THE FORMER BRADBURY HALL, CHATSWORTH ROAD, CHESTERFIELD. GROUP LEADER, DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT

Transcription

1 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 THE FORMER BRADBURY HALL, CHATSWORTH ROAD, CHESTERFIELD. MEETING: PLANNING COMMITTEE DATE: 17 TH MAY 2004 REPORT BY: WARD: COMMUNITY FORUM: GROUP LEADER, DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT HOLMEBROOK HOLMEBROOK AND ROTHER BACKGROUND PAPERS FOR PUBLIC REPORTS TITLE File 2/1040/G LOCATION Development Management Directorate of Regeneration Town Hall, Chesterfield 1.0 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 To consider the potential listing of the former Bradbury Hall as a building of Special Architectural or Historic Interest. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 The building has up until recently been occupied as two night club venues known as Genesis and Liberty however they have now closed and the building is unoccupied and boarded up. 2.2 Richard Robinson and John Lilley of the Brampton Living History Group have approached the Council concerning the possible listing of the buildings on then site. 2.3 Concern is expressed that Brampton is loosing its landmarks and reference is made to Brampton Brewery, Wheatbridge Works, Walton Works, Plowrights and Kent House. 3.0 THE BUILDINGS 3.1 The building on the site comprises three separate parts. 3.2 The former Fields House is a three storey coursed stone building in the centre of the site. It has a double gabled frontage beneath a slate roof with a chimney stack at its western side. The gables are stone coped with ball finials. The elevation incorporates a stone plinth and string courses together with stone mullioned windows and door surround.

2 3.3 The west elevation also incorporates a double height half round projecting bay constructed in ashlar stone with Venetian style stone window surrounds. 3.4 All windows have been replaced with pvcu as have all the rainwater goods and the front door. 3.5 Internally the building has been partially re-planned and altered without any care for the original internal features such as plaster cornices. This is especially the case at ground floor level where alterations have been carried out to allow for the night club use. 3.6 The first floor maintains its compartmentalisation however the roof of the building is in a poor state of repair and ceilings are falling in as a result of the ingress of water. 3.7 The cellars are extensive with brick vaulted ceilings however the floors have all been replaced with concrete and the original stone stair case has been replaced and repositioned with a modern timber stair as part of the re-planning referred to above. The cellars have also been altered to provide a modern drinks facility for the night clubs above. 3.8 The former Bradbury Hall is the large block added to the west and north of Fields House and comprises the main night club space of Libertys. The extension dates from the late 1920s/early 1930s and has an Art Deco theme. All the windows have however been changed to pvcu. 3.9 The former York Hall is to the east and this again is a large later 1930s style extension. Windows have again been changed to pvcu. Field House Bradbury Hall York Hall

3 4.0 HISTORY 4.1 The oldest building on the site is the former Fields House which according to records dates from the C17th and may or may not still exist. 4.2 The earliest reference is in the deeds when it was sold on 28 th March 1801 by Benjamin Thompson to John Smith, the eldest son of the founder of Griffin Works. It appears that he had been a tenant of the house prior to its purchase. At the time the house was of a c17 appearance unlike the current building. 4.3 The only part of the original house which may survive are the cellars. The cellars are large and give credence to the view that Field House was once an Inn and that the ale was brewed in them. What is certain is that Mrs Mary Smith after her husband died in 1815, built a brewery on the land immediately to the rear of the house. The business but not the premises was believed to have been sold to the Brampton Brewery. This has now gone having been replaced by late C19/early C20 housing. 4.4 The principal interest of the house lies with its occupiers rather than in the building. In the early part of the C19 it was occupied by the head of the largest industrial undertaking in Derbyshire, with its headquarters at Griffin Foundry nearby. The site of Smiths was covered with the factories of Robinson and Sons who bought them at the time. The heads of both firms occupied Field House : John Smith from 1801 till 1814 and William Bradbury Robinson from 1852 to 1867 and then as owner from 1887 to his death in The existing Cannon Mill on Dock Walk was built by the Smiths around 1788 and was the casting house for the new furnace at the time. The Smiths built the pumping engine in 1791 that was latterly in Pentrich Colliery and which is now in the Science Museum (having been working for 125 years). 4.6 Field House was rebuilt or significantly altered on four occasions, the third in 1893 by William Bradbury Robinson and the last being in 1928/9 when the house was incorporated into Bradbury Hall Canteen and Welfare buildings. 4.7 The 1893 alteration totally changed the appearance of the building to its current form and reflects its Victorian architecture. 4.8 The Bradbury Hall wing was opened on 23 rd September 1929 to provide a central canteen to accommodate 1000 diners, a public hall and a dance hall for the firms employees. It was built by local builders G F Kirk and Plowrights, the Brampton Constructional Engineers, provided the ironwork for the building. An architect was not engaged for the design but it incorporated a barrel vaulted ceiling 84 feet high at the centre and 21 feet at the sides with 12 large windows 12 feet deep. It was connected to Field House by a large corridor. 4.9 York Hall was built in 1937 as an additional dining room to accommodate 650 diners.

4 5.0 LISTING CRITERIA 5.1 The following are the main criteria, which the Secretary of State applies as appropriate in deciding which buildings to include in the statutory lists: Architectural interest: the lists are meant to include all buildings which are of importance to the nation for the interest of their architectural design, decoration and craftsmanship; also important examples of particular building types and techniques (eg. buildings displaying technological innovation or virtuosity) and significant plan forms; historic interest: this includes buildings which illustrate important aspects of the nation's social, economic, cultural or military history; Close historical association: with nationally important people or events; group value, especially where buildings comprise an important architectural or historic unity or a fine example of planning (eg. squares, terraces or model villages) Age and rarity are relevant considerations, particularly where buildings are proposed for listing on the strength of their historic interest. The older a building is, and the fewer the surviving examples of it s kind, the more likely it is to have historic importance. Thus, all buildings built before 1700 which survive in anything like their original condition are listed; and most buildings of about 1700 to 1840 are listed, though some selection is necessary. After about 1840, because of the greatly increased number of buildings erected and the much larger numbers that have survived, greater selection is necessary to identify the best examples of particular building types, and only buildings of definite quality and character are listed. For the same reasons, only selected buildings from the period after 1914 are normally listed. Buildings which are less than 30 years old are normally listed only if they are of outstanding quality and under threat. 5.2 It is clear in this case that the buildings referred to are well built and contribute to the streetscene as a result of their presence however it is Field House which contributes the most as the centrepiece of the site. The buildings are otherwise architecturally modest. 5.3 The building has also been altered on a number of occasions and it is very likely that the building which exists on the site (Field House) is the 1893 version on top of the older cellars. The cellars have lost their special interest in that the stone stair is replaced in a different location with a timber one and the floor slabs and any stone tables which would have existed have gone. The main building has also been significantly altered by changing all but 2 windows with plastic and re-planning the interior. 5.4 It is considered that the building does not have sufficient special interest to merit listing on the basis of its age, architectural value or historical association. 5.5 It is known that the owner of the site, Luminar Leisure intends to dispose of their interest and a number of discussions have taken place with housebuilders on the prospects of obtaining a planning consent. Whilst the site would be a good housing site in locational terms and replacing the current less appropriate use of the two night clubs adjacent to an existing residential area, the enquirers have been asked to consider the possibility of the reuse of Field House as part of a residential

5 scheme. This may extend to the retention of the existing south and west facades of Field House as part of any redevelopment scheme. 6.0 HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 6.1 Under the Human Rights Act 1998, which came into force on 2 nd October 2000, an authority must be in a position to show:- Its action is in accordance with clearly established law The objective is sufficiently important to justify the action taken The decisions taken are objective and not irrational or arbitrary The methods used are no more than are necessary to accomplish the legitimate objective The interference impairs as little as possible the right or freedom 6.2 It is considered in this case that the recommendation is objective and in accordance with clearly established law. 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 That the Chesterfield Borough Council do not consider that the buildings on the site have sufficient special interest to merit listing on the basis of its age, architectural value or historical association. 7.2 Consideration be given to retention of all or part of the former Field House as the centrepiece of any redevelopment scheme considered. P. STANIFORTH GROUP LEADER, DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT Further information on this report can be obtained from Paul Staniforth on