May 4, 2021 11.32 am This story is over 14 months old

Final approval sought for 150 Woodhall Spa homes

Controversial plans were approved, now they need the final nod

A developer’s 150-home plan in Woodhall Spa has been submitted for final approval.

Jackson Brothers Property’s proposals for land to the rear of Witham Road were given outline approval in 2018 despite objections and have now returned before East Lindsey District Council for reserved matters.

The plans are considered the second phase of the applicants’ designs for the area, having already approved a further 150 homes previously, accessed through the demolition of 99 and 101 Witham Road.

The latest plans include 15 pairs of semi-detached dwellings, nine blocks of three flats and 93 detached homes with associated garages, along with the provision of play equipment.

In a design and access statement submitted at outline stage Jackson Brothers Property said the build would not adversely affect the character and appearance of the area and was in a sustainable location.

“The proposed development will help to underpin the social and economic fabric of the Local Community without a significant cost to the environment,” they said.

How the second phase of the developers plans would be laid out.

The plans faced objections from the parish council who said the access was insufficient and that the land was part of open countryside. They, along with others had concerns over the impact on village infrastructure and highways.

The latest submission has already received objections, with one resident calling for more protection for the local Swift population, while another repeated previous concerns.

Keith Hutson, of Witham Road, said: “The Spa’s amenities and infrastructure are overstretched now, the through roads congested and the effect on the environment caused by additional traffic and the random discarding of waste grows daily.

“Witham Road’s speed signs are ignored by most of the traffic coming here and will if this development goes ahead, be an absolute danger to negotiate.

“My objection, therefore, is on the grounds of – impacts on amenity, nuisance, highway safety and the environment.”

The plans will be discussed at a later date.