West Bridgford Victorian buildings can’t be demolished by developer

An appeal from developers to knock down two historic buildings in West Bridgford has been thrown out.

Rockwood Developments Ltd first submitted an application to demolish Grafton House and Welbeck House, two Victorian buildings, in 2024, with a view to building a block of flats in their place.

In March 2025, Rushcliffe Borough Council refused the plan permission, for reasons such as the “cramped, overintensive” nature of the potential flats and a lack of “clear justification for the substantial harm” proposed to the non-designated heritage asset buildings.

A month later, the developers decided that instead of trying to get permission on the flats, they’d just knock down the buildings instead, which as owners they didn’t need permission to do.

•  West Bridgford Victorian buildings saved as council refuses demolition plans

- Advertisement -

But they still had to notify the council of their intentions, and when planning officers found out, they issued an Article 4 direction, revoking the right of the owners to knock the buildings down.

In August, the developers submitted their appeal to the original planning application.

It focused on trying to alleviate the council’s concerns regarding planning framework policy and the lack of need for more homes than are already being built in Rushcliffe, as well as the flood risk posed by the prospective flats due to floor levels and their proximity to the River Trent.

But after the temporary Article 4 direction was made permanent in September, Rushcliffe planning officers have now dismissed the August appeal.

This decision was noted by councillors at a planning committee meeting on Thursday, November 13.

The planning inspector in charge of deciding the appeal said he attached “positive weight” to the fact that the scheme would be in a “sustainable location” and would make a “positive contribution” to the housing mix in Rushcliffe.

But he said that the scheme would not represent an “adequate standard of design” and that it would be “harmful to the living conditions of existing occupiers of neighbouring dwellings”.

There is also the fact that the buildings are non-designated heritage assets, which is “not justified”.

He also noted that the flood risk issue remains unresolved.