Plans from 7 June 2010
Planning Application W2010/ 0185LB/0188 Globe Hotel, Theatre Street,
Warwick.
Dear Ms Prince
Although the proposal to clad the kitchen fume extraction duct on the west elevation in response to enforcement action might be an improvement, it is by no means satisfactory. Despite its lack of care this is a listed building in a Conservation Area and a solution that removes the duct from the Theatre Street elevation should be adopted. There was a proposal to resite the duct within the courtyard, this option is preferable and should be pursued in $consultation with a qualified and experienced Conservation Architect.We would ask the Council to refuse planning permission for this proposal.
Planning Application W2010/ 0334 43 High Street, Warwick.
Dear Ms Butler
It is regrettable that this outbuilding, which is within the curtilage of a listed building, has been allowed to deteriorate to its present condition. It appears to have some character and should be repaired rather than demolished.
Planning Application W2010/ 0349 88 Emscote Road, Warwick
Dear Mr Wallsgrove
We wish to object to the proposal to convert this dwelling into a ‘House in Multiple Occupation”, the cumulative effect of such conversions in this part of the town is having a detrimental impact on the area. Allowing this application to proceed will have an unacceptable adverse effect on the amenity of nearby users contrary to Local Plan policy DP2.It is a recognised problem and we understand that there is guidance in place to enable local authorities to limit the number of such establishments concentrated in any one area. We would ask the Council to refuse planning permission for this application.
Planning Application W2010/ 0408LB/0566 22 Mill Street, Warwick.
Dear Mr Wallsgrove
The fact that there is a roof terrace at the house next door to 22 Mill Street is not a precedent for other listed buildings to be treated in similar unsuitable way, planning permission for the development should be refused. The Council has now the means of resisting such features in the advice in its design guide.
Notwithstanding this view, should the Council be minded to grant permission we would ask that the advice of the Conservation Architect be sought to ensure that the railings will be appropriate.
Planning Application W2010/ 0509 128 Myton Road Warwick.
Dear Mr Haslett
We wish to object to the proposed extensions to this property, they are quite out of proportion to the neighbouring properties and damaging to their amenity, such developments are contrary to Local Plan policy DP2. We would ask the Council to refuse planning permission for this application in its present form.
Planning Application W2010/ 0512/0513LB 80 Coventry Road, Warwick.
Dear Mr Wallsgrove.
While having no objection to the proposal to convert the garage into sleeping accommodation we are concerned that it may involve the reduction in garden area to accommodate the parking of vehicles. Such
a development would affect the setting of this listed building contrary to Local Plan policy DAP4 and would be grounds for refusal of planning permission.
Planning Application W2010/ 521/522LB 13 The Butts, Warwick.
Dear Mr Wallsgrove
We find the improvements to the fenestration admirable and have no objection to the external alterations to the outbuilding, however we would reiterate our concern at the proposal to have a plate glass balustrade on the top floor, which will be highly reflective and very visible from the important landscape of Priory Park. A well designed metal railings would be more appropriate.
Planning Application W2010/0524LB 64-66 Market Place, Warwick.
Dear Mr Wallsgrove
The building is of considerable historic interest as industrial and commercial premises, the proposals should be reviewed very carefully by the Conservation Architect to ensure that as much of its remaining features and character are retained.
Planning Application W2010/0530 Land rear of Cherry Street, Warwick.
Dear Mr Wallsgrove
Subject to neighbours comments, we have no objection to this residential development nor to the layout proposed, however, an excessive proportion of the site is taken up by parking and the provision for vehicle access is entirely unsatisfactory. The proposals would produces a highway environment in a residential area (where vehicle traffic is very light and should be very slow speed) and would be contrary to DFT policy by giving priority to vehicles over people on foot. This is both functionally and visually unacceptable. Not withstanding the Highway authority’s prior involvement, this aspect of the scheme should be re-worked before planning permission is given.
Planning Application W2010/ 0601 9 Mill Street, Warwick
Dear Ms Butler
This extension is out of character with what is a very typical mediaeval cottage. It damages the listed building and the conservation area all contrary to Local Plan policies. It is particularly regrettable that this application follows the premature demolition of part of the building. It is inappropriate that work to such a delicate listed building has not had the benefit of qualified conservation architectural expertise.
Planning Application W2010/ 0622 2 Myton Crescent, Warwick.
Dear Ms Prince
While welcoming the principle of building a new house to meet stringent environmental standards and add to the stock of Life-Time homes, we are not certain that this design is necessary to achieve these objectives. It would seem that in seeking security, the design has produced front and side elevations which appear fortress-like and unsympathetic to the neighbouring properties.
Planning Application W2010/ 0658LB 78-80 West Street, Warwick .
Dear Ms Prince
The proposal to remove old, albeit not original staircases (little is original in a house of this age) and especially the proposal to form very wide openings in old structural walls gives rise to concern that they may cause undue damage to the historic character of the building. We ask that the conservation architect becomes involved to consider carefully the extent to which these changes are appropriate.
JULY
Planning Application W2010/ 0644. 23a Market Place, Warwick.
