A developer is planning on building a four-bedroom house on a 1,000 square metre patch of land he bought for almost a quarter of a million pounds last year.
The tiny plot in Lower Market Street in Hove, believed to have been caused by wartime damage, went under the hammer at auction for £234,000 after a bidding war.
Now developer Talbot Developments, owned by Robin Cross and Jonathan Wright, has applied for planning permission to build a family home there.
The application says: “In the original plan for Brunswick Town prepared by Charles Busby, Lower Market Street was envisaged as a complete terrace, providing relatively modest accommodation for the working classes.
“The 1853 map of the area shows a complete terrace, but subsequent plan records show a gap in the terrace extending from 36 to 43.
“During the intervening period, these vacant plots formed extended gardens for 13 to 15 Waterloo Street. Two of the three plots were eventually developed in the latter part of the 20th century, to create numbers 37 and 43 on either side of the proposed site.
“Unfortunately, the architectural quality of these later additions was a poor match for the original development and, when combined with the incomplete gap in the terrace, has led to to an unloved and untidy appearance to this part of the street that the proposed development will help to repair.
“The proposed design follows the classically elegant architecture of the Regency Style employed within the Brunswick Town estate from the early to mid-19th century.
“It uses a traditional palette of materials, with painted render and slate roof tiles, together with timber sliding sash windows and painted render detailing.
“The emphasis of the design has been to provide a well-proportioned traditional appearance using established materials and detailing to ensure that the building sits comfortably in its surroundings to provide anelegant addition to the street scene.”
A previous owner, architect Ludwik Chrzaszcz, applied in 2007 to build a four-storey building made up of two maisonnettes there, but both his application and a subsequent appeal were unsuccessful.
Some of the objections relate to an undergound stream, saying it should never be built on.
“Comment submitted date: Mon 18 Nov 2024
UNSUITABLE LAND FOR BUILDING ON:
Underground water underneath plot which would mean unstable foundations and flood risk. This is why it has never been built on!!!!!”
I can see future problems for neighbouring properties with the ivy, either side. There are arguments for and against ivy growing against walls. However, there’s also a risk that if it was just cut down at the bottom, the ivy may root into the walls. That aside I say, leave the foxes alone!
And what was the planning officers comment in reply to that?
The site is currently open to the elements so yes there will be water there at times because there is little or no drainage.
Installing peoper drainage will be part of the building process and would eliminate any flood risk.
And clearly the person making that comment doesn’t know that the site WAS previously built on!
Ivy can easily be removed
Regarding the ivy, perhaps let English Heritage know, they’re researching it.
What have English Heritage got to do with the Ivy?
If you’re that concerned then you should let them know!
ChrisC – English Heritage already do know, and I only mentioned them in response to your comment that “Ivy can easily be removed.”. That’s all!
Found the Nimby
Nimby, nay, not at all. I have insomnia, so at 4 am was just having a look at some of the comments on the planning application, which included a couple about the underground stream, and also foxes.
Brunswick Square is only round the corner for the foxes.
As long as it’s built in Regency style to match the street, I have no issues.
Better to build on brown and infill land with existing infrastructure than green belt.
I am sure they will find a way to deal with the underground stream and it is not the only property it passes under.
Found the troll!