Development Control - TrustNews Jun 03
Members will no doubt have noticed that the façade of the Charles House restaurant on the corner of Sussex Street and Upper High Street is no longer there. Hardly surprising, considering the cavalier way in which the rest of the building was removed. Having reached this unsatisfactory position, the Trust would much prefer to see a contemporary facade that would be in keeping with the new development behind to an inaccurate reconstruction of the original, which had no great merit apart from being familiar. A decision on this has still to be made.
A decision is also needed on whether The Hermitage Retirement Home, Cheriton Road, should be demolished and replaced by fourteen 1- to 3-bedroom fiats. The contemporary scheme now proposed is an improvement on the previous one, but the Trust very much questions whether a pleasing flint and brick house that is acknowledged to be in good condition should be demolished without any evident thought being given to its possible conversion. Winchester has many similar properties that are vulnerable to demolition in favour of higher-density schemes, and, if it becomes 'acceptable' that they can be demolished in the name of increased (PPG3) density, we fear for the future of our City's intrinsic character.
Also needing a decision is 76-82 Alresford Road, where it is proposed the existing dwellings should be demolished to make way for a mixed development of flats and houses. In this instance the Trust has no objection to the demolitions, but it does have considerable reservations about the lack of place and neighbourhood the new development would provide. This is largely due to the proposed layout, which splits the site into two camps, with the flats near the road and the more expensive houses in the hinterland, separated by two large areas of parked cars.
Following a meeting of the St Cross Planning Sub-Committee, the development at The Grange, 140 St Cross Road, was withdrawn when it became clear that the density of the scheme was based on calculations using a gross rather than net area. Net calculations make allowance for land on which it is impossible to build, either because of the topography or to protect trees. As this site is mostly covered with trees, the density proposed was clearly impractical.
Decisions have been made about the proposed demolition of Chestnut Mead, Kingsgate Road, which was refused for many of the reasons given in the last TrustNews, and the large development at Salters, Salters Lane, which was granted. The Trust believes this ill-conceived permission is one that Winchester will live to regret, because of inadequate local infrastructure and the undesirable precedent that will have been set for low standards of design for both architecture and landscaping.
Two interesting developments have recently entered the planning pipeline.
The Hampshire Constabulary wants to refurbish the Police Headquarters, West Hill,Romsey Road. The updating of this '60s building is long overdue because of the need to remove asbestos and the intrusion by prevailing winds and rain into the south-facing offices, causing considerable discomfort and inconvenience. It is proposed that the existing structure should be clad with a glass skin, an approach with which the Trust has no quarrel. Following a helpful presentation and tour of the site, it was, however, felt that we had to object because of the lack of detail provided for a prominent structure such as this. The proposal includes the removal of the collection of ill-assorted structures that litter the site, which we welcomed, and the construction of a new 3-storey office block in the south-east corner, which was on the whole acceptable although we felt its design should echo the more simple treatment proposed for the main building.
At King Alfred's College, Sparkford Road, it is proposed that the existing dining hall should be re-developed to provide new dining and student facilities, sited on Sparkford Road opposite the new blocks of flats currently under construction. While a large building here could be acceptable, the Trust does not feel the scheme shown in the outline application would be appropriate in its present form. The structure pays little regard to the complex topography of the site and being higher up the hill, its 3-storey frontage running along close to the road boundary, would be taller than the yet-to-be-built 3-storey flats. We felt this could produce a rather claustrophobic and canyon-like character to this stretch of the road, which would have a greatly reduced period of sunlight than at present. We have suggested that, as well as being designed to take advantage of local geography, it would be better for Sparkford Road if the building were drawn back at the southern end and either stepped or canted progressively nearer the road as, it climbs the hill, so leading to the visual pinch point where the road seems to narrow. It will be interesting to see whether this sage advice will have any bearing on the eventual decision.