Issue - meetings

Refused planning permission.

With reference to the supplementary report tabled at the meeting the Area Planning Manager, Andy Bates informed members that the applicant’s architects had made a further submission setting out their criticisms of the Councils stance, and included more detailed drawings of the various aspects of the proposal. The issues raised included internal and external insulation and roof detail.  Andy Bates submitted that whilst the benefits and disadvantages of the insulation were not in dispute, the primary consideration when considering applications within a Conservation Area was the impact on the character and appearance of the building.  He considered that the proposed development would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the dwellinghouse.  He stated that the roof details submitted were on balance considered to be acceptable as the differences in the height between buildings would not have a significant impact in the streetscene.

The Planning Manager continued that in view of a number of late changes made by the applicant including the retention of the chimney, the restriction of access to the roof of the rear extension in order to prevent overlooking and further details of the front garden treatment, reason for refusal numbers 2 and 4 should be deleted and reason for refusal 1 should be replaced with the wording as set out in the tabled supplementary. In conclusion, Andy Bates submitted that having considered the implications of the proposal on the conservation area as well as the benefits for energy savings the proposed measures would be inappropriate and unsympathetic.

Mr Alexis Rowel the applicant’s architect speaking in support of the application reiterated the relative merits and benefits of insulation.  He highlighted the ever increasing prices of fossil fuel and the need for energy efficient homes, making references to practices in support of energy efficient homes in the London Borough of Camden.