Dear Ms Butler
While it is claimed that this change of use from retail to office does not breach the 25% non retail limit on a primary retail frontage we wish to object to the loss of another retail outlet on this prime Warwick shopping street, we are concerned that the change will not enhance the commercial viability of the town centre. It should be noted that there is already a new estate agency two or three doors away from these premises. We would ask the Council to refuse planning permission for this change of use.
Planning Application W2010/ 0660. 40 Market Place, Warwick.
Dear Mr Wallsgrove
The coffee shop next door to this shop was persuaded to tone down its logo in consideration of its proximity to the historic Market Hall Museum and we would ask that the factory outlet shop do the same. The fascia sign comprising two lines of text is too large and the colours employed are too bright and garish. It is unfortunate that the new shopkeeper did not consult with the Council before erecting advertising signs in the Conservation Area and without the benefit of planning permission. The situation can now be rectified by Council refusing permission for the new signs and signs more appropriate to the shop’s location put in their place. We also wish to object to the application of an opaque covering to the lower parts of the four shop windows, this should be removed and the windows used for display purposes as intended. The setting of listed buildings is specifically protected from adverse development in the Local Plan at policy DAP4 as is the Conservation Area at policy DAP 8.
SENT 7 JULY
Planning Application W2010/ 0541. 22 Swan Street, Warwick.
Dear Ms Butler
We are concerned over the inadequacy of the fume extraction proposed which is designed to cater for a modest cooking programme but which may be extended without making further application to the planning department. The discharge from the extractor is by way of a vertical duct outside the building which will prove to be be an eyesore, and a nuisance from noise and smell, in what is a very confined area of rear buildings and yards. We ask the Council to refuse planning permission for this application.
Planning Application W2010/ 0632. 13-15 Jury Street, Warwick.
Dear Ms Butler
This building is sandwiched between much older buildings which have a common style and proportion of fenestration with slim glazing bars, the large windows of 13-15 Jury Street are an example of the period in which the building was erected. Breaking up the widows into two smaller side hung windows will remove this feature and will do so in a clumsy fashion if UPVC with its thick framing and central glazing bars is used. It is because of the thickness of their structural members that the use of plastic windows is considered as inappropriate in a Conservation Area. It is our view that the new windows should be made from powder coated aluminium. The aversion to the use of plastic building products in the Conservation Area extends to UPVC shiplap cladding and we do not see the use of this as an acceptable cure for a damp wall, there are other ways of dealing with such a problem. We ask the Council to refuse planning permission for this application in its present form.
Planning Application W2010/0676. The Eastgate, Warwick.
Dear Mr Wallsgrove
We welcome the proposed change of use of the Eastgate from schoolroom to residential which will hopefully lead to its restoration and future maintenance. We are assuming that there will be a listed
building planning application when details of the changes shown on the drawings will be scrutinised, however we would at this stage express concern over the proposal for the installation of Velux rooflights which may be visible and inappropriate in such a setting.
Planning Application W2010/0680. 19 Myton Croft, Warwick.
Dear Ms Galloway
We are not happy with the proposal to use a flat roof as part of the expansion of this residence, aesthetically it would be out of place on this building and architecturally unsatisfactory. However we would not wish to press the point if the neighbours do not find the proposals objectionable.
Planning Application W2010/ 0695. Campbell House, Stratford Road. Warwick.
Dear Mr Wallsgrove
We welcome the proposed move of Fortress Wastecare from their premises in Dongan Road and the ending of the use of Warwick town centre streets by the company’s heavy vehicles. However the Campbell House site is in an area where rural policies apply and is on one of the main approach roads into the town which has up to now been reasonably well protected from the obvious intrusion of industrial development. While the planning application makes much of the accessibility for the company’s vehicles of the A46 trunkroad and M40 motorway it does not specifically rule out the use of Warwick town centre. For these reasons we would ask that permission be withheld until a comprehensive landscaping plan has been approved which will screen the vehicles from view and screen the industrial fence on the frontage to the Stratford Road and that a condition be included in the permission which prohibits the use of Warwick town centre by the company’s vehicles except where a collection is to be made within it.
Planning Application W2010/0794. 50b Coten End, Warwick.
Dear Ms Prince
We see this application as a sensible use of these premises by two complimentary practitioners. The original planning application to use them for this purpose raised problems for parking, we would ask you to ascertain that these been resolved to the satisfaction of the neighbours before granting permission.
Planning Application W2010/0804. Park Tavern, Lakin Road, Warwick.
Dear Mr Smith
We wish to object to the construction of a covered pergola in the yard of these premises, this proposal together with changes to the doors from the function room indicate that the intention is to extend the activities of the public house into the yard to the detriment, because of increased noise levels, to the peace and amenity of nearby residents. We ask the Council to refuse planning permission for this application. Notwithstanding the above, if the Council is minded to grant permission we would ask that a condition be attached limiting the use of the covered yard to say 10 pm or to more limited times specified by the Environmental Health department.
NB
Planning Application W2010/ 0792. 22 Myton Gardens, Warwick. Roof lterations, revised scheme. We criticised application for over development but have not forwarded comments as planning permission was granted for this development by W2009/0906.
