The Council Chamber at Malvern Hills District Council was packed on Thursday, (November12), for the opening of an planning appeal where the need for a "green lung" at Hayslan Field was set against the social and economic benefit of a housing estate on the site.

More than 80 Pickersleigh residents were in attendance, and they heard complex legal arguments as to whether Malvern Hills District Council's planning policy on protecting green space at Hayslan Field was "consistent" with national policy.

The Council threw out an application for Barwood Strategic Homes for 150 homes on the site in February, but Barwood appealed.

At the appeal on Thursday, Barwood representative Jon Kirby, said the site in question was private land with no right of access, and he questioned the status of the site as public open space.

But council planning officer, Simon Rees said that public rights of way crossed the site.

Speaking for the Pickersleigh Residents' Group, Jeff Williams said: "Pickersleigh ward is one of the most deprived wards in Malvern. It seems illogical, unfair and inappropriate to take away an amenity when amenities are very thin on the ground in our ward.

"The fields are a much valued and much needed amenity."

Mr Williams, who is chairman of the residents' group, received loud cheers from the residents in the room.

During the debate, questions were asked as to whether the Malvern District Local Plan of 2006 was out of date and out of step with national policy.

Speaking for Barwood, barrister Peter Goatley said the fact the council did not have a five year plan for housing supply made its 2006 district plan "out of date", and that the National Planning Policy Framework allowed for a balance to be made between the need to preserve open space and the need to look at social and economic needs.

He said: "If there isn't a five year housing supply, other plans will be considered out of date."

Concerning the need to balance economic need with the need for green space, Mr Goatley said that the 2006 district plan "fails to grapple with the points of that balance".

Council planning officer, Mr Rees said the fact the plan dated back to 2006 did not make it inapplicable.

He said: "The fact local plan policy has been 'saved' does not automatically diminish the weight it carries."

Hearing the appeal, Inspector Jane Miles spoke of the complexity of the planning arguments and indicated that the hearing could run into a second day, which would be Friday, November 13.

A site visit will also take place.

At the time of going to press, the hearing continued.