CONTROVERSIAL plans for more than 100 homes in Fradley have gone to appeal after twice being refused permission.
Councillors previously argued that the proposals for 109 new homes on land off Horner Avenue were not in compliance with the Local Plan.
In total the scheme planned to provide a mix of two, three and four bedroom houses along with two blocks each containing six apartments.
The development would have also contributed 31 affordable housing units.
The plans received a significant number of objections from stakeholders and local residents, with 112 objections received by the planning department from local residents, while Fradley Parish Council said it “unequivocally” opposed the scheme.
Despite being recommended for approval by planning officers ahead of a July 2024 meeting, committee members refused the application due to the development being outside the settlement boundary and allocated for employment use, as well as concerns over highways and noise.
But now the developers – Vistry Homes Ltd and Greenlight Developments Ltd – have appealed the decision. This means a hearing is set to take place later this year, with initial statements due by mid-June.
Since the appeal was lodged there have been changes to the national planning policy framework, which has caused the new housing requirements across Lichfield district to increase. As a result, in February this year it was confirmed that only highways and noise concerns would now be defended by the council.
An earlier version of the scheme – for 115 houses – was also refused and subsequently appealed. Following the inspector’s comments, the plans were revised to address the issues raised.
In their statement to the planning inspector, the applicants said:
“The proposed development delivers much needed affordable housing and appropriate house sizes and tenures, achieves good design, public open space is policy compliant and the council’s residential amenity standards are met.”
“Turning now to the sole reason for refusal, the first part of that reason has already been considered and rejected by an inspector at appeal and the second part amounts to vague and generalised complaints about the impact of development that are not supported by the evidence.
“The appellant’s principal position is that the proposed development is in accordance with the Development Plan as a whole. Even if there were deemed the proposed development was not in accordance, that objection would be overcome by other material considerations, namely the contribution to the council’s five-year housing land supply in a highly accessible location.”
The proposals have previously drawn criticism from residents on Horner Avenue have warned that the planned location was unsuitable.
If this is granted all residents on that road should just park on the street. Prevent any construction vehicles getting down there. If democracy doesn’t work direct action is the only way.
When developers keep returning to appeal on several occasions, why should they be able to keep returning. Surely they should be limited to two or at most three appeals?
Is anyone else getting a bit tired of hearing the line- “affordable homes”? What is the true definition? – Social Housing? pocket- sized houses: with a tiny patch called a “garden”? as well as the fact they’ll all flock to the already saturated surgeries! Causing living standards for residents already there to sink a bit further?? Nah! No one’s bothered!