Architect vs Conservation Officer

[ajbaker]

An ongoing email exchange between my architect and conservation officer has just prompted an interesting question in my head.

Background. 18C 2 bed terraced cottage. GII listed. Currently tiny kitchen in horrid condition and rotten wooden outbuilding. Conservation officer approves that an extension needs to be built for comfort, aesthetics etc. etc.

I have commissioned an architect who has sketched two proposals. One fairly elaborate, and one only just meeting the criteria of creating a nice kitchen area. The simple design does not involve any removal or change of original features, simply hiding the rear of the house in the extension.

The more elaborate design includes the removal of one original interior wall and the creation of a corridor through the existing brick rear of the property, first floor.

My architects current job is to establish how the conservation officer feels about the steps required for the elaborate plan. He however has asked to see the other sketch to "consider both alongside each other."

Now I have no problem with that request, or in fact the officer himself, but it does raise an interesting question...

If he has only been asked to comment on the changes at this point in time, should his interest extend to "considering both alongside each other"? To me this sound as though he his intending to express his preference at this early stage. Is this passed his remit or am I being paranoid? I suspect the latter but thought I would pose the question....

 

[Nimster]

Does he know that you've had two sets of plans drawn up? Have you actually told him? I would be tempted to say they haven't been drawn up yet as you would prefer to go with the elaborate plan, but if that's rejected you'll revise it, rather than just submitting the simple plan. Assuming that's what you want of course.

If you give him the option of picking between the two, I suspect he'll go for the simple one as it doesn't affect the original building.

Point out that two sets of drawings will cost you twice as much, so you would rather work with the first set for now, and see what he thinks.

 

[Nemesis]

You may well have to have the second set drawn up anyhow, as removing the wall may not be approved.

Adding to existing rather than taking away is sound conservation.

 

[ajbaker]

Not so paranoid after all! The architect has informed him there are two sets. Un/fortunately price is not an issue since they are just initial sketches. Will email architect letting her know of my concern.

 

[ajbaker]

The intention of this initial consult was to gather his opinions on the issues raised by the larger extension.

If he flat out refused we can concentrate efforts on the smaller plan. However if he was willing to consider the larger plan then we could work concentrate on that and work out the details with him.

My concern is that he will now refuse the ideas of the large simply because he is aware of the existence of the smaller.

 

[ajbaker]

I guess what is most interesting is that he replied to her email almost immediately. I have had to prompt him after a week before! Hmmmm.

 

[Nemesis]

I think he may well have sussed out for himself that it is possible to do something smaller, which retains the wall, and in line with sound conservation practice for listed buildings you know!

Maybe he's very busy at times too.

 

[ajbaker]

Nemesis, that's the response my architect gave too which seems sensible - "its obvious you can do something smaller."

Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticising the fact he occasionally takes a while to respond. We all work. Just find it interesting he responded quickly to something he may well object to...

As for 'sound conservation', yes I am aware of that. This is the first time I have attempted something perhaps departing from that; the rest of the house is being returned to its former glory. I have no doubt he will weigh the issues objectively.

 

[Nemesis]

I presume the house is listed as it's a good example of a small and relatively unspoilt type.

Knocking down a wall is rather drastic, and could remove the 'historic interest'.

I'd look carefully at the less intrusive build.

In the end, you may get permission, but but the CO may recommend it with a heavy heart.

And when it's in a skip it can't be put back.

 

[middi]

In my experience CO,s are not there to put the spanner in the works, quite the opposite actually, they are there to preserve the building and any additions which are proposed, regardless of size, are judged on their own merit as to how much of a deterimental impact these will have on the existing building and surrounds.

You should have no real need for concern.

 

[Nemesis]

Removal of a substantial amount of historic fabric and alteration of the character is a cause for concern though.

 

[middi]

Quite right Nemesis, indiscriminate removal of existing fabric never goes down well with CO,s and is a sure way to get their back up.

Usually it is the main reason why( at times) owners of LB's and CO's are at loggerhead.

Lack of understanding from the owners I am afraid.

 

[ajbaker]

Guys. Thanks for your comments; please be assured I will take them onboard, and agree with you in the most part. Everything has to be taken in context.

This is one of the most unfortunate aspects of employing an architect. I knew her proposals would be far more elaborate than I had in mind, but it was the Conservation Officer who recommended I involve an architect rather than attempt the design myself, or even involve a 'draughts' person. (And yes she does specialise in conservation.)

 

[middi]

Once you have expressed your wishes and/or requirement to the conservation architect he/she will make a draft of your proposals which are more likely to be accepted by the CO.

CO's prefere to work with architects which also specialise in conservation for the simple reason that when they discuss any proposals they are more than likely to be on the same wavelength where old buildings are concerned, which results in the final drawings to be more accurate and likely to be accepted, and cheaper for you.

Good luck

 

[ajbaker]

Now I am really frustrated. Following your comments here, and thinking about the situation realistically I have come to the conclusion a two storey extension is excessive, and in no way beneficial to the property. The fact an amount of historic fabric would be destroyed is obviously a large factor in this.

However, the Conservation Officer has also out-right refused to consider a single storey extnsion the full width of the property. This would involve NO removal of existing fabric, but would enclose the lower floor of the house (including a window) within the new extension. I would not wish to remove this window or cover up the rear with plaster etc.

Several weeks before I contracted the architect he visited the property and we discussed a full width extension. He stated given the right choice of materials it would be considered, and mentioned details including materials and the obvious resistance to remove window etc. He recommended contracting an architect to help move the project along and help in the choice of materials/design etc. He is now not willing to entertain this idea, contradicting his previous comments, and leaving me 'out of pocket.' I do not consider this acceptable.

The reason I invited him to the property was to establish what would/not be considered. He had an opportunity to say no; I would have been upset but would have accepted that, and certainly would not have gone ahead with an architect to draw sketches. The issue is that he has simply contradicted himself. Perhaps his office may pay my architects fees as a result?!!

I have made a real effort to ensure everything I have done for the property has been acceptable and beneficial. I have applied for consent for many things which I know other people have simply gone ahead and disregarded the need for consent. I have made an effort to understand the officers requirements etc. and given him plenty of opportunity to guide my thoughts re the extension. Now I am really frustrated, and left wondering why I should go to all of this effort.

I feel fairly sure many of you will side with the officer, assuming there are issues I am not informing you of. Trust me, if there are, he has no stated them to me! (I should mention that he has expressed a desire to see an extension built to improve the living conditions in the house.)

My only thought is public visibility - but do not understand how this could be an issue because there are numerous factors preventing visibility to the rear of the house.

Angry

 

[skier-hughes]

Mr Angry

Did he give any reasons? If so, can you supply them?

Graham

 

[Penners]

I know someone with a listed building who wished to build an extension. The first plan was for a lean-to structure against the back of the house, but this wasn't well received.

The revised proposal was for a separate, small, single-storey building, about a metre away from the main house, and joined to the house by a "link" corridor. This meant that the existing building wasn't "smothered" by the new extension, and all existing windows remained uncovered. It also allowed the original house to be recognised as such, with no visual confusion between the old and new structures.

This idea was enthusiastically approved.

 

[middi]

You say that the CO is refusing to consider an extension the full width of the property, I am not surprised, a CO is more likely to accept an addition to a listed property if the width and height of the new addition is well defined, smaller and very "distinguishable" from the existing building elevations.

If a CO is willing to consider some additions to a listed property, he/she would not want the existing to be swamped to the point where the outline of the new merges with the old.

It is not a question of taking a CO,s side or point of view here, these are sound conservation principals to take into consideration when new additions are proposed.

I find difficult to believe that a CO accepts, in principal, some sort of addition and then refuse to consider anything at all.

I must conclude he is not happy with any of the proposals you have put forward, then again there are plenty of ar*e holes in the world from all walks of life and this can easily apply to an odd CO here and there.

 

[Penners]

there are plenty of ar*e holes in the world from all walks of life

Oh, come on Middi! Don't tiptoe around with diplomatic language. Say what you mean! :wink:

 

[middi]

Sorry Penners but my English was learned in a comunity where a two year old would tell someone to " fat off " as he couldn't speak properly yet. :wink: