Page 30 - Archive in reverse date order

SUMMARY

• The deciding factor should be Bexley's Policy CS17 against harmful backland
development, not recent govt. pressure to increase housing supply

• The proposed development is also contrary to Policies UDP H3, H5, H8 and CS06

• There is no perceived change in planning law to contradict Planning's views in 1967,
1973 and 1984; nor those of two Planning Inspectors.

• The application site might be surrounded on all sides by houses, but it is, nonetheless,
garden land

• The garden's use as a backland development for houses and a new road will have a
harmful impact: loss of amenity and privacy, more noise and disturbance, light
pollution and less security.

• The proposed development will change the character of the area, one which adjoins a
Conservation Area

• What was wrong for Wansunt Road in 2012 is even more wrong for St James Way
because of the greater impact on people's amenities etc.

• There will be a significant loss of mature trees; and a real threat to the Cedars
protected by TPOs – both of them from root damage, and one from brutal pruning

• Whether or not Listed Building Consent has been granted in respect of the old wall
is unclear

• There will be a harmful impact on wildlife, eg badgers which are a protected species

• The development would not make a significant contribution to Bexley's housing
supply – one already made by North Cray in recent years

• The plans present an unrealistic picture of the true nature and size of site.

• A Site Visit before any decision is made is strongly recommended,

Yours sincerely

Jean Gammons

Appendixes:-

A- Precedents for refusal
B- Residents' concerns
C- Plans of Wansunt Road & St James Way /APPX A