Home   News   Article

Subscribe Now

Owner of historic Flores House in Oakham, Rutland, loses appeal to build orangery on Grade II listed building




The owner of an historic building in Rutland has lost her battle to build an orangery on the back of the house.

Geraldine Feehally applied last November to add a brick and glass extension to Flores House on High Street, Oakham, but her plan was rejected by Rutland County Council.

She then appealed to the Government’s Planning Inspectorate, but a decision published on September 28 reveals this too has been rejected.

Flores House on High Street, Oakham. Photo: Google
Flores House on High Street, Oakham. Photo: Google

The Grade II listed building, which has now been split into two, dates back to the 13th or 14th century and is located in a Conservation Area.

Thought to be the oldest residence in the town, it is named after William Flore who was Controller of the Works of the Castle from 1373 to 1380.

He was also Sheriff of Rutland and his son Roger was elected Speaker of the House of Commons on four occasions, according to Historic England.

Online estimates suggest Flores House is worth between £675,000 and £726,000.

Mrs Feehally had argued that the orangery could easily be dismantled in future and would significantly increase the amount of natural light entering the kitchen.

This would both reduce household costs and improve facilities for the current and future occupiers.

However, Planning Inspectorate case officer Ruth Howell wrote in her report that there was no public benefit to the scheme that might justify it and the orangery would be a “visually jarring addition to the listed building”.

She wrote: “This would be at odds with the otherwise generally formal appearance of this particular part of the building and would introduce an architecturally incongruous and discordant feature of a design and materiality wholly at odds with its host elevations.”

Mrs Howell noted that neither the town nor parish council had objected to the plans but this did not represent an argument in favour of the extension.



This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More