Plan for 110 homes in Telford rejected
People power has won the day after a Government planning inspector dismissed plans to build more than 100 homes in Telford.
Inspector Simon Hand has rejected an appeal from Gladman Developments, which had wanted to build 110 homes in Muxton but had been denied permission by Telford & Wrekin Council.
Mr Hand made the judgement despite ruling the homes would cause less harm to the countryside than original proposals.
More than 500 people had signed two petitions set up by residents Phil Loughlin and Jim Simmons objecting to the proposed development off Muxton Lane.
Parish councillors at Lilleshall, Donnington and Muxton Parish Council "strongly objected" to the plans, and Wrekin MP Mark Pritchard gave the objectors his full support.
Concerns were raised about the plans not falling in line with the borough council's Local Plan, where it says it will protect the rural landscape of Lilleshall, along with green spaces that form part of the 'Lilleshall Gap' between Telford and Newport.
Plans to build 74 homes on nearby land were also rejected by the borough council in December 2014.
Mr Loughlin, 52, of Lytham Green, said: "It has been 20 months of hard campaigning but it has finally resulted in the right decision being made.
"So from the residents point of view we just wanted to celebrate the fact that we have been fighting the appeal and we have won.
"It goes to show other communities fighting developers and similar plans that there is hope and that they can be successful.
"The council have identified other land in the borough that can be used for development but it was important for this land to be protected and not used for development.
"But we are delighted with the result."
In his report, Mr Hand said: "The pulled back scheme would cause less harm to the countryside, to views and to the Lilleshall Gap, but this does not alter the balance in favour of allowing the appeal.
"The smaller development proposal would cause less harm again to the countryside and would not intrude into the Lilleshall Gap at all.
"However it would provide less affordable houses. The planning balance is therefore against all three versions of the appellant's scheme and I shall dismiss the appeal."
