Villagers braced for fresh fight against supermarket near Stourbridge - five months after plans were refused

For the latest planning applications and public notices in your area, visit the Public Notices Portal

Dhaminder Singh, of Dudley-based SEP Properties, wants to demolish a semi-detached former insurance office in Enville Street, Kinver, to make way for a new 3,300 sq ft supermarket with 16 parking spaces.

The plans were refused in March, after more than 700 people in the village signed a petition against the proposals. But Mr Singh has now lodged an appeal, and is asking for South Staffordshire Council to pay his costs, saying the authority had acted unreasonably in refusing the application.

South Staffordshire Council had refused permission on the grounds of access and road safety, adding that parking provision was insufficient with regards to the floorspace of the development.

The former Swinford insurance office is located at Potters Cross, close to the driveway of Brindley Heath Academy and Kinver High School.

Postmistress Becky Spicer, who was a leading campaigner against the original application, said the fight would continue.

She admitted that she was concerned about the impact of the development on her business, but said her primary concern was about the traffic and road safety.

"It's on a four-way junction, and if you park by the junction it's going to be chaos," she said.

Mrs Spicer said there was a vacant former supermarket in Kinver High Street, which would be far better suited for such use.

She voiced concerns that the planning inspector intended visiting the site during the school holidays, when there would be less traffic around than normal.

Mrs Spicer said campaigners would be organising a fresh petition against the plans.

The proposals are for a new detached building, which will be about 60 per cent larger than the one it replaces.

However, a statement issued on behalf of the developer said the council had failed to demonstrate how the extra floorspace would result in an unacceptable highway impact sufficient to warrant refusal.

“Instead, they have raised numerous minor highway concerns that can be easily addressed,” said the statement, adding that the developer proposed improvement to an “informal school crossing”.

“It is proposed that tactile paving be introduced to the crossing to retain the crossing point and make it more visible to passing traffic, protecting pedestrian safety,” it said.

The statement said the developer also proposed improvements that would create a safer vehicle entrance.

“It is considered that a robust highway case has been presented to officers that demonstrates that the proposals will not result in any unacceptable harm to pedestrian safety,” said the appeal.

“No detailed comments have been provided by officers setting out why they consider the details submitted insufficient or confirming what additional information or measures would be needed.”

It said a new pedestrian and traffic survey of Enville Road had taken place “on a neutral weekday” in support of the appeal.

“This has demonstrated that outside of peak school periods, pedestrian flows along Enville Road are low, with any interaction between pedestrians and vehicles occurring in a low-speed, pedestrian environment,” said the statement.

“As such, there will be no material safety risk associated with the development.”

Resident Graham Gough said the existing post office and convenience store played a vital role to the community, and he would be concerned about anything which put its future at risk.

The matter will now be considered by the Government’s Planning Inspectorate.