Proposed development of two dwellings.

The application was refused contrary to the Case Officer’s recommendation.

(Proposed development of two dwellings.)

The Senior Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Ms S Parkinson, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor Swinglehurst, spoke on the application.

She made the following principal comments:

·        There was a high level of objection from local people who believed the development would have a negative impact on the character of the settlement, that it was unacceptable in form, design, scale and location and that it would have a severe impact on the local road network, particularly in the light of the application for a single dwelling close by potentially meaning a cumulative increase of three dwellings.

·        For many years Welsh Newton Common had seen minimal growth.  The Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) noted that the common  ‘is characterised as a place of beauty and unspoiled nature with a feeling of remoteness and tranquillity reminiscent of days gone by’.   Many of the objectors believed that the development for two dwellings would change that character forever and set a precedent.

·        The parish as a whole had met the minimum housing target.  Whilst it was recognised that Welsh Newton Common was a settlement considered to be appropriate for proportionate growth in policy RA 2 of the Core Strategy the objectors considered that the proposal did not meet the criteria within that policy  Given that the minimum housing numbers had already been exceeded in the parish, there was no reason for these policies not to carry full weight in the planning balance.

·        The NDP expressed a clear preference for smaller scale, organic growth with 2/3 bed houses and high levels of sustainability wherever possible and that ridge heights should not exceed 6m.  The proposal was in conflict with that policy.

·        Objectors considered the design was not in keeping with the ‘grain’ of the village and would not make a positive contribution to the surrounding environment and its landscape setting as required in policy RA2.

·        Many objectors questioned whether Welsh Newton Common  should be a RA2 settlement. The post office and shop had recently closed.  There were now no services on the common.  The bus ran once a week.  Broadband was slow. 

·        The access was via a single track road. This was contrary to Policy MT1 which required that there should be genuine choice as regards movement. Residents had to reverse up sometimes 20 or 40 metres to avoid oncoming traffic.  The nature of the lane made it hard to see pedestrians, horse riders or cyclists and a number of letters raised the fear that the congestion would increase to a dangerous extent if this proposal were permitted.  Further concern related to the cumulative effect in conjunction with the related application for a single dwelling which one objector stated would push it beyond breaking point.  A report had been submitted on behalf of the residents making the case for the impact being ‘severe’ and in contravention  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80