Potterhanworth scheme for nine homes rejected as too big for village

Permission to be able to build nine homes on land on the southern fringe of a village near Sleaford has been denied by district council planners who claim the community is already oversubscribed for new development.
Planning applications news. EMN-170222-111317001Planning applications news. EMN-170222-111317001
Planning applications news. EMN-170222-111317001

The application for outline planning permission to site and access nine large, detached homes with amenity open space adjacent to The Park in Potterhanworth was refused in line with officers’ recommendations at North Kesteven District Council’s planning committee last night (Tuesday).

Applicant Chris Murphy of Beal Developments in Hessle, near Hull, had proposed the 1.7 hectare site for development to the south and east of The Park, a residential estate built around the turn of the century. The Park is located in the grounds of the former Rectory, which has been demolished. The site was described by officers as being rough grassland and brambles with a number of trees and would be accessed from The Park.

There had been 32 letters of objection from residents mainly saying the site was unsuitable, outside the village curtilage and housing requirements for the village up to 2036 had already been met. They said it would impact on the character of the area.

The Potterhanworth Parish Council also objected, saying it was beyond the village’s development limits. Its representative claimed the developers have not considered their concerns about the development and it does not have a mix of housing types, saying the village does not need four and five bedroom properties, but smaller properties, and affordable properties.

The district Tree Officer was also opposed.

Planning officers recommended refusal on the grounds that development in the village was already 10 per cent over that prescribed by the Local Plan up to 2036 and that it was an inappropriate location, being visually intrusive, lacking in a mixture of house types and an inefficient use of land making it unsustainable development.

Coun Ray Cucksey agreed, saying it was clear that the development would exceed the village’s proposed allocation and would impact on the rural character, supporting the recommendation to refuse, seconded by Coun Peter Lundgren and members voted unanimously to reject the scheme.