FURIOUS Evesham Town Council chiefs have once again called on Wychavon planning bosses to refuse the controversial proposed development at Boat Lane after a new application was submitted by developers.
Planning chiefs at Wychavon District Council deferred Hallam Land Management’s proposals for 220 homes and a care home in November during a tension-filled meeting which saw angry residents vent their opposition to the controversial plans.
Now the developers have submitted a new plan for up to 200 new homes, open space and a children’s play area.
But despite the revised plans, town councillors repeated their opposition to any development on the land during a meeting last Monday and recommended the application be refused when Wychavon District Council discuss it in the coming months.
Councillors welcomed the reduction in homes proposed and the removal of provision for a care home and office space but said concerns still existed which would still enable the scheme to be given the thumbs down.
Worries over the current infrastructure and how it would cope with a new development, the impact on traffic with the only access to the development from the already congested Abbey Road and the narrow roads proposed have all been highlighted by concerned council chiefs.
“The main through road on the development should be able to handle all traffic . It is not just residential traffic which will access this road. There are many events that take place at Hampton Ferry and consideration needs to be given to cars towing caravans, lorries etc that will need access to Hampton Ferry via Boat Lane and do not want to have to navigate parked cars,” their report said.
Worried councillors have also highlighted the historic significance of the site and its vicinity to a listed monument in the form of the Abbot Chryton Wall and the loss of prime agricultural land and the views offered from the area.
“This is such an important site for the town that an outline planning application does not provide enough detail on which to comment. To highlight this, the application makes reference to ‘infrastructure’ however it is not clear to what ‘infrastructure’ this refers. Instead a full application should be made,” the report said.
* What do you think? E-mail [email protected] with your views
