APPLICATION 24/501763/LBC   1 MARKET PLACE AND 123-124 WEST STREET, FAVERSHAM

The Faversham Society formally and strongly objects to the proposals for internal and external alterations, as it did to the proposals in Application Nos 23/504900/LBC and 23/504902/ADV, both of which were withdrawn by the Applicant in January 2024.

While we welcome the additional information that has now been supplied with regard to air supply and extract, the proposals shown in the current application are fundamentally the same as those depicted in the 2023 applications.  In order to avoid the tedium or repetition, we therefore ask that the grounds for our objections to 23/504900/LBC & 23/504902/ADV (submitted to you in December 2023) be taken into account by the Council when assessing the current application.  Copy of our December 2023 objection is therefore attached.

Given the new information provided in this Application, we wish to make the following additional points:

APPLICATION FORM

We regret that so much information has been redacted.

There is reference on the form to Pre-app Advice Request No. 24/500165/PAPL, dated 12^th January 2024 and a statement that the current application has been submitted as no advice had been received.  Why is no reference made to the two earlier sets of advice apparently given by your Conservation Officer and referred to in the Case Officer’s report on the 2023 Applications?  We trust that advice will be taken into account when assessing the current application.

EXTERNAL SIGNAGE

While welcoming the proposed change from an applied to a painted external sign, we consider the revised proposal still to be out of scale, inappropriate in location and scale and of a character harmful to the character of the Listed Buildings and the Conservation Area.

USES AND ALTERATIONS

We are increasingly concerned about the proposed use of part of the First Floor and the whole of the Second Floor for residential purposes which would be above commercial premises which uses naked flame or open heat source, apparently until late at night.  We do not believe this building – which some of us have visited previously – has appropriate fire protection measures between floors, or of doors and walls giving onto the escape roue, or of party walls and the flying freehold.  The fact that there is no alternative means of escape from Second Floor bedrooms should surely be taken into account in the Council’s assessment and decision.

Although ‘Fan Resources’ provide considerable technical information about the fresh air and extract ducts and equipment, neither of their reports, nor the Design and Access Statement or the Heritage Assessment provide any information on:

1. The detailing of the fresh air intake grille on the South elevation: how will it relate to the mathematical tiling and underlying wall structure?  How will the internal duct connect to it?
2. How will the 500mm diameter extract duct on the Ground Floor be connected to the ancient brick chimney stack and brick flue?  How will the inevitably smaller brick flue be lined?  What disturbance will there be to the historic brickwork?  What noise and vibration will take place at this connection between 2 flues of radically differing air capacities?
3. How will the 315mm diameter air intake duct on the First Floor be connected to the 220mm square flue of the slender front chimney?  There is reference to an existing connection but no detail is supplied and no indication of whether that existing connection needs adjusting.    

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we continue to maintain that the proposed revised use and layout is inappropriate for this Grade II* building and for that location.  We retain our concern about potential associated behaviour, litter, traffic and parking problems.  We still consider insufficient information has been provided about the detailed effects of the proposals on the historic fabric of this signature building and we are increasingly concerned that there appears to have been no assessment of the need for fire protection measures.