EXPANDED plans for the latest phase of a massive new housing development in Chester have been unexpectedly thrown out.

Cheshire West and Chester’s planning committee had been recommended to approve an application by Taylor Wimpey for 212 properties and a children’s play area on Wrexham Road when it met yesterday, Tuesday.

But the committee went against officers’ advice, rejecting the plans due to what they said would be over development and impact on residential amenity.

The scheme was part of the wider 153-acre Garden Village site already being developed by Taylor Wimpey and Redrow, with permission granted for 1,269 homes – of which almost 400 are already occupied.

The latest application was set to form phase three of Taylor Wimpey’s King’s Moat development. It had been revised since approval was originally granted in 2019, with the number of proposed properties having risen by 85 from the original plan of 127 homes – a hike of 68 per cent.

But it was this increase, and the location of the new properties,  that caused the most concern at the meeting.

Westminster Park Residents Association had already objected, citing concerns including loss of privacy and amenity.

Jennifer Crew, the Association’s chair, told the meeting: “Such an increase in the number of houses overlooking existing properties will have a great impact on the amenity for residents.  Many properties will be overlooked by three or more new houses, and as the development is to the south, some will lose most of their sunlight and suffer significant loss of daylight.”

Brian O’Connor, planning consultant speaking on behalf of Taylor Wimpey, said the increase in homes was due to changing market demands.

He said: “Taylor Wimpey has undertaken a collaborative approach and addressing the responses received from Westminster Park Residents Association.

“The site layout was amended during determination to address concerns raised including reduced density and elimination of mews type properties along the boundaries, and broad repositioning of a number of the 2.5 storey homes away from the boundary and increased open space provision.”

But the committee was unmoved, rejecting the plans due to what it said was over development resulting in detriment to the character of the area and local amenity.