Two homes plans face refusal over fears it would lead to dependency on cars

Plans for 25 homes on land south east of Wheatfields in Whatfield has been recomended for refusal Pi

Plans for 25 homes on land south east of Wheatfields in Whatfield has been recomended for refusal Picture: GOOGLEMAPS - Credit: Archant

Two separate housing proposals in Whatfield have been recommended for refusal -over fears they would lead to a high level of car dependency from those living there.

Babergh District Council's planning committee are set to discuss plans for 25 homes on land south east of Wheatfields and 15 homes on land south of Naughton Road, on Wednesday, September 25.

The first application, brought by Mrs V and Mr R Riddleston, is for 23 two-storey homes and two bungalows, including eight affordable homes, on the southern fringe of the village.

A previous application at the same site, for 15 homes, was refused by the council in July 2015 on the grounds that the scale of the development would be disproportionate to the growth of the village.

Whatfield's Parish Council have objected to the new planning application, saying it includes more homes than the previously refused proposal, and that no change in policy has been made since then.

Planning officers added the positive impact the homes would have in terms of increasing housing supply in the area now carries less weight than in 2015, because Babergh can now demonstrate a five year housing supply.

The second proposal for 15 homes, including six for social housing, has been submitted by Notcutts Limited.

Most Read

These have also faced objections from Whatfield Parish Council, which argues there is a lack of justification for housing demand locally, that the site's proposed new access from Naughton Road will cause road safety issues and that public transport is not viable and sustainable in the area.

The committee has been advised by officers to turn down both plans, in both cases saying the development would 'result in a high level of car dependency for future occupants."

In both cases, planning officers conclude the developments would cause 'demonstrable environmental harm' to the village.

The reports read: "The scale and location of the development would result in landscape harm, undermining the open character and rural setting of the village.

"For these reasons the proposal would cause demonstrable environmental harm and therefore does not constitute sustainable development."

Become a Supporter

This newspaper has been a central part of community life for many years. Our industry faces testing times, which is why we're asking for your support. Every contribution will help us continue to produce local journalism that makes a measurable difference to our community.

Become a Supporter