Owner of Darwen site says building work will begin on time

First published in News
Last updated

THE owner of a site controversially approved for the building of 133 homes said work would ‘definitely’ start before the end of a two-year deadline.

Blackburn with Darwen Council approved the plans for the site between Pole Lane and Spring Meadows in Darwen in December, 2012.

But in giving the go-ahead, councillors imposed a two-year deadline for work to begin before planning permission would be withdrawn.

Since then, no work has been done on the site with the December deadline looming just eight months away.

Builder David Knowles, working in partnership with Ruttle Plant Holdings, said the plan was to sell the land on to a developer with the planning permissions already in place.

Mr Knowles said: “There are about six different companies who are very interested in buying it. “I reckon it will be sold within the next 12 to 14 weeks.

“I am confident work will begin well before December. “If it didn’t sell the only option would be to develop it ourselves but I do not think that will be necessary.”

The plans, which had originally been knocked back in 2011, were met with a great deal of anger by neighbouring residents concerned about a number of issues, notably an increase in traffic in Pole Lane.

The development became part of Blackburn with Darwen Council’s ambitious plans to build up to 4,000 rural executive homes in the the borough in response to new Government targets.

Other Darwen sites nominated for the ‘National Planning Policy Framework’ were at Ellerslie House, Bury Fold Lane, Bailey’s Field, Cranberry Lane, Jack’s Key, Johnson New Road in Waterside and Springside Works at Belmont.

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:36pm Sun 20 Apr 14

Good call says...

Yet more land in another nice area of what is a mainly nice town is to concreted over with horrible looking identikit rabbit hutches. Pole Lane is busy enough as it is, and adding 133 houses (and I also believe another concreting over is planned for this area) to it will be a disaster.
Yet more land in another nice area of what is a mainly nice town is to concreted over with horrible looking identikit rabbit hutches. Pole Lane is busy enough as it is, and adding 133 houses (and I also believe another concreting over is planned for this area) to it will be a disaster. Good call
  • Score: 20

8:52am Mon 21 Apr 14

shirtbox says...

Money grabbing speculators,hope it all falls flat on them,just using the system for personal gain.
Money grabbing speculators,hope it all falls flat on them,just using the system for personal gain. shirtbox
  • Score: 17

2:27pm Mon 21 Apr 14

grumpyoldlady says...

What is the point of giving planning permission for all these sites when the one at Belgrave is at a standstill, leaving people living on a half finished site.
What is the point of giving planning permission for all these sites when the one at Belgrave is at a standstill, leaving people living on a half finished site. grumpyoldlady
  • Score: 18

3:09pm Mon 21 Apr 14

english rose 1 says...

grumpyoldlady wrote:
What is the point of giving planning permission for all these sites when the one at Belgrave is at a standstill, leaving people living on a half finished site.
Because each Council has been given a statutory target by the Government to allocate land for building. This land has been designated for housing for many years. BwD's target is 9,300 by 2026.
*
The Council really has no choice but to allow development on those pieces of land allocated for housing as the Govt would give permission plus fine the Council if it refused permission. (as in the Ribble Valley)
*
The 9,300 includes such sites at Belgrave.
[quote][p][bold]grumpyoldlady[/bold] wrote: What is the point of giving planning permission for all these sites when the one at Belgrave is at a standstill, leaving people living on a half finished site.[/p][/quote]Because each Council has been given a statutory target by the Government to allocate land for building. This land has been designated for housing for many years. BwD's target is 9,300 by 2026. * The Council really has no choice but to allow development on those pieces of land allocated for housing as the Govt would give permission plus fine the Council if it refused permission. (as in the Ribble Valley) * The 9,300 includes such sites at Belgrave. english rose 1
  • Score: 5

3:55pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Good call says...

english rose 1 wrote:
grumpyoldlady wrote:
What is the point of giving planning permission for all these sites when the one at Belgrave is at a standstill, leaving people living on a half finished site.
Because each Council has been given a statutory target by the Government to allocate land for building. This land has been designated for housing for many years. BwD's target is 9,300 by 2026.
*
The Council really has no choice but to allow development on those pieces of land allocated for housing as the Govt would give permission plus fine the Council if it refused permission. (as in the Ribble Valley)
*
The 9,300 includes such sites at Belgrave.
It is down to the council to stand up and refuse this covering over of nice areas with horrible rabbit hutches. I am sure you are aware that Pole Lane is busy enough , and that adding hundreds of homes to the area will make the roads a complete nightmare.

Stop trotting out the excuse of "the government has told us, so we must do it, we are only following orders", the clowncil need to grow a backbone, they are an utter disgrace to the people of this town.That said, allowing hundreds of thousands of people into the country doesn't help things.
[quote][p][bold]english rose 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]grumpyoldlady[/bold] wrote: What is the point of giving planning permission for all these sites when the one at Belgrave is at a standstill, leaving people living on a half finished site.[/p][/quote]Because each Council has been given a statutory target by the Government to allocate land for building. This land has been designated for housing for many years. BwD's target is 9,300 by 2026. * The Council really has no choice but to allow development on those pieces of land allocated for housing as the Govt would give permission plus fine the Council if it refused permission. (as in the Ribble Valley) * The 9,300 includes such sites at Belgrave.[/p][/quote]It is down to the council to stand up and refuse this covering over of nice areas with horrible rabbit hutches. I am sure you are aware that Pole Lane is busy enough , and that adding hundreds of homes to the area will make the roads a complete nightmare. Stop trotting out the excuse of "the government has told us, so we must do it, we are only following orders", the clowncil need to grow a backbone, they are an utter disgrace to the people of this town.That said, allowing hundreds of thousands of people into the country doesn't help things. Good call
  • Score: 9

4:56pm Mon 21 Apr 14

phil kernot says...

People don't understand , with immigration being at its highest on record ,, were are people going to live ,, As long as people pay there way there's no problem building more houses ,,, the true reason people don't like house building because , people think and there probably right that there house is not a strong investment as , more houses mean that house prices will drop,,,, (good more competion ) the maths is if you build 3 houses you would get your 4 th free ,, So 30% profit on each house built for the house builder , the council can't lose , with planning costs , council tax ,, ,, people need to work out how much thay pay back over 25 years on a mortgage , for what to be chained to the goverment all there life ,, And when it's payed for can't sell it as you need some where to live ,,, suppose it would get sold in the end to pay for your care home fees ,,, enjoy your life owning a house is not important as being happy :)
People don't understand , with immigration being at its highest on record ,, were are people going to live ,, As long as people pay there way there's no problem building more houses ,,, the true reason people don't like house building because , people think and there probably right that there house is not a strong investment as , more houses mean that house prices will drop,,,, (good more competion ) the maths is if you build 3 houses you would get your 4 th free ,, So 30% profit on each house built for the house builder , the council can't lose , with planning costs , council tax ,, ,, people need to work out how much thay pay back over 25 years on a mortgage , for what to be chained to the goverment all there life ,, And when it's payed for can't sell it as you need some where to live ,,, suppose it would get sold in the end to pay for your care home fees ,,, enjoy your life owning a house is not important as being happy :) phil kernot
  • Score: -10

5:22pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Good call says...

phil kernot wrote:
People don't understand , with immigration being at its highest on record ,, were are people going to live ,, As long as people pay there way there's no problem building more houses ,,, the true reason people don't like house building because , people think and there probably right that there house is not a strong investment as , more houses mean that house prices will drop,,,, (good more competion ) the maths is if you build 3 houses you would get your 4 th free ,, So 30% profit on each house built for the house builder , the council can't lose , with planning costs , council tax ,, ,, people need to work out how much thay pay back over 25 years on a mortgage , for what to be chained to the goverment all there life ,, And when it's payed for can't sell it as you need some where to live ,,, suppose it would get sold in the end to pay for your care home fees ,,, enjoy your life owning a house is not important as being happy :)
I oppose the rabbit hutch invasion on the basis of the roads not being able to cope and the loss of countryside , rather than any concerns about the housing market and the prices.

One other thing, once the interest rates go up and the cheap money stops flowing in, I wouldn't be surprised if the UK economy drops faster than a prostitutes knickers and in an attempt to prop the banks up the government pulls a Cyprus and starts robbing from accounts/ savings to prop up the banks.

I thought that lessons would have been learned from what happened in 2008, when the USSA (United Soviet States of Amerika) economy went down , taking the world economy with it, as a result of giving cheap mortgages to people who could never afford them, but the UK looks set to repeat the same crisis with our "help to buy" scheme.
[quote][p][bold]phil kernot[/bold] wrote: People don't understand , with immigration being at its highest on record ,, were are people going to live ,, As long as people pay there way there's no problem building more houses ,,, the true reason people don't like house building because , people think and there probably right that there house is not a strong investment as , more houses mean that house prices will drop,,,, (good more competion ) the maths is if you build 3 houses you would get your 4 th free ,, So 30% profit on each house built for the house builder , the council can't lose , with planning costs , council tax ,, ,, people need to work out how much thay pay back over 25 years on a mortgage , for what to be chained to the goverment all there life ,, And when it's payed for can't sell it as you need some where to live ,,, suppose it would get sold in the end to pay for your care home fees ,,, enjoy your life owning a house is not important as being happy :)[/p][/quote]I oppose the rabbit hutch invasion on the basis of the roads not being able to cope and the loss of countryside , rather than any concerns about the housing market and the prices. One other thing, once the interest rates go up and the cheap money stops flowing in, I wouldn't be surprised if the UK economy drops faster than a prostitutes knickers and in an attempt to prop the banks up the government pulls a Cyprus and starts robbing from accounts/ savings to prop up the banks. I thought that lessons would have been learned from what happened in 2008, when the USSA (United Soviet States of Amerika) economy went down , taking the world economy with it, as a result of giving cheap mortgages to people who could never afford them, but the UK looks set to repeat the same crisis with our "help to buy" scheme. Good call
  • Score: 0

6:13pm Mon 21 Apr 14

HelpingDarwen says...

