Fear that plans for four-storey care home in Stroud could lead to a loss of privacy and site for residents

Fear that plans for four-storey care home in Stroud could lead to a loss of privacy and site for residents

Fear that plans for four-storey care home in Stroud could lead to a loss of privacy and site for residents

First published in News Stroud News and Journal: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

PLANS to build a four-storey residential care home in Stroud have been recommended for approval despite public opposition.

The application proposes plans for ten new two and three-bedroom flats, in a single building in Westward Road, Stroud.

Developers Neon Homes have also designed the building to be split level – meaning that the side that faces the road is three storeys high and the side that faces the rear is four.

Residents who live opposite the proposed development have adamantly opposed the plans, claiming that it would lead to a loss of privacy and a loss of sight for them.

One Westward Road resident Miles Gray has expressed his concerns not just about the impact the proposed development would have on his property and person, but also the impact on the English Heritage conservation area.

“The plans are not in keeping with the rest of the area,” added Mr Gray.

“The development would sit well somewhere down in Ebley, but it doesn’t sit well in a conservation area next to a row of two storey buildings.

“Is the heritage conservation area being dictated to by developers or is SDC going to stand up and be counted?”

According to a spokesman for the agent, Abigail Snook, on behalf of the developers Neon Homes, the proposed development has been designed in order to avoid overlooking or overshadowing of any adjacent property.

The plans have been called into SDC’s development control committee which will discuss them on Tuesday.

Comments (6)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:49pm Thu 3 Jul 14

eastcombe says...

Clarification required.
The development is residential development and not care home as reported, also the scale and mass of the development would sit well at "Ebley Wharf” not as reported just "Ebley" – (sorry no offence meant to the neighbouring ward).

The article in SNJ came across as a bit of Ninbyisum due to a missing word - with “just dump it down in Ebley” (again very sorry) but missed reported and no offence meant to Ebley or the residents of, but put the word "Wharf" with the "Ebley" bit and you'll understand where my comments where aimed.

Ninbyisum far from it, the site has a valid planning application for residential use 2 flats and 2 houses over 2 and 3 storeys and sits well within the existing residential pattern.

The concern is, the proposed development of 4 storeys within an Industrial Heritage Conservation Area (IHCA), this IHCA was reviewed in 2008; adding in older 2 story properties to the north of the site as they reflect the character and architectural quality of the IHCA, at the same time a omitting the Hilly Orchard development (directly west of the current proposals) from the IHCA due to its direct detrimental impact on the area. The current proposed application is significantly larger in height, scale and mass than the adjacent dwellings of Hilly Orchard and will have a greater impact on the local IHCA than Hilly Orchard.

The question is, should Stroud District Council allow development to determine the conservation area boundary with the consequence of reviewing and altering it again or should the conservation area and its adopted design guide document determine the development??

Again, very sorry for the missed reporting regarding the comments about Ebley.
Clarification required. The development is residential development and not care home as reported, also the scale and mass of the development would sit well at "Ebley Wharf” not as reported just "Ebley" – (sorry no offence meant to the neighbouring ward). The article in SNJ came across as a bit of Ninbyisum due to a missing word - with “just dump it down in Ebley” (again very sorry) but missed reported and no offence meant to Ebley or the residents of, but put the word "Wharf" with the "Ebley" bit and you'll understand where my comments where aimed. Ninbyisum far from it, the site has a valid planning application for residential use 2 flats and 2 houses over 2 and 3 storeys and sits well within the existing residential pattern. The concern is, the proposed development of 4 storeys within an Industrial Heritage Conservation Area (IHCA), this IHCA was reviewed in 2008; adding in older 2 story properties to the north of the site as they reflect the character and architectural quality of the IHCA, at the same time a omitting the Hilly Orchard development (directly west of the current proposals) from the IHCA due to its direct detrimental impact on the area. The current proposed application is significantly larger in height, scale and mass than the adjacent dwellings of Hilly Orchard and will have a greater impact on the local IHCA than Hilly Orchard. The question is, should Stroud District Council allow development to determine the conservation area boundary with the consequence of reviewing and altering it again or should the conservation area and its adopted design guide document determine the development?? Again, very sorry for the missed reporting regarding the comments about Ebley. eastcombe
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Thu 3 Jul 14

kjag23 says...

Have they lost site or sight? Confusing article.
Have they lost site or sight? Confusing article. kjag23
  • Score: 3

4:31pm Fri 4 Jul 14

eastcombe says...

light!
light! eastcombe
  • Score: 0

9:50am Sun 6 Jul 14

robbles says...

This site is also an area used by bats for roosting, any development would surely effect these.
If a bat survey has not already been undertaken to determine the potential for bats on site, and or the presence of bats:
The authority should request that the developers commission an appropriate survey
If a bat survey demonstrates that development is likely to affect bat foraging and/or commuting habitat:
Linear features such as tree lines should be retained, and compensatory planting should be considered wherever possible.
If a bat survey demonstrates that bats and/or a known roost are likely to be affected by the proposed development and planning permission is to be granted:
A condition should be placed on the decision notice requiring the developer to apply for, and obtain, a European Protected Species Licence before work commences.
This site is also an area used by bats for roosting, any development would surely effect these. If a bat survey has not already been undertaken to determine the potential for bats on site, and or the presence of bats: The authority should request that the developers commission an appropriate survey If a bat survey demonstrates that development is likely to affect bat foraging and/or commuting habitat: Linear features such as tree lines should be retained, and compensatory planting should be considered wherever possible. If a bat survey demonstrates that bats and/or a known roost are likely to be affected by the proposed development and planning permission is to be granted: A condition should be placed on the decision notice requiring the developer to apply for, and obtain, a European Protected Species Licence before work commences. robbles
  • Score: 0

9:52am Sun 6 Jul 14

robbles says...

Bats roost here and it will effect them if this development goes ahead.
If a bat survey has not already been undertaken to determine the potential for bats on site, and or the presence of bats:
The authority should request that the developers commission an appropriate survey
If a bat survey demonstrates that development is likely to affect bat foraging and/or commuting habitat:
Linear features such as tree lines should be retained, and compensatory planting should be considered wherever possible.
If a bat survey demonstrates that bats and/or a known roost are likely to be affected by the proposed development and planning permission is to be granted:
A condition should be placed on the decision notice requiring the developer to apply for, and obtain, a European Protected Species Licence before work commences.
One wonders if these have been undertaken, lets hope so
Bats roost here and it will effect them if this development goes ahead. If a bat survey has not already been undertaken to determine the potential for bats on site, and or the presence of bats: The authority should request that the developers commission an appropriate survey If a bat survey demonstrates that development is likely to affect bat foraging and/or commuting habitat: Linear features such as tree lines should be retained, and compensatory planting should be considered wherever possible. If a bat survey demonstrates that bats and/or a known roost are likely to be affected by the proposed development and planning permission is to be granted: A condition should be placed on the decision notice requiring the developer to apply for, and obtain, a European Protected Species Licence before work commences. One wonders if these have been undertaken, lets hope so robbles
  • Score: 0

1:08pm Tue 8 Jul 14

BigBoy22 says...

robbles wrote:
Bats roost here and it will effect them if this development goes ahead.
If a bat survey has not already been undertaken to determine the potential for bats on site, and or the presence of bats:
The authority should request that the developers commission an appropriate survey
If a bat survey demonstrates that development is likely to affect bat foraging and/or commuting habitat:
Linear features such as tree lines should be retained, and compensatory planting should be considered wherever possible.
If a bat survey demonstrates that bats and/or a known roost are likely to be affected by the proposed development and planning permission is to be granted:
A condition should be placed on the decision notice requiring the developer to apply for, and obtain, a European Protected Species Licence before work commences.
One wonders if these have been undertaken, lets hope so
If the developers were to commission the survey the result would only go one way. SDC should commission it and charge the cost on to the developer.
[quote][p][bold]robbles[/bold] wrote: Bats roost here and it will effect them if this development goes ahead. If a bat survey has not already been undertaken to determine the potential for bats on site, and or the presence of bats: The authority should request that the developers commission an appropriate survey If a bat survey demonstrates that development is likely to affect bat foraging and/or commuting habitat: Linear features such as tree lines should be retained, and compensatory planting should be considered wherever possible. If a bat survey demonstrates that bats and/or a known roost are likely to be affected by the proposed development and planning permission is to be granted: A condition should be placed on the decision notice requiring the developer to apply for, and obtain, a European Protected Species Licence before work commences. One wonders if these have been undertaken, lets hope so[/p][/quote]If the developers were to commission the survey the result would only go one way. SDC should commission it and charge the cost on to the developer. BigBoy22
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree