DCSIMG

Appeal to build nine dwellings in Burgess Hill rejected

Permission to build nine dwellings on the site of Oaklands and Holfords on Keymer Road was rejected on the grounds of unacceptable overlooking

Permission to build nine dwellings on the site of Oaklands and Holfords on Keymer Road was rejected on the grounds of unacceptable overlooking

A planning inspector has dismissed a developer’s appeal after permission was refused to knock down two dwellings in Burgess Hill and replace them with nine.

IndigoScott’s plan to build the homes on the site of Oaklands and Holfords on Keymer Road was rejected on the grounds of unacceptable overlooking.

Planning inspector David Harmston’s evaluation stated: “Taken as a whole, I consider that the introduction of a three-storey form of development with habitable room windows on the upper floors overlooking adjoining land and buildings to be materially harmful to the amenities of the adjoining residents.”

Letters of objection were sent to the Planning Committee about the original application.

Anne Holgate, from Hazel Grove, said: “It would have an overbearing impact on the views from both my house and garden and would deprive the garden of the natural light, both daylight and sunlight, that we currently enjoy. “It would also give rise to a loss of the privacy our garden currently gives us.”

Additional objections to the scheme were made by the Oak Hall Residents’ Association, Burgess Hill South East Residents, South of Folders Lane Action Group and Burgess Hill Town Council.

They were concerned about overdevelopment of the site, overlooking and loss of outlook, access and traffic hazards, car parking shortfall, air and water pollution, pressures placed on local infrastructure including schools, land stability, trees, drainage and flooding.

But the inspector deemed unacceptable overlooking to be the only factor significant enough to reject the proposal, concluding: “The basic, underlying fault lies in the design, height and siting of the dwellings and their relationship to their surroundings and the adjoining houses and the development is inherently unacceptable for that reason.

“The adverse impact in this respect would be so serious as to render the proposals unacceptable on this issue. I dismiss the appeal accordingly.”

What do you think? Leave a comment below, or email middy.news@jpress.co.uk

 

Comments

 
 

Back to the top of the page

 

X scottish independence image

Keep up-to-date with all the latest Referendum news