A controversial planning application for 150 new homes on a plot of land known locally as the Upper Rough has been thrown out by the council.

The land, in Colne, was earmarked for development by Accrue Capital, who initially wanted to build 172 homes on the site near Windermere Avenue, essentially creating a 'new community' for the town.

In June 2022, the developers created a virtual exhibition of what the new community, called Colne Valley View, would look like once finished and invited people to have their say on the proposals.

But members of countryside charity, Lidgett and Beyond, claimed their town was "under attack" and urged its supporters to object to Accrue Capital’s bid, saying the proposals "fly in the face of an appeal decision" made in 2016 when a similar application was lodged with the council.

Residents had also been outraged by the name of the development, which referred to Colne Valley, which is actually a region of Yorkshire.

Mark Chung, who is on the Lidgett and Beyond management team and is also a trustee of the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) and of the Ramblers Association, said at the time: "Colne is under attack from housing developers.

"This totally flies in the face of the appeal decision of 2016 which rejected a similar development.

"Lidgett and Beyond believe the developers have not addressed the Planning Inspector’s determination from the 2016 appeal for the previous planning application on the Upper Rough.

"The Planning Inspector in 2016 was quite clear and nothing has changed since.”

In 2014, two overlapping applications were lodged with Pendle Borough Council, one seeking to build 90 new homes on the land off Windermere Avenue and one to build 270 new homes.

Both of the applications were refused in 2015, but appeals were launched against these decisions the following year, with only the 90 home development appeal being successful and planning permission granted.

READ MORE: Consultation launched over plans for 172 new homes on land in Colne

The appeal against refusal for 270 homes was dismissed, with the negative impact on the conservation area, destruction of natural habitat for birds and animals - especially the red-listed curlew, negative impact on long range views, and detrimental impact on footpaths, popular with hundreds of locals and visitors, cited as main reasons.

The consultation period for Accrue Capital’s proposals ended on June 27, and was met with overwhelming negativity.

One respondent said: "I wish to strongly object to the proposal to build Colne Valley View (Colne Valley is near Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, by the way, so perhaps you can take it there instead).

"As a local resident in this area, I don't want our lovely countryside developed into housing estates and will join other neighbours in actively objecting to this highly unsuitable proposal.

"Please reconsider and find an alternative area to develop, that doesn't swallow up Pendle's precious countryside (it has plenty of brownfield sites to have a look at).

"Rest assured, local residents like myself, will fight very hard to prevent this unwelcome development from going ahead just as we did back in 2015/16."

READ MORE: Residents in Colne urged to object to 172 homes plan over claims 'town is under attack'

Despite this, Accrue Capital pushed forward with their plans and in November, submitted an application for 150 new homes (22 less than their original proposals).

The application also asked for permission to refurbish and extend an existing pump house building, form a new means of access onto Windermere Avenue, alter existing means of access onto Castle Road, and other associated works.

A report submitted with planning documents read: “It is anticipated that there will be a mix of property types, albeit the majority will be detached.

“Similarly, it is anticipated that the majority of new homes built will be two or three bedroomed, with a limited number of four bedroomed units.

“Most new homes delivered will be two storey, although some three-storey typologies are included in the intended house types, reflective of traditional three storey housing to be found locally.

“The design codes are intended to give the local planning authority comfort that the future scale and massing of the proposed developed will respond appropriately to the surrounding context, such that any less than substantial harm to the conservation area at the minor end of the scale is outweighed by the public benefits of bringing forward new, high-quality family housing.”

READ MORE: Response to consultation for 172 new homes in Colne overwhelmingly negative

After the plans were received by the council hundreds of further objections were lodged and on Thursday the council refused the application stating: “The proposed development would result in the unacceptable loss of a prominent greenfield site to the east of the settlement of Colne that currently makes a significant contribution to the landscape character and quality of the area.

“The development would lead to a poor relationship with the town and countryside. In visual terms, there would be unacceptable impacts on views looking towards the application site in particular from the opposite side of the valley and for users on the footpaths approaching and passing through the site.

“The development would lead to unacceptable harm to the ecological value of the area with specific harm to the ornithological value of the site.”

David Cockburn-Price, chair of Lidgett and Beyond, said: "It was wonderful that, unlike the last time development on the Rough was mooted, when it had the full support of the Pendle Council Planning Department, now councillors were advised to reject this application for 150 houses. 

"The application is very clearly contrary to Pendle Council’s Core Strategy Policies: LIV 1, ENV 1, ENV2, policies 13 and 20 of the adopted Replacement Local Plan and policies 13 and 14 of the newly made Colne Neighbourhood Plan. 

"Apparently, it is also contrary to National Planning Policy in the form of paragraph 137 of the National Planning Policy Framework. 

"Put simply, this application is not sustainable and is simply a money making exercise from the speculators behind the scheme.”