A controversial seven-storey “oversized” coastal retirement scheme will be lowered by just one floor, according to a revised planning application.
The new plan for the plot on the western edge of Sovereign Harbour also reduces the number of apartments by eight to 128 and changes the appearance of the building.
But the residents’ association would like to see a maximum of five storeys, which was the size of a building put forward by a different developer in 2016 for 67 apartments plus 12 houses.
In March, Eastbourne Borough Council’s planning committee voted unanimously to defer the seven-storey application due to the height of the three blocks, the number of apartments and the concrete design.
Councillor Hugh Parker (Lib Dem, St Anthony’s), chair of the planning committee, said at the time: “It is rather large, to say the least: it is an oversized development and parking is not sufficient.”
The developer, retirement specialist Untold Living, was told to “revisit the design to reflect the maritime locality and the Martello Tower”.
It states in the new application that lighter-coloured panels and a dark wall render will “contrast nicely” in the design.
Frances Lawrence, above, chair of the Sovereign Harbour Residents’ Association (SHRA), told the Eastbourne Reporter that they would like to see the blocks remain at five storeys.
“We would like to see it deferred again to have the five storeys the original consent was for.
“We would also really like to see housing which would work for a greater age range – we could do with some younger people here.”
She added: “The parking problem is also exactly the same and that is one of the main reasons residents are not happy. The infrastructure is not there for that older age group.”
Highways authority East Sussex County Council (ESCC) notes that the number of parking spaces “remains acceptable” at around 70 due to the reduction in the number of flats.
It said that parking surveys in nearby streets showed “significant spare capacity throughout the day” and that facilities on the site “would further reduce the need for residents to travel”.
In its original response, ESCC said the frequency of the current hourly 5A bus from Sovereign Harbour to the town centre was going to be doubled.
Gaunt Francis Architects say, in a design and access statement as part of the revised application, that there are “significant amendments to the massing, height and scale”.
They state: “In particular, a storey has been removed from the tallest block to closely match the neighbouring Sovereign Quay buildings.”
The statement says an apartment has been removed from the centre and a glazed upper link will allow views of the sky and create the appearance of two smaller elements in the central section.
The northern end of the building will be changed to open up views of the Martello Tower from Sovereign Quay, “improving the relationship and appreciation of this historic building when approached from the north”.
Revised landscaping includes natural play features for use by local children.
Untold Living has been approached for a comment.
The scheme has so far received more than 400 objections. Comments from the public on the revised application here, reference 230847, should be submitted to Eastbourne Borough Council by 16 August.
:: Main picture courtesy of Untold Living
:: Independent news outlets like this – a non-profit organisation reporting for the community – are under threat of closure, turning British towns into news deserts.
I am a qualified journalist with more than 30 years’ experience in the UK and overseas. I interview people, ask questions and delve deeper into the issues affecting Eastbourne. I do not copy and paste PR guff or social media comments just to fill space.
If my coverage helps you understand our community a little better, please support Eastbourne Reporter with a one-off or monthly donation here on KoFi for any amount you can to cover running costs. I am working voluntarily.
Choose the news. Don’t lose the news.
When are the Council going to put a stop to hideous builds in this town and realise that we don’t have the infrastructure in place to accommodate all the new builds that are going on?
Maybe it would be a good idea to include more local residents in the committee that keeps making these decisions so we can have people who care about our town and can stand up for it.
Not all residents object or have concerns, specifically the immediate adjoining owners who have proactively interacted with the developer to discuss their plans and understand the project.
The most important fact is that there is extant planning consent for a very similarly sized apartment building on the site which could go ahead with no further consent required. That was for 62 3/4 bed luxury apartments with no constraint on whether they became second homes or holiday lets which, by definition, would be occupied by people with no interest whatsoever in the local residents.
Untold are not just the developer, they are the long term occupier, owner/managers of the proposed Retirement Community.
The Harbour Seals will not be affected at all … those guys live with the constant 24/7 coming and going of all types of boats and at least twice each year, the Sospan Dau dredger. There are resident foxes, and an abundance of alternative locations to which they will relocate. The ecology report shows no reason not to build … and the extant flats could be built as soon as someone works with Building Regs and gets started. There is no SSSI on the site.
On the subject of sewage works risks: why is it considered that the apartments nearby will have any more impact than the thousands of new homes built in its catchment area over the last 10 years? The simple fact is Southern Water are working day and night to upgrade their facility: a few retirement flats won’t break their ability to keep the sewage going wherever they send it. It would be far more useful for campaigners to advocate for advising everyone that only pee, poo and paper should ever go down the drains and for S.W. to invest in another plant!
Martello 66 has stood for a very long time, and each year survives a minimum of two x 2 week interventions by PCDL and their contractors to move shingle from one side of the harbour to the other. These vehicles, including large and heavy plant, bulldozers and diggers, have not caused it to crumble or even crack. Historic England have withdrawn their earlier comments on the development because they appreciate that clearing the site, piling the footings and constructing the block of apartments will not cause material damage.
Yes, the visual sightline of Martello 66 from the apartments behind it will change: those who purchased these properties were, or should have been, aware of the fact there was a building site in front of them from day 1.
The Eastbourne land horizon will change. Currently as you approach the harbour from the sea there are a row of properties that are similar in style and colour to many of the other prominent buildings along the sea front, specifically Metropole Court and Monarch House, then a motley collection of differing styles, heights and colours. The new building will complete the existing shoreline building profile in a very similar style.
It is relevant to note that following the first planning committee hearing the developer has significantly changed the design in the plans and drawings now under consideration. Few of the ‘rallying’ residents appear to have given these due consideration.
At times there is traffic congestion, largely due to visitors to the seaside, which can cause residents inconvenience although properties do have allocated parking.
The writer has repeatedly suggested to the Council and Highways Authority that the imposition of residents only permits on the road in question could solve the problem by forcing unauthorised visitors into the adjacent large public car park and having regular visits from the dreaded traffic wardens. It works in the town.
Untold’s data from existing sites and research indicates that many of the residents will give up their cars – notwithstanding that their provision is within the recommended statutory requirements – and that they will use the ‘club cars’ and minibus.
The so called green space that will be ‘lost’ is not green space at all, it is a building site, and there is a huge public park a few hundred yards away to serve Sovereign Park, as well as the sea front, beach access, etc.etc.
Yes, there will be noise and disruption during the build: building the extant 62 flats will cause a similar problem, we will just have to get over it.
There is clear evidence that not only will the apartments be affordable to local Eastbourne residents, it will have a domino effect on the housing market by freeing up much needed family homes down the entire housing chain.
The Village will create some 40+ jobs once complete, many more during construction as it will be subject to local supplier rules. It will have 24/7 on site health care, eliminating the need for most of the health issues residents have to be directed to local GPs and our under-resourced and over-stretched DGH.
Residents will use the local cafes and restaurants, visit the local theatres and bars and generally carry on the lives they lead before deciding their large family homes were too much for them.
The Village’s social amenities will be available to ‘outsiders’ and integration will be encouraged.
Finally, the long awaited children’s play area and completion of the hard surface route from the promenade to the Harbour Wall will benefit all.
Much of the skepticism is largely due to not understanding exactly what a retirement village is and how they operate. I recommend visiting one to see just how it enhances life and prolongs for older people. After all, there may be an older person in your family!