An Extension

Councillors considered the proposed extension would be well screened and the site was large enough not to be overdeveloped.

The property was not within the parish of Highclere. Councillors however could see no reason to refuse this aplication

Councillors expressed concern that this application was for yet another five bedroom house. It was however appreciated that had the land been sold to a developer there would have been an intensive over-development of the site with multiple dwellings. The original old house "Westridge" was also to be preserved. Councillor Mrs Roberts wished it to be recorded that she objected to the vehicular access opening on to Tubbs Lane and pointed out that there already existed a driveway into Star Lane that could be used. All councillors considered this but there was no consensus of opinion on this point, however it was agreed that minimum hedge removal should be a condition of planning approval.

Councillors were aware that a previous application had been refused. Although once again a large house was being created, there had been much development around this property of large dwellings, and they felt that planning approval could not be refused.

Erection of a 2 Storey Extension

Councillors considered that this would not look out of place

(a) A copy of a letter dated 30 July 2000, sent from Mrs C Morrell to Basingstoke and Deane Planning Department has been received. It outlines objections to application BDB48353 removal of condition limiting attendance at Brookfield Clinic.

(b) A copy of a letter dated 1 August 2000, sent from Thames Vale Homes Ltd to Mr A Reid has been received. The letter discusses the removal of conifers on the joint boundary between Mr Reid's property "Sunnyholm" and the Woodside development.

Councillors expressed disappointment but not surprise, at Thames Vale's decisions.