Agenda and draft minutes
PDF 172 KBVenue: Council Chamber, Town Hall, Saturday Market Place, King's Lynn PE30 5DQ. View directions
Contact: Kathy Wagg
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Apologies for Absence Minutes: There was none. |
|
|
Urgent Business To consider any business which, by reason of special circumstances, the Chair proposes to accept as urgent under Section 100(b)(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972. Minutes: There was none. |
|
|
Members present pursuant to Standing Order 34 Minutes: None. |
|
|
Chair's correspondence Minutes: None. |
|
|
Items for consideration 21/01873/FM Construction of 226 new homes and associated green space, landscaping and ancillary infrastructure at Land south east of 60 Queen Mary Road, north of Railway Line and south of Parkway, Gaywood, King's Lynn, Norfolk Minutes: Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube.
21/01873/FM Construction of 226 new homes and associated green space, landscaping and ancillary infrastructure at Land south ease of 60 Queen Mary Road, north of Railway Line and south of Parkway, Gaywood, King’s Lynn, Norfolk
Officers presented the application and provided an overview of the Planning History for the site. It was noted that a previous application had been approved for 379 dwellings and a footbridge, since then the application had been withdrawn and revised to scale down the development site and remove the intention to cross the Sand Line.
There would be a mix of houses and flats on the site including an affordable housing provision. Information on improvements to highways, footways, cycleways, bus stops, and junctions were provided to the Group.
Officers answered questions from the Panel relating to the flood risk, materials and types of houses proposed and landscaping. Concerns were also raised relating to tree planting and the loss of trees.
The Panel’s main concern was the impact this development would have on traffic and the number of cars on the road. Officers explained that the development was focussed on environmentally friendly modes of transport and promoted walking and cycling. It was also noted that Highways had not objected to the application, the site was an allocated development site, and an application for more housing on the site than now proposed had previously been approved and subsequently withdrawn.
The Panel referred to overarching traffic plans for the area, but were still concerned that this development would have a negative impact on traffic in the area and traffic plans were still a long way off being implemented.
AGREED: The Panel did not support the application, with their main concern being the impact the development would have on traffic in what was already a busy area.
|