The development of Southway Park
Background
During the past 200 years this country has experienced massive changes in society and culture. Our housing and the way we live has also changed dramatically and continues to change in the 21st century. The housing development known as Southway Park is typical in many ways of estates built during the 1970s and 80s.
I graduated from Bristol Polytechnic now the University of the West of England in 1973 and my first job was working in Bath for John Sharp Associates, a firm of architects based in Brock Street, as an Architectural Assistant working on the design and layout of what was to become Southway Park for our clients English and Continental Homes. The office was just around the corner from La Vendange wine bar in St Margaret’s Buildings where many of us spent rather too many hours each evening on leaving work!
John often employed those undertaking their professional practice prior to becoming fully qualified as architects and young graduates with related skills. We were for the most part youthful, enthusiastic and not particularly well paid but there was always fun, excitement and optimism for the future.
Southway Park
The site, originally open fields and hedgerows with some dry-stone walling, bordered the Kennet and Avon Canal to the south; the former Claypits associated with the building of the canal to the west; Poulton to the north and Trowbridge Road to the east. It was originally developed by English and Continental Homes, who went into liquidation during the construction of Fitzmaurice Close, and the whole site was then purchased by Thorner Homes, though subsequently they too went into liquidation. Barrett Homes then purchased and completed the final phases.
There were a number of constraints on the development – the location on the edge of the settlement, the proximity of the canal, the overall flatness of the site, the need for a spine / link road between Trowbridge and Frome Roads (allegedly to form part of a subsequent by-pass!), a need to preserve some of the hedgerows and the existing mature trees, a requirement for buffer planting, provision of areas of public open space that would become informal play and passive recreation areas, and the necessity to use appropriate materials – recon stone under concrete tiled roofs. There was no requirement for affordable housing because this was 1973 and the Right to Buy did not appear in the Tory Manifesto until 1974 and did not become legislation until 1980.
The overall design concept was that it would be an open plan development with both private rear gardens and shared spaces to create a sense of spaciousness and community. The intention was to create variation and contrast in the layout with groups of houses and with the spaces created in between the dwellings as important in the design as the houses themselves. Small groups of planting were introduced to create a diverse landscape setting. These groups of planting now well established has enhanced the character of the area and softened some of the hard boundary treatments especially those built from reconstituted stone. The layout of the cul-de-sacs followed the original field pattern and the field names subsequently became the names of used by the council for the street names such as Folly Field, Barn Piece and Piplar Ground.
The roads and access routes including parking and turning spaces were designed to the technical specifications expected by the local highway authority. The spine road, although necessary as a link between two major routes into and out the town, was standard methodology at the time in housing layouts. The secondary link road with cul-de-sacs leading off it was also relatively standard in housing layouts but it has worked particularly well at Southway Park. However, in some instances vehicle access to some properties built in tandem has resulted in the need to drive in front of the neighbouring dwelling.
Sensitive boundary treatments, connectivity for walkers and cyclists between the different parts of the development and adjoining development plus landscaping to reinforce the existing trees and hedgerows were considered essential in order to create structure and diversity. Some of the existing trees are subject to Tree Preservation Orders. Varying boundary wall heights in both natural stone and recon where used to emphasise the public and private realm and these helped create neighbourhood identity.
Back in the 1970s land prices were relatively low and build costs not excessive. So, without the pressure we see on land compared to today, most new estates were built at substantially less than 30 dwellings per hectare. Southway Park is approximately 25 dwelling per ha excluding the spine road and buffer planting. Government guidance in the year 2000 was that all new build should be within the range 30 – 50 dwellings per ha. Today much housing development it is at an even greater density because the shortage of land is now acute. Contrast the layout and size of gardens of Southway Park with the adjoining high density development of the former Claypits (Wainhomes) site, now Bailey’s Barn developed in the early part of the 21st century. I was by coincidence the Case Officer for the Claypits site when subsequently working for West Wiltshire District Council so am very familiar with both developments!
There have been fundamental changes in opinions about design and layouts since the 1970s when Southway Park was conceived. This was at a time when large open-plan estates were the norm. Whereas today people prefer smaller gardens, greater privacy and their own ‘defensible’ space.
There was a complete disregard for the character of neighbouring development other than to use a palette of colours to match existing development in the town. The developers were merely concerned with maximising their investment and securing sales without unnecessary risk.
Indeed there was no attempt to reflect the local identity but merely create the standard house types that were known to sell easily – nothing special, nothing overly adventurous, just a standard mix of semi-detached, linked-detached and detached comprising predominantly 3 and 4 bedroom dwellings. Family homes for aspiring professionals. Thorner and English and Continental Homes both used Bath based architect John Sharpe Associates. Barrett subsequently used their own in-house designer but there were few changes to the overall scheme. The English and Continental houses were built in reconstituted smooth faced blocks whereas the Thorner homes and Barrett houses were built in reconstituted split stone blocks. Floor areas were not large and the integral garages on some of the plots enabled the dwellings to be sold as 4 bedroom but this was at the expense of the ground floor layout resulting in small, narrow living rooms and cramped kitchens
There was no ambition to create outstanding contemporary design but a development that could be easily constructed and would appeal to conventional tastes. Easily sold and re-saleable and equally easy to obtain a mortgage. That is a premise that has continued throughout the history of Southway Park. But the development has stood the test of time well and it is a pleasant environment in which to live and those who live within it don’t want significant change. There is a sense of identity and distinctiveness, no mean achievement, that is worth preserving.
Since this was the first major project I had worked on I remember it well and with a certain fondness. It was a stepping stone for when I left John Sharp Associates to take up a post with the rather more prestigious practice of Sir John Burnett, Tait and Partners with offices in Clifton and Bloomsbury, and eventually a not always cosy sojourn until retirement as a Principal Planner and Team Leader in West Wiltshire.
Conclusion
It is a great pity that town planners, and to a certain extent architects, are no longer held in the esteem they once were, and as someone once suggested planners are “accused of being in alliance with developers to despoil our town and frustrate local people’s hopes”. I believe we are all too often falsely accused but perhaps in attempting to negotiate schemes that attempt to meet all aspirations we end up with a poor compromise that fails to meet anyone’s objectives. A bit like Brexit!! Interference by elected members doesn’t always help and I’ve known some terrible planning decisions being made just before local elections! However, it must be remembered that the uncontrolled development of land would be untenable and there is a necessity to protect the built environment and use land wisely, economically and above all sustainably. When we get it wrong we are pilloried but when we get it right, and we frequently do, it goes unnoticed.
Rosie MacGregor 2018
