Planning applications

Reports for the last three months

By Mary Tiles
Chair, City of Winchester Trust Planning Appraisal Group

june planning applications report

During the first three weeks of June we reviewed 42 applications, objected to 4, commented on 21, and made no comment on 17, and noted 4 tree felling applications.

New applications June 2019 - objections

Ref No 19/00714/FUL
Location 2 Fiona Close

Proposal
Change of use to HMO.

Comment
This application is within the area of the Article 4 direction for Winnall which came into effect on 1 May 2018. The house seems already to be occupied as an HMO. Whilst it may be the case that HMOs do not yet reach the percentages of properties referred to in the Article 4 direction, this is not a street but a small residential close and is thus not in keeping with the scale of Fiona Close and will have a negative impact on the amenity of local residents through noise, late night activities and additional pressures on parking.

Ref No
19/00922/FUL
Location Hazelwood,  29 Downside Road

Proposal
Application Reference Number: 18/02454/FUL. Date of Decision: 10/01/2019 Condition Number(s): Condition 2 (Approved Plans).  Amend approved plans condition to reflect proposed changes to some elevations and repositioning of dwellings within the plot.

Comment
The Trust’s original concerns over the redevelopment of this back lot were when the applicant was proposing two 5 bedroom houses; we did not object to the final amended scheme.  Most  of the proposed variations to that scheme are modest but we objected to the proposal to increase the size and ridge height of Plot 3 which we thought was an attempt to set the scene for an early application to increase the size of this dwelling to 3 or more bedrooms.

Ref No 19/01002/LDP
Location 12 Brassey Road

Proposal
Loft conversion including installation of an L-shaped flat roof dormer to the rear elevation, installation of two Velux roof-lights to the front elevation, to form new habitable space.

Comment
We do not usually comment on LDP applications but strongly objected to this one which appears to be a box extension, not a dormer, which neither maintains nor enhances the character of the house and the neighbourhood. We felt design considerations needed to be rigorously applied.

Ref No 19/01211/LDP
Location 24 Cheriton Road

Proposal
Conversion of loft space to form habitable room, incorporating Flat Roof Rear Dormer & 2No Velux Roof light to the front.

Comment
We felt that even an LDP application should be accompanied by some drawings; there are no drawings available in this case.

Planning application updates June 2019

Ref No 19/00584/FUL
Location 86 Cromwell Road

Proposal
Use of existing annex and attached cabin as separate 2 bed dwelling.

Comment
Allowed but restricted to use as a dwelling within class C3(a) [which covers use by a single person or a family but excludes HMO].

We had complained about absence of contextual information, of elevations and indication of the designated use of the proposed dwelling.

Ref No 19/00618/FUL
Location Cromwell House, 15 Andover Road

Proposal
Application Reference Number: 76/00179/OLD Date of Decision: 22/07/1976 Removal of Condition Number: 9. The condition is unfairly onerous on the freeholder & is not appropriate in the context of the current planning framework & should be removed.

Comment
Allowed. With the condition “The premises comprising not less than 14,000 sq. ft of floor space for use for car parking to be created by the said employment (being office premises by virtue of Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971) shall be used for car parking and for no other purpose. Reason: To comply with the requirements of the Office Development Permit originally and the Development Plan.”

We had objected because the application does not make clear what Condition 9 is and we felt it should remain at least until a better case for its removal had been made. The officer's report makes it clear that Condition 9 says “Eight car parking spaces shall be made available for use by the occupiers of the adjoining properties at 15-23a Andover Road.”

Ref No 19/00577/FUL
Location 7-9 Gordon Avenue

Proposal
Retrospective alterations/amendments connected to the approved scheme 16/00258/FUL; - additional living area formed within the roof space serving units 4 and 5 - additional light well serving unit 2 - small window infilled serving unit 3 on the west elevation - minor landscape alterations - revised bin/cycle storage.

Comment
Allowed.

We had objected because it was clear that the alterations and amendments had been implemented without prior approval and we thought Planning Officers should investigate this together with safety issues that might have arisen.

Ref No 19/00645/FUL
Location 49 Stoney Lane

Proposal
Proposed development of 4 x 3 bed semi-detached houses and 4 x 2 bed apartments following removal of existing dwelling.

Comment
Refused. Grounds given:– (1)The proposed development would, by reason of its size, scale, layout, unsympathetic design and prominent location, result in a dense and intrusive form of development which would be out of keeping with the pattern and spatial characteristics of the surrounding area to the significant detriment of its character and appearance (2)The proposed dwellings would, by reason both of their close proximity to each other within the development site and to the neighbouring property to the east, have an overbearing and unacceptable impact on the amenities of the occupants of those properties through loss of outlook and privacy through potential overlooking (3)The proposal would result in the loss of trees, covered by a Tree Preservation Order to the detriment of the visual amenity of the surrounding area. It would therefore be contrary to policies CP20 of Winchester District Local Plan Part 1 and DM23 of Winchester District local Plan Part 2.

We had objected because we felt the proposal seeks to overcrowd the site, the apartments are not well oriented, with north facing windows and very little fenestration on the south side thus making very little use of any passive solar gain. The detailed comments of the urban design officer seemed accurate and we supported these. Our objection was maintained when we reviewed the amended plans.

Ref No 19/00556/AVC
Location
Hampshire Constabulary HQ, Romsey Road
Proposal
Erection of mesh directional banner.

Comment
Application withdrawn.

We had objected that since this site is already the subject of many hoardings advertising the project, this further sign on an old wall in the Conservation Area was superfluous.

Ref No 19/00470/HOU
Location
6 Chester Road

Proposal
Proposed loft conversion including insertion of roof-lights and dormer window extension. Proposed single storey rear extension, changes to external appearance, boundary treatment and associated internal and external alterations.

Comment
Allowed after the plans were revised. We had objected to the changes proposed for the front of the house – the proposal to paint the brickwork white and to replace the white windows with dark grey aluminium ones. However, as was pointed out in the decision notice, repainting the house doesn't require planning permission.

Planning appeals June 2019

No appeals were lodged or decided in June.

may planning applications report

During May we reviewed 38 applications, objected to 7, commented on 7, and made no comment on 24.

WCC has reported its statistics on planning appeals 1 July 2018 to 31 March 2019, during which time 37 appeals were received. Note that this covers the Winchester District not just Winchester Town.  Of these, 11 (30%) were allowed, 25 (67%) dismissed and one notice quashed a planning permission that had been granted (3%). Eight applications were made for costs. Six of these were refused, one was dismissed and one was allowed. 

Only seven of the appeals concerned Winchester Town. One was a  Tree Preservation Order (TPO) which allowed a tree to be felled on Bereweeke Road. One was about signage on a listed building (dismissed) and one was for a telecom site (allowed). The development for student accommodation on Greenhill Road was allowed on appeal.  The other three for Winchester Town (Dashwood House, 24 Quarry Road and 8 Grosvenor Drive) were all dismissed.

New applications May 2019 - objections

Date 11/04/2019
Ref No 19/00826/HOU
Location
Barnes Cottage, 1 Barnes Close SO23 9QX

Proposal
Demolition of existing detached garage & erection of replacement detached garage; installation of new sliding gates.

Comment
The Trust objected to the over-dominance of the new garage which is too high, has white PVC windows and a metal sliding gate with loss of gate piers.

Date 02/05/2019
Ref No
19/00986/FUL
Location
1-4 Woodpeckers Drive

Proposal
Erection of extra care/assisted living accommodation for older people with communal facilities and car parking.

Comment
As far as the Trust could see, the application is basically the same as that presented to the Trust on 16 April 2019. We objected strongly on the grounds that this would amount to over-development of the site, a building that would be detrimental to the character of the area and which also has inadequate parking arrangements given its intended use.

Date 09/04/2019
Ref No
19/00815/FUL
Location
Prospect House, 15 Magdalen Hill SO23 0HJ

Proposal
Proposed development of 3x3 bed dwellings an 1x2 bed dwelling following the removal of Prospect House.

Comment
The dwellings were not regarded as an acceptable re-interpretation of the architectural character of this Conservation Area. There were specific concerns about the large blank white wall at the top of the terrace which would confront pedestrians coming down the track from St Giles Hill. The site plan does not indicate any provision for bicycle storage and only minimal provision for bins. We were also not convinced that the trees on the site would be able to survive the proposed development.

Date 26/04/2019
Ref No
19/00763/LIS
Location
Goodworth House , 53 St Cross Road SO23 9RE

Proposal
Erection of eight dwelling houses consisting of one 2-bedroom, three 3-bedroom, two 4-bedroom and two 5-bedroom dwellings, with associated vehicle and pedestrian access, garages, parking, landscaping and the relocation of frontage wall at Goodworth House.

Comment
We welcomed the levels of local consultation on this scheme and the applicants’ evident willingness to incorporate the conclusions of the consultation exercises into the proposals. We supported the layout, number and the group value of the vernacular style of dwellings 4 – 8. Our objection was to Block 1-3 fronting onto St Cross Road. We were concerned about the impact of this large neo-classical block on Goodworth House, no 51 St Cross Road and the general street scene [which was apparently a factor in the listing of Goodworth House]. It was felt that the block was falsely grandiose, too large in height and bulk, and that the neo-classical detailing was alien to the character of the this end of St Cross and to its roadscape.

Date 21/03/2019
Ref No
19/00645/FUL
Location
49 Stoney Lane SO22 6DP

Proposal
Proposed development of 4 x 3 bed semi-detached houses and 4 x 2 bed apartments following removal of existing dwelling.

Comment
We noted that permission was given last year (17/01172/FUL (AMENDED PLANS)) for a new detached three bedroom chalet bungalow on this site which we thought much more appropriate and in character with the area than the scheme currently proposed. The proposal seeks to overcrowd the site and the apartments particularly are not well oriented, with north facing windows and very little fenestration on the south side thus making very little use of any passive solar gain. The detailed comments of the urban design officer seem accurate and we supported these. Our objection was maintained when we reviewed the amended plans.

Date 15/04/2019
Ref No
19/00556/AVC
Location
Hampshire Constabulary HQ, Romsey Road

Proposal
Erection of mesh directional banner.

Comment
Since this site is already the subject of many hoardings advertising the project, we thought this further sign on an old wall in the Conservation Area was superfluous.

Planning application updates - May 2019

Date 05/04/2019
Ref No
19/00584/FUL
Location
86 Cromwell Road SO22 4AE

Proposal
Use of existing annex and attached cabin as separate 2 bed dwelling.

Comment
We complained about the absence of contextual information, of elevations and indication of the designated use of the proposed dwelling. We thought the character of Stanmore would be compromised by such ad hoc development. Allowed but restricted to use as a dwelling within class C3(a) [which covers use by a single person or a family but excludes HMO].

Date 18/03/2019
Ref No
19/00618/FUL
Location
Cromwell House, 15 Andover Road

Proposal
Application Reference Number: 76/00179/OLD Date of Decision: 22/07/1976 Removal of Condition Number: 9. The condition is unfairly onerous on the freeholder & is not appropriate in the context of the current planning framework & should be removed.

Comment
The application does not make clear what Condition 9 is and we felt it should remain at least until a better case for its removal had been made. Allowed. The decision makes it clear that Condition 9 says “Eight car parking spaces shall be made available for use by the occupiers of the adjoining properties at 15-23a Andover Road.” The Officer's report says that Policies CP10 and DM18 highlight that sustainable transport such as walking and cycling should be encouraged, especially in sustainable locations such as Andover Road. The spaces are to be absorbed into the business use of the site for Cromwell House but remain as parking. [The report cites the number of objections as 7 when is was in fact 14.] No decision notice was available.

Date 01/03/2019
Ref No
19/00470/HOU
Location
6 Chester Road SO23 0EL

Proposal
Proposed loft conversion including insertion of roof-lights and dormer window extension. Proposed single storey rear extension, changes to external appearance, boundary treatment and associated internal and external alterations.

Comment
Our objection was to the changes proposed for the front of the house – the proposal to paint the brickwork white and to replace the white windows with dark grey aluminium ones. Allowed after plans revised.

Planning appeals May 2019

Lodged

Date 04/06/2018
Ref No 18/01385/FUL
Location
11 Somers Close SO22 4EJ

Proposal
Detached three bedroom house in garden of 11 Somers Close.

Comments
We had objeccted because of lack of information. The application was refused on grounds amongst others of non-conformance with parking policy and unsafe access (Highways objected). The appellant did not accept any of the grounds for refusal.

Date 12/12/2018
Ref No
18/02853/FUL
Location
44 Fromond Road SO22 6EG

Proposal
(Amended Description) 7 Bedroom HMO at 44 Fromond Road.

Comment
This property is already in use as a 6 bedroom HMO. We felt that any increase would be an over intensive use of the site and other consultees seem to have agreed. The applicant seeks to dispute this at length citing NPPF as well as local policies.

Decided

Date 04/06/2018
Ref No
18/01385/FUL
Location
11 Somers Close SO22 4EJ

Proposal
Detached three bedroom house in garden of 11 Somers Close. See under lodged appeals above.

Comment
The appeal was dismissed and upheld WCC’s grounds for rejection.

April planning applications report

During April we reviewed 36 applications, objected to 12, commented on 5, and made no comment on 19. The Response to Station Approach is not included here although the application was reviewed by two PAG panels whose comments fed in to the Trust response (circulated separately).

We seem to have objected to an unusually high proportion of the reviewed applications this month, which has seen an increase in requests to remove conditions previously attached to approvals and of requests, made by developers, to demolish existing houses and replace with relatively dense developments (there are two more in the pipeline). The Trust is not in principle opposed to dense development and has in fact argued that for new developments, such as Barton Farm, the density should be increased. But on many infill sites developers are trying to cram too much onto a single small site without really paying enough attention to the character of the neighbourhood, the layout of the site (including the orientation of the houses), and the quality of the buildings themselves.

Often it seems that the motive is to make the maximum profit (which from a developer's point of view may be rational) rather than to deliver good quality but still affordable housing that works for the neighbourhood. For a planning system to be justified it has to balance out the competing interests and provide a counterbalance to the natural inclination of developers, or others seeking to maximise their profit from land, which is often itself overpriced.

New applications April 2019 - objections

Date 05/04/2019
Ref No
19/00584/FUL
Location
86 Cromwell Road SO22 4AE

Proposal
Use of existing annex and attached cabin as separate 2 bed dwelling

Comment
We complained about absence of contextual information, of elevations and indication of the designated use of the proposed dwelling. We thought character of Stanmore would be compromised by such ad hoc development.

Date 15/03/2019
Ref No
19/00605/FUL
Location
1-4 Salters Acres

Proposal
Erection of eight dwelling houses consisting of two 4-bedroom, four 3-bedroom and two 2-bedroom dwellings with associated access, landscaping and parking.

Comment
We thought the density and grain of the development excessive for the site. Since it will be contiguous to the Meadowland site it was noted that twice the number of dwellings has been proposed for an area similar to that of Meadowlands, resulting in very small curtilages. The scale, mass and style of the proposed dwellings were not thought to be sympathetic to the character of this edge of city position. We suggested that the whole design of this development should be seriously re-considered.

Date 14/03/2019
Ref No
19/00611/FUL
Location
Unit 3, Moorside Business Park, Moorside Road

Proposal
New shop front and partial change of use to retail shop A1

Comment
We thought this change of use for just one of several industrial units would present the difficulties outlined in an objection from a neighbouring unit states.

Date 18/03/2019
Ref No
19/00618/FUL
Location
Cromwell House, 15 Andover Road

Proposal
Application Reference Number: 76/00179/OLD Date of Decision: 22/07/1976 Removal of Condition Number: 9. The condition is unfairly onerous on the freeholder & is not appropriate in the context of the current planning framework & should be removed.

Comment
The application does not make clear what Condition 9 is, nor is it clear how it relates to the present situation; and supporting documents give little further information. We gathered from objection letters that it concerns parking. We felt this Condition 9 should remain at least until a better case for its removal had been made.

Date 13/03/2019
Ref No
19/00577/FUL
Location
9 Gordon Avenue SO23 0QE

Proposal
Retrospective alterations/amendments connected to the approved scheme 16/00258/FUL additional living area formed within the roof space serving units 4 and 5; additional light-well serving unit 2; small window infilled serving unit 3 on the west elevation; minor landscape alterations; revised bin/cycle storage.

Comment
The alterations and amendments have already been implemented without prior approval. We felt that we could not approve and that the Planning Officers should investigate.

Date 22/03/2019
Ref No
19/00648/HOU
Location
Nearwater, Domum Road SO23 9NN

Proposal
Remove part of the railing, hedge and small tree to front boundary and build up ground to create an open parking bay in the front garden.

Comment
The application was poorly presented. It was assessed using Google maps. Since the house has a garage with additional parking space in front of it, we concluded that the proposed works would be detrimental to the rural character of the street scene and that the case for additional parking had not been made.

Date 04/03/2019
Ref No
19/00476/FUL
Location
39 Shepherds Road SO23 0NR

Proposal
Change of use from C3 to C4.

Comment
We objected to any increase in HMOs in Winnall and felt the objections of the neighbours concerning poorly maintained gardens were well-founded. We suggested that such applications should give details about how garden spaces will be managed.

Date 20/03/2019
Ref No
19/00631/AVC
Location
Bishop On The Bridge, 1 High Street SO23 9JX

Proposal
Installation of two projecting signs, and lantern to entrance. There was no objection to the proposed lantern or to a hanging sign on the street frontage. We objected to the proposed hanging sign on the riverside path.

Date 08/03/2019
Ref No
19/00556/AVC
Location
Hampshire Constabulary HQ, Romsey Road

Proposal
Erection of mesh directional banner.

Comment
This is a reapplication to put a (modified) banner on the wall at the corner of West End Terrace, which we felt to be superfluous and objected for the same reasons as last time.

Date 21/03/2019
Ref No
19/00645/FUL
Location
49 Stoney Lane SO22 6DP

Proposal
Proposed development of 4 x 3 bed semidetached houses and 4 x 2 bed apartments following removal of existing dwelling.

Comment
We noted that permission was given last year (17/01172/FUL) for a new detached three bedroom chalet bungalow on this site. This seemed more appropriate and in character with the area than the scheme now proposed which seeks to overcrowd the site. The detailed comments of the urban design officer seemed accurate and were supported.

Planning application updates April 2019

Date 22/01/2019
Ref No
19/00207/FU
Location
2 Ruffield Close SO22 5JL

Proposal
Removal of condition 11 to allow rear dormer and conversion of roof space (18/00853/FUL, determined as permitted 30.05.2018)

Comment
We could not see what justification there could be for removing this condition within 9 months of its imposition. Allowed.

Date 30/01/2019
Ref No
19/00210/HOU
Location
10 Pinehurst Place, Bereweeke Road SO22 6AN

Proposal
Installation of a green powder coated wire mesh security fence along the property boundary above the existing wall along Bereweeke Road and turning the corner to the side access road to Winchester Racquets and Fitness Centre.

Comment
We could not understand the need for this additional security fence as it would detract from a fine character wall within the neighbourhood. Refused on the grounds that the fence, in its location and prominence, would be detrimental to the setting, character and appearance of the surrounding area.

Date 24/12/2018
Ref No
18/02924/HOU
Location
23 Francis Gardens SO23 7HD

Proposal
A proposed side extension and rear amendments to the ground floor.

Comment
We objected because of the negative impact we thought it would have on the street scene. Allowed.

Date 14/01/2019
Ref No
19/00083/FUL
Location
132 Stockbridge Road SO22 6RN

Proposal
Condition Number: 7 Condition Removal: use of garden space for business 12-20:00 Monday -Saturday (Application Reference Number: W11026/05 Date of Decision: 03/09/2014).

Comment
We felt that was hard to see how use of the garden in the evenings could not fail to disrupt the users of the many adjoining gardens. Application withdrawn.

Date 21/12/2018
Ref No
18/02917/FUL
Location
Land Adjacent to Stanmore Primary School, Stanmore Lane

Proposal
Construct 5 No. detached houses (1 x 4 bed, 2 x 3 bed [each with detached single garage] and 2 x 2 bed) and 4 x 2 bed apartments, associated means of enclosure, surface car parking and new access spur. …. Erection of 3m high acoustic fence to part of common boundary with adjoining electricity sub-station.

