Under the proposals, a caretaker’s home to the rear of the Masonic Lodge would have been demolished to make way for five one-bedroom, and one two-bedroom rental flats.
However, a nearby resident wrote to the Planning Department to object to the plans, stating that the proposed development would ‘blight’ the area.
The letter adds: ‘My husband and I, as well as many house owners in the area, were horrified at the sheer scale and height of this development, particularly in an area which consists of many period properties, the majority of which have been maintained with a great deal of love, hard work and constant maintenance, to the highest standard.
‘Unfortunately, however, we understand that the development will proceed, and, despite years of protest, the scale of the works and number of units to be included has reduced only minimally.’ The National Trust for Jersey also objected to the plans, stating that ‘the height and style of the proposed flats would be detrimental’ to the streetscape, which is made up of many listed buildings. The trust added that in its opinion the third floor of flats should not be allowed and a pitched roof should be added so that the building was ‘sympathetic’ and had ‘reference’ to the
other properties on the road.
Planning officer Elizabeth Staples recommended that the application be refused, as she said the proposals were contrary to policies within the Island Plan. A senior officer within Planning has since agreed with her recommendation and a decision notice explaining why the scheme was refused has now been sent to the applicant.
Although the removal of the caretaker’s building is not objected to and it is accepted that better use could be made of the site, Ms Staples said the proposals failed to provide ‘appropriate preservation or enhancement’ of the temple, which is a listed building.
The decision notice states: ‘The scale, mass and design of the proposed replacement building would be out of character and detrimental to the street scene in general and to other properties in close proximity, including the setting of adjacent listed buildings, by reason of overlooking, shadowing and an overbearing impact.’
When the plans were unveiled earlier this year, the Provincial Grand Master of Jersey’s Freemasons, Kenneth Rondel, said that due to the age of the Masonic temple it cost the organisation about £2,500 in annual maintenance. He added that money raised from renting out the flats would help pay for the temple’s upkeep.
