General Discussion
Planning application has been put in for the erection of a concrete statue on pedestal on The Lawn.
Does anyone know anything about this?
It's a gentleman from Teignmouth who has applied for planning permission to erect a statue on the Lawn. Teignbridge planning committee are legally obliged to consider the application, and the first step of this process is the advertised public consultation.
He would need the consent of Teignbridge estates department to erect a statue on the lawn, as they act as landowner. I'm not aware that he has approached them yet.
Dawlish town Council will be consulted on the planning application, and it will be discussed at a future meeting of the town council planning committee. Most likely on April 2nd
I will see what I can find out
The town council is paying for hanging baskets to be put on the bandstand, but I don't know about any pots
The application is for the controversial "Statue of Happiness".
Planning application is on the TDC website:
Re-arrange these words to form a sentence:
cigarette a of packet back.
I'm all for art being a talking point. But this isn't art in my opinion, this is all about shameless self-promotion. If it ever happened, and I doubt it will because he still hasn't got any funding for it, it would make this town a laughing stock. I'm surprised that David Force supports the idea.
Well said!
Is there any truth in the rumour that this has already been turned down by Teignmouth, the home town of the artist (artist being used in the loosest sense of the word), and Shaldon?
Yes Margaret, Teignmouth turned him down as did, if I recall correctly, Bovey Tracey. I'm not sure where Sheldon is.
@ZIGGY. i've been told that this is an initiative by local voluntary group "dawlish in bloom". it's a work in progress as they await the bandstand being repainted. the tubs will be cleaned, planted up and pushed closer to the stage.
its being organised by Mary Lowther, and she says she is happy to answer any further questions. Her email is mklowther@btinternet.com
They have planted up the three 'large cement pots' today and they look stunning. When the flower baskests are added to the bandstand it will make our boring pedestrian bandstand look a lot better. All the good work is a credit to Councillor Mary Lowther and Val Mawhood.
To return to the Statue of Happiness planning application.
So, there I was in the middle of Italy (Tuscany/Umbria - land of Michaelangelo and da Vinci and goodness knows how many other renaissance artists) and I thought I'll just log on to see what's going on and I found this thread. OMG! Did you not hear my hoots of derisive laughter from all those hundreds of miles away?
Oh the irony of where I was, with its history of such fine art and sculpture, and my reading about the proposed plans for this er....... work of art.
Sheldon
Although MS admitted it was a typo (but obvious that she did mean Shaldon) there is a Sheldon a couple of miles West of Dunkeswell.
I see from the planning documents that this application is to be decided by the planning committee ie district councillors. Well at least that might afford some entertaining debate and visible planning decision making rather than the decision being made, quietly, behind the scenes, by planning officers.
BTW - a few years back I went up the road in Teignmouth that goes up towards Teignmouth hospital from the A379. And there, in a garden, on the left as I went up the road, was a very large statue of a female form.
That woudn't by any chance be Happiness would it? Does anyone know? And if it is the statue in question, is it still there?
It automatically goes to Full Committee at Teignbridge because the application relates to land in the Council's ownership.
I think the statue you are referring to in Teignmouth (Kingsway?) is something of a religious nature, which I don't think applies to the statue called 'Happiness', unless it's the fact that when you see it you say 'Oh God'.
That address you're thinking of is the 'artist's' residence.
He did try to get a mermaid statue in Teignmouth a few years ago but they turned him down
He did a consultation at Sainsbury's a while back, I put in a comment that was not complimentary, I didn't realise that the gentleman was hovering nearby and as I walked away he must have heard me saying to my companion how hideous I thought it was - oops!
However I stand by the hideous comment and God forbid (and our Councillors) that we end up with it in Dawlish.
You can use the link to the application to make a comment supporting or objecting to this. I've just made my comments - bet you can't guess which way I voted!!!!
Not totally irrelevant, but Mr Nance is a member of the Scientology cult. I won't call it a religion.
What did he do with his mermaid statue when Teignmouth turned it down?
This link will give you the planning info re his request for his mermaid statue to be sited in Teignmouth http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=37977&p=0
note that it was recommended for refusal and the reasons why that recommendation was made.
I see from looking at the planning correspondence that Mr Nance has been in contact with Ken Dodd in Knotty Ash, Liverpool, seeking his support for this planning application. I imagine that is because of the "Happiness" connection.
Might I suggest that if Mr Nance wishes this statue to be erected somewhere that he applies to whatever the name of the council is that covers Knotty Ash and request that they grant planning permission for this stature to be erected there. After all there is a connection between Knotty Ash and this statue (Ken Dodd/Happiness) which is more than can be said for its connection to Dawlish - which as far as I can see is zilch.
Perhaps he could do some smaller statues of diddymen as well so as to accompany "Happiness" in her Liverpool abode?
look at the info on this link below for planning reasons why it should be refused
This link will give you the planning info re his request for his mermaid statue to be sited in Teignmouth http://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=37977&p=0
note that it was recommended for refusal and the reasons why that recommendation was made.
