Plans for 70 homes in Ellesmere go to public enquiry
A public inquiry will determine whether plans to build nearly 70 homes in a town should be given the go-ahead.
Developer David Wilson Homes has lodged an appeal to the Government Planning Inspectorate over Shropshire Council's decision to refuse planning permission to build 68 homes off Teal Drive in Ellesmere.
Shropshire Council turned down the application earlier this year after ruling that the plans would not enhance the countryside and would have too great a "cumulative impact" when considered alongside other proposed developments.
Council planners thought another 68 homes, a mix of three, four and five-bedroom properties, would be too much for the town because 700 homes have already been earmarked for the area.
But now Les Stephan Planning Ltd has appealed against the council's decision on behalf of David Wilson Homes.
The authority has listed the matter for a public inquiry, although a date and location has yet to be set.
Ann Hartley, Shropshire Council member for Ellesmere, said: "I spoke out strongly against it at the planning meeting and was delighted the north planning committee turned down the application.
"It is clearly an unsuitable site.
"It is out of our hands now and I just hope the planning inspector sees sense and listens to the community."
Documents submitted by the agents say the council's reason for refusal has not been demonstrated with "appropriate evidence".
"This site will be a sustainable and valued addition to Ellesmere which will create an attractive urban edge and the delivery of housing in the short-term," the documents say.
The developers argue that the site is next to the existing development boundary.
"It is not considered that it encroaches into the countryside or contributes to any harmful erosion in this respect," the documents add.
"The environmental aspect of this proposal can only seek to enhance the experience for users and neighbouring properties, particularly once the open space is made publicly available following completion.
"We believe that the reason for refusal, which relates solely to the harm caused to the environmental dimension of sustainability, has not been demonstrated with appropriate evidence."
