A plan to build a 118-home estate on the edge of a Herefordshire town has been refused permission for a second time.
Muller Property Group had revised its outline plan for land south of Barons Cross Road, Leominster, after a previous bid was refused by county planners in April last year.
With extra technical documentation and indicative plans, this swelled to nearly 100 the supporting documents accompanying the application.
RELATED NEWS:
- 120-home estate for Bromyard, Herefordshire: decision announced
- Details of seven-house scheme by Kings Caple school, Herefordshire
- Controversial 118-home plan for Leominster is back
Even so, Herefordshire Council’s highways engineer considered that the estate would not be in a sustainable location as regards travel, the application had not dealt properly with its likely impact on local roads, or demonstrated safe access to it.
On air quality, the council’s environmental health service manager said they still had “significant concerns regarding the additional vehicle movements and increased emissions in the AQMA” – the air quality management area at the town’s Bargates Junction, identified as an air pollution hotspot in the county.
The council’s ecology officer said that as before, they were “unable to support the site design, landscaping proposals, impacts on protected species and levels of biodiversity loss resulting from the proposal”.
OTHER NEWS:
- Herefordshire to buy up 'at least 10' properties for young homeless
- Hereford's Volunteer Inn is to get a new look
- Sir Bill Wiggin: housing plans will force county farmers to sell land
Leominster town council also maintained its objection, given that access to the site would still be via “a narrow road at the end of a series of cul-de-sacs”, requiring demolition of a bungalow.
Town councillors also said the proposed relief road from the west to the south of the town “needs to be in place before the houses”, and claimed the developer’s revised traffic movement forecast was “not credible”.
Over 150 objections were also submitted by members of the public, with none in support.
Planning officer Chloe Smart added that the “piecemeal” proposed development of the site “could prejudice” the proposed strategic urban extension to the town, which “needs to be masterplanned”.
In recommending refusal, she also identified outstanding issues with potential water pollution, site drainage and a lack of a commitment from Muller to provide affordable housing.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel