Work to listed home 'harmed heritage'
HISTORIC features lost during "unacceptable alterations" to grand Amberley Court have been inspected by planners.
Some 33 contraventions of listed building rules at the 200 year-old mansion were discussed on a site visit for an informal public inquiry.
-
Amberley Court entrance
Government inspector Anthony Davison heard from Stroud District Council's Jamie Cooper and Kate Russell the alterations had caused substantial damage to the "important heritage asset".
The council officials also listed 78 steps needed to restore the house to its former glory. But experts representing Amberley Court's owner Dr Mark Harrison, said the alterations had not been harmful.
Sunday and Monday evenings £12.00 per head for an all inclusive meal with Indian and Thai cuisine (normal price £14.50).
Bring this voucher to the restaurant complete with your name and email address on it.
Terms: Expires 31st July
Contact: 01452 223782
Valid until: Wednesday, July 31 2013
The inquiry hearing was opened only briefly at the council's Ebley Mill headquarters before it adjourned to Amberley Court.
The 200 year-old house, off Theescombe Hill, is said to have been the real house where the Victorian novel John Halifax Gentleman was based. Its interior had largely maintained a late Regency/early Victorian historic character until Dr Harrison carried out alterations, repairs and refurbishments.
The council took enforcement action, Dr Harrison appealed, and the inquiry was triggered.
A summary of the council's case aid: "Certain alterations ie the installation of wooden panelling on walls ... of halogen spotlights, limed oak architraving and of two panel lined oak doors are repeated often throughout the building. The totality of the works has done substantial harm to the listed building."
But planning consultant Andrew Williams and heritage architect Stephen Levrant, for Dr Harrison, said they'd thoroughly researched the building and its significance.
"My client's case on appeal is that many of the alterations do not cause harm and that listed building consent should be granted for the work," Mr Williams added.
"It is fundamentally incorrect to describe the house as Regency," he said.
It was the "eclecticism and degrees of variation" at Amberley Court which formed its character and significance.
"That has been misinterpreted or even ignored by the council," he said.
However both Dr Harrison and the council officers were in accord over many elements and both parties continued to work together, he added.
Comments
by FreeRadical1
Friday, October 12 2012, 4:36PM
“Dr. Harrison is starting to look like someone who doesn't think that rules apply to him.”
by TimMessanger
Thursday, October 11 2012, 1:00AM
“Dr Harrison is also currently unable to practice for up to 18 months after he earlier this year appeared before an interim orders panel of the General Medical Council.
The hearing took place after a BBC London investigation alleged he encouraged nurses to order Botox drugs in one person's name for use on another.
The GMC had earlier banned doctors from remotely prescribing injectable cosmetic medicines like Botox on the phone, fax or on-line without a face-to-face consultation.
A GMC spokesman said the suspension was while an investigation decided whether Dr Harrison should also face a fitness to practice panel.”
by FreeRadical1
Wednesday, October 10 2012, 6:18PM
“If you want a modern home, then buy a modern home. Don't buy a listed building and ruin it.”
by Douglasknows
Wednesday, October 10 2012, 11:09AM
“Should have left the house unsold and empty and allowed it to decay, not make it fit to live in. That would have have pleased the the council!”
by Matt1006
Wednesday, October 10 2012, 9:47AM
“So the consultants employed by Dr Harrison "thoroughly researched the building and its significance", but still allowed him to carry out a multitude of works on the LISTED building without gaining consent first. I'd suggest Dr Harrison does not employ the same consultants again, should he chose to do any further works (on this property, or any other).
The idea is that LBC is applied for (and approved) BEFORE any works are done. So the comment from Mr. Williams stating "...many of the alterations do not cause harm and that listed building consent should be granted for the work...".
The rules apply to all, Dr. Harrison. You have undertaken unapproved works to a Listed building, which is a breach of the rules. Whether the works have or haven't harmed the heritage of the building is for the inquiry to decide, but doesn't get over the fact that works requiring prior consent have been carried without permission. Tut tut.”