Archived Website

Campaigning for Appropriate Development at the former Elizabeth Shaw Chocolate Factory Greenbank Road Easton Bristol BS5 6EL

Back in the spring of 2006, an organisation named Consensus delivered postcards door to door in the Greenbank area of Bristol, inviting everyone to a consultation day about development plans for the Chocolate Factory.

Aware that the consultation day was likely to be a PR campaign for the developers, Persimmon, to convince us their plan was a good one, a few people got together to work out what they could do to make sure local people were truly and fully involved in the consultation process. We wanted to inspire the community to think of their own ideas and come up with questions, above all to ensure people didn’t think the glossy plans the developers were presenting were the only ideas that were possible.

The Chocolate Box community group (ChocBox 1.0) began with individuals talking to neighbours, encouraging as many people as possible to go along to the consultation and to put forward their own ideas. At the consultation event, Consensus gave people survey forms to take away with them, and more than 80 were returned. The City Council’s Planning team allowed the ChocBox group to see the completed forms. We produced a summary of the ideas and opinions Greenbank people had come up with and posted them on a website (a wiki, set up so that anyone could contribute to it). We began to hold street meetings and our own consultation events. A couple of architects helped us by illustrating what could be done with the site if the buildings were kept and turned into live/work spaces.

In July 2006 Persimmon submitted an application for ‘Mixed use development comprising 108 no. dwellings, 1591.2 sq.m. of office accommodation (Use Class B1) and 32 sq.m. of Use Class A3; retention of existing office building and demolition of existing factory buildings.’ Later that summer the Elizabeth Shaw group closed the factory and moved out of the site, leaving it with minimal security, about which we protested: there was widescale looting of the factory for lead and copper, and the police were called out many times. The roofs were damaged and water pipes broken, and the building flooded and began to deteriorate.

By the time the consultation period closed, around 200 people had sent in letters of objection against Persimmon’s plan. Planning officers agreed with local people; they rejected the planning application on specific grounds: ‘loss of employment space, impacts on traffic flow and safety’, plus statements that the ‘scheme is considered to be of a poor standard, neither introducing architecture that is stimulating and original nor reinforcing local distinctiveness’ and ‘the proposals fail to make an acceptable contribution toward the provision of recreational open space; education, employment initiatives and complimentary transport measures’.

Persimmon appealed against the council’s decision. The Planning Inspectorate decided the matter should go to Public Inquiry and a date was set: June 2007. The Chocolate Box group prepared for the inquiry, holding its own consultation afternoon in March to gather opinions about employment, sustainability, consultation and historical interest, and collecting signatures to show people’s opinions. We were later able to use this documentation as proof that what we were arguing for was truly representative of the community and not the opinion of a small group. We got together a group of expert witnesses and with the support of South West Planning Aid we took part in the public inquiry. The inspector considered evidence from us, Bristol City Council and Persimmon in deciding:

• • whether the loss of existing employment floorspace on the site would significantly harm the local economy, environment or community, taking into account any social, economic or sustainability benefits arising;

  • the impact of the proposals on the character and appearance of the locality, having regard to the relevant national, strategic and local adopted planning policies;

  • the effect of the scheme on potential living conditions for possible future occupiers of properties to the east of the site.

His decision was that the character and appearance of Persimmon’s plan was adequate, but he rejected Persimmon’s appeal on the other two grounds (employment and living conditions). The documents are all still available on the web at http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/easton_bristol/files/.

By this time we’d significantly raised awareness of the factory and illustrated its potential, and after the inquiry eight developers were suddenly interested in the site. The factory owners started regular meetings with ChocBox to discuss what kind of developer would be acceptable to the community. Eventually they engaged with a local developer, Squarepeg, who then went on to employ Acanthus Ferguson Mann Architects to develop a design for the site.

A great deal of consultation took place but subsequent events ensured that Squarepeg’s development plan (retain all buildings, buy and use some adjoining land. 186 houses and flats, 6213 sq.m of business floorspace, 800 sq.m. of cafe type space, 330 sq.m. of community floorspace and a twenty-bed youth hostel/hotel) was never realised. The US sub-prime real estate crisis of 2007 became the Global Financial Crisis in September of 2008, and UK recession soon followed. In common with many other building schemes of the time, the Chocolate Factory development plan ran into difficulty.

The factory has remained derelict, occasionally used as a film location (including an episode of the BBC TV series Dirk Gently and the 'Lies' video for the pop group McFly). The site is currently in the hands of the Generator Group, which ‘offers practical, deliverable solutions to stressed and distressed property problems which maximise exit strategies based on a client’s appetite for risk and preferred timeline’.

Factory from Co-operation Road, 2006

Public meeting held by ChocBox1.0, 11th May 2006

Architects plans. More on www.flickr.com/photos/86811249@N00