The Civic Centre is grade II* listed but they have managed to convert the old courts and remove the grand stone steps to put in a lift and fit two huge modern glass light boxes on the roof! sotonboy84
  • Score: 0

9:40am Fri 22 Mar 13

southy says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
Don't worry about the listing status, you only have to look to Southampton City Council for that.

The Civic Centre is grade II* listed but they have managed to convert the old courts and remove the grand stone steps to put in a lift and fit two huge modern glass light boxes on the roof!
Oh very true boy.
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: Don't worry about the listing status, you only have to look to Southampton City Council for that. The Civic Centre is grade II* listed but they have managed to convert the old courts and remove the grand stone steps to put in a lift and fit two huge modern glass light boxes on the roof![/p][/quote]Oh very true boy. southy
  • Score: 0

10:17am Fri 22 Mar 13

Torchie1 says...

Saintly wrote:
Vital facelift or hidden agenda?

Depends on who you believe.

It seems this particular council representatives are intent on ruffling as many feathers as possible - Cricket Club, Sea Water Baths, High Street parking....

All we hear are long standing local councillors being sidelined or bypassed in favour of a closed shop.

If there was transparency in the first place, there wouldn't be dissenters.

Quite easy when you think about it....
Oliff-Coopers hands aren't as clean as he would have us believe and Listing the baths has upset his plans for getting the Council to pay for modernisation before one of his friends took them over to run as a commercial venture. As for sidelining local councillors, the ones complaining tend to be the ones who like the office but don't like anyone questioning the amount of effort they put in to it (or not) and they've found themselves outmaneuvered by those who use their position for the benefit of the town and its people.
[quote][p][bold]Saintly[/bold] wrote: Vital facelift or hidden agenda? Depends on who you believe. It seems this particular council representatives are intent on ruffling as many feathers as possible - Cricket Club, Sea Water Baths, High Street parking.... All we hear are long standing local councillors being sidelined or bypassed in favour of a closed shop. If there was transparency in the first place, there wouldn't be dissenters. Quite easy when you think about it....[/p][/quote]Oliff-Coopers hands aren't as clean as he would have us believe and Listing the baths has upset his plans for getting the Council to pay for modernisation before one of his friends took them over to run as a commercial venture. As for sidelining local councillors, the ones complaining tend to be the ones who like the office but don't like anyone questioning the amount of effort they put in to it (or not) and they've found themselves outmaneuvered by those who use their position for the benefit of the town and its people. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

12:28pm Fri 22 Mar 13

Jimbo2012 says...

Listing the building was a vital step in securing its future.

There has been a lot of underhand gong on regarding the sea water baths. Some on the council would have sold it off if they could.

Like the person commenting above said Grade 2 listing doesn't stop sensible and appropriate development.

With enough imagination the Seawater Baths could have a long and succesful future ahead of them.
Listing the building was a vital step in securing its future. There has been a lot of underhand gong on regarding the sea water baths. Some on the council would have sold it off if they could. Like the person commenting above said Grade 2 listing doesn't stop sensible and appropriate development. With enough imagination the Seawater Baths could have a long and succesful future ahead of them. Jimbo2012
  • Score: 0

12:30pm Fri 22 Mar 13

Jimbo2012 says...

Apologies for the typo - I meant 'underhand goings on".
Apologies for the typo - I meant 'underhand goings on". Jimbo2012
  • Score: 0

4:54pm Fri 22 Mar 13

Frank28 says...

Excellent news! A 19th century heritage site has been saved. The Sea Water Baths are a useful and safe facility. English Heritage has a duty to protect historical sites from hungry developers. Perhaps those who wanted to develop the site, can go down to the Bath, and take a running jump into it.
Excellent news! A 19th century heritage site has been saved. The Sea Water Baths are a useful and safe facility. English Heritage has a duty to protect historical sites from hungry developers. Perhaps those who wanted to develop the site, can go down to the Bath, and take a running jump into it. Frank28
  • Score: 0

5:29pm Fri 22 Mar 13

cantthinkofone says...

Glad it's been listed. Soton are living proof that you can't trust councils to exercise discretion and sensitive judgement voluntarily. Especially when big fat developer cheques are at stake.
Glad it's been listed. Soton are living proof that you can't trust councils to exercise discretion and sensitive judgement voluntarily. Especially when big fat developer cheques are at stake. cantthinkofone
  • Score: 0

5:42pm Fri 22 Mar 13

Torchie1 says...

cantthinkofone wrote:
Glad it's been listed. Soton are living proof that you can't trust councils to exercise discretion and sensitive judgement voluntarily. Especially when big fat developer cheques are at stake.
You're skills at misinterpreting are to be applauded as there is no developer in the story at all. It's a shame that the story isn't anywhere near as interesting as your imagination.
[quote][p][bold]cantthinkofone[/bold] wrote: Glad it's been listed. Soton are living proof that you can't trust councils to exercise discretion and sensitive judgement voluntarily. Especially when big fat developer cheques are at stake.[/p][/quote]You're skills at misinterpreting are to be applauded as there is no developer in the story at all. It's a shame that the story isn't anywhere near as interesting as your imagination. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

7:12pm Fri 22 Mar 13

cantthinkofone says...

