Warrington-Worldwide.co.uk incorporates the Village Life, Culcheth Life, Frodsham Life & Lymm Life magazines.

Developer offers £30,000 for roadwork


A DEVELOPER pushing controversial housing plans on a former military camp site near Warrington has offered £30,000 towards the cost of highway improvements near a local school.
Planning officers are recommending the scheme on the former HMS Gosling site at Croft be approved.
But Croft Parish Council, borough councillor Chris Vobe and more than 130 residents have lodged objections.
Elan Real Estate want to build 25 four and five bedroomed houses on the site – said to be the only remaining wartime military camp in the Warrington area.
In addition to offering £30,000 towards the cost of traffic management schemes and on-street parking at nearby St Lewis’ RC Primary School, the firm has agreed to pay £240,000 towards the cost of affordable housing elsewhere in the borough.
Croft Parish Council says the site is in the Green Belt is of historical interest.
They argue there is no need for more housing in Croft, there are no sewage or gas supplies in the area, the development would lead to road safety hazards and the site is home to a wide variety of wildlife.
There would also be a risk of increased flooding in Lady Lane.
Cllr Vobe (right) says nearly 400 people have signed a petition opposing the scheme.
He said: “The sheer volume of objections to these disrespectful plans should send a stark message to the developers and to Town Hall planners, which they cannot ignore.
“People in Croft are determined to protect this valuable green space and put pay to the traffic chaos that would ensue if it were to go ahead. That is why I am urging the council planners to stand up for local people and reject these plans when they come before committee.
“There is no room for negotiation with the developers on this issue, and there never will be. These people seem to believe that because their plans tick certain boxes and don’t contravene national policy, that local councillors should simply roll over and accept this for what it is.
“They seem to forget the one, overriding fact: that local people don’t want these houses and they simply are not right for Croft.”


About Author

Experienced journalist for more than 35 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with six 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. Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.


  1. If a set of plans “tick all the boxes” which the politicians have insisted upon, and are in-line with national policies drafted by more politicians, then yes politicians SHOULD “accept this for what it is” – a planning application which meets all of the necessary planning criteria.

    If politicians don’t like it then they need to look at their own policies and procedures – not criticise a developer who is following the rules which have been laid down.

  2. I’ts nice to see one of our Councillors representing the electorate for once. Surely the wishes of local residents is very important and ought to weigh heavily in the decision making process! Good luck to Councillor Vobe. Keep up the good work.

  3. Show me a developer who strictly follows the rules and I’ll show three who will find every which way to get round them, including misrepresenting the local situations. As Warringtonian says it is a welcome change to see a councillor representing the local residents, whose wishes have for far too long have little or nothing. It is also very pleasing to read that the elected members on our planning committees are also taking serious account of the electorate’s wishes.

  4. Note yet again – “Planning officers are recommending the scheme …. be approved.” They don’t seem to be following any consistent policy re what applications in the green belt could constitute ‘exceptional’ circumstances’ and what can’t. Not long ago a farmer applied to develop in his own farmyard so that his sick wife could end her days in comfort with her family. Officers recommended refusal, the ‘exceptional circumstances’ in this case were given no weight. This present development is purely for profit – there is no dire shortage of 4-5 bedroom houses in Warrington. Social housing is needed but the offer of 3-4 is so small it surely could not be considered enough to disregard the inconvenience that would be caused to so many people if the application were to be passed. In this application the developer is no philanthropist! in fact far from it, Some social housing provision would be expected on any application this size – that they have offered to pay towards social housing not on the same plot but “elsewhere in the borough” certainly does not provide for social integration – in fact it is blatant social discrimination.

  5. 25 more houses will make traffic chaos what total nonsense! this site has been derelict for years and nobody has shown any interest in the history and heritage you can’t even get in to have a look at it so why do the nimbys think they should get there own way?

Leave A Comment