RESIDENTS are calling for work on 33 affordable houses to be stopped, claiming the buildings pose an increased risk of ground flooding and subsidence.
Those living in Chequers Lane in Wychbold say the fact the properties are on a brine run is detrimental both to the new homes and their own.
One resident, Lisa Cox, said she feared her 84-year-old father may lose his house if the new properties are built.
“He should not have to worry at night about his house potentially falling down by a development he did not even ask for, that is potentially unsafe.”
The houses will come with associated infrastructure, including roads, driveways and parking areas for the new residents.
Carry Smart, the Chairman of the Wychavon Residents Association, said: “We are not against the building of houses, but we cannot condone the building of these on unsafe ground.
“Why we think it is wrong to build these affordable houses is because people who do not have a lot of money cannot afford to live in houses that may subside.”
When the application was passed, assessments highlighted that the flood risk was low, and the land could accommodate the development proposed.
But a Terrafirma Ground Report commissioned by the residents claimed that within the application, land stability policies were not considered and ‘no mention of suitable mitigation measures, such as ground investigation and suitable sub-structure (and super-structure) design’ were carried out.
Terrafirma reports details examinations carried out by geologists, soil scientists and engineers to assess risks from mining activity, subsidence and sinkholes.
The report suggested ground within Wychbold had the presence of numerous surface subsidence features, such as sinkholes, within the surrounding area.
The ground on a brine run can lead to ground movement due to it being made up of soluble salt content, which can dissolve.
A Wychavon District Council spokesman said: “The presence of brine runs is not a material consideration, so it’s not something we can take into account when considering planning applications.
“The National Planning Policy Framework makes it clear planning decisions and policies should be focused on deciding if the proposed development is an acceptable use of land and not the control of processes or emissions.
“Where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development lies with the developer and/or landowner.”
It added the issues raised were covered by alternative legislation and not the planning system.
“We’re confident we have decided this planning application in the proper way, taking into account all the material considerations.”
In a statement, the Environmental Agency said it had not been consulted as there were no river flood risks.
We contacted Jonathan Sproule Developments, but they declined to comment.
