The department’s recommendation originally was that this Planning in Principle application should be approved. The scheme proposed the creation of a low dormer-style 3-bedroom dwelling within the rear garden of an existing dwelling Westwinds in Maudelaine Estate. The estate is located within the Built Up Area and therefore there is no presumption as such against development of this nature. Furthermore, the proposed dwelling is able to achieve sufficient standards of amenity space and parking (in accordance with the department’s standards) and could be designed so as not to be unduly prejudicial to any neighbouring properties. Access is to be through the site of an existing garage block (which is to be demolished) – therefore the point of access onto the private road is existing and would not need to go through the central part of the estate. In light of the fact that Maudelaine Estate is a distinctive group of some 15 individual dwellings, the Planning Applications Panel took the view that the scheme proposed an inappropriate development which would have been out of keeping with, and detrimental to, the character of the area. The strength of this argument as a material planning consideration is considered to be weakened somewhat by recent approvals for the sites opposite Westwinds. In 2002, permission was granted for the demolition of the property High Gale and the construction of 2 new dormer cottages in its place. In 2004, permission was granted for the construction of 3 new detached 4-bedroom dwellings in the garden of Melmea. These sites are both within the Built-Up Area and located immediately adjacent on the opposite (south) side of the railway walk. A 12-signatory petition objecting to the proposal together with three other letters of objection were all received at the time of the application. One further letter of objection was received since the re-advertisement of the application as an RFR. Points raised originally within the letters include the following; The development would be detrimental to the environmental setting of the Railway Walk. It would be out of keeping with the character and setting of the estate (ie 15 units on distinct individual plots) and be a general over-development of the area. It would interfere with the privacy of the residents who live to either side of this development and as a result there would be an attendant devaluation of these properties. This development is proposed for speculative rather than personal reasons. An approval would set a precedent for further development of this nature within the estate - thereby leading to the bespoilment of the estate’s character and ambiance. The location of the proposed vehicle entrance to the proposed dwelling with pose a danger to cyclists and pedestrians using the railway walk. Following recent residential development on land opposite the site traffic problems have worsened largely as a result of reduced visibility at the corner where the new driveway would emerge. This development would compound the problem. If this development is permitted a condition should be included to retain landscaping in the vicinity. The agent responded to these letters; his reply is included here. Points raised include; The property would be designed so as to ensure no loss of privacy to neighbouring properties. This is a Built-Up Area site and easily able to provide adequate parking and amenity The development proposed is consistent with recently approved development nearby Having regard to all those circumstances mentioned above, the department continues to believe that it would be unreasonable to refuse permission. | 
gov.je