130 homes at 93 - 94 Wilton Road, London SW1V

The site and surroundings

The 7.22-hectare agricultural site lies north of Uppingham Road and east of Bushby, beside existing homes, hedgerows, trees and Thurnby Brook.

“The site covers 7.22 hectares and is currently used as agricultural pastureland. It comprises two field parcels, connected by intervening land. The southern parcel adjoins Uppingham Road and is bounded to the south and east by hedgerows and mature trees. To the west, adjoining the Zouche Way development, the boundary is marked by a post- and-rail timber fence and, in places, a gappy hedgerow with mature trees.”

“The application site, along with the recent development along Zouche Way, lies on the southern side of the Thurnby Brook valley, with the watercourse defining the northern edge of the Site and the lower extent of the landscape. Levels across the site generally slope downwards to the north away from the A47. The southern part of the site slopes steeply from Uppingham Road northwards towards a disused railway line.”

Officer report

Earlier planning decisions

Earlier applications for up to 125 and 150 homes on the site were refused, while a nearby discount foodstore was approved.

“Refused 18.07.2018 11/00003/OUT Residential development for up to 150 dwellings together with access, drainage, services and open space Refused 09.03.2011”

“Erection of a discount foodstore (Use Class E) with access, parking, landscaping and other associated works Approved 29.04.2026”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the site could provide housing and affordable housing, while identified landscape, heritage, highway and drainage effects could be managed.

“HDC’s Housing Need has increased from 510dpa under the previous Standard Methodology to 723dpa under this new Standard Methodology. On this basis, the Council is currently unable to demonstrate a 5-year supply of deliverable sites for housing (a position of 3.1 years was published in October 2025) and, thus, its policies for housing supply, including SS1 and H1, are considered to be out-of-date.”

“Overall balance and conclusions 7.17 There would be a substantial benefit from the proposed development in respect of meeting general housing need as well as affordable housing need. The benefits listed above are considered to clearly outweigh the identified harm and as such the application is recommended for approval, subject to conditions and a S106 legal agreement as set out in the appendices.”

Officer report

What residents and groups said

The parish council raised flooding concerns, while local groups and residents objected over housing scale, traffic, landscape, flooding, ecology and residential amenity.

“Issues of Principle • Elements of the Local Plan may be considered out of date, but the Local Plan is a material consideration and must still be afforded full weight. • The draft Local Plan identifies a further 90 dwellings in Thurnby & Bushby and this application exceeds this amount in Bushby alone.”

“Residential amenity issues • Adverse impact for existing residents from traffic and the scale and density development proposed. • Development would result in unacceptable overlooking, loss of privacy and an overbearing impact on houses on Harcourt Grove • Development would result in overshadowing and loss of daylight to nearby properties and gardens • The development would result in noise and disturbance during construction and once occupied.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant’s agent addressed the committee, which then questioned speakers and officers.

The committee’s decision

Planning permission was approved subject to the recommended conditions, a satisfactory S106 agreement and consultation on the reserved matters masterplan.

“25/01615/OUT – Land East of Zouche Way, Bushby The Strategic Growth Officer introduced the report in respect of application 25/01615/OUT, Land East of Zouche Way, Outline application for up to 130 dwellings (access off A47 to be considered). Representations were heard from the applicant’s agent, Chloe French.”

“Against: 0 Abstain: 0 Therefore, Planning Permission was approved for the reasons set out in the report, subject to the recommended conditions set out in Appendix A, the completion of a satisfactory S106 agreement as set out in Appendix B and the following additional note: For the avoidance of doubt the submitted masterplan is not approved. The applicant is asked to consult with the Local Planning Authority when producing its reserved matters masterplan for this approval. 9.”

Minutes