Planning Appraisal Group - TrustNews Dec 04
Please note the new name for this part of the Trust's activities, known as PAG for short.
There's been some unease in the Trust Council about our previous title, Development Control, since it was felt it could give rise to confusion with the official activities of the City's officers and councillors. It was also misleading, because of course we didn't actually have any control over anything. However, apart from the change of name, business continues as usual and the duties of the panels haven't got any less demanding as a result of a different title. The Trust continues to be very grateful to all those members who are willing to give so much of their time to this ongoing activity.
There have been a spate of appeals over the past couple of months or so, and we have written in support of the Local Authorities for their refusal to grant permission for these residential schemes: development at Barton Farm, Andover Road, demolition and development at 46-48 Chilbolton Avenue, demolition and development at 18 Bereweeke Close, conversion and development at 15 Chilbolton Avenue, and demolition and development at 1-3 Westley Close which demolishes only No 3 and has a reduced density of 45.3dph (which we still think is too high for this position); in all other respects seems much the same as the previous proposal, so we have again objected.
The most recent scheme for Enniskerry, Sleepers Hill, has been refused, as has the proposal to demolish Lang House, 27 Chilbolton Avenue for 13 new units. The large Linden Homes development for 49 units behind 8-22 Chilbolton Avenue has just been given permission.
There has also been a new application for the Prince of Wales, 26 Hyde Street, still for the conversion of the pub to residential use, but with one new residential unit instead of three to be built at the rear. However, even with this reduced size, the property immediately to the north would still suffer considerable over-shadowing and loss of sun light, quite apart from the fact that any cohesion of design the new buildings might have had has been lost in the effort to reduce their height, and we have again objected.
We had considerable reservations, but did not object, about a proposal to build 14 dwellings on land adjacent to 135-137 Andover Road on a site with an unusual and difficult shape that made the development seem too cramped for the character of the neighbourhood, even though the density was around an acceptable 30dph. The application has now been withdrawn, so no doubt in due course we shall be looking at another scheme for this site.
As members will no doubt have seen in the local papers, there has been an amended scheme for the Police HQ, Romsey Road. This attempts to answer some of the reasons for refusal given in the documents of the Appeal that is wending its way through the system, and it is certainly better in some respects than the original proposal, with a more practical recladding of the tower block and the new office building being attached to the main block so that the land in front of the building is left available for soft landscaping. However, the Trust would very much prefer to see a building with a lower profile on this site, rather than compounding the mistake to the Winchester skyline that was made nearly half a century ago, and has again objected to the scheme.
A decision is still awaited on the development proposed on the site of the Royal Observer Corps HQ, Abbotts Road, and in the meantime an application has been made to demolish the Listed Building. This was discussed by the Trust Council, who reached the conclusion that while the best option would be to have its equipment returned and the building become a museum, there seemed little point in preserving this far from beautiful building unless it housed the artefacts that give it its raison d'etre, and that the present proposal to convert it to residential use was the worst of all choices because this would compromise both the original building and the design of any future development on the site.
Another matter causing the Trust Council much angst is the appearance of two tall notice boards on the pavement outside The Guildhall. We had objected to the application for these but were informed that they were "permitted development". Not only do we feel they do nothing to improve the appearance of the Guildhall, but they are inconsiderately sited for pedestrians, especially those with impaired vision who would not expect an obstruction there. We are glad to hear we are not alone in our concern to see them there and the question has been raised by members of the City Council.