PLANS to build hundreds of homes on a site in Sudbrook have resurfaced.

A proposal for 209 homes for the Sudbrook papermill site will be determined by Monmouthshire County Council (MCC) next Tuesday (3rd November).

Developers Harrow Estates originally submitted plans for the site in 2012 where they sought to build 340 houses.

Their request was refused by MCC.

Harrow Estates, have lodged an appeal against non-determination of their new application. The planning committee must, therefore, make a decision on whether or not to approve the plans on Tuesday.

The new proposal seeks to build 10 two bed houses, 110 three bed houses and 89 four bed houses.

MCC has recommended the plan for refusal because it offers no provision for affordable housing, contradicting a Local Development Plan (LDP) requirement.

The plans show a lack of off-street parking which fails to comply with the council’s parking standards.

The planning committee is also concerned by the absence of a Section 106 agreement for the provision of education infrastructure which they believe would put unsustainable pressure on primary schools in the area.

County councillor Peter Fox of the Portskewett ward, voiced his concerns earlier this year surrounding the infrastructure pressures facing Sudbrook. He said: “I still maintain real concerns about access to this site. The only way in is across the single lane railway bridge which is controlled by traffic lights.

“209 houses will create a massive amount of additional vehicle movements a day having to cross the little bridge and travel through the already congested village centre of Portskewett.

“Most journeys from this site by future residents are likely to be by car due to its proximity from local facilities in Caldicot.

“This, in my view, is not in line with creating a sustainable community.

“I also have concerns over the amount of houses proposed which will double the size of the historic village of Sudbrook.

“Whilst the council’s LDP agreed to 190 houses on the site I have always maintained my position that this number is too many recognising the constraints within the immediate area.

“If additional housing is to be built within this community there should at least be provision made for affordable housing.

“The application that has been submitted currently has no provision for such housing which is wrong and against the county council policy.”