Agenda item

Report of the Director of Planning and Property attached.

RESOLVED: (Yes: 8 No: 4)

That the Pickerings Farm Masterplan, Design Code and Infrastructure Delivery Schedule as submitted by Taylor Wimpey and Homes England be refused as a result of concerns regarding highways; green infrastructure; ecology; drainage provisions; impact on air quality; lack of appropriate and necessary infrastructure; inappropriate mix of housing; and the impact on the residential amenity of the wider community.

The Committee received a report of the Director of Planning and Property which sought consideration of the Masterplan, Design Code and Infrastructure Delivery Schedule, as submitted by Taylor Wimpey and Homes England, for the Pickerings Farm site in Penwortham.

Five members of the public spoke in objection to the Masterplan on a range of topics including transport provisions, viability of the site and ecology concerns. Ward Councillors Carol Wooldridge and Ian Watkinson and Councillors Paul Foster (Leader of the Council), Matthew Trafford, Colin Clark, Michael Green and Karen Walton also spoke in objection.

Representatives of Homes England, Avison Young, Eddisons and 5Plus Architects were also in attendance.

Members of the committee felt strongly that the Masterplan and associated documents were grossly inadequate and inconsistent, and raised several concerns and areas for improvement.

During the discussion, emphasis was placed on the need for green infrastructure within the development and members requested an increased amount of green infrastructure and public open space in character with the rural area.  There were also calls for the retention of the orchard, existing hedgerows and A- and B-type trees.

An ecology survey of the entire Masterplan site was also requested.

Concerns were also raised regarding proposed drainage provisions and air quality implications, with reference to increased traffic as a result of the development. A further Air Quality Assessment was requested in addition to robust air quality mitigation and management measures.

Discussion also centred around the Cross Borough Link Road and members felt strongly that work on this should be completed prior to the commencement of works on the development.

Members agreed that the Masterplan lacked significant detail. Commitment to completing the village centre in first phase of developmentand proposals for a train station and associated car parking were requested, in addition to further details on ‘Green Lanes’ and bus, cycle and pedestrian links to Kingsfold.

Significant concerns were raised regarding the proposed mix of housing and that this did not comply with policies 4, 6 and 8 in the Penwortham Neighbourhood Plan. It was felt that provisions for single-storey bungalows were necessary and that dwellings should be restricted to one- or two-storeys where adjacent to existing properties.

Removal of reference to 4-storey buildings, comprising of apartments, was also encouraged. 

Members also empathised with local residents and queried the impact of the development on wider communities in Penwortham, Lostock Hall and Whitestake.

Councillor Cliff Hughes left the meeting at 7:55pm

Following careful consideration of these issues, in addition to the concerns raised in the Planning Officer’s report, an amendment was moved by Councillor Mary Green and seconded by Councillor Barrie Yates to defer the decision to allow the applicant opportunity to address the concerns made.

The vote on the Amended Motion was Yes: 6 No: 6 and the Chair declared that, subject to his casting vote, the Amended Motion was lost.

The Substantive Motion was moved by Councillor James Flannery, seconded by Councillor Will Adams, that the application be refused as a result of concerns regarding highways; green infrastructure; ecology; drainage provisions; impact on air quality; lack of appropriate and necessary infrastructure; inappropriate mix of housing; and the impact on the residential amenity of the wider community.

The vote on this was Yes: 8 No: 4 and the Chair declared that the Substantive Motion was carried.