Planning Search

1)

The upper ground floor extension by reason of its design and height would not be visually subordinate to the Grade II listed building and its original closet wing, disrupting the rhythm of rear additions and the established height of extensions in the vicinity, failing to protect, preserve or enhance the conservation area, harming the special interest of the listed building, all contrary to the Council's Core Strategy and 'saved' UDP Policies, in particular, CL1, CL2, CL3, CL4, CD47 and CD63.

2)

The upper ground floor infill extension by reason of its bulk, size, siting, design and position in front of the canted bay represents an incongruous addition to this Grade II listed building, harmful to the special architectural and historic interest of this heritage asset and the terrace to which it adjoins, failing to protect, preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area, all contrary to the Council's Core Strategy and 'saved' UDP Policies, in particular, CL1, CL2, CL3, CL4, CD47, CD48 and CD63.

3)

The proposed closet wing extension, by reason of its size and siting would disrupt the rhythm of rear additions on the Thurloe Square terrace, failing to protect, preserve or enhance the conservation area, harming the special interest of the listed building, all contrary to the Council's Core Strategy and 'saved' UDP Policies, in particular, CL1, CL2, CL3, CL4, CD47 and CD63.

4)

The proposed basement by reason of its design fails to protect the green and leafy appearance of the borough, fails to demonstrate the protection of adjacent trees of special amenity value and fails to provide adequate provision for landscaping, including a replacement tree, all contrary to policies of the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010, in particular policy CL2, CR6 and the Subterranean Development SPD adopted 26 May 2009.

1)

Relevant Policies Used
You are advised that this application was determined by the Local Planning authority with regard to Development Plan policies including relevant policies contained within the London Plan Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London adopted July 2011; the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010 and the 'Saved' policies of the Unitary Development Plan adopted 25 May 2002.

2)

Refused/No pre-app or discussion
To assist applicants in finding solutions to problems arising in relation to their development proposals the Local Planning Authority has produced planning policies, and provided written guidance, all of which are available on the Council's website. A pre-application advice service is also offered. In this case the proposal does not comply with guidance and policies. No pre-application discussions were entered into, but the Council is ready to enter into discussions with the applicants through the advice service to assist in the preparation of any new planning application.