On Wednesday (October 1), Lewes District Council’s planning committee approved proposals to demolish the Dewdrop Inn in Steyning Avenue, Peacehaven, and build a four-storey apartment building in its place.
The replacement building, proposed by developer Blue Skies Brighton Ltd, would be expected to contain 14 self-contained apartments, as well as community and office space on its ground floor.
Before making their decision, the committee heard from objectors who had raised concerns around the character impact of the building’s design, pressures on local infrastructure from new housing and the permanent loss of the currently vacant pub, which had been nominated as an asset of community value.
Similar concerns had also been raised by Peacehaven Town Council, which had formally objected to the proposals. Some of these concerns were highlighted by town councillor Sue Griffiths during the meeting.
Cllr Griffiths said: “The Dewdrop is a large traditional public building of great historic importance to Peacehaven and East Sussex as a whole. It was created in 1928 when two buildings were joined together.
“It has always been a place for community events, including history exhibitions and mummers’ plays, and is understood to be the only chalk cellar remaining in East Sussex.”
She added: “This building could be a living museum and the proposed community room could never replace the amount of community space being lost or the history or meaningfulness of the present building to our residents.”
Cllr Griffiths also told the committee how Peacehaven residents have been attempting to get the pub registered as a building of heritage asset, while also highlighting how the Campaign For Real Ale (Camra) had noted the building’s interior to be “of very special historic value” at a national level.
Several committee members appeared to share concerns around the heritage value of the building and the loss of a community asset.
Committee members had also raised concerns connected to the scale of the building, with some arguing its part three-, part four-storey design would be out-of-keeping with the character of the area.
For their part, officers said the building’s scale was not considered to be unusual for the area.
In a report to the committee, officers had also described the building as being “historic in the context of Peacehaven” and having “some merit as a traditional building”. But they had concluded the demolition would be acceptable, noting how the building was considered to be in a “poor state of repair” and had no formal designation as a heritage asset.
Officers had also highlighted how the loss of the pub would be offset by the creation of a “new and more versatile community space” on the ground floor of the proposed building.
Committee members had raised particular concerns about the potential loss of the chalk cellar highlighted by Cllr Griffiths. These concerns saw committee member Councillor Graham Amy ask whether an additional condition could be added to preserve the space.
Cllr Amy said: “What I would ask is, if it was possible not to destroy it but to preserve it. Now that can be done in many, many ways. There are areas of great archeology throughout Britain where areas have been covered by soil and things like that during construction.
“All I would ask is that is part of the mitigation; that it is not filled up with concrete or something like that.”
He added: “Other than that I have no real objections, because there’s nothing to really object [to]. We’ve said about the heights, it’s sustainable, it’s right next to a bus stop etc. etc.
“So I’m afraid, I’m quite happy to propose acceptance of the officers’ recommendation, given the mitigation of the preserving the cellar; they could perhaps put a plaque outside to say it is one of Britain’s last remaining chalk cellars.”
For their part, officers said such a direction to explore the preservation of the chalk cellar could be added to the existing archaeological conditions. Such a condition would be tied to the scheme’s viability, officers said.
This form of condition was considered to be acceptable by Cllr Amy, who formally proposed approval of the scheme. This motion was supported by the majority of the committee when put to the vote.
For further information see application reference LW/25/0224 on the Lewes District Council website.
Source link
[Featured]
[Just In]
