Archery Ground: Orbit seeks changes while Gemselect demolishes vandalised building

Orbit Homes has lodged its second application to vary the conditions of the planning permission granted in 2013 for the redevelopment of the Archery Ground, a move which has prompted objections from various parties. Meanwhile Gemselect has reached a memorable milestone with the demolition of the main college building. Nick Terdre reports.

The main college building, which after years of neglect and poor security, ended its days extensively vandalised and with most of its windows broken, has finally been demolished by Gemselect, the new owner of the Archery Ground in Burton’s St Leonards. This act of mercy, for both the building itself and nearby residents, was accomplished over a couple of weeks in April.

Work now continues with the demolition of other buildings, creating heaps of rubble. The rubble will be crushed on site to create good quality hardcore that can be used in the construction, Gemselect director Gordon Ritchie told HOT. Some 50,000 cubic metres of hardcore will be created.

Gemselect is working with Orbit Homes, a housing association, to redevelop the Archery Ground. Planning permission was granted in late 2013 for a revised scheme submitted by the then owner, Gladedale. One key decision which the new management has made is that the number of affordable homes will be almost trebled, from a minimum of 26 to 76.

After submitting an application in February seeking to remove the footbridge in the north of the site, the partners are now proposing a number of changes to the design of the affordable housing. The changes, which were the subject of an exhibition held in the Masonic Hall on two days at the end of April, include the removal of roof terraces, the removal or reduction of some balconies, a reduction in the height of the multi-storey Building A in the north of the site, the omission of one of the lifts in this building, and the use of uPVC windows instead of aluminium.

Orbit development manager Sophie Palmer tells HOT that it is the company’s preference to omit double balconies/terraces where they are accessed from a bedroom; it is uncommon for balconies accessed from a bedroom to be used and they also pose a potential security and safety risk, she says – the balconies accessed from the living areas are satisfactory for residents’ open space requirements.

On the roof gardens Ms Palmer says, “The flats have sufficient outside space in the form of balconies/terraces and the houses all have individual private gardens. We therefore feel that the roof gardens do not offer any additional amenity space. Orbit would not want residents to use the roof gardens for amenity purposes due to health and safety implications and possible anti social usage.

“In addition roof gardens require intensive maintenance, irrigation and drainage systems, are limited by climate conditions, and can be costly to maintain and repair. This will increase service charge costs to our customers.”

Neither application has found much favour with the Save The Archery Ground campaign group. “They want to get rid of features such as balconies and roof terraces, water down architectural details like stone walls and quality metal windows, and ditch the green roofs that would have softened the impact of the development on its surroundings,” it says on its website.

“STAG believes all this is a direct result of the development changing from a mostly private estate that would have been marketed on its architectural quality and innovation, to one largely controlled by a housing association.

“Which raises the question: Why should social housing tenants get lower quality, fewer amenities and less innovation than private householders?”

In response to this statement Ms Palmer says, “The homes will actually be of a higher quality than most private accommodation” – they will adhere to various sets of regulations and guidelines including Secured By Design and the Code for Sustainable Homes requirements, and will benefit from energy efficient heating and lighting.

However, in an objection lodged with the planning department Stag reiterates that, “In our view the reality is simply that the new owners want to save money. The casualties will be the residents, their neighbours, the Conservation Areas and the surrounding heritage assets…

“It is clear that the reductions in the quality of design and materials being proposed are a direct result of the change from predominantly private to public housing. This, coupled with a loss of amenities such as balconies, terraces and the public walkway, will unfairly disadvantage social housing tenants, alienate them from the neighbourhood and cause long-term damage for social integration.”

The footbridge application was due to be considered by the planning committee at its meeting on 29 April but was removed from the agenda at the request of the applicant. It is now likely to be heard, along with the second application, at a meeting on 1 July.

 

Orbit’s application relating to the footbridge (HS/FA/15/00107).

Orbit’s application for design changes (HS/FA/15/00175).

Stag’s objection.

See also Archery Ground: new owner seeks changes

Also in: Home Ground

« Jeremy Birch memorial event
Tributes to Jeremy Birch »