Decision made on plans for controversial housing plans in Stalmine

Controversial plans to build almost 80 new affordable homes in the Over Wyre village of Stalmine have been given the green light by Wyre Council.

Objectors at today’s Wyre planning committee spoke out against the proposals to erect 79 affordable dwellings, with access, parking, landscaping and associated works, on land south of Stricklands Lane in the village.

The speakers, including a Lancashire County councillor, two Wyre councillors, a parish councillor and three residents, raised concerns about road safety hazards, sewage spills, the risk of flooding, threat to local wildlife and lack of local infrastructure (school places and GP and dental provision) to accommodate the occupants of 79 new homes.

They were some of the 84 people who had registered their objection to the plans, wth 21 people submitting letters of support for the application.

However, the councillors on the planning committee struggled to find a strong enough argument to refuse the planning application in the face of a lack of objection from statutory bodies including Lancashire County Council’s highways department.

Although concerns that two blind bends situated a relatively short distance apart, on a busy stretch of road, would be highly dangerous for families and children, Lancashire County Council’s highways department did not feel there was sufficient reason to object.

Resident Andrew Mercer told the meeting: “A BBC documentary said you were three more times likely to suffer a serious accident on the A588 than average.

“This a dangerous stretch of road with two blind bends les than a 100 metres apart.”

Lancashire County Councillor Nigel Anderson said: “There are inadequate facilities for people who are already living in the village of Stalmine – schools are already at capacity; dentists – there is only one practice in the whole area; doctors – only one surgery covering a huge area.”

Wyre councillors Julie Robinson and Lynn Bowen also spoke at the meeting; Cllr Bowen said: “There are so many reasons make this unsuitable. I hope people see sense and refuse this application.”

But Katie Delaney, an agent from Maybern Planning, on behalf of applicants Westchurch Homes, refuted the arguments and pointed out that Lancashire County Council’s highways had raised no concerns.

Mr Oliver Chan, a partnership director of Westchurch Homes said: “This scheme will offer socially-rented homes at the most affordable prices possible.

“We pride ourselves on building homes people want to live in.

“We’ll be build spacious, energy efficient homes for local families in need of a safe, warm place to call home.”

Committee member, Cllr Harry Swatton, said the application was complicated and the evidence presented contained contradictory facts, raising concerns that there did not seem sufficient basis to defend a refusal if it went to appeal. He said: “ I can’t see a way for us to refuse this.”

Cllr Claire Rimmer challenged this view, citing that the proposals contradicted the recommended allocation of homes in a rural setting, but Head of planning Steve Smith said that if the plans were to be refused, the strongest grounds to do so would be on highway grounds – and that could be overturned if the applicants appealed.

By majority, the committee approved the recommendations of the planning officer – to grant full planning permission for the erection of 79 affordable dwellings and associated works subject to conditions and an appropriate legal mechanism to secure financial contributions towards, education, health care provision.

In addition, to secure on site Green Infrastructure, 100% onsite Affordable Housing and Biodiversity Net Gain.

After the meeting, objector Andrew Mercer said: “It was a horrible process, loaded in favour of the developer.

“Everything we said was dismissed as “opinion” and everything the officers said was “expert”, which made it a no-win situation from the start.

“Who will be held responsible if, as we fear, the site entrance leads to accidents or death on that stretch of road?”