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

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

stroud.gov.uk
from stroud.gov.uk More from this publisher
01.12.2012 Views

Consultations/Representations: Parish / Town Planning Schedule Date: 10/08/2004 overbearing effect or creating significant loss of light to the neighbouring properties. The size, design and scale of development is in keeping with the existing property and its wider setting. Object: The roof tiles and the extensions fenestration must match the house. Revised Parish Object: We support the reduction in size of the extension, but remain opposed to the application because of the colour of the roof tiles and wall, which should match existing. Neighbour Contributions Letters of Objection Mr & Mrs Watts, Fairhills, Lower Washwell Lane • Object: Materials not in keeping with the existing property. • Question design of windows to rear elevation. Letters of Comment Dr R Evans, Glebe End, Lower Washwell Lane 172

Site Location: Site Report: Planning Schedule Date: 10/08/2004 The application is brought before this Committee due to the objections received by the Painswick Parish Council. The application site is located towards the north eastern edge of the village of Painswick. The site consists of a two storey detached property finished in Bradstone. To the north east and north west of the property are similar detached dwellings with public highways bounding the south east and south west of the site. The application is made for the erection of a single storey side extension to provide a sun room to the property. Planning History. None Planning Considerations. The relevant policy advice for this application is contained within policies H23 and G1 of the Stroud District Local Plan, Revised Deposit Version (as amended June 2001). These policies seek to allow extensions to residential properties subject to a number of criteria. These aim to retain the character of the dwelling to be extended, the amenity of the site and that of neighbouring properties. 173

Consultations/Representations:<br />

Parish / Town<br />

<strong>Planning</strong> <strong>Schedule</strong> <strong>Date</strong>: <strong>10</strong>/<strong>08</strong>/<strong>2004</strong><br />

overbearing effect or creating significant loss of light to the<br />

neighbouring properties. The size, design and scale of development is<br />

in keeping with the existing property and its wider setting.<br />

Object:<br />

The roof tiles and the extensions fenestration must match the house.<br />

Revised Parish<br />

Object:<br />

We support the reduction in size of the extension, but remain opposed to the application because<br />

of the colour of the roof tiles and wall, which should match existing.<br />

Neighbour Contributions<br />

Letters of Objection<br />

Mr & Mrs Watts, Fairhills, Lower Washwell Lane<br />

• Object: Materials not in keeping with the existing property.<br />

• Question design of windows to rear elevation.<br />

Letters of Comment<br />

Dr R Evans, Glebe End, Lower Washwell Lane<br />

172

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!