"UPSET" and "shocked" residents have rallied together yet again to face the fight against a controversial care home plan.

The plan to build a 70-bed care home on land known as the 'Donkey Field', off Northwick Road in Worcester, has gone to appeal after Wychavon District Council took too long to decide.

Campaigners have begun protesting the appeal by getting as many people to sign their petition as possible.

Rosie Drinkwater, a resident and campaigner, said: "We ask how many more buildings are going to be built on floodplains, how many more historic ecological sites are going to be destroyed, how many heritage trails are going to be urbanised, how many areas of beauty vandalised? 

"We are fighting for their future. Once this is gone, there is no turning back.

"Please help. Your countryside needs you."

It will now be up to the government's planning inspectors to decide on the care home's future due to the developers appealing over 'non-determination', which means Wychavon District Council missed the statutory deadline of 13 weeks.

Northwick Developments Ltd and Landowners submitted its planning application two years ago. 

Worcester City councillors like Mel Allcott and Karen Lawrance said they are backing residents in the fight to get the application rejected. 

A statement on behalf of Northwick Developments Ltd and Landowners said: "Northwick Development has submitted an appeal against the failure of Wychavon District Council to determine the planning application for a care home which has been demonstrated to be required.   

"The appeal is now in the process of being assessed by an independent Inspector who will take into account the information submitted by all parties across a wide range of matters in coming to a decision. 

"As such, it would be inappropriate to make any further comments at this stage of the appeal process."

Ciaran Power, head of development management for Wychavon District Council, said the council had received a late objection from the flooding authority, which raised various concerns for the site.

He added rather than recommending refusal, they offered the applicant the opportunity to respond to the technical matters raised, which was the reason behind the delay.

"The applicant chose not to do this and instead opted to appeal on the grounds of non-determination," said Mr Power.

"We are disappointed they chose this course of action, but that is their legal right, and we will robustly defend our recommendation this application should be refused at appeal."