Baildon Business Park design criticised as ‘crinkly tin shed’

An artist’s impression of the building for the Buck Lane site

An artist’s impression of the building for the Buck Lane site

First published in News Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Photograph of the Author by , City Hall Reporter

To some it is a “thoughtful” design for a contemporary business park, while to others it is a “crinkly tin shed”.

The first phase of a controversial business park is dividing opinions with its new redesign.

The 2,811 square metre unit would be the first building at Baildon Business Park, a flagship Bradford Council-backed scheme which has been given outline planning permission on green fields off Buck Lane.

A full planning application, finalising the details for this first building as well as the road through the rest of the plot, looks set to be approved by planners on Thursday.

The original plan was withdrawn by Manchester-based Russells Construction and developer Pendle Projects last year on the advice of the Council, who wanted to see a better design.

Now the plan is back, and the Council’s design team is much happier with it. In a report, the authority’s design experts say the double-height glazed entrance, protruding window and door surrounds and concealed gutters “help lift a traditional form into a building with a contemporary edge”.

But not everyone is convinced. Baildon Town Council has called on the committee to refuse the plan and request another redesign.

Its statement said: “Outline planning permission was granted for Buck Lane on the basis of development being of high quality design, whilst this application is again basically a square shed.”

And Edward Butterworth, of campaign group Baildon Residents Against Inappropriate Development (Braid), said in his view the redesign was “a darn sight uglier” than the original.

He said: “What we are getting is a crinkly tin shed – a not particularly big one that could have gone anywhere.”

Mr Butterworth added that the campaign group was resigned to the fact the park would be built, and was now fighting for the units to be taken by hi-tech companies as promised rather than “any old industrial business”, for any jobs to go to Bradfordians and for a bypass to help with the traffic.

Mark Taylforth, director of Pendle Projects, said of the new-look design: “We are happy with it.”

He said the plan was “meant to be something a bit different” to give the scheme some individuality.

The Regulatory and Appeals Committee meets at 10am at City Hall.

Comments (17)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:41am Tue 28 Jan 14

thatsnotmyname says...

“meant to be something a bit different” to give the scheme some individuality.

What? Looks like the usual tin shed construction you see on lots of industrial sites. I know your trying to save money.but good design can save it. How about thinking out lf the box?
“meant to be something a bit different” to give the scheme some individuality. What? Looks like the usual tin shed construction you see on lots of industrial sites. I know your trying to save money.but good design can save it. How about thinking out lf the box? thatsnotmyname
  • Score: 12

8:24am Tue 28 Jan 14

Grumpygirl says...

The Council told us that the hi-tech research firms that they promised were coming to Buck Lane would only build their landmark headquarter buildings on green fields. Buck Lane had to be sacrificed for the greater good.

The reality is that we have a (charitably) mid-tech metal basher housed in a really ugly bent metal industrial unit that could have been built on any number of the Council owned brownfields in Shipley. The only people gaining from this are the private developers cashing in on another green field.

This is the completely unnecessary destruction of a green space; a public asset handed over by City Hall for the enrichment of the private sector. The Council have been taken for a ride, again.
The Council told us that the hi-tech research firms that they promised were coming to Buck Lane would only build their landmark headquarter buildings on green fields. Buck Lane had to be sacrificed for the greater good. The reality is that we have a (charitably) mid-tech metal basher housed in a really ugly bent metal industrial unit that could have been built on any number of the Council owned brownfields in Shipley. The only people gaining from this are the private developers cashing in on another green field. This is the completely unnecessary destruction of a green space; a public asset handed over by City Hall for the enrichment of the private sector. The Council have been taken for a ride, again. Grumpygirl
  • Score: 14

8:28am Tue 28 Jan 14

BaildonGuy says...

City Hall promised Buck Lane would provide 700 plus, brand new, hi-tech jobs in landmark buildings built to the very highest environmental standards. What we have is a bog standard industrial shed with a few pretties stuck on it. The Council claimed this shed would provide 100 plus jobs. In reality there will be 40 existing jobs transferred from another location with the pious hope that, over the years, it might expand to 60.

