City of Winchester Trust
  • kingalf
  • cathedral
  • roundtable
  • westgate
  • guildhall
  • wolsey
  • stcross
  • library

Planning Applications Updates Sept 2017

Date 07/11/17 Ref No. PP-05546435 Case No. 16/02954/FUL
Location 192 Stockbridge Road, SO22 6RP.
Proposal Development of two dwellings with associated amenity space and on-site car parking provision (AMENDED PLAN RECEIVED).
Comments The Amended plans were Allowed. The Trust drew our objection once the amendments had been made.

Date 23/05/17 Ref No. PP-06072753 Case No. 17/01382/HOU
Location 32 St Faiths Road, SO23 9QD.
Proposal Single storey rear extension, matching the footprint of the existing conservatory. Loft conversion and dormer extension to the rear, three skylights in the loft to the front (Mrs Katherine Jarrett).
Comments The Trust had objected to the loft conversion and dormer extension. This application was Allowed.

Date 30/06/17 Ref No. PP-05910889 Case No. 17/01716/FUL
Location Cathedral Christmas Market, The Close, SO23 9LS.
Proposal Temporary application for a 5 year period from 2017-2021 inclusive, to site 105 wooden chalets and a covered ice rink in the Inner close and 8 chalets on the Outer Close, behind the War Memorial. The structures are to be on site between October and January, inclusive (precise dates to be agreed on a yearly basis).
Comments The 5 year application was approved which does means that after this year there will be no increase in the number of stalls. The approval also contains dates all sales to the public 20 November 22 December 2017; no setting up before 9 October 2017 and removal by 22 January 2018.

Date 29/06/17 Ref No. PP-06189429 Case No. 17/01699/HOU
Location 155 Greenhill Road, SO22 5DU.
Proposal A loft conversion to a detached house.
Comments This application was Allowed.

Date 30/06/17 Ref No. PP-06144535 Case No. 17/01673/FUL
Location Dashwood House, Sleepers Hill, SO22 4ND.
Proposal New 3-storey 3 bed detached dwelling on the upper garden area behind the existing garage.
Comments This application was Refused, because (1) would result in the loss of a protected tree that would have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. Further to this the proposed development would lead to future pressure to fell or prune protected trees which would harm the character of the area. And (2) The proposed development is considered to have a harmful impact on the character of the area due to the scale, size and position resulting in a cramped layout of the site.

Return to list