Plans to build up to nine homes on land next to Church Lane, in Caldecott, refused by Rutland County Council amid strong objections

Plans to build up to nine new homes in a village have been refused after nearly 30 objections from residents.

R2 Developments was seeking outline permission from Rutland County Council to build between six and nine homes on land next to Church Lane, in Caldecott, near Corby.

In an outline application submitted on September 16, the firm said there was a need for additional homes as the council is currently unable to demonstrate a five-year housing supply.

It added that the location is sustainable and in proportion with its surroundings.

However, the proposal attracted strong opposition from some residents, with five submitting more than one objection, as well as from the parish council.

Their concerns were surrounding highway and pedestrian safety, inadequate access to the site, the loss of wildlife and farmland, flood risk, drainage issues, and a lack of housing need, given that several properties in the village remain unsold, among other issues.

Following a consultation with residents, the parish council submitted a formal objection to the proposal, stating the proposed location is next to a busy road – the A6003 – which is already recognised as a high-risk stretch of road.

It said the road has a documented history of accidents, including vehicles leaving the carriageway and striking nearby properties.

Find out about planning applications that affect you at the Public Notice Portal.

“The proposed development would significantly intensify vehicle movements at this hazardous point, creating unacceptable risks for residents, drivers, cyclists and pedestrians,” said the objection letter.

“The A6003 throughout Caldecott is constrained by narrow pavements, blind bends and the one-way bridge, which already causes regular congestion.

“Introducing further developments in this location without mitigation would run contrary to these objectives.”

The letter also said the local plan considers Caldecott a ‘smaller village’, allowing only a limited number of houses to be built – typically one or two, and exceptionally up to five.

Therefore, an application for up to nine homes does not meet the policy requirements and is ‘not supported by any exceptional circumstances’.

The parish council also raised concerns about the loss of greenfield land, which supports a range of wildlife, including protected bat species.

It also pointed to the drainage system being at capacity and there being a lack of essential amenities, such as no shop, school or medical provisions and a limited bus service.

“The application offers no proposal for supporting infrastructure,” it added.

“It introduces severe highway safety risks, conflicts with local planning policy and provides no tangible benefit to the community.”

Similarly, a resident living in Church View said: “The development would severely and irreversibly impact our natural views, disrupt the character and tranquility of our surroundings and diminish the environment quality of our home.

“The proposal is wholly inappropriate for this location.”

Another resident living on the same street said: “This is a ridge and furrow field that should be protected.

“The access is straight onto the main road and is very limiting.”

“This location is an important area of green belt land and this development would encroach on this, changing the nature of the village,” added another.

“Currently this development promises no enhancement of the village and is more likely to detract from the small rural village appeal.”

In the delegated report, the case officer recommended the outline application for refusal, stating the proposal would lead to the loss of an open greenfield site currently under cultivation.

They noted the current site contributes to the rural character of the area and its surroundings, and the proposed development would ‘cause adverse harm to the distinctive rural character of both the site and the wider Caldecott village.’

The outline application was rejected on Thursday, October 16.