PLANNING chiefs at Warrington have thrown out an application from a farmer for permission to build a bungalow on his own land for his wife, who is suffering from a rare condition likely to result in her becoming increasingly disabled.
Members of the borough council’s planning committee visited Mr John Cross’ Cliff Lane Farm, in Cartridge Lane, Grappenhall before reaching their decision.
They also considered a plea from the Mayor, Cllr Mike Biggin, who asked that the extenuating circumstances be considered.
There was no objection from Grappenhall and Thelwall Parish Council – and there were four letters of support from nearby residents.
But in the end the committee decided to go along with the recommendations of officers – that the scheme be refused because it would cause harm to the Green Belt and add unnecessarily to the surplus of housing land in the borough.
Officers argued that the application be rejected because personal circumstances, no matter how compelling, should rarely, if ever, be considered sufficient to outweigh Green Belt policy.
One issue troubling councillors was that the site is only a short distance from the Cartridge Lane site where a group of gypsy families won permission on appeal less than two years ago for a caravan site in the Green Belt.
The committee was told Mr Cross’s wife has been diagnosed with Multiple System Atrophy (MSA) – a condition which can necessitate the immediate attention of family members.
Her condition is expected to continue without improvement for the rest of her life, with a progressive loss of mobility.
Mr Cross applied for permission for a three bedroom bungalow because of the need to accommodate himself and his wife separately, together with an overnight carer.
The existing farmhouse is not suitable for conversion because the ground floor is on a number of levels with internal steps and also has steps leading into the house.
Other farm buildings are also unsuitable for conversions and there is a sloping, cobbled yard with would present difficulties for a disabled person.
Planners say it is a working farmyard – part of a large, arable farm – and it would not be appropriate for a disabled person to interface with farming operations. There is also no opportunity to create a garden or amenity land for the new property.
PLANNING chiefs at Warrington have thrown out an application from a
farmer for permission to build a bungalow on his own land for his wife,
who is suffering from a rare condition likely to result in her becoming
increasingly disabled.
Farmer loses battle over disabled wife
1212 Comments
Share.
About Author
Gary Skentelbery
Experienced journalist for more than 40 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with three in-house titles and on-line daily newspaper for Warrington. Experienced writer, photographer, PR consultant and media expert having written for local, regional and national newspapers. Specialties: PR, media, social networking, photographer, networking, advertising, sales, media crisis management. Chair of Warrington Healthwatch Director Warrington Chamber of Commerce Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.
12 Comments
And he didn’t offer a bung!
These people who sit in judgement make decisions from ignorance and not from an individual personal aspect. Shame on them. I just hope that one day, they will realise the detrimental affect that this decision will have on the family. But, “I’m alright Jack”!!!
“Officers argued that the application be rejected because personal circumstances, no matter how compelling, should rarely, if ever, be considered sufficient to outweigh Green Belt policy.” If only that were true for all applicants, personal circumstances are exactly the reason why gypsies have been given planning permission for green belt sites, the prime example, as mentioned in the article, is on the same road and just a few hundred yards from the Cross Farm. The Cross family must, rightly, feel hard done by, indeed they must be very cross!
There must be a policy at Job Centres to send all the incompetents to work for Warrington Council. I would be annoyed if I had voted for a member of this contemptuous body of Councillors.
Maybe it is the Green Belt policy that is wrong then, but of course if it was done away with, there would be howls of protest from people who don’t want development. I assume that Mr Cross can appeal the decision to the planning inspector, as indeed the gypsies down the road from him did, and they won.
If you voted for any of this shower you need to have a rethink
This is an absolutely disgraceful decision. After all the comments made by Council Tax Payers within the Borough in support of this application by Mr Cross our “elected” Councillors chose to ignore them and make a foollish decision. Can we be told who voted against the application so that we can remember when WE vote at the next election?
I think there should be a thorough investigation into the inconsistency of “recommendations of officers”. In other cases adding unnecessarily to the surplus of housing land in the borough has not seemed to hold such great weight
and protection of the Green Belt has not appeared to be so important. Recently the planning officers recommended approval for a wind turbine on green belt / farmland -yet not long ago a neighbouring authority refused a similar application for no other reason than it was on Green Belt! If Warrington’s planning officers can justify applications for profit making as ‘exceptional circumstances’ why not exceptional personal circumstances, which could in law be considered – albeit ‘rarely’. This lady’s illness and circumstances are indeed rare but it appears little weight has been given to this fact.
Profit making for whom?
If we are to believe that the views being expressed here are truly representative of the general public then we must ask if the people making these decisions have completely lost touch with the feelings of the people they claim to represent. Who are the councillors who made this heartless decision? This web site is full of wanabe politicians so someone should know. Lets have their names so that we’ll know what to tell them when they come knocking for our votes!
I fail to see how one small bungalow on the gent and ladies own land could “cause harm to the Green Belt” and even more so “add unnecessarily to the surplus of housing land in the borough”. The council should look at the surplus of housing they have allowed to be built elsewhere on land which used to be industrial for starters and they should also take a look at all the large and open green fields up at Appleton/Stretton which now have large signs on them saying ‘reserved for future development’. They are greenfield too aren’t they but that doesn’t seem to matter. Mr & Mrs Cross will no doubt be able to appeal now but that will surely cause them even more distress. I personally I can’t see why after living and working on their own land for so long they can’t actually continue to live there and build a small home which is more suitable for Mrs Cross and her condition. Would the council prefer them to sell up and move or for the lady to go into a care home ?
Some decisions are just not right and I do hope that if they appeal they get their permission. Maybe the council’s planning dept/committee has been over cautious here though and are just passing the buck so as not to open the floodgates for more applications like this or maybe they are just sticking to the rules like they are written in stone as I believe they have just had another telling off by the Ombudsman and ordered to pay compensation due to maladministration concerning another planning case … red faces again then.
This was all at the same meeting where the esteemed Committee put the interests of a man from Stockport ahead of thousands of residents who didn’t want him to have an airstrip on green belt land near to their homes. And guess what they decided? Yes, that application was OK and he can fly his plane 7 days a week. It really does beggar belief!