Swallownest homes plan approved but residents worried about flooding and road safety

Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council’s planning board last Thursday (August 29) agreed that up to four new homes could be built on land behind a house at 147 Worksop Road.

The plans also show the proposed access route to the new houses.

Council development manager Lisa Brooks said that the applicant’s outline plans had shown that in principle four houses could be accommodated on the site with adequate separation between them.

She explained that the original house would be retained but a garage would be demolished to make way for upgraded access to the land.

The private driveway to the houses would be widened to 5.5 metres for the first 10 metres of its length, she said. That would allow for two vehicles to pass without one having to reverse on to the road.

Ms Brooks said that permission wasn’t needed for tree felling that has taken place on the site, which was mentioned by objectors. The applicant said the trees were unsafe, shallow-rooted and at risk of blowing over.

Biodiversity

Six out of 22 remaining trees, described by Ms Brooks as low-quality fruit trees, would need to be removed. Tree officers have raised no objection, provided that the trees are replaced, she said.

Applicants now have to provide a biodiversity net gain plan of 10% for their plans by law, she said. This can be achieved either on the site or off it, including by buying government biodiversity credits.

Representing the applicant, Stella Heeley of DLP Planning said: “I appreciate four new dwellings will generate more cars but it will likely generate two to three peak-hour vehicle movements and 24 two-way daily movements, which is classed as a negligible increase in traffic on a local highway network.”

She said that an arboriculturist had examined the unsafe trees before they were felled and there was no sign of a bat roost or wildlife.

The proposal has been objected to by 17 people and supported by 13.

Objector Miss Appleby said her main concerns were a lack of privacy in her garden after the felling of trees and drainage issues on “very boggy, swampy land” with bullrushes growing on it. A brook runs past the bottom of the gardens, she said.

Torrential

She asked: “Is that going to impact and make flooding when there is torrential rain because there’s always standing water on my land and there’s always standing water on Bramley Avenue as well?

“So I’m concerned, if they build the dwellings, who’s going to monitor how this drainage is working and the flooding risk there is to everybody there.”

Another objector said her garden is “big, peaceful and private,” adding: “If this development goes ahead, our quality of life will be severely diminished.”

Get a bespoke headline round-up, as well as breaking updates, when you sign up to The Star’s free emails

She explained that her house is elevated above the land in question and said any house of more than one storey will overlook her patio and outdoor living space. She also said the planned access road would be right alongside her home, just a couple of feet away.

“It would create noise, vibration and be intrusive. Five homes with vehicles and families just over the hedge will create a significant increase in ambient noise,” she said.

She also mentioned the boggy ground, which already becomes knee-deep in water, and worried her garden would be “turned into a pond”.

Tranquillity

The objector also mentioned daily near misses on the road and many incidents of road rage, pointing out that a car had run into the wall at the point where the access would be.

A third objector, Mr Osborne, also mentioned drainage concerns. He said the new road and houses “would completely strip us of the right to peace and tranquillity”. He also worried about the potential for light pollution and loss of privacy.

He questioned the need for four more houses in the village, where there are already extensive building plans in place or on the way.

Ms Brooks reiterated that the indicative layout showed that adequate separation distances between old and new houses are met.

She said that the council’s drainage team and Yorkshire Water had been consulted. They have no objections to the proposals, subject to full details of drainage being agreed before any development is brought forward.

Environmental health officers had advised that noise levels would not be unacceptable, she said.

Visibility

Highways officer Simon Gammons said the plan includes measures to improve visibility for pedestrians and cars.

Coun Simon Currie asked if the site would be investigated for coal gases, as houses have had to be demolished in the past when it had been found. He said that he was concerned at how much housing development is taking place locally.

Coun Drew Tarmey said: “I hate garden grabbing but there’s no legal way to prevent it.” He said he would vote for the proposal as it just involves access to the land but is concerned about several issues.

Coun Joanna Baker-Rogers told objectors that she shares their concerns about road safety and other aspects of the plan. She said she wanted to hear more from residents about the issues they had raised.

Coun Eve Rose Keenan said: “I’m worried about the applicant and biodiversity net gain when they fell the trees in the middle of the nesting season. This is not filling me with confidence that this developer will take this seriously, properly.”

She said she was voting against the proposal for that reason. The plan was approved by a vote of 7-2 with more specific details about the homes to be submitted and decided at a later date.