87 Land to the south of Greenend, 17 Dene Road - 73243/APP/2022/2535
PDF 30 MB
Erection of 6 dwellings with new access to Foxdell and erection of 3 dwellings with new access to Dene Road with associated landscaping and parking.
Recommendation: Approval with s106 legal agreement
Decision:
RESOLVED: That the application be approved.
Minutes:
Erection of 6 dwellings with new access to Foxdell and erection of 3 dwellings with new access to Dene Road with associated landscaping and parking.
Officers presented the application and drew Members’ attention to the addendum, which noted that there were some revised drawings. There was also a minor alteration to include the proposed crossover, and a Heads of Term for managing the implementation of the legal agreement. There was also some amended wording to the construction management plan.
Officers highlighted some verbal updates. Since the publication of the addendum report, officers had received two additional representations. The first was from David Simmonds CBE MP, who noted that residents had raised issues with existing construction works taking place near the site which had rendered Dene Road inaccessible by residents and minivans collecting students from the nearby RNIB Sunshine House School. Concerns had also been raised with the proposed access from Foxdell given the sighting of the tree. The MP would like these matters taken into consideration.
A second representation had been received from a neighbouring resident which identified minor inconsistencies and labelling between the proposed site plan and the floor and elevation plans for the proposed terrace dwellings of No. 7-9. It also raised concerns with the loss of light to the downstairs hall at No. 1 Foxdell. Neighbouring amenity was addressed within the committee report. As this was not a habitable room, any impact would be acceptable. On the inconsistencies in the plans, it was confirmed that the first-floor windows on the side elevation that faced No. 1 Foxdell would be obscured glazed as per the condition.
Two petitions had been received in objection to the application.
The first lead petitioner addressed the Committee and made the following points: