Front garden basement at 44 Arthur Road, Winchester

What was proposed

The application proposed a basement beneath the front parking area, with the driveway reinstated above it.

“The proposal is for a basement beneath the front parking area. This is to be approximately 4m in depth, 9.5m in width (walls inclusive) and 10.9m in length. It will cover the extent of the land beneath the driveway. The driveway will then be reinstalled.”

Officer report

The site and its history

The site is a contemporary two-storey house in the Winchester Conservation Area, with earlier extensions and gate replacement permitted.

“The application site is a contemporary two storey dwelling house located within the Winchester Conservation Area, specifically within the Hyde area. The property itself is on relatively level ground; however, Arthur Road slopes down considerably from Worthy Road towards Saxon Road. The frontage of the site is currently partial block paving with gravel around. The boundary to front of the site is black gates, and an approximately 2m high evergreen hedge.”

“22/02434/HOU - Replacement of old wooden gates that have rotted (now removed) with a new sliding gate more in keeping with the property and with similar properties on the road – Permitted 10/02/2023”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended permission because the development was not considered to cause harmful effects on local character or residential amenity warranting refusal.

“The development is recommended for permission as it is not considered to result in detrimental harm to the character of the area or to residential amenity that would warrant refusal.”

“The application is reported to Committee due to the number of Objections received contrary to the Officer’s recommendation.”

Officer report

Main concerns about the work

Drainage, landscape and tree officers raised concerns about groundwater, loss of natural ground and insufficient protection for neighbouring trees.

“Service Lead – Engineering (Drainage) - • Objects. Following review of the submitted Drainage and Ground Conditions Technical Assessment, I maintain my objection to the proposal on groundwater and drainage grounds. Whilst the report provides a desk-based review of available geological and environmental information, it confirms that no intrusive ground investigation, groundwater monitoring, or site specific hydrogeological assessment has been undertaken.”

“The principal concern relates to the proposed basement and its potential to alter groundwater flow paths, impede groundwater movement, or cause groundwater mounding that could adversely affect neighbouring land, property, drainage infrastructure, or flood risk. The submitted report acknowledges that the groundwater regime cannot be confirmed without further investigation but nevertheless concludes that impacts are unlikely.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Archaeology, historic environment and ecology officers raised no objections, while drainage, landscape and tree officers did not support the proposal.

“Service Lead – Sustainability and Natural Environment (Landscape) – • The Landscape Officer maintains a position of being unable to support the application following review of the further information submitted.”

“Nor has it been demonstrated that the existing landscape character and function of the garden could be satisfactorily recreated through the proposed raised planting. This is particularly significant given the site's location within the Hyde Conservation Area. The existing front garden, boundary vegetation and soft landscape form part of the characteristic separation and transition between the property, neighbours' property and the street.”

Officer report

What people said

Councillors and objectors raised concerns about construction disruption, biodiversity, traffic, residential amenity, the Conservation Area and nearby foundations.

“Councillor Paula Ferguson – Winchester Eastgate - I am submitting these comments in my capacity as the County Councillor for Winchester Eastgate, having been contacted by residents in my division who are concerned about this proposal. Residents have raised two main concerns.”

“- Traffic Disruption – construction traffic, vehicular access, narrow road, pedestrian safety. - Environmental – loss of biodiversity through trees, hedgerow, landscaping; carbon footprint - Residential Amenity – noise and vibration during construction, air pollution. - Harm to the character of the Conservation Area. - Development is discordant with the local vernacular. - Development could impact foundations of nearby buildings.”

Officer report

Public participation

There was no public participation before members asked questions and debated the application.

The committee’s decision

The committee granted permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives, including the added groundwater and drainage condition.

“In addition, the planning case officer gave a further verbal update in respect of an additional Condition 6 regarding submission of a ground water investigation as well as detailed foul and surface water drainage proposals prior to the development commencing.”

“The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informative set out in the report and in the verbal update (regarding new condition 6).”

Minutes