PLANS for 51 new homes in a picturesque Worcestershire village have taken a step forward after the design and layout of the site was approved, despite a raft of concerns.

The reserved matters portion of the application – comprising elements such as the layout of the development and the design of the homes – for land at Kiln Lane in Leigh Sinton, was discussed at a meeting of Malvern Hills District Council’s Northern Area Development Management Committee on Wednesday, July 1.

Speaking at the meeting vice chairman of Leigh and Bransford Parish Council Cllr Stephen Seymour said he and colleagues had worked with developer CALA Homes since the development was granted outline planning permission in June last year to ensure residents’ concerns were addressed, with some success.

But he said concerns remained around other elements of the development, to include six three-bedrooms houses, seven two-bedroom homes, three two-bedroom bungalows and four one-bedroom flats, such as the density of the buildings and the access to the site.

But planning director at CALA Reuben Bellamy said the organisation had listened to concerns and made a number of changes such as reducing the amount of homes by two and significantly enlarged a proposed play area.

“We appreciate that for people adjoining the site this development will mean a great change and this change will not be welcomed,” he said.

But Cllr Sarah Rouse said she did not believe the development was a well-designed as it should be.

“I’m just not satisfied we’ve reached the best possible decision yet for future residents “I feel the houses are more urban in design,” she said. “If they are allowed they will set a precedent for other applications in Leigh Sinton.”

Cllr Anthony Warburton agreed, saying: “I think this application pays no respect whatsoever to the site’s surroundings.

“What is planned is in effect an urban intrusion into a village.

“We have to make the best of a bad job – this ain’t a city, it’s the countryside.”

Although it was proposed to reject the plans on the grounds it was too dense, not in keeping with the area and the design of the homes was not satisfactory, members voted the motion down by six votes to five and instead approved the application.