CSCA Chairman’s comments re. retrospective planning application Cuckoo Hill, Bures
Objection Letter from CSCA Chairman Alexander Robson
Comment submitted date: Tue 30 Apr 2019
Applications DC/19/01422; DC/19/01427; DC/19/01428.
I write to object to the above applications.
I am Chairman of the Colne Stour Countryside Association.
Refusal of these applications should be made swiftly and the law upheld.
The Council has already unanimously rejected retrospective planning permission for the whole site. All houses have been equally wrongly built. The houses across all plots are substantially higher than the original plans and what is the point in the planning process when it appears you cannot follow them, build what you want and then apply retrospectively? It appears that the developer is persistent and determined in getting the properties approved by repeatedly posting retrospective planning permission. The Council has again rightly rejected applications for Certificates for lawful development for each of the plots.
Nothing has changed to justify any different decision.
This is just a further attempt to avoid or lessen enforcement action, which is long overdue.
These applications highlight the importance of protecting the character and setting of Bures, particularly given the decision, supported by Babergh District Council, to apply to have the Dedham Vale AONB extended to include Bures and land further towards Sudbury.
The retrospective Planning Application DC/18/00929, for the whole site, was unanimously refused in July 2018, a decision based on the unacceptable harm identified for the Conservation Area and Grade II Listed White Horse House.
In January Babergh’s own Legal Team refused 5 Applications for Certificates of Lawful Development, a decision that considered the merits of each individual plot, including plots 1&2,3,4 confirming: – “The development does not accord with the site levels drawing approved under planning permission B/14/01103/FUL. – The height of the dwellings does not accord with the plans permitted under planning permission B/14/01103/FUL. – The development has not been constructed in accordance with the permit.