Fire damaged cottage must not be demolished
A cottage in Boxgrove damaged ‘beyond reasonable repair’ must not be demolished, the district council has ruled.
The proposed demolition of Walnut Tree Cottage in Marsh Lane, Crockerhill, was rejected due to the ‘unjustified harm’ it would cause to the area, despite a ‘catastrophic’ fire in 2016.
The intention, as per the heritage statement, was to apply for a replacement dwelling that ‘takes account of the heritage value of the area and role within the setting of a number of listed buildings’.
The heritage statement, produced by Murphy Associates, noted that the only ‘viable option’ was to remove the building completely.
However, Chichester District Council ruled that there would be no ‘overriding public benefit’.
It added: “The works would result in substantial and unjustified harm to the heritage asset.”
The proposed demolition of a ‘designated heritage asset’ in Boxgrove has been rejected by the district council due to the ‘unjustified harm’ it would cause to the area.
Mark Sawyer, owner of Walnut Tree Cottage, requested the demolition of the building in Marsh Lane, Crockerhill, after a ‘catastrophic’ fire in 2016 left the home ‘beyond repair’.
The intention, as per the heritage statement, was to apply for a replacement dwelling that ‘takes account of the heritage value of the area and role within the setting of a number of listed buildings’.
The heritage statement, produced by Murphy Associates, noted that as the building was ‘so severely damaged and beyond reasonable repair’, the only ‘viable option’ was to remove it completely.
It added: “The roof structure, thatch roof and first floor were completely destroyed. Many of the original timber rafters and the first floor joists had imploded into the ground floor. The ground floor was damaged by the collapsed structure.
“In tackling the blaze, a substantial volume of water caused further loss of historic fabric, leaving only the shell of the building perilously standing.
“Whilst elements of the first floor walling remain standing, it is unlikely that there is any retained structural integrity of the building facades and as such recommendation has been made to demolish the building on the basis that it is structurally impaired.” The applicant proposed the ‘total removal’ of the building, as ‘very little can be salvaged’.
Historic England suggested that the ‘best course of action’ would be for the current application to be withdrawn and for the applicant to ‘pursue an application for delisting’.
No such action was taken in time and the application was refused due to ‘no overriding public benefit’.
Outlining the grounds for the refusal, Chichester District Council said: “The proposed demolition of the grade II listed building would result in the total loss of a designated heritage asset without justification to demonstrate that the total loss of significance would be necessary to achieve any substantial public benefits that would outweigh the loss.
“Therefore, the works would result in substantial and unjustified harm to the heritage asset.”