Tipton homes plans set for rejection
CONTROVERSIAL proposals to build 56 homes in Tipton St John are set for rejection after planning authority experts recommended they be refused.
CONTROVERSIAL proposals to build 56 homes in Tipton St John are set for rejection after planning authority experts recommended they be refused.
The fate of Devonshire Homes’ blueprints for land South of Otter Close, which include 22 ‘affordable’ dwellings, will be decided on Tuesday.
East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) Development Management Committee will grant or refuse the developer planning permission.
Planning officers have told members to turn the bid down and branded it “unacceptable.”
You may also want to watch:
EDDC has received 70 letters of objection to plans and only one in support.
Proposals include barring vehicles from a ‘sunken’ access lane to the village so it can be dedicated to pedestrian and cyclist use.
Most Read
- 1 Stalker jailed and banned from Ottery St Mary
- 2 Tipton St John children's author wins national award for pioneering work
- 3 'I feel that front line workers should be vaccinated as soon as possible'
- 4 Sidmouth vaccinations are off to a good start
- 5 Government scraps proposals to increase house building quota in East Devon
- 6 Police to use ANPR cameras to enforce Covid rules across Devon
- 7 'We are passionate about involving young people in planning'
- 8 Sid Valley Practice appeals for help during vaccine rollout
- 9 Popular Sidmouth swimathon set to return this year
- 10 How the Beeching Report signalled the end of the line for many local railways
In a report to development management committee members, an EDDC officer says: “While there may not be any insurmountable physical or technical difficulties to the development of this site, there are a number of constraints which render the proposal unacceptable.”
The report adds the “prominent” site is outside Tipton’s ‘built-up area boundary’.
Reasons for a recommendation of refusal feature concerns the development will be “overbearing and result in excessive dominance” that would “harm” the amenities of existing residents, like those in Mallocks Close.
The officer adds the homes would be too far away from “adequate” services, employment, education and public transport and would see an increase in traffic.
He adds the development would “result in an environment that fails to reflect the character and appearance of the surrounding area.”