{"id":20446,"date":"2018-10-12T17:22:02","date_gmt":"2018-10-12T16:22:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ihbconline.co.uk\/newsachive\/?p=20446"},"modified":"2018-10-12T17:22:02","modified_gmt":"2018-10-12T16:22:02","slug":"ihbcs-heritage-from-the-doorstep-wolverhamptons-iconic-royal-hospital-to-lose-nurses-home-as-costs-mean-heritage-friendly-conversion-options-not-viable","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/?p=20446","title":{"rendered":"IHBC\u2019s \u2018heritage from the doorstep\u2019: Wolverhampton\u2019s iconic Royal Hospital to lose nurses home as costs mean heritage-friendly conversion options not \u2018viable\u2019\u2026 says Homes England"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"website\"<\/a>Wolverhampton\u2019s historic Royal Hospital is a step closer to being converted under a \u00a325 million project, according to a report in Express and Star News<\/em>, but Homes England said \u2018the costs involved with converting the nurses\u2019 home into flats\u2019, as opposed to demolition \u2018would not make [the more heritage-friendly scheme] financially viable\u2019.<\/h3>\n

<\/p>\n

Express and Star News<\/em> writes:<\/p>\n

The former Grade II-listed hospital built in 1848 will house 53 flats and form part of a major scheme for 192 new homes at the site in total. A 1910 nurses\u2019 home will also be knocked down and replaced by a three-storey 24 apartment block as part of the development. The project looks set to be approved by a committee next week in the wake of advice from planning officers. The grand building came back into view on Wolverhampton\u2019s skyline last summer after the old bus depot was demolished in front of it.<\/p>\n

Barry Hodgson, secretary of Wolverhampton Civic and Historical Society, said: \u2018Anything which keeps the original hospital building and facade is a good thing for the city. I would like to see the nurses\u2019 block remain, and it is a casualty, but this is an exciting project which will retain the main hospital building.\u2019<\/p>\n

Developer Homes England submitted the planning application last year. It received opposition from Historic England which said knocking down the nurses\u2019 home would \u2018amount to substantial harm\u2019 to the historical value of the site. The view was echoed by The Victorian Society, which said the block was an \u2018attractive\u2019 Edwardian Queen Anne building.<\/p>\n

Homes England responded, saying the costs involved with converting the nurses\u2019 home into flats would not make the scheme financially viable. In a report to next Tuesday\u2019s planning committee, planning officers said: \u2018The scheme results in the loss of the former nurses\u2019 home, which is harmful to the historic significance of the Grade ll-listed former Royal Hospital building and the conservation area. However the demolition of the former nurses\u2019 home building and the harm that this would cause to historic significance, is justified in order to secure the substantial public benefits offered by the redevelopment and regeneration of this site\u2026\u2019<\/p>\n

\u2026 Wolverhampton Councillor Milkinder Jaspal said: \u2018The hospital is a magnificent, beautiful building which we need to redevelop as soon as possible. I don\u2019t want it to get into a state which no-one will want to touch. This is exactly what we need.\u2019<\/p>\n

\u2026 The hospital closed in 1997 with services transferred to New Cross Hospital. The site was acquired by Tesco in 2001, but plans for a new supermarket were dropped three years ago before it was purchased for housing. The bus depot was demolished two years ago and is also earmarked for housing.<\/p>\n

Read more….<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Wolverhampton\u2019s historic Royal Hospital is a step closer to being converted under a \u00a325 million project, according to a report in Express and Star News, but Homes England said \u2018the costs involved with converting the nurses\u2019 home into flats\u2019, as … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-20446","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ihbc-newsblog"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20446","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=20446"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20446\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20448,"href":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20446\/revisions\/20448"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=20446"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=20446"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsblogs.ihbc.org.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=20446"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}