Future of Brighton's Stanmer Park to be decided this month

SDNPA’s planning committee meets on Thursday to decide on £5.8 million plans by Brighton and Hove City Council to restore Stanmer to its 18th century roots.

But campaigners say the authority has already failed to save the park’s heritage by not intervening to stop damage inflicted upon the Grade II* listed stables despite receiving warnings more than two years ago.

Historic England is calling for legal action to be taken against developers Threadneedle Developments for the damage.

In a crucial month for the park’s future, the planning committee meet a week before the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) board decides whether to grant £4 million towards the project.

A separate £4.8 million HLF heritage grant bid towards the renovation of the grade II listed park’s Home Farm was unsuccessful, which has led to the council’s unpopular sell-off of agricultural downland as an alternative funding source.

The unauthorised construction of a studio flat at Stanmer Stables by a development company owned by Hove millionaire businessman Mike Holland has led campaigners to question the SDNPA’s role as the park’s guardian.

Planning consent was granted in 2013 for eight flats with the condition that part of the stables remain.

In a retrospective planning application for a studio flat in their place developers claim that is no longer possible to retain them because of their poor state of disrepair and the need for damp proofing earth floors .

SDNPA were contacted in February 2014 about a possible planning breach regarding the removal of the historic staircase but a historic buildings officer who visited the site found no breach.

The authority received further reports in July of a possible breach in relation to the work now subject to the application under consideration.

Stanmer campaigner Sue Craig said: “I brought the stables to the South Downs’ attention and it appears they did nothing.

“What has happened with the stables has been shameful. South Downs should be prosecuting, they are totally toothless and not fit for purpose. Now it appears that they are about to give more licence to kill Stanmer with the HLF bid.”

Tim Slaney, SDNPA director of planning, said: “We know that it is as frustrating for local communities as it is for us when we hear that our shared heritage may have been damaged but there are strong guidelines to follow when establishing whether a breach has been committed and what actions should follow.”

£5.8M RESTORATION DUE TO GET PLANNING GO-AHEAD

PLANS to remove trees planted in memory of lost loved ones at Stanmer Park could be reconsidered.

South Downs National Park Authority (SDNPA) planning officers said they would not object to retaining the memorial trees alongside plans for a green drive and expanded car parks as part of Stanmer’s £5.8 million redesign.

The loss of trees have been among the most contentious issues to Brighton and Hove City Council’s restoration project which SDNPA officers have recommended should be granted permission when its planning committee meets on Thursday.

The city council plans include the restoration of the historic Lower Lodges entrance and doubling its car park, a new kiosk with toilets, cycle hire and café, a green drive for pedestrians and cyclists and restoring the Frankland monument.

The park’s walled garden will become a working garden with cafe, garden centre and education facilities while a Citypark depot will make way for a car park and meadows.

Officers said while parts of the proposal had potential to cause harm to heritage assets including Stanmer Church, this was outweighed by the wider public benefit of the overall scheme.

The SDNPA said Stanmer Park had suffered from a lack of funding for many years and the current unmanaged car parking created an “unsafe environment”.

But officers have raised concerns about the loss of trees to screen the expanded Lower Lodge car parks suggesting there should be more trees and fewer car parking spaces.

Plans for a central car park, which SDNPA officers said would have caused significant adverse impact, have been dropped, though the SDNPA also questioned the need for its alternative, a new overflow car park at the Patchway.

As part of the move to keep cars out of the heart of the park, parking would be removed from around Stanmer House.

Seventy-six individual trees would be lost as well as the “partial removal” of 12 groups of trees but more than 250 new trees would be planted and 10 trees and a group of young trees relocated.

Jason Knight, of Stanmer Residents’ Association, said views were divided over the merits of the scheme and while the majority were supportive, concerns remained about the loss of trees and the impact of the new access road into the park.

He added: “The council has been hamstrung from the start because they are having to do this from a heritage angle but because the first bid failed for the buildings, all they have left for heritage is putting the park back to 200 years ago.

“It’s not a heritage car park, it’s not a heritage bike hire.”

Campaigner Sue Craig said: “The whole idea of having a holistic approach to Stanmer Park was lost when they failed with the first bid.

“They talk about restoring it to the 18th century but they don’t really know much about it and what information there is doesn’t really look anything like what they plan to do.”

The council’s environment committee chairwoman Gill Mitchell said: “We consider the wider project to be the best way to preserve this magnificent park for future generations while respecting its history and heritage.

“We have explained clearly the reasoning behind our proposals to remove some trees, many of which are in poor health.”

ROW OVER DAMAGE TO STABLE BLOCK

A DEVELOPER could face prosecution over the damage caused to a 300-year-old Grade II* listed stable block.

Historic England has recommended the South Downs National Park Authority (SDNPA) consider prosecuting Threadneedle Estates for “unauthorised works” converting the Old Stable Block in Stanmer Village into a studio flat.

The firm received planning permission for eight flats but some stable rooms were omitted because of their rarity and historic significance which would have been lost with “even a sensitive residential conversion”.

The applicants claim that in undertaking the flat conversion, the stable block was found to be in a very serious state and action was needed to cope with “considerable rot and dampness” to external walls.

An application from the firm’s director Mike Holland states it was always their intention to apply for retrospective permission for the flat, which has never been occupied, but “tragic circumstances” on the site, notably the death of carpenter Dave Clark following a fall in September 2014, had prevented them from doing so.

Mr Holland and his foreman Grant Oakes will appear in court over manslaughter and health and safety charges over Mr Clark’s death in the New Year.

Historic England has now written to the SDNPA suggesting that prosecutions should be sought over the work on the stables questioning why damp proofing work was carried out.

Developers said that stable stalls had disintegrated because of a severe damp problem meaning the earth floors had to be replaced with concrete.

In their planning application, the firm said the remaining stable area was only a very small part of the building and could not be retained because of their proximity to the new flats.

But heritage officers said they were not “entirely persuaded” by the reasons given and criticised developers for not raising the issue with SDNPA before harmful works were carried out.

It has advised SDNPA enforce a reinstatement and that developers should volunteer to carry out conservation work while prosecutions should also be considered.

A South Downs National Park Authority spokeswoman said if the retrospective application was refused, the authority would consider whether to take formal action against developers.

Resident Jason Knight said: “I think it’s important that when a private venture is involved, you have to be careful that there is a clear social aspect to it.

“It would have been better for Stanmer Stables to have been turned into five flats and the rest left as the stables as possibly a home for the village social club.

“There is a concern with the Long Barn going forward that you could see history repeating itself.”