New 800-home 'super village' plan for west Worcester under attack

Worcester News: New 800-home 'super village' plan for west Worcester under attack New 800-home 'super village' plan for west Worcester under attack

PLANS for a new 'super village' in west Worcester have come under attack from city planning experts - with fears it could damage St John's, threaten the existence of a primary school and cause congestion havoc.

Worcester City Council's planning chiefs have delivered a withering verdict on early proposals for a huge 800-home expansion next to Dines Green.

A key report says the project, by Hallam Land Management, still has a whole host of unanswered questions before it should be accepted.

The project, on 60 hectares of farmland north of the A44 Bromyard Road in Lower Broadheath, includes a school, health centre with a doctors' surgery, shopping units, office space, restaurants, takeaways and bars, sports pitches, a playground, and acres of open space.

An outline planning application, first revealed by your Worcester News last September, is now being debated by the city council before it goes to a vote by politicians in Malvern Hills, as it sits a few feet over the boundary.

During a city council planning committee debate, politicians agreed to back a report from officers spelling out serious concerns about it.

Residents also turned up at the meeting to say they will not "put up and shut up" about their fears.

Anthony Mansell, who lives in the new Earl's Park development next to the site, said: "We pay our rates to Worcester City Council, so we won't put up and shut up about what is being decided by people in Malvern.

"This council, I hope must take into consideration that we don't want to be overrun by this. The road outside our properties could become a rat run."

Councillors said they shared officers worries about how it could impact on St John's.

Cllr Derek Prodger said: "There are serious questions about infrastructure, we need to be so mindful it doesn't damage the sustainability of St John's as a retail area, and what it does to schools.

"The infrastructure must be capable of accommodating it."

Cllr Lynn Denham said: "I lot of careful thinking has gone into this report, and I commend it.

"This development is on the very edge of our city and the people who live there will be living in our city - they don't live their lives by council boundaries."

The report is being sent to planners in Malvern, who will be tasked with making a recommendation to their own committee within weeks.

If the outline application is approved, a final, detailed plan must then be drawn up which Worcester City Council will get a second look at.

The 'super village' proposal follows a failed 2010 bid by Bloor Homes to build 3,950 homes in the area, a plan which was withdrawn after a public backlash.

Since then the land has been earmarked for up to 975 properties in the draft South Worcestershire Development Plan.

Hallam Land Management did not respond to the report yesterday but insists it wants to build “an attractive and sustainable”village.

PANEL - WHAT THE REPORT SAYS

- The plan includes a new shopping centre, but no assessment has been made on what it could do to retailers in St John's, or the existing Dines Green neighbourhood centre

It goes against a council policy to protect "shopping choice" and is considered essential as the site includes too much retail.

- It also includes a new primary school, but Worcestershire County Council has told city planners there is no need and it could "threaten the viability" of Dines Green Primary, which has surplus places

- Hallam Land Management says it will aim for "up to 40 per cent" of the development to be affordable homes, when city council policy is for no less than 40 per cent, unless an independent assessment is made to justify a lower number

- The application mentions 26,000 sq ft of office space, but the city council says it does not want "significant office development" because it could damage Worcester city centre

- No reference is made about housing to meet the needs of older people, which the council considers vital

- The South Worcestershire Development Plan earmarks land on-site for 10 traveller pitches, in a bid to stop them going elsewhere, but the application has none

- There is no provision for allotments, civic space or a churchyard

-It needs to be clearer on infrastructure, including a 'parking hub' by the A4440 and offer money to improve the highways network, especially for emergency services

Comments (29)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:15am Sat 25 Jan 14

skychip says...

Expect it will be the same scenario the developers will get what they want because the Council is afraid of legal costs etc. if application is turned down.
Expect it will be the same scenario the developers will get what they want because the Council is afraid of legal costs etc. if application is turned down. skychip

10:38am Sat 25 Jan 14

brooksider says...

This the land required to complete a ring road around Worcester
On that basis alone the application should be refused.
This the land required to complete a ring road around Worcester On that basis alone the application should be refused. brooksider

11:14am Sat 25 Jan 14

Jabbadad says...

