Residents celebrate as home plan is turned down

sp92261 Langley Mill Residents Celebrate Planning Victory. L-R, Stan Morris, Nancy Taylor, June Barlow, Pat Ottowell, Stuart  Eglinton, Lynn Bright.

sp92261 Langley Mill Residents Celebrate Planning Victory. L-R, Stan Morris, Nancy Taylor, June Barlow, Pat Ottowell, Stuart Eglinton, Lynn Bright.

0
Have your say

A BID to build a four-bedroom house in a Langley Mill back garden has been turned down amid fears it would create a ‘double row’ of homes.

People living along Cromford Road turned out to object to Mohammed Setayesh’s application at Amber Valley council’s planning latest planning meeting.

Resident Lynne Bright said: “I couldn’t believe it was a unanimous vote – it’s normally chaos up there with shouting and jeering.

“We have had six months of hard work campaigning against it. We had petitions, bill boards – we think that’s what did it.”

The application at 291 Cromford Road included works to widen an existing access road, provide a fence and a Tarmaced drive in the front garden.

It sparked 20 letters of objection and 65 residents signed a petition against the development. Officer Claire Thornton described the application as “finely balanced” and added that the application was technically in compliance with rules governing size, scale, access and environmental impact.

But resident Sheena Trower warned: “If someone comes out of their kitchen door there could be an accident. It’s a boxed-in area. If this goes ahead there may well be other developments.”

The meeting heard the draft National Planning Policy Framework refers to the need to “significantly increase the supply of housing.” Officers also advised that approval would help the council’s targets for housing. An average of 578 dwellings per year need to be provided over the next five years, but the council can only identify 399 per year.

A report on the proposal to the committee said: “There is no policy within PPS3 that states that greenfield land should not be developed and there is no policy that identifies that garden land should not be developed. “PPS3 identifies garden land and its definition and that it does not constitute brownfield land.

“This represents a significant material consideration that must be weighed against other material considerations.”

Cllr Alan Cox said pressure from the last government to class gardens as brownfield sites was gone.

He said: “If we approve this one we will set a precedent. You will have a whole double row of back to back housing.”