Listed building security works at The Commandery Sidbury, Worcester

What was proposed

Security works would internally board five windows and one door, and install internal bars on eleven windows in the canal wing.

“W(indow)5 – existing window on western elevation to be internally boarded. W6 – existing window on western elevation to be internally boarded. W8 – existing window on western elevation to be fitted with internal window bars. W38 – existing window on eastern elevation to be fitted with internal window bars. W39 – existing window on eastern elevation to be fitted with internal window bars. Unlabelled door between windows 40 and 39 – existing door to be internally boarded.”

“W103 - existing window on eastern elevation to be fitted with internal window bars. W104 - existing window on eastern elevation to be fitted with internal window bars. W105 - existing window on eastern elevation to be fitted with internal window bars. W152 - existing window on western elevation to be fitted with internal window bars. W153 - existing window on western elevation to be fitted with internal window bars.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The works affect part of a Grade I listed building within the Sidbury and Fort Royal Conservation Area and an Archaeologically Sensitive Area.

“The application site relates to The Commandery, a Grade I Listed Building which is located on the outskirts of the City’s historic centre in Sidbury. The site is located in close proximity to a significant number of other heritage assets including Grade II listed buildings and locally listed buildings. The site is also set within the Sidbury and Fort Royal Conservation Area, as well as within an Archaeologically Sensitive Area.”

“As evidenced within its official Historic England listing, The Commandery is a Grade I listed building of exceptional historic significance. The site itself was founded as a medieval hospital in the 11th Century, however the earliest buildings on the site date to the 15th Century (the hall range), with considerable additions and modifications from the 16th-19th Century.”

Officer report

Planning history

Previous planning history does not relate to these proposals, while three other listed building consent applications remain pending.

“As the application site is a historic building, the site has been subject to an extensive planning history, however, none of the previous history relates to the current proposals.”

“It is noteworthy that this application of one of four live applications for listed building consent on the site for various separate works – the remaining three remain pending consideration.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the works would secure a permanent Regimental Gallery exhibition and preserve the building with minimal harm.

“The works would therefore be suitably sensitive to the historic fabric of the building resulting in minimal disturbance and overall loss. The works could be reversed in the future by suitably filling the holes given that they would be made predominantly to brick and plaster – and not to materials which are traditionally harder to sensitively fill such as timber or metal.”

“As such, Paragraph 215 of the NPPF is triggered which states that ‘where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use.’ The public benefits to the proposals are clear: the provision of security measures would enable this part of the building to be used as a permanent…”

Officer report

Consultation responses

No third-party, Historic England, archaeological officer or ward councillor comments were received; the conservation officer supported the proposal subject to a condition.

“Neighbours and other third party comments: No third party comments have been received to date. Consultee Comments: Historic England:”

“The proposed installation of internal metal security artworks will have some impact on the western elevation of the Grade I Listed building and the setting of the Canal Conservation Area, though placing these to the interior of the building will ensure a consistent appearance to the glazing of this elevation, and with an appropriate design, could aid understanding of the building’s heritage, supplementing interpretation of the building’s long history.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant’s property manager spoke to the committee about the application.

Members’ discussion

Members heard that the works were needed for security and welcomed minimal fixings into mortar joints and internal boarding.

“The applicant informed Committee Members that the insurers, with security in mind, would be looking to fit stereotypical sort of prison bars, but were working with them to try and provide something more in keeping with the historic nature of the building. With this in mind work is being carried out with a metal work art company. With regard to the boarding, it was planned to put that on the inside, so it has minimal impact.”

“Committee Members were pleased to see that any fixings would be into mortar joints and would be kept to a minimum to ensure any impact to the historic fabric of the building is kept to a minimum.”

Minutes

The vote

The motion to approve was agreed with eleven votes for, none against and no abstentions.

“A proposal to approve the application had been made and this was seconded. There being no further points made the Chair requested the voting of each Member of the Committee who were eligible to vote. Following the recording of the votes the proposal was agreed as recommended.”

Minutes