Wymeswold scheme rejected by councillors

PLANS to build four homes on a piece of land in Wymeswold were rejected after concerns were raised over a narrow access point and a lack of need for more houses in the area.

Charnwood Borough Council plans committee met on Tuesday, August 1 to discuss an application to build two pairs of semidetached, three bedroom homes on land adjacent to 16 Waydale, Wymeswold.

A document presented to the meeting said an application to build six homes on the site was rejected in 2015 but the new proposal “overcomes the previous reasons for refusal”.

Speaking on behalf of the applicant, Maurice Fairhurst said: “I hope you take a positive view of the application, it will provide needed housing and a more affective use of the land and contribute to the footpath network.”

The document presented at the meeting stated the 0.1 hectare application site would be accessed by vehicles via an existing turning between 16 and 18 Waydale.

The document stated the access width at its narrowest point, between 11 Waydale and 12, 14, and 16 Waydale, is 4.25m.

But an officer at the meeting said measurements on site showed the narrowest point to be 4m.

He said the difference was “not considered to be enough” to alter the recommendation to approve the application.

The proposal was brought before the committee at the request of Coun Jenny Bokor who spoke at the meeting and expressed a number of concerns including those relating to ‘restricted’ access, car parking and overdevelopment.

She said: “We do not need more houses as stated by the applicant, we have 31 houses on Storkit Lane that have not sold.”

Waydale resident Alice Coote also spoke at the meeting and told councillors the proposals “disregard key issues with the development and its impact” on neighbouring properties.

Wymeswold Parish Councillor Jeremy Clouston-Jones also spoke of how neighbours may be negatively affected.

During councillor discussions, Coun Seaton said: “The only thing I can see that we could object to is the lack of car parking spaces, but when it boils down to that, I don’t think it’s strong enough to refuse the development on.”

Coun Bill Bebbington said: “I think it should be refused due to access and the lack of requirement for housing in the area.

“What I saw round there was like a large town development rather than a village development and an extra four would make it even worse.”

Eight councillors voted in favour of refusing the application, two against and two abstained.