A number of possible sites have been identified around the village and these are shown on the map to the left (click on the image to see a larger version).  The map shows three sites, to scale, and the area that 16 properties would occupy on each site is outlined in red. 

There has been a preliminary evaluation of each of these sites and this was conducted on Friday 15th February at a site meeting between Alf Trewin, of the Trewin Design Partnership, and Michael Cox.  Mr Trewin commented on his initial thoughts in a letter to the Project Team, via Steve Parsons, on 18th February 2008.  His comments on each site are as follows:

SITE A - WEST OF THE SCHOOL

In planning terms a good location close to the school and in a position where additional parking and dropping off points can be formed within the new access to the residential development.  The site forms a natural rounding of between Kyl Cober Parc and the school.

The exisiting tree belt to the north side of Kyl Cober Parc will provide good screening and a reasonably good break between the two residential developments.

The disadvantage is that it's on relatively high ground and is close to the area of great landscape value which fronts the northern side of the road to the north of the crossroads.

SITE B - EAST OF KYL COBER PARC

The site is on high ground and relatively exposed and backs onto a number of properties of Kyl Cober Parc.  The road is narrow and would require areas of hedgebanks to be removed. In my opinion this site is the least suitable.

SITE C - EAST OF THE GRAVEYARD AND THE RECTORY

This site fits comfortably within the natural boundary of the village.  The eastern dry stone hedge is strong and will form a good boundary.  When viewed from Kitt Hill it can be seen as a natural rounding off.  Access through the north west corner could be accommodated without too much disturbance.  The site is close to the centre of the village and has footpaths through the Kyl Cober site to the school.

There is not a lot to choose between Sites A and B, although Site A is probably the easiest site to develop as there are less restraints.  Site C would probably be the site favoured, if any, by residents.

Alf Trewin (Trewin Design Partnership)