# South Brink House



## Rubex (Dec 6, 2015)

This house, sitting on 0.68 Acres, was originally built in 1920. It was most recently sold in 2006 for £185,000. The house suffered an upstairs fire in 2009 which has left the place with no roof and no ceilings, and part of the rear of the building has since collapsed. The owner, an Essex businessman, applied for planning permission to build a seven bedroom Georgian style house which was later denied as being too ostentatious and the committee agreed the mix-up of styles didn’t do anything to reflect the character of the town. Personally, I think they’re miserable old buggers! You can see from the plan how lovely it could have looked:





Yet, as you’ll see from these photos, this is how the house stands to this day. 


















































































Thanks for looking,

Rubex


----------



## krela (Dec 6, 2015)

Smells like a very convenient fire!


----------



## Mikeymutt (Dec 6, 2015)

God that place looks dodgy.great set there


----------



## URBANMYTH (Dec 6, 2015)

Nice detail in your report and as always great photos well done


----------



## Freemo (Dec 7, 2015)

So the planners would prefer to have a burnt down house over a new build.


----------



## HughieD (Dec 7, 2015)

That's one poorly house. You keep find 'em Rubex. Your urbex-radar is working well...


----------



## TheNarrator (Dec 7, 2015)

Very good photos! I agree, that's a very convenient fire. The proposed building would look so much better than what's stood there now


----------



## flyboys90 (Dec 7, 2015)

Great collection.Thanks for sharing.


----------



## smiler (Dec 7, 2015)

It's peculiar how often refused planning permission and spontaneous combustion go together, I have to agree with you though, demolish it and put something else there, Well photographed Rubex, I liked it, Thanks


----------



## Sam Haltin (Dec 7, 2015)

Nice report. But with what there is left I don't think you'll get seven rooms in there, unless demolish and start anew.


----------



## Dirus_Strictus (Dec 8, 2015)

Thank God for an honest Planning Committee - hanging a Neo-classical/Georgian frontage onto the glass walled box that so called 'new money' likes to exhibit themselves to us mere surfs these days, isn't going to alter the fact that the proposed build is not only out of keeping with the area but also hideous. Burning down property that you are having planning problems with is the least sensible thing to do - all it allows is rebuilding to the same style and on the same footprint with all types of insurance fraud raising its head above the parapet. For anybody here with an odd acre situated in a conservation area or National Park that is having planning problems - propose a modern building. The present trend seems to favour architect designed modernistic structures on these locations.


----------



## krela (Dec 8, 2015)

Dirus_Strictus said:


> For anybody here with an odd acre situated in a conservation area or National Park that is having planning problems - propose a modern building. The present trend seems to favour architect designed modernistic structures on these locations.



This is generally only true if the building is built to BREEAM "excellent" standard or above, which costs a very significant sum to achieve.


----------



## UrbanX (Dec 9, 2015)

Nice one Rubex, cheers for sharing


----------



## Badger (Dec 23, 2015)

The planning will be extremely hard to get here, probably something to do with the guy who was our local Tory MP having his mansion over the road in the trees. When I was a kid, the people who owned this house ran a farm shop from there. As I recall, they didn't seem to want to be there as the guy was always grumpy-so much so that when it closed, he painted "YES! CLOSED!" on the gate..... Weren't there a few properties in this town burnt at around the same time though?


----------



## Badger (Jan 2, 2016)

Drove past the other day. It's gone now.


----------

