EXCLUSIVE: Planning Inspector Griffiths refuses appeal for 10 houses in greenbelt near Storeton Woods

EXCLUSIVE: Planning Inspector Griffiths refuses appeal for 10 houses in greenbelt near Storeton Woods

EXCLUSIVE: Planning Inspector Griffiths refuses appeal for 10 houses in greenbelt near Storeton Woods

                             

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Planning Appeal to OUT/13/01259 Land adjacent Marsh Lane Higher Bebington CH63 5PP Part 2 Committee Room 2, Wallasey Town Hall, 23rd July 2014

In an update to a story about an informal planning appeal hearing held at Wallasey Town Hall last week the Planning Inspectorate have made their decision to refuse the appeal. The site is currently a paddock with stables next to Storeton Woods.

The original grounds Wirral Council planning officers had given for refusing the application were inappropriate development in the greenbelt, highway safety and the effect it would have on trees covered by a tree protection order. The main issue for Planning Inspector Griffiths to consider was whether ten houses on this site (planning permission has already been given for conversion of the existing stables to three houses) was inappropriate development in the greenbelt.

On highway safety grounds, Inspector Griffiths disagreed with Wirral Council officers and local residents, as he regarded the extra traffic would not be significant. The Appellant had proposed moving a sandstone wall with an adjacent property to provide an access road to the ten houses. However in the Planning Inspector’s decision he stated this “would complicate and disrupt the continuous linear nature of the sandstone wall in an injurious fashion”.

The trees on the appeal site, which were protected by a tree protection order, were also referred to in the decision as “attractive features that contribute positively to the area.” He also felt it wasn’t clear that the moving of the sandstone wall for the access road could be done without resulting in the loss of trees.

Erecting ten houses (with gardens) on the site with an access road would affect the openness of the greenbelt permanently. In conclusion the Planning Inspector stated that “the proposal would have a harmful impact on the character and appearance of the area” and would “conflict with UDP Policy HS4 that requires proposals for new housing development not to result in detrimental change in the character of an area, amongst other things, and UDP Policy GR7 that, in simple terms, seeks to protect trees.”

There was a long discussion at the end of the hearing about housing land supply. The Council’s position was that it had a six-year supply of deliverable housing sites (or five years with a 20% buffer). The Appellant, using figures from the previous Regional Spatial Strategy instead said that the Council could only demonstrate a four-year supply or three and a half-year supply with a 20% buffer. The inspector commented on the housing land supply in his decision “Against that overall background, and on the basis of the evidence before me, it is difficult to reach a definitive view as to whether or not the Council can demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites.”

In conclusion the Planning Inspector stated that even if Wirral Council couldn’t prove a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites, that the provision of ten houses on the site along with highway improvements weren’t enough to outweigh the harm caused by inappropriate development in the greenbelt. Therefore the appeal didn’t constitute the “very special circumstances” for development in the greenbelt and was refused.

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

Baldrick has a “cunning plan” about horse trading (satire)

Baldrick has a “cunning plan” about horse trading (satire)

Baldrick has a “cunning plan” about horse trading (satire)

                         

The following is a work of satire. Any similarities to people living or dead are purely coincidental.

Baldrick has a cunning plan about horse trading (Blackadder)
Baldrick has a cunning plan about horse trading

HORSE TRADING

by

John Brace

INT. A LARGE OFFICE ROOM OF TYRRELL COUNCIL – DAY

BALDRICK
I have a cunning plan.

BLACKADDER
Does it involve turnips?

BALDRICK
No.

BLACKADDER
Does it involve closing half of the local libraries because Deputy Big Cheese is still cheesed off about that?

BALDRICK
No.

BLACKADDER
It doesn’t involve overcharging the disabled?

BALDRICK
No, my plan involves horses.

BLACKADDER
Horses? Well that’s new I suppose, but we’re a local council, we do serious stuff like schools and social services. We don’t horse around!

BALDRICK
Ahh, but this is a cunning plan involving other people’s horses.

BLACKADDER
Other people’s horses? Isn’t that theft?

BALDRICK
Have you heard of Turnbank Farm?

BLACKADDER
No.

BALDRICK
Well this council owns it. We rent it out to a riding stables for a pittance of a rent. The land is worth millions.

BLACKADDER
I still don’t understand what your cunning plan is.

BALDRICK
Well the lease comes up for renewal soon. My cunning plan is to send the tenants a letter saying we’ll renew the lease. The tenants will be lulled into a false sense of security and will think we want to renew. We then wait for the existing lease to expire then we can get them evicted. The land can then be sold for millions for housing and it’s on a flood plain!

BLACKADDER
That is a very dastardly, diabolical cunning plan. Is it legal though?

BALDRICK
Well if anyone queries why we sent the wrong letter, with all the bad things that have happened here over the past few years it’ll just be put down to incompetence rather than design.

BLACKADDER
That is the most evil, diabolical cunning plan you’ve ever come up with Baldrick. Not only are you suggesting we use trickery to get what we want but you’re suggesting houses should be built on a flood plain.

We just have to make sure none of the local press or bloggers find out before we get a judge to sign off on a possession order otherwise we’ll be foiled (and probably sacked). In case our in-house solicitor opens his mouth about this in court make sure he’s on holiday when it comes to trial.

BALDRICK
Certainly, Blackadder. Who will we get instead?

BLACKADDER
Well when the public find out about all this going on they’ll need cheering up, how about we get the famous comedian Dara O’Briain to represent us in court?

BALDRICK
I’m afraid the cupboard is a little bare after agreeing all those gagging orders, so we can’t afford the famous comedian Dara O’Briain. How about Sally O’Brion instead? She’ll only cost us £1,800.

BLACKADDER
Great. Let’s do it then. If anyone kicks up a fuss afterwards we’ll just say that it’s part of our job description to act “in a commercial manner” so they can’t sack us.

THE END OR IS IT?

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

What next for demolished Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory site (Joseph Proudman Building) on Bidston Hill?

A story about the former Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory (Joseph Proudman Building) site on Bidston Hill, Wirral, England

What next for demolished Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory site (Joseph Proudman Building) on Bidston Hill?

                     

Demolished Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory, Bidston Hill

First, a quick history of what’s been happening about this site. Last year in June, Wirral Council’s Cabinet received a report recommending demolition. People had asked the Cabinet about the effect of the Unitary Development Plan change in 2004 on a decision to demolish it, so as nobody seemed to know whether this was still in effect, a decision on it was deferred to the meeting on the 9th July 2012.

The Cabinet meeting on the 9th July 2012 was in postponed to the 10th July 2012 and was told that the bit of the Unitary Development Plan relating to Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory had been deleted in 2007. However between June and July an application had been made to English Heritage for listed status. A decision was then deferred again to Cabinet’s meeting of the 6th September (in the hope that English Heritage would’ve decided on listed status by then).

It wasn’t on the Cabinet agenda of the 6th September or the next meeting of the 27th September. By October a decision had been reached by English Heritage not to accept the application for listed building status and on the 8th October 2012 the Cabinet Member for Corporate Resources, Cllr Adrian Jones gave consent to demolition (effective from the 16th October) for the Joseph Proudman Building. Since then it has been demolished by Hunter Demolition.

Wirral Council owns the site of the former Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory, but NERC (the Natural Environment Research Council) has a 99-year lease from 1973. Wirral Council receive £1,800 a year rent from NERC. However NERC have tried to sell their lease. Local residents are concerned that now the building has been demolished that there could a residential development on this site, especially as the Lighthouse Cottage and Bidston Observatory are now being used for this purpose.

In the evidence base (see page 112) for Wirral Council’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment 2012 it is listed as a site (it lists it as Bidston Observatory but the coordinates are for the Joseph Proudman Building) with a capacity for thirty-eight dwellings. This document gives it an achievability score of 3 (which means development of the site could be achieved in the next five years). It states in that document “Car park and other building require demolition/conversion” (which has already happened).

Any decision on new housing on the site of the Joseph Proudman Building would be first need planning permission and being a major development would be decided by Wirral Council’s Planning Committee. A future request for planning permission would attract opposition from local residents wanting to keep Bidston Hill as it is, its impact on the existing listed buildings (the Lighthouse and the Observatory) would also need to be considered. Until that happens the future of the site is up to NERC and Wirral Council.

Cabinet (Wirral Council) 24/11/2011 Part 4 Housing Money, Gas disruption (Leasowe and Moreton)

Cllr Steve Foulkes said they would move to the letter about the grant. Cllr George Davies said he was very pleased, that their application for transitional funding of £3 million had been accepted. They had brough in the Chief Executive of the Homes and Community Agency, the four Wirral MPs who had sent a cross-party letter to the Rt Hon Grant Shapps MP. Cllr George Davies was pleased they had received £2.7 million which would allow them to complete all work and to safely purchase the existing properties. Keepmoat and Lovell were the council’s contractors. He said it was good news and he was delighted.

Cllr Steve Foulkes thanked Cllr Tom Harney and Cllr Jeff Green for signing the letter. He said George had used his influence to get his voice heard.

Cllr Steve Foulkes then asked Dave Green for an update on the situation in Leasowe and Moreton.

Dave Green said there had been disruption to the gas supply of 5,500 properties, due to a burst water main on the 11th November in Danger Road (Ed – surely he meant Danger Lane?), Hoylake (Ed – surely he meant Moreton?). The water had got into the gas supply, causing severe disruption. National Grid had sent out eighty to a hundred gas engineers and a plan had sprung into action. As it was on such a scale a Bronze incident room had been set up as well as a Silver incident room in Manchester. Work had involved Wirral Council and the Primary Care Trust, with councillors receiving regular communication.

Planning Committee – 25th January 2011 – Part 4 – Items 7/8 – APP/10/01206 – Land bounded by Bedford Road to north, New Chester Road to east and Nelson Road to south, Rock Ferry – erection of 78 houses and 57 apartments (extension to OUT/2006/7396) & APP/10/01205 – Land bounded by Bedford Road to north, New Chester Road to east and Nelson Road to south, Rock Ferry – erection of 148 houses (extension to OUT/2006/7397)

Item 7 – APP/10/01206 – Land bounded by Bedford Road to north, New Chester Road to east and Nelson Road to south, Rock Ferry – erection of 78 houses and 57 apartments (extension to OUT/2006/7396) and item 8 – APP/10/01205 – Land bounded by Bedford Road to north, New Chester Road to east and Nelson Road to south, Rock Ferry – erection of 148 houses(extension to OUT/2006/7397) were considered together.

This was part of the Fiveways Masterplan area which would extend the previous consents. A Lib Dem councillor asked if the reserved matters would also be considered by the Planning Committee. The answer given was not necessarily, unless asked for. The Lib Dem councillor expressed concern as the application did not include the design. This councillor said it didn’t do any favours to the local community or town.

Cllr Salter said he had spent quite some time in Rock Ferry and it was looking nice. The old buildings had been taken away and it was absolutely beautiful. He was asked if it would be a similar design by the councillor he said yes.

The Chair said he had noticed the development from the railway line and that it would change the whole area. He proposed approval, which was seconded by Cllr Salter. Items 7 and 8 were unanimously approved by all councillors.