Planning polices in practice
The late Beryl Brownsword, who sat on both the Society’s Executive Committee and the Advisory Panel for Bedford Park set up by Ealing Council, recorded how the Society considers planning applications.
“We ought to have a policy.” This remark was overheard in connection with the consideration of a planning application referred to the Society. If the speaker presumed that the Society’s comments on planning matters are based on the whim of the moment, be assured they are not.
The original aim of Jonathan Carr, and his architects, was to create the feeling of an English village with well designed homes set between the mature trees on 24 acres of land in west London. The character of the estate was intended to be different from that of other contemporary developments in London.
The aim of the Society, founded in 1963 when houses on larger sites were being demolished to make way for blocks of flats, was to preserve this character, depending as it does, on the protection of the fabric and detail of the houses in their setting, their gardens and the mature trees that influenced the informal layout of the estate.
Perhaps the most obvious feature affecting the “feel” of the neighbourhood is the spread of palisade fences into roads where low close-boarded fences were originally preferred. Once a precedent is set it is difficult to stop the trend, and it seems that many people think they are replacing an original feature.
Other frequent submissions are for dormers to light converted attics, conservatories to increase living space, and side extensions to accommodate utility rooms and cloak rooms. All of these have an impact on the neighbourhood, and each must be considered on its individual merit.
Semi-detached houses predominate in this area- two dwellings but designed as a single building, the symmetry and balance of which must be taken into account when considering alterations to one house. Changes made in the past may lead to the acceptance of a proposal that restores balance, even when the basic policy may be to resist.
To set down on tablets of stone objection to certain alterations would make an informed appraisal of proposals pointless. An awareness of the principles favoured by the majority of those who support the Society in its aim of protecting the historic and architectural character of Bedford Park must, and does, influence considerations of submissions, and compilations of comments to those in authority. But there are no guarantees and, in some cases, no controls to enable the refusal of permission. We can only do our best to present reasoned and reasonable arguments to support our opinions.