A decision to refuse the development of nine flats above a Whitchurch shopping arcade has been upheld by Government inspectors.
Plans to extend and redevelop the first floor of St Mary’s Arcade, at 13-17 High Street, into residential apartments and redevelop the shop units underneath were rejected by Shropshire Council’s planning department last year due to concerns about town centre parking and a loss of privacy for the building’s neighbours.
Applicant Russell Harrison lodged an appeal to the planning inspectorate in January, but the inspector agreed with the council’s initial decision – and added that the “highly dominant” extension would harm the significance of the town’s conservation area.
A scheme to redevelop the building was first proposed in 2021, with plans for 17 flats withdrawn following council officer concerns about over-development of the site, which backs on to the Grade II listed Whitchurch Heritage Centre building.
Proposed designs for the building had attracted nine objections from the public, with one town councillor comparing the proposed extension to a “1960’s Eastern European Soviet building” – although council planning officers said in their report the plans would represent an improvement on the existing “unsightly” car park and storage yard.
READ MORE: Shopping arcade on Whitchurch ex-Woolworths site
READ MORE: Council issues 'lawful certifcate' for Whitchurch arcade
A supporting statement submitted with the revised scheme said the applicant had considered the views of the council, and reduced the number of flats proposed for the site accordingly.
“The proposed development seeks to reform, extend and reinvigorate an existing building to provide enhanced retail opportunities at ground floor level and residential at upper levels, ” it said.
“The public benefit from restoring active use of the building would outweigh this less than substantial harm and would be seen as an enhancement of the Conservation Area.”
However on appeal, the Government’s planning inspector said that the development would damage the significance of the town’s conservation area, and that the public benefits to the town’s retail economy would not outweigh the harm caused by the scheme.
They added that windows in one of the proposed apartments would face directly onto the walls of the next-door building, which would offer a “limited and unsatisfactory outlook” for residents, while a large window in part of the extension would cause “unacceptable loss of privacy” to residents in a neighbouring flat.
“Even though I have found there to be no harm to the setting of the neighbouring listed buildings, including the Heritage Centre, I find that the proposal would fail to preserve the character and appearance of the CA,” wrote inspector N Bromley.
“The contemporary design would contrast harmfully with the scale, mass, and appearance of the existing buildings along St Mary’s Street and St Johns Street.
“The combined footprint and scale of the proposal would result in a building that would be highly dominant. Moreover, the various elements of the structure would appear noticeably at odds with the more uniform scale and massing of buildings close by,” the decision report added.
The appeal was dismissed.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here