A developer has been accused of wanting to plonk an insensitively designed box on top of two “charming and elegant” 180-year-old shops in a conservation area in Brighton.
Lisgo-Charlton Limited wants to build a three-storey extension above Latina café and deli and the neighbouring Seven Cellars wine merchant at the Seven Dials.
The two shops – at 104 Dyke Road – are currently single-storey buildings with a flat roof, dating from 1841.
Lisgo-Charlton, owned Anne and Mark Packwood, both 60, of Berriedale Avenue, Hove, wants to add a one-bed flat and two studios, according to plans submitted to Brighton and Hove City Council.
Neighbours, conservationists and a councillor have submitted objections to the plans while the businesses in the two shops – Latina and Seven Cellars – also contend with a change of landlord.
The Co-op, which trades from the premises next door to Latina, has taken over the ground-floor lease for 104 Dyke Road and wants to expand its premises.
It said that it would honour the existing terms for Latina and Seven Cellars until their tenancies expired in late 2025.
Thousands of people have signed a petition to try to save both independent businesses. To add your name, click here.
Green councillor Lizzie Deane, who represents St Peter’s and North Laine ward, submitted a formal objection to the plans to build three flats.
She wrote: “I write in my capacity of ward councillor in support of West Hill residents in their objection to this application.
“It is clear from the letters submitted that the Seven Dials is highly valued as a village community, characterised by its small independent shops.
“Long-term plans to expand the currently small Co-op by overtaking its two neighbouring shops will be highly detrimental to the character to the area.
“Residents are concerned that the addition of a three-storey extension is overdevelopment, with a lack of aesthetic that is not in keeping with and does nothing to enhance the local community or West Hill Conservation Area.
“There is already a large Co-op supermarket just a few yards up the road so the addition of a second supermarket will be a threat to the existing small independent businesses in neighbouring premises which have stood there since the 1840s.
“While technically this row of early Victorian shops may be deemed of ‘little architectural merit’, it should be noted that any building or amenity that is held in high affection and regard within the community and beyond has a merit in itself and should continue to be preserved and valued.”
The council’s Conservation Advisory Group has recommended that the council refuse to grant planning permission.
And the council’s heritage team also recommended refusing the current application although it did not out any future development.
Heritage officer Deborah Gardner said: “The proposal in its current form is overbearing, prominent and unsympathetic to the existing and historic roof forms and as such will result in harm to both the roofscape and the approaching views along Dyke Road.”
Neighbours have sent more than 30 letters of objection. One, whose details were redacted by the council on its website, said: “I am deeply concerned by the loss of light and privacy in my garden because, according to the plan, the new development would block the sunlight in my and neighbours’ gardens located behind the planned property.
“The new development would have back windows in immediate proximity to the windows of the adjacent building at 6 Buckingham Place.”
Another objector, whose details were also redacted, said: “Quite frankly, it looks like an eyesore.”
The objector said that the proposed flats were an insensitively designed “box” plonked on the top of some very charming and elegant early Victorian shops built in 1841, adding: “The elevations are of poor architectural quality considering their status in a conservation area.
“The windows lack detail and appear to be out of character with the surrounding architecture.”
To see the planning application and to comment, click here to go to the planning portal on the council’s website and search for BH2021/03856.
Plonk? Surely you can do better than that.
Regarding the petition against the expansion of the Co-op: it’s far better to write a short note directly to your local councillors. Petition signatures are considered very low effort and are largely disregarded by decision makers.
Their contact details can be found here: https://democracy.brighton-hove.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?bcr=1
Exactly, but best of all, though, are individual letters of objection sent to the Planning Dept. These are then listed in the Report, and six or more of them ensures that it goes to the Committee. Petitions are lazy.