A new Planning Application has been submitted in respect of Whittington Farm.
I have to admit that when I first saw the Application I couldn’t think of a reason for a further application. However, the Planning Statement, which forms part of the Application, puts the position very clearly. It states as follows:
“Whittington Farm was the subject of LCC Outline Application 16/00397/OUT which granted permission for 19 Dwellings plus a shop.
The Permission included:
- ) 12 Open Market Dwellings
- ) 7 Affordable Houses
Unfortunately, the site layout includes five very large dwellings with Gross Internal Areas ranging from 180 to 244 sq m which requires high retail prices in order to make the site viable and would inevitably price local purchasers out of the market.
In addition, a large proportion of the properties did not have a secure garage and instead relied upon open parking places and on-site separation distances between dwellings were less than the DM DPD Policy DM35 requirements.
The property has been marketed for some time through two agents without success using the existing Planning Permission because of lack of viability a revised viable alternative is proposed so that the affordable dwellings can to be realised within the village.
The revised house designs and road layout provides viable alternative properties which have integral garages and with increased security, spacing between properties which meet DM35 requirements and yet maintain the requirements of the original planning permission in providing the requisite 7 affordable ( plots 13 to 19 ) houses and 12 open market properties and shop.”
So, in a nutshell, it would appear that the plans have had to be re-configured because nobody wanted to buy the site, as defined by the existing Outline Planning Permission.
The Story goes on. You can view the new Planning Statement in its entirety at this LINK.
I have now added the Site Plan so that people can see the new layout, which is markedly different from the previous one. Be patient, this takes a little time to load.
PS: It has just been drawn to my attention that the children’s playground no longer forms part of this development. Frankly, I am in two minds about this but, on balance, I tend to think that it was unsafe to expect children, from other parts of the village, to use this playground because of the extremely dangerous entrance to the development. Which, arguably, should have prevented the scheme from being approved in the first place.