Homes bid for bowling green gets go-ahead

Worcester News: Homes bid for bowling green gets go-ahead Homes bid for bowling green gets go-ahead

A NEW development of 10 affordable homes in Bransford, near Worcester, has been given the go-ahead after councillors were convinced the site posed no risk from chemical contamination.

Festival Housing Association has been seeking permission to build the houses on an old bowling green next to the Bank House hotel, to tackle the need for more affordable housing in the village.

But the application was thrown out in October, with members of Malvern Hills District Council raising concerns that the site may be contaminated with dangerous chemicals.

Fears were raised over the presence of benzo-alpha-pyrene, known to cause cancer, in soil on the land.

There were reassurances from Worcestershire Regulatory Services that it was not in the areas of the proposed homes and contamination was not a significant issue.

However, after further investigation the application returned to the district council’s northern area development control committee last week and was approved.

John Sharp, chairman of Leigh and Bransford Parish Council, said he had been frustrated by the delay but was delighted the homes had now been approved.

He said a housing needs survey carried out last year by the parish council and housing enabler Community First had identified an urgent need for 10 affordable homes.

He said: “The initial application for the site went in at the start of April so it has been a long, hard fight but we have got there. We are delighted because there are people in our parish who are desperately in need of this type of housing.”

Worcestershire developer Wolverley Homes will be working with Festival Housing to deliver the new homes.

Coun Sharp said he was hopeful work could get under way before Christmas.

Comments (9)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:10am Mon 12 Nov 12

mayall8808 says...

It never ceases to amaze me that the very people who are supposed to represent the taxpayers wants to push ahead of what could be a danger.
(Not a significant issue) Tell that to who might live there?.


Fears were raised over the presence of benzo-alpha-pyrene, known to cause cancer, in soil on the land.

There were reassurances from Worcestershire Regulatory Services that it was not in the areas of the proposed homes and contamination was not a significant issue.

I have heard it all before so lets not forget,

BUILDERS ARE IN IT FOR THE MONEY ONLY, NOT ANYONE'S WELL BEING.

This project should be thrown out.
It never ceases to amaze me that the very people who are supposed to represent the taxpayers wants to push ahead of what could be a danger. (Not a significant issue) Tell that to who might live there?. Fears were raised over the presence of benzo-alpha-pyrene, known to cause cancer, in soil on the land. There were reassurances from Worcestershire Regulatory Services that it was not in the areas of the proposed homes and contamination was not a significant issue. I have heard it all before so lets not forget, BUILDERS ARE IN IT FOR THE MONEY ONLY, NOT ANYONE'S WELL BEING. This project should be thrown out. mayall8808

1:55pm Mon 12 Nov 12

Hwicce says...

@mayall8808 - You just don't like anyone building anywhere do you?

You should be trumpeting this development as it’s on a brown field site, or are you just the hypocrite you always come across as.
@mayall8808 - You just don't like anyone building anywhere do you? You should be trumpeting this development as it’s on a brown field site, or are you just the hypocrite you always come across as. Hwicce

4:32pm Mon 12 Nov 12

green49 says...

So here we go again, Hwicce i did not say do not build anywhere but even you should read the article, it shows a potential of possible danger building on the site, no you cannot believe so called reports done by builders as they are bent to suit, this site is unsuitable full stop the first report by the council stated that, Nothing has changed, I DO NOT object to building anywhere but it should be suitable for the area in which any build would be, too many in one place with no new infastructure? even you must see the sense in that, but then you would'nt want anything in your back yard would you? only in everyone elses.
So here we go again, Hwicce i did not say do not build anywhere but even you should read the article, it shows a potential of possible danger building on the site, no you cannot believe so called reports done by builders as they are bent to suit, this site is unsuitable full stop the first report by the council stated that, Nothing has changed, I DO NOT object to building anywhere but it should be suitable for the area in which any build would be, too many in one place with no new infastructure? even you must see the sense in that, but then you would'nt want anything in your back yard would you? only in everyone elses. green49

4:37pm Mon 12 Nov 12

green49 says...

Hwicce, my mate mayall has similar views to me on this subject and thats why i replied to you,
Do we want Worcester and area concreted over with small boxes they call affordable housing? hope not and why build more when there are 800,000 empty in the country?
Hwicce, my mate mayall has similar views to me on this subject and thats why i replied to you, Do we want Worcester and area concreted over with small boxes they call affordable housing? hope not and why build more when there are 800,000 empty in the country? green49

9:19pm Mon 12 Nov 12

Hwicce says...

You need to read what it says not what you want it to say (under whatever name you want to use).

"members of Malvern Hills District Council raising concerns that the site MAY be contaminated"

"reassurances from Worcestershire Regulatory Services THAT IT WAS NOT in the areas of the proposed homes and contamination was not a significant issue"

So the Councillors who are laymen said MAY, and the professionals said "THAT IT WAS NOT". At some point you are going to have to believe someone, though I suppose that will only be the someone who supports YOUR view.

There is a word for people like you who will not take any advice or anyones elses oppinion even if the evidence is stacked against you. I won't use it on here as it will upset Murray but you are it anyway.
You need to read what it says not what you want it to say (under whatever name you want to use). "members of Malvern Hills District Council raising concerns that the site MAY be contaminated" "reassurances from Worcestershire Regulatory Services THAT IT WAS NOT in the areas of the proposed homes and contamination was not a significant issue" So the Councillors who are laymen said MAY, and the professionals said "THAT IT WAS NOT". At some point you are going to have to believe someone, though I suppose that will only be the someone who supports YOUR view. There is a word for people like you who will not take any advice or anyones elses oppinion even if the evidence is stacked against you. I won't use it on here as it will upset Murray but you are it anyway. Hwicce

7:24am Tue 13 Nov 12

mayall8808 says...

I have been involved with so called professional reports, they are a myth sometimes so as to get what is applied for, councillors only get fed the information from officers that they want them to have,, YOU really are neive in this or know nothing, so that leaves me with the same view towards you mate? get the facts, i live by this place and i know the facts.
I have been involved with so called professional reports, they are a myth sometimes so as to get what is applied for, councillors only get fed the information from officers that they want them to have,, YOU really are neive in this or know nothing, so that leaves me with the same view towards you mate? get the facts, i live by this place and i know the facts. mayall8808

8:52am Tue 13 Nov 12

green49 says...

Hwicce;; There is a word for people like you who will not take any advice or listen to anyones elses opinion even if the evidence is stacked against you. I won't use it on here as it will upset Murray but you are it anyway.

Hey like that, takes one to know one does'nt it?
As mayall says, get the facts,
Hwicce;; There is a word for people like you who will not take any advice or listen to anyones elses opinion even if the evidence is stacked against you. I won't use it on here as it will upset Murray but you are it anyway. Hey like that, takes one to know one does'nt it? As mayall says, get the facts, green49

9:28am Tue 13 Nov 12

Hwicce says...

Point proved - especially as you are posting the same thing twice under different user names.
Point proved - especially as you are posting the same thing twice under different user names. Hwicce

10:25am Tue 13 Nov 12

mayall8808 says...

Hwicce;; Green49 is a mate and has the same point of view,,Get a life for gods sake, you always seem to have a view you are right, just for a reaction, the above article is a serious situation yet you turn into a personal attack when no one agrees with you,, you don't warrant any further reply, get the facts.
Hwicce;; Green49 is a mate and has the same point of view,,Get a life for gods sake, you always seem to have a view you are right, just for a reaction, the above article is a serious situation yet you turn into a personal attack when no one agrees with you,, you don't warrant any further reply, get the facts. mayall8808
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

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