You are browsing Planning Applications for the year 2021
| No | Location | Description | PC's response |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21/01810/OUT | Land West Of 26 To 34 High Street Stilton | Application for Outline Planning Permission for the Erection of up to 16 Dwellings and Associated Infrastructure Works and Access (Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale to be considered at reserved matters stage) | TBC |
| 21/01808/REM | Land West Of 26 To 34 High Street Stilton | Application for approval of reserved matters (Access, Appearance,Landscaping, Layout and Scale) following outline approval for 70 Residential Dwellings, together with the provision of a New Access from High Street, Open Space and New Footpath/Cycle Ways and Doctors Surgery The outline planning permission was not for EIA development. | Stilton Parish Council would like this application to go to Planning Committee . We are extremely concerned about the financial relationship between HDC and Cross Keys Homes, the Social and affordable housing provider, and the fact that this REM application is so different from the Original Outline Consent (18/02192/OUT) and its Conditions From the Carter Jonas Planning Statement on behalf of Cross Keys Homes: 1.7 The outline planning permission is subject to a planning obligation that requires a minimum delivery of affordable housing of 40% of the units consented. Cross Keys Homes is a registered provider of affordable housing and intends in this instance to deliver 100% of the housing on the site as affordable housing. Cross keys has secured funding from the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority to assist with this delivery, this carries with it a requirement to commence development by the first quarter of 2022 Timing Cross Keys has a deadline to start building. They are required to start by the first quarter of 2022 and we are now in the last quarter of 2021. We are concerned that there is not enough time to allow a truly independent and thorough scrutiny of this REM Application. As HDC, Cross Key Homes and the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority are all involved they could be seen as “Judge, Jury and Executioner” ? Michael Gove, the Housing and Communities’ Minister has called a halt to changes to the planning processes which adversely affect local communities. Planning Policy. Stilton residents welcomed the mix of houses to be provided in the original Outline Application (18/02192/OUT) because it was seen as a positive move towards the children of Stilton families being able to buy a home of their own, in their own village community, close to family support and friends or to allow other residents to move house within the village. The proposed scheme does not include any bungalows - this discriminates against older and disabled people. We realise that bungalows take up more space, but a good development should not be discriminatory. Planning Policy is to provide a blend of housing within developments. Residents are now looking at this Reserved Matters Application with dismay. Condition 4 of the Original Outline Consent states : “This development hereby permitted shall not exceed 70 dwellings.” There is no rider to say that the Local Planning Authority can vary it. No doubt the planning department and Planning Committee had good reason to attach this Condition. Therefore it follows that the 70 Affordable homes should not all be squashed together to free up land for an extra 16 houses (by separate Application). We ought to consider the two applications: 21/01808/REM and 21/01810/OUT together and come up with a combined development that does not exceed 70 homes. This would produce a better overall development, comply more closely with NPPF and LP Policies, and more importantly comply with Condition 4 of the 18/02192/OUT Outline Consent granted on 15 May 2019. Stilton Residents would also see it as a more positive move. Condition19 asked for a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). This is not yet included in the REM. We would expect a wheel washing facility to be included. Infrastructure support Affordable homes do not attract a CIL contribution to mitigate against the adverse effect and impact the development will have on the village. So, unless the 10 houses for sale on the open market in 21/01810/OUT materialise, Stilton will be much poorer for this development. Flooding The area is prone to flooding. We do not believe the measures proposed will work, and we fear there could be severe flooding impacting the site and surrounding area. From December 2020 to February 2021 Stilton saw lots of flooding and overflowing of drains. We do not feel the suggested measures would adequately deal with the water and flooding on the land and that of the surrounding houses, roadway and drains. Parking The parking allowances seem very inadequate. How does this compare with normal design requirements? Stilton already has a very serious parking problem. People do have more cars than off street parking or allocated spaces. The design as presented will lead the new residents trying to park anywhere they can in the village, which will increase problems for everyone and particularly emergency vehicles. Public Transport The bus company threatened not to service Stilton because it is sometimes impossible to get through streets with cars parked on both sides. The Travel Sustainability Report claims that residents will rely heavily on public transport (and not cars) to get out and about. This claim was made for Hampton years ago, and it has proved to be totally false. (There is No public transport on Sunday in Stilton). GP Surgery The proposed GP Surgery provision, promised in the Outline Application has now been listed as a consultation clinic and will be the subject of a separate application. This is not the same thing at all. At a Consultation Meeting with the developers for this site the Parish Council asked that if the Doctors’ Surgery did not go forward within the 5 years’ time limit, could the land be given to the Parish Council as an asset for the village, keeping the D1 classification. The Parish Council was told Yes, if HDC agreed. Therefore, we hope that this land if not used for a Doctors’ Surgery will not be put forward for more housing. Sustainable Development In the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) the overall objective requires sustainable development. In Para 8, c) there is an environmental objective, protecting and enhancing, mitigating and adapting to climate change, including moving to a low carbon economy. In this Reserved matters Application it is good that air-source heat pumps will be installed. However, some homes appear to have only 3 solar panels. Is this just indicative or actual design? 3 per home are not enough. Healthy Living Conditions Para 117 of the NPPF deals with ensuring healthy living conditions. In this REM Application there are homes that do not appear to have any private outside space or anywhere outside to hang out washing. Drying clothes inside (particularly for a family) is unhealthy for the occupants (mould spores thrive in damp conditions and can cause Aspergillosis – see Aspergillosis.org) and for the building itself. Vented tumble driers could work, but they are expensive to buy, expensive to run, use electricity and above all, there is not always room for them in a small home. Energy Efficiency Solar panels? Electric car charging points? Are there any measures for heat recovery mechanical ventilation to be installed? Energy-saving measures are particularly important for the less well-off tenants as well as for sustainability for the planet. Street scene NPPF (2021) 2.2 sets out the Government’s planning policies for (amongst other things): achieving well-designed, beautiful and safe places; conserving and enhancing the natural, built and historic environment. LP 11 Design Context : A proposal will be supported where it is demonstrated that it responds positively to its context and has drawn inspiration from key characteristics of its surroundings, including natural, historic and built environment, to help create distinctive, high quality and well designed places. Unfortunately, cramming in 70 homes on 75 % of the consented site with houses that do not look much like the existing houses will not meet this objective. Nearby Developments We are concerned that HDC does not see the big picture and does not take into account Peterborough’s urban extension, Great Haddon, with 5,300 new houses planned to be built less than a mile away from Stilton, simply because it is “outside their area”. Building is about to start on the first tranche of 1500 houses, including 500 social homes at Norman Cross. The balance of our community is being changed. There is nothing wrong with Social housing (it is needed) but we feel the balance is being forced to change and residents have reservations about the speed and extent of the change. |
| 21/01773/TREE | Street Record Ravensdale Stilton | T1 Walnut - Crown lift over road to 4.5m above ground level and 3.5m above ground level over footpath. | RECOMMEND APPROVAL |
| 21/01462/HHFUL | 14 Ermine Crescent Stilton Peterborough PE7 3RD | Two storey rear extension | RECOMMEND APPROVAL |
| 21/01142/S73 | 2 Bishop Close Stilton Peterborough PE7 3XJ | Variation of condition 2 (plans) to 19/01629/HHFUL for new canopy/front porch to approved plans | RECOMMEND APPROVAL |
| 21/01098/FUL | Land Rear Of 68 To 82 North Street Stilton | Proposed Surface Water Drainage outfall | RECOMMEND APPROVAL |
| 20/02362/REM | Land Rear Of 68 To 82 North Street Stilton | Reserved matters application for the erection of 90 dwellings and associated infrastructure, detailed matters relating to appearance, layout, scale and landscaping following the grant of Outline Planning Permission (ref: 18/01796/OUT) | 1. Mixed Development We are pleased with the overall mix of homes which is not always found in other developments. However, after our meetings with the developers we still have concerns and reservations. 2. Drainage and Flood Risk. We are still concerned about the surface water drainage. Originally a pumped system was planned, but a gravity system was mentioned at a recent meeting between Stilton Parish Council and Bellway Developers. Would this meet Anglian Water’s requirements? Has a solution been agreed with Anglian Water? 3. Entrance from North Street . We are still concerned about the design of the entrance to the development. The developer has said that nothing more will done because the design has already been passed. It was requested that the developer provide roads, paths/ cycleways etc., in accordance with Government and HDC policy standards. 4. Environmental Considerations . Ventilation . A non-standard location (adjacent to a motorway) needs enhanced treatment for health considerations for the potential residents. The proposed solution (a “Vent-Axia” type extractor fan), which removes heat from the property, as well as the damp or stale air, is not energy efficient. Serious consideration should be given to installing mechanical heat recovery ventilation systems. (heat is removed from the warm damp air as it is extracted and the heat is fed back into the house with the fresh air.) Energy efficiency is particularly important for social or shared ownership properties. Noise We are concerned about the noise and particulate matter as the site is so close to the A1(M) and would not normally be considered for development. However, Acoustic glass appears be proposed for some dwellings nearest the A1(M). Why not include acoustic glass in all the properties? Solar panels . The development offers a tremendous opportunity to provide true environmental benefits by including solar panels on the social housing and part-ownership homes. This could possibly provide carbon-net-zero for the occupiers. The development as presented falls short of the villagers’ aims. |
| 21/00949/HHFUL | 44 Mill Road Stilton Peterborough PE7 3XY | Single storey extension to the rear | RECOMMEND APPROVAL |
| 21/00910/HHFUL | 97 North Street Stilton Peterborough PE7 3RR | Single storey side and rear extension and garage conversion | RECOMMEND APPROVAL |
| 21/00917/HHFUL | 9 Oak Road Stilton Peterborough PE7 3RB | Erection of a single storey extension | RECOMMEND APPROVAL |
| 21/00700/HHFUL | 78 North Street Stilton Peterborough PE7 3RR | Two storey side extension partially over existing garage and single storey rear extension. | RECOMMEND APPROVAL |
| 21/00643/FUL | 24 High Street Stilton Peterborough PE7 3RA | Demolition of existing commercial premises and erection of 5 number dwellings. | RECOMMEND APPROVAL - type of development recognised as needed in the village in a former village survey |
| 20/02504/HHFUL | 8 Caldecote Road Stilton Peterborough PE7 3RH | Single storey front and rear extensions, first floor side extension and alterations to dwelling | RECOMMEND APPROVAL |
| 21/00312/HHFUL | 10 Elm Close Stilton Peterborough PE7 3RY | Proposed Single Storey Front Extension | RECOMMEND APPROVAL |
| 20/02362/REM | Land Rear Of 68 To 82 North Street Stilton | Reserved matters application for the erection of 90 dwellings and associated infrastructure, detailed matters relating to appearance, layout, scale and landscaping following the grant of Outline Planning Permission (ref: 18/01796/OUT) | Stilton Parish Council have, although noting many positives such as the good mix of dwelling types, recommended rejection of the application based on the following: Shared vehicular/pedestrian access – this has been provided at Hampton and there have been many complaints about cars too close to houses and people. Children were not safe walking in what is essentially a road, especially unaccompanied children. The shared access was narrower, providing less room for error by pedestrians or vehicles, difficult for wheelchair users and pushchairs, all of which will be exacerbated by an insufficient parking provision. No solar panels on roofs, especially on the affordable homes. Electric car charging points only appear to be homes with in garages, and there are less houses with garages. There should be more, particularly for properties without garages. Not enough visitor parking spaces. Concern about the adequacy of the entrance to an estate of 90 houses. Planting needs to be more carefully considered, by way of an example a laurel hedge has been specified near the play area which can be toxic to cats and dogs. Maintenance - who will be responsible for landscape and play area maintenance. In one section it suggests that these will be adopted by the Adopting Authority – who is this and has it been agreed? A proper noise survey is required, COVID 19 is not considered a justifiable reason for not undertaking one. Measurements taken were during a quiet period and when the wind in a direction that favoured the recording of lower noise levels. Affordable housing was supposed to be constructed from the same finishing materials as other housing, it is not. No Construction Phase health and Safety Plan been made available. The Stilton community would like to understand where temporary accesses will be provided and who will be the Liaison Officer to whom resident can raise queries and complaints. The Parish Council were under the impression that what was Lime Kiln Lane kept it’s Bridleway status and as such fifty percentage of it would be owned by the riparian owner of the adjacent depot. This requires clarification, indeed Stilton Parish Council maintained the area on this belief for many years. The play area is small scale, minimal and only suitable for under 8’s. Nearly all of the affordable housing is situated along the eastern side of the development. This was an original criticism of the outline plan. Why should those who can afford least be expected to provide a noise barrier to those who can afford more? As noted above, there are no provisions for vehicle charging for any of these properties. |
| 21/00120/HHFUL | 13 St Marys Road Stilton Peterborough PE7 3RX | Proposed removal of existing conservatory and erection of single storey rear extension with balcony to first floor. Installation of cladding. Erection of mono-pitch roof and canopy to ground floor front elevation. | RECOMMEND APPROVAL |