Councillors Approve Martello Tower Conversion

Plans to convert historic naval defences into holiday homes have been partly approved by Eastbourne councillors.

On Tuesday (June 3), Eastbourne Borough Council’s planning committee approved proposals to convert Martello Tower 66— a grade II listed scheduled monument — into “short-term holiday accommodation”.

The committee had also been due to decide on a second and similar application concerning Martello Tower 64. Discussion of this scheme was deferred until a later date in light of what officers described as a “procedural matter.”

Before making their decision, the committee heard from Robert Adams, the applicant behind both applications.

Mr Adams said the conversions would restore and preserve the heritage value of the Napoleonic-era structures.

He said:

“My goal is simple: to preserve these towers for future generations. However, restoration comes at significant cost.

"To ensure their long term survival I needed to find a use that could generate sustainable income for ongoing maintenance.

“To support this vision I assembled a skilled team, including my architect and several experienced advisors.

"For the past four-and-a-half years we have worked closely with the ancient monuments department at Historic England. Together we evaluated a wide range of alternatives before arriving at the current proposal.

“This solution has received unanimous support from all stakeholders and [scheduled monument consent] was approved by the secretary of state without any modifications.”

He added:

“There is quite simply no viable alternative that would guarantee the towers’ preservation. Without this plan they will continue to deteriorate and eventually collapse into the sea, as many others have before them.”

The specific conversion works include extension to the tower’s roof and the construction of a new access staircase, which will lead up to a reinstated entrances at the first floor.

In a report, council planning officers had said the “alterations to the property are well-designed and in keeping with the existing structure.”

While recommended for approval by planning officers, the scheme had seen concerns raised by a number of Sovereign Harbour residents.

Speaking on behalf of some of these objectors, White Point resident Christine Earl said she and her neighbours supported the restoration of Martello Tower 66 but had concerns about parts of the proposals.

Ms Earl said:

“I applaud the officers’ recommendation of approval subject to conditions, because Mr Adams’ restoration of these historic Martellos will complement the council’s strategic plan for restoration of the seafront.

“I fully support restoring Tower 66, as do my neighbours … but it is disingenuous of the applicant to say that we received the entire proposal positively. We do have practical concerns.

“We are relieved that the proposal now no longer includes parking spaces, but feel that the planning consent needs to go further in defining exactly what traffic is allowed across this section of the King Charles III coastal path and when.”

"For their part, officers had noted how vehicular access to the site would be controlled by condition. This condition requires any use other than emergency services or consent works to gain written permission from the council.

"Objectors had also highlighted concerns connected to sea flooding work regularly undertaken by the Environment Agency (EA) in the nearby area.

"The EA had initially raised its own concerns about the proposals, but withdrew its objections subject to conditions.

"These requested conditions will require the towers to be closed while the EA carries out sea defence works in the area, which the EA notes can be “at short notice in response to adverse weather or other factors.”

However, committee members felt the proposal for Martello Tower 66 should be approved.

Speaking in support, committee chairman Hugh Parker said:

“It seems to me that Historic England have been thorough in their approach. That seems to me to be a positive.

“Not only that, our own planning department has been very, very thorough. I am sure the applicant is well-aware of that and he seems to have responded positively.

“I completely understand some of the objections that have been put forward, but on balance it seems to me to be a reasonable application.”

The committee agreed to approve the application in line with officers’ recommendations.

This saw the committee agree to leave the formal grant of planning permission to officers, which would be contingent on further consultation on the proposals with the county ecologist.

The application for Martello Tower 64 had also initially been recommended for delegated approval.

As the meeting began, however, council planning officers told the committee that there was a “procedural” issue with the application.

This issue, officers said, was related to the scheme’s ‘red-line boundary’ — a map which shows all the land to be involved in the development, including its highways access.

Officers said they had requested and received an amended version of this plan, but needed more time to follow all the procedures connected to the document.

In light of this, officers changed their recommendation to deferral. This was agreed by the committee.

For further information on the proposals see applications 240561 and 240559 on the Eastbourne Borough Council website.