Appeal over planning refusal for 58 homes in Northumberland village
A developer is appealing against the refusal of its plans for 58 new homes in a Northumberland village, alongside a second bid for the same site.
Proposals for 58 three, four and five-bedroom houses and bungalows as well as two-bedroom apartments, on land north of Fairfields in Longframlington, were submitted in September 2018.
The application was then recommended for approval when it went before the North Northumberland Local Area Council last August.
However, members went against the planning officers’ advice as they felt the development would have a detrimental effect on the character of the local area and that the design was out of keeping with the village.
The applicant, Tantallon Homes, then submitted a second scheme in November, this time for 47 properties, on the same site – which has an extant permission for 17 detached homes.
Now, an appeal has also been lodged against the refusal of the first application, meaning the final decision will be made by a Government-appointed planning inspector.
The developer’s appeal statement notes that neither of the reasons for refusal ‘makes reference to any development plan policy or any other document which could act as a material consideration in the determination of the planning application’.
It adds: ‘We do regard this as highly irregular and we do not believe this complies with the relevant legislation.’
Elsewhere, an appeal for non-determination – not dealing with the application quickly enough – has been filed in relation to an outline bid for five properties on land north of Beachside and Silvercarrs Caravan Park, in Low Hauxley.
The scheme was lodged back in November 2018, but the council says it is being held up by a lack of archaeological information and the need for a section 106 legal agreement to secure ecological mitigation.
Finally, an appeal over refused outline plans for five bungalows, on land west of 42 Park Road in Swarland, has been dismissed.
Council officers turned the application down last June on the basis of its detrimental impact on the character of the local area and the harm it would cause to the Grade II-listed building next door.