|
We recieved the following feedback from a local resident after press comments about Thorntree House:
Having read comments in the Darlington & Stockton (25 July 2008) said to have been made by Graham Robb which described
Thorntree Villas as a "dogs breakfast" I was intrigued by your website. Could someone tell me why there is a photo of
Thorntree House on your website with the following comment attached to it:
From Cllr Doris Jones: Thorntree House, Picture (above) showing Thorntree House before development started. Further
planning applications will be resisted.
I have lived in MSG for over 11 years and for the last 18 months I have been a resident of Thorntree Villas. Prior to
this "dogs breakfast" development this property was one of the best kept secrets in the village - no-one knew it was
there as the grounds appeared to be over-grown and poorly maintained. As a result of this development eleven families
will now have the opportunity to live in the centre of the village. Rather than perpetuating the myth that this has resulted
in the loss of a mature green space I prefer to look on it as an opportunity to secure a long term future for a number of
mature trees which prior to the development were neglected by the previous owner.
I have three mature chesnut trees in my garden which I am committed to protecting. Part of this protection will involve
the services of a qualified aborist as all the trees are in need of some attention. As all the trees are subject to tree preservation
orders I will require planning permission to undertake these works. Can I assume that the FCA will object to my application
?
Robin Coulson
1 Thorntree Villas
From Cllr Doris Jones: Thorntree House, Picture (above) showing Thorntree House before
development started. Further planning applications will be resisted.
Comments from local resident in Castle Close
A resident in castle close has contacted us concerned about the planning
application (08/00264/FUL) for a dwelling in what was the garden of 2 Castle Close, which would front onto
Church Lane.
2 Castle Close:The plan is for a two bed bungalow
- The site area is 534 sq metres
- The floor area of the proposed building is given as 134 sq metres (plus garage, I assume?)
Length 16.50m, width 9m, height 5.10m.
- The materials used would be red/orange bricks, with PVC double glazing
- A new vehicle and pedestrian access onto Church Lane would have to be made
- There are trees and hedges which would be affected, including five trees with TPOs
- Sewage and surface water would go into the main sewage system
- There has been no neighbour consultation
The above information is taken from the application.
Concerned has been expressed that:
- This site area is very small and the bungalow would fill a lot of the available area, looking
out of proportion. The garage would directly abut the fence which separates this plot from 2 Castle Close to the
east, and the bungalow would be very close to the fence between it and 4 Castle Close to the north.
- Admittedly, there are already some other modernish properties in Church Lane which are not
very attractive, but why add to their number?
- In the proposal the applicant has stated that biodiversity will not be affected, and that there
are no protected or priority species either on the site or adjacent. However, any loss of green space, trees and hedges will
obviously affect biodiversity, and as a keen birdwatcher I know that there are at present a large number of birds in the area,
which although not currently endangered species are certainly not common eg bullfinches, sparrowhawks,
great spotted woodpeckers.
- A section of hedge fronting onto Church Lane has already been removed.
- The applicant has submitted at least two similar previous applications for this site, which
have been refused, even after appeal.
EDITOR REPLIES: The friends of the Conservation Area meeting were in sympathy with your point of
view on Castle Close/Church Lane and will make an objection.
From Mrs J Hardy:
Just to say how impressed I was with Wednesday's meeting and I am sure the level of support will continue
to grow day by day. I am very grateful that you are including the proposed development to the rear of my property in
your campaign. The reference number is: 08/00264/FUL and the Planning Officer is Stephen Edwards. All objections have
to be in by 22nd April. I heard from a planning officer yesterday that the trees referred to in this particular application
and which they wish to fell are in fact under a Tree Preservation Order, but I knew this anyway. He says they will only
grant permission for felling if the trees are diseased (which they aren't, at the moment that is) or a danger to the
public, which they are not.
|
