Planning Applications - Runnymede Borough Council

3.3 One off street parking space would be provided for the two-bedroom house.
The dwelling would be sited some 2.5 – 3 m back from the frontage and be
a minimum distance of some 4 metres away from the common boundary
with no.53 Strode Street. A garden area would be provided along this side
and at the rear with the rear garden depth a minimum of some 3.5 metres.
3.4 The dwelling would have a ridged with gable ends on the side elevations
and a height of some 5.1 metres to the eaves and some 7.7 metres to the
ridge respectively. The single storey projections at the front and rear would
have lean-to ridges with maximum height at some 4 metres. The front bay
would also have a lean-to ridge with a maximum height at some 3.1 metres.
3.5 A Design Statement has been submitted in support with the main points
summarised below:
• The Inspector who dismissed RU.94/0804 concluded that the scheme
had addressed concerns about the size of the site and the impact on
adjoining properties but that a bungalow was out of character with the
area;
• The proposal follows the established pattern in Strode Street with the
eaves height matching that at no.49 Strode Street and the main front
wall set at the same building line. The projecting bay is similar to other
bays on houses further down the road;
• The siting, internal layout and fenestration ensures that there would be
no overlooking for neighbours and the siting also results in a reasonably
sized coherent garden space with the dwelling not too close to no.53
Strode Street;
• The existing use is out of keeping in a predominantly residential area.
The buildings are dilapidated and the land is unkempt and used for
dumping of rubbish. The site is an eyesore;
• There is a demand for housing in the area, in particular affordable. This
proposal would provide this.
4. Consultations
4.1 The application was advertised on the Council’s weekly list and nine
individual letters of notification were sent out. Two letters of support have
been received summarised below:
• In favour of removing run down semi-commercial buildings to replace
with a house in a residential area;
• Existing site is a rubbish dump and therefore welcome its removal.
(However, request that the building operations be confined to within the
site as parking is bad enough in the street at present.)
4.2 Two letters of objection have been received. The objections are
summarised below: