Planning Appraisal Group - TrustNews Feb 05
Since January we have written in support of the Local Authorities for appeals against refusal of three proposals, two of which were for major developments: at1 Westley Close, where a second reduced scheme (to demolish only No 3 and build five flats and six houses) was also refused, and at 27 Chilbolton Avenue, where it is proposed to demolish Lang House and build a 3-storey block and three 3-bedroom detached dwellings.
This part of Winchester is under further assault from large developments. It is proposed 1-7 Chilbolton Avenue should be replaced by 49 dwellings, ranging from 4-bedroom houses to 1-bedroom flats, which could accommodate 118 new residents. The Trust found the approach and style of architecture acceptable, and welcomed the underground parking included in the scheme. This was not our reaction to the other scheme, an outline proposal to demolish 2-4 Chilbolton Avenue and West Hayes Lodge, Sarum Road, and replace them with 40 apartments in blocks, with a 6-storey circular tower facing onto the Romsey Road roundabout. Large blocks of flats to achieve high densities in suburban areas may be characteristic of places like Bournemouth, but the Trust feels most strongly that they should not become part of the Winchester scene, especially on important routes into the City such as this is. We were very concerned about the additional demands on the local infrastructure made by schemes of this size, and therefore objected to both schemes as premature until the completion of the long overdue study of the area that has been commissioned by the local authorities.
An outline application for land adjacent to Little Orchard, St Cross Road, proposes the demolition of four houses overlooking the water meadows near the Bushfield roundabout to make way for a large development of houses and flats that would have a density of over 55 dwellings per hectare (dph). Not only would an unacceptable amount of traffic be added to an already overloaded road, but this is also a very sensitive site on an important route into Winchester which would be visible from St Catherine's Hill, and the Trust has objected in the strongest possible terms to this application.
The Christchurch Road Conservation Area is also showing signs of pressure for increased development. A block of four dwellings in place of 138 Edgar Road is under construction, and the demolition of 136 Edgar Road to build three houses for Winchester College staff has been granted, as has another dwelling in place of the Old Fives Court Building, Beaufort Road. Another scheme is to demolish the Coach House, 88 Christchurch Road, and build six dwellings in its place. While the existing house is of no great merit and is not visible from the road, this is a very small site, tight up against the railway line, and we felt that this number (and a density of c.55dph) would be overdevelopment.
The setting of Rosenheim, 42 St Cross Road, has been given its coup de grace with the granting of a large single storey extension running along the Ranelagh Road boundary. The garden of this unfortunate house has now been almost completely built over, with a garage and flat over on the corner of Ranelagh and Edgar Roads, and a detached house facing onto St Cross Road to its south, both of which were granted on appeal. Not much left of the spacious setting of the Victorian development that was the reason for its being made a Conservation Area some 25 years ago, and a rather depressing indicator of what the future might bring, despite the guidance in PPG3 (much quoted when increased density is mooted) that new development should respect the character of the neighbourhood.
Other applications we've objected to include the demolition of the wall in Mews Lane to make way for part of the development adjacent to the Pumping Station, Romsey Road, a new alternative scheme for the block of flats in place of 18 Bereweeke Road, and a proposal to convert 25 St Thomas Street to residential use and build three new units at the rear where we felt the information provided was inadequate for a Listed Building in this sensitive position - this application has now been withdrawn.
These are the major schemes we've seen during the few past months. Lack of space prevents details of the many other applications the panels have objected to or commented on, all of which will affect their surroundings and so change the character of the City.