Palatines Homes have won their appeal to build 3 homes on the site at 253 Greys Road (opposite Chilterns End) after both Henley Town Council and SODC refused the planning application.
The original application was submitted in May 2020 and has been reviewed by Henley Town Council twice after amended plans were submitted. On both occasions their recommended reasons were that “on the grounds that the proposal would result in overdevelopment, would be overbearing for neighbouring properties and would not respect the character of the area. This development would result in significant additional cars and the Committee are concerned over safety with vehicular entrances proposed near to the roundabout. Concerned that substantial trees have been removed prior to the arboricultural reports being undertaken.”
Most of the developments on this part of Greys Road have had only 2 houses built on the original site.
The Planning Inspectorate in his report which allowed the appeal said, “The spacing between the 3 dwellings proposed on the site and to the adjacent properties at 251 Greys Road and 255a Greys Road would be relatively modest, and the plots would also be among some of the narrowest along the street. However, the area has no prevailing building form or pattern of plot widths or spacing between buildings. In this context, I do not consider that the width of the plots would be striking or incongruous, nor that their height, depth or appearance would be unsympathetic. The gaps between buildings would not be dissimilar to those that I observed between a number of others nearby, and despite their depth would still be sufficient to provide for appreciable separation between the dwellings and to afford views through to the rear part of the site from the street. The space to the sides of the buildings would also be supplemented by the deep frontages and rear gardens, and in my judgement the overall spacing around the development would provide a suitable setting for the dwellings and an appropriate sense of spaciousness.”
“The Council raises concern the dwelling on Plot 1 would be overbearing to the occupiers of the adjacent dwelling at No 251. This property has a ground-floor side projection with full-height rear glazing serving a habitable room set fairly close to the boundary with the appeal site. The dwelling proposed on Plot 1 would project deeper than No 251 to the rear. However, the majority of the additional depth would be single storey with a flat roof, and much of its height would be screened by the existing boundary fencing. The two-storey part of the dwelling would extend only a modest distance beyond the rear of No 251, and would include a sloping rear roofslope that would reduce in height towards the deepest point.”
Work has already started with the original house demolished and plant machinery is on site preparing the foundations.