Parish council turn down Langford homes
PUBLISHED: 18:00 10 July 2015
A proposal for a 43-home development in Langford was unanimously opposed by Churchill Parish Council on Monday.
Issues surrounding increased traffic, pressure on schools and area flooding were cited as key to the authority’s opposition.
The development’s proposed site is outside the parish’s settlement boundary and it was stated that it ‘was not supported by the majority of the parish’s residents’.
Councillor Simon Hegarty said the proposal would not benefit the community because new occupants would have to commute to Bristol or Weston, as there was not enough employment in the immediate area for new people to take.
He added: “We want to be a cohesive community, but if this were built we would essentially have a whole new village on the wrong side of the A38.”
The attending public were keen to emphasise the strain that building this and other potential developments on Pudding Pie Lane would put on the area, insisting that it would be rendered urban from its current rural status.
Mike Dresman said: “We will lose our identity if all of these new houses are allowed to creep in.
“I have been hit a couple of times walking my granddaughter to school by vehicles that there is already no room for and we just would not cope if we had a significant increase in that number.”
Concerns were also raised about the amount of places in nearby schools, with only a handful currently remaining at nearby Churchill Primary School.
Areas of the site earmarked for development by Edward Ware Homes, it was heard, are prone to flooding, with three nearby properties having faced difficulty in the past three years.
A pond has been included to combat flooding in the worst affected corner alongside the A38, but it was feared by councillors that the proposed green at the site’s centre would also retain water.
The council also heard a pre-application presentation on a proposal to build 31 homes on the former Stock Lane Nurseries site on Pudding Pie Lane.
The properties would be primarily for elderly residents looking to downsize.
Councillors questioned why 20 three and four-bedroom homes were included in the proposal, given the desired age range they would be built for, along with their perceived wishes to occupy smaller properties.