Reiterate that the applicant’s preferred name for the property, ‘Hambledon Park’, duplicates the name of another property in the village which would cause confusion.
It is premature to make any decision at this stage before it is known whether the property will be listed.
Department of Culture, Media & Sport -
“English Heritage, the Secretary of State’s statutory advisors on the historic environment, has assessed the building and advises that it has been too altered to merit listing. Having carefully considered all the evidence, the Secretary of State has decided to accept English Heritage’s advice and will not, therefore, be adding the building to the statutory list”.
Twentieth Century Society -
“The building’s exterior is good enough to merit recording, and the Society strongly urges the Council to include this as a condition of consent, if consent is given to the application”.
17 letters have been received, objecting on the following grounds :-
- The current house, designed by Lady Casson, has architectural merit. The building is unique and fits unobtrusively into the park setting. The proposals would destroy its character. Within Conservation Area, view as to whether it is worthy of listing.
- The proposed alterations are not viewed as being an improvement over the existing building. The character of the house would be lost. It would be impossible to identify the fabric of the existing building.
- Non-compliance with Policy RD2 – disproportionate in terms of bulk, massing, floor area and height. Design does not reflect the local distinctiveness of the area and would be more intrusive within the landscape.
- Concerns over the height of the first floor/roof and impact on neighbouring amenity/ loss of privacy. The proposed roof would be more visible, affecting outlook.
- Confusion resulting from re-naming of the house to “Hambledon Park” – a property of this name already exists.
- The existing property is a long standing feature predating and included within the Conservation Area.
- Other properties nearby are not in the vernacular style but are still part of the character of the area.
- The proposed height of the building is nearly three times that of the existing, the major proportion of which has a height of 4.1 m.
- It would be more intrusive within the landscape by virtue of its bulk and height.
- It is considered to breach all the provisions of the RD2 policy, and making an exception to policy on grounds of visual improvement would represent an undesirable precedent.
- Concerns about debate at Committee.
- Extra pressure on sewerage system and concerns re: pollution in village.
- In support of demolishing Rock Hill House to build an entirely new state of the art appropriate dwelling elsewhere on the site.