Housing plans opposed in Darwen

PLANS to make an area of Darwen available for the development of 50 executive homes have been roundly condemned by people living nearby.

Whitehall councillors organised a public meeting ahead of Blackburn with Darwen’s Local Plan going on display in Darwen Town Hall for public consultation.

The plan, published in full last November, included provision for building on the Ellerslie House estate, off Bury Fold Lane.

Coun David Foster, who organised the meeting, said almost all residents in the area were represented in the meeting at Bolton Road Methodist Church, at which 95 per cent of people were against the proposals.

He said: “We had 55 people at the meeting and I think there are about 60 houses in the area.

“I was impressed with the turnout. We were putting extra chairs out in the end.

“It was a positive meeting and people wanted to know how they could object to it.”

Coun Foster said he was careful to explain to those who attended that no physical plans had been submitted to develop the site.

However, under Government rules, the council has to identify potential sites for 9,400 homes to be built by 2026.

Coun Foster said: “People were concerned that the area had only come in at a late stage and was not part of the initial consultations from the council.

“Concerns were expressed that the road was inadequate to take 50 extra houses, in addition people were worried about the impact on wildlife and drainage.

“The lane is used extensively by walkers and increased traffic would be a road safety risk.”

The Local Plan can be inspected at Darwen Town Hall and objections and comments need to be sent to the council between January 27 and March 10.

Other sites for potential development in Darwen include Bailey’s Field Darwen (500-plus homes), Kirkham’s Farm, Cranberry Lane (200 homes), two sites in Pole Lane (130 and 133 homes), Jack’s Key (dozens of homes in small pockets), Johnson New Road, Waterside (80 homes) and Springside Works, Belmont (120 homes).

Comments (25)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:41pm Sat 25 Jan 14

pdb951 says...

Complete bull**it
Complete bull**it pdb951

8:01pm Sat 25 Jan 14

Malthus says...

Why does no one ever ask what an "executive home" is? Even now, in these days of "all being in it together" it appears that class and status are still being used to gain planning permission. I personally would be more impressed if I saw an headline that said Affordable Houses to be built for the industrious working classes and also houses built for the young to put a foot on the property ladder. This appears to me to be a divisive headline that rubs the noses of those who wan ton "subscribe" in the dirt.
Why does no one ever ask what an "executive home" is? Even now, in these days of "all being in it together" it appears that class and status are still being used to gain planning permission. I personally would be more impressed if I saw an headline that said Affordable Houses to be built for the industrious working classes and also houses built for the young to put a foot on the property ladder. This appears to me to be a divisive headline that rubs the noses of those who wan ton "subscribe" in the dirt. Malthus

8:08pm Sat 25 Jan 14

Just an observer says...

pdb951 wrote:
Complete bull**it
The difference being that an executive house has a lawn, unlike a working class home only has a garden.
[quote][p][bold]pdb951[/bold] wrote: Complete bull**it[/p][/quote]The difference being that an executive house has a lawn, unlike a working class home only has a garden. Just an observer

8:11pm Sat 25 Jan 14

pdb951 says...

If Darwen got some executive homes thy might help drag it up!
If Darwen got some executive homes thy might help drag it up! pdb951

8:12pm Sat 25 Jan 14

pdb951 says...

The only class I recognise in people is a human
The only class I recognise in people is a human pdb951

11:03pm Sat 25 Jan 14

happycyclist says...

Why isn't the old Moorland school site mentioned? There is also a development on the old Belgrave site that stalled years ago. Why isn't that being pushed ahead of spoiling a narrow lane?
Why isn't the old Moorland school site mentioned? There is also a development on the old Belgrave site that stalled years ago. Why isn't that being pushed ahead of spoiling a narrow lane? happycyclist

11:11pm Sat 25 Jan 14

Steven11 says...

pdb951 wrote:
If Darwen got some executive homes thy might help drag it up!
Whats wrong with Darwen ?
[quote][p][bold]pdb951[/bold] wrote: If Darwen got some executive homes thy might help drag it up![/p][/quote]Whats wrong with Darwen ? Steven11

11:13pm Sat 25 Jan 14

Steven11 says...

Steven11 wrote:
pdb951 wrote:
If Darwen got some executive homes thy might help drag it up!
Whats wrong with Darwen ?
What's wrong with Darwen ?
[quote][p][bold]Steven11[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pdb951[/bold] wrote: If Darwen got some executive homes thy might help drag it up![/p][/quote]Whats wrong with Darwen ?[/p][/quote]What's wrong with Darwen ? Steven11

11:37pm Sat 25 Jan 14

Michael@ClitheroeSince58 says...

Bunch of Nimby's get them built
Bunch of Nimby's get them built Michael@ClitheroeSince58

12:38am Sun 26 Jan 14

Notonpolelane says...

I hope people who live up bury fold and that are connected to the land on Pole lane aren't objecting to the new development near them. Would smack of hypocrisy
I hope people who live up bury fold and that are connected to the land on Pole lane aren't objecting to the new development near them. Would smack of hypocrisy Notonpolelane

1:01am Sun 26 Jan 14

Steven11 says...

Michael@ClitheroeSin
ce58
wrote:
Bunch of Nimby's get them built
I suppose there is not much more could be built in Clitheroe then .
[quote][p][bold]Michael@ClitheroeSin ce58[/bold] wrote: Bunch of Nimby's get them built[/p][/quote]I suppose there is not much more could be built in Clitheroe then . Steven11

7:59am Sun 26 Jan 14

Primus622 says...

If central government say your having 'em then your having 'em......objections or not...
If central government say your having 'em then your having 'em......objections or not... Primus622

9:24am Sun 26 Jan 14

louderfasterlonger says...

happycyclist wrote:
Why isn't the old Moorland school site mentioned? There is also a development on the old Belgrave site that stalled years ago. Why isn't that being pushed ahead of spoiling a narrow lane?
The old Moorland site IS on the plan but the council cannot build on it without the permission of Michael Gove. The developer of Belgrave heights went bust and the land is at the disposal of the receivers. The land at Bury fold has been earmarked as a potential building plot probably because the owner has indicated he may wish to sell it as such.
[quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote: Why isn't the old Moorland school site mentioned? There is also a development on the old Belgrave site that stalled years ago. Why isn't that being pushed ahead of spoiling a narrow lane?[/p][/quote]The old Moorland site IS on the plan but the council cannot build on it without the permission of Michael Gove. The developer of Belgrave heights went bust and the land is at the disposal of the receivers. The land at Bury fold has been earmarked as a potential building plot probably because the owner has indicated he may wish to sell it as such. louderfasterlonger

10:25am Sun 26 Jan 14

myzzy says...

Notonpolelane wrote:
I hope people who live up bury fold and that are connected to the land on Pole lane aren't objecting to the new development near them. Would smack of hypocrisy
There is decent reasoning that we are opposed to the houses on bury fold and, some of which are highlighted in the article; to be honest if they built houses up pole lane, so be it we dont live there and it is not dangerous to all living beings. People ditch their cars on the maim road when its bad weather imagine another 50+ cars in the main road, even if it was possible ti fit them on it would have a major impact on safety with pulling out onto the road
[quote][p][bold]Notonpolelane[/bold] wrote: I hope people who live up bury fold and that are connected to the land on Pole lane aren't objecting to the new development near them. Would smack of hypocrisy[/p][/quote]There is decent reasoning that we are opposed to the houses on bury fold and, some of which are highlighted in the article; to be honest if they built houses up pole lane, so be it we dont live there and it is not dangerous to all living beings. People ditch their cars on the maim road when its bad weather imagine another 50+ cars in the main road, even if it was possible ti fit them on it would have a major impact on safety with pulling out onto the road myzzy

1:05pm Sun 26 Jan 14

happycyclist says...

louderfasterlonger wrote:
happycyclist wrote:
Why isn't the old Moorland school site mentioned? There is also a development on the old Belgrave site that stalled years ago. Why isn't that being pushed ahead of spoiling a narrow lane?
The old Moorland site IS on the plan but the council cannot build on it without the permission of Michael Gove. The developer of Belgrave heights went bust and the land is at the disposal of the receivers. The land at Bury fold has been earmarked as a potential building plot probably because the owner has indicated he may wish to sell it as such.
...earmarked as a potential building plot probably because the owner has indicated that he might wish to sell it as such."
Really? Is that how it works? The article talks of plans and proposals -which I thought had to go through planning departments and committees before getting to this stage. Doesn't the land have to be deemed suitable by the council BEFORE it gets to this stage?
[quote][p][bold]louderfasterlonger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote: Why isn't the old Moorland school site mentioned? There is also a development on the old Belgrave site that stalled years ago. Why isn't that being pushed ahead of spoiling a narrow lane?[/p][/quote]The old Moorland site IS on the plan but the council cannot build on it without the permission of Michael Gove. The developer of Belgrave heights went bust and the land is at the disposal of the receivers. The land at Bury fold has been earmarked as a potential building plot probably because the owner has indicated he may wish to sell it as such.[/p][/quote]...earmarked as a potential building plot probably because the owner has indicated that he might wish to sell it as such." Really? Is that how it works? The article talks of plans and proposals -which I thought had to go through planning departments and committees before getting to this stage. Doesn't the land have to be deemed suitable by the council BEFORE it gets to this stage? happycyclist

1:08pm Sun 26 Jan 14

happycyclist says...

Notonpolelane wrote:
I hope people who live up bury fold and that are connected to the land on Pole lane aren't objecting to the new development near them. Would smack of hypocrisy
Pole Lane is a reasonably wide, good access road though, unlike the narrow Bury Fold Lane.
[quote][p][bold]Notonpolelane[/bold] wrote: I hope people who live up bury fold and that are connected to the land on Pole lane aren't objecting to the new development near them. Would smack of hypocrisy[/p][/quote]Pole Lane is a reasonably wide, good access road though, unlike the narrow Bury Fold Lane. happycyclist

1:11pm Sun 26 Jan 14

happycyclist says...

500 homes on Bailey's Field? I always though there was a subsidence risk with Bailey's because of the old mining. Same with the triangle of land between Hoddlesden Road, Roman Road and Harwood's Lane -which would otherwise seem like a sensible site for more housing.
500 homes on Bailey's Field? I always though there was a subsidence risk with Bailey's because of the old mining. Same with the triangle of land between Hoddlesden Road, Roman Road and Harwood's Lane -which would otherwise seem like a sensible site for more housing. happycyclist

1:14pm Sun 26 Jan 14

happycyclist says...

Darwen Golf Course would be the best place of all to turn into a housing development site. That's the biggest waste of land in Darwen.
Darwen Golf Course would be the best place of all to turn into a housing development site. That's the biggest waste of land in Darwen. happycyclist

2:04pm Sun 26 Jan 14

hewdale says...

Bailey's field is not suitable for building on, I don't know why the council insist on still looking at it for that purpose. Are they silly enough to forget that Troy County wanted to attempt to build on it over 10 years ago, dug deep and found the ground not stable enough and even filled in a 'pit' on the hill in the field which sunk again within the space of a year? I also agree that Bury Fold isn't suitable either for various reasons. We've just had new houses/apartments built on Anyon Street, Belgrave Heights isn't finished and the new developments on Union Street haven't even been filled. How many more houses do we seriously need in Darwen?
Bailey's field is not suitable for building on, I don't know why the council insist on still looking at it for that purpose. Are they silly enough to forget that Troy County wanted to attempt to build on it over 10 years ago, dug deep and found the ground not stable enough and even filled in a 'pit' on the hill in the field which sunk again within the space of a year? I also agree that Bury Fold isn't suitable either for various reasons. We've just had new houses/apartments built on Anyon Street, Belgrave Heights isn't finished and the new developments on Union Street haven't even been filled. How many more houses do we seriously need in Darwen? hewdale

9:43pm Sun 26 Jan 14

Darwentrublue says...

There is also the former mill site at the rear of Watery lane which has planning approval already in place for 22 semi and 4 detached houses, which I believe is currently up for sale with a local commercial property agent in Darwen
There is also the former mill site at the rear of Watery lane which has planning approval already in place for 22 semi and 4 detached houses, which I believe is currently up for sale with a local commercial property agent in Darwen Darwentrublue

9:48pm Sun 26 Jan 14

english rose 1 says...

hewdale wrote:
Bailey's field is not suitable for building on, I don't know why the council insist on still looking at it for that purpose. Are they silly enough to forget that Troy County wanted to attempt to build on it over 10 years ago, dug deep and found the ground not stable enough and even filled in a 'pit' on the hill in the field which sunk again within the space of a year? I also agree that Bury Fold isn't suitable either for various reasons. We've just had new houses/apartments built on Anyon Street, Belgrave Heights isn't finished and the new developments on Union Street haven't even been filled. How many more houses do we seriously need in Darwen?
Groooannn.... hewdale and happycyclist must be living in a secret underworld as ALL Councils MUST produce a plan where new housing may be located. ALL Councils have a target agreed by Govt for the number of new allocations (in the case of BwD this is 9,400 up to 2026).
All this has been regularly reported in the LT and national press.
*
Just because Baileys Field is allocated for housing does not mean it will be built on ! It has been allocated for many years now, and as hewdale says, isn't particularly suitable for building on (because of the old shafts it would cost a fortune for the groundwork). However, if a builder ever comes along and thinks he can make a profit on this land (which is doubtful) then it is available. Otherwise the Council would have to allocate another piece of land for 500 homes.
*
We don't need that many new homes in Darwen, but the Govt insist that ALL Councils must produce plans to allocate land for new housing. That does not mean that houses will be built !
[quote][p][bold]hewdale[/bold] wrote: Bailey's field is not suitable for building on, I don't know why the council insist on still looking at it for that purpose. Are they silly enough to forget that Troy County wanted to attempt to build on it over 10 years ago, dug deep and found the ground not stable enough and even filled in a 'pit' on the hill in the field which sunk again within the space of a year? I also agree that Bury Fold isn't suitable either for various reasons. We've just had new houses/apartments built on Anyon Street, Belgrave Heights isn't finished and the new developments on Union Street haven't even been filled. How many more houses do we seriously need in Darwen?[/p][/quote]Groooannn.... hewdale and happycyclist must be living in a secret underworld as ALL Councils MUST produce a plan where new housing may be located. ALL Councils have a target agreed by Govt for the number of new allocations (in the case of BwD this is 9,400 up to 2026). All this has been regularly reported in the LT and national press. * Just because Baileys Field is allocated for housing does not mean it will be built on ! It has been allocated for many years now, and as hewdale says, isn't particularly suitable for building on (because of the old shafts it would cost a fortune for the groundwork). However, if a builder ever comes along and thinks he can make a profit on this land (which is doubtful) then it is available. Otherwise the Council would have to allocate another piece of land for 500 homes. * We don't need that many new homes in Darwen, but the Govt insist that ALL Councils must produce plans to allocate land for new housing. That does not mean that houses will be built ! english rose 1

7:09am Mon 27 Jan 14

happycyclist says...

Thanks, english rose 1
Thanks, english rose 1 happycyclist

4:13pm Tue 28 Jan 14

IMHO says...

x
x IMHO

4:28pm Tue 28 Jan 14

IMHO says...

Planning application 10/10/0551 was granted for 54 Exec homes off Milking Lane, Lower Darwen in July 2010. So far not a sod has been cut and the site continues to deteriorate into an even greater eyesore. Still 18 months before this expires so they better get a move on.

Perhaps the council should be asking what is going on here before granting even more permissions to build.

Maybe grant permission where a developer actually wants to build rather than sit on the now valuable land until house prices rise.
Planning application 10/10/0551 was granted for 54 Exec homes off Milking Lane, Lower Darwen in July 2010. So far not a sod has been cut and the site continues to deteriorate into an even greater eyesore. Still 18 months before this expires so they better get a move on. Perhaps the council should be asking what is going on here before granting even more permissions to build. Maybe grant permission where a developer actually wants to build rather than sit on the now valuable land until house prices rise. IMHO

5:32pm Tue 28 Jan 14

pm1960 says...

IMHO wrote:
Planning application 10/10/0551 was granted for 54 Exec homes off Milking Lane, Lower Darwen in July 2010. So far not a sod has been cut and the site continues to deteriorate into an even greater eyesore. Still 18 months before this expires so they better get a move on. Perhaps the council should be asking what is going on here before granting even more permissions to build. Maybe grant permission where a developer actually wants to build rather than sit on the now valuable land until house prices rise.
You are right, but Councils don't have the powers to do this.
*
Interestingly the Labour Party are saying that if they win the election they will give Council's powers to do exactly what you state.
[quote][p][bold]IMHO[/bold] wrote: Planning application 10/10/0551 was granted for 54 Exec homes off Milking Lane, Lower Darwen in July 2010. So far not a sod has been cut and the site continues to deteriorate into an even greater eyesore. Still 18 months before this expires so they better get a move on. Perhaps the council should be asking what is going on here before granting even more permissions to build. Maybe grant permission where a developer actually wants to build rather than sit on the now valuable land until house prices rise.[/p][/quote]You are right, but Councils don't have the powers to do this. * Interestingly the Labour Party are saying that if they win the election they will give Council's powers to do exactly what you state. pm1960

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree