Monday, January 15 is an important day for Alex and Katie Clarke, owners of the George Hotel in Rye. Having had their retrospective planning application refused over the colour change for the external elevations of the George when it was redecorated in 2021, their only option was to lodge an appeal against the planning decision.
Having been alerted to the Save our Colour campaign I felt Rye News readers should be made aware of the significance and importance of this campaign and have the opportunity to add their support.
If you wish to show your support by either a comment or letter you need to register with the Planning Inspectorate no later than next Monday, January 15 using the following email address: East2@planninginspectorate.gov.uk and include the following planning references APP/U1430/W/23/3324343 and APP/U1430/Y/23/3324344.
Many of us remember how scaffolding engulfed the hotel during the rebuilding process and the disruption caused to shoppers, traders and vehicle movements. If it were to be repainted this would, of course, involve scaffolding, with the work being carried out during the summer months, which would impact greatly on the town once more. The costs, including planning fees, are estimated to be around £100,000 which would add significant financial pressure to a business recovering not only from the aftermath of the fire but also the effects of the Covid pandemic.
The existing colour has been referenced to a colour which the hotel was previously painted and during the nineteenth century it was also painted in a variety of colours, including the light brown palette you see today. Only last year, following completion of the refurbishment, the hotel was awarded the Sussex Heritage award (commercial category) a significant award which would not have been made had the panel felt that the new colour had been considered inappropriate to the town’s historic townscape.
The George is not only one of the town’s main employers, it also attracts a significant number of visitors to Rye, many of whom will use local shops, bars, cafes and facilities. The owners are now in a difficult position for the sake of a paint colour which they were encouraged to use by the same authority who rejected their planning application. Their hope is that the Planning Inspectorate will overturn the planning refusal.
Unusually, the conservation officer at the time of the planning proposal was also the planning case officer for this project and confirmed his support by email to the owners and on that basis, they went ahead. Waiting for an official acceptance would have taken months but the building was deteriorating and needed to be rebuilt and reopened without any unnecessary delays.
With the planning officer leaving his position and the colour scheme uploaded to the planning portal, Rye Conservation Society, as consultees for Rother, wrote to RDC accusing them of not following due process by failing to give them sufficient time to consider the colour scheme.
The Clarkes were advised to remove the external paint colour from their application if they wanted approval, this they did and then applied for retrospective approval which was refused.
They are now in a very difficult position and need your help. By lobbying the Planning Inspectorate using the details above you can register your views. To help you with the background to this appeal the links at the bottom of this article give you more detailed information.
Anyone can take part, you don’t have to be local or affiliated to Rye, however the clock is ticking, and Monday, January 15 is the last opportunity for you to show your support.
1. Buildings in Rye’s citadel which are not white
4. External link to Sussex Heritage Awards 2023
5. Rye Conservation Society Letter – 5th August 2021
6. Rother District Council Comments on Planning Application – 18th October 2022
7. Rother District Council report on Planning Application
8. Paint analysis report by Catherine Hassell
9. Planning report by Eimear Murphy of Murphy Associates, our planning consultant
10. Cover letter from Murphy Associates
11. Report by Heritage consultants Manor Wood
13. Examples of buildings in Rye adopting a grey palette, not favoured by the Conservation Officer
14. Letter from C Hassall, paint expert, 4 January 2024
15. Letter from client project manager, Neil Stevenson, 7 January 2024
Image Credits: Alex Clarke , The George in Rye .
I consider myself a true ‘Ryer’. I have lived and made my living here for all my life, although I now live 3 miles North of the town.
It always amazes my as to why our town is controlled by unelected officials in local government Rye has a character that can only be described as quirky. That is what makes it such an attraction to people who want to spend money in Rye.
The colour that the owners of The George Hotel considered to be to be appropriate was
obviously carefully chosen. I for one admire the boldness of it, and adds to the quirky character of Rye.
I’m sure that having gone through the upheaval of the last three or four years like the Goerge has, any business would be keen to get back to getting some income again. Hopefully this means employment and revenue for the local councils.
If the planning people want something really useful to do with our hard earned tax money, may be they should get the owners of Pontins to redecorate their main building at Camber in a less teenage bedroom colour. Oh, Rother Council are the owners.
I like the colour. It will wear well and gently fade and soften.
Hardly unelected officials! As the George is in a conservation area, any change to the exterior has to comply to the rules and clearly the owners didn’t bother to get permission. The Town Council is an elected body as is Rother District Council.
I’m not too bothered by the change in colour and there is a process for me to comment.
Whether or not we approve of The George’s new colour personally is of course subjective and a matter of taste (I have really liked it from the day I first saw it), what matters here is consistency, fair application of guidance and common sense rules as well as of course supporting a key local business which, along with The Mermaid is one of our two top rated hotels.
