Comment

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 14145

Received: 16/03/2018

Respondent: Marlingford and Colton Parish Council

Representation Summary:

In the light of residents' comments, the council supports a development of five (or less) small single storey residences with careful screening, including retention of natural hedging wherever possible. It was felt that such a development would support the long term health and sustainability of the community, adding to the diversity of dwellings available. The council would not support any development of larger executive-style housing. Careful attention must also be paid to the significant drainage problems of the site.

Full text:

While the parish council was unanimously opposed to all other proposed developments within the parish, the council initially came to no firm decision on the only site lying in the centre of Marlingford. The parish plan of 2006 (available online at marlingfordandcolt.wixsite.com/home/parish-plan) concluded that residents'wishes were `at most, only very modest housing development, such as the conversion of redundant buildings'. However, at a well-attended public meeting, called by the Council on February 19th 2018 in Colton Village Hall, no opinions were voiced regarding this development, while strong objections were raised to all other sites in the parish. Out of the seven attendees identifying themselves as residents of Marlingford, four were in favour of development of five houses or less in the village while three were against any development.

In the light of these divided opinions, a more detailed consultation was undertaken with leaflets delivered to 27 houses bordering the proposed site. Fourteen responses were received. Seven responses supported the scheme but unanimously with the condition of single-storey buildings only and suitable environmental screening. In particular preservation of the natural hedges surrounding the land and suitable fencing where the land adjoins another residence. Most responses also raised concerns regarding drainage and difficulties with access. Six responses (including three anonymous) were firmly against any development in the village, while one respondent wrote that they would prefer no development on the land, but that single storey dwellings would be acceptable as long as access was from Mill Road.

The result of the consultation shows that the village is divided evenly on the merits of the development plans, but there is no support for large two-storeyed dwellings.
Development on the site faces significant obstacles - specifically drainage, access and visual impact on a rural environment. However a number of residents overlooking the site support the idea of small bungalows to complement existing housing provision in the village.