Faux pas?

[88v8]

We plan/planned a couple of small additions to our C17 cottage. Engaged an established local conservation architect who has a good pedigree, and drew up and submitted something that will/would blend in.
The CO has now come back and said they will definitely advise against, as the extensions would prejudice the cottage's simple form and unadorned appearance.

Without getting into the details, I am wondering whether we were in error in not holding a pre-meeting with the CO to discuss our intentions. Having engaged this architect chap, I would have expected him to know the appropriate moves and politics. I cannot help wondering whether the CO's response is in part because they are miffed at not having been consulted.

What do we think?

Ivor

 

[chuckey]

If your cottage is not in any special area (nat. park, conservation area...) and is not listed, then I can't see what the CO has to do with anything. Did you expect your architect to say "no you can't build that, that will be £ 100 please" ?
Frank

 

[88v8]

It is G2 listed, and it was a jolly sight more than £100 :?

Ivor

 

[LadyArowana]

It is G2 listed, and it was a jolly sight more than £100 :?

Ivor

I rather doubt that it's because they were not consulted before hand, but that's just a guess really. Before we bought our house I spent a long time reviewing planning applications for the area generally to see what got approved, what didn't, what got resubmitted with slight changes etc. it struck me that the process seemed more than somewhat arbitrary. Some CO's seemed a bit more picky than others and a great many ( obviously expensive and architect supplied ) plans were rejected. Sadly then I am not entirely surprised by your predicament.

If your local authority website gives you the ability to review other people's LBC applications, and results thereof, I would recommend that you take the time to see if there is anything vaguely similar to yours that has been approved. If its anything like my LA you will find that there is an awful lot of sifting through "tree felling" applications required, before you find anything remotely useful.

Should you be lucky enough to find something relevant it might be a pointer on how you can proceed to maybe reach a compromise on appeal or resubmission.

 

[Penners]

I am wondering whether we were in error in not holding a pre-meeting with the CO to discuss our intentions.

That's impossible to judge with certainty. For what it's worth, I think it may be factor - not because the CO will automatically turn down any application that wasn't discussed with him/her beforehand, but because, had you had this discussion before formulating your plans, you would have had a much clearer idea of what the CO would and would not approve.

Personally, I would never prepare an LBC application without first discussing my proposals with the CO. In my experience, if you approach the CO with a flexible attitude of "what I'm trying to achieve is this - how should I best approach the project?", you will usually get a lot of very helpful and practical advice. You can also be reasonably confident that, having been involved in planning the project, the CO is likely to approve your application.

 

[Flyfisher]

I can echo every word of that from personal experience of three LBC applications (same house, same CO).

 

[masochists-r-us]

I can echo every word of that from personal experience of three LBC applications (same house, same CO).

Ditto. Always discuss with CO first and as suggested by Lady A. look at what has been approved in your county previously to help you formulate your plans. Sorry, probably not what you wanted to hear, but hopefully the situation can still be salvaged.
What kind of house do you have and what were you proposing to add out of interest ?

 

[88v8]

Thankyou.

Yes, I guess we need to take a step back and start again. It's not a total washout, we also applied for a garage which it seems may go through, but that's detached and some way from the house. We're making it look 'old' but for our own benefit, rather than any Planning requirement.

The house, or perhaps cottage, is C17, mainly stone and part black & white. We planned a glazed porch on the west front (stone, oak, leads) and a conservatory at the back (stone, oak, leads). There is a lean-to at one end, age unknown but rebuilt/enlarged 1993, and a 1960s bathroom at the other end which was thatched in 1972.

One aim of the 'porch' was to link the cottage with the lean-to, which is where the washing machine is and will also be our main cupboard space. Rather a nuisance having to go outdoors to get to it in the winter, when it's raining. We discussed this with the then CO before buying the cottage, but only very briefly, our main focus was the garage which was a 'red line' for buying or not buying.

Been looking on't Council website, can see current applications but blowed if I can see how to find approvals. Onwards...

Ivor

Porch location...



Rear



And a more general one of the front

 

[Penners]

One aim of the 'porch' was to link the cottage with the lean-to

Do I understand correctly that your porch would, in fact be a kind of covered walkway across the front of the house? I'm not sure if I have properly understood your verbal description in relation to your photos, but I am imagining that the lean-to is at the right-hand end of the house (as viewed in the bottom photo), to the right of the garden bench and behind the small tree. is that correct?

If so, then to be frank I think you are going to have some considerable trouble in obtaining LBC to build a structure along that wall, enclosing both the front door and the large window (albeit with a glazed structure). This would totally alter the character of the house and tend to obscure two of its best defining features - the front door and the window.

I'm sorry that this is a pessimistic point-of-view, and I must hasten to add that I'm not an expert on this matter.

It's also entirely possible that I have completely misunderstood your proposals.

 

[masochists-r-us]

On our council website all applications outstanding,approved,refused etc appear. In fact, reviewing the refusals can actually be very enlightening with regard to what not to ask for as each application states detailed reasons for refusal too. Perhaps someone in your planning dept can help you find what you're looking for.
It's a shame that you seem to be hitting a brick wall since what you're asking for doesn't seem unreasonable, especially as the precedent has has already been set with your existing extensions.
For info, it took me 18 months and lots of dialogue with CO to get my way with one alteration which I believe was in the interests of the building and its future.
Good luck and beautiful house,by the way.

 

[MatthewC]

... it struck me that the process seemed more than somewhat arbitrary. Some CO's seemed a bit more picky than others and a great many ( obviously expensive and architect supplied ) plans were rejected.

