HOME   ARCHIVE   GALLERY   SHOP   ABOUT US   LINKS      
 

 
SALFORD COUNCIL PLANNING SHAMBLES AS PEEL HOLDINGS LOSE OUT
 

Star date: 8th July 2011

CHAOS AND DISGRACE AT SALFORD COUNCIL PLANNING MEETING – BUT PEEL HOLDINGS REFUSED GREEN FIELD SITE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN WALKDEN

"This isn't democracy – this is a disgrace" Walkden resident.

There were mad, chaotic unbelievable scenes at Salford Council's planning panel meeting yesterday, as the Council's head of planning, Councillor Derek Antrobus, and chief planning officers tried to overturn a decision to refuse Peel Holdings outline permission to build 350 houses on the green field Burgess Farm site in Walkden.

Residents who were objecting to the plans were appalled and shocked by the Council's behaviour before a new vote was eventually taken and Peel's plans to destroy more green land in Salford were finally kicked out. Although the battle for Burgess Farm and the crested newts is only just beginning…

Full story of the fiasco here…


No-one had quite seen anything like it before. Over fifty residents who had come to Salford Council's planning meeting to try to win a democratic decision were totally shocked by the behaviour of certain councillors and officers.

For over two hours the planning panel had listened to arguments for and against Peel Holdings plans to build 350 houses on the green field site of Burgess Farm in Walkden. A vote was taken, planning permission was refused and then those in favour, led by Salford Council's Lead Planning Member, Derek Antrobus, tried to get the decision nulled. 

First, three councillors voted to visit the site to see for themselves the reality of the housing proposal. Then a vote was taken on the application itself which was rejected by a five to four majority. But, incredibly, Councillor Antrobus and chief planning officers - who had recommended approval of Peel's plans - said the vote didn't count, as councillors had to go on the site visit.

Councillor Karen Garrido, who had proposed the visit, said that she would withdraw her request so that the refusal could stand. But planning officers and Councillor Antrobus again tried to void the decision, arguing that the panel couldn't just vote against the proposal. They had to move a separate motion giving reasons why they were voting against it.

Amidst chaotic scenes, with residents shouting `cheats' and `disgrace' from the public areas, a new motion to refuse the application was put forward and finally accepted by the same 5-4 margin, as Peel Holdings and its Council supporters were sent packing. But the whole process had left residents gobsmacked…

"We're very pleased with the decision but disappointed with the way it was done, it was a shambles" said Eddie Howarth, who had earlier given a passionate and articulate speech to the panel against Peel's plans

"If that's the way the panel operate I'm not surprised that a lot of wrong decisions get made in terms of planning" he added "Of course they tried to get out of it. Once the vote went against them they tried to retract that and suggest they shouldn't decide it. We weren't surprised by the comments from Councillor Antrobus – we all know the history there…"

And Joel Hughes, a pupil at St George's RC High School in Little Hulton, who had made his own personal plea to the panel to save the wildlife on the site, was equally shocked by the Council's behaviour…

"I'm very pleased with the decision but I thought they were being stupid and were trying to make reasons for not allowing it" he said "But I'm really looking forward to doing my work experience on the farm now, like delivering lambs and shearing sheep…"

Campaigner, Sue Occleston added… "I think it was diabolical actually, very poorly done, it was a shambles."

Basically, Salford Council had tried to bulldoze the decision through, despite determined opposition from local residents and logical, articulate arguments against the proposed housing development on a green field site by Peel Holdings.

Speakers against the proposals pointed out the shocking impacts of traffic congestion resulting from 350 `aspirational' houses; the fact that Salford Council itself states that there is no need for the housing; the impact on already overflowing primary schools in the area; and the negative impact on local ecology, including the heavily protected great crested newt which has its breeding ground only 150 metres from the proposed building site.

Councillor Les Turner, representing Walkden South, and scoffing at Peel's plans for a `nature park', asked the panel to imagine they were newts…

"You're living in this tranquil site and suddenly bulldozers, lorries and humans become your neighbours. Would you stay? No, you'd get the hell out!"

And Joel Hughes from St George's High School read out a leaflet he'd produced for the meeting…

"If you take away Burgess Farm…you are taking away a part of history in Little Hulton" he said "We also don't need a `man made' nature reserve that Peel has offered us because we have already got a massive `natural' nature reserve that is home to a variety of animals, some rare and some common but all valued by the local community."

These arguments certainly helped sway the planning panel…

Councillor Judith Tope, representing Eccles, said that "the idea of newts packing their bags and going to their nice new home is just not true." And Councillor Ronnie Wilson, representing Weaste and Seedley, added "We have a history of making mistakes with nature and I don't want to be part of making a mistake. We shouldn't be messing around with nature at this stage."

Other councillors pointed out that even Salford Council's own official report recommending approval of planning permission stated that there was no actual need for this housing in Salford.

Speaking from the public gallery, Councillor Iain Lindley, representing Walkden South, declared that he was "flabbergasted" by the report…

"I thought that there was need for this level of housing but there isn't one" he said "Why would we approve a site on green field land when there is no need? Can members honestly say that they can justify this?"

Panel member Councillor Stephen Ord, representing Irwell Riverside, agreed, saying that he had "concerns that this is strategic land and we shouldn't be using it until it is needed."

In response, Lead Member for Planning, Derek Antrobus, said he was impressed with the design of the houses, spoke of the "long term aspirations of the city" and the £500,000 in potential council tax revenues. He argued that this should be balanced against the environmental issues.

Amidst shouts of `disgrace' he agreed that "something very precious is being lost to people in that area…but we must balance local interests against the wider interests of the city"…

… And amidst more shouts of `disgrace' from the public, Councillor Antrobus threatened that if the panel refused the outline planning permission for the development "it will be upheld on appeal".

Indeed, the skewed nature of the planning system means that the battle is only just beginning. Having finally lost the vote, Peel Holdings can now appeal against the decision – even though, had the decision gone in favour of Peel's plans, residents couldn't appeal.

"We're not over the moon yet because we know it will go to appeal" said Eddie Howarth "This is just the beginning…but at least it's an independent body now that's going to determine whether it should be approved or not."

Councillor Lindley said afterwards that there was a long way to go, and urged people in Salford to oppose plans in the Council's Draft Core Strategy for the site to be brought forward officially for housing…

"I'm really pleased that the panel in the end has listened to the residents and refused the application" he said "But this is the first battle and there's still a long way to go. We have the core strategy up for consultation and that effectively demonstrates a need, so we have to have to work very hard until 1st August to make sure we get it removed from the core strategy"

As for the way the panel meeting was run, he just shook his head…

"I think the conduct of the meeting was poor, and in particular we need to make sure that residents have confidence in the planning system - I don't think they will be encouraged by what they saw this morning."

Or as one Walkden resident shouted from the public gallery "This isn't democracy – this is a disgrace…"

Objections to Salford Council's plan for the Burgess Farm green field site in the Draft Core Strategy can be made online before August 1st (see here)

 

 

 

 


 

Fadge - No Hope in this dead city wrote
at 3:21:10 PM on Saturday, October 01, 2011
Caroline makes a valid point about the destruction of farm land and the need to import food .This will be of no relevance to the clowncils that infest Britain , as a clowncils sole remit is to cram as much shoddy housing as possible wherever possible , in order to extort the maximum ammount of council tax from the dis-regarded citizens .The tinpot town hall dictators must maintain the vast fund of extorted income to pay obscene salaries to all important ' executive ' shite-spouters ,fund brain-dead schemes , and to throw at big business chums .The worst example of this is this dump salford . Useless bastards , all of them .
 
caroline wrote
at 1:59:04 AM on Saturday, October 01, 2011
Once again it seems that dark forces are at work in favour of big bussiness and disregarding what Joe public say's or wants. I wonder what all the men and women who gave their lives so we could be free in two great wars would think if they could come back to see if their lives were well spent?. This seems Quite common up and down the UK. Although I am not saying its the same it reminds me of the disgraceful Polson affair. The other point is the ever destruction of farm land that could feed the UK so we do not have to depend on major food imports costing the country large amounts of money.
 
UoS wrote
at 8:31:08 AM on Friday, July 08, 2011
Whilst I agree the attempt to 'sweep' a democratic vote under the carpet is a disgrace (but no less than I would expect from Labour), I am afraid Antrobus is right on the money - the decision will be nodded through on appeal.
 
Eddie Banyard wrote
at 4:19:24 AM on Friday, July 08, 2011
AW.. Shame . Poor council didn't get their way for a change .They can always throw another 15million at Peel , to maintain the all-too-cosy relationship .
 
Please enter your comment below:
 
 
 
CCJS
Kersal Moor
Big Life Job Advert
Salford Star photo stories
Cornerstone advert
Mary Burns Publishing
 
Contact us
phone: 07957 982960
Facebook       Twitter
 
 
Recent comments
article: SALFORD COUNCIL £6 MILLION LET OFF FOR MIDDLEWOOD LOCKS DEVELOPER
And yet another site in the Salford area that has rare breeding birds that is being concreted over with no thought given to the ec... [more]
article: SALFORD COUNCIL FAT CAT SALARY WAY TOO HIGH
My old dad would say its a case of "more chiefs than injuns"..or "they wouldn't know their a..e from their elbow, just watch, when... [more]
article: SALFORD DE LA SALLE COLLEGE SET FOR BULLDOZERS
Went to school at both the Prep School and the College, and my wife worked there when it was the Hairdressing College. It is a cry... [more]
article: SALFORD COUNCIL £6 MILLION LET OFF FOR MIDDLEWOOD LOCKS DEVELOPER
This is also, judging by the pictures, a loss of what I would call 'urban green belt'. I doubt the proposed park will be very spa... [more]
article: SALFORD COUNCIL £6 MILLION LET OFF FOR MIDDLEWOOD LOCKS DEVELOPER
To our dear council, and its officers - have you completely lost the plot? This farce has been going on since the old high school ... [more]
 
 
 
 
 
Days
Hours
Minutes
Seconds
 
 
 

Donate

Help the Salford Star...

all donations welcome

 
 

More articles...

DESPERATE FIGHT TO SAVE SALFORD CHILDRENS HOLIDAY CAMP

Star date: 17th April 2014

SALFORD COUNCIL CUTS £50,000 FROM `JAM BUTTY' CAMP

Jam Butty Camp Fundraiser
Saturday 3rd May
Welcome Inn, Robert Hall St, Ordsall
1-6pm Free 7pm £2 entry

`What do I think is behind the cut? The sale of the land' Nick Abbott

When Salford Council announced it was going to cut £50,000 from the Salford Children's Holiday Camp in Wales, where thousands of youngsters have had their first holiday, the Camp's trustees stated that it would close.

Since then, the community has leapt into action, raised thousands of pounds, and now has a business plan to take over the Camp. But Salford Council is stalling over the proposals. Why?

Full details here…

SALFORD COUNCIL £6 MILLION LET OFF FOR MIDDLEWOOD LOCKS DEVELOPER

Star date: 17th April 2014

SALFORD COUNCIL TEARS UP PLANNING RULES (AGAIN) FOR MIDDLEWOOD LOCKS

Scarborough Development Group is planning to put huge apartment blocks, a hotel and loads of shops on the currently derelict Middlewood Locks site. For the privilege of plonking an urban profit farm on the Salford border with Manchester, the developer should be paying over £8million in fees to the Salford Council…

…But the Council is only asking for less than £2million - letting the Group off with a massive £6million in payments. This despite £4million of public money having already been spent on the site. 

Full details here…

SALFORD MAYOR AND COUNCIL SHOULD APOLOGISE TO SHELAGH DELANEY

Star date: 16th April 2014

SALFORD HYPOCRITE MAYOR ANNOUNCES DELANEY DAY

With incredible hypocrisy, Salford City Mayor, Ian Stewart, yesterday announced that 25th November will be the city's official `Shelagh Delaney Day' – failing to mention how Salford Council, the Mayor and the then Salford City Reporter tried to destroy the brilliant writer because her work was said to tarnish the image of the city.

Yesterday, Stewart said that Delaney's work "captured and celebrated the spirit of Salford" – not what the Council said at the time of A Taste of Honey! The Salford Star is demanding that the Mayor and Salford City Council should make a full formal apology before jumping on the Delaney bandwagon.

Full details here…

SALFORD COUNCIL FAT CAT SALARY WAY TOO HIGH

Star date: 15th April 2014

SALFORD COUNCIL DIRECTOR JIM TAYLOR IN TOP 1% OF EARNERS IN UK

Last night, Salford Council rubber stamped the appointment of former Rochdale Chief Exec Jim Taylor as its controversial new £150,000 `Council Director'.

While Mayor Ian Stewart crowed about Salford's `pay ratios' at a recent Council meeting, a new report by Steady State Manchester and Equality North West slates local council pay inequality – and Salford is no exception.

Full details here…

SALFORD COUNCIL TO TAKE ON FAT CAT ROCHDALE REJECT

Star date: 14th April 2014

REJECT ROCHDALE CHIEF EXEC JIM TAYLOR GETS £150K AT SALFORD  

Jim Taylor, the controversial Chief Exec of Rochdale Council, is to be appointed `Council Director' of Salford – the controversial £150,000 a year job created in the wake of former Fat Cat Chief Exec, Barbara Spicer's departure.

Over in Rochdale there was fury when the Council wanted to increase Taylor's wages by £40,000 while making cuts of £45million. Public outrage led to the Council doing a U-turn – but now Mayor Ian Stewart will formalise Taylor's Fat Cat Salford appointment at a special Council meeting tonight.

Full details here…

 



written and produced by Salfordians for Salfordians
with attitude and love xxx