Planning Schedule Date: 10/08/2004 - Stroud District Council

Consultations/Representations:
Parish / Town
Planning Schedule Date: 10/08/2004
Informatives:
1. For the purposes of Article 22 of the Town and Country Planning
(General Development Procedure) (England) (Amendment) Order
2003, the following reasons for the Council's decision are summarised
below together with a summary of the Policies and Proposals contained
within the Development Plan which are relevant to this decision:
The proposal complies with the provisions of Policies G1, G5, H14, N6,
B11 and B4 of the Stroud District Local Plan Revised Deposit Version
(as amended June 2001) which seek to ensure proposals do not
adversely affect the amenities at present enjoyed by occupiers of
neighbouring dwellings by reason of overlooking, overbearing effect or
loss of light. The design, scale, and size of the development is in
keeping with the character of the area, it does not extend the built form
into the open countryside, it would not involve the loss of an important
open space, adequate amenity and parking space is provided. The
design and materials compliment the character of the area. the
development does not involve the loss of features of important historic
or characteristic value to the Conservation Area. That the setting of the
Listed Building is preserved. The proposal will not cause highway
dangers.
Support:
Councillors do not object to the proposals providing that adjacent properties do not suffer a loss
of privacy.
Neighbour Contributions
Letters of Objection
Mr & Mrs Hamilton, Manor Farm, Wick Lane
J R Wood, Eaves Cottage, Stinchcombe
Mr & Mrs Townsend, Pound Cottage, Wick Lane
D C Leach, Church Cottage, Stinchcombe
• Conservation Area.
• Contrary to the District Local Plan.
• Should protect open grounds around an historical building in order to protect the original
environment.
• Will require the removal of the swimming pool and tennis courts - there is a covenant within
planning consents giving Stinchcombe residents access to these facilities.
• Public right of way.
• Footpath would pose a security risk to residents of the dwelling and is not in keeping with the
type of potential purchaser.
• Motorway noise.
• Out of design, scale and character of the existing buildings.
• Will be a significant addition to the skyline.
118