Comment
Allowed.
We had objected to the layout and design ad in particular the insistence on detached houses.

Date 12/12/2019
Ref No
18/02853/FUL
Location
44 Fromond Road SO22 6EG

Proposal
7 Bedroom HMO at 44 Fromond Road.

Comment
Refused.
We had objected on grounds of insufficient information and that the increase in adult occupants would result in an over intensive use of the site. WCC agreed with the latter saying that it would be to the detriment of the character of the area and would result in a significantly harmful impact on amenity in terms of noise and disruption to the neighbouring properties in C3 use.

Date 18/10/2018
Ref No
18/02436/HOU
Location
85 Westman Road SO22 6DX

Proposal
(Part Retrospective) Proposed construction of front garden wall and entrance gates.

Comment
Allowed
after submission of modified plans. We had objected to the height of the wall (subsequently lowered) and to the proposal to have electronically operated metal gates opening outward (to which highways also objected). The gates are now wooden and open inwards, with a condition attached to the approval to ensure that they do.

Date 04/03/2019
Ref No
19/00476/FUL
Location
39 Shepherds Road SO23 0NR

Proposal
Change of use from C3 to C4.

Comment
Allowed.

Date 26/02/2019
Ref No
19/00425/FUL
Location
140 Stanmore Lane SO22 4DP

Proposal
Erection of one three-bed dwelling in the curtilage of 140 Stanmore Lane.

Comment
Allowed.
We had objected that the proposal would remove the garden setting of No 140, which is an essential aspect of the design of the Stanmore Estate, and would overcrowd the site with an intrusive and uncharacteristic terrace. Revised drawings were submitted and there was local support.

Date 15/11/2018
Ref No
18/02628/FUL
Location
Bishop On The Bridge, 1 High Street

Proposal
External alterations to the beer garden including a pergola, outbuildings, a bavona structure and associated works.

Comment
Allowed.
We had concerns about lack of information on 3 aspects of the proposal which were subsequently clarified to WCC’s satisfaction.

Date 20/03/2019
Ref No
19/00631/AVC
Location
Bishop On The Bridge, 1 High Street SO23 9JX

Proposal
Installation of two projecting signs, and lantern to entrance.

Comment
There was no objection to the proposed lantern or to a hanging sign on the street frontage. We objected to the proposed hanging sign on the riverside path. Allowed after plans amended to remove one of the hanging signs and reduce the size of the remaining hanging sign.

Date 14/03/2019
Ref No
19/00611/FUL
Location
Unit 3, Moorside Business Park, Moorside Road

Proposal
New shop front and partial change of use to retail shop A1.

Comment
We thought a change of use for just one of several industrial units would present difficulties. Refused as being contrary to the local plan – this is a designated as a employment district.

Planning appeals April 2019

Lodged

Date 04/12/2018
Ref No
18/02775/HOU
Location
15 St Swithun Street SO23 9JP

Proposal
Rear facing dormer,rear bi-folding doors 1new roof light to front elevation.

Comment
We had objected that the rear facing dormer is very large and out of keeping with the rest of the house. The bifold doors also look clumsy and out of keeping with the scale and character of the house. WCC agreed that the dormer was out of keeping but allowed a very similar subsequent application 18/02775/HOU (to which we also objected and historic environment agreed with us). This application was for a slightly reduced dormer (but it was still substantial). The appeal argues that there is not enough difference between the allowed and refused applications for there to be a substantive difference.

Date 19/12/2017
Ref No
17/03193/FUL
Location
St Clement's Partnership, Tanner Street SO23 8AD

Proposal
Change of use from class D1 to class B1(a).

Comment
We had declined to comment. The grounds for refusal were that the proposed development would result in the loss of a local facility, for which there is no confirmed alternative facility within the vicinity. The Appellant claims that there was a commitment made to WCC to retain the surgery until such time as an alternative had been found. WCC and the appellant seem to disagree over the status of this agreement. The argument is lengthy with lots of attached documents.

Decided

Date 03/09/2018
Ref No
18/02069/HOU
Location
8 Grosvenor Drive SO23 7HF

Proposal
Works to the front.

Comment
Appeal dismissed.