One would hope that the planners have brought this to the attention of the Councils involved, but there I go forgetting the blinkered planners we seem to have.
One would hope that the planners have brought this to the attention of the Councils involved, but there I go forgetting the blinkered planners we seem to have. Jabbadad

2:14pm Sat 25 Jan 14

goodygoody says...

Horrific. All that green land gone forever, for bricks and mortar, paved drives, cars, fumes, noise, rubbish and everything else the human race brings with it. Devastation caused by planners. Who do they think they are? Who are they to say what happens to our lovely green spaces? I object, strongly.
Horrific. All that green land gone forever, for bricks and mortar, paved drives, cars, fumes, noise, rubbish and everything else the human race brings with it. Devastation caused by planners. Who do they think they are? Who are they to say what happens to our lovely green spaces? I object, strongly. goodygoody

2:32pm Sat 25 Jan 14

TheLoudBloke says...

The council need to get a serious grip on reality.

Protecting the city centre? Who in their right mind would want to work in the city centre, given that there is insufficient parking due to the brains trust at the arcane planning dept and what there is is over priced.

Perhaps the council and the planners could upgrade the city centres archaic 19th Century road infrastructure to somewhere near the 21st Century and provide decent and cheap parking. That should see people flocking into the city centre to work and shop. God forbid any retailers actually take up tenancy in St Martins Quarter, the car parking there is already a nightmare most days of the week.

The only way for Worcesters' economy to grow, is for more people to live here. As they are not going to live in the city centre, the council needs to put the infrastructure in place to allow them to move about the city for business and pleasure.

Perhaps having people work close to their homes, may be of benefit to the current traffic chaos that is Worcester, not to mention the reduction in noise and pollution.

The council should be mindful of the upcoming elections and act accordingly.
The council need to get a serious grip on reality. Protecting the city centre? Who in their right mind would want to work in the city centre, given that there is insufficient parking due to the brains trust at the arcane planning dept and what there is is over priced. Perhaps the council and the planners could upgrade the city centres archaic 19th Century road infrastructure to somewhere near the 21st Century and provide decent and cheap parking. That should see people flocking into the city centre to work and shop. God forbid any retailers actually take up tenancy in St Martins Quarter, the car parking there is already a nightmare most days of the week. The only way for Worcesters' economy to grow, is for more people to live here. As they are not going to live in the city centre, the council needs to put the infrastructure in place to allow them to move about the city for business and pleasure. Perhaps having people work close to their homes, may be of benefit to the current traffic chaos that is Worcester, not to mention the reduction in noise and pollution. The council should be mindful of the upcoming elections and act accordingly. TheLoudBloke

2:55pm Sat 25 Jan 14

yamoto says...

until the northern bypass is completed, how could they possibly think of introducing more development to the west side of worcester. hope the planners have the common sense to think of this, but i doubt it, with a short term policy of the back pocket, maybe.
until the northern bypass is completed, how could they possibly think of introducing more development to the west side of worcester. hope the planners have the common sense to think of this, but i doubt it, with a short term policy of the back pocket, maybe. yamoto

3:24pm Sat 25 Jan 14

denon says...

No use winging about worcester city council ...the decision rests full square on Malvern since its in their area
No use winging about worcester city council ...the decision rests full square on Malvern since its in their area denon

5:49pm Sat 25 Jan 14

dropkick55 says...

denon wrote:
No use winging about worcester city council ...the decision rests full square on Malvern since its in their area
whinging
[quote][p][bold]denon[/bold] wrote: No use winging about worcester city council ...the decision rests full square on Malvern since its in their area[/p][/quote]whinging dropkick55

5:56pm Sat 25 Jan 14

voledog says...

There has to comes a point when Worcester has to stop expanding. The population of this city has increased from 60,000 to nearly 100,000 in less than 50 years. That growth has caused congestion and little in the way of a genuine improvement in the quality of life for residents.
We live in a city with a medieval road system with all main routes leading to the centre and the river crossing. We've had plenty of by-passes built over the years but still the problems get worse. New roads always attract new developments which always mean more people and more traffic, and those extra people will also jump into their cars to head into the city centre to shop or work. By-passes are totally self defeating and will never solve Worcester's problems.

