Get involved! Send your photos, video, news & views by texting MG NEWS to 80360 or e-mail us
Flooding and traffic fears scupper Upton homes plan
A CONTENTIOUS plan for 70 new homes to be built near Upton Marina has been thrown out. Residents were concerned about an increase in traffic on the already busy A4104.
And, at a meeting of Malvern Hills District Council’s southern area planning committee this week, members voted to reject the plan. Speaking against the application by landowner Tingdene Marinas, Ripple Parish Council clerk Lorna Gower said residents had serious concerns about the scheme’s impact on the busy A4104. “It’s too close to the bend outside the pumping station where visibility is already poor,” she said.
“The number of units proposed is unacceptable and excessive for the area.” Resident Marion Born of nearby Holly Green said there had been a number of accidents. “This is a narrow, twisting lane,” she said.
“It’s already very busy with commuter traffic and is even busier when there are events in town. It’s likely there will be at least 100 cars on the development – we are concerned the A4104 will become even more dangerous.”
The applicant already has planning permission, approved on appeal in 2008, for a development of holiday homes at the site, but had recently submitted the new application.
Paul Bennett, from Upton Town Council, said members were not opposed to some housing on the site, but were against this application. “Only a year ago we were told this type of application at the marina was not going to happen,” he said.
Worcestershire County Council highways officer Brian Sharp told the meeting the council had lodged an objection to the development for road safety reasons. “The application is a residential development that would generate traffic 365 days a year,” he said.
“We do not see this as being in the interests of highways safety.” Other concerns included the impact of flooding on the site, with some saying the proposed emergency access to the site would become used as a main access.
However, Tim Willis of Shoosmith’s solicitors, representing the applicant, described it as a “sustainable family development” and said that measures could be put in place to prevent residents from using the emergency access on a daily basis.
The council’s development control manager Duncan Rudge told members planning officers had recommended the application should be refused due to the impact on highway safety and that a section 106 agreement, whereby the applicant agrees to fund a project in the community, had not been set up.
However, he said it was still a possibility that a section 106 agreement could be reached.
Members voted by 16 votes to one, with one abstention, to reject the application.