Charity continue windows row with Telford council

Change of use plans approved were approved last year allowing the charity to move into the former Barclays Bank building at 23 Church Street.

Applicant Telford Investments Limited wanted to change the windows as part of a change of use application, but faced an objection from the council’s conservation officer so withdrew that part of the proposal.

However, after the charity spent its first winter in the building the applicant says that it became ‘very evident’ that the existing metal framed, single glazed windows ‘have failed, are no longer fit for purpose and are thermally inefficient’.

The applicant submitted an application to Telford & Wrekin in April to replace all the existing windows and cladding with grey uPVC windows.

“The proposal also includes the modernisation of the exterior of the building including replacement of the existing pebbledash cladding panels with a self coloured render finish,” added the applicant in their planning statement.

“The proposed replacement windows will significantly reduce the heating bills due to the improved thermal efficiency of the fenestration, and will reduce the financial drain on the charity which occupies the building.

“The proposed works will ensure a more comfortable working and learning environment for staff and students using and attending this supported employment and training non-profit charity that transforms over 800 lives a year across the West Midlands.”

Telford Investments Limited claims that the 1960s building ‘does not contribute positively’ to the character of the Wellington Conservation Area.

The council’s built heritage officer objected to the plan and said that while it was not a historic building, the proposed uPVC windows would have a ‘bold appearance with wide frames accentuating a pattern of fenestration and glazing that is atypical of the area’.

“The proposed uPVC would not respect either the architecture of the host building, or the character and appearance of the conservation area, and would have a detrimental impact on views along both Church Street and Queen Street where buildings generally retain historic timber joinery and architectural detail,” said the heritage officer.

The heritage officer added that a number of neighbouring buildings with uPVC buildings ‘illustrate the harm that can be caused to the quality of the historic street scene by the use of inappropriate window materials and designs’.

The council officer said that there was no objection to replacing the existing windows subject to appropriate design and materials being agreed.

They suggested that powder-coated aluminium would be ‘more commensurate with the architecture’ of the host building and would achieve more slender frames and a ‘less strident appearance’ within the street scene.

The heritage officer added that aluminium would offer the required upgrading and thermal improvements and has ‘greater green credentials’ than uPVC.

In response to this suggestion the applicant claims that aluminium is a ‘cold material’ and that the proposed uPVC were more energy efficient and had better noise insulation.

They also argue that the aluminium windows suggested are financially unviable.

Telford & Wrekin Council refused the plans in June and said that the uPVC would result in ‘significantly detrimental harm to the character and appearance’ of the former Barclays Bank building and surrounding conservation area’.

“Whilst some public benefits have been highlighted, these are not considered sufficient enough to outweigh the level of harm caused,” said the council’s planning officer.”

Telford Investments Limited has appealed the decision and has asked the planning inspector to ‘give more weight’ to the thermal improvements that the replacement windows will bring.