15 West Street has been the subject of a small battle over the question of planning permission. The property was purchased by its current owners, the Wilson Dyer Goughs, in 2003. They received permission to convert it into a residential property in 2004. The building dates from the 17th century and is built with stone from Fotheringhay Castle; it is listed as Grade Two and is located in a conservation area. The property also features 18th century sash windows and, contentiously, a shop front that dates from 1897. This shop front has provoked questions about the nature and role of restoration and to what extent we should preserve the marks of the past.

The debate started in 2006 when the current occupants submitted an application to restore the shop front to its previous incarnation as a small Georgian window. They felt that now the property was residential, it made sense to remove the shop front. Apparently the structure of the window also allowed for unwanted noise and vibrations from the street. The application stated that the timber frame of the shop front is structurally unsound and that a new window is therefore the preferable option. A restored shop front would be a facsimile and seems an understandably artificial means of conservation. In the past, buildings at 64 and 74 West Street have received permission to replace late 19th century shop windows. The Wilson Dyer Gough’s application was also supported by four other Oundle residents and contested by one.

The application was accidentally granted permission by Oundle Town Council to go ahead, however this permission was quickly withdrawn with an apology from the Town Clerk. A subsequent appeal was also refused. The council cites planning policy guidance which states that “wholesale reinstatement of lost elements of a building is inappropriate”. Historical additions such as the shop front in question comprise part of the history and evolution of the building and, according to the council, should be preserved at all costs. The council advised the occupants to use a steel frame to restore the unstable timber frame and to cope with the noise by adopting “a more imaginative approach to provide improved living conditions”; a suggestion that must certainly have galled the occupants. The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings chipped in with the opinion that the shop front was an “early example, and thus of interest to the building’s history.” In November 2008, a high court appeal by the Wilson Dyer Goughs was also denied, costing the claimants £3,500.

The house front, perhaps as a mark of defiance, is currently boarded up. On the one hand the need to conserve and preserve local history is clearly important. However, as stated in their application, the residents have spent much time and money updating the interior of the house “in keeping with the original architectural style”. The Colleyweston slate roof has also been pristinely restored. The council desires that the marks of a building’s architectural evolution be preserved, but that no further marks be made upon the building. While, their proposals would make the building more symmetrical and aesthetically pleasing, it would also involve the permanent removal of a historic shop front. The question is whether this constitutes the “major and significant attack on the history and heritage of Oundle town” that the council suggests. However, the council had the last say in the matter and in the current circumstances it seems unlikely that the residents will ever gain permission for their proposed alterations.

In the meantime, the facade of 15 West Street remains an unattractive blight on one of Oundle’s main streets. It appears that a stalemate has been reached. While the residents’ grievances are understandable, they faced the same battle that owners of listed houses face everywhere: a battle that has been fought and lost and must perhaps now be moved on from.