Planning News — New Application to Build Homes Around West Street Church


Planning News
Planning Number: 20/04312/FULL
Date Received: 25 / 11 / 2020
Registration (Validation) Date: 07 / 01 / 2021
Consultation Start Date: 07 / 01 / 2021
Earliest Decision Date (Consultation Period Expires): 10 / 02 / 2021
Target Date for Decision: 04 / 03 / 2021
Location: St Marys RC Church, 82 West Street, Dunstable, LU6 1NY
Parish Name: Dunstable
Conservation Area: Dunstable
Listed Building Grade: Ecclesiastical Two
Environmental Assessment: Not available
Expected Decision Level: Not available
Description: Demolition of Presbytery. Erection of a block of 8 flats and a bungalow and associated works.
View all documents: LINK
Recommended Reading in Full - Design and Access Statement: LINK
Submit a Public Comment Online: LINK


An entirely new plan has been drawn up to build on space surrounding a Roman Church off West Street, Dunstable. The previous plan was for 10 dwellings on this site and three-storey in height. That was refused planning last summer.   The church was put on the National Heritage List for England on 18th May 2020 at grade II.

Listed building consent is being sought  for  the  demolition  of  the Presbytery, built after 1948. Marian Hall, at the rear of the church was demolished at the end of 2020.  Badgers from underneath the Hall were removed prior to demolition with a license from Natural England to do so. 

It is proposed to demolish the Presbytery and erect a block of 8 apartments on two storey on the site of the Presbytery and a bungalow on the site of the former Marion Hall. The bungalow would be for use of the Fr Brennan.

Detached bin stores and cycle store are proposed along with parking for 15 cars. Of these spaces, there would be 1 allocated parking space per flat, 2 spaces allocated to the proposed bungalow and 5 visitor spaces. The existing access is proposed to be widened.

One of the reasons for the proposal is to fund £200,000 of urgent repairs said to be required to the church.

The new application addresses the concerns raised in the earlier refusal. The height of the buildings proposed has been reduced, archaeology reports have been included and drainage has been addressed.








Source: