Home   Stamford   News   Article

Subscribe Now

New homes on Oakham allotments would be too near noisy Oakham-Stamford-Corby railway line




A site for planned housing in Oakham would be too near a noisy railway line for its future occupants.

The Planning Inspectorate has dismissed an appeal from The Burley Estate Farm Partnership, which sought to build up to 40 homes on the former Brooke Road allotments on Brooke Road.

Burley evicted the allotment-holders in 2016 to develop the site, with some users having been there for up to 50 years.

Rob Bowley at his allotment
Rob Bowley at his allotment

At the time of the planning application in October 2017, Burley claimed the 1.97ha site was now empty and looking untidy.

Rutland Council however, refused the application in August 2018, saying the lower-level site was too near the noisy railway line and development would bring too much extra traffic on Brooke Road.

Planning Inspector Chris Forrett said the main issues were the noise from passing trains would provide suitable living conditions for future occupiers and the development’s impact on highway safety.

Visiting the site, Mr Forrett said he heard passing freight trains, which without mitigation would deliver too much noise to residents.

Rutland County Council
Rutland County Council

Even measures such as an acoustic fence would not make enough difference unless they became too high.

Even though the planning application was at its outline stage, the inspector added he did not have enough information to believe the site could be developed in such a way that would provide “suitable living conditions for its future occupants".

He accepted there were other homes on the west of the railway line and another site being developed to the south-east of the appeal site, but the level of the housing sites differed so they would receive less noise.

Regarding traffic, Mr Forrett agreed with the developer that a realignment of Brooke Road would mitigate extra traffic. But the harm to future occupiers outweighed this, and the appeal should be dismissed.

To read more news from Rutland and Stamford, click here.



Comments | 0
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More