In Defence of Beauty by Daphne Glazer

In 1991 the baths were facing a controversial plan of renovation.  Daphane Glazer a local resident and user of the baths, wrote three articles, some of which were published in the Guardian and the Observer.  The following article is titled as above and was written in the hope that national exposure might shame the Council into taking public reactions into account.

I bet that if on any one day I were to look through the cages of all the local newspapers in this country, I would be bound to find countless articles featuring local community versus embattled council. 

Such a battle has been in progress in Pull for several years, and as is often the case in similar conflicts there have been apparent lulls and truces but the underlying situation has continued to worsen and now it seems the final conflagration is at hand.

It all concerns Beverley Road Baths - a Victorian swimming baths opened in May 1905.

On March 30th this year the Hull Daily Mail carried a retort by Mike Fox on the present state of affairs, headed:

'Baths battle 'tax' protest'

This explains how local residents spearheaded by Ken Spencer of the 'Beverley Road Paths Preservation Society' are preparing to go to the Government Ombudsman protest about the handling of the baths issue.

Hull City Council had approved £2.3 million for the re-development of Beverley Road Paths, a Grade II listed building.  In the meantime, thousands of pounds have been frittered away on surveys purporting to look into the state of the bath. The latest news is that £150,000 has been spent in drawing up a design brief for the baths. The Option 3 Plan which the Council has passed will slice chunks off the main pool, making part of it a kiddy pool. The women's pool will be demolished, likewise, the children's pool and a new fitness studio will be built. However in view of Peverley Road Baths listed building status the Secretary of State for the Environment, Mr Michael Heseltine)will have to be consulted before the changes can go ahead, Bath-users are in violent disagreement with the new plans.

They are protesting because the building's beauty will be destroyed but also on sheer practical grounds. There are three modern pools in Hull with wave machines, kiddy pools, a Jacuzzi. These incidentally have run into all manner of problems because of design flaws and already repairs have had to be undertaken on pools which have been built within the last years. Why must the full-length pool be sacrificed to some councillor's whim?

The chairman of the Council's Leisure Services Committee, Councillor Harry Woodford (after whom one of the modern pools has been named) is reported in the Hull Daily Mail as being undeterred by the Preservation Society's approach to the Ombudsman.

"What are you supposed to do? We've talked to everyone we should have done. They've had political representation on the committee, we've made our decision and now it will all be decided by the Minister. We believe this plan is in the interests of the people and we will go on with its."

What is likely to be the outcome of all this? Until today I had assumed the following: Mr Heseltine would be unlikely to sanction such a gutting of the building as Option 3 would require. This would cause a stalemate and those in the Counci1, like the chairman, who wish to see the demolition of this fine old building would have their way.  Gradually, through neglect, the pool would fall into disrepair. An increasing number of surveys and partial repairs would see to it that the Council's £2.3 million would have been spent (So far, apart from the expensive surveys a great deal of money must have been lost because the Council has failed, despite public requests, to pay the £3,000 required for the renewing of the pool cover. This would cut down enormously on heating costs.  Then that supermarket nearby, which would like to expand, could apply to the Council for building permission and the Council would be able to pursue its business undisturbed by protestors harassing them about some old building in which their Chairman has no interest in.

 
I can imagine that similar scenarios may be taking place all over the country, and they cause great disquiet. What is really at stake here?

The main pool which is used daily by many people and has acquired a community-following has art nouveau scrolled wrought-iron work around its balconies and a high classed-in roof, and when you're doing the back-stroke you can gaze up and see the pattern of clouds moving behind the glass. Changing cubicles line the sides so there is no need to struggle with locker[keys and the like.

Now, what about the ladies' pool? The public has not been able to see this for some years. Its door is padlocked.  Were you to gain access, you would gasp at its magic. This pool is in better condition I understand to be than the main pool.  It has a pattern of wooden arches supporting the roof which is re-echoed in the terracotta-coloured brick window arches. The brickwork is pale-yellow and honey-coloured light washes the entire bath. There is a big window surrounded with old terracotta-coloured slabs, and as in the foyer, there are lovely old friezes of turquoisy-green tiling. This bath is even lighter than the main pool.

