Page 101 - Archive in reverse date order

www.northcrayresidents.org.uk

TO: Mrs Helen Acton, Development Control, London Borough of Bexley

FROM: Mrs Jean Gammons, Hon Secretary

Dear Mrs Acton DATE: 7 July 2015

15/01453/FUL Orchard View Farm: removal of mobile home and replacement by a 4 bedroom
detached chalet bungalow and double detached garage.

1. This is to register our strong OBJECTION to the above application. We regard the building of a
large detached two-storey house and a double detached garage on this site as an inappropriate
development in Green Belt and Heritage Land. A new 2-storey building which, with its mass and
height, would have a greater adverse impact upon openness than the mobile home which it is
intended to replace. Nor is the proposed new house a re-use of an existing building. Nor is its size
and design in keeping with neighbouring (Locally Listed) dwellings.

2. The site is in a relatively unspoilt area of Green Belt and Heritage Land, and the building of a
large house with a double detached garage would significantly change its character from a rural one
to one of a suburban nature. Also, the site is on land classified as “agricultural”. There is no
precedent for it to be developed for residential use, and we certainly do not see the presence of
boarding kennels etc on this agricultural Green Belt/Heritage Land as a very special circumstance to
justify developing it for residential use. In fact, we see no very special circumstances that would
justify breaching the policies that are intended to protect Green Belt and Heritage Land. Notably,
policies CS01 (g); CS06 (e); CS09 (a); CS17 (a) and (c) and 4.8.10; CS19 (c) and (d); ENV4;
ENV11; ENV22, 5.29 and 5.32; and the NPPF paras 79-80, 87-90, 111 and Annex 2 Glossary.

Please also see also attached annex summarising key extracts from these policies.

3. We are also concerned about the estimated additional vehicular movements a day along
Parsonage Lane and Cocksure Lane (narrow country lanes with no pavements) that would result
from this proposed development- especially bearing in mind our comments in para 4 below. This is
especially relevant in upper Parsonage Lane as the application site lies alongside a bridle path used
for leisure purposes by riders and walkers. The applicant's argument that such a development could
lead to the “refurbishment of the current industrial and/or boarding kennel business” is seen as a
fatuous, meaningless statement without foundation- and it creates no “special circumstances”.
Moreover, it is one unhelpful to local residents, and those who visit this area for recreational
purposes, as the proposed development would result in even more vehicular traffic!

4. We also feel very strongly that this fresh application should be considered together with the
applicant's previous wish to erect three 4-bedroom detached houses with detached garages on
another part of the site (ref 15/00015/FUL). This application was rejected (see decision letter dated
24 March 2015) but we note that the applicant has now appealed against this decision.