Bromfield Road Housing MasterplanPlans for around 215 homes will be considered by the South Planning Committee on 24 June, with a recommendation for approval. I know a lot of people are unhappy with this scheme which, if approved, will add more than 200 homes to our quota over and above the housing proposed in SAMDev. However, because Shropshire Council does not have a five year land supply, development, even if it is not in SAMDev, can only be turned down if it is unsustainable.

Although I am a member of the South Planning Committee, I am not allowed to vote on this application, so I have already made my views known in an objection (below). The agent for the developer has responded in detail (also below).

I’d welcome your views. For further details of the application, search for 13/03862/OUT at

Bromfield Road Housing Air

13/03862/OUT | Outline application for residential development (up to 215 dwellings)
Comments by Andy Boddington

This proposal creates an isolated development on the edge of town. It will be the first Ludlow development with vehicle access only from the A49 bypass. This access arrangement will encourage residents to drive away from Ludlow rather use town centre facilities.

Noise levels near the bypass will be high and the public protection specialist recommends higher standard glazing. But the residents will still be subject to high noise levels in their gardens, as well as air pollution.

Pedestrian and cycle access to the site is poor. The footbridge over the railway gives access to the leisure centre but otherwise no useful locations. The footbridge over the Corve gives access to a play area, but it is not a useful route into town. There are no details I can see of how pedestrians and cyclists will be routed across the play area.

The Corve footbridge seems to be on stilts and has a lengthy approach to the Corve.

I am concerned it might urbanise this stretch of river and the remaining meadow. Notwithstanding the ecological reports, I am worried that creating this route will have a negative impact on the otters in the Corve.

The transport plan is out of date, especially with regard to bus transport. It is also overly optimistic on the number of trips by cycle and on foot, given that housing in Ludlow tends to attract elderly residents. I do not believe it meets the requirements of NPPF 17.

The potential for increased flooding is major issue. The development has been moved back from the floodplain. But much more could be done to alleviate run off which will be around two and a half times the current level. Porous parking surfaces and grey water harvesting should a planning obligation. I do not see any arrangement for swales or similar mechanisms that will slow run off and contribute to the ecology of the Corve riverside. Even with this, I remain concerned that this development will lead to increased folding downstream on the Corve.

I do not believe that this development is sustainable within the terms of the NPPF.

13/03862/OUT | Outline application for residential development (up to 215 dwellings)
Response by Andy Williams, Advance Land and Planning Ltd.

  • There has been relatively little objection (for a major scheme) and much of the objection comes from residents in Fishmore View.
    We thought the footbridge was a good idea at the time and the planners agree with us, but IF members including yourself do not like the idea, then the scheme is not dependent upon it and it could be deleted.
  • In terms of sustainability, the site is opposite a primary school, a high school and a leisure centre and it is on a bus route.  The proposals also envisage the provision of a small commercial unit which could accommodate a modest neighbourhood store.
  • The application site is no further out from the Town centre than the SAMDev proposals, both of which are on the far side of the A49 by-pass.
  • Indeed, Officers have intimated that had they known last year, that we could provide the access arrangements we have since agreed with the Highways Agency and the Council’s Highway Section, then the site might well have been proposed for allocation.  The SHLAA appraisal indicates that the site has many advantages and that development in this location will be within the physical confines of the Town will have relatively little impact upon the immediate or wider surroundings.
  • The SAMDev proposals are the subject of significant and material objections and these sites remain to be considered by an Inspector at the Examination and so they cannot yet be relied upon.
  • In any event, if approved, the development will strengthen the Council’s housing land supply and it need not be in competition with the SAMDev proposals which if endorsed may yet take several years to bring forward.
  • Layout and detailed design of properties are reserved matters, but I can assure you that noise is not an overriding impediment and the issue can be covered by condition.
  • The development area is NOT in the flood plain and any discharge of surface water will have to be attenuated to greenfield run-off rates and so it will not exacerbate any existing problems downstream.
  • There are no highway, drainage, flood risk, ecological, noise or other objections.
  • The proposals will deliver an attractive riverside ‘park’/open space and in the future there may even be the possibility of pedestrian linkage under the railway line at the southern end of the site to allow for even greater connectivity.

Discover more from

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading