Developers Satnam 'disappointed' by Peel Hall decision

Developers Satnam 'disappointed' by Peel Hall decision Developers Satnam 'disappointed' by Peel Hall decision

THE developers looking to build 150 homes on Peel Hall say they are ‘disappointed’ after councillors turned their scheme down.

They voted against the plan on Thursday night in the Town Hall, following large scale protests.

Hundreds of residents showed their opposition claiming the proposal would be the ‘thin of the wedge’ with 1,000 more homes possible on the land.

Now Satnam, the developers behind the scheme, how expressed their disappointment.

Nobody from Satnam spoke at the meeting but speaking on Monday morning, Colin Griffiths, from Satnam, said they would carefully consider the council’s response.

He added: “Naturally we are disappointed with the development management committee’s resolution, that had it been able to determine our application it would have refused our proposals for 150 new homes.

“As the agreed time limit the council has to determine a planning application has expired by a considerable period, we have submitted an appeal based on the grounds of non-determination.

“This is not a decision we have taken lightly.

“We are confident that our application is the appropriate site and right approach for delivering sustainable growth in Warrington.

“Satnam is dedicated to delivering a development which will benefit and provide valuable additions to existing communities, which is why we have committed over £1 million to improve local sporting facilities in Warrington as part of the proposals.’ “We are committed to working with all interested parties on this development to ensure that the best possible scheme is delivered.

“At this stage, we will carefully consider the council’s reasons for refusal as we continue through the planning process.”

As well as the housing, the plans will include new football pitches for Winwick Athletic close to Windermere Avenue.

The application will be discussed later in the year at public inquiry.

Comments(13)

nextdoor says...
12:54pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Erm, Satnam DID attend.

Billy Porter says...
1:20pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Yeah, I thought I saw Mr Griffiths in a discussion with a Traffic Warden and a friend said they saw him in the hall.

Very odd though, they're not the kind of people who would tell fibs or be intentionally misleading.

nextdoor says...
2:36pm Mon 11 Mar 13

The man from Satnam who held a talk last summer was spotted by a number of people, I am unsure of his name.

If they wanted to lie, surely they would have sent someone who hadn't already addressed the locals. Maybe WG getting mixed up or incorrect information.

Billy Porter says...
2:53pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Colin Griffiths.

Yes, it may be that what they meant was that Satnam made no representation to the planning committee.

blueted says...
3:13pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Colin Griffiths is Satnams Representative, he was at the meeting. I sat behind him at the Parr Hall. He stayed until the committee announced their decision, then he made a quick exit.

old-codger says...
3:53pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Satnam shouldn,t be disappointed,
They should just disappear,
They are not wanted by anyone . Now they are trying to get it through the back door by lodging an appeal,
They still wont be wanted.

grey_man says...
4:41pm Mon 11 Mar 13

It's no longer a decision the people of Warrington have a great deal of say in thanks to the planning department.

Regulus regulus says...
5:22pm Mon 11 Mar 13

“Satnam is dedicated to delivering a development which will benefit and provide valuable additions to existing communities, which is why we have committed over £1 million to improve local sporting facilities in Warrington as part of the proposals.’ “We are committed to working with all interested parties on this development to ensure that the best possible scheme is delivered.

IF THEY DID ATTEND
THEY OBVIOUSLY DIDN'T LISTEN


(part of ste dodds speech thurs)

This is reported to be a £1M plus investment, and I doubt much of this money will be invested in Warrington people or businesses.

If the application is approved, how will the Council pay the ongoing maintenance costs in this economic climate?
Dave Cotterill (WBC) has put on record and I quote “The council is facing significant revenue pressures and the creation of new or enhanced facilities without additional ongoing funding will make this a whole lot worse”

Why can’t he create this facility on his own land?
Under the TOWN & COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990, S106 states he can put something back that he has taken out, but he has not taken anything out.
WHY is the developer proposing to develop OUR playing fields in OUR community? It’s not wanted. It’s not his land, it’s OUR land!

It’s been said that the proposal of football pitches on radley common is more for the benefit of winwick football club if so and they want to play outside of their district i direct both satnam and winwick football club back to the orford hub where 32 million has been spent for such puposes.more likely nearer and safer to travel to.

radley common has a vibrant community hub already which is used every day and at weekends, by all ages within our community. Further development is NOT NEEDED. The developer has never asked US what we want, so we can tell him now, WE DON’T WANT IT! It seems like a bribe to us, WE DON’T ACCEPT IT

http://www.facebook.com/groups/127334547418004/ says...
5:47pm Mon 11 Mar 13

“At this stage, we will carefully consider the council’s reasons for refusal as we continue through the planning process.”

As well as the housing, the plans will include new football pitches for Winwick Athletic close to Windermere Avenue.

OH REALLY

gazhopley says...
5:59pm Mon 11 Mar 13

still cant see how winwick athletic is local to radley common with a great big motorway in the middle, isn't that like saying we want to build houses in dover but dont worry we want to build a stadium for calais fc, coz after all they are only a few miles away, just a bit of water inbetween. its that bit inbetween that makes all the difference. if satnam had put a bit of effort in they may have realised, and would anyone listen to those who dont put effort in.

Regulus regulus says...
6:19pm Mon 11 Mar 13

gazhopley wrote:
still cant see how winwick athletic is local to radley common with a great big motorway in the middle, isn't that like saying we want to build houses in dover but dont worry we want to build a stadium for calais fc, coz after all they are only a few miles away, just a bit of water inbetween. its that bit inbetween that makes all the difference. if satnam had put a bit of effort in they may have realised, and would anyone listen to those who dont put effort in.
the people living next to the proposed pitches didnt even know about the sports plans for radley common,there is no connection between peel hall and radley common other than the people living round both areas are totally against their development by satnam

Billy Porter says...
9:13pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Ooh, look, the copy has changed from "Nobody from Satnam attended the meeting..." to "Nobody from Satnam spoke at the meeting..."

I wish the local Gruan would at least acknowledge changes like these when mistakes are pointed out to them.

old-codger says...
9:38pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Further development is NOT NEEDED. The developer has never asked US what we want, so we can tell him now, WE DON’T WANT IT! It seems like a bribe to us, WE DON’T ACCEPT IT”


The residents have spoken,
Appeal if you want to waste more money,
WE DONT WANT IT,
WE ARE NOT HAVING IT,

BYE BYE.

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