Planning Applications

[park381]

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

A petition won't stop the work and besides that it is a fair way up from any residential area.

There are houses directly opposite, and a busy road junction a little further up.

The main reason for the petition was the fact that there was to be "No left turn" from the business/industrial park, in other words the traffic could not turn back towards Accrington, hence the petition from the residents of Windsor Ave who feared that Windsor Ave would become a rat run for traffic from the site that wanted to go back in to Accrington. The planning application for the business/industrial site has still to be lodged with HBC, I spoke to Councillor Heyes who at the time indicated that the application would be submitted in the summer, (he failed to say which summer )

[BERNADETTE]

My mistake was thinking it was neare to Accrington but can see it in my mind now and know exactly where you mean.

[park381]

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

My mistake was thinking it was neare to Accrington but can see it in my mind now and know exactly where you mean.

The proposed business/industrial park will go right up to the Farm at the Redcap.

[BERNADETTE]

Originally Posted by park381

The proposed business/industrial park will go right up to the Farm at the Redcap.

It is going to be quite some size then!!!

[park381]

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

It is going to be quite some size then!!!

Sure is. Don't know if this will work but worth a try. The area in question is right on the boundary with BwD and coloured purple. You must note that since this plan was adopted in 1996 the motorway now runs close to the Redcap pub, so the business/industrial park would be right up to the motorway, from the boundary with BwD

http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloads/planmap.pdf

It's a very big file so its slow on the download

[park381]

I see from the recent planning applications that there is a resubmission of the application to build 9 No two and three storey houses on the former Spring Hill Club land at Pickup st/Longsdale st. I am sure that the planning committee refused this applicaion on the grounds that the plan was not suitable. Looks like another complete 'U' turn.
There is also a resubmission for the formation of gate access to land off Stanhill road, the first submission was by Taylor Woodrow Developments ltd, this time its Taylor Whimpy Developments ltd.
The Barrett Homes application has also been resubmitted for the Pickle Factory

Must all be as a result of this - quote "Last month a Government minister surprised East Lancs councillors when she said there should be no limits on the new homes councils can approve."

http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/site/cu...07TO281207.pdf

Developer Welcomes Building Regulation (from Lancashire Telegraph)

Think some one needs to get a move on with the land off Blackburn road What a mess - The Gateway to Accrington

[park381]

This also makes interesting reading, I know its dated march but serves to indicate just how large these companies are.
Taylor Woodrow & Whimpy merger £6billion, will make the new company Taylor Whimpy Developments bigger than Barrett Developments. So why are the two largest house builders developers interested in
1. Barrett - building 59 houses on the pickle factory site
2. Taylor Whimpy - seeking planning permission for gate access to a field off stanhill road.
Is the building trade so bad at the moment that these two giants of the building world need these small developments to keep them going, or are they both after a foothold in Hyndburn to become a preferred developer for the land created off Blackburn road.

Wimpey and Taylor Woodrow plan merger - Times Online

[katex]

Originally Posted by park381

[COLOR=blue]
Is the building trade so bad at the moment that these two giants of the building world need these small developments to keep them going, or are they both after a foothold in Hyndburn to become a preferred developer for the land created off Blackburn road.

Wimpey and Taylor Woodrow plan merger - Times Online

Could be park that they make more profit from these smaller developments than the larger ones as price of the land would be at a smaller cost to other parts of the country. There again, so would the houses, but the prices 'aint so cheap at the moment.

Think the resubmissions were something to do with height, however, feel they will get passed eventually after a little 'tweeking'.

The big one of course this week is the go-ahead to submit plans on the Tesco store in Gt. Harwood and the Co-op extending their premises at the same time. Know they will get, but I was in the Co-op over Christmas and find it more than adequate to feed the people of Gt. Harwood. Shame the council cannot face up to the bullying Tesco.

Been a little quiet over Christmas, just one or two small ones that may be of interest:-

Dental surgery applications: 1 on Petre Court, Petre Road, Clayton and 2 at 520 Manchester Road.

Betting Shop in High Street Rishton.

The Oak Tree Inn Blackburn Road: to become Solicitors/Estate Agent.

Shop in Park Road: back to a dwelling .. this for Cashy.

ATM machines: One outside Spar in Ossie; one on Broadway outside Marks and Spencers.

Don't know if you spotted anything else interesting Park ?

[park381]

Originally Posted by katex

Think the resubmissions were something to do with height, however, feel they will get passed eventually after a little 'tweeking'.

Don't think so, think its as a result of this article.
HBC know if the applications went to appeal they would loose and it would cost them (HBC) money

Developer Welcomes Building Regulation (from Lancashire Telegraph)

Residents Fight Homes Plan (from Lancashire Telegraph)

[MargaretR]

Does anyone know precicely where in Stanhill this other application relates to
"2. Taylor Whimpy - seeking planning permission for gate access to a field off stanhill road"

Is it in connection with the building application under discussion - or maybe it portends access to yet another potential building site

[park381]

Originally Posted by [email protected]

Does anyone know precicely where in Stanhill this other application relates to
"2. Taylor Whimpy - seeking planning permission for gate access to a field off stanhill road"

Is it in connection with the building application under discussion - or maybe it portends access to yet another potential building site

No mararet it is a totally diffent application,

[The application site is an agricultural field directly opposite Cabin End Row on the southern side of Stanhill Road. The proposed location of the standard agricultural access gate is at the eastern end of the frontage in the stone wall bounding Stanhill Lane and opposite No. 26 Cabin End Row.
Observations
The application relates to a field on the junction of Stanhill Road and Haslingden Road to the rear of “The Quarry” repair garage. The site is an agricultural field and just outside the urban boundary, on the fringe of the green belt. The field is used for agricultural purposes; access was previously from Haslingden Road through neighbouring land not within the ownership of the applicant.

The application is to erect a gate 3.6m wide with associated posts. The gate is a standard field gate of galvanised steel. It will be set back from the footpath on Stanhill Road by approx 3 metres.
The application has been fully discussed with the highway authority (Lancashire County Council) and no highway objections have been raised by the authority. The access will be used by agricultural vehicles intermittently and will only create minimal traffic to and from the site. The access will be set back from the main highway allowing the occupier somewhere safe to pull in while opening and closing the gate. Visibility at the proposed gate location is satisfactory and I do not believe that this development will significantly increase traffic problems on the road.

The application involves the removal of no more than 4 metres of the wall, which extends the whole length of Cabin End Row. While it is always unfortunate to lose established dry stone wall a minimum length of wall is to be removed and there is a genuine need to provide agricultural access to the field. I do not believe this development will result in the destruction of the micro-climate for the mosses and lichens provided by the wall, as the majority of the wall will remain intact.]

The application ref was 11/07/0584 and was recommended for acceptance by the Officers of the Planning Dept, since it has surfaced again as application 11/08/0009. I can only think that the Planning Committee turned the first application down
The paragraphs above are taken from planning agenda documents (freedom of information)
I do know there is 'agricultural' land for sale in the same area

[MargaretR]

Thanks for finding that info - my son and family live in Stanhill - I don't want the village to have urban sprawl.

[park381]

Originally Posted by [email protected]

Thanks for finding that info - my son and family live in Stanhill - I don't want the village to have urban sprawl.

margaret, I have just been reading the report of HBC's planning officers to the planning committee relating to the barrett development at the pickle factory, it would seem that the officers wanted to grant barretts planning permission on the first application, it was the committee that refused the planning permission

The document is worth reading because it gives full details of the residents objections and fears. It also indicates that some of the land "the old quarry" could contain BLUE asbestos dumped there many years ago.
I will post the link to the document in the Homes at Pickle works thread
have a read

[katex]

All good stuff Park..

[park381]

Originally Posted by katex

All good stuff Park..

cheers katex
Tis a hobby of mine as well, have had a run in with Planning Dept in the past, so I like to keep myself informed of what is going on, I also check Blackburn with Darwen as well since I now live on the border