Property Development Project - Day 116
The assistant officer has been as good as his word and the Conservation Officers comments arrive in the post the next day.
They read as follows:
The garage/utility space extension to No53 by virtue of its relationship to the existing dwelling and the design of its roofscape appears awkward and visually inappropriate at odds with the architectural language and composition of the house. There is also some concern relating to the loss of generous spaciousness that is necessary for this building to relate comfortably to its context i.e. cramping.
Which is further exacerbated by the insertion of the additional dwelling. The design of the additional dwelling with the exception of the garage/lobby roof is not in itself a cause for concern. The totality of additional building is and this needs to be resolved if there is not to be harm to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
Recommendation – Refusal or Negotiation
This is potentially disastrous after all she is questioning whether a new house can be built at all. I can’t seriously reduce the size as it is already fairly narrow and if I reduce it to the size of a 2-bedroom house it will look ridiculous between two fairly large detached houses.
Anyway I telephone her and she remembers the application. She also gets hold of her copies of the plans so that we can discuss the proposed property development properly.
It turns out that the cramping issue is not her major concern so I can breathe again. She wants the roofscape altered for both houses. Now where the old house is concerned I did not show you my original plans since they have now been deleted; but the roof pitch for the garage was very low (20 degrees) the reason for this was to keep the existing window in bedroom 3.
The main roof pitches for the house are 45 degrees but there is minor pitch of 30 degrees for the bay window near the front door.
I tell her that I will alter the roofscape for the garage.
Now where the new house is concerned I cannot overcome her concern without some major redesign ideas. I do however manage to establish the full nature of the issues that she has and I indicate that I will redraw both schemes. I request a meeting with her so that we can consider my fresh ideas and establish any other alterations that she might want.
She say she cannot meet me for at least two weeks and suggests that I write in with the plans and she will comment on them as quickly as she can.
Now of course I have been caught out here before and know that it can take a planner a month to reply to a letter so I say I would like to book the meeting anyway and if it becomes unnecessary then we can always cancel it.
That is what we do and now I need to get back to my plans and solve the problems.
Stay tuned to Property Fortunes...
They read as follows:
The garage/utility space extension to No53 by virtue of its relationship to the existing dwelling and the design of its roofscape appears awkward and visually inappropriate at odds with the architectural language and composition of the house. There is also some concern relating to the loss of generous spaciousness that is necessary for this building to relate comfortably to its context i.e. cramping.
Which is further exacerbated by the insertion of the additional dwelling. The design of the additional dwelling with the exception of the garage/lobby roof is not in itself a cause for concern. The totality of additional building is and this needs to be resolved if there is not to be harm to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
Recommendation – Refusal or Negotiation
This is potentially disastrous after all she is questioning whether a new house can be built at all. I can’t seriously reduce the size as it is already fairly narrow and if I reduce it to the size of a 2-bedroom house it will look ridiculous between two fairly large detached houses.
Anyway I telephone her and she remembers the application. She also gets hold of her copies of the plans so that we can discuss the proposed property development properly.
It turns out that the cramping issue is not her major concern so I can breathe again. She wants the roofscape altered for both houses. Now where the old house is concerned I did not show you my original plans since they have now been deleted; but the roof pitch for the garage was very low (20 degrees) the reason for this was to keep the existing window in bedroom 3.
The main roof pitches for the house are 45 degrees but there is minor pitch of 30 degrees for the bay window near the front door.
I tell her that I will alter the roofscape for the garage.
Now where the new house is concerned I cannot overcome her concern without some major redesign ideas. I do however manage to establish the full nature of the issues that she has and I indicate that I will redraw both schemes. I request a meeting with her so that we can consider my fresh ideas and establish any other alterations that she might want.
She say she cannot meet me for at least two weeks and suggests that I write in with the plans and she will comment on them as quickly as she can.
Now of course I have been caught out here before and know that it can take a planner a month to reply to a letter so I say I would like to book the meeting anyway and if it becomes unnecessary then we can always cancel it.
That is what we do and now I need to get back to my plans and solve the problems.
Stay tuned to Property Fortunes...
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home