Decision on plan to build 100 homes in Wem put off

Members of Shropshire Council’s northern planning committee said they did not support the proposals put forward for a site on the outskirts of Wem, but deferred a final decision to a future meeting on the advice of council officers.

The proposals by Metacre Ltd relate to an area of land off Lowe Hill Road, and follow a decision by county planning officers last year to refuse a similar application on the grounds that it would lead to “significant visual and biodiversity harm”.

Officers said the revised plans addressed their concerns and had recommended the scheme be approved by the committee, but councillors were not convinced.

While the majority of the land is allocated for 100 houses in the council’s current development plan, members said they did not believe it was necessary to extend the proposed site into a neighbouring field as proposed.

The developer claimed a gas pipe and existing trees made part of the allocated site unsuitable for building on, and said the extra land was needed to ensure the full 100 houses could be delivered.

Wem Town Council and 20 members of the public objected to the plans, citing the fact that part of the site was outside the town’s development boundary, as well as concerns over flooding, ecology, traffic and road safety.

Deputy mayor Geoff Soul addressed the committee, saying the town council objected to the proposed development of un-allocated greenfield land.

He said: “The onus is on the developers to demonstrate there are exceptional reasons why this should be permitted.

“We are not talking about a neat extension of a strip alongside this land, this is a rectangular area sticking out further for a distance of 150 metres into open countryside away from any likely future planning boundary.”

Mr Soul added that the area deemed unsuitable for building on was around three quarters of a hectare, and did not justify extending the site by a proposed 1.6 hectares.

Councillor Edward Towers, one of the town’s two Shropshire Councillors, said that while the town’s residents accepted a need for new homes there were serious concerns surrounding the development, particularly over drainage and road safety.

He said the proposed access off Lowe Hill Road, between the junction for Pyms Road and the entrance to Thomas Adams School, was in “entirely the wrong place”.

Councillor Towers added that serious changes were needed to the town’s road network – including improvements at Maunds Corner and a possible one-way system – before more houses are built.

A representative from Savills, agent to Metacre, also addressed the committee, saying the scheme would generate a developer contribution of more than £600,000 for local infrastructure improvements.

Ten of the properties would be ‘affordable homes’, while the proposals also include public open space and a site for community use.

The agent added that the proposed drainage strategy had been deemed acceptable by council officers, which he said addressed community concerns over flooding.

Councillor Joyce Barrow said: “Approximately 30 per cent of the western section of the proposed development site is outside the site allocation and falls outside of the town’s development boundary.

“The land in this section is contrary to the local plan.

“Currently there is no development on the western side of Lowe Hill Road.

“Lowe Hill Road is like a natural environmental boundary to the town and it’s actually quite beautiful.

“The proposed development will have a negative impact on the setting of the town to the west.

“The town’s infrastructure is under severe strain and has been for a number of years.”

Councillor Barrow added that the proposed access was “badly sited” and showed “no awareness of the potential conflict” between agricultural vehicles, commuters and school traffic which already place the route under pressure at busy times.

Councillor Vince Hunt said: “For me the fundamental issue that remains is the fact that part of this site which is going to be utilised is not within the development boundary, it’s as simple as that.

“It could be the best scheme since sliced bread, but it’s taking open farmland that is not within the development boundary.”

With councillors poised to refuse the application, officers advised that a decision be deferred to the next meeting in line with council protocol.