Plan to build homes on Darwen derelict land

5:00pm Monday 19th November 2012 in News Photograph of the Author By Dan Clough, Reporter

THREE new homes could be built on an overgrown and unused patch of land in Darwen after a planning application was submitted.

Developers want to erect the houses on land fronting Spring Vale Garden, in Cocker Street.

A spokesman for the applicant said the site would be cleared to make way for the development of the new homes.

He said: “The site fronts on to Spring Vale Garden village roadway and is an overgrown and vacant area of land.

“The site is to be cleared and regraded to permit three houses to front onto Spring Vale Garden village.

“Each house will have three bedrooms and due to space limits will form a terraced row.”

Interested parties can make comments on the application until December 6, and a final decision on the plans is expected in the New Year.

Comments (5)

9:23am Tue 20 Nov 12

sean_brfc says...

I'm sure the 'derelict land' in question is more of a woodland than derelict land. Say no to the development and leave it in its natural state. Maybe then the money could be spent on the large, dilapidated terraced house round the corner and the area can remain as green as possible.
I'm sure the 'derelict land' in question is more of a woodland than derelict land. Say no to the development and leave it in its natural state. Maybe then the money could be spent on the large, dilapidated terraced house round the corner and the area can remain as green as possible. sean_brfc

11:54am Tue 20 Nov 12

eastlancslad says...

Looking at Google Earth, I'd say you are right Sean. A natural little wildlife haven.
Why spoil it in the name of profit?
Don't suppose the development vandals see it that way though. Question is, do the planning committee?
Looking at Google Earth, I'd say you are right Sean. A natural little wildlife haven. Why spoil it in the name of profit? Don't suppose the development vandals see it that way though. Question is, do the planning committee? eastlancslad

3:03pm Wed 21 Nov 12

Yimkin says...

Glad to see local residents sean_brfc and eastlancslad commenting. I am sure living in the area you will be aware of the rubbish dumping, rat infestation, drug taking, youths drinking and numerous visits from the police on a weekly basis to this little piece of heaven on Cocker Street.
By the way you're right there is a lot of wild life...but not the kind you're thinking of.
The sooner these houses are built and the house owners are responsible for the land the better.
Glad to see local residents sean_brfc and eastlancslad commenting. I am sure living in the area you will be aware of the rubbish dumping, rat infestation, drug taking, youths drinking and numerous visits from the police on a weekly basis to this little piece of heaven on Cocker Street. By the way you're right there is a lot of wild life...but not the kind you're thinking of. The sooner these houses are built and the house owners are responsible for the land the better. Yimkin

12:22pm Thu 22 Nov 12

milano says...

sean_brfc wrote:
I'm sure the 'derelict land' in question is more of a woodland than derelict land. Say no to the development and leave it in its natural state. Maybe then the money could be spent on the large, dilapidated terraced house round the corner and the area can remain as green as possible.
Unless the landowner also owns the terrace house mentioned then i fail to see how you can comment the money could be spent on that house. And even if it is the same owner people & the council cannot dictate how he spends his money, unless of course the house in question is unsafe or unfit. Just because you think it is a 'woodland' and therefore valuable greenspace (which many would disagree with) does not mean that the owner cannot clear the land regardless of whether he attains planning for the houses or not. As far as i am aware there are no protected trees on the site in question. And even if there was this would be taken into account prior to any consent being given by planning. As yimkin says the area does attract anti-social behaviour and the benefits of planning permission being allowed will outweigh any objections based on loss of perceived amenety value.
[quote][p][bold]sean_brfc[/bold] wrote: I'm sure the 'derelict land' in question is more of a woodland than derelict land. Say no to the development and leave it in its natural state. Maybe then the money could be spent on the large, dilapidated terraced house round the corner and the area can remain as green as possible.[/p][/quote]Unless the landowner also owns the terrace house mentioned then i fail to see how you can comment the money could be spent on that house. And even if it is the same owner people & the council cannot dictate how he spends his money, unless of course the house in question is unsafe or unfit. Just because you think it is a 'woodland' and therefore valuable greenspace (which many would disagree with) does not mean that the owner cannot clear the land regardless of whether he attains planning for the houses or not. As far as i am aware there are no protected trees on the site in question. And even if there was this would be taken into account prior to any consent being given by planning. As yimkin says the area does attract anti-social behaviour and the benefits of planning permission being allowed will outweigh any objections based on loss of perceived amenety value. milano

5:52pm Fri 23 Nov 12

sean_brfc says...

The property I mention was on the market last time I checked, along with many other good quality stone terraced houses just in need of some tlc. Though of course it is much easier for developers to clear a green space and start afresh.

And when you mention anti-social behaviour, don't you and Yimkin think that those responsible will find somewhere else to do whatever it is they do. Or will they simply disappear?
The property I mention was on the market last time I checked, along with many other good quality stone terraced houses just in need of some tlc. Though of course it is much easier for developers to clear a green space and start afresh. And when you mention anti-social behaviour, don't you and Yimkin think that those responsible will find somewhere else to do whatever it is they do. Or will they simply disappear? sean_brfc

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