It has been a long journey with many meetings, public consultations, a withdrawn planning application which was amended then presented tonight. We now need to be prepared for either an appeal, or another planning application.
Many thanks to all members of the committee who spoke in favour of the officer recommendation and voted unanimously against the application.
Below are my typed words to the Development Control Committee tonight which are pared back considering the officer recommendation to refuse and the prospect of an appeal, or another application, as always I deviate and ad lib a bit on the night (which the Charnock Panto team will be all too familiar with).
Chorley Council planning officers
are thorough and professional, they assess each planning application on its own
merits, when applicants abide by planning policy their planning applications
are recommended for approval and this happens in the majority of cases.
However when an application does not
abide by planning policy, as in this instance, the planning officers, quite
rightly, recommend the application is refused.
As a resident of Charnock Richard, the
parent of a child who attends the School and heavily involved in the Pre-School
and the Old School I know, at first hand, the problems experienced on Charter
Lane. Put simply: neither Charter Lane (nor Charnock Richard as a whole) has
the infrastructure to cope with new houses on the scale proposed, over 3km from
the nearest (oversubscribed) GP surgery and the bus frequency is now one about every
2 hours (starting at 8am and finishing at 6pm) Monday to Saturday are just two
things that contribute to the fact that this is not a sustainable site for
development.
Once again I find myself at odds
with the LCC Highways professionals. Traffic congestion on Charter Lane has
increased significantly over the last few years, mainly from the
(oversubscribed) school run and the increasingly successful football club. I cannot
believe that further increasing traffic volumes along Charter Lane and therefore
increasing use of the 'T' junctions at both ends of it, both of which have a
dangerous acute-angle making them difficult to exit, is considered safe, or at
least worthy of risking it, by LCC highways.
Neither can I envisage how,
realistically, a functional 2 metre wide footway can be achieved, on the West
side of Charter Lane for its full length, without narrowing the road and removing
a significant amount of the existing mature hedgerow and trees.
Planning applications should conform to the development
plan for the area which, in the case of Charnock Richard, is small scale and
appropriate infill and this application is neither. However relative to the
13,881 houses built by Taylor Wimpey, in their 2016 financial year, 60 houses could
be considered small scale, but in the settlement area of Charnock Richard,
where there are approximately 450 homes, 60 additional houses is certainly not
small scale.
The Taylor Wimpey agent will, misguidedly, reason
that this development is needed and in doing so might suggest that the reason
for refusal is based on a minor policy issue. However policies are set to
define the boundaries of what is and, in this instance, what is not acceptable,
this application is outside of the boundaries set by policy and must be
refused, in line with the thorough and professional planning officer’s
recommendation.
