Homes plan rejected over fears of ‘daisy chain’ developments destroying character of separate villages

The 28 homes-plan for Earby Road, Salterforth, prompted dozens of objections and has been rejected by Pendle councillors.

Applethwaite Ltd, of Preston, wanted permission for new houses, landscaping, infrastructure and altered access at a field numbered 0087 on Earby Road, Salterforth.

In the past, separate planning permission was given for 34 homes there. But a number of people spoke against the Applethwaite plan at Pendle’s West Craven committee.

Among them was Jasmin Laurie. She said: “I represent 40 objectors. These homes would sit outside the community in open countryside. There also concerns about flood risks, with clay land there unable to absorb water and a natural stream on the hillside.

“There are also concerns about highway dangers, with the road having a pinch-point and a blind spot. To have a new junction built there for 28 homes would be unacceptable. There have been traffic collisions and some terrifying near-misses.”

She called on councillors to make a decision themselves rather than delegate it to a planning officer, adding: “There is no need to destroy this field in an over-saturated area.”

Another objector was Catherine Coulthread. She said: “If these homes are built, I will look out to the gable end of a new two-storey home rather than see the sky. And my house will face a flood risk. I find that totally unacceptable. And selling my house in future would not be feasible. Who would want to buy a house with an outlook of concrete?

“And if this development was approved with new roads into the field, it could possibly mean that the villages of Earby, Sough, Salterforth and Kelbrook would lose their rural character and identities.”

Another speaker, Wendy Kelly, raised concerns including pressure on utilities from new homes, the loss of trees and hedges, and the impact on wildlife. Also she feared ground excavation work could effect the stability of existing homes.

And Karen Sharrock, Salterforth Parish Council’sclerk, said: “The minute that field is built on, Salterforth and Earby will become one. I accept that towns do grow and evolve. But this needs to be thought about.”

Earlier, agent Graham Love represented Applethwaite and spoke in favour of the plan. He said: “This site already has planning permission, so any objection now to the principle of development cannot carry any weight.”

In its application, Applethwaite describe the site as land south of Park Avenue, Earby, but this name was disputed by councillors.

An Applethwaite report said: “We have carefully considered the opportunities and constraints of the site and the needs of local residents, whilst understanding how these interact with the council’s policies.

“Our approach to the design has been led by technical consultants who understand the context of the site and the surrounding area. We truly believe we have designed a scheme which goes above-and-beyond the needs of future residents, whilst helping Pendle Council to meet its housing aspirations. The site is well located to achieve all of this.”

Answering various points, council planning officer Laura Barnes said previous approval for 34 homes was still valid. Regarding the new application, the distances between existing and proposed homes were acceptable and Lancashire County Council did not think a road crossing was needed. The county had no highways objections.

Pende planning officers felt bio-diversity measures had been addressed by Applethwaite, a drainage update had been submitted and comments on that were awaited from water authorities. So officers recommended councillors to delegate the plan to them.

However, a number of borough councillors were unhappy with the plan and committee chairperson Lib-Dem Lola Whipp recommended it be refused. Reasons included the field being outside existing settlements, the design and lay-out, drainage, road safety and the impact on wildlife. In a vote, councillors refused it.