Details of plan to transform town revealed

BIG IDEAS: An artist’s impression of how the centre of the development proposed for Malvern could look BIG IDEAS: An artist’s impression of how the centre of the development proposed for Malvern could look

MORE detailed plans for the 700-home development that could change the face of Malvern have been revealed for the first time.

The Worcester News's sister paper the Malvern Gazette has obtained a report by developer Gleeson Strategic Land outlining its plans for a massive development of housing and employment land at Newland on the north-east edge of Malvern.

The site, a major belt of farmland between Lower Howsell Road and the A449 Worcester Road, is earmarked for 700 homes in the South Worcestershire Devel-opment Plan (SWDP).

Gleeson was first linked with the area in 2008, when it submitted a report recommending the same site for inclusion in the South Worcestershire Joint Core Strategy – the aborted predecessor of the SWDP.

However, the latest document, received by stakeholders including parish councils and Malvern Civic Society this week, reveals exactly what Gleeson has in mind.

As well as 700 homes, including affordable housing and accommodation for the elderly, it refers to 25 acres of employment land, a primary school, community hall, cemetery, police post and neighbourhood shops.

Almost half of the site would be green space, including sports pitches, play areas and a community orchard.

The SWDP – a planning blueprint mapping out where development should take place until 2030 – is still a work in progress and must win the backing of Malvern Hills district councillors before going forward to an examination in public and potential adoption in 2013.

Gleeson spokesman Scott Chamberlain said: “The site is within walking distance of Malvern and, due to the scale proposed, it can deliver multi-million pound improvements to local roads, the Townsend Way roundabout, affordable housing, on-site employment and new facilities.

Roger Sutton, chairman of Malvern Civic Society, said: “I think it is extremely presumptuous when it has not even been agreed to build any houses at Newland.”

Comments(9)

More Tea Vicar says...
8:06pm Mon 1 Oct 12

It's amazing that the Tories are doing this and the Greens are so silent.

If the Tories are looking to increase their electoral chances, and make useful spending cuts, the SWDP is the place to start.

Usual generic, meaningless chocolate box picture, trying to hide the fact that the SWDP is a complete disaster.

As for the Greens - are they actually interested in the environment?

Samboy says...
11:49pm Mon 1 Oct 12

Every time I pass through Norton to go to the Retreat , to my embarrasment, I am reminded that I signed the petition against the recycling plant with visions of queues of lorries and litter strewn roads. I have only ever seen one commercial vehicle, the site is beautifully landscaped and there is less sign of activity than from the other units there. I am wary of objecting for objectings sake these days. So, if it is in the 'best possible taste', why not?

denon says...
7:06am Tue 2 Oct 12

Well said Samboy

Andy-Apache says...
7:54am Tue 2 Oct 12

Why not?

1) It's not necessary
2) It will be built on greenbelt
3) It won't be like the artists impression (compare and contrast same for north site)
4) There will be no increase in employment in line with the increased headcount (as per north site)
5) See 4 - people who move in, who actually work, will be commuting, putting further strain on an already busy road network, and already insufficient motorway link.
6) See 3 & 4 - the developer will not improve the road network, or build the business units 'promised' (as per north site)

I'm sure there's plenty more, but maybe you just prefer the view of endless sprawling housing estates rather than fields and trees?

FarmerT says...
1:51pm Tue 2 Oct 12

It won't be long before Malvern Link and Worcester are joined up through housing estates! However I would far rather this area be developed (next to existing housing estates, retail parks, industrial estates) than somewhere like Welland where they are trying to double the size of the village with a proportionally huge development.

In any development of this scale, I feel sorry for the people's whos houses back onto the site. They pay a premium for a rural setting within urban convenience and suddenly their nice view is ruined by lego brick houses. I think all developers should compensate those who border the development, by getting 3 estate agents to quote the loss in value. Or make the developer give those people an option to sell at market rate.

Hwicce says...
2:14pm Tue 2 Oct 12

If people want to protect their view they should buy the land.

If they don't/won't/can't do this then they are just fools if they think they own the view.

I'm sure someone has complained about their view since the first caveman left the cave and built the first house. It won't change so you may as well get over it and stop whinging about it all the time. It just gets very boring for the rest of us having to hear you drone on all the time.

sugarlump says...
3:11pm Tue 2 Oct 12

it's an obscene development. In fact the picture above is an obscene scene.

Andy-Apache says...
3:16pm Tue 2 Oct 12

Nice rational response Hwicce...

As farmer T says, year on year, the green space around villages is eroded by ugly developments, leading to villages merging into one large housing estate.

You only need to look back less than a century to see Barnards Green, Malvern Link and Great Malvern being totally separate entities. Now, it is one large populated built up area.

Are you sure you are happy for there to be no green space at all in another 100 years?

Oh, and please feel free not to read or respond if you don't want to 'hear us drone'.

FarmerT says...
1:42pm Wed 3 Oct 12

Hwicce,
You sould like a developer!!!
I agree, if you buy on the edge of a town then you risk drowning in concrete. However it doesn't stop me feeling sorry for those that are surrounded.

There is plenty of non green belt land to regenerate and redevelop. The problem is that it is more costly than tearing up hedgerows and felling trees and everything is done for the cheapest option these days...

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