Council loses flats decision

A decision on whether to build 49 retirement flats in the town centre has been taken out of the council’s hands.

Evesham town centre’s Swan Lane car park would be flattened to make way for 49 ‘retirement living’ flats and seven two-bed ‘cottages’ for the over 60s under plans by Churchill Retirement Living.

Major applications have a 13-week target to be decided which meant a ruling should have been made by planners by December 30 last year.

Various delays meant concerned council planners were still consulting with the public on redrawn designs at the start of February – with a decision long overdue – when Churchill Retirement Living lodged an appeal with the government’s planning inspectorate over non-determination.

The launch of an appeal against the amount of time the council has taken a decision means the council loses its right to make a decision.

Wychavon District Council’s planning committee will still be meeting on Thursday (March 31) to discuss the application and will be asked to list its reasons for refusal – the verdict officers would have recommended making if it still had the ability to decide.

The reasons for refusal will be used by council officers when a public inquiry is held by the planning inspectorate in May.

A report, which will be discussed by the planning committee at a meeting at the Civic Centre in Pershore on Thursday, said the application was submitted in September last year and should have been decided by December 30.

The council said the plans were put forward with “no developer contributions on the grounds of viability” and had to be independently verified in October.

Concerns were raised by officers about the layout of the flats which meant the plans had to be redrawn in January this year.

The reconfigured plans were put out to consultation by the council again until February 3, but the appeal was made on February 1 preventing any reports on the application to go before the planning committee.

Council planners said they would have recommended the plan was rejected as it was “overbearing” and “unviable.”