Author Archives: bethjsc

Save the Marquis page now closed

Thank you for your support on this campaign. I will no longer be updating this blog. The campaign has morphed, as it were, into the East End Preservation Society.

follow them here: https://www.facebook.com/EastEndPSociety

here: https://twitter.com/EastEndPSociety

or, Spitalfields Life blog is deeply involved in the society so if you’re not on Facebook you can follow this instead :  http://spitalfieldslife.com/2013/12/01/the-east-end-preservation-society-launch/

thank you for your support and comments!

Beth

Advertisements
Image

Ptolemy Dean article for Country Life

New article in Country Life

New article in Country Life, click on the image to zoom

How-To: OBJECT:::

Objections can still be sent direct to the Borough of Hackney.

You can make your comments either by going online or writing a letter.

Online go here:

http://apps.hackney.gov.uk/servapps/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/generalsearch.aspx 
and search the application number 2013/0053 then click on the application number underlined with dots in the ‘Planning Application Search Results’ box to view the application details. Then, in the ‘Application Progress Summary’ box click ‘add comments here’ and fill out the form.

Or…

Send a written objection quoting application number 2013/0053 to:

Planning Duty Desk, Hackney Service Centre, 1 Hillman Street, E8 1DY

Chipperfield's proposed replacement

Outlines for what grounds you can object by are here on page 3:

http://www.hackney.gov.uk/Assets/Documents/how_to_have_your_say_on_planning_applications.pdf

and finally,

Below is a comment I found on the BDonline article showing CAMRA’s objection letter to the planning dept:

Objection 2013/0053 Conservation Area Consent from Jane Jephcote, Chair of CAMRA’s London Pubs Group, Flat 10, Ravenet Court, Ravenet Street, London SW11 5HE

Demolition of the Marquis of Lansdowne public house

Dear Hackney Planning

On behalf of CAMRA’s London Pubs Group, I should like to object to the demolition of the Marquis of Lansdowne at 32 Cremer Street E2 on the following grounds:

1. As evidence of the area’s previous late Georgian/ early Victorian antecedents, the Marquis of Lansdowne constitutes a heritage asset, in much the same way as the Wenlock Arms does in the Regent’s Canal Conservation Area also in the borough. In the second case consent for demolition was refused on this ground in October 2011, although it is noted that at the time the Wenlock Arms was not in a conservation area.

2. Loss of the building leading to a permanent removal of any possibility that the Marquis might one day be repaired and reopened as a pub. NPPF Para 70 protects against the loss of pubs. P70 has been used by inspectors to defend a pub use even where that use ceased some years before. The planning appeal decision for the Plough Shepreth which established this principle is attached.

3. The ‘redundancy’ of the building is challenged. Historic buildings which are ‘mothballed’ or given low impact ‘meantime’ uses such as the Marquis has under its ownership by the Geffrye Museum can survive long enough for their context to change sufficiently to enable a sustainable repair and reinstatement. The Marquis, which has been in use as offices upstairs in the ancillary living accommodation (and not also on the ground floor in the pub’s trade area) would, with the arrival of Hoxton Station and the nearby Museum itself, find many buyers if it were offered on the open market. As much was admitted by David Dewing, the Museum’s Director to a member of the London Pubs Group at the consultation event in December.

4. The loss of pubs from conservation areas has been identified by planning inspectors in four recent dismissed appeals cases as detrimental to the character of the conservation area. This can be caused either from the loss of the building itself and its associated use, or from the loss of the use through a scheme of conversion affecting the character of the conservation area, and being considered to constitute ‘substantial harm’. The relevant appeal decision on the Cross Keys is attached for your reference. the other cases followed the Cross Keys case both in time and reasoning. Other planning decisions including the Fairfield PH in RB Kingston recorded refusals at delegated level following the Cross Keys case.

5. The dating of the Marquis of Lansdowne has not been firmly established. However, I attach a photograph of the Queens Head E14, a Grade II listed building and its list description which identifies it as late C18th or early C19th, and invite you to note the similarities between them including the recessed arches and 1950s mottled beige tiling. It must be said that the Marquis, even in its delapidated state, is a more elegant building, ’rounding’ its corner and presenting a more considered design for its prominent site than the Queens Head.

6. The loss of the Marquis’ built context, i.e. its flanking terraces, is a shame, but there is consequently an opportunity to create a new and harmonious context for the pub within a new scheme for the Geffrye, ‘fitting new to old, rather than old to new’, or in this case demolishing the entire building completely. Public houses in this ‘orphan’ form survive in a great many urban areas after the slum clearances of the interwar and post war periods as the singular reminders of their role in servicing residential streets. They are to be cherished (as above) and not to be disregarded.

7. I have been shown a photograph of the Marquis taken in 1951 or possibly earlier, showing it after an InterWar timber panelled refit and refronting of some distinction and quality. The present tiled treatment is absolutely typical of Charrington’s post WWII austerity repair programme and a significant number of these survive still. However, while the surface decoration is of little merit, it would appear that the present building is little altered in its roof, window apertures and the disposition of doors and so on.

8. The applicants are defending their application on the grounds that the loss of the present building is justified on the grounds that the new proposed extension is of greater public benefit. This seems a regrettable approach by a museum of the Geffrye’s standing. Furthermore, previous proposals, funded as I understand it by Heritage Lottery Fund grant, showed retention of the Marquis and its incorporation into a considered scheme.

