A controversial proposal to demolish a very distinctive 1960s bungalow, and build five more on the site instead has been refused permission.

Swindon-based building firm Proudmill Homes had put in a request for consent to knock down 27 Church Walk South and build five bungalows on the site and garden.

The company’s submitted plans show that three bungalows will be lined up at the rear of the plot, with gardens to the back of the houses backing on the gardens of the houses in Cheney Manor Road.

The plans received significant opposition from neighbours.

There were 25 letters of objection sent to council planners with many saying the existing building put up in the 1960s, and which had a very distinctive appearance, should be kept.

Stephen Dunford and Greg Mills who run Proudmill Homes said that was impossible.

They showed the Local Democracy Reporter around the house which appeared to be in very poor condition.

He said at the time that restoration was the company’s original plan but added: “After an inspection and a survey, it would cost much too much to get back into a modern habitable state.

“It would be well over £200,000.”

Central Swindon North objected to the plan saying it would be overdevelopment and there was a covenant that said the land could support a maximum of 12 properties per acre, and the proposal would be in contravention of that.

The then ward councillor Sudha Sri Nukana, who has just been elected again to the Rodbourne Cheney ward also objected and asked that if planners were minded to approve the plan it be called in for discussion by the planning committee.

Cllr Nukana cited the loss of greenery and trees as well as overdevelopment, parking issues and visual impact as some of her objections.

In the end, planning officers were not minded to approve the plans.

The recommendation said: “The proposals would result in the net gain of four new homes which would offer environmental, social and economic benefits in the form of the provision of homes in an environmentally sustainable location, construction opportunities, local spending etc.

“In this case, the adverse impacts in respect of the proposed design and harm to the visual amenity of the area, and failure to demonstrate acceptable impacts on legally protected species and a lack of biodiversity net gain.”

The planners also had issues with the design and layout of the proposed bungalows: “The proposal represents a cramped form of development, and “overdevelopment” of the site, resulting in plot sizes which would not be characteristic of the area."

Help support trusted local news

Sign up for a digital subscription now: https://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/subscribe/

As a digital subscriber, you will get:            

  • Unlimited access to the Swindon Advertiser website        
  • Advert-light access             
  • Reader rewards             
  • Full access to our app