Members of the Eden area planning committee have today approved plans submitted by Persimmon homes for a variation to its approved plans for building 229 houses on the land at Raiselands Farm.
The application was submitted for a variation of condition for amendments to boundary treatments and the inclusion of levels, landscaping after residents in PennyHill Park raised concerns with Westmorland and Furness planning enforcement of per the changes to levels of gardens in the new development and the construction of retaining walls and wooden fencing.
Westmorland and Furness Council issued an enforcement notice against the developers placing a temporary halt on the work to build the retaining walls and fencing between the new development and the existing properties on Penny Hill Park.
The enforcement notice expired in January and work resumed to construct the walls and fencing that residents have described as a prison wall that it’s claimed has blocked light and any outlook from their properties.
This application was put before members of the planning committee with a recommendation to grant permission for the changes to the levels of external garden areas and the construction of retaining wall structures for plots 221 – 229 of the development,
Members of the planning committee carried out a sight inspection with a visit to the gardens of some residents on PennyHill Park to see the impact of the new fencing and walls on the residents themselves ahead of todays planning meeting.
The application came before the committee following objections by local residents and the town council to the plans.
The town Council objected saying “Penrith Town Council believes that the changes fundamentally change the application and should not be a variation of condition.”
“The proposal creates overshadowing on existing properties and loss of outlook with the top of the proposed fence being at a 30 degree angle from the back of those houses. The addition of trees in this area would bring a loss of sunlight and create additional overshadowing although it is understood that there may be utilities in this area which would need to be explored before any planting is undertaken.”
“With the additional build up of these garden areas, there is concern that the gardens on Pennyhill Park will be put further at risk of flooding as they are so much lower down. There has been no explanation within the application of any mitigation measures that may be necessary to prevent this happening.”
“Penrith Town Council has consistently expressed concerns about this development and had cause to object to it and the effect on existing neighbouring properties. It is disappointing that in no previous applications, the Local Planning Authority requested the cross sections shown with this application (all others were from the A6 to the railway line), as it would have clearly demonstrated the adverse impact on existing properties.”
In the objections by neighbours to the plans concerns around increase in ground levels heighten the risk of further flooding to properties in Penny Hill Park, Concerns around community safety and anti-social behaviour due to concerns the fences risk creating hidden or poorly monitored spaces, which could become hotspots for anti-social behaviour between the two housing estates. Concerns over loss of light were also raised by residents.
In response to concerns about possible anti social behaviour planning officers said “Whilst concern has been raised about the possibility of future antisocial behaviour within the buffer, this is not for consideration as part of this application. The provision of a buffer was part of the original approved application and the principle of the buffer has already been accepted.”
“Whilst the boundary treatment situated to the rear of plots 225 and 226 and side of plot 229 results in the fencing appearing more elevated when viewed from the rear gardens of 2 - 10 Pennyhill Park, this boundary treatment does not immediately abut the existing properties. The fence is elevated between 0.4m and 0.9m above the adjacent land level, however, a landscaped buffer measuring approximately 4.6m in width lies between the gardens of these plots and the rear gardens 2 – 10 Pennyhill Park. As a result, this elevated fencing is not considered to be overbearing development and is viewed against the backdrop of the approved properties on these on these plots.”
“The land subject to this application is not prominent in the public realm and is not considered to impact on the surrounding wider built and natural environment. The most significant visual impact of the proposal would be when viewed from the rear of existing properties on Pennyhill Park.”
Members of the planning committee voted to approve the plans with only one councillor voting against the approval and one councillor abstained from voting.
Cllr Atkinson who voted against the plans commented that he had stood in the garden of the residents on PennyHill park last week during the site visit by members of the planning committee and found the fence very oppressive.
After the planning meeting one of the residents who attended the meeting to speak agains the application said “todays meeting was just a rubber stamping exercise this was all determined before we even entered the room with no regard for the impacts all this has on existing residents.”
One resident was shocked to receive some garden landscaping advice from their Westmorland and Furness ward councillor after raising concerns about the plans. Cllr Bell advised Mrs Scott “There are some good shrubs you could clothe the fence with which would look good, be colourful and attract birds.”
Then select "Add to Home Screen"