The piece of land in question is an eyesore and a few houses on it will actually improve the view!
The piece of land in question is an eyesore and a few houses on it will actually improve the view! HelpingDarwen
  • Score: -10

6:22pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Notonpolelane says...

HelpingDarwen wrote:
The piece of land in question is an eyesore and a few houses on it will actually improve the view!
Eyesore, green field. Go and have a look when the development grinds to a halt, that would be an eyesore!
[quote][p][bold]HelpingDarwen[/bold] wrote: The piece of land in question is an eyesore and a few houses on it will actually improve the view![/p][/quote]Eyesore, green field. Go and have a look when the development grinds to a halt, that would be an eyesore! Notonpolelane
  • Score: 10

11:27pm Mon 21 Apr 14

darwenTower says...

Notonpolelane wrote:
HelpingDarwen wrote:
The piece of land in question is an eyesore and a few houses on it will actually improve the view!
Eyesore, green field. Go and have a look when the development grinds to a halt, that would be an eyesore!
When the houses on Pole Lane were built was there opposition?
I suspect so.
[quote][p][bold]Notonpolelane[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HelpingDarwen[/bold] wrote: The piece of land in question is an eyesore and a few houses on it will actually improve the view![/p][/quote]Eyesore, green field. Go and have a look when the development grinds to a halt, that would be an eyesore![/p][/quote]When the houses on Pole Lane were built was there opposition? I suspect so. darwenTower
  • Score: 3

2:31am Wed 23 Apr 14

english rose 1 says...

Good call wrote:
english rose 1 wrote:
grumpyoldlady wrote:
What is the point of giving planning permission for all these sites when the one at Belgrave is at a standstill, leaving people living on a half finished site.
Because each Council has been given a statutory target by the Government to allocate land for building. This land has been designated for housing for many years. BwD's target is 9,300 by 2026.
*
The Council really has no choice but to allow development on those pieces of land allocated for housing as the Govt would give permission plus fine the Council if it refused permission. (as in the Ribble Valley)
*
The 9,300 includes such sites at Belgrave.
It is down to the council to stand up and refuse this covering over of nice areas with horrible rabbit hutches. I am sure you are aware that Pole Lane is busy enough , and that adding hundreds of homes to the area will make the roads a complete nightmare.

Stop trotting out the excuse of "the government has told us, so we must do it, we are only following orders", the clowncil need to grow a backbone, they are an utter disgrace to the people of this town.That said, allowing hundreds of thousands of people into the country doesn't help things.
No, - you obviously do not understand current Govt policy. If the Council (or any Council) does not approve a 'Core Strategy' (including the housing targets) the Govt will give permission to developers irrespective of what you or the Council thinks. (Ribble Valley being a prime example).
*
You really need to clue up on what is happening !
[quote][p][bold]Good call[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]english rose 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]grumpyoldlady[/bold] wrote: What is the point of giving planning permission for all these sites when the one at Belgrave is at a standstill, leaving people living on a half finished site.[/p][/quote]Because each Council has been given a statutory target by the Government to allocate land for building. This land has been designated for housing for many years. BwD's target is 9,300 by 2026. * The Council really has no choice but to allow development on those pieces of land allocated for housing as the Govt would give permission plus fine the Council if it refused permission. (as in the Ribble Valley) * The 9,300 includes such sites at Belgrave.[/p][/quote]It is down to the council to stand up and refuse this covering over of nice areas with horrible rabbit hutches. I am sure you are aware that Pole Lane is busy enough , and that adding hundreds of homes to the area will make the roads a complete nightmare. Stop trotting out the excuse of "the government has told us, so we must do it, we are only following orders", the clowncil need to grow a backbone, they are an utter disgrace to the people of this town.That said, allowing hundreds of thousands of people into the country doesn't help things.[/p][/quote]No, - you obviously do not understand current Govt policy. If the Council (or any Council) does not approve a 'Core Strategy' (including the housing targets) the Govt will give permission to developers irrespective of what you or the Council thinks. (Ribble Valley being a prime example). * You really need to clue up on what is happening ! english rose 1
  • Score: -4

4:59pm Wed 23 Apr 14

Corsetmaker says...

