Building of bungalow in Peterborough garden approved despite neighbours objecting

Peterborough City Council planning officers had recommended refusal of the application on the grounds that it would have an unacceptable impact on the character of the surrounding area.

The planned bungalow, if built, would house the owner’s elderly father who would otherwise have no option but to go into an old person’s home.

Speaking to members of the council’s Planning and Environmental Protection Committee at their meeting on Tuesday, the applicant, Deirdre Hardy, explained: “I’m lucky enough to have a huge garden in which to build this home for my elderly father.

“The garden is fenced-off at the northern end from my neighbours, all of whom have complained about the removal of trees and the loss to the local wildlife – but I’ve no intention of removing a single shrub, much less a tree all of which I love and care for dearly.

“I’m not even looking for a financial gain from this application; I’m simply putting a bungalow on our very substantive garden so that my increasingly frail father will have somewhere to live near to his family.

“Isn’t this exactly what society says we should all be doing? Bringing the extended members of our families back together so they can be closer.

“If this application isn’t approved, my father will have no alternative but to go into an elderly person’s home.”

Objecting on behalf of his own property in Mary Armyne Road and with a letter signed by all the other neighbours from that street, David Jones said: “This dwelling will be built right up against our fence line at the back of our property and remove what privacy we have as it will be at least 5.5m high.”

Cllr Christian Hogg (Lib Dem) said: “I understand there’s been significant development to many of the eight properties in Mary Armyne Road, including a substantial extension of your property into your garden reducing it in size up to the fence line adjacent to the applicants’ property, and that Ms Hardy did not object to any of these applications going ahead.

“Isn’t it also the case that collectively the eight neighbours in Mary Armyne Road tried several times to purchase the land owned by Ms Hardy – the garden where she now plans to build the bungalow – so that the eight of you could collectively extend the lengths of your gardens?

“And isn’t it also the case that your gardens at the rear of your properties in Mary Armyne Road are shorter than they were only because of the significant developments that have taken place to these eight properties, so in fact you are actually victims of shortening your own gardens?”

Cllr Graham Casey (Conservative) summed the matter up, saying: “This is only an outline planning application and it is for Ms Hardy to now show that whatever design she comes up with will pass the planning process. I see no reason why at this stage we cannot agree to this application.”

The application was approved unanimously.

Robert Alexander, Local Democracy Reporting Service