Retrospective permission given to 'eyesore' Shirrell Heath house

Mary Day, of Solomons Lane, Shirrell Heath, applied for retrospective permission to add a first-floor extension to her bungalow.

The extension had already been constructed under Class AA permitted development.

The application was approved by Winchester City Council’s Planning Committee on Wednesday, August 14.

Speaking in objection to the proposal, James Allman, who appeared alongside fellow objector Derek Morgan, said: “This building has an approval, it was approved under a permitted development order, so why are we thinking about changing the rules? Does this not set a precedent for any development in the village?

James Allman and Derek Morgan addressing the planning committee (Image: NQ)

READ MORE: Homes needed in Winchester district could increase by more than 60 per cent

“Permitted development requires the use of similar or matching materials, which the original application noted. Why was that never enforced? The building was erected in August last year – had the materials used in this retrospective application been present in the original application, it would have been refused.

“If a building of this size and scale with these materials had been submitted as a standalone application, it would not have been permitted, as it’s larger than the allowance under small dwellings in the countryside policy. What we have here is a conundrum and we seem to be acting retrospectively to change the rules.”

Cllr Sam Charles, of Shedfield Parish Council, also objected to the application. He said: “Shedfield Parish Council strongly apposes the application, citing non-compliance with the original conditions and deviations from the intended design which was meant to harmonise with the neighbouring properties.

“The council asserts that the applicant has disregarded conditions on materials and windows, and has failed to meet the original stipulations.”

He continued: “This has resulted in a property that stands out from the local community. The parish council and residents consider this an eyesore.”

Cllr Jane Rutter said: “While the building looks very different from the original bungalow, it in fact looks more like a barn at the end of the lane. And as such, it disappears into the landscape quite quickly. The ground floor being rendered makes it not dissimilar to other buildings in the neighbourhood. While initially it was a bit of a shock, I don’t consider the level of harm is such that I would turn down this application.”

Cllr Brian Laming said: “I find that listening to what Class AA is, we would not have accepted this application in the first place, because it is not brick construction anymore. Looking at the building it is out of character and keeping with the area, and I would be in mind to refuse this application.”

The property in Solomons Lane, Shirrell Heath (Image: WCC)

SEE ALSO: Danny Chambers outlines his hopes for Winchester in first sit-down interview

Cllr Patrick Cunningham said: “I feel that the decision of the applicant to finish the development in white render and grey hanging walls in place of brick and slate is more regrettable.

“They say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder; well, as a beholder, I see no beauty here. In fact, all I behold is a dull, uninspiring, grey box. Had this been located on the frontage, I would have no hesitation on refusing permission.

“However, as it is located behind other dwellings and hidden away, I will reluctantly support the officer recommendation and hold my nose.”

The application was approved, with six committee members voting in favour of the application, and three voting against it.