The Parish Council meeting on 8th January was very well attended with approximately 30 local residents  interested to know what the Parish Council was proposing regarding the Duchy Homes planning application to build 29 dwellings on the paddock at 40 Little Weighton Road. With those attending the meeting holding opposite views the meeting was always going to be lively, and at times, so it proved.

The Chairman welcomed the local residents to the meeting and advised that this was a Parish Council meeting and therefore not a debating chamber; representatives of the various groups would have the opportunity to speak for 5 minutes to outline their concerns. Furthermore, the Parish Council is a consultee in the application process, which means that like residents, they are invited  to make comment on the planning application. However, it was up to East Riding Council (ERYC) to make the final decision on the proposal. 

The main issue and concern for the residents was that Duchy Homes proposed that vehicular access to the site, at 40 Little Weighton Road, would be solely via Little Weighton Road. 

A summary of the views:

West Mill Rise

  • Residents accept the development will happen.
  • The Local Plan of 1996, updated in 2016 could not have foreseen that, after the sale of the land, the large dwelling on the site would be demolished and so provide access to Little Weighton Road. 
  • The Transport Plan completed by an independent consultancy supported the site access on Little Weighton Road and ERYC’s Highways Department also agreed.
  • The Parish Council has previously  commented about the amount of traffic passing through the village. With the proposed site access on Little Weighton Road, the overall impact of the new traffic on the village, would be reduced because some traffic would head west along Little Weighton Road towards Skidby, or the M62.
  • There was no support from both sets of residents for a new link road between West Mill Rise and Redgates.
  • Access via Little Weighton Road would be easier for all the new traffic and cause less disruption to the majority of local residents.

Kirk Lane

  • Residents took the opposite view to the above arguments.
  • The Local Plan had the intention on not increasing the traffic load on Little Weighton Road or Kirk Lane.
  • As a single road, Kirk Lane is unsuitable for increased traffic. As with Little Weighton Road there are no footpaths and therefore  a risk to all road users including pedestrians, cyclists etc.
  • Two cars meeting on Kirk Lane would be required to encroach onto residents driveways to pass each other.
  • The speed of vehicles is always an issue.
  • The junction at the top of Kirk Lane with Little Weighton Road is not safe.

Redgates

  • Residents were adamant that the access to the development should be via Little Weighton Road. The new properties are to be built at 40 Little Weighton Road and so access should be onto this road. 
  • At certain times of the day Redgates already has severe congestion with parking on both sides of the road reducing it to single lane. Vehicles often have to reverse back up the hill to allow oncoming traffic to pass.
  • Little Weighton Road was a quite road with more off-street parking.
  • Redgates is a feeder road for Spinney Way, Teal Close and Lawson Close and extra traffic from the new homes would be unacceptable.
  • Access to the main road is difficult enough at present; further traffic coming down Redgates would cause chaos and larger log jams every morning.

The Chairman of the Parish Council outlined his views on the planning application; they focused on the inadequate housing mix proposed by Duchy Homes and their failure to meet national standards; the purpose of the Local Plan and the fact that in 2016 few residents had raised objections to the proposed link road between Redgates and West Mill Rise; the developer should contribute to any extra work required on the highways. The Chairman also put forward the idea of shared access to lessen the impact of the extra traffic.

The Parish Council’s submission to ERYC on the planning application made by Duchy Homes is shown below.

On 08.01.2019 Walkington Parish Council resolved:

This application should be referred to the relevant Area Planning Sub-office to enable a full and open debate and in particular whether or not any material considerations have been satisfied. In addition subject to the above Walkington Parish Council recommends rejection of the application because:

1. The housing needs of the village are not being met

2. The quality of the proposed affordable housing is below national standards

3. A planning evaluation of Beechborough 40 Little Weighton Road as a Windfall site and the proposed development of seven dwellings therein

4. Alternative access routes should be explored to spread and thereby diminish the traffic impact 5. There should be a contribution by the developer towards any highway works considered necessary because of this proposed development

6. Following the views expressed by the Highways Department Management that they are going to re-examine the highways arrangements and perhaps explore alternative arrangements for access.

Editor’s Note: On telephoning the ERYC Case Officer, Mr Tim Williams. I am advised that despite the planning application document stating that the closing date for comment was 9th January 2019, ERYC will still accept comments for ‘the next week or so’.

At times the meeting got quite noisy and it was difficult to fully appreciate what was being said, so I hope I have adequately captured the comments and sentiments of the three speakers, if not, please get in touch and I will revise the text.

editor@walkigton-life.co.uk

Posted on: 11, January, 2019 | Author: editor
Categories: Parish Council
One Response to Duchy Homes Comments From Parish Council Meeting
  1. Hi Keith many thanks for an accurate and succinct summary of the debate re Duchy Homes. Re the Chairman’s comments as far as I am aware no resident during 2014/16 raised any objection to the Local Plan’s proposed development for WAL D eg Brockman’s paddock. Otherwise you did well to capture the essentials of the debate. Regards George

Leave a Reply