Retrospective appeal to use reconstituted stone in Bath is thrown out

"Reconstituted stone is not natural stone. While it may seek to replicate and reflect natural stone, its different appearance and behaviour becomes increasingly obvious with time, when the natural processes of weathering reveal the inferiority of the artificial product." – Inspector.

An independent inspector has upheld a decision by Bath Council planners to refuse retrospective planning permission to use reconstituted stone rather than natural Bath limestone for four houses in the city.

Planning permission was granted for the houses in Gibbs Mews, in the Bath Conservation Area that is part of the World Heritage Site, in February 2009, on condition they were built using “natural Bath Stone”.

They were not. What the council has described as “reconstituted faced Bath stone blocks” were used instead.

The developer, Thameside Property Company Ltd, maintained that the reconstituded stone fulfilled the condition of the planning permission to use ‘natural stone’.

The Council considered this assertion “perverse”. The officer responsible reported when the Council considered a retrospective planning application to change the planning approval in April last year, that: “Natural stone would suggest in its natural state, and reconstituted stone is a product of a manufacturing process, and could never be described as 'sawn', as it is on the relevant drawings. If the definition of 'natural stone' is extended to encompass reconstituted stone, it would appear extremely difficult for a condition to be set which requires 'real' Bath stone to be used.”

The restrospective planning application was rejected. The developer appealed against the decision. On 8 January this year the appeal was heard by Inspector Jennifer Armstrong. It included a site visit. On 22 January the appeal was dismissed.

Among the reasons given is: “Reconstituted stone is not natural stone.”

Ms Armstrong reported: “While it may seek to replicate and reflect natural stone, its different appearance and behaviour becomes increasingly obvious with time, when the natural processes of weathering reveal the inferiority of the artificial product.

“This can be seen in a number of 20th century buildings in the city and, as the Council stated at the hearing, such examples illustrate why natural stone is routinely required for new development in the Conservation Area.

“And while I have considered the applications before me on their own merits, any acceptance for the use of artificial stone could be cited as a precedent for development elsewhere.”

The Council (its full name is Bath & North East Somerset Council) says it will now write to the applicant to ascertain how it intends to comply with the original planning permission.