Comments and questions on:
NDP-S004 - Sue & John Chapman - Caldecott
|NDP-S004 - Sue & John Chapman - Caldecott|
|Comment no.:||Q225||Date:||22/02/2014 13:30|
|Comment by:||NDP Working Party||Post code:||NN9 6AP - Water Lane|
|Following public consultation, the original proposal NDP-S004 has now been submitted as 2 separate propositions.|
|Comment no.:||Q052||Date:||17/01/2014 12:47|
|Comment by:||Session NDP-C001||Post code:||NN9 6AR - Caldecott|
|Q. Would you have put forward this site if the call for aspirational sites hadn't happened?
A. Yes both of the proposed dwellings have previously been the subject of planning applications.
|Comment no.:||Q036||Date:||17/01/2014 12:18|
|Comment by:||Adrian Dale||Post code:||NN9 6AP - Water Lane|
|Q. Would these be considered as two separate dwellings with a shared drive and garden or one property with one dwelling ancillary to the other?
A. They would be two separate properties with shared drive access
|Comment no.:||Q035||Date:||17/01/2014 12:16|
|Comment by:||Session NDP-C001||Post code:||NN9 6AP - Water Lane|
|Q. As you haven't worked out the details yet, are you basically seeking to register the plot as suitable for 2 dwellings at some point in the future.
A. Yes, we have failed to get planning approval for both properties at various points in the 1990s because the plot was then technically outside the boundary of Caldecott. We are using this opportunity to establish that we can build.