Relief as 'extra care' homes plan is rejected

An application was made by construction company Jessup, to build 74 apartments and six bungalows for over 55s, as well as 30 affordable homes for a housing trust, and 28 houses for private sale, on land off Shaw Lane in the village.

The application was met with considerable objection from the village's parish council and residents, and led to Albrighton Development Action Group being set up to fight the development.

A statement was submitted to planning officers before the meeting, and a petition objecting to the proposal was signed by more than 1,000 people.

Councillors heard from various objectors and the developers, before they had their say.

The majority were against the application due to traffic issues in Shaw Lane, the inappropriate scale of the building and drainage issues that could cause potential flooding in a village that has suffered problems in the past.

The decision was met with delight by campaigners who had been battling against the plans for months, including parish council chair Peter Woodman.

Mr Woodman, who is also a member of the action and had admitted the group could take legal action if the application was passed, said: "All the hard work we have put in has been worth while, and this is the right result for Albrighton.

"We're pleased that councillors have listened to us."

Parish councillor Rod Smith and county councillor for Albrighton, and former leader of Shropshire Council, Malcolm Pate addressed the meeting and cited a number of reasons for refusal.

They included the fact residents didn't want more housing for elderly people coming to the area, increased congestion due to the number of homes, the impact on the nearby medical practice, the size of the building and an inadequate drainage system.

Councillor Pate she he couldn't understand why the application had been recommended for approval.

He said: "People don't want this in Albrighton and I am gobsmacked this has come forward for approval.

"It is a monster of a building and is totally inappropriate for the area.

"It is a ridiculous application and I implore this application to be rejected."

The meeting was also told how the action group wanted the access to the site to be from the south, and not Shaw Lane to the north because of increased traffic congestion, and potential dangers to school children in the area with increased traffic.

Andy Williams, on behalf of the developer, said the application wasn't for a care home, but a extra care facility that wouldn't be a burden on the local medical practice.

Councillors were also told the land was earmarked for development under the SAMDEV plan, however many said this development was not appropriate for the land.

Many councillors were concerned about the increase in traffic on Shaw Lane, and the increase of construction traffic that would create a danger to local schoolchildren.

Councillor Nigel Hartin said the construction would cause an increase in traffic, and a danger to traffic, adding: "A child will end up being crushed by a dumper truck."

Councillor Heather Kidd said she couldn't support the application due to the impact that drainage plans could have on flooding, before Robert Tindall proposed the application should be refused.

He said it should be refused for a number of reasons stated throughout the meeting.

After a small adjournment for the council's solicitor to advise members on the correct reasons as to why the application could be refused, a vote was taken and the application was rejected.