There is nothing to stop anyone giving planning reasons plus subjective comments as to why they object (and I doubt very much that I shall be able to resist the temptation). After all are the supportive subjective comments already lodged with this application valid planning reasons for permission to be granted? Don't think so. For goodness sake let's not give the applicant and his supporters any excuse to think that there is no opposition to this proposal - whether our objections are valid planning reasons or not.
Exactly Lynne. The reasons for refusal of the Teignmouth version are planning-related. One can't just say that one doesn't like the look of it. Hopefully enough people will send in objections to this and hopefully the powers that be will make the right decision.
As Michael has pointed out above, I've just checked, and this is an item on the 2nd April town council's planning committee agenda.
PS have just gone through the 2013-33 Teignbridge Local Plan and did a search on TDC's website but can find no policies relating specifically to the siting of public works of art.
However, where the applicant is wanting Happiness to be sited is within the Dawlish conservation area and I did find something concerning Design and Heritage policies which, quite understandably, are concerned with inappropriate development in conservation areas. To quote:
" any development needs to preserve and enhance the character of the area" and "any new development through its siting, scale, design and use of materials must be complementary to the character and make a postive contribution to the conservation area".
This is an excellent idea. Dawlish needs a conversation piece and this could be it. I'll bet that as soon as its sited people will be standing around it taking pictures all day long. The weird thing about Dawlish is they don't seem to want anything different. That is to say the people of Dawlish who are most vocal, for example those who stood against the new bandstand opportunity, seem to be the ones who want Dawlish to just bumble along.
Damion Hursts statue in Ilfracoombe has actually turned around the fortunes of the whole town. Maybe the forward thinkers of Dawlish could raise their voices above the stagnant objectors and bring Dawlish into the twenty first century instead of being permanently stuck with one foot in the grave.
Agree that a Damian Hurst creation could prove a tourist attraction (can't find anything on the web to say that it has turned around the fortunes of Ilfracombe though). And the Damian Hurst sculpture is, apparently, as controversial as this Mike Nance one. But we ain't talking about a piece of art by an internationally known artist are we?
Personally I don't have any objection at all to a piece of work of art in the town as a talking point/tourist attraction. In fact on this website about a year ago I and others who regularly post on here were talking about that very thing. I just feel that it should be Dawlish related in some way (how does Happiness fulful that criteria?).
I don't have a problem with different. I like different. Different is controversial. But I don't think this will do anything at all for Dawlish and most certainly not make a positive contribution to the town centre conservation area.
What is being proposed is the following (info from the planning application form):
Happiness will be made from concrete and will be 10' 6" (3.2metres) in height.
She will rest on top of a 7' high concrete pedestal.
and both the pedestal and the statue will be sited on the raised garden area beside the toilets in the town centre.
The pedestal space will be 1 metre 40cm square.
@ willos
Yes, they will come but for all the wrong reasons and wont come again.
That hideous monstrocity is enough to make people NOT come again and doesn't say much about what we would call art.
It is not even nice to look at and will surely make Dawlish a laughing stock of the country.
Everyone knows of Dawlish as 'the place where the train runs along the sea wall' and if this thing is allowed to be erected, it will be known as 'that place with that awful statue'.
Yes, it would be nice to see a lovely statue in town but not that.
Policy EN5 concerned with Heritage Assets from the 2013-33 Teignbridge Local Plan states that:
I e-mailed TDC asking them what policies planners might look at with regard to planning applications for public works of art being installed.
I was referred to policy S2 of the 2013 - 2033 Teignbridge Local Plan. This is what policy S2 says:
"S2 Quality Development
New development will be of high quality design, which will support the creation of attractive, vibrant places. Designs will be specific to the place, based on a clear
process which analyses and responds to the characteristics of the site, its wider context and the surrounding area, creating a place with a distinctive character and taking account of the following objectives:
a) integrating with and, where possible, enhancing the character of the adjoining built and natural environment, particularly affected heritage assets;
b) making the most effective use of the site;
c) create clearly distinguishable, well defined and designed public and private
spaces which are attractive, accessible and safe and provide a stimulating
environment;
d) allow for permeability and ease of movement within the site and with adjacent areas, placing the needs of pedestrians, cyclists and public transport above those of the motorist, depending on the nature and function of the uses proposed;
e) create a place which is easy to find your way around with streets defined by a
well structured building layout;
f) the building layout takes priority over parking and roads, so highway
requirements do not dominate the site’s appearance and function;
g) the buildings exhibit design quality using materials appropriate to the area,
locally sourced if feasible;
h) create inclusive layouts which promote health, well-being, community cohesion
and public safety;
i) provision of an appropriate range of dwelling types taking account of
demographic changes;
j) incorporate public art where this can contribute to design objectives;
k) respect the distinctive character of the local landscape, seascape, protecting
and incorporating key environmental assets of the area, including topography,
landmarks, views, trees, hedgerows, wildlife habitats, heritage assets and skylines;
l) ensure that the development is usable by different age groups and people with
disabilities; and
m) location and scale of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems."
its also know as the place with the black swans. There are now four. I don't think four swans are going to encourage heards of tourists however a conversational and controversial piece of art will. I wouldn't worry about it too much though this council can't even hang a flag onto a pole let alone install some new ones. I give up.
Lynne - look no further than the first line - it should be of high quality design. On that point alone the application should fail. What is alarming is that the refusal in 2013 for the marginally more relevant mermaid at Teignmouth notes it had previously been approved in 1996 and 2001. So I guess we can't rely on the good sense of our council. Good to see a few objections are appearing on the application.
@Willos
If you're concerned about the number of swans why not start a fund where traders can donate to buy a couple every year (they're about £500 a pair). That would soon get the population up.
This public art idea.
I was thinking of how something (but deffo not what is presently being proposed!) might be funded and commissioned etc but then I asked myself what if the resulting artwork were to fall foul of those planning policies that I have posted above. All that time and money and effort and for what? a planning refusal.
Might it be that this idea of having a controversial public piece of art in the town (even if the problem of funding could be overcome) is effectively a no, no?
After all if the planning policies have the last say as to what would be and what would not be acceptable, then perhaps Dawlish TC should seek some indication from TDC planners as to what would be deemed acceptable and what not before this public art idea gets pursued any further.
Why would Dawlish Town Council do that ? It is not planning any public art projects.
Far better that anyone planning such a project ask the planners directly. Direct communication is always better
A separate and equally important consideration is whether TDC estates department would give consent as a Landowner, whatever the planning position. Most importantly - what do the people of Dawlish want?
Because the town council represents the people of Dawlish? And even if it isn't planning any public art projects it might be useful for it to know what TDC's 'line' is on such a thing and then for that 'line' to be communicated to the people of Dawlish? That way we might all know what is possible and what not (funding and everything else allowing of course).
That said though, I suspect TDC's 'line' will become known as a result of this planning application.
I'm not hearing a great clamour around the town for a public art project on the lawn, and if there is I would still suggest anyone who wants to organise it should speak directly to Planning Officers to avoid any confusion.
What was/is going around in my mind was an art project referencing last year's storm and the iconic image of the railway line dangling in mid-air.
Perhaps something referencing that event could be incorporated in any future replacement bandstand designs? (planning policies allowing of course). Perhaps TDC could be checked out on what it would consider okay designs, as per planning policies, for a replacement bandstand and what it would not?
So that if some money were to be available somehow sometime in the future for a replacement bandstand of some kind then perhaps such knowledge might save money being wasted on designs that TDC planning policies wouldn't allow anyway.
I'll ask TDC. But I suspect that all they will do is refer me to the two policies that I have already posted on this thread.
There is a TDC led working party that is supposed to be planning a new Bandstand, but as mentioned on previous posts it hasn't met for a year now. You could send your suggestion about Great Storm related public art to Mr Tony Watson at TDC
It has just been put to me that perhaps this statue might have some use as a pillar to help support the Zip wire and aerial walkway high above Dawlish proposal, as was reported in last week's Dawlish Gazette.
I see in today's paper that someone called Pria Lofol contacted the Gazette last week to express how great she thought the zip wire idea was and that when she first read about the Happiness statue proposal she thought that was the April Fool's joke until she realised she was reading about it in March.
well done Lynneand this is what Dawlish Town Council has to say on the matter (my emphasis in bold)
Well, this is what TDC's Design and Heritage section has to say about it:
I have but a second ago received an e-mail fronm TDC's planning department concerning what any future bandstand should and should not incorporate. Here's what the e-mail said (and I imagine that although it refers to the bandstand in particular the policies quoted would also be relevant to any other kind of development in the town centre conservation area).
Now that the Town Council Planning Committee has met and considered the application for the statue, I can give my own views.
I puzzled how anyone can propose a figure in a static pose to be cast in concrete and placed in any public place. To be a work of sculpture I need to feel it and get a rewarding tactile experience out of it, so marble, bronze, wood, seem appropriate for figurative sculpture. If it is an abstract figure then the range of materials widens, but not to concrete.
On a slightly different tack, in the garden of the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam are a number of animal sculptures, not toys, but figures by respected artists that children are allowed to climb on and enjoy. A hippopotamus is especially favoured by the young arts admirers. In the gardens at Dartington is a small bronze of a donkey (I hope I remember correctly) and the bright burnished body is evidence of the many children who have climbed or been lifted onto it for a few moments of marvelling at the reassuring strength of it. They are working works of art and may give Mr Nance a better idea of how to turn his attention.
I don't know if anyone saw the television programme a couple of nights ago about the emergence of figurative sculpture from the Minoan culture to that of ancient Greece, for here was the real lesson for Mr Nance. The earliest figures were rigid, hands by the side standing figures, just like 'Happiness', but as the culture evolved in the Greek form (and to be carried forward in Roman and later times) the figures conveyed stories and ideas through dynamic poses. The figures from the Parthenon and from other temple friezes that can be seen in museums across the world all show how the basis of European civilization developed the active physical form. Even a standing figure can convey the sense of contained energy, like Michelangelo's David. I believe you can get small scale reproductions of that!
And to put it less eloquently, it's pants.
I hope the Planning Application fee covers the bother of dealing with it.
TDC planning committee met yesterday (Tuesday 28th April). Permission was refused.
