Fraser star Kelsey Grammer has angered neighbours after being given the greenlight to demolish a historic 200-year-old Somersetcottage.
The actor and comic, who additionally starred in Cheers, has been accused of ‘conceitedness’ and a complete ‘disregard’ for the historic constructing close to Bristol after searching for permission to knock it down.
Grammer had earlier failed in a bid to construct an extension on it – however has now been instructed ‘no prior approval’ is required to eliminate the cottage in Portishead – that’s at the very least 185 years outdated – in its entirity.
His plans have infuriated neighbours with eight letters of objection submitted revealed on the North Somerset Council planning portal with none in assist.
Considerations included lack of historic worth being misplaced, no justification for demolition, harm to rural nature, lack of greenspace and objections to future trendy designs.
However in a just lately revealed determination discover, council planners confirmed no prior approval was wanted and the demolition may very well be carried out.
Circumstances hooked up to the approval included that work should be carried out earlier than 12 February 2030.
The proposal infuriated neighbours.
One objector wrote: “We don’t want to stand in the best way of this glorious, historic cottage being modernised and future-proofed, made greater and/or extra appropriate to trendy residing.
“We didn’t object to, or touch upon, the earlier planning software, regardless of the large scale of the proposed works.
“Nonetheless, the potential of this cottage which is at the very least 185 years outdated, being razed to the bottom, shouldn’t be acceptable. We might implore the native authority to make sure that this isn’t allowed to occur.”
One other objector wrote: “I’m involved to see that the proposal to demolish a personality cottage constructed within the vernacular fashion, sited prominently on the coast highway is being thought-about.
“The event of any web site alongside this stretch of highway will harm the agricultural nature of this space and contribute to suburban unfold.
“It’ll set a precedent for additional improvement alongside this space necessary shoreline.”
One other objector stated: “It could be a really unhappy day to see a stunning outdated cottage with such wealthy native historic significance be destroyed.
“The opposite objections state fairly clearly the the explanation why demolition shouldn’t be entertained.
“If the logic for rejecting the proposed extension was stable, then the planning consent for these new builds that additionally don’t slot in with the prevailing properties within the space ought to have been rejected, however they weren’t.
“I hope the choice makers could make the best determination and never let this cottage be misplaced, however as a substitute be preserved and stored for future generations.”
One other wrote: “Completely object to the demolition of this cottage. A detailed pal of mine lived fortunately right here on this lovely cottage for fairly just a few years.
“This cottage is over 150 years outdated, historic, and a part of the heritage of this shoreline.”
The cottage is known to be one of many few properties seen on the 1840 tithe maps alongside the coast highway from Portishead to Clevedon and was initially surrounded by the thick heathland.
An extra objector wrote: “The gorgeous character of this era constructing ought to be purpose sufficient for any request to demolish to be discounted.
“If we don’t worth our architectural heritage comparable to this, then what stands in the best way of unscrupulous builders and apathetic bureaucrats? The cottage ought to be cherished not swept apart.
“Secondly, the overt and callous submission to demolish, having been refused planning permission to increase, solely serves to publicise the boastful forces at play and their disregard for NSC determination making.
“I urge the choice makers to take a stand in opposition to these behaviours, in a time the place bullying and bluster is commonplace on the world stage.
“Set a precedent now and the door is all that simpler to open subsequent time.”
Walton-in-Gordano Parish Council additionally objected and described the cottage as a “historic icon” alongside this stretch of coastal highway “that clearly invitations delicate and proportionate updating to make it right into a modest – fairly than a palatial – trendy residence.”
Map of Portishead:
The council added: “Walton-in-Gordano parish council really feel that the detailed causes behind the (earlier) refusal carry as a lot weight in relation to the present software and belief that the proposed vandalism of (the cottage) will be disallowed by as sturdy a refusal determination.”
Planning permission is granted by laws and never the native authority below the phrases ‘permitted improvement.’
North Somerset Council’s position was to find out whether or not ‘prior approval’ was required, or ought to be granted, for sure features of the ‘permitted improvement’.
The council stated: “The proposed demolition is unlikely to have a big affect upon native amenity and it’s concluded, due to this fact, that prior approval shouldn’t be required close to the tactic of demolition and the restoration of the positioning.”
Grammer and his spouse Kayte met on a transatlantic flight the place she was working as an air stewardess, and so they have been married in 2011.
Talking in 2023, the star revealed the couple had purchased a ‘little place’ in Portishead to be nearer to his spouse’s Bristolian household and deliberate to do work on it.
In an interview on the time, he stated they have been going to be “engaged on it” and would not take up residence there for some time however have been “fairly excited.”
Final yr, they sought permission to demolish all the varied extensions on three sides of the historic cottage, which have been largely constructed within the Eighties, and construct a big new extension that was as much as twice the scale of the unique constructing, in addition to put in a brand new basement.
That was turned down by planners who stated it could ‘lead to a big and disproportionate enlargement of the dwelling’, and would ‘hurt the openness of the Inexperienced Belt’.
Source link