I understand that until eighteen months ago this pool could have been opened given three days notice for cleaning out.  How this is not possible. Few know why, but many suspect. The hot secret is that eighteen months ago in an operation costing £43,000 someone in the City Engineer's office gave instructions for the two sand-filters serving the ladies' pool to be removed. They were cut up for scrap and sold off.

If the ladies' pool were to be re-opened there would have to be a new filter system and no doubt the authorities would declare this too expensive. The children's pool is separated from the women's pool by a white tiled corridor.  Its deep end is four foot and its shallow two foot. The original roof-trusses span the ceiling. There is the recess where the showers were and miniature stalls with a rail still hanging above them, which once held a curtain, I suppose, and behind which the tots could change.

This pool is only separated from the main one by a door. I can remember bringing my daughter here when she was about six, and she could run back and forth to me if I took a quick dip in the main pool.  No adult swimmers were allowed in the tiny pool then and so the children were not jostled, nor did they hold up serious swimmers doing lengths.

Other mysterious and fascinating areas contained in this great building are the Russian vapour roan and the shampooing room. You can lounge on wooden benches in a temperature of 120 F with the steam winding about you. Until about four years ago you could wander from there into the shampooing room, where you would lie on cool, white-veined marble slabs (the originals) whilst the masseur kneaded your aching limbs. There are marvellous tales of the lady masseur, now retired, who stood no nonsense from small boys who came careering round. Then there was Frank Jackson, retired boxer, who pummelled the male trapezius.

Adjoining the hot room is a carpeted space with white plastic loungers where vapour-baths users may relax whilst watching tele. You can dally there whilst scrunching toast and sipping tea or you may transfer to the gymnasium for a work-out. This is a world beloved of over-worked taxi-drivers.

Another room included in the vapour section is now empty. Once it served as a 'Voluntary Hospital Room'. People were referred there by their doctors for massage and were treated by a specialist masseur. Originally a Sports Injury Clinic was proposed here, but because the masseur retired and the Council was not prepared to send the pool staff on a training course, this was abandoned.

The plant room with its two giant Rustin and Hornsby boilers for heating the pool water squats beside the laundry. This ceased to operate a year ago and the laundry-man lost his job. It used to launder the towels for the porcelain slipper baths which are also contained in the complex and took in contract laundry for the council.It supplied clean towels too for the vapour-baths, but the towels wore cut and have not been replaced and now the vapour-bathes users must bring their own towels.

Now what I really don't understand is why a unique building such as this cannot be retained in its original form as an historic monument still in working order. The laundry for example could be re-started; the Sports Injury Clinic could be introduced. Tourists would, I'm sure, visit the baths as an attraction. German friends of mine on taking a swim in the large pool were astounded at its beauty. How amazed would they not be if they could see the rest !

Other cities like Bradford and Sheffield for instance have made strenuous efforts to turn their historic buildings into financial assets. The same could be done here.

Up to the minute news from the battle zone here indicates something very puzzling. On April 3rd a notice was posted outside the baths to the effect that in three weeks time the Council will start work on the demolition of the ladies pool, the vapour area etc.  Anybody wishing to comment on this must apply in writing to J.S.Halmshaw, Acting Planning Officer at the Guildhall.
 
As Michael Heseltine has not yet given his consent, does it mean that, even in the face of very strong public opposition, the Council intends to force its decision?

All this highlights the sad fact that decisions are made by councils which take no account of public opinion. People who are serving the public and acting on its behalf should beware of letting personal prejudice cloud their vision. This issue is not merely concerning now, it also concerns our children's heritage of which we are guardians, and it seems that these days we are often wrecking our environment just as surely as any bomb might have done.