Old River Lane Working Group

PUBLIC MEETING – ALL WELCOME
A BETTER VISION FOR OLD RIVER LANE

The cross-party Old River Lane Working Group is holding a public meeting on:
SUNDAY 19TH FEBRUARY 2023 at 2.45
at The Bishop’s Stortford High School, London Road, Bishop’s Stortford, CM23 3LU.
The meeting will discuss our concerns about the Cityheart proposals and present our vision for this site. Speakers invited include:
 Bishop’s Stortford Civic Federation
 Old River Lane Working Group
 Bishop’s Stortford Labour Party
 Bishop’s Stortford Liberal Democrats
 East Herts Green Party
 Bishop’s Stortford Conservatives
 Bishop’s Stortford Climate Change Group
 Bishop’s Stortford Arts Group
 South Mill Arts
The meeting will include time for speakers and questions from the general public and any other groups who wish to attend. For more information please contact: [email protected].

Please see below details of our meeting on 19th February 2023.

Public meeting called on controversial Old River Lane scheme A working group of Labour, Lib Dem and Green Party members has organised the forum for Sunday February 19 at The Bishop’s Stortford High School.

This is a copy of our representation to East Herts Council regarding the plans to demolish Charringtons House and the Water Lane Church Hall:

Cross-party Working Group on ORL
Ms Sara Saunders
Head of Planning
East Herts District Council
9 January 2023

Dear Ms Saunders

3/22/2546/FUL : Demolition of Charringtons House, URC Church Hall and No.1, 2 and 3 Old River Lane : The Causeway/Old River Lane (BISH8), Bishops Stortford, Hertfordshire

This letter comprises an objection to demolition of the church hall and Charringtons House, on behalf of the Cross-party Working Group on ORL, comprising members of Lib-Dem, Labour and Green Party (also submitted on the portal).

This objection demonstrates that :

(i) The URC Church Hall provides a valuable and much needed community resource whose loss would have a significant impact on a number of community groups and activities. In the complete absence of any proposal to replace the Church Hall facilities elsewhere within the immediate area, the proposed demolition of the Church Hall is contrary to Policy CFLR8 of the East Herts Local Plan.

(ii) The application is not accompanied by any analysis of the extent to which the Church Hall continues to be needed for community uses and, if it is, the extent to which that facility will be replaced elsewhere. Such an analysis is required by Local Plan Policy CFLR8 Loss of community facilities. This application therefore fails to demonstrate that the scheme will comply with Local Plan policy.

(iii) The Heritage Statement which accompanies the application is defective in that it does not contain any analysis of the extent to which the loss of the Church Hall could harm the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The application fails therefore to demonstrate compliance with Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

(iv) Charringtons House is a viable, useful asset, in good condition, capable of continued office use or change of use, adaptation and alteration and integration within the ORL masterplan.

(v) There is no evidence, economic, environmental or design studies to support the demolition of Charringtons House. There is no information about the proposed replacement development.

The Church Hall as a Community Facility

Policy CFLR8 (Loss of Community Facilities) of the Local Plan provides that :

Proposals that result in the loss of uses, buildings or land for public or community use will be refused unless: (a) An assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown that the facility is no longer needed in its current form; or (b) The loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by enhanced provision in terms of quantity and/or quality in a suitable location; or (c) The development is for an alternative community facility, the need for which clearly outweigh the loss.

Paragraph 19 of the supporting text to that Policy says that : Community facilities provide for the health and wellbeing, social, educational, recreational, leisure and cultural needs of the community. The URC Church Hall clearly falls within the Local Plan’s definition of a Community Facility which, according to para 19, includes but is not limited to art galleries, cinemas, community centres, crèches/nurseries, healthcare facilities, household waste recycling centres, museums and libraries, music and concert halls, places of worship, schools, post offices, public houses, village halls and local/village shops.

Such facilities are said to act as the focus of community activity and contribute towards community cohesion. The Local Plan notes that Community facilities are provided by a wide variety of agencies including local authorities, other public service providers, churches and the voluntary and business sectors … ..

The Church Hall comprises a valuable community resource actively providing a long-established, centrally-located and affordable community resource. It has yoga, pilates, karate classes, a coffee morning, entertainment events such as Uncle Funk and the Comedy Club, and single event bookings.