In summary: the Marquis of Lansdowne is a purpose-built public house absolutely of its time and place. It is a survivor from Hoxton’s Georgian history, of which precious little now survives. The context around it has greatly improved during its time in the Geffrye’s ownership and it is easy to see that it could with some care and attention, be refitted and returned to its original use and there is evidence that there would be appropriate owners interested in a purchase. The loss of this pub from the conservation area, both in its built form and use, constitutes ‘substantial harm’ and should be resisted.

Please refuse consent.

Jane Jephcote
Chair, CAMRA London Pubs Group

The London Pubs Group is formed of CAMRA’s London region pubs officers and pub protection officers as well as historic pubs enthusiasts and planning/historic buildings professionals with a particular interest and knowledge of the subject.
Jane Jephcote is co-author with Geoff Brandwood of “London Heritage Pubs” 2008, CAMRA.

Aside

Geffrye Museum is holding ‘Open Evening’ on this Wednesday the 20 March at 6pm to discuss development plans & demolition of pub. Go if you can! http://www.geffrye-museum.org.uk/whatson/events/adults/

this from Nick Pope, who got wind of the campaign via BD online:

Nick Pope's 3D rendering

Nick Pope’s 3D rendering fleshes out the Spitalfields Trust’s sketch

“I saw the great sketch done by the Spitalfields Trust and I wanted to start looking a bit more about how it could actually look in situ so I produced a 3D visual to try and illustrate my take on it. I don’t think anyone at all would object to buildings surrounding the restored pub so I’ve showed these in my visuals as blocks to either side. The pub could be used as a stand alone building or extended and incorporated into their development – both of which are very valid and possible options but seem to have been ignored so far.

I think it’s very easy to walk past an old, rather tired looking building and to think the area would be better without it. But with a bit of consideration and a little investment the result can be a building that relates so much more to its surroundings and benefits both locals and visitors to the area than just a new development alone.

If you leave the main streets in east London, very little is actually left of the interesting streets, squares and alleys that used to make up the area and with such popular areas like Shoreditch, Columbia Road and BroadwayMarket so close by that still have a few of these features left, I think it’s important to preserve what we can and to incorporate these buildings into future developments.
It’s obviously an exciting time for the Geffrye Museum and I would strongly urge them to look at a way of incorporating the old Marquis of Lansdowne building into their plans.”
Nick Pope
This put me in mind of another new building that works well around an existing pub, the Bear Lane project by Panter Hudspith Architects in Southwark:
165_2_view_along_bear_lane

Local comment from the BDonline archive:

 

Elaine Napier | 19 February 2013 1:10 pm

As one whose family owns property by Cremer Street, and whose ancestors lived and worked in Bethnal Green and South Hackney as orris (specialist silk and gold/silver thread) weavers in the 19th and early 20th centuries, I am bitterly disappointed to learn that the Geffrye Museum considers it appropriate to demolish one of the few remaining 1800s properties in the area to replace is with a new-build extension to the museum.

The Geffrye Museum is dedicated to showing the public the lifestyles of past centuries in East London. Surely they can see that the Marquis of Lansdowne is a serious example of the sort of public house that was fundamental to the lifestyles of those who occupied this wonderful part of London in its fascinating history. There must be a whole range of ways in which the property could be used to enhance the Museum itself, or to be restored as a separate public house which would act as a source of revenue for the Museum as part of the revival of this exciting area..

Local Authorities are far too quick to allow the destruction of the taxpayers’ heritage. Thousands of houses were demolished in the East End in the post-war period, delivering in their place unattractive concrete blocks which quickly demonstrated that the quality of the building was poor and the culture of the estates did not meet the needs of the people. Please try to be a bit more imaginative about how you deliver the future for these areas. Many beautiful squares and terraces could have been saved and restored to the kind of homes that people actually want. My great-great-grandparents began their married life in 1841 in the terraced house which is now number 7 Buckfast Street (formerly Abbey Street), E2. This charming little house is still in excellent condition, providing a happy home for a 21st Century family instead of sticking them in chilly isolation in some pile of ugliness way up in the sky.

Please try to preserve the real appearance of the East End and give its people the sort of environment they want. Extensions can fit in almost anywhere. The loss of original historic buildings is a real tragedy.

The Spitalfields Trust Draws up an Alternative Scheme for Retention of Pub as The Geffrye Museum submits Demolition Plans

marquisoflansdownerestored
The Geffrye Museum has now submitted a planning application which includes the demolition of the Marquis of Lansdowne pub. Despite claiming that extensive consultation has been carried out, the Museum has refused to show anyone final plans prior to submission – something that will set the alarm bells ringing at the Heritage Lottery Fund – who will be providing a colossal £11m grant for the scheme. Never at any point in the consultation process was the retention of the pub up for discussion – and, to our knowledge, a full feasibility study looking at alternatives to demolition has not been produced.
In the meantime, The Spitalfields Historic Buildings Trust has drawn up a vision of how the pub could look if carefully repaired, with missing detail reinstated. It shows how, if retained, this modest but handsome building could make an enormous contribution to any new scheme – enriching the streetscape and providing valuable historical context for the modern extension. Whether revived as a pub, restaurant, bar, education space or visitor centre it is clear that this building would anchor the new scheme in the architecture and history of this special, but much abused, part of the East End.