Comment or question: Q205
| NDP-S017 - Woolhead/Bagley/Coote - Britten Close | |||
| Comment no.: | Q205 | Date: | 12/02/2014 11:09 |
| Comment by: | DAVID BAGLEY | Post code: | NN9 6AY - Britten Close |
| We read with interest the comments made by your focus group in their letter NDP-0171 to you dated 9 February 2014. We refer in particular to the paragraph concerning our submission NDP-S017 and I quote "On a positive note, the Britten Close proposals have some merit. We are supportive of the amendment proposed by you i.e. access to the proposed bungalows via Kimbolton Road rather than via Britten Close so as not to set a precident for building behind buildings" This observation seems to contradict its self as on the one hand the writer supports our submission if access were via Kimbolton Road but not if the bungalows are behind existing houses which of course they must be as they are all proposed dwellings on rear garden land. After all we can't change the shape of our very large gardens to overcome this situation. Building behind buildings is not unusual where there is sufficient land to do so and we would advocate our submission falls into this category. The concerns raised by your writer over the JST submission could have also referred to the very high density proposed for the site which includes 8 two tier dwellings and 1 dormer bungalow equivalent to 36 dwellings per hectare. We thought the village expectation was to ensure that any development was kept well below the Government top target not exceed it and wouldn't this development also involve building behind buildings albeit new builds? We understand the concern over building behind buildings and support those decisions where it is not practical to do so a recent example might be the proposed social housing off Hill Side where the previously rented garages are located. |
|||