Councillors reject homes plan for former business site
Councillors have rejected proposals for houses to be built on the site of a business yard.
The plans put forward by Bulkrite Ltd for its former base in Acton Burnell were refused by Shropshire Council’s southern planning committee on the grounds that the scheme also covered an area of previously undeveloped land.
The village is classed as countryside in Shropshire Council’s local plan, meaning there is a presumption against any new developments of open market housing.
Planning officers said the development of the brownfield site, known locally as the Albert Davies Yard, would provide benefits that could weigh in favour of going against the policy.
But they said the fact the proposed site extended “significantly beyond” the commercial yard onto what is currently “garden land” meant it could not be supported.
The application proposed building eight houses and two bungalows, and a statement from the parish council urged the committee to back the application on the grounds that there was a “great need for bungalows in the village”.
A statement was also read from Amy Henson, planning consultant at Berrys and agent for the applicant.
She said: “The Albert Davies yard has grown organically and has unrestricted commercial use.
“It has the potential to cause detrimental impact on amenities of local residents in terms of highways movements from HGVs, noise and disturbance.
“Following substantial growth, the Davies family chose to relocate their main base to a premises on the outskirts of Dorrington.
“We have worked hard with the parish council to produce a scheme with an excellent mix of housing.”
Councillor Madge Shineton said she supported the application, particularly the two proposed bungalows.
She added: “The land is contaminated. The main business that was run there has moved elsewhere.
“We are going to be left, then, with a bare, baron, contaminated, ex-industrial site like we have in one or two other place in the south of the county, and that’s not a good idea.”
Planning officer Richard Fortune warned members that approving a development in open countryside on the basis that bungalows were provided could set a precedent for similar applications elsewhere.
The committee refused the application by six votes to four.