Some of these would move to the proposed United Reformed church extension, but each of their proposed new rooms is only 30 sq m in area, so unable to hold public events.

We have vaguely heard the proposed cinema will have a space suitable for live performance, but for only 150 people standing. The church hall takes 200 seated.

In October 2022, the District Council formally designated the Church Hall as an Asset of Community Value, thereby confirming the extent of its value to the town as a venue for a wide range of community activities. There can therefore be no doubt that the Church Hall is a community facility which is protected by Policy CFLR8.

Policy CFLR8 makes it clear that planning permission for the demolition of the Church Hall cannot be granted unless the three criteria which are set out in the Policy are all met in full :

(a) An assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown that the facility is no longer needed in its current form : This application is not accompanied by any such assessment. There is no material in front of the Planning Authority in support of this application which could possibly allow the Authority to conclude that the Church Hall is no longer needed. Indeed, this letter demonstrates that a substantial need for the Church Hall to remain available to community groups exists now and will continue to exist in the future.

(b) The loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by enhanced provision in terms of quantity and/or quality in a suitable location: This application does not include any proposal at all to replace the Church Hall anywhere or in any form. The outline planning application for ORL, although not referenced by the demolition application, describes an arts centre. In the design and access statement, it says ‘It is proposed the existing uses within the URC hall would be accommodated within the arts centre and a proposed extension to the main URC building’ and shows a table of facilities. The illustrative notes in the design and access statement about a performance space, show that seating is less flexible, and the seated capacity is much less than the church hall, and therefore not an equivalent provision. There are no parameters for approval in the outline application relating to the specification of facilities, size of spaces, the operation of a centre; and nothing in the s106 heads of terms to timetable the construction. Neither application provides any clarity or certainty about what cinema, arts and community facilities might be provided. This means that demolition of the church hall cannot be justified.

(c) The development is for an alternative community facility, the need for which clearly outweigh the loss: The development for the purposes of this application comprises only the demolition of the Church Hall and Charrington House. It does not describe what will be developed in its place. Everyone knows that the replacement development is tarmac for a surface car park – this is not an alternative community facility, the need for which clearly outweigh the loss of the community hall.

It is therefore absolutely clear that none of the criteria in Policy CFLR 8 are met by this proposal. It follows that a decision to approve the demolition of the Church Hall would be a breach of Policy CFLR 8 and would therefore be unlawful.

Heritage Statement

Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires a Planning Authority which is exercising its planning functions, including the consideration of an application for planning permission to demolish a building within a Conservation Area, to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. That duty is not confined to considering solely the impact of the loss of any listed buildings, but extends to considering the potential impact of the demolition of any building within a Conservation Area on the character and appearance of that Area.

The author of the Heritage Statement appears to have taken the view that that, because the Church Hall is not a listed building, its loss in Conservation Area terms does not need to be assessed. This is a wholly incorrect approach.

Apart from a brief description of the Church Hall in paragraphs 5.21. and 5.22 of the Statement, there is no attempt to assess the historic interest of the Church Hall or the contribution that it makes to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

The report does assess the extent which the demolition of the Church Hall would impact on the setting of the listed Church and concludes that the church hall has been much altered and extended and it is not Listed. It represents a minor historical association to the church that does not contribute to its significance; its loss would therefore not result in harm to the significance of the church through alteration to its setting. That is however a separate matter from the issue of the Conservation Area character assessment.

The failure to assess whether the demolition of the Church Hall will preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area means therefore that the Heritage Statement is flawed. In the absence of such a proper analysis, any decision to approve this application on the basis of the current supporting material would be unlawful.

Charringtons House as an active and adaptable economic asset

Keeping Charringtons House is not about character and conservation, it is about business, economy, adaptability, sustainability and local council services.

There is no supporting statement or analysis saying why it has to be demolished.

The building is in use, in good condition. It has been continuously let by office companies, floors have been recently refurbished. It is not derelict and therefore not a regeneration need. As a building in public ownership, it earns revenue for the District Council.

To demolish Charringtons House is environmentally irresponsible. Demolition and rebuilding means a heavy carbon cost, the embodied energy in the existing concrete frame and deep foundations (on a former river bed) is significant.

Demolition would be in conflict with the District Council’s Climate Emergency statement of 2019.

The application fails to recognise the building’s potential as a valuable existing asset for business workspace, and public uses.

The foundations, concrete frame, floor slabs and stair / lift cores mean that building can be easily adapted, updated and altered. While it is constrained by floor heights and width, the bottom floor could be extended outwards; areas of floor slab removed for double-height; curtain walling replaced; an additional storey added; the ground floor removed for car parking, or be opened up to be part of an arts centre.

In land use terms, it can continue to be used for offices, as demand exists in this location. It could be easily adapted for education, library, or converted to flats. The stair and lift towers to the side are an advantage in keeping unimpeded floor spans. But they could be demolished and relocated.

None of this has been analysed, there are no option studies accompanying this application or the outline planning application.

Yet perversely, the proposed development will include a new office building. We object to this wasteful use of resources, and the lack of any supporting evidence for this flawed land use planning.

We object to the loss of the Council public counter service contained in Charringtons House.

The developer may see Charringtons House as dated and not fitting easily with their pre-determined layout. But that is because they are out of step with current thinking about adaptation, and lack the imagination to change this building. Their assumption it can be swept away means they have not done design option studies. The rigidly fixed block of the illustrative arts centre is not the only way to design a community and leisure facility and it could be integrated with the existing building.

Conclusion

This application must therefore be refused on the basis that:

(ii) These two buildings in active use should be seen as existing positive assets that need to be integrated in development. They are not derelict or redundant.

(iii) The preservation of the Church Hall as a community facility is required by Policy CFLR8.

(iv) In the absence of any analysis at all of the extent to which the Church Hall is needed as a community facility, none of the requirements of Policy CFLR 8 are met.

(v) The Heritage Statement fails completely to consider whether the demolition of the Church Hall would impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Approving this application would therefore amount to a breach of the Authority’s statutory duty in Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

(vi) Charringtons House is in active use, in good condition, contributes to the Stortford town centre economy, provides a rental income to the District Council.

(vii) It can be adapted for long term use and integrated with the ORL masterplan.

(viii) Demolition is environmentally damaging and irresponsible.

We therefore urge you to refuse this application.

Our response to local media coverage of the East Herts Council's 'survey' on Old River Lane:
"Your headline "Under 30's back Old River Lane" in last week's paper (the Bishop's Stortford Independent) was unfortunately misleading. East Herts Council's 'consultation' on ORL earlier this year didn't allow respondents to express a view one way or another on the scheme to build a five screen cinema (which they are cynically describing as an 'Arts Centre') on the site. It simply asked whether people would go to see films at this venue. Without giving any indication as to the films being shown, or the ticket price, this was a fairly meaningless question.
EHC were obviously unhappy with the online response which showed overwhelming lack of interest in these hypothetical films, so sent their people out onto the streets looking for a more sympathetic response, which they duly found.
Despite these blatant attempts to skew the results of the survey, a clear majority (53%) said they would not use the new venue. The total number of responses to the survey was barely over 500, out of a population of some 40,000. This extremely limited sample cannot possibly justify the Council’s claim that there is support for its proposal."

The Old River Lane Working Group has developed a compelling alternative vision for ORL which doesn't squander tens of millions of pounds of taxpayers money on this white elephant and which retains Charringtons House at the heart of the site.

Further positive coverage of our report in the Bishop's Stortford Independent.

'You don’t have to knock it down to have a knockout development' Urban planner and designer Yvonne Estop-Wood, of the Old River Lane Working Group, makes the case for keeping Charringtons House.

A quick reminder that East Herts Council's survey on its plans for a five-screen cinema in Old River Lane is open until 6th August (https://www.eastherts.gov.uk/latest-news/2021/have-your-say-designs-old-river-lane). We are encouraging residents of Stortford to complete the survey but fear that the council has already decided on building the cinema whatever the outcome of the exercise. We are also encouraging people to write to the leader and the Chief Executive of EHDC ([email protected] and [email protected] and your councillor (details on the East Herts website) to express your views on these plans in a way the survey does not allow.

Page not found | East Herts District Council You may have received an email from us titled ‘Electoral Register – Response Required’, the email address will appear as [email protected]. This is a genuine email and we require your response in order to ensure the register is up to date.

Further coverage of our report from the Independent.

Opposition parties ramp up rival plans for Old River Lane Old River Lane Working Group invites feedback on its scheme for an education and community hub at Charringtons House.