ANGRY residents are fighting plans to build 10 three-storey “affordable” four-bedroom homes on open land adjoining a disused village pub.
The objectors claim the application on land adjoining the Farmer’s Arms in Rushgreen Road, Lymm, is a “cynical and insulting act.”
It will be considered by Warrington’s planning committee next Wednesday at the request of borough councillor Ian Marks (pictured), who is backing the residents.
He says he supports the principle of quality affordable housing but would prefer to see this site retained as open land.
Eight years ago, two separate plans to build houses or apartments on the site were refused on the grounds the development would have a damaging effect on the open character of the area and harmful impact on trees on the site.
Soon after, a 6ft high fence was around the land, despite neighbours protests that it was an eyesore.
Now planning officers – who are recommending the scheme be approved – say it would be difficulty to justify refusing consent on the grounds of loss of open space because the site is fenced off and no longer making a positive contribution to the area.
In fact, the fence itself detracts from the visual amenities of the area.
Residents say erecting the fence was a cynical and insulting act and that the land should be retained as a green, community space.
They also object on the rounds of road safety, parking, danger to school children, loss of light, etc and query the need for four bedroomed “affordable” homes.
Twenty seven people oppose the scheme, including two parish councillors. But the council itself did not lodge an objection.
1 Comment
On what planet do our planners live? If “eight years ago, two separate plans to build houses or apartments on the site were refused on the grounds the development would have a damaging effect on the open character of the area and harmful impact on trees on the site.” and “the fence itself detracts from the visual amenities of the area.” Why did the planners stand idly by and take no action to protect the amenities, they initially considered had to be protected? They certainly had the power to do so. This is not the first time our perfidious planners have changed their stance and tune to suit changes in circumstances they were instrumental in bringing about.
There’s a lot of concern nationally on the proposed changes to our planning laws being based on the presumption of consent to development. Here in Warrington we appear to have jumped the gun, because our planners have doing just that for several years, by one dubious means or another.