Whilst i know that councils have been given targets, they could at least be a bit.. creative instead of all these boring identikit houses, which are all bought up by landlords and let out to tenants and neither have much of an interest in the exterior upkeep of the properties.

Darwen is fast becoming a dropzone of half arsed, half finished building projects... Anyone know when Auchwitz formerly known as "luxury office Space" Axxis Park will ever get finished - what an utter eyesore to the people coming into Darwen via the M65 slip road...
Whilst i know that councils have been given targets, they could at least be a bit.. creative instead of all these boring identikit houses, which are all bought up by landlords and let out to tenants and neither have much of an interest in the exterior upkeep of the properties. Darwen is fast becoming a dropzone of half arsed, half finished building projects... Anyone know when Auchwitz formerly known as "luxury office Space" Axxis Park will ever get finished - what an utter eyesore to the people coming into Darwen via the M65 slip road... Corsetmaker
  • Score: 5

9:08pm Wed 23 Apr 14

Good call says...

english rose 1 wrote:
Good call wrote:
english rose 1 wrote:
grumpyoldlady wrote:
What is the point of giving planning permission for all these sites when the one at Belgrave is at a standstill, leaving people living on a half finished site.
Because each Council has been given a statutory target by the Government to allocate land for building. This land has been designated for housing for many years. BwD's target is 9,300 by 2026.
*
The Council really has no choice but to allow development on those pieces of land allocated for housing as the Govt would give permission plus fine the Council if it refused permission. (as in the Ribble Valley)
*
The 9,300 includes such sites at Belgrave.
It is down to the council to stand up and refuse this covering over of nice areas with horrible rabbit hutches. I am sure you are aware that Pole Lane is busy enough , and that adding hundreds of homes to the area will make the roads a complete nightmare.

Stop trotting out the excuse of "the government has told us, so we must do it, we are only following orders", the clowncil need to grow a backbone, they are an utter disgrace to the people of this town.That said, allowing hundreds of thousands of people into the country doesn't help things.
No, - you obviously do not understand current Govt policy. If the Council (or any Council) does not approve a 'Core Strategy' (including the housing targets) the Govt will give permission to developers irrespective of what you or the Council thinks. (Ribble Valley being a prime example).
*
You really need to clue up on what is happening !
Fair enough, the council have targets, but what are councils doing to prevent the desecration of the countryside, and the placement of hundreds of houses in areas where the roads won't be able to cope.Surely the councils could lobby to have the targets reduced or even better scrapped.

In addition my reply to someone who said people objecting to building based on their property prices going down, all I can say is that I don't believe that is the primary concern, but I don't blame people who are concerned. These days most pensions are god awful, so is it any wonder that people might be worried about their property price, as that may be their only source of retirement income for their golden years.
[quote][p][bold]english rose 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Good call[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]english rose 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]grumpyoldlady[/bold] wrote: What is the point of giving planning permission for all these sites when the one at Belgrave is at a standstill, leaving people living on a half finished site.[/p][/quote]Because each Council has been given a statutory target by the Government to allocate land for building. This land has been designated for housing for many years. BwD's target is 9,300 by 2026. * The Council really has no choice but to allow development on those pieces of land allocated for housing as the Govt would give permission plus fine the Council if it refused permission. (as in the Ribble Valley) * The 9,300 includes such sites at Belgrave.[/p][/quote]It is down to the council to stand up and refuse this covering over of nice areas with horrible rabbit hutches. I am sure you are aware that Pole Lane is busy enough , and that adding hundreds of homes to the area will make the roads a complete nightmare. Stop trotting out the excuse of "the government has told us, so we must do it, we are only following orders", the clowncil need to grow a backbone, they are an utter disgrace to the people of this town.That said, allowing hundreds of thousands of people into the country doesn't help things.[/p][/quote]No, - you obviously do not understand current Govt policy. If the Council (or any Council) does not approve a 'Core Strategy' (including the housing targets) the Govt will give permission to developers irrespective of what you or the Council thinks. (Ribble Valley being a prime example). * You really need to clue up on what is happening ![/p][/quote]Fair enough, the council have targets, but what are councils doing to prevent the desecration of the countryside, and the placement of hundreds of houses in areas where the roads won't be able to cope.Surely the councils could lobby to have the targets reduced or even better scrapped. In addition my reply to someone who said people objecting to building based on their property prices going down, all I can say is that I don't believe that is the primary concern, but I don't blame people who are concerned. These days most pensions are god awful, so is it any wonder that people might be worried about their property price, as that may be their only source of retirement income for their golden years. Good call
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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