There needs to be a total halt put on all housing development around Worcester, Malvern and Droitwich - only business developments that bring jobs to the area should be allowed. We do need a lot more housing and the only sensible solution for this area is to build a substantial new town a couple of miles to the east of the M5 just north of Worcester - maybe to eventually accommodate around 40,000 people. Building a properly planned new town with schools, healthcare facilities and an easily accessible shopping centre is the only way we're ever going to make Worcester and other towns in the area sustainable and, most importantly, keep them as pleasant places to live.
There has to comes a point when Worcester has to stop expanding. The population of this city has increased from 60,000 to nearly 100,000 in less than 50 years. That growth has caused congestion and little in the way of a genuine improvement in the quality of life for residents. We live in a city with a medieval road system with all main routes leading to the centre and the river crossing. We've had plenty of by-passes built over the years but still the problems get worse. New roads always attract new developments which always mean more people and more traffic, and those extra people will also jump into their cars to head into the city centre to shop or work. By-passes are totally self defeating and will never solve Worcester's problems. There needs to be a total halt put on all housing development around Worcester, Malvern and Droitwich - only business developments that bring jobs to the area should be allowed. We do need a lot more housing and the only sensible solution for this area is to build a substantial new town a couple of miles to the east of the M5 just north of Worcester - maybe to eventually accommodate around 40,000 people. Building a properly planned new town with schools, healthcare facilities and an easily accessible shopping centre is the only way we're ever going to make Worcester and other towns in the area sustainable and, most importantly, keep them as pleasant places to live. voledog

6:41pm Sat 25 Jan 14

MissMini says...

This is utterly crazy.

People of St Johns, can you even imagine the congestion on Oldbury Road?

Brookside Rd, Penhill Crescent, Greenacres, Dines Green,100 times worse rat run / speeding problems.

In fact with that increased volume of traffic there would probably need to be traffic lights at the top of Solitaire Ave / Oldbury Road / Comer Gardens, as you would probably never see a gap to pull out onto Oldbury Road.That junction is a nightmare most mornings anyway at rush hour / school run time.

I'm amazed there hasn't already been a serious accident there, especially with the huge delivery lorry from Solitaire Stores often completely blocking the view onto Oldbury Road for pple trying to pull out of Solitaire.

Just a bit further down Oldbury Road is Oldbury Park Primary, where the road is virtually impassable on school run mornings because parking on both sides of the road reduces it to a crawl with room to pass (very carefully!) in one direction only.

Then further along the road we have the busy entrance to the University!

So 800 new homes built off Oldbury Road = say, at least one car per household? How many of these 800 cars will be trying each morning to get to the City Centre or the bypass to access the motorway?
This is utterly crazy. People of St Johns, can you even imagine the congestion on Oldbury Road? Brookside Rd, Penhill Crescent, Greenacres, Dines Green,100 times worse rat run / speeding problems. In fact with that increased volume of traffic there would probably need to be traffic lights at the top of Solitaire Ave / Oldbury Road / Comer Gardens, as you would probably never see a gap to pull out onto Oldbury Road.That junction is a nightmare most mornings anyway at rush hour / school run time. I'm amazed there hasn't already been a serious accident there, especially with the huge delivery lorry from Solitaire Stores often completely blocking the view onto Oldbury Road for pple trying to pull out of Solitaire. Just a bit further down Oldbury Road is Oldbury Park Primary, where the road is virtually impassable on school run mornings because parking on both sides of the road reduces it to a crawl with room to pass (very carefully!) in one direction only. Then further along the road we have the busy entrance to the University! So 800 new homes built off Oldbury Road = say, at least one car per household? How many of these 800 cars will be trying each morning to get to the City Centre or the bypass to access the motorway? MissMini

9:23pm Sat 25 Jan 14

Captain Thrap says...

Why not just build a new university campus on there instead, chuck all the students out of our St Johns neighbourhoods and then all the houses will come free again without the need to build any new ones, simples. Just think of the extra council tax revenue !!! Then the northern link road could carve through them all LOL
Why not just build a new university campus on there instead, chuck all the students out of our St Johns neighbourhoods and then all the houses will come free again without the need to build any new ones, simples. Just think of the extra council tax revenue !!! Then the northern link road could carve through them all LOL Captain Thrap

9:46pm Sat 25 Jan 14

orange 99 says...

denon wrote:
No use winging about worcester city council ...the decision rests full square on Malvern since its in their area
malven and worcester city council is all in one now
[quote][p][bold]denon[/bold] wrote: No use winging about worcester city council ...the decision rests full square on Malvern since its in their area[/p][/quote]malven and worcester city council is all in one now orange 99

12:28am Sun 26 Jan 14

Jabbadad says...

the breif mention of the Northern link road is so obvious as a huge solution to all of Worcester and no less to St Johns. But there are many who live that side of the water who are opposed to the Bypass for selfish reasons.
the breif mention of the Northern link road is so obvious as a huge solution to all of Worcester and no less to St Johns. But there are many who live that side of the water who are opposed to the Bypass for selfish reasons. Jabbadad

8:50am Sun 26 Jan 14

denon says...

orange 99

No it isn't one Worcester City Council is Labour controlled with the help of liberal Democrats and Malvern Hills District Council is Conservative controlled with the help of Liberal Democrats ...you grapefruit.
orange 99 No it isn't one Worcester City Council is Labour controlled with the help of liberal Democrats and Malvern Hills District Council is Conservative controlled with the help of Liberal Democrats ...you grapefruit. denon

10:42am Sun 26 Jan 14

liketoknow says...

am I being cynical? the government have relaxed the planning laws, creating easier conditions for developments ,which in turn 'creates' new jobs ; which in turn artificially massages the unemployment figures. where are the huge wage rises coming from to enable people to buy these homes?
am I being cynical? the government have relaxed the planning laws, creating easier conditions for developments ,which in turn 'creates' new jobs ; which in turn artificially massages the unemployment figures. where are the huge wage rises coming from to enable people to buy these homes? liketoknow

11:10am Sun 26 Jan 14

denon says...

If new jobs are created how does that massage the employment figures...jobs is jobs . More houses in the end mean a surplus of houses which reduces prices. I think....the nibby's just want to keep their own house prices up.
If new jobs are created how does that massage the employment figures...jobs is jobs . More houses in the end mean a surplus of houses which reduces prices. I think....the nibby's just want to keep their own house prices up. denon

11:29am Sun 26 Jan 14

green49 says...

liketoknow says...

am I being cynical? the government have relaxed the planning laws, creating easier conditions for developments ,which in turn 'creates' new jobs ; which in turn artificially massages the unemployment figures. where are the huge wage rises coming from to enable people to buy these homes?

The application will say something like this, as developers we will build to enhance the structure of Worcester, we will supply more jobs, we will build houses for use by the local council, we will build afforable homes etc etc all the usual political b******, what about OUR enviroment?, more cars more pollution, more traffic chaos, etc etc Mr Pickles is getting us into a right pickle, Worcester needs more infastructure BEFORE any further development takes place as Developers promise much but deliver very little, Make the Developers put in the road systems, the additional bridges etc etc, they will be quite happy to take the profit and leave us the local taxpayer with the mess.
This propsal should be denied until we all get some of the above things to cope with it all.
liketoknow says... am I being cynical? the government have relaxed the planning laws, creating easier conditions for developments ,which in turn 'creates' new jobs ; which in turn artificially massages the unemployment figures. where are the huge wage rises coming from to enable people to buy these homes? The application will say something like this, as developers we will build to enhance the structure of Worcester, we will supply more jobs, we will build houses for use by the local council, we will build afforable homes etc etc all the usual political b******, what about OUR enviroment?, more cars more pollution, more traffic chaos, etc etc Mr Pickles is getting us into a right pickle, Worcester needs more infastructure BEFORE any further development takes place as Developers promise much but deliver very little, Make the Developers put in the road systems, the additional bridges etc etc, they will be quite happy to take the profit and leave us the local taxpayer with the mess. This propsal should be denied until we all get some of the above things to cope with it all. green49

3:01pm Sun 26 Jan 14

liketoknow says...

denon wrote:
If new jobs are created how does that massage the employment figures...jobs is jobs . More houses in the end mean a surplus of houses which reduces prices. I think....the nibby's just want to keep their own house prices up.
just seems strange when wages are lower than ever and we're in a recession everybody wants to start building houses .
[quote][p][bold]denon[/bold] wrote: If new jobs are created how does that massage the employment figures...jobs is jobs . More houses in the end mean a surplus of houses which reduces prices. I think....the nibby's just want to keep their own house prices up.[/p][/quote]just seems strange when wages are lower than ever and we're in a recession everybody wants to start building houses . liketoknow

5:35pm Sun 26 Jan 14

MissMini says...

The houses are for mirgrants from the EU
The houses are for mirgrants from the EU MissMini

6:16pm Sun 26 Jan 14

CJH says...

MissMini wrote:
The houses are for mirgrants from the EU
What do you do when you're not reading the Daily Mail? And what exactly are 'mirgrants' ? When you've explained that perhaps you could give us the source for your statement. I'm sure we'd all be fascinated to see actual proof.
[quote][p][bold]MissMini[/bold] wrote: The houses are for mirgrants from the EU[/p][/quote]What do you do when you're not reading the Daily Mail? And what exactly are 'mirgrants' ? When you've explained that perhaps you could give us the source for your statement. I'm sure we'd all be fascinated to see actual proof. CJH

2:20pm Mon 27 Jan 14

sugarlump says...

I'm thinking of moving to Birmingham - there will be more green there than in Worcestershire the way things are going.
I'm thinking of moving to Birmingham - there will be more green there than in Worcestershire the way things are going. sugarlump

3:20pm Mon 27 Jan 14

denon says...

utterrubbish sugarlump
utterrubbish sugarlump denon

8:42pm Mon 27 Jan 14

worcestawarrior says...

Denon you sound like another brain washed civil servant
Denon you sound like another brain washed civil servant worcestawarrior

7:50am Tue 28 Jan 14

denon says...

Im neither brain washed nor civil nor a civil servant. I earn my own money through hard work .

lok at google earth and tell me which is greener birmingham or Worcestershire
Im neither brain washed nor civil nor a civil servant. I earn my own money through hard work . lok at google earth and tell me which is greener birmingham or Worcestershire denon

12:42pm Tue 28 Jan 14

sugarlump says...

gosh is humour dead?
gosh is humour dead? sugarlump

1:16pm Tue 28 Jan 14

CJH says...

sugarlump wrote:
gosh is humour dead?
I don't think it was ever born in some people sugarlump. Never mind, more for the rest of us.
[quote][p][bold]sugarlump[/bold] wrote: gosh is humour dead?[/p][/quote]I don't think it was ever born in some people sugarlump. Never mind, more for the rest of us. CJH

3:23pm Tue 28 Jan 14

Robot 3021 says...

What isn't reported here, and makes this a whole lot worse, is that there is a separate proposal from Bloor Homes for a further 360 homes on the other side of Oldbury Road at Temple Laugherne. The same company also has a controlling interest in pretty much all of the rest of the land that lies between Dines Green and Lower Broadheath.
What isn't reported here, and makes this a whole lot worse, is that there is a separate proposal from Bloor Homes for a further 360 homes on the other side of Oldbury Road at Temple Laugherne. The same company also has a controlling interest in pretty much all of the rest of the land that lies between Dines Green and Lower Broadheath. Robot 3021

12:36am Wed 29 Jan 14

DeBrian Thronker says...

People, I've made a facebook group in protest against the proposed developments. To stay updated, search for "Protect Worcester's Green Belt" and be sure to share it with your friends.

Let's make our voices heard!
People, I've made a facebook group in protest against the proposed developments. To stay updated, search for "Protect Worcester's Green Belt" and be sure to share it with your friends. Let's make our voices heard! DeBrian Thronker

1:45pm Fri 31 Jan 14

_stu_ says...

Funny how the guy that bought a house in the latest development up there doesn't want another development behind his house spoiling his views...
Funny how the guy that bought a house in the latest development up there doesn't want another development behind his house spoiling his views... _stu_

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree