Page 69 - Eden Meadow 35 houses application as of 12 October

PART B- ADDENDUM

SITE LAYOUT PLAN

Feedback from the consultation period during the application

focused on changing the concept so that the parcel works as a stand

alone site. This in turn required a reconsideration of the layout with

a move to more of a perimeter block so that the proposals would

respond positively to the edges of the site.

The revised site layout plan illustrates how the concepts to move

towards a perimeter block and introduce larger buffers both to the

listed Ellen’s Place to the northeast and to the east and western

boundaries has been achieved. Proposed units are also moved away

from the western boundary to ensure that the existing trees and

hedgerows can continue to flourish.

The northeast corner has been completely redesigned with only two

units located here, accessed by a private drive. These are houses on

large plots with gaps between them and their informal layout helps to

minimise the continuous built form. Further they now front the north

east corner and are pulled back from the boundary by a minimum

of 14.8m and are a total of 98m from the built form of Ellen’s Place.

The space to the north of the units allows for some 9.5m of buffer

planting although in places it will be deeper than this.

The eastern boundary has also been substantially redesigned so that

units now front onto this boundary. Again these are in an informal

layout and accessed by a small private, drives with the built form

pulled back by a minimum of 7m but most of the build form is 17m

or more from the boundary. Again an allowance has been made for

buffer planting with a minimum of 5m but the majority of which is

closer to 10m or more.

It is not proposed that the road connects all the way around the

edge of the site as this would mean the roads would increase in

width from 3.7m to 4.8m (based on KCC standards), as the road

would serve more units than is acceptable for a private drive. As a

consequence the roads would be over engineered for their purpose

and the character of the country lane would be lost. Instead it is

proposed that the connection around the edge of the perimeter

block on the east site of the site is fulfilled by a footpath connection.

This would be informal in nature, in keeping with a rural edge.

The southern boundary is treated in a similar manner to the east

with the houses now pulled back further (minimum 12m but most

built form is circa 15m from the boundary). A minimum 5m planting

buffer is introduced, however, this is much thicker in places and the

informal nature of the road geometries allows this to thickened to

create a more natural edge.

The north-western corner now responds to the more industrial

/commercial existing buildings with a ‘farm courtyard’ cluster of

units that are more formally laid out in response to the context. All

units are now pulled back a minimum of 5m from the existing heavily

vegetated boundary to the west. The more formal and enclosed

nature of the farm courtyard suggest this as an end point with the

existing planting along the western boundary as a backdrop. The

v units don’t therefore front this boundary, although windows in flank

walls will ensure passive surveillance of the western boundary.