I second that. So much seems to be dependent on the CO's personal taste rather than the interpretation of any (even vague) set of guidelines.

As for pre-application advice, when we wanted some sort of conservatory (when we couldn't have a larger extension than the existing), my wife and the architect had a meeting with the CO who said what we could have and effectively designed an acceptable conservatory for us. However, when drawn up and submitted as suggested, it was refused on the same grounds as the original application! Complete waste of time and money.

However, if Penners' interpretation above of Ivor's application is correct, then in this case I am not surprised by the refusal either.

 

[Penners]

The conservatory, being on the back of the house, may be less controversial than the "porch". But as always, the final result will depend to a considerable extent on the CO's opinion as to the effect of any addition on the character of the building.

As m-r-u commented, this is a very beautiful house, and that will figure in the CO's thinking on the application.

So much seems to be dependent on the CO's personal taste rather than the interpretation of any (even vague) set of guidelines.

I hold no brief for COs, but I must reiterate something that I have said often in the past.

It is in the very nature of listed buildings that every one is unique. That's why they're listed! It is also why it's impossible to draw up a hard-and-fast list even of detailed guidelines, let alone rules, as to what alterations will or won't be permitted.

So the CO has to rely on his/her training and a series of general guidelines that are issued by English Heritage, in making his/her decision about any LBC application. But it's inevitable that there will be a degree of subjectivity in every decision. That doesn't mean that the CO is simply relying on his/her personal taste - it just means that different people may interpret the guidelines in different ways for any given building. That is completely unavoidable.

The one common factor that will run through all such CO decisions is that they will rank the interests of the building, as part of the country's architectural heritage, above the interests of the owner who wishes to change the building. That is immutable, and anyone who imagines otherwise is, I'm afraid, risking disappointment.

 

[skier-hughes]

Our council remove all completed applications shortly after permission has been granted.

 

[88v8]

As m-r-u commented, this is a very beautiful house, and that will figure in the CO's thinking on the application.

The one common factor that will run through all such CO decisions is that they will rank the interests of the building, as part of the country's architectural heritage, above the interests of the owner who wishes to change the building. That is immutable, and anyone who imagines otherwise is, I'm afraid, risking disappointment.

Yes, you correctly interpreted my vague description.
Here is the door to the lean-to.



Considered objectively, with my DIY CO hat, the aesthetics are difficult. Not only would it obscure to a degree the mock-Tudor door and stone mullion window, but the diagonal line of the roof would cut across the half-timbering on the flank wall of the kitchen.



In utility terms it would be a great boon, linking the house to the lean-to which will contain our main storage and which already contains the washing machine. Presently, and I fear futurely, access is via galoshes and umbrella. With adroit manipulation of some soapsuds, the washing could on occasion be executed en route to the machine. I would add a at this point, but my wife who is In Charge of the washing machine is more on the topic.
Annoyingly, the previous CO gave an oral and provisional OK for the porch, it must be said having had no more than a cursory conversation over one photograph, and in fact we have subsequently discovered there was a porch there until 1972, when it fell down or was pulled down.
Heyho.

The back of the house is also rather beautiful, with the land sweeping down to the wall. Something Is Going To Be Done there, as the sitting room floor is two feet underground, with the usual results. but if we cannot get permiss for the conservatory then that will just become a gardening matter.

I am meanwhile toying with the thought of a much smaller conservatory/porch on the rear, linked to the lean-to by a cut-and-cover passageway. This would entail the creation of a new door below that window you see in the stone wall in my previous post, two staircases, a hatch through the concrete floor of the lean-to, a lot of excavation, and some sort of sump pump to deal with the inevitable leakage of the copious local ground water. It would probably be cheaper to employ a couple of dhobi-wallahs with a sedan chair for use in periods of inclement weather.
No doubt my architect would be happy to produce some elegant plans.
Hmmmph.

Ivor

 

[LadyArowana]

It would probably be cheaper to employ a couple of dhobi-wallahs with a sedan chair for use in periods of inclement weather.
No doubt my architect would be happy to produce some elegant plans.
Hmmmph.

Ivor

Do arbours, arches and pergolas require LBC if they are in the garden? Some things grow quickly and are quite waterproof.

 

[plasticpigeon]

I think it would be a real shame to alter the front of your house, the door, window and half timbering all look too nice to mess with or obscure. How about an underground tunnel to the lean to!!!! I hope one day my garden can look as mature and picturesque as yours.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

It would probably be cheaper to employ a couple of dhobi-wallahs with a sedan chair for use in periods of inclement weather.
No doubt my architect would be happy to produce some elegant plans.
Hmmmph.

Ivor

Do arbours, arches and pergolas require LBC if they are in the garden? Some things grow quickly and are quite waterproof.

No, but they might require planning permission.

Going back to the original question, is there no way to make an internal opening between the outshut and the house?
Adding what is in effect a single-storey corridor across the principal facade looks to me (both as a CO and as an architect formerly in private practice) like something that would always have been a non-starter, and I'd expect an architect who really had a good reputation for work on historic buildings to know that and not to waste a home owner's time and money by encouraging them to think it was possible.

 

[Penners]

Ahem - I don't recall writing that, Milady, nor am I normally addressed as Ivor.

Or am I?

My memory isn't what it used to be...

 

[LadyArowana]

Ahem - I don't recall writing that, Milady, nor am I normally addressed as Ivor.

Or am I?

My memory isn't what it used to be...

My apologies, an error in editing on the iPad. If it would make up for it you can call me Ivor!

 

[Penners]

you can call me Ivor!

Milady - surely you know me well enough to avoid an old joke bear-trap like that!