I am fully supportive of The George’s appeal and whilst I am not a member of the Planning Cttee (not that, as I understand it, this decision came in front of the Cttee), I will do what I can to support The George in their appeal and I urge anyone with an interest to respond and comment using the link helpfully provided in Rye News story above.
The colour must stay. It looks so inviting to stay there, a good choice.
We are often in Rye although living seven miles distant. We shop there, we eat there and appreciate the nature of the town. We have never been in The George, although the High Street is a source of interest.
There is a picture of the new facade at the top of this page, for comparison go to Google Earth Street Level and compare it to the dull, dreary, miserable appearance of the grey paint which previously adorned that historic building and decide for yourself which is the better.
Far from me to influence you, but I know which I prefer.
If RDC Planning do not now like it they should have had a more efficient through put of planning applications so that the whole proposal could have been dealt as one, then the owners would have been able to get on with the rebuild knowing excatly what they could do to keep the planners on side.
There is a subtle difference between “quirky” and “gaudy”. If, as Janet suggests the colour fades, it would be an improvement on the current hue. It is important for business owners and private residents alike to wait for actual approval, not assume rights of their own choice. Sorry to pour cold water on the subject, but those who choose to push at limits have to stand accountable for their actions and avoid shifting the blame elsewhere. Don’t they still?
Maybe a neon sign next?
I don’t care one way or the other about the colour, but I agree with Kate Humphreys that the owners, being clearly astute businesspeople, should have known they had to apply for planning permission and then waited for said permission before going ahead. It feels like this is one of those occasions where someone made the decision to take a risk, so it’s rather disingenuous of them to now expect the town to rally round them on the basis of the cost and disruption of rectifying their own deliberate action.
But why we shouldn’t support them? Rother Council recently gave retrospective planning approval to two ghastly backlit signs at the New Road roundabout which add absolutely nothing to the character of the town. Quite a different situation to a business that brings a liveliness to Rye, employees many local residents, has recently recovered from a devastating fire and then the pandemic. And the hypocrisy of it all is stunning. The High Street has a lime green building and a racially insulting slur as the name of a Mexican restaurant (and new unapproved paint), which the council doesn’t seem bothered about. And the number of High Street buildings in need of new paint and a good washing?
Why is The George being singled out? There is a growing number of obvious examples around the town of significant external colour changes that appear to not have been the subject of an application, let alone received consent. One wonders what action is being taken to have appropriate decorative schemes reinstated by other owners too?
It seems unfair to me that the George is having so many problems when Los Gringos, 7 High Street, Rye is the paint colour it is and hasn’t applied for planning permission either.
Whether people like the colour or not is irrelevant . As others have mentioned there is a planning process to go through. After the fire and planning permission was obtained did the owners apply to change the colour within the planning permission?. If not then they should have. There is no excuses for submitting retrospective PP/Conservation ,especially when the owners had such a long time to apply prior to work commencing. One major issue is Conservation officers are not consistant and haven’t been for decades.
The question should also be asked as to why so many shops in the town are painted grey. The town looks very drab for much of the time.
The present colour is absolutely hideous, a shocking eyesore – and the sooner it goes, the better. The reasons listed in the article as to why it should remain are unconvincing at best and spurious at worst. Very surprised that the article seems to advocate for the owners of The George by presenting template arguments rather than simply reporting on the fact of the appeal and advising readers how they can make their views known to the planners.
What a waste of public money by RDC. Leave the colour as it is, it will fade in time. The last thing Rye needs is yet more disruption in the High Street.
The George is not the first to do something without permission in Rye and as the colour is similar to a previous one, I see No problem.
We had a purple ice cream shop on the High street.
Addition to houses often are done with retrospective planning.
We don’t need another year or more of scaffolding and shutting a big part of the High street.
I understand about consistency of rules but in the years I have lived here I have not seen this from the planning department.
A lovely inoffensive earthy warm colour. Why waste money changing it, not to mention the associated upheaval it will cause in the high street. Business is hard enough in the current climate. Leave it as it is, but perhaps a donation to the food bank might be in order!! Surely with all the misery and uncertainty in the wider world there are much bigger things to get stressed about.
The colour is of its period. It’s cheerful, warm and inviting. It must stay.
‘Of its period’ is a red herring. Eau de Nil and Apricot are art deco colours, but you wouldn’t expect Marine Court in St Leonards to be painted in either of those colours regardless of the fact that both would be ‘of the period’. What is important is the harmonious effect on the immediate surroundings; regardless of personal feelings about the colour, the fact that the new colour stands out is beyond question. The effect is **not** a harmonious one. It’s also a bit disingenuous for supporters of The George to imply that repainting the exterior elevation will involve months and months of scaffolding – that simply isn’t true. Last time the scaffolding was erected there were building works being carried out. Repainting would be a comparatively swift job.
