Development Control - Trust Annual Report 1994
It could be said that on the whole this has been a good year for Development Control in Winchester.
There will be no Tesco superstore at Bar End and no high-density development at the Peninsula Barracks site. But, it remains to be seen what will eventually happen at Bar End and whether some bending of the proposals of the original conservation scheme for the Barracks will become necessary on grounds of economic viability.
On Romsey Road the Butterfield Block of the Royal Hampshire County Hospital stands resplendent, several elegant shades lighter after its cleaning and refurbishment, and the hospital's multi-storey carpark has been built. It should now be possible to park when visiting the hospital - but at a price.
The M3 is nearing completion and the City's experimental Park & Ride scheme has started, both of which should eventually improve the environment of the central area by reducing traffic, although at the time of writing it is too early to say whether this is in fact happening. But will the reduction of vehicles these schemes may bring be sufficient to offset the additional traffic that might be generated by the new superstores to be built at Winnall ?
There are fewer vacant shops in the centre of Winchester and thankfully it is not only building societies that are filling the empty properties. As a result there has been a crop of ill-conceived and badly designed signs and fascias with little or no consideration for either the building or the street into which they are to be placed, and discussing these applications takes a surprisingly large amount of the viewing panels' time. It could be argued that such signs are only a passing phase in a building's life and that time should not be wasted on ephemera, but do we really want the atmosphere of Winchester's High Street to emulate that of, say, Edgware Road in London? A gradual slide into something similar is what could happen if unsuitable sign and fascia applications are not contested to prevent undesirable precedents being set for the central Conservation Area.
Much of planning control is concerned with the setting of precedents, of which a good example is the influx of building societies into the High Street that occurred once the Abbey National won its appeal to open up in the Pentice stretch of this central area.
That was a precedent of which the City and the Trust were only too well aware but there are some that slip by almost unnoticed and others that arise by default.
A good example of how something becomes established without anyone really noticing is the ubiquitous velux window, the opening roof-light that has become part of our built environment during the past thirty years or so. It is a wonderful invention that allows use to be made of attic rooms that were previously only good for box-rooms, which has the bonus of adding a little extra room height and being much cheaper than a dormer window. It is therefore not surprising that velux windows have become very popular and, because they are relatively inconspicuous, their installation has become an accepted fact of life, helped by recent relaxations in the regulations controlling alterations to private houses in Conservation Areas. The drawback of this useful window is that its installation is usually only perceived in terms of how it will benefit the internal use of a house, and little consideration is given to how it looks externally. The ease of installation has led to a proliferation of velux windows that pimple the roofscape of Winchester like a rash and this could have a disastrous visual affect in areas such as Hyde, where there are many terraced houses.
Much of the charm of the Hyde terraces lies in their uniformity, and the random placing of differently sized roof windows breaks the rhythm of this uniformity. This unsatisfactory state of affairs is now being compounded by the fire regulations which require an escape route for rooms in the roof via an exit on the front elevation. The Trust is very concerned about the damaging consequences that this could have on Winchester's attractive roofscape.
At this stage there is no possibility of bottling this particular genie: the precedent for having velux windows in the roof was set many years ago without our noticing or thinking about it. But in Conservation Areas at the very least, the Trust would like to see the Planners giving some thought to the positioning of these windows to ensure that they relate to other external features of the house, such as chimneys and the windows below and, if the house is in a terrace, to the features of the neighbouring houses, many of which may already have installed velux windows.
Another precedent at present being established without much discussion or apparent thought is the destruction of front gardens as a consequence of the proposed parking restrictions in residential areas. While the Trust applauds the efforts to reduce the use of residential streets for commuter parking, a knock-on effect is that wherever a householder has sufficient front land, this area will now become a hard surface to accommodate the resident's car free of charge. The questions then remain: Is this environmentally beneficial for Winchester in the long term? Could a way be found of preventing the loss of front gardens in this way, especially in Conservation Areas?
An example of a precedent that could be set by default is Edmonds Lodge in Christchurch Road that was under threat of demolition at the time of our Summer Newsletter. The house in question has been used for student accommodation and is admitted to be structurally sound. This should be sufficient to preserve the building because the Area Local Plan states the consent for demolition would not normally be granted unless the building is wholly beyond repair or incapable of beneficial use. It was said by the applicant, a developer, that it would not be economically viable to refurbish this Victorian house for residential use, and the officers concurred. The Trust would also agree that this is so for someone other than a private purchaser because of the cost of servicing the advance finance that would be required. It does, however, question whether a desirable precedent would be set if, for the first time in twenty years in this particular part of the Conservation Area, a developer is allowed to demolish a house that would be viable for a private purchaser to modernise, especially as recent speedy sales in this area indicate that private acquisitions of similar properties are very viable indeed.
Other houses in this area currently being used for student accommodation are likely to come on to the market in the future and could fall into the same category of uneconomic refurbishment. The Trust feels very strongly that to allow this house to be demolished and replaced with a higher-density development of four terraced houses would set an extremely dangerous precedent.
The Trust will therefore be actively supporting the Planning Committee's refusal for this scheme at the public inquiry due to take place in December, because it considers that the decision reached then will be crucial for the future of Conservation Areas in Winchester and the surrounding districts.