In any other walk of life the Council would be sued for gross misrepresentation.
City Hall promised Buck Lane would provide 700 plus, brand new, hi-tech jobs in landmark buildings built to the very highest environmental standards. What we have is a bog standard industrial shed with a few pretties stuck on it. The Council claimed this shed would provide 100 plus jobs. In reality there will be 40 existing jobs transferred from another location with the pious hope that, over the years, it might expand to 60. In any other walk of life the Council would be sued for gross misrepresentation. BaildonGuy
  • Score: 13

8:34am Tue 28 Jan 14

buffetlegs says...

A corrugated carbuncle.
A corrugated carbuncle. buffetlegs
  • Score: 11

9:44am Tue 28 Jan 14

imi-r6 says...

Typical BS from architects. It is what they learn at uni. Its a tin shed, you can buy these things off the shelf. You could not trust the good burghers of Bradford to have any taste or common sense whatsoever. Apparently the King will be parading along Charlestown in his fine new clothes.
Typical BS from architects. It is what they learn at uni. Its a tin shed, you can buy these things off the shelf. You could not trust the good burghers of Bradford to have any taste or common sense whatsoever. Apparently the King will be parading along Charlestown in his fine new clothes. imi-r6
  • Score: 8

10:44am Tue 28 Jan 14

Dragon Saddle says...

The Labour oligarchs at Bradford's Kremlin are determined to waste taxpayers money by building on Baildon's green fields where the Tory aristocracy are colluding with them in return for a horsey path to walk their posh ponies. If this were a sitcom I'd find it ridiculous, as it is reality nobody is laughing.
The Labour oligarchs at Bradford's Kremlin are determined to waste taxpayers money by building on Baildon's green fields where the Tory aristocracy are colluding with them in return for a horsey path to walk their posh ponies. If this were a sitcom I'd find it ridiculous, as it is reality nobody is laughing. Dragon Saddle
  • Score: 5

10:53am Tue 28 Jan 14

Albion. says...

That is only the first of a number of buildings. I think some comments here are ignoring that. I support the development and that it is on a bog of a field that was only used to hold dubious looking ponies. Having said that, the sheer starkness of the building certainly surprised me, I would have preferred something on similar lines to the buildings in the neighbouring fields. Anyway, we await the verdict.
That is only the first of a number of buildings. I think some comments here are ignoring that. I support the development and that it is on a bog of a field that was only used to hold dubious looking ponies. Having said that, the sheer starkness of the building certainly surprised me, I would have preferred something on similar lines to the buildings in the neighbouring fields. Anyway, we await the verdict. Albion.
  • Score: 0

11:18am Tue 28 Jan 14

BaildonGuy says...

Albion. wrote:
That is only the first of a number of buildings. I think some comments here are ignoring that. I support the development and that it is on a bog of a field that was only used to hold dubious looking ponies. Having said that, the sheer starkness of the building certainly surprised me, I would have preferred something on similar lines to the buildings in the neighbouring fields. Anyway, we await the verdict.
Hi Albion, sorry to disappoint you but the Council's Planning Statement says that this shed will 'set a precedent for the rest of the park'. So we're just going to get more of the same.

In other words the developers want to maximise their profits by putting up the cheapest pre-fabricated sheds possible. Buck Lane is not going to be the collection of outstanding architectural statements hyped by City Hall.
[quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: That is only the first of a number of buildings. I think some comments here are ignoring that. I support the development and that it is on a bog of a field that was only used to hold dubious looking ponies. Having said that, the sheer starkness of the building certainly surprised me, I would have preferred something on similar lines to the buildings in the neighbouring fields. Anyway, we await the verdict.[/p][/quote]Hi Albion, sorry to disappoint you but the Council's Planning Statement says that this shed will 'set a precedent for the rest of the park'. So we're just going to get more of the same. In other words the developers want to maximise their profits by putting up the cheapest pre-fabricated sheds possible. Buck Lane is not going to be the collection of outstanding architectural statements hyped by City Hall. BaildonGuy
  • Score: 11

11:24am Tue 28 Jan 14

Albion. says...

BaildonGuy wrote:
Albion. wrote:
That is only the first of a number of buildings. I think some comments here are ignoring that. I support the development and that it is on a bog of a field that was only used to hold dubious looking ponies. Having said that, the sheer starkness of the building certainly surprised me, I would have preferred something on similar lines to the buildings in the neighbouring fields. Anyway, we await the verdict.
Hi Albion, sorry to disappoint you but the Council's Planning Statement says that this shed will 'set a precedent for the rest of the park'. So we're just going to get more of the same.

In other words the developers want to maximise their profits by putting up the cheapest pre-fabricated sheds possible. Buck Lane is not going to be the collection of outstanding architectural statements hyped by City Hall.
I was already disappointed, anyway we await the planners on Thursday.
[quote][p][bold]BaildonGuy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: That is only the first of a number of buildings. I think some comments here are ignoring that. I support the development and that it is on a bog of a field that was only used to hold dubious looking ponies. Having said that, the sheer starkness of the building certainly surprised me, I would have preferred something on similar lines to the buildings in the neighbouring fields. Anyway, we await the verdict.[/p][/quote]Hi Albion, sorry to disappoint you but the Council's Planning Statement says that this shed will 'set a precedent for the rest of the park'. So we're just going to get more of the same. In other words the developers want to maximise their profits by putting up the cheapest pre-fabricated sheds possible. Buck Lane is not going to be the collection of outstanding architectural statements hyped by City Hall.[/p][/quote]I was already disappointed, anyway we await the planners on Thursday. Albion.
  • Score: 3

11:25am Tue 28 Jan 14

BaildonGuy says...

Dragon Saddle wrote:
The Labour oligarchs at Bradford's Kremlin are determined to waste taxpayers money by building on Baildon's green fields where the Tory aristocracy are colluding with them in return for a horsey path to walk their posh ponies. If this were a sitcom I'd find it ridiculous, as it is reality nobody is laughing.
Coun L'Amie is on the Regulatory Committee and, along with his fellow Baildon Tories, has always claimed to be against this development. Let's wait and see which way he votes. I'm sure he didn't sell out for a bridle path.
[quote][p][bold]Dragon Saddle[/bold] wrote: The Labour oligarchs at Bradford's Kremlin are determined to waste taxpayers money by building on Baildon's green fields where the Tory aristocracy are colluding with them in return for a horsey path to walk their posh ponies. If this were a sitcom I'd find it ridiculous, as it is reality nobody is laughing.[/p][/quote]Coun L'Amie is on the Regulatory Committee and, along with his fellow Baildon Tories, has always claimed to be against this development. Let's wait and see which way he votes. I'm sure he didn't sell out for a bridle path. BaildonGuy
  • Score: 4

12:22pm Tue 28 Jan 14

bd7 helper says...

Cheap and cheerfull
Cheap and cheerfull bd7 helper
  • Score: -1

12:46pm Tue 28 Jan 14

Bone_idle18 says...

Grumpygirl wrote:
The Council told us that the hi-tech research firms that they promised were coming to Buck Lane would only build their landmark headquarter buildings on green fields. Buck Lane had to be sacrificed for the greater good.

The reality is that we have a (charitably) mid-tech metal basher housed in a really ugly bent metal industrial unit that could have been built on any number of the Council owned brownfields in Shipley. The only people gaining from this are the private developers cashing in on another green field.

This is the completely unnecessary destruction of a green space; a public asset handed over by City Hall for the enrichment of the private sector. The Council have been taken for a ride, again.
Public asset. What did the public use it for? All I've ever seen on there are Gypsy horses and weeds!
[quote][p][bold]Grumpygirl[/bold] wrote: The Council told us that the hi-tech research firms that they promised were coming to Buck Lane would only build their landmark headquarter buildings on green fields. Buck Lane had to be sacrificed for the greater good. The reality is that we have a (charitably) mid-tech metal basher housed in a really ugly bent metal industrial unit that could have been built on any number of the Council owned brownfields in Shipley. The only people gaining from this are the private developers cashing in on another green field. This is the completely unnecessary destruction of a green space; a public asset handed over by City Hall for the enrichment of the private sector. The Council have been taken for a ride, again.[/p][/quote]Public asset. What did the public use it for? All I've ever seen on there are Gypsy horses and weeds! Bone_idle18
  • Score: -2

4:37pm Tue 28 Jan 14

sorrow&anger says...

bd7 helper wrote:
Cheap and cheerfull
Cheap it certainly is. It's also not what City Hall promised when they were asking for planning permission.

The Council should be held to account for making promises they have no intention of keeping.
[quote][p][bold]bd7 helper[/bold] wrote: Cheap and cheerfull[/p][/quote]Cheap it certainly is. It's also not what City Hall promised when they were asking for planning permission. The Council should be held to account for making promises they have no intention of keeping. sorrow&anger
  • Score: 7

10:39pm Tue 28 Jan 14

wobbley-bob says...

Not in my back yard!
Not in my back yard! wobbley-bob
  • Score: -5

8:47am Wed 29 Jan 14

taleoftruth says...

BaildonGuy wrote:
Dragon Saddle wrote:
The Labour oligarchs at Bradford's Kremlin are determined to waste taxpayers money by building on Baildon's green fields where the Tory aristocracy are colluding with them in return for a horsey path to walk their posh ponies. If this were a sitcom I'd find it ridiculous, as it is reality nobody is laughing.
Coun L'Amie is on the Regulatory Committee and, along with his fellow Baildon Tories, has always claimed to be against this development. Let's wait and see which way he votes. I'm sure he didn't sell out for a bridle path.
He's not voting on this. It suits the Tories better to be off the record.
[quote][p][bold]BaildonGuy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragon Saddle[/bold] wrote: The Labour oligarchs at Bradford's Kremlin are determined to waste taxpayers money by building on Baildon's green fields where the Tory aristocracy are colluding with them in return for a horsey path to walk their posh ponies. If this were a sitcom I'd find it ridiculous, as it is reality nobody is laughing.[/p][/quote]Coun L'Amie is on the Regulatory Committee and, along with his fellow Baildon Tories, has always claimed to be against this development. Let's wait and see which way he votes. I'm sure he didn't sell out for a bridle path.[/p][/quote]He's not voting on this. It suits the Tories better to be off the record. taleoftruth
  • Score: 1

4:59pm Wed 29 Jan 14

ltbaildon says...

When Watson Batty architects submitted their plans they stated that BREAM excellent standard will be required to be attained on all the buildings of the site. Atkinson Associates who are dealing with the marketing of the units say that the units will be built to the BREAM very good standard. Has Brad Met changed their minds? Additionally the HOTEL is now being marketed as a public house - again when was this agreed?
When Watson Batty architects submitted their plans they stated that BREAM excellent standard will be required to be attained on all the buildings of the site. Atkinson Associates who are dealing with the marketing of the units say that the units will be built to the BREAM very good standard. Has Brad Met changed their minds? Additionally the HOTEL is now being marketed as a public house - again when was this agreed? ltbaildon
  • Score: 5

12:12pm Sat 1 Feb 14

Dragon Saddle says...

BaildonGuy wrote:
Dragon Saddle wrote:
The Labour oligarchs at Bradford's Kremlin are determined to waste taxpayers money by building on Baildon's green fields where the Tory aristocracy are colluding with them in return for a horsey path to walk their posh ponies. If this were a sitcom I'd find it ridiculous, as it is reality nobody is laughing.
Coun L'Amie is on the Regulatory Committee and, along with his fellow Baildon Tories, has always claimed to be against this development. Let's wait and see which way he votes. I'm sure he didn't sell out for a bridle path.
Not a single one of them turned up to fight the case at the planning panel. For that, there is no excuse, they could still make a speech at the meeting if they wanted to, no matter what their official position. They claim to 'stand up for Baildon', and they're paid to do it. Not impressed.
[quote][p][bold]BaildonGuy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dragon Saddle[/bold] wrote: The Labour oligarchs at Bradford's Kremlin are determined to waste taxpayers money by building on Baildon's green fields where the Tory aristocracy are colluding with them in return for a horsey path to walk their posh ponies. If this were a sitcom I'd find it ridiculous, as it is reality nobody is laughing.[/p][/quote]Coun L'Amie is on the Regulatory Committee and, along with his fellow Baildon Tories, has always claimed to be against this development. Let's wait and see which way he votes. I'm sure he didn't sell out for a bridle path.[/p][/quote]Not a single one of them turned up to fight the case at the planning panel. For that, there is no excuse, they could still make a speech at the meeting if they wanted to, no matter what their official position. They claim to 'stand up for Baildon', and they're paid to do it. Not impressed. Dragon Saddle
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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