What do you call “comparatively swift”?
The scaffolding alone will cost tens of thousands and take a while to erect.
You have described the colour as an hideous eyesore but also state that whether or not you like the colour is irrelevant.
Would you have given such a strong argument to the rules if you liked the colour?
If you’re so passionate about eyesores maybe a walk round the outskirts would really give you something to complain about.
Hear, hear!
Good grief. What a teeny tiny world some live in. A goodly part of our planet is being terrorised, bombed, starved, hounded, hunted, and kicked into hell. And what is a rather sedate and soon to be fading colour on one of the high street is of such concern? Really? Anyone being killed, molested, terrorised, stc. by the colour of this building? Well, why not take all the money that would go into re-painting it and actually use it to do something with real meaning? E.g., give it to the local food bank; donate towards Sea Cadets nicked van replacement; pay it into heating accounts for some freezing local old people (there are real poor people in Rye, shock, horror). There’s a lot to be said for some perspective in this matter.
Being ‘Harmonious’ may also be a red-herring. “Forming a pleasing or consistent whole” or “looking, tasting, or working well together” is an entirely subjective matter, which in this case does not necessarily mean blending in.
A landmark building like The George must be considered using established historic townscape and conservation terms, where the distinctive qualities of the current decorative scheme may have merit for that very reason – they define it as one of the most notable buildings in Rye and therefore could be considered contextually ‘harmonious’ in a broader sense.
I certainly find that to be the case.
I support keeping The George the colour it is.
The whole planning process reads like a complete cock-up from beginning to end so even if you don’t like the colour I don’t believe that the costs should be imposed upon The George at this time and the inconvenience imposed upon the residents of Rye that scaffolding (yet again) would bring.
If the colour has to be changed then surely it makes sense to leave it until external redecoration is necessary anyway. Even the Sir Herbert and Lady Gussets of Rye ought to be able to put up with it until then!
PS at the AGM of the RCS in 2022 (and of course we RCS members know best) we had a show of hands on whether the colour was good or bad. There was a 50/50 split I recall. Just Sayin!!!
Planning Law is not a matter of “who likes/doesn’t like the colour” though, it’s a matter of considering the harmonious effect on the immediate surroundings. Just as importantly, shrugging and letting the matter go will formally establish a precedent which would make it much easier for unscrupulous developers to ignore planning decisions and overturn refused applications for neon signage, satellite dishes and the like.
Applying for retrospective planning seems to be the latest trend in our society.
I needs to be curtailed as it’s becoming more frequent.
I personally don’t like the colour it’s to brassy but like most things it becomes normal the more times you see it a bit like a wart.
It is widely known that there is good taste and bad taste.
I would suggest that those who love the warm earthy colours of NATURE belong to the good taste category.
The shades also mirror the original colour of the bricks. Let us hope these lovely colours do NOT fade
There’s a simple question to be answered here – did The George deliberately ignore planning process or were they misled and misinformed by Rother officers ? If the former then I would suggest the colour be allowed to remain for practical reasons alone and The George should pay a fine equivalent to or greater than the cost of redecorating which Rother should allocate directly to the benefit of Rye. If the latter then Rother should accept their part and n the outcome and not waste any further public money in pursuing the matter
I refer to your piece about the George and the colour scheme. The Rye Conservation Society together with others objected to the new colour scheme in August 2021 but the George owners went ahead. Rother Council then turned down their retrospective application. However we have advised Rother Council and the Appeal process that we would not wish to see the original colour scheme enforced at this stage, given the commercial and other disruption that would be involved. It will not be long before repainting falls due when the George would need to make a new planning application. I would like to add that the planning rules are in place to protect our cherished Conservation Area, but no doubt there will be continuing lively debate about the appropriateness of different colours.
… in what circumstances would a Planning Application be required for future maintenance repainting, if such repainting does not deviate from what is eventually agreed and consented through this current process?
There is a reason why certain structures are listed and why, certain areas are ‘conserved.’
The current owners, I say, current owners, given the age of The George, knew what they were doing. Rye has lost an incredible amount of its historic fabric; several centuries worth, through a series of ‘renovations’ to many of its unique structures. This choice of colour, if not addressed properly, will give a green light to any who do not respect Rye’s unique historic fabric. The result will be an onslaught of retrospective listed building consent. We are fast losing what makes Rye Rye.
Agree with AmyB.
Rye News should report the controversy; not offer a template for commenting on an appeal, backing the appellant against the Planning Department.
One problem may be changes of Personel at Rother, but I understand there were several unauthorised changes made as the building work progressed, on the assumption that retrospective approval would be granted.
I also understand that the wall colours were accepted, but that the window colour wasn’t.
The only positive I can see, is that the different colours emphasise the separate Regency and Georgian façades.
And what about plastic frontage of the library David, did Rye Conservation object to that,and why was it allowed in the heart of the conservation area.
Or the neon sign on the Mermaid Cafe in Mermaid Street too?
There is no doubt that the colour scheme blends right in with the High Street
It’s a palette that has been used before on the George
I really like the way that the different buildings that make up the George are painted in different tones of the same colour.. which made me look at the building afresh and understand it better
Forcing it all to be repainted cream , what an expensive own goal that would be for the town
We think that the present colour is totally in keeping with the character of Rye High Street. When you consider the enormous challenges that the Clarke’s faced in restoring the hotel to its former glory we should all be grateful for what they have achieved. How lucky we are to have such a splendid hotel in this ancient town.
I’ll probably ruffle several feathers here, but I can’t see what is wrong with white masonry and black paintwork? Some people cite seagull waste as a culprit, but surely that needs to be cleaned away, whatever colour the building? With narrow streets, light coloured buildings attract more light, dark coloured do not.
And most of the above posts tell us why, in this country next to diddly squat gets done, or if it gets done it takes ten times longer than it should. This is not a slur on those that have contributed posts but merely an observation.
Too much ‘nymbism’ a lot of subjectivity, too many planning ‘experts’ throwing their weight around, self-righteous out of touch planning departments, burdensome and sometimes archaic regulations and ‘Conservation Societies’ who clearly ‘know better’ than Joe Public.
Mix them all together and you arrive at a ‘planning methodology’ which in this country has developed into just another facet of its managed decline.
Oh, and for what it’s worth, I quite like the colour.
Thank goodness there is nothing more important to worry about in Rye than the colour of a building.
Just leave the colour. Looks great and we dont need it to change. I agree with Michael Jones, why is the George being singled out? There’s a bright lime green building a few doors down!
Exactly Margot! I have however sent a letter into the planning department hoping they may reconsider and have a more balanced approach.
How one must agree with Paul Camic, just look around the high street, Terracotta frontage on the apothecary shop and on the craft shop, the lovely Boots blue, and plastic windows fronting the library, where was the hue and cry from Rye Conservation Society, when these were approved, and by whom.
Can someone explain to me who and what the conservation society are, are they elected, self appointed or appointed by the council.
It’s the word “society” that conjures up visions of enthusiasts sat round a table discussing old relics.
How much clout do they have and can they be overruled by elected members of whichever council it involves.
As I live inside the conservation area I think these are valid questions.
The Conservation Society is a voluntary organisation independent of local authorities.
https://www.ryeconservationsociety.org/
The Conservation Society has been operating as a voluntary body of people interested in the buildings and townscape of Rye for the past fifty years. Currently we have over 200 members, mostly living locally. We seek to protect the town from inappropriate development and to keep the things that make Rye an attractive place which to live. Currently for example we are discussing how broadband cabling can be installed less intrusively on listed buildings. The Society has an elected committee and holds AGMs and other functions. Anyone can join and take part, all activity is carried out by volunteers. The Society comments on planning proposals but decisions are made by the local council, Rother in our case with whom we can raise concerns. I would be happy to discuss further with you, but I can assure you that old relics do not often concern us unless you put the Landgate in that category.
Thank you to David and Andrew for your explanations.
Our good friend who lives in Victoria Lodge ( the old fisherman’s school ) opposite skinners garage was so impressed with the Terracotta colour scheme of The George he used it for his redecorated frontage and looks extremely pleasant on one’s eyes , it may not please everyone’s taste but let’s allow people to have their own choice its not a ghastly colour and it wouldn’t do for everyone to have the same likes and dislikes.
The most worrying issue is probably the inconsistency shown by RDC’s planning division — especially when dealing with planning applications in Rye Conservation Area. As several commenters have pointed out, why have other buildings in the High Street been allowed non-traditional facade colours and why were bright electronic advertising screens controversially permitted at the petrol station roundabout, which is also inside the Conservation Area? Neon signage, electronic screens and illuminated signs in storefronts (such as those in estate agents) are a growing threat to Rye’s historic character. Many of these signs in fact contravene the law relating to Conservation Areas and illuminated advertising in general. In the case of the electronic advertising screens at the A259/A268 roundabout, National Highways allowed them with certain conditions, but my strong suspicion is that this installation is the first time in the south east (or nationwide) that driver-distracting bright electronic screen advertising has been permitted on an ‘A’ road roundabout. If National Highways has sanctioned electronic screen advertising on ‘A’ road roundabouts elsewhere in the country, I’d be delighted if they could inform us where these locations are.