Pub owner makes further bids to remove tiles

Pub owner makes further bids to remove tiles.

The owner of a Brighton tavern has made two new bids to remove all of its original green tiles.

Charlie Southall is set to face trial for failing to comply with an enforcement notice to restore the tiled facade of the Montreal Arms in Hanover. Meanwhile, he is appealing the council’s refusal to approve an application to remove all of the tiles and replace them with copies.

In addition, he has sought for a certificate stating that the enforcement notice is now invalid because it is impossible to comply with it while also implementing his approved strategy to restore the tiles.

Brighton and Hove City Council denied his June plea to remove two conditions from his previous year’s approved application to restore the tiles.

The first states that the council must agree in writing on how the tiles will be restored, while the second states that all intact tiles shall be maintained unless the council agrees. Mr Southall’s wife, Viktorija Garskaite, wrote the application, which stated that professional advice indicated the conditions were a barrier to development.

In its September judgement, the council stated: “No new information or reports from any professionally qualified surveyor or heritage surveyors have been submitted as part of the application.” just repeats of the those which were considered as part of the approved application.

The applicant has made statements stating that the condition of the property and the proposed works require the removal of all existing tiles in order for the works to be implemented, which have been noted but not supported by any previously submitted or current reports from professionally qualified persons.

“The LPA has repeatedly requested that the applicant provide additional expertly assessed information to justify why the variation of the conditions in the manner suggested is required, as well as why any material considerations have changed from those previously considered to support the rationale for the conditions being imposed in the manner they were.

“The applicant has refused to provide any additional expertly assessed information.”

Mr. Southall filed an appeal against the rejection this month. His latest application claims that the enforcement notice, which was issued in 2022 and later changed and affirmed on appeal in 2023, is no longer valid because it contradicts the planning permit obtained in 2024.

argues the fact that the notice requiring tile reinstatement contradicts the planning authorisation, which allows for further tile removal and progressive reinstatement.

It reads: “Inconsistency detected. The enforcement letter requires full reinstatement by July 17, 2024.”The planning authorisation lawfully authorises works such as tile removal and façade improvements, and also enables for construction to begin at any moment until June 6, 2027.

“It is impossible to comply with both simultaneously.”

Read more on Straightwinfortoday.com

Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.