Iamwritinginrelationtothe Variation of Development for the Site at 13 Chapel Lane

7 Chapel Lane,

Barrowden,

Rutland LE15 8EB

25th April 2017

Patrick Gear,

Plannng

Rutland County Council

Catmose

Oakham LE15 6HP

Dear Sir,

Ref 2017/2033/FUL

Iamwritinginrelationtothe variation of development for the site at 13 Chapel Lane,

Barrowden.

Ioriginally objected to theschemefor the constructionofthreenewdwellingsasIdidnotbelievetheschemeasproposedaccords

withRutlandCountyCouncil’sCoreStrategy.I do not feel the points I made were considered adequately. Making the property larger merely compounds the problems previously highlighted.

I forward my original notes.

1)TheschemeasproposeddoesnotincorporatethenaturalstonethatistheprevalentbuildingmaterialinthatpartofChapelLane.ThisdoesnotaccordwithpoliciesCS19andCS22oftheCoreStrategyinparticular.

Paragraph1.35oftheCoreStrategy,adoptedinJune2011,notesthat“Newhousingneedsto

bedesignedtothehighestqualitysothatitrespectstheexistingbuiltandnaturalenvironment,is
energyandresourceefficient,isatthehighestdensityandmakesuseofdevelopedlandwhere
possible.Adequateinfrastructurewillneedtobeprovided”.

StrategicObjective13:Highqualitydesignandlocaldistinctivenessthenstates“Toensurethat
designofnewdevelopmentisofthehighestqualitytoprovideattractiveandsafeplacestolive,
workandvisitandreflectsthelocalcharacter,identityanddistinctivenessofthetownsand

villages”

PolicyCS2(b)confirmsthatnewdevelopmentwillbe“ofanappropriatescaleanddesignthat
reflectslocalcharacterandisconsistentwithmaintaining and enhancing the environment and contributes to local distinctiveness' whilst sub paragraph (m) focuses on 'promoting high quality design that respects resource efficiiency , local distinctiveness and safeguards the special historic and landscape character, cultural heritage and environment of the towns and villages and rural areas.

ThisistakenforwardinpolicyCS19whichsetsoutthat“Allnewdevelopmentwillbeexpectedtocontributepositivelytolocaldistinctivenessandsenseofplace,beingappropriateand

sympathetictoitssettingintermsofscale,height,density,layout,appearance,materials,anditsrelationshiptoadjoiningbuildingsandlandscapefeatures,andshallnotcauseunacceptableeffectsbyreasonofvisualintrusion,overlooking,shading,noise,lightpollutionorotheradverse

impactonlocalcharacterandamenities.

Allnewdevelopmentswillbeexpectedtomeethighstandardsofdesignthat:

a)aresympatheticandmakeapositivecontributiontowardstheuniquecharacterofRutland’s
towns,villagesandcountryside…”

Finally,PolicyCS22setsoutthat“ThequalityandcharacterofthebuiltandhistoricenvironmentofRutlandwillbeconservedandenhanced.Particularprotection will be given to the character and specialfeatures of:

…b)conservation areas…All developments, projects and activities will be expected to protect and
wherepossibleenhancehistoricassetsandtheirsettings,maintainlocaldistinctivenessandthe
characterofidentifiedfeatures.

Developmentshouldrespectthehistoriclandscapecharacterandcontributetoitsconservation,
enhancementorrestoration,orthecreationofappropriatenewfeatures”

Paragraph137oftheNationalPlanningPolicyFrameworksetsoutthat“Localplanning

authoritiesshouldlookforopportunitiesfornewdevelopmentwithinConservationAreasand

WorldHeritageSitesandwithinthesettingofheritageassetstoenhanceorbetterrevealtheir

significance.
Proposalsthatpreservethoseelementsofthesettingthatmakeapositivecontributiontoor

betterrevealthesignificanceoftheassetshouldbetreatedfavourably”.Itissubmittedthathere,theproposeddevelopmentdoesnotaccordwiththispolicyasitdoesnotmakeapositive

contributiontotheConservationArea.

Inordertocomplywiththeabovepolicies,itissubmittedthatifthedevelopmentisconsented,a
conditionmustbeimposedwhichrequiresthatlocalstoneisusedforthemainstructureofthe
dwellingsandlocalslatemustbeusedontheirroofs.Barrowdenisaconservationarea, and ChapelLanesitswithinthatConservationArea’sheart,withthemajorityofbuildingsontheLane
(includingthoseneighbouringthedevelopmentsite)beingmadeoflocalstone–seenumber7
ChapelLanebywayofexample.

2)Thesiteisbeingtoointensivelydeveloped/overdeveloped.

Itisasmallsiteandtoogreatanumberofdwellingsarebeingproposed.Thisovercrowdingof

thedevelopmentsitedoesnotaccordwiththepolicieslistedaboveasitdetractsfromthe

ConservationAreaanddoesnotcontributetoorfitinwiththatConservationArea.
Inaddition,thecurrentdesignwithcauseamenityissuesforthosebuyinganynewproperties,

whowilllackanappropriateamountofoutsidespaceandwillbeinverycloseproximitytotheir
neighboursinawaythatisoutofkeepingwithnormalvillagelife.
Inordertocomplywiththeabovepolicies,itissubmittedthattheproposalsshouldbeamended
suchthatonedwellingisconstructed.Ifacasecanbemadefortwodwellingstositappropriately
withinthesite(perhapsplots2and3)thenIwouldnotobjecttosuchaproposal.

3)Thenumberofdwellingsandinadequateprovisionforparkingon‐sitewillcontributetothe
alreadyexistingtransportissuesonChapelLane.
Therearealreadyissueswithon‐streetparkingalongChapelLane.Introducingthreedwellings(andtherefore,realistically,atleastsixcars)willcompoundthisproblem.
Inconclusion,theadverseimpactsoftheproposeddevelopmentontheConservationAreaand

thevillagemorewidelycannotbeshowntobeoutweighedbyitsbenefits.Theproposals’materiallackofcompliance with theNPPF and the Core Strategy also weigh strongly in favour ofrefusing theschemeas currently proposed.
Kindregards
JohnMerritt