'No need' for 62 homes at Stourport site

Kidderminster Shuttle: New application: Alan Smith, left and Labour councillor Jamie Shaw next to the proposed housing site after Bovis Homes first attempt. Picture: PHIL LOACH. 091302L. New application: Alan Smith, left and Labour councillor Jamie Shaw next to the proposed housing site after Bovis Homes first attempt. Picture: PHIL LOACH. 091302L.

CONTROVERSIAL plans to build homes just outside Wyre Forest's boundary would "create an urban extension" to Stourport and are not needed, councillors will tell a planning consultation.

A re-worked application from Bovis Homes to build 62 houses on green fields between Pearl Lane, Areley Common and Malvern Edge Court will be discussed by Wyre Forest District Council's planning committee at a meeting next week.

The site at Astley Cross is just past the Wyre Forest/Malvern Hills boundary line, meaning the application has been sent to Malvern Hills District Council. Affected Wyre Forest residents and councillors can only have their say on the plans but will not make the final decision.

Bovis proposed building 106 properties on the fields last April but withdrew the bid following strong opposition. Councillors, however, say the reduced number of homes in the latest plans has not addressed significant concerns regarding the previous application.

The committee is likely to object to the plans at the 5.4ha site on the grounds the site is not allocated for residential building in either Malvern Hills or Wyre Forest's respective development plans.

Councillors will also argue there are "little or no" nearby services within easy reach of Pearl Lane in Malvern Hills district and if the plans went ahead future residents would, therefore, depend on stretched Wyre Forest services at Areley Kings and Stourport.

Original plans received strong opposition from Stourport councillors and residents when first proposed last year. Malvern Edge Court resident, Alan Smith, whose house is in Wyre Forest but part of his garden in Malvern Hills, set up a mailing list for people opposing the homes and said residents would "not let this happen without a fight".

Stourport town councillors registered their objections to the latest application at a meeting last month.

Comments (11)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:38am Fri 10 Jan 14

stour67 says...

Who owns the land will make a difference if planning get approved
Who owns the land will make a difference if planning get approved stour67

11:24am Fri 10 Jan 14

jon cooper says...

As well as aged roads, Stourport is also going to be hit with dramatic downgrading and axing to frontline services in the near future. With both situations, Stourport simply cannot cater for a bigger increase to its population - it's as simple as that.

I wish Councillor Shaw well when this issue hits WFDC next week; and I trust WFDC will see the sense in turning down this ridiculous application once and for all !!
As well as aged roads, Stourport is also going to be hit with dramatic downgrading and axing to frontline services in the near future. With both situations, Stourport simply cannot cater for a bigger increase to its population - it's as simple as that. I wish Councillor Shaw well when this issue hits WFDC next week; and I trust WFDC will see the sense in turning down this ridiculous application once and for all !! jon cooper

4:52pm Fri 10 Jan 14

emjaypee says...

The decision rests with Malvern DC Jon not WFDC, it's over the boundary so Cllr Shaw & WF will not be able to approve or reject.
If Stourport cannot cope with larger population then why have so many new houses been built both recently and at present...... The basins, Morgan Matroc timber Lane area to name but a few?
The decision rests with Malvern DC Jon not WFDC, it's over the boundary so Cllr Shaw & WF will not be able to approve or reject. If Stourport cannot cope with larger population then why have so many new houses been built both recently and at present...... The basins, Morgan Matroc timber Lane area to name but a few? emjaypee

10:17pm Fri 10 Jan 14

jon cooper says...

It's a strange one really, but I haven't heard or read one comment from named persons who are in favour of cramming as much inaffordable housing in Stourport. If Stourport is intended to grow in population, then surely it should have services and an adequate road network to accommodate it ? Stourport clearly doesn't, and in the next five years services and access will get a lot worse in my opinion.

Regarding the above proposal, there are concerns that Stourport or Wyre Forest as a whole won't benefit from this 'Bovis' development. No, WFDC haven't the power to say 'Yay' or 'Nay' to this particular development, but they could, and should, at least fight against it surely, at least for common-sense sake ??
It's a strange one really, but I haven't heard or read one comment from named persons who are in favour of cramming as much inaffordable housing in Stourport. If Stourport is intended to grow in population, then surely it should have services and an adequate road network to accommodate it ? Stourport clearly doesn't, and in the next five years services and access will get a lot worse in my opinion. Regarding the above proposal, there are concerns that Stourport or Wyre Forest as a whole won't benefit from this 'Bovis' development. No, WFDC haven't the power to say 'Yay' or 'Nay' to this particular development, but they could, and should, at least fight against it surely, at least for common-sense sake ?? jon cooper

12:12pm Sat 11 Jan 14

John Herbert Smith says...

Thanks to Labour, we have had an extra 4 million people to this country in the last decade. As such, homes are needed.

The sensible option is to limit immigration to sustainable levels so housing growth can be accommodated on brown field sites.

But of course, that's "racist" - lets continue to build on green fields and cause more flooding.
Thanks to Labour, we have had an extra 4 million people to this country in the last decade. As such, homes are needed. The sensible option is to limit immigration to sustainable levels so housing growth can be accommodated on brown field sites. But of course, that's "racist" - lets continue to build on green fields and cause more flooding. John Herbert Smith

7:05am Sun 12 Jan 14

SOS lad says...

emjaypee wrote:
The decision rests with Malvern DC Jon not WFDC, it's over the boundary so Cllr Shaw & WF will not be able to approve or reject.
If Stourport cannot cope with larger population then why have so many new houses been built both recently and at present...... The basins, Morgan Matroc timber Lane area to name but a few?
Sounds like you have something to gain, Areley Kings, , Astley, Shrawley are semi rural areas, and to commute residents will either use unsuitable B roads or go through Stourport, and what amenities are Malvern council going to contribute towards Stourport, nothing.
This just shows how greedy property devolpers are, and is cheap win for them, they wont have to contribute to Stourport's bypass, school's, parks, roads etc, the houses newly built around Mill lane had to wait years before their roads were properly surfaced. I just hope this scheme fails it is not needed in this part of Stourport and shame on any councillors or planners that appprove this development.
[quote][p][bold]emjaypee[/bold] wrote: The decision rests with Malvern DC Jon not WFDC, it's over the boundary so Cllr Shaw & WF will not be able to approve or reject. If Stourport cannot cope with larger population then why have so many new houses been built both recently and at present...... The basins, Morgan Matroc timber Lane area to name but a few?[/p][/quote]Sounds like you have something to gain, Areley Kings, , Astley, Shrawley are semi rural areas, and to commute residents will either use unsuitable B roads or go through Stourport, and what amenities are Malvern council going to contribute towards Stourport, nothing. This just shows how greedy property devolpers are, and is cheap win for them, they wont have to contribute to Stourport's bypass, school's, parks, roads etc, the houses newly built around Mill lane had to wait years before their roads were properly surfaced. I just hope this scheme fails it is not needed in this part of Stourport and shame on any councillors or planners that appprove this development. SOS lad

3:40pm Sun 12 Jan 14

John Herbert Smith says...

The scheme IS needed. Due to immigration we are increasing our population by hundreds of thousands every year.

Until the immigration crisis is sorted, expect more and more countryside to be bulldozed.

Why are all politicians burying their heads in the sand over this?
The scheme IS needed. Due to immigration we are increasing our population by hundreds of thousands every year. Until the immigration crisis is sorted, expect more and more countryside to be bulldozed. Why are all politicians burying their heads in the sand over this? John Herbert Smith

8:46pm Sun 12 Jan 14

JKay00 says...

John, you are talking utter rubbish. Worcestershire has one of the lowest amounts of migrants in the country. 96% of the county is White British. The population of Wyre Forest has been stagnant for 30 years since most of the youth want to leave due to lack of decent jobs and whiny boring bigots that frequently rear their heads in this area.

The vast majority of migrants in this country privately rent in larger cities and are not the problem. The real issue is the Conservative agenda, propped up by new Labour, to sell off the council houses and not build anymore. Then with this, because of whingy NIMBY types who refuse any sort of development even though only about 5% of the country is actually built on urban land, not enough houses are being built. This also then gives the added bonus of artificially high housing prices, giving yawn-inducing Middle England types the idea that they have assets.

If anything, you should welcome some development in this dreary little backwater.
John, you are talking utter rubbish. Worcestershire has one of the lowest amounts of migrants in the country. 96% of the county is White British. The population of Wyre Forest has been stagnant for 30 years since most of the youth want to leave due to lack of decent jobs and whiny boring bigots that frequently rear their heads in this area. The vast majority of migrants in this country privately rent in larger cities and are not the problem. The real issue is the Conservative agenda, propped up by new Labour, to sell off the council houses and not build anymore. Then with this, because of whingy NIMBY types who refuse any sort of development even though only about 5% of the country is actually built on urban land, not enough houses are being built. This also then gives the added bonus of artificially high housing prices, giving yawn-inducing Middle England types the idea that they have assets. If anything, you should welcome some development in this dreary little backwater. JKay00

8:42am Mon 13 Jan 14

norman73 says...

as someone who would live in my own town I would buy a house there
as someone who would live in my own town I would buy a house there norman73

7:40pm Tue 14 Jan 14

John Herbert Smith says...

Yes true -Worcestershire is currently relatively unaffected by immigration.

But people are moving out of our cities in huge numbers due to immigration and Worcestershire is an area so called "white flighters" (I dislike this term) come to from Birmingham. They come because the area where they live is being completely transformed culturally and socially e.g. local schools have high proportions of children not speaking English. There are areas of London where Subway do not sell bacon sandwiches. We are told it is great as it is multicultural and inclusive, etc. Yet people move away.

We cannot continue to import millions of people and not build homes.
Whether it's right or wrong, get used to more development if nothing changes!
Yes true -Worcestershire is currently relatively unaffected by immigration. But people are moving out of our cities in huge numbers due to immigration and Worcestershire is an area so called "white flighters" (I dislike this term) come to from Birmingham. They come because the area where they live is being completely transformed culturally and socially e.g. local schools have high proportions of children not speaking English. There are areas of London where Subway do not sell bacon sandwiches. We are told it is great as it is multicultural and inclusive, etc. Yet people move away. We cannot continue to import millions of people and not build homes. Whether it's right or wrong, get used to more development if nothing changes! John Herbert Smith

8:12pm Tue 14 Jan 14

JKay00 says...

John, I'm glad you've gone on a rather unerudite rant about migration, because it shows you up for how little you know.

'People are moving out of the cities in huge numbers'. Can you please provide me with the figures? I'd quite like to quantify 'huge'. Also, they can't be coming to the Wyre Forest in such high numbers, as like I have stated previously, the population of Wyre Forest has been stagnant for around thirty years.

Also, I'm not sure what your bacon rant is about, but the Subway at the top of Curry Mile, near to where I live serves pork products. Also, capitalism plays a part, if a Subway franchise is in an area with a large Jewish or Muslim population, then selling things like bacon may just not be economical

But what on earth that has to do with some houses being built in Stourport I don't know. And yes. Get used to more development, like every flipping human being has had to since the dawn of man. Goodness me, do you think Abberley Avenue, the Walshes, the power station estate etc. have been there for all eternity?
John, I'm glad you've gone on a rather unerudite rant about migration, because it shows you up for how little you know. 'People are moving out of the cities in huge numbers'. Can you please provide me with the figures? I'd quite like to quantify 'huge'. Also, they can't be coming to the Wyre Forest in such high numbers, as like I have stated previously, the population of Wyre Forest has been stagnant for around thirty years. Also, I'm not sure what your bacon rant is about, but the Subway at the top of Curry Mile, near to where I live serves pork products. Also, capitalism plays a part, if a Subway franchise is in an area with a large Jewish or Muslim population, then selling things like bacon may just not be economical But what on earth that has to do with some houses being built in Stourport I don't know. And yes. Get used to more development, like every flipping human being has had to since the dawn of man. Goodness me, do you think Abberley Avenue, the Walshes, the power station estate etc. have been there for all eternity? JKay00

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree