The Ashdell Campaign | "The very heart of Sheffield's Victorian heritage"

April 1999
"THE VERY HEART OF SHEFFIELD'S VICTORIAN HERITAGE"

Letter of objection to Sheffield City Council (April 1999), raising the key points against the proposals.

Mr. N. Bajaria,
Head of Planning Transport and Highways Development,
Town Hall,
Sheffield,
S1 2HH

Re. Application no. 99/0202P
5 storey block of flats at land between Stephenson Hall, Oakholme Road and Ashdell
& Application no. 99/0203P
5-storey block of flats and 6 dwelling houses between numbers 8 and 18 Oakholme Road

Dear Mr. Bajaria,

I write to express my objection to the proposed developments above. Although I am now resident in Newcastle, I spent the previous six years in Stephenson Hall, and would not wish future generations of students to be deprived of the amenities and environment I was able to enjoy.

You may recall my previous objections to a proposed dwellinghouse on the front garden of Ashdell (Application nos. 98/0307P & 98/0308P LB). Thankfully, that particular application was turned down, and a corner of Broomhill's Victorian heritage was (at least for now) saved.

The new proposals, if anything, will be even more damaging to the historic, environmental, aesthetic and amenity quality of the area.

General comments relating to both applications
Overdevelopment, and loss of attractive and historic green settings
One of Broomhill's greatest assets is its green, open and leafy character, with generous open grounds that form the garden settings of important and attractive Victorian villas. Since Broomhill was designated as a Conservation Area in 1977, its green spaces have been progressively eroded, but it can be argued that the essential character of the area around Oakholme and Ashdell Roads has been kept intact. However, the proposed developments would threaten this character more than ever before, as well as involving the loss of mature trees and a vital green lung for the city, and constituting a significant increase in the density of occupation.

I would wish to reiterate Policy BE16 in the Sheffield UDP- "Development in Conservation Areas"- which states that in Conservation Areas, planning permission will not normally be granted:

"for built development in existing gardens and local open spaces except where it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area".

Further support for this view is contained in PPG15:

"The Courts have recently confirmed that planning decisions in respect of development proposed to be carried out in a conservation area must give a high priority to the objective of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the area. If any proposed development would conflict with that objective, there will be a strong presumption against the grant of planning permission".
(Paragraph 4.19)

I would suggest that if these policies in PPG15 are properly applied in these cases, the proposed development of these open spaces cannot possibly be admissible, since there can be little doubt that they will neither "preserve" nor "enhance" Broomhill Conservation Area.

Traffic
Development at the densities envisaged would lead to increased traffic (and greater risk to school children, students and other local pedestrians trying to get around safely), with more pollution and congestion in an area that is already vehicle-clogged and dangerous at peak times of the day.

Practical concerns
The residents and staff of Stephenson Hall appreciate the need, and make every effort, to respect the fact that the University is just one part of a much bigger local community, and try extremely hard to foster positive relations with nearby residents. However, in a large student community, some degree of noise and disruption is unavoidable.

However, the siting of the flats (99/0202P) next to the kitchen service yard and bar area of Stephenson Hall, in particular, seems to defy logic. These areas take daily deliveries by lorry (both in term time and vacation conferences), are near to where discos and other hall events are held, and will face onto the road that forms the main route for returning students between the Broomhill shops and bus stops, and Stephenson Hall. Assuming that anyone wishes to live here in the first place, I can foresee the complaints about student noise that are likely to arise from the residents of this new block.

Application 99/0202P
The loss of the tennis courts will be a major amenity loss in an area that has undergone increases in student numbers, but a reduction in facilities. In recent years, tennis courts have already disappeared at Crewe Flats (now covered by Betjeman Gardens and Oakholme Mews), Halifax Hall and Tapton Hall. The ones at Stephenson are among the last remaining. Pupils from Birkdale School have also been able to use and enjoy the facilities as part of their PE curriculum, and their loss will therefore be felt both by students of the University and the wider community.

The plans also suggest that The Dell, part of the gardens around Ashdell House, will be lost to development; at the very least, the development of the adjoining greenspaces will have a significant and detrimental visual and overshadowing impact. As I noted in my successful objections to the earlier applications (98/0307P & 98/0308P LB), the grounds of Ashdell are an essential part of the building's setting. I also noted the suggestion that they are the work of Robert Marnock (responsible for the nearby Botanical Gardens), and the assertion that the garden may be worthy of inclusion on the Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest, maintained by English Heritage.

I also refer to the City Council's own document- "Sheffield's Historic Parks and Gardens", published in 1997, which recognises Ashdell as one of the city's most important gardens. The existence of that document would suggest that the City Council is serious and positive about protecting Sheffield's landscape heritage. Yet, if the Council was to permit a development that had a negative impact upon Ashdell's garden, it would certainly raise questions about their commitment to this document. In my view, the entire report would be worthless, and the whole concept of protecting these important gardens would be fatally undermined.

Application 99/0203P
The proposed demolition of Heatherleigh, and its replacement with modern flats, is of particular concern. Although not a listed building, it does sit within the Conservation Area, and is a well-built, attractive Victorian villa within a generous garden setting. As such, I would draw to your attention Paragraph 4.27 in PPG15, which states that "the general presumption should be in favour of retaining buildings which make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of a conservation area". Noting that demolition of buildings in conservation areas "should be assessed against the same broad criteria as proposals to demolish listed buildings", the main implication of Paragraphs 3.16-3.19 is that demolition is only acceptable in exceptional circumstances, most usually where the building is in a poor state of repair, or where efforts to find an alternative viable use have failed.

I would argue that neither of these circumstances apply with regard to Heatherleigh. Firstly, the building is still occupied as University Halls, so is clearly in a reasonable and habitable state. Secondly, there is no reason why the building could not be retained, and returned to private residential use. The sensitive conversion of Heatherleigh to private apartments would be much more appropriate than its demolition and replacement, probably with a building that would display nothing of Heatherleigh's prestige, grandeur or aesthetic value, and be at odds with the architectural character of this area.

Additionally, the Victorian garden at 8 Oakholme Road is one of the most unique, best maintained and attractive in the area, and its disappearance beneath new development would be an unjustifiable and very sad loss.

Conclusions
The area threatened by the proposed developments is at the very heart of Sheffield's Victorian heritage. The University should not be allowed to sacrifice the historic and visual character of the area in the interests of short term financial gain, and its disregard for local opinion and concern flies in the face of efforts among staff and students alike to work together with local residents in the common interests of the wider community.

The issues raised about traffic, noise and loss of amenity are significant and fundamental. However, it is the destruction of historic gardens and open spaces, and the impact of new development both upon the setting of existing buildings, and the whole character and townscape of this area, which is the gravest cause for concern.

I urge officers and members to listen to the views of all those who know and love this area, and to act in the long term interests of the city's heritage by refusing permission for these damaging and ill-conceived developments.

Yours sincerely,

Graham Soult
Researcher in Architecture and Planning

[Back to The Ashdell Campaign homepage]