Lewes District and Eastbourne Borough Councils' logo

Lewes and Eastbourne
Councils

Agenda item

Kempston, 3 Granville Road. Application ID: 180040.

Minutes:

Demolition of existing building and redevelopment to provide x16 residential apartments (Use Class C3) (x8 net additional), new vehicle access on Granville Road and car parking – MEADS.   

 

The committee was advised that Stephen Lloyd MP objected to the application for the following reasons:

1) The property listed for demolition was a fine example of a Victorian house and retained many of its original features.  2) Eastbourne needed affordable housing and it appeared that the property owners had deliberately run down the property over the years and failed to make much of an effort to rent out the remaining empty flats in the block. This was inappropriate and frankly did not fill Mr Lloyd MP with confidence at this company’s future plans. Bulldozing this structure and replacing it under the aegis of their current planning application did not include any element of affordable housing, all of which the current block offered.  3) The building had an important historical footprint; it was a military hospital in World War 1. In this year the 100th commemoration of the Great War, it would be wrong to demolish a building which maintained a living history link with the important time in our nation’s journey.  4) Mr Lloyd MP believed that were this planning application be granted, it could encourage other property developers to neglect similar period buildings with an agenda to dismantle them. This would undermine the high quality aspect of the area, resulting in a further deterioration of an area of High Townscape Value.

 

It was also reported that the Specialist Advisor for Conservation objected to the application for the following reasons:

Although not originally the subject of a conservation consultation due to its non-protected location, the application’s consideration by CAAG and significant public interest invited commentary on my part and he made the following points.

1)  3 Granville Road was a sizeable Victorian villa that clearly evidenced a number of features that typified and helped define the character and appearance of this area, which in turn formed part of the broader, distinctive town- planned vision for Eastbourne developed for the 7th Duke of Devonshire.   2) As such, this attractive and carefully detailed property made a positive contribution to its well- established and verdant residential community, which underpinned the local designation as an area of High Townscape value.  3) The absence of additional specific heritage protection for the property was unfortunate, although it appeared from documentary evidence submitted by a local resident that positive consideration was given to extending the College Conservation Area to encompass the area occupied by this property in the mid- 1980s. This was never actioned, however. As indicated at Conservation Area Advisory Group on 2 April 2018, an opportunity to reassess the situation would arise over the coming months as the Council were currently planning to undertake an appraisal of an Eastbourne conservation area during the 2018-19 cycle, and it was felt appropriate that this effort was focused on reviewing College or Meads Conservation Areas, thereby allowing for the issue of small pockets of non-coverage such as this to be reviewed afresh.  4) A number of substantial individual properties in the immediate area had been demolished over the course of the last 40 years. These had generally been replaced by apartment blocks in a range of broadly ‘contemporary’ styles, the effect of which had been to slowly alter, and erode, the traditional character and appearance of the area. This application also envisaged the replacement of a single dwelling,  admittedly now internally sub-divided into a number of rented apartments, benefitting from generous outdoor space with another copycat block, with existing garden areas given over for parking spaces. This loss of green space was a cause for concern.  5) The design for the new block was broadly similar to a number of other developments locally, and did not invite any great excitement or commendation in architectural terms. Indeed, the design was not especially innovative, or of its time, and certainly did not use its distinctive and distinguished setting as an architectural inspiration, opting instead for a rather nondescript built form. The overall sense was one of a missed opportunity even in its own terms.  In conclusion the Specialist Advisor for Conservation stated that he strongly believed that the proposed demolition of 3 Granville Road and its replacement by an apartment block of the kind envisaged is an inappropriate development for its setting and would have an adverse effect on the area in which it was situated.

 

Finally, the Specialist Advisor for Planning reported that the Victorian Society objected to the application for the following reasons:

1) Kempston was a handsome red-brick villa which occupied a prominent plot at the corner of Granville and Blackwater Roads. It was a finely detailed building, with many of its original features intact.  2) The building played an important role in defining the character of the immediate area, and especially the view along Blackwater Road which currently presented an almost complete prospect of handsome Victorian Villas.  3) Not only would the proposals result in the total loss of the non-designated heritage asset, but they would also significantly erode the predominantly Victorian character of the local area. There were already modern developments on two of the adjacent corner plots; far from setting a precedent these developments made it even more important that further erosion of local character was resisted.

 

Ms Hodge addressed the committee in objection stating that the property was is an area of High Townscape Value.  She stated that the development would have a detrimental impact on Blackwater Road.

 

Councillor Smart, Ward Councillor, addressed the committee in objection stating that the property should be included in the forthcoming Conservation Area review.

 

Ms Nagy, agent for the applicant, addressed the committee in response stating that the property was in need of considerable repair, but was not of such significance to warrant listing. She also stated that there were many different styles of properties within the vicinity of this proposed development.

 

The committee discussed the proposals and agreed that it would be an overdevelopment of the site which would be out of keeping with the surrounding area.

 

The committee also requested that should the applicant wish to appeal, such an appeal should be in the form of an informal hearing so as to allow all interested parties the opportunity to raise their concerns. 

 

RESOLVED: (Unanimous)That permission be refused on the grounds that:

1) The proposed demolition would result in the loss of this Victoria Villa within an Area of High Townscape Value, detrimental to the character and appearance of the area contrary to saved policy UHT16 of the Borough Plan 2007, D10 of the Core Strategy Local Plan 2013 and section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

2) The proposal, by virtue of the height, footprint, bulk and scale and detailed design and materials is an over development of the plot which does not respect the character and appearance of the Area of High Townscape Value nor the pattern of development in the area, contrary to saved policy UHY1, UHT4, UHT5 and UHT16 of the Borough Plan 2007, Policies D10 and D10a of the Core Strategy Local Plan 2013 and Section 7 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

 

Appeal

Should the applicant appeal the decision the appropriate course of action to be followed, taking into account the criteria set by the Planning Inspectorate, was considered to be an informal hearing.

 

 

Supporting documents: