Do you like green fields and weeds, or is it better to meet people’s housing needs?

Do you like green fields and weeds, or is it better to meet people’s housing needs?

Tollemache Road greenfield photo 1
Tollemache Road greenfield photo 2
Tollemache Road greenfield photo 3

Do you like green fields and weeds, or is it better to meet people’s housing needs?

                          

Do you like green fields and weeds,
or is it better to meet people’s housing needs?

The officers wanted green fields and weeds,
they did not want to meet people’s housing needs.

The local councillor said we want bungalows here and there,
and that she didn’t want dog fouling anywhere.
Kids will have to play where we want,
we blame all this on the government!

Cllr Kelly wanted the green fields and weeds to stay,
was he going to vote with Labour, no way!

Cllr Kenny did not want dog fouling here or there,
he didn’t want dog fouling anywhere.
He did not want green fields and weeds,
he wanted bungalows to meet people’s needs.

Cllr Realey asked if the green field was assessed for housing?
No, the officers said, who she was rousing.
We do not want to meet people’s housing needs,
we’d prefer to keep green fields and weeds.

The vote was taken to approve the plans,
Nine councillors voted for with their hands,
Four councillors voted against,
So the building of bungalows will be commenced.

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Tollemache Road greenfield or 12 houses? Planning Committee decides tonight

Tollemache Road greenspace or 12 houses? Planning Committee decides tonight

Tollemache Road greenfield photo 1Tollemache Road greenfield photo 2
Tollemache Road greenfield photo 3

Tollemache Road greenfield or 12 houses? Planning Committee decides tonight

                          

You can click on the photos above for more detailed versions. Earlier this year in a similar case, despite Cllr Ian Lewis’s best efforts, the Planning Committee voted 7 votes to 6 against local resident’s wishes to approve building a play area on some greenspace in Leasowe.

This planning application is for building a dozen houses on this field. The officer’s report to the Planning Committee recommends refusal as they believe it to conflict with policies HS4, GR6, CS42, CS6, CS32 and the National Planning Policy Framework. Normally such an application would be decided by officers. However Cllr George Davies (the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods, Housing and Engagement) has taken it out of their hands and asked for the Planning Committee to decide it instead as Cllr George Davies thinks that the proposed development would “help to address identified housing needs”.

This is unusual in itself as generally this is only done by councillors representing the ward the planning application which in this case is Bidston & St. James ward. Cllr George Davies represents the adjoining Claughton ward. A number of local residents in Bidston and St. James ward have objected to the planning application.

Council officers claim that retaining this open space was a condition of a previous planning consent and that removing it would set a bad precedent. There is a demand for two bedroom properties in the area, however the Planning Committee only last month approved Keepmoat’s application for building 125 houses (a mix of two and three bedroom properties) in the nearby Laird Street area.

The demand for two-bedroom rental properties in the area is because of the “bedroom tax”*/spare room subsidy* (*choose which term you prefer depending on your politics). Although it may go some way to meet this need if approved, building houses there is unpopular with local residents who want the greenspace to stay for the many reasons outlined in the officer’s report.

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks: