CONTROVERSIAL plans for 35 new homes on a resting site during the Battle of Worcester have been blocked - after fears it would damage the city's heritage.

Your Worcester News can reveal how after an intervention from Historic England developers have been prevented from creating a big estate on Rose Bank, off London Road.

The land sits within two Conservation Areas and contains a number of historic buildings and heritage assets, including a 19th century cottage and some still-standing boundary walls of the historic, demolished St Catherine Hill house.

Developer Matthews City & Country Homes was trying to get the nod for the properties but it was voted down by Worcester City Council's planning committee, which agreed to defer the bid rather than reject it outright.

The land is earmarked for some property under the South Worcestershire Development Plan (SWDP), but no more than 20 homes.

The firm had instead drawn up proposals for 35 on a slightly bigger site, demolishing large swathes of the site and building just metres away from some listed buildings.

After campaigners turned up at a planning committee meeting to object vociferously it was blocked.

Nigel Bullock, a nearby resident, called it "laughable" and said "one third of the Conservation Area" would become a 16-space car park.

He also told them it would seriously "damage the setting" of listed buildings dating back to the 19th century, saying: "Is this really how we protect our heritage from harm?"

Councillor Jabba Riaz also attended, saying he was speaking on behalf of 200 people who wanted it thrown out.

"If Battenhall Farm was described as the last green lung of the city, this is the green heart of it," he said.

"The residents were completely gobsmacked when they saw the developer was trying to get 35 homes on there - we shouldn't go for mass development on this site."

When pushed on how many properties he felt it could take, he called for "five or six eco homes" at most.

Victoria Poole, from Poole Phillips Associates, attended for the developer and told the committee the work would result in three distinctive open spaces, a cycle route and space for badgers to roam.

She also said experts believe the development is "innovative, distinctive and has the potential to be exemplary", saying Historic England's objection was at odds with conservation officers.

"At the moment you have a lost piece of land, this site will be developed for what we feel is appropriate for it," she said.

It divided opinion on the committee, with Councillor Alan Amos, the chairman, among those against it, saying "if I had my way, frankly, it would be untouched".

Councillor Geoff Williams called it "a sensitive site" but said he'd struggle to find planning reasons to refuse it.

Councillor Andy Roberts said: "We could refuse it, we could say 'yes, it's ok', or we could defer it to get the best out of the site - which is what we should do."

The committee agreed to defer it for talks.