Parrs Lane Development “Permission In Principle” Query By ARG

Aughton Residents Group 2012 (ARG2012)

has found another Parrs Lane item of local land development interest in the form of Planning application 2019/1109/PIP (Permission in Principle).

It was received at WLBC on 25 October and validated on 12 November 2019. This application was submitted by Mr Phillip Rothwell of Round Thorn Cottage Parrs Lane [etched in red on the plan, below].

The intention is to demolish the old farmhouse and the fairly recently converted barn at the rear (2 dwellings in total) and replace them with the building of 4 new dwellings on the same site.

There are a number of interesting documents, including a report and plans which can be viewed, attached to this application including a response from Peter Richards, WLBC Strategic Planning, Regeneration & Implementation Manager.

He queries whether this is “an appropriate quantum of housing to grant PIP on this site so as not to be over development of the site and for it to be in keeping with the character of the area’. He delegates such a judgement to a planning officer.

Once again, at this stage, there doesn’t seem to be a requirement for neighbour consultation and or notification. What does it mean? More development, more cars, more use of scarce resources in the area, all coming to a village setting that suffers from extremely poor infrastructure.

But it’s a done deal. The WLBC response from one officer to another “In terms of the above PIP application, in terms of the Principle of the proposed development, I’m happy the application is in line with the Adopted Local Plan. While the site is part of a wider Safeguarded Land designation (Policy GN2), the application site itself is in an existing residential use and is within the Settlement Boundaries defined by Policy GN1 and the Policies Map, and so this application is really just for intensification of that use, and would not affect the capacity of the wider Safeguarded Land site to accommodate housing in the future (as required by Policy GN2).

“As such, the only question is whether 4 units (a net increase of 2 units) is an appropriate quantum of housing to grant PIP for on this site (so as to not be overdevelopment of the site and for it to be in keeping with the character of the area), and I will leave that to your judgement”.

 

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s