Home   News   Article

Rejection for 46 homes plan in Great Gonerby




Plans for 46 affordable homes in Great Gonerby have been rejected because of concerns over health and education.

Applicant Longhurst Group’s build, on Easthorpe Road and Belton Lane, would have included a mix of shared ownership and rented accommodation, made up of two, three and four-bedroom properties.

A 153-signature petition had been handed in to the council objecting to the proposal.

Design of the proposed development in Great Gonerby. (8595625)
Design of the proposed development in Great Gonerby. (8595625)

In a report before South Kesteven District Council, officers had praised the scheme. However, members of the development management committee raised concerns about the impact on local education and health services.

More than £150,000 had been asked for from education and health bodies, however, Longhurst said it would not be able to provide a viable scheme if they were requested.

They also had concerns over the impact of the two-storey homes on nearby bungalows.

Design of the proposed development in Great Gonerby. (8595554)
Design of the proposed development in Great Gonerby. (8595554)

They voted for refusal, saying: “The benefits of the affordable housing did not outweigh the lack of developer contributions for health and education.

"The proposed design was not in-keeping with the country lane character of Easthorpe Road, in particular the juxtaposition of the proposed two-storey housing to the existing bungalows.”

Design of the proposed development in Great Gonerby. (8595749)
Design of the proposed development in Great Gonerby. (8595749)

Objectors raised concerns over the site being unallocated greenfield, as well as suggesting the openness of the area adds to the rural character. They have also noted worries including infrastructure, flooding and traffic.

Officers had said the development would “not only benefit the applicants for affordable housing the local community and whole of the area.”

Lincolnshire County Council’s highways department had not objected to the scheme.


Read more



This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More