Construction of 2 new detached 2 storey properties with new site access and arboricultural works off Hazel Way. Variation of Condition 1 of Permission: 18/00213/F - Amendments to include the provision of two separate accesses from Hazel Way and alterations to the landscape scheme. Amended plans submitted 4 July 2022; 24 Jan 2023; 7 June 2023 and now 23 August 2023. Permission granted.

The CRA’s views are as previously submitted, there is yet again nothing in this 23 August retrospective application which justifies granting permission for two entrances. 

The application seeks to legitimise the two entrances that were built without permission and despite the permission granted for one entrance.  It was clear from the Inspector’s decision, the agreement and the amended application submitted by the applicant following that decision and the planning permission granted that two entrances were not permitted for this development. 

The facts have not changed and are:

a)      When the appeal for the two additional houses on this site was considered, the Planning Inspectorate’s main concern was the effect that two separate entrances would have upon the character and appearance of Hazel Way. The Inspector considered that two entrances would be an obtrusive, urbanising feature in the street scene and detract from the semi-rural character of the lane.

b)      Following this decision, the applicant submitted a revised application, changing the design and site layout so that the two houses shared one access point onto Hazel Way. Planning permission was granted in March 2021 for one access point and with certain boundary treatments made a condition of the permission in order to preserve the visual amenity of the area and protect neighbouring residential amenities. 

c)       Despite this and ignoring both the revised application and the planning permission granted for one access, the applicant immediately built two separate entrances into Hazel Way in March 2021, one with obtrusive features eg. brick pillars and black fencing. This was reported to Enforcement, resulting in the first of many retrospective applications some ten months later.

The two entrances have no legitimacy.

There is no evidence provided with this revised retrospective application to show that two driveways are not, as the Inspector originally found in 2021, inappropriate.  The brick pillars built to one entrance and inappropriate boundary treatment, not in line with the planning permission, exacerbates the problem.  The original arguments against having two access points remain - they are an obtrusive, urbanising feature that impacts adversely on Hazel Way’s semi-rural character and have an adverse impact upon neighbouring residential amenity, more so since existing trees were removed during construction in 2021. 

The proposed street scene diagram showing planting that screens the two dwellings is not at all representative of the reality of Hazel Way today, as the Tree and Landscape Officer confirms.  Both dwellings and access points can be clearly seen from the roadway.  It would take decades for the landscape to look as depicted.  The proposed regimented planting is exactly in keeping with the urbanising features that would be so detrimental to this semi-rural location, destroying its character.

The two entrances were built in the full knowledge that it was the exact opposite of what had been approved, as it had not been possible to legitimately obtain permission for them through the planning system, even at appeal.  If this retrospective application is granted permission, it would make a complete mockery of the planning process.  It would legitimise developers doing as they like, in this case, despite an appeal decision and the planning permission granted to allow the two houses to be built in the first place but with only one entrance.

The CRA request that this application be refused and the appropriate action taken.