The saga of the People’s Republic of Stokes Croft’s artwork destroyed by Bristol City Council “by mistake” takes a new laughable legal turn.
Having now made a very public and PR-friendly apology for the news media‘s benefit, the council has now returned to business-as-usual – lying, bullying and threatening – to get their own way.
You may remember that after the council vandalised the artwork, PRSC immediately used the space to condemn the council and advertise Chief Exec Jan Ormondroyd’s email in large letters so we could write to her direct and tell her what a tosser she is.
Now the PRSC blog reports:
the owner reports that last week, BCC contacted his agents to request permission to remove the “Council Vandalism” piece. The owner referred them to ourselves… Still we heard nothing…
The following day, the owner was contacted again by BCC. This time they informed him that he required planning permission to paint on the front of his boarded up shop, and that the “Council Vandalism” piece was therefore illegal…
Really? Illegal to paint what you like on a building is it? Not according to, er, Bristol City Council it isn’t.
Here’s an email from the council’s very own planning enforcement expert, Jon Bishop to the councillor for the area, Mark Wright on this very issue from March:
>>> Jon Bishop 03/19/08 9:08 AM >>>
Under schedule 2, part 2. Class C of the General Permitted Development Order, planning permission is not required for any application of colour to the exterior of a building unless the painting is for the purpose of advertisement, announcement or direction.
The same ‘permitted development’ right applies to buildings in conservation areas so in theory someone could choose to paint their house purple without the need for planning permission.
In fact, if you look at some of the terraces in Cliftonwood you will see quite a range of colours. If the building in question is listed as being of architectural or historic interest then the painting of its exterior may require listed building consent.
Best wishes Jon
Dearie me. Are the council just using the law when they feel like it now? Presumably on the instructions of their Chief Executive, who apparently doesn’t like being forced to be made directly accountable for her reprehensible actions in large letters on one of the city’s major arterial roads?
If you need planning permission for the purpose of advertisement, announcement or direction why hasn’t the council enforced this law for private advertising hoardings over about the last 25 years then? Bit of a precedent set there maybe?
What a sad little bully Ormondroyd is. Although perhaps what she needs to understand pretty urgently is that we are being forced against our collective will to piss away £180k a year on keeping her in a style she’s done nothing to deserve and for that we’re gonna make her directly fucking accountable any way we feel like.
So Jan, if we want to publish your email, your salary, your address, your expenses or anything else we bloody well feel like saying about you in ten foot high letters we bloody well will. And if you don’t like it then fuck off back to Bradford.
As for your pathetic legal bullying, why not pick on someone your own size? Leave the artists alone you miserable little shit of a woman and get your halfwitted legal gang to try their bullshit on the Bristol Blogger if you fancy a fight with locals.
Of course – judging by past precedents of pompous idiot council officers threatening “legal action” against Bristolians – you won’t because you ‘d be pissing those expensive pants you’ve looted from the public purse in five minutes flat at the first sign of a fight.
These soppy city council legal threats never materialise do they? Because they’re actually a load of council senior management fantasy-world bollocks.
Perhaps someone should explain to them – for their own sakes – they’re here to serve us not threaten us?