image credit: Jan Barron
Decision Day has come for the Beach Tavern site. A Wealden planning officer report has recommended approval for the major development here in the heart of Pevensey Bay.
Approval for the scheme would see a radical change to the profile of the Bay at a focal point for both residents and visitors.
The decision will be made by elected Wealden Councillors at a meeting of the Planning South Committee on Thursday 27 February.
We look at the three year community campaign against the development, the proposals, appeals and decisions made so far in the long running sorry saga that has caused so much anxiety to local residents.
If the proposal is approved, the consequences for Pevensey Bay as a visitor destination could be of significance. “Put things this way”, as one resident explained, “people do not come to Pevensey Bay to see the flats do they?”
The scheme, dismissed by the planning inspectorate as being ‘alien’ to the surrounding has been re-submitted. The proposal is now for eight flats over three storeys, instead of nine flats. The bulk of the building has been slightly reduced.
Like a heard of small baby elephants, there are to be palm trees at the front to distract attention from the fact that the huge building will dominate the scene, dwarf the surroundings cafes and shops and become a new reference point for the visitor destination.
“Wish you were here”, the postcards will say,”come to sunny Pevensey Bay and see the new three storey flat complex at the heart of the village”.
How did we get here and will the scheme win approval?
Proposal:
DEMOLITION OF THE BEACH TAVERN AND CONSTRUCTION OF 8 NO. APARTMENTS AND ASSOCIATED CAR PARKING, BICYCLE STORAGE AND REFUSE STORAGE
planning application WD/2018/1320
The appearance of the Beach Tavern site on the agenda of the Planning Committee South meeting at Wealden Council means that finally the community will get to find out whether the site development is to go ahead
For over three years the community has been fighting against the development which proposes a three storey block of flats, here in the heart of Pevensey Bay. The Beach Tavern site is a focal point in Pevensey Bay. The prospect of such a big development. on the site, would radically alter the profile of the Bay, both for residents and visitors.
As a local resident put things to the Pevensey Bay Journal, on first hearing about the plan, “put things this way, people do not come to Pevensey Bay to see the flats do they? The first iteration of the building was dismissed on appeal to the planning inspectorate.
Sheila Holden, the inspector who wrote the report dismissing the appeal on behalf of the Inspectorate, suggested that the main question was the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area. She explained, “its overall width, depth, mass and bulk would dominate the site and appear out of scale with other nearby buildings. Its angular shape would also be incongruous and incompatible with the surrounding street scene.”
The second iteration of the building is slightly smaller, there are to be eight flats not nine. The building would still dominate the scene The question of the scale, incongruity with the character of the area remains.
The question of whether the proposal will go ahead has been discussed for three years, producing a degree of sustained anxiety amongst residents, One resident, who lives with his family, 8.6 metres away from the planned development, has said ‘this will be the end of the village if this development goes ahead”.
On Thursday 27 February, councillors at Wealden Council will vote and decide what is to happen.
Will planning application WD/2018/1320/F win the approval of councillors?
The recommendation from a planning officer for Wealden District Council is that full planning permission BE GRANTED.
His report concludes, “the previous appeal has narrowed the matters determinative to this scheme. It is clearly in principle acceptable to redevelop this brownfield site in this central village location with alternatives to the private car and access to a number of local services under the local and national policies. No flood risk matters have been identified and residential amenity impacts are lesser than those of the dismissed scheme where there was found to be acceptable relationships to neighbours. In addition the loss of the pub was accepted. The appeal scheme identified impacts to the character of the area and the appropriateness and scale of any parking provision and potential impacts outside the site from any under provision. These are the determinative matters in this application.
With the reduction in scale and massing of the building and alternative design to incorporate the appearance of a more 2storey building with rooms in the roof, with the subsequent additional area of landscaping and additional parking, the scehme overcomes the previous objections in relation to the scale massing and design and parking provision. It is now an appropriately scaled focal building on this prominent corner plot that delivers excess parking above the parking requirement of ESCC. As such it is recommended permission be granted.”
The decision on the Beach Tavern site has come and with the day, the future direction of the village of Pevensey Bay is at stake.
In many ways, the decision about the Beach Tavern site will mean much more than just what will happen at the site. Some residents are seeing the decision as dictating the future direction of Pevensey Bay.
When the first application to build a three storey complex of flats on the site, the application was met with derision, fear and astonishment.
The plan is so big in terms of scale and proportion, that any such development would dwarf the scene. Approaching the block from the village, the complex would overshadow the scene. The scale of what residents and visitors would see would dominate their daily lives.
The first iteration of the building for the site was hardly a masterpiece.
The architect demonstrated that at best, what was on offer was just the sketch of a possibility. Some of the facts were wrong, the research of the location and setting was limited.
Pevensey Bay was described as a town. Pevensey Bay is not a town.
The building proposal was described as picking up the colours of the beach huts here. There are no beach huts here.
Most importantly the research into the history of the site was absent. The architect offered the view that the date of build was not known. This was not true, what was true was that the architect had not bothered to find out the date of the build.
We found out the date of the build within ten minutes, with the help of researcher Deborah Sadki. The site was built in 1905 and became the Honeypot Tea Rooms, successfully trading for over sixty years. The deeds to the building are held in Scotland, available and accessible.
Why this most basic work about the site was not done as part of the design statement is a mystery. A cynic might argue that the architect did not want to know anything about the building.
Was anything done at all to understand how the new focal point for the village would sit with the story of Pevensey Bay”
The plan is simply too big, much too big for the site at this focal point. The building is out of character with the Bay, the surroundings and the context of the Bay and the 20o year old history of Pevensey Bay as a health resort
The plan was offered to Selma Montford MBE for comment. Selma Montford has spent over fifty year analysing the plans of developers in Brighton. She knows the area. In her analysis of what the architect had planned, she chose to make just one comment. She said “I see he has been to B&Q”
The proposal received 468 signatures against what was envisaged in a petition raised on change.org. There are now close to 100 objections to the first and second iterations of the building.
John Davey, a Pevensey Bay resident for 38 years said (2 May 2017) “my response is unprintable. I can not believe that they don’t get that we don’t want that great big monstrosity there. It is totally out of character for the area and for Pevensey Bay.
“They are just not listening to anybody. The bottom line is that it is all about money and greed, plus who would want to live in a 1950s East German prison type camp build anyway.
“I am angry in the way that they are just not listening to the concerns of people, as long as they are making money and lining their own pockets, that is their concern.
“They are not worried that people down here will have to put up with that great big white elephant.
Not a single councillor voted in favour of the first proposal for development, with one abstention at the Wealden Council Planning Committee Committee meeting on 20 July 2017.
Local district councillor at the time, Dianne Dear (who is also the publisher of Bay Life and the Pevensey Bay Journal), spoke for the village, when she pointed out at the beginning of the planning meeting that the proposed development was ‘just too big’. She also gave the view that the applications was ‘based on greed’.
Local residents, Martin Beeney. whose family live 8.6 metres away from the development said (8 May 2017), “it will be the beginning of the end for the village if this building goes ahead”.
Following the decision to reject the application, the decision went to the planning inspectorate. The appeal was lost.
Sheila Holden, the inspector who wrote the report dismissing the appeal on behalf of the Inspectorate, suggested that the main question was the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area
She explained, “its overall width, depth, mass and bulk would dominate the site and appear out of scale with other nearby buildings. Its angular shape would also be incongruous and incompatible with the surrounding street scene.
She added, ‘in my view when seen in the context of the surrounding development, the building would appear alien and out of place on this prominent and important site in the village”. (Reasons for Decision point 9).
In her conclusion she said, “the Framework also advises that planning decisions should ensure that developments establish a strong sense of place, which will function well and add to the overall quality of an area over the long term.
In the second application made by the developers, they explained at a parish council meeting (7 August 2018) that they had ‘listened to the community’.
There was no evidence that they had listened to the community. They have not spoken to the community.
The difference with the second application was that there were to be eight, not nine flats, the building was slightly smaller in scale.
Laughably, what then appeared at the front of the sketch in the second iteration, was a series of palm trees. They were described by one resident as ‘like a small herd of baby elephants”.
A cynic might argue that the purpose of the palm trees was to distract from the size, scale and inappropriateness of the three story complex.
As a resident suggested at the time,” the elephant was still in the room”.
So now, over three years later, the sorry saga that has caused distress and anxiety to the community will reach a conclusion.
Villages change, they are built on continuity and change, communities change and context changes, but there is something about the importance of the focal position of the Beach Tavern site in Pevensey Bay that says any decision should be made with great caution.
The reason that people live here is because they love the place, the quirky history, the location, the small scale seaside spirit, the legends, the beach sunsets and the holiday feel, the ommunity sense of belonging is something special.
Of course places change, but they change over tine.
Such a radical change at such an important position in the village, would be like throwing out the parish pump and putting in place a huge plastic fountain.
The building of a three storey complex of flats, right in the heart of this quirky village, right at a focal point for all to see, obviously out of character and out of scale in Pevensey Bay, threatens everything.
What is remarkable is the contradiction in the context here.
Close to a million pounds has just been spent on the restoration of the Bay Hotel. What we now see is something close to the glory of the neo-gothic building that would have been seen in 1898, when we began our story as what was documented at the time as “the emergence of a health resort.”
And today we have the report of the Wealden Council planning officer.
According to his report, what we are now seeing “incorporates the appearance of a more 2storey building with rooms in the roof”.
How anyone in authority can look at a three storey building and see a two storey building, calls into question the most basic of questions about the use of language, the way in which authorities make decisions about the communities that they serve and the way in which authorities function. Authorities must be held to account.
In Animal Farm by George Orwell, the book ends with these words. “No question now what has happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which.”
Sheila Holden, the inspector who wrote the report dismissing the appeal on behalf of the Inspectorate was right with the first proposal. She suggested that the main question was the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area. As we know, she explained, “its overall width, depth, mass and bulk would dominate the site and appear out of scale with other nearby buildings. Its angular shape would also be incongruous and incompatible with the surrounding street scene”.
What she said stood for the first proposal. What she said stands for the second proposal.
The decision on what will happen here in the heart of Pevensey Bay, will be made at Wealden Council on Thursday 27 February 2020.
Simon Montgomery
