Neighbour objections to three homes on the edge of the Sutton Poyntz conservation area may not stop the development going ahead.

Planning officers are recommending approval of the scheme even though some residents living near the White Horse Drive site say it will result in a loss of privacy and add to parking problems. They also complain that the development will appear ‘cramped’ and not in keeping with the area.

Jolliffe Builders Ltd want to construct two three-bed and one four-bed homes on part of an orchard at the end of White Horse Drive, to the rear of 6 Sutton Park. The site also has Winslow Road to the north, Sutton Park to the east and Sutton Road to the west.

Residents claim that two of the homes will overlook properties in Winslow Road, also preventing winter sunlight getting to rooms to the rear of the properties; that White Horse Drive is not a suitable access to a construction site and could cause blockages and damage to parked cars; and that the proposed garages for the new homes do not comply with the size recommendations with only five parking spaces proposed, when the standard suggests their should be seven.

They also say the layout is cramped and out of character with the area and that no heritage assessment or statement has been submitted even though the site is within 100metres of the boundary of the Sutton Poyntz conservation area.

But planning officers say the overall aims of the development fit with local policies and despite claims about the designs the area has a wide variety of housing, of different sizes, built in a range of materials.

“It is considered that the scheme has a satisfactory layout that is not detrimental to the visual amenity of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty in which the site lies,” said officers in their report to the December 12th local planning committee.

They also refute claims of any direct overlooking of neighbouring properties and say the scheme will not result in any unacceptable loss of privacy or overshadowing, given that the closest property will be 30 metres away.

On parking the officers say the policy guidance is just that – guidance, and is not mandatory while the Highway Authority point out that, despite residents claims, the scheme does have seven parking spaces. The Highways Agency are not objecting to the application and neither are any of the other statutory consultees.

The officers also reject the claim about a heritage statement being needed as ‘unreasonable’, concluding: “The proposal will not have an impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area.”