Planning inspector says yes to ‘rejected’ flats plan
A COUNCILLOR has hit out after plans were approved for five blocks of flats on the fringes of the town.
Cllr David Bill represents Clarendon ward on Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council and was dismayed that the Planning Inspector allowed an appeal to build 55 one, two and three-bedroom flats off Paddock Way.
The council’s planning com- mittee refused the plans from Centre Estates Limited in May 2017 on the grounds that the layout and mix of the properties would not complement or enhance the character of the area.
There were also concerns it would over develop the site and fail to provide a mix of housing types and tenures suitable to the location.
Cllr Bill said: “This goes against everything we were led to expect and is unbelievable bearing in mind that the approv- al for 10 detached properties was itself a compromise. “For over 15 years we have been arguing that this one remaining stretch of original countryside the length of Coventry Road should be retained.
“We argued against the proposal to put 18 houses on the site and this was reduced to 10 by the Planning Inspector.
The Lib Dem councillor said: “I have asked the officers to look carefully to see if there are any grounds to challenge the ruling and I have also asked the affected residents to do the same.
“One key aspect is decides on good design.
“Everyone involved, residents, planners and councillors came to the conclusion that the design is unacceptable and yet one person has the right to impose his view on everyone else.”
A spokesperson for the council said: “The developer appealed to the Planning Inspector who subsequently concluded the development who would not have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area.
“The Inspector allowed the appeal and granted planning permission.
“The developer also appealed to the Inspector for its costs to be paid by the council.
“However this was refused by the Inspector who did not find the council had demonstrated unreasonable behaviour that had resulted in unnecessary or wasted expense.”