October Planning Report
I started my first Report of 2009 by saying that it promised to be an interesting year for planning if for nothing else!! I ended it by saying that hopefully the Council would have learnt some lessons from the long-running saga of the King Alfred planning application, not least to listen to what the residents of Hove actually want.
It's ironical that in this last Report of 2009 I should mention the controversial resubmission (with some alterations) of the planning application to build 2 penthouses on the top of the Old Market building in the Brunswick and Adelaide Conservation Area. This application has been made controversial not only by the design of the proposed flats (you either like them or you don’t) but also by the reasons for making it (purely financial) and the reasons argued for supporting it (the potential loss to the City of a community resource, the loss of local employment, and the possibility that an important building may fall into disrepair if the Old Market Trust as freehold owner fails).
The last two are not valid planning issues, yet the Conservation
Officer himself supports the application. We considered it crucial for the Hove
Civic Society to look at the aesthetics of the application only in order to
fulfil its role of caring for Hove, and having seen the very detailed and
carefully (if not passionately) argued letters from the local Residents
Associations and from the Regency Town House, we sent a letter of objection
urging the Planning Committee to ignore the non-planning issues and to reject
it.
We have no objection to the proposed new use of an addition to the building
as residential nor to the concept that a suitable high quality design would give additional stature to the building and help it evolve
towards a more modern and practical usage. We welcome the idea of the sedum
roof to help control urban heat, and a more substantially planted-up roof/roof
terrace might also help with rain water capture as well as being an attractive
natural feature. But we consider the proposed design would still have a
detrimental effect on the surrounding Conservation Area, in particular on the
prominent Western Road vista where it opens up towards the Open Market
building.
The application is likely to be considered on the 15th October and my own view is that it will probably be approved, which means that the opinions of the people who actually live in Brunswick and Adelaide, and who love the area and fight to protect it, will have been ignored, which is where I came in at the top of this page!
I can give you some cheerful news though. Apart from the meticulous restoration of the Birdcage Bandstand, of which you will all be aware, the houses in Medina and Albany Villas which formerly comprised the Dresden Nursing Home are being refurbished, and in particular 38 Medina Villas will be converted into one 6 bedroom house and one 5 bedroom house. This has led to a suggestion that a Cliftonville Society should be formed, which we are supporting.
We recently objected to an application to build a house at the rear of 29 Medina Villas, effectively on land forming the garden of the house. There were design issues but we considered this over-development on a narrow site which would “grab” most of the garden of the existing house. A recent application for a 2 storey side extension to 17 Osborne Villas was refused as compromising the sense of space between the houses which marks the character of the Conservation Area. There is certainly work for a Cliftonville Society to do.
Carolyn Oxenbury Vice Chairman 1/10/2009