Plans for 44-home housing development in Elmswell rejected
It's due to concerns over the loss of land in the countryside
A 44-home development in Elmswell has been rejected due to its encroachment into countryside land and safety concerns for residents walking to nearby businesses.
Mid Suffolk District Council’s planning committee refused the plans for the land east of Warren Lane today, in line with officer recommendations and on the basis that the problems outweigh the benefits.
Applicants JD and RJ Baker Farms Ltd gained permission for 38 homes in 2018, although they have since extended the application site to include countryside land.
Cllr Andrew Stringer, who put forward refusal, said: “There could be a scheme within the boundaries of the earlier application and the site allocated in our plans.
“This would be an easy way of delivering the site sustainably.”
Officers had previously recommended approving the development in December 2021 and March 2022 but councillors had opted to defer to gain more information.
One of the things councillors wanted to know was the housing land supply in the area. It has since been discovered that housing land supply in the village is enough to meet expected need for more than 10 years, without developing the proposed site.
The land supply was an important factor in the officers’ decision to propose refusal this time around.
Cllr John Field said: “To me, the land supply of more than 10 years questions the need for countryside encroachment to provide houses.”
Another issue that concerned both officers and councillors was the unsafe pedestrian route from the development to nearby businesses to the south of the site.
These include a café and takeaway, alongside employment opportunities such as a trucking company and building materials supplier.
The county council’s highways department differed on the pedestrian route point, suggesting this was not grounds for refusal because residents would be more likely to choose the more significant facilities at the north of the site.
James Bailey, agent for the applicants, said: “The officer recommendation for refusal has come as a surprise and a disappointment.
“This is a site that previously had planning permission and has long been identified in the emerging local plan. Officers have approved our applications for this site.
“We strongly differ in our findings than the council. Independent advice was sought for landscaping matters that reached the conclusion that landscape harm would not outweigh benefits to the landscape.
“It is slightly disingenuous of your officers to suggest there are only modest benefits for this scheme. It would deliver 35 per cent of affordable housing and nine bungalows.
“Footpath connections would be created that link to the village and safety improvements would be made to the roads from the site.
“We would provide financial contributions for education and a footpath.”
The developers’ commitments through the community infrastructure levy (CIL) would have been £82,032 for new early years provision, £42,175 for secondary school transport and £37,400 towards a new path between Elmswell and Woolpit.