®Planning appeal decision
Leigh House Hotel, 1 Leigh Street, LONDON, WC1H 9EW
Creation of a new enclosed reception area at ground floor level through the removal of the former small guest room. Removal of former reception kiosk. Introduction of a double guest room and en suite bathroom on the basement floor level in the former breakfast room, breakfast room moved to rear of building in former single guest room. Introduction of a new fire escape corridor allowing escape access to the front of the building from the new basement bedroom, entailing: the introduction of a new partition between this corridor and the adjacent kitchen, swapping the location of the window and door on the basement's northern facade, re- using the door and replacing the non-original window frame with a new timber framed sash
- Authority
- London Borough of Camden
- Appeal type
- other · Listed Building Consent & Conservation Area Consent Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- other · Other minor developments
- Inspector
- Rann J
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the proposals would preserve the grade II listed building identified in the list description as "Numbers 1, 2 and 3 and attached railings, 1, 2 and 3 Leigh Street" and any of the features of special architectural or historic interest that it possesses
- the effect of the proposals on the character or appearance of the Bloomsbury Conservation Area
What decided it
The proposed basement door, fitted flush with the adjacent walls rather than in a deep reveal consistent with the building's fenestration pattern, would disrupt the strong rhythm of the listed building's elevations and harm its special interest and the conservation area's character, and this harm was not outweighed by the moderate weight afforded to unproven fire safety benefits.
The considerable importance and weight given to the harm to the listed building and conservation area was not outweighed by the moderate weight afforded to the public benefits of fire safety improvements, as the necessity of the specific harmful works was not demonstrated.
Plan policies cited: Policy D1, Policy D2
Judgments cited: Palmer v Herefordshire Council & Anr [2016] EWCA Civ 1061
The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.