Response to Planning application
Former Jolly Weavers


To the Developer
 
 

13/00561/LB

Banbury

Jolly Weavers 22 South Bar Street Banbury Demolition of single storey store and replace with two storey extension. Single storey extensions to rear of public house. Enclosure around existing external staircase. Additional external staircase to provide access to flats above public house. Internal alterations to remove internal walls and outbuildings, alterations to toilet facilities in restaurant, new partition wall and bannister rail in flats above public house. Installation of windows and roof lights for Mr Koyas Hussain (Delegated)(LB)(C)

13/00560/F

Banbury

Jolly Weavers 22 South Bar Street Banbury Demolition of single storey store and replace with two storey extension. Single storey extensions to rear of public house. Enclosure around existing external staircase. Additional external staircase to provide access to flats above public house. Installation of windows and roof lights. for Mr Koyas Hussain (Delegated)(C)

 
I see that there have been

I see that there have been issues regarding the registration of these applications. I was surprised that the lack of a heritage statement was not amongst them, given the extent of the proposed works to a grade II Listed building.

 

I couldn't help noticing the five bedrooms and lounge (No.22A) and four flats (No.22) shown 'as existing' on the upper floors, as well as the courtyard lean-to abutting the south range (no 22A (LB)). I was surprised to see that none of these appear to be recorded on the building's planning history. From the lack of recorded history, possibly some of these may require a certificate of lawful use or retrospective consent (and presumably LBC for any physical works). I suspect that the planning history of No.22A is not shown however. As the application affects buildings at the rear of No.22A, the planning history of both buildings is relevant, particularly as No.22 and No.22A are Listed as a single entity.  

 

With the Jolly Weavers' unaltered collection of historic courtyard buildings (stables, brew house etc) and so much additional accommodation existing or being applied for, we would expect that any proposed, or existing but unconsented losses to historic fabric are compensated with corresponding enhancements to the historic fabric that is to remain. Certainly there is significant scope for enhancements within the old courtyard, which is greatly marred by concrete hard-surfacing, blocked windows, ugly modern flat-roofed rendered lean-tos, exposed ductwork and a modern close-boarded fence that partitions what was historically (and relatively recently) an attractive and undivided courtyard area. We would regards the existing dilapidated ranges (including that proposed for demolition) as unrealised heritage assets however, particularly as both are shown on the 1882 1:500 OS map.

 

I note that the applicant's agent fully expects that the proposals may change as the result of further discussions with yourselves. We very much hope that this may be the case, so that we end up with an exemplary scheme similar to that recently completed with your conservation team's detailed input at the Three Pigeons PH, where the changes to the garden and to the now-unique former 'court' (blind-backed) housing (now holiday lets) at the rear are a delight.

 

I have previously offered Koyas Hussain the Society's assistance in working up further proposals for the property. We would be delighted to help in any way we can. 

 

Yours sincerely

Rob

(Rob Kinchin-Smith, Acting Chairman, Banbury Civic Society)