Issue - meetings

Construction of pitched roof single storey side extension with accommodation in the roofspace at Solesbridge House, Solesbridge Lane, Chorleywood, Rickmansworth.

Recommendation: that planning permission be refused.

The application was for construction of a pitched roof single storey side extension with accommodation in the roofspace at Solesbridge House, Solesbridge Lane, Chorleywood.

The application was before the Committee as the agent for the application is a Three Rivers District Councillor.

The Planning Officer advised that there were no updates in relation to the application but clarified that the application for planning permission (agenda item 6) and the application for listed building consent (agenda item 7) were separate applications.  The application for planning permission was recommended for refusal for the reasons set out in the report and on the grounds of the adverse impact the extension would have on the character and the significance of the listed building.  The application for listed building consent related to works which directly impacted the historic fabric of the building or affected its character as a building of special architectural and historic interest.  In this case, the works which would attach the proposed extension to the existing building would involve alterations to a single storey projection which was constructed after 1958 and which was a modern structure.  The proposed works were not considered to harm the building’s special character and so the application for listed building consent was recommended for approval.

Applications 24/1360/FUL and 24/1476/LBC were debated together.

Committee members asked questions on the detail of the applications which were responded to by officers.  The Committee’s discussions included the following:

·         Objections to the application for planning permission had been received from both the Conservation Officer and Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings.

·         The scale and bulk of the proposal, and the obscuring of the view of the listed building were of concern.

·         The harm to the heritage asset was not considered to be outweighed by the benefits of the proposal.

Councillor Hearn moved, and Councillor King seconded, that the application be refused for the reasons set out in the officer report.  On being put to the vote this was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED: that the application be refused.