Lymington Society Objection
to Ford's Redevelopment Application - May 2010
The
South East Plan requires local planning authorities to protect and enhance
the character of small country towns. In
particular, Policy
CS2 requires that "New development will be required to be well designed to respect the
character, identity, and context of the area’s towns, villages and
countryside. All new development will
be required to contribute positively to local distinctiveness and sense
of place, being appropriate and sympathetic to its setting in terms
of scale, height, density, layout, appearance, materials, and its relationship
to adjoining buildings and landscape features, and shall not cause unacceptable
effects by reason of visual intrusion, overlooking, shading,
noise, light pollution or other adverse impact on local character
and amenities. . . ."
while Policy
CS3 requires that "Development
proposals must protect and, where possible, enhance sites of recognised importance
for nature and heritage conservation .
. . New development proposals should maintain
local distinctiveness and where possible enhance the character of identified
features. . . ."
The
following extract from the applicants' website gives an idea of what may be
expected from their claimed 767 nationwide establishments:
"During the day, our Lloyds No.1 bars can offer a quiet, relaxed
pub, for all to enjoy a drink or meal; at night, the teams up the mood and
tempo. The night-time teams are really
focused on, and enthusiastic about, people having fun and providing a really
vibrant atmosphere. Watch out for
our regular party nights – great fun and often a bit of an eye-opener! At the weekends, many of our Lloyds No.1 bars
have live DJs or live music." Even
in today's secular, iconoclastic world it would be hard to devise a more inappropriate
proposal than to separate such an establishment from a tranquil, historic
church and its surrounding precinct only by an ancient listed wall.
(The front door of the proposed drinking establishment and the west
door of the church are separated by but 20 yards).
A distinctive feature of the town is the high number of dwellings clustered
on and around the High Street, many of which would be within the likely sound
footprint of the applicants' description above. (The closest, just 20 yards across the street,
is an old people's home). There is
no merit to be found, either, among the other possible supporting reasons
for a change of use. The A1 category,
once lost, is unlikely to be regained and the vibrancy of the High Street
will be diminished in proportion. Employment
opportunities would be scarcely more numerous than those offered by the existing
shop. No additional dwelling space
is proposed, affordable or otherwise. The
building lies opposite a busy road junction which is already habitually congested
by vehicles many of which are parked illegally, and has no off-street parking
space for delivery vehicles or for customers; and Lymington and Pennington are already well
provided with pubs and clubs distributed both along the High Street and around
the wider town.
It
may be argued that such an establishment would serve the needs of the town's
younger inhabitants in a way that the existing High Street pubs do not, but
the public order experience of recent years from establishments aimed at a
similar target clientele suggests that where "The night-time teams
are really focused on, and enthusiastic about, people having fun and providing
a really vibrant atmosphere" the centre of the Conservation Area,
between parish church and rest homes, is not an appropriate place.
This application fails the tests of Policies CS2 and CS3 of the Core
Strategy, and also conflicts with the
distinctive character of the High Street and the standing of its ancient church,
and should be refused.
