Plans for historic Sunderland Point church have "divided the community"

Plans to install a toilet and kitchen in a 19th century former church have "divided the community" of a Morecambe Bay village.

Lancaster city councillors voted in favour of the new facilities at Sunderland Point Mission Heritage Centre, after hearing arguments from villagers who were for and against the plans.

Owners, the Mission Heritage Centre Trust, want to see the former church used for events, activities and exhibitions in future, so asked for planning permission to install a new toilet and kitchen.

But some residents are against the work being done to the Grade 2 listed building, an issue which councillors said has split opinion in the village.

A Lancaster City Council report said they had received 67 letters of objection to and 61 letters of support for the plans.

Councillor Keith Budden said at Monday's meeting: "I've never known an application this small to produce so many emails and responses, both for and against."

Three residents spoke out against the plans at the Lancaster City Council planning regulatory committee meeting at Morecambe Town Hall.

Sunderland Point resident Hazel Parkinson said the church's "value was its history and its simplicity" and that rejecting the application would "protect this building from future harm".

Another resident, Brendan Smith, said the plans were "a vanity project" from the members of the trust.

But Brian Holmes, one of the trustees in charge of the building, said "the community vision to provide a heritage centre was long-standing" and providing a disabled toilet was "essential" as there are "no toilet facilities for disabled people at the Point".

Charlotte Greenhow, planning officer, said the building had ceased to be a church in 2017, that there had been the "odd art exhibition" there since then, and that the plans would be "conserving it for future use".

But Councillor Peter Yates (pictured below), one of three Conservative councillors to oppose the plans, said: "I don't agree.

"Conservation means saving something. We have a situation here where we are not saving this building."

He proposed that the plans be rejected, which was seconded by his colleague Councillor Mel Guilding, who said: "I would like to see this rejected until a water supply application is put in."

There were also questions raised over alleged 'fixtures and fittings' which had been removed from the listed building. 

But Councillor Sandra Thornberry from Labour (pictured below), chair of the planning committee, said: "There has been a lot of talk about fixtures and fittings but my understanding was that they were neither fixed nor fitted, they were free standing."

Other councillors also gave their views on the plans, which had been changed from a previous request for two toilets in the building,

Councillor Keith Budden, Conservative, said: "It's a special community, Sunderland Point. A close-knit community. And I think it should be treated as such. I think they should have the right to make comment on all the alterations and the amendments."

Councillor Tim Hamilton-Cox said: "The Conservation Officer is saying he has no objection. The trust has a big job to rebuild trust but I can't see a planning reason on which this application can be refused."

His colleague in the Green group, Councillor Dave Brookes said: "I've not heard a reasonable reason to refuse this. I can see that it is dividing the community but it's not the council's job to be a mediator."

But Councillor Yates then said: "A Conservation Area is just that. The listing of a listed building is to protect that building. That's the only proof we need.

"The building should stay as it is. It should not be a tourist attraction. It is lethal to have a tourist attraction on Sunderland Point. That road (into the Point) is lethal. If you've got people coming from away, they will not know the danger of that tide (coming in over the road)."

Councillor Thornberry replied: "I can't see that a disabled toilet makes it a gigantic tourist attraction."

A vote then took place to decide whether to reject the planning application from the trust.

Councillors Yates, Budden and Guilding voted in favour of turning down the plans, but councillors Greenwell, Brookes, Hamilton-Cox, Bryning, King, Redfern, Boyd-Power and Bryning voted against, so the motion was defeated.

A second motion, to approve the application, was voted through by a majority, with councillors Yates, Guilding and Budden voting against, and two abstentions.

This included an amendment to the application, to ensure that some railings were retained.

Beyond Radio asked residents who opposed the plans if they would like to comment on the decision, but they declined.

Prior to the meeting, council planners had recommended the plans for approval.

A report said: "The council's Conservation Officer has offered detailed advice throughout this application resulting in the location of the kitchen area and WC being moved from the rear of the building to the front.

"Following receipt of these amendments, the Conservation Officer has raised no objections to the scheme citing that the alterations are relatively low key and would enable to the building to be understood in terms of its historic use.

"In addition, the proposed improved facilities will allow the building to become a valuable resource for the local community and given the rich local heritage and ecology in the area, and the nature of the former use of the building, the proposals seem entirely appropriate.

"However, a condition for large scale details of the new oak panelling and new oak doors is recommended, in the interest of the appearance and character of the listed building. 

"In terms of the above, the proposed alterations are considered to result in less than substantial harm to the historic fabric of the building.

"Any harm will only be permitted where this is clearly justified by the public benefits of the proposal. Given that the former church services have recently ceased and that the proposals seek to bring the building back into viable public use, the less than substantial harm caused to the building is considered justified in this instance.

"Furthermore, whilst it is noted that some of the original internal character of the building will be lost, the proposed WC and kitchenette area are considered to be simple additions to the building which would be both useful and valuable to the local community and visiting public alike. 

"Concerns have been raised within the letters of objection that all of the furniture within the building including the altar, benches and timber railings have been removed/relocated from the site.

"In this case, the council's Conservation Officer has reviewed the site and deems the items to be freestanding elements that would not amount to fixtures and fittings. As such, they would not form part of the listed fixtures and fittings of the listed building.

"In conclusion, the proposed internal works are considered to result in some less than substantial harm to the character, appearance, and fabric of the Grade II listed building. However, this harm is considered to be outweighed by the overall public benefits of bringing the building back into long-term viable use for the local community and visiting public. Consequently, subject to the pre-commencement condition for large scale details of new oak panelling and oak doors, the proposed internal works are considered acceptable."

The report also says: "It is worthy of note that the (council) are aware of unauthorised alterations to the panelling to allow for the installation of a water supply which have not yet been addressed. The agent is aware of this and intends to submit a separate application. Failure to address these points will result in enforcement investigation and action."

Talks on the plans had been deferred from last month's planning meeting, when a small sewage treatment plant to serve the heritage centre was given the go-ahead.

Related Story: Sewage treatment plant for historic Sunderland Point building gets go-ahead - Beyond Radio