Torchie1 wrote:
cantthinkofone wrote:
Glad it's been listed. Soton are living proof that you can't trust councils to exercise discretion and sensitive judgement voluntarily. Especially when big fat developer cheques are at stake.
You're skills at misinterpreting are to be applauded as there is no developer in the story at all. It's a shame that the story isn't anywhere near as interesting as your imagination.
Your (nb spelling) skills at misreading are impressive. Listing it takes it out of the potential grasp of developers - nowhere have I suggested that they're involved at this stage. It's a shame that your desire to patronise is nowhere near as advanced as your capacity for comprehension.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cantthinkofone[/bold] wrote: Glad it's been listed. Soton are living proof that you can't trust councils to exercise discretion and sensitive judgement voluntarily. Especially when big fat developer cheques are at stake.[/p][/quote]You're skills at misinterpreting are to be applauded as there is no developer in the story at all. It's a shame that the story isn't anywhere near as interesting as your imagination.[/p][/quote]Your (nb spelling) skills at misreading are impressive. Listing it takes it out of the potential grasp of developers - nowhere have I suggested that they're involved at this stage. It's a shame that your desire to patronise is nowhere near as advanced as your capacity for comprehension. cantthinkofone
  • Score: 0

7:31pm Fri 22 Mar 13

Torchie1 says...

cantthinkofone wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
cantthinkofone wrote:
Glad it's been listed. Soton are living proof that you can't trust councils to exercise discretion and sensitive judgement voluntarily. Especially when big fat developer cheques are at stake.
You're skills at misinterpreting are to be applauded as there is no developer in the story at all. It's a shame that the story isn't anywhere near as interesting as your imagination.
Your (nb spelling) skills at misreading are impressive. Listing it takes it out of the potential grasp of developers - nowhere have I suggested that they're involved at this stage. It's a shame that your desire to patronise is nowhere near as advanced as your capacity for comprehension.
Thankyou for pointing out an unforgivable grammatical error. No developers were anywhere near nor could they have got their hands on the sea water baths. One small group of councillor s wanted to hand over control of the baths to a private company to run so that the facility would no longer be available to make money for the town. Another group of councillor s got the baths Listed so that the baths and buildings could remain as they are with an additional layer of protection. The potential plans included adding other attractions on the same site or possibly hiving off part of the land for a dinghy park. At the end of the day, it was Listed to prevent the possibility of anyone treating it as a piece of prime building land.
[quote][p][bold]cantthinkofone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cantthinkofone[/bold] wrote: Glad it's been listed. Soton are living proof that you can't trust councils to exercise discretion and sensitive judgement voluntarily. Especially when big fat developer cheques are at stake.[/p][/quote]You're skills at misinterpreting are to be applauded as there is no developer in the story at all. It's a shame that the story isn't anywhere near as interesting as your imagination.[/p][/quote]Your (nb spelling) skills at misreading are impressive. Listing it takes it out of the potential grasp of developers - nowhere have I suggested that they're involved at this stage. It's a shame that your desire to patronise is nowhere near as advanced as your capacity for comprehension.[/p][/quote]Thankyou for pointing out an unforgivable grammatical error. No developers were anywhere near nor could they have got their hands on the sea water baths. One small group of councillor s wanted to hand over control of the baths to a private company to run so that the facility would no longer be available to make money for the town. Another group of councillor s got the baths Listed so that the baths and buildings could remain as they are with an additional layer of protection. The potential plans included adding other attractions on the same site or possibly hiving off part of the land for a dinghy park. At the end of the day, it was Listed to prevent the possibility of anyone treating it as a piece of prime building land. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

8:55pm Fri 22 Mar 13

cantthinkofone says...

Torchie1 wrote:
cantthinkofone wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
cantthinkofone wrote:
Glad it's been listed. Soton are living proof that you can't trust councils to exercise discretion and sensitive judgement voluntarily. Especially when big fat developer cheques are at stake.
You're skills at misinterpreting are to be applauded as there is no developer in the story at all. It's a shame that the story isn't anywhere near as interesting as your imagination.
Your (nb spelling) skills at misreading are impressive. Listing it takes it out of the potential grasp of developers - nowhere have I suggested that they're involved at this stage. It's a shame that your desire to patronise is nowhere near as advanced as your capacity for comprehension.
Thankyou for pointing out an unforgivable grammatical error. No developers were anywhere near nor could they have got their hands on the sea water baths. One small group of councillor s wanted to hand over control of the baths to a private company to run so that the facility would no longer be available to make money for the town. Another group of councillor s got the baths Listed so that the baths and buildings could remain as they are with an additional layer of protection. The potential plans included adding other attractions on the same site or possibly hiving off part of the land for a dinghy park. At the end of the day, it was Listed to prevent the possibility of anyone treating it as a piece of prime building land.
Thank you for confirming exactly my point. :-)
.
Happy to help with the grammar. You're welcome.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cantthinkofone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cantthinkofone[/bold] wrote: Glad it's been listed. Soton are living proof that you can't trust councils to exercise discretion and sensitive judgement voluntarily. Especially when big fat developer cheques are at stake.[/p][/quote]You're skills at misinterpreting are to be applauded as there is no developer in the story at all. It's a shame that the story isn't anywhere near as interesting as your imagination.[/p][/quote]Your (nb spelling) skills at misreading are impressive. Listing it takes it out of the potential grasp of developers - nowhere have I suggested that they're involved at this stage. It's a shame that your desire to patronise is nowhere near as advanced as your capacity for comprehension.[/p][/quote]Thankyou for pointing out an unforgivable grammatical error. No developers were anywhere near nor could they have got their hands on the sea water baths. One small group of councillor s wanted to hand over control of the baths to a private company to run so that the facility would no longer be available to make money for the town. Another group of councillor s got the baths Listed so that the baths and buildings could remain as they are with an additional layer of protection. The potential plans included adding other attractions on the same site or possibly hiving off part of the land for a dinghy park. At the end of the day, it was Listed to prevent the possibility of anyone treating it as a piece of prime building land.[/p][/quote]Thank you for confirming exactly my point. :-) . Happy to help with the grammar. You're welcome. cantthinkofone
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree