Warrington Councillors call on community to fight Peel Hall plans

5:10pm Tuesday 25th September 2012 in News

Clr Brian Maher Clr Brian Maher

LABOUR councillors have urged residents to help them fight the proposed development of up to 150 homes at Peel Hall.

Clrs John Kerr-Brown, Steve Roberts and Brian Maher have declared themselves ‘totally opposed’ to the development, to be carried out by Satnam, and stressed time is running out to speak out against the plans.

“We objected when Satnam first proposed the idea in 1992 and we fiercely object to this latest planning application” said Clr Kerr-Brown.

Satnam say the development will bring vital investment to the area, but more than 1,000 residents have signed a petition against it.

They believe council approval of the initial 150 houses could lead to thousands being built on the site in the long term.

Clr Kerr-Brown said that the planning application would not go to the council’s development management committee until later this year or early in 2013.

He added: “However, the statutory consultation period ends on October 3 so people need to get their views registered quickly.”

Comments(10)

knighty_night says...
7:17pm Tue 25 Sep 12

well done chaps! good to see you all pulling in the same direction on this. the first councilor looks like he's wearing a toupee though.

Report this post »

jazzy_bum says...
7:21pm Tue 25 Sep 12

i have had dealings with all 3 of these councillors. Mr. roberts is by far the best, a really nice man and always very helpful. the other 2 are a rite pair of plonkers!!!

Report this post »

comwgn says...
8:09pm Tue 25 Sep 12

It would be good if the three labour councillors in Poulton North joined in to stop this development.

So far their suport has been totally lacking.

Report this post »

Billy Lines-Rowlands says...
8:34pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Hi comwgn,

As a Poulton North councillor I'd like to respond to your comment.

1) Graham Friend & Geoff Settle are both on the Planning committee, so they have to limit what they can say.

2) I was at the exhibition that was at St. Bridgets (in Poulton North) and if you were there you would have seen how 'out-spoken' I was and still am about this issue.

3) This issue is not in Poulton North so it is 'manners' to let the councillors who represent the ward where the planning application actually is, to speak first. However yes, this will affect residents in Poulton North, which is why right now I am 100% behind the Poplars & Hulme councillors on this article and pretty soon I will get involved for the residents in Poulton North.

4) This is a very serious issue that will affect so many people, I have received a lot of emails from residents not only in Poulton North but in Poplars & Hulme ward as they saw/heard me speak on the evening of the exibition in St. Bridgets and they are happy that their elected councillors are on the same wave length as them and that we all feel very strong about this issue.

5) There is a lot of work I personally am doing (as the other 2 Poulton North councillors are on planning commitee) to work with residents and to out right campaign against this proposed development.

6) If you are a resident of Poulton North, feel free to contact me as quite soon I will be publicly speaking out and as always the more the merrier.

Speak Soon

Billy

Report this post »

Billy Porter says...
9:41pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Agree with what Billy said (and confirm what he says about St Bridgets).

Think Geoff has stood down from the planning committee on this one.

Get your objections in and let your councillor know how you feel. If you want any tips on what to write, have a look at the Peel Hall thread on the other Warrington site.

Report this post »

Reader says...
10:20pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Are any councillors from other parties in objection or doing anything about it or are they just being quiet in the hope it will get pased so the ruling Labour party will get the back lash ;)

Same goes for the ones openly saying they are opposed (soz) but seen it many times before from others of all parties where they 'seem' to be opposed just to save face and gain 'respect'. Not saying these are it's just a little niggle and wonder thats all.

And if a councillor stands down from his/her role of decision maker on the committee that's just daft as they then can't vote AGAINST an application (if they are really against it) so what's the point in that. It's like bailng out so they can say it was nowt to do with them.

Thought that GS was against it though so why waste a valuable vote which could result in a refusal?

100/1 it will get refused but then go to appeal and be passed ;)

Report this post »

Billy Lines-Rowlands says...
11:17pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Hi Reader,

It's important to understand the planning process and how the planning committee works.

If GS stands down from voting on the planning application then that would be the right thing to do, as he has already spoken out against this development. Voting against it on the committee could result in the developer claiming that the comity is bias (as he has publicly spoken out against it). So it makes sense for GS to stand down from the vote and represent the people who elected him rather than be in a neutral position on the committee. After all, truth is, the planning committee should be neutral as far as residents and developers are concerned. Also, for arguments sake, if Lib Dems were against single story extensions, and you submitted a single story extension application, would you want a Lib Dem elected councillor on the planning committee who has spoken out against single story extensions?

Please don't use this thread to attack GS, as I said earlier this is a serious issue where lots of people will be affected. If you wish to contact me in confidence (as you have used what I hope is a fake name...) and get involved then please do so.

p.s. that 100/1, are you offering those odds or would you prefer those odds??
;)
Billy

Report this post »

Billy Porter says...
12:09am Wed 26 Sep 12

Reader - "100/1 it will get refused but then go to appeal and be passed ;)”

That's a pretty widespread opinion from some I know who have experience of these things. It's all pretty new to me and I'm always inclined to take people at face value.

So, if the planning department are saying they won't recommend it, and councillors are saying they're strongly opposed, how on earth could it get approved?

The only answers I can come up with are either incompetence (such as a planning process which favours developers), or corruption.

I'd be glad to hear of any other ways it could get through though.

Report this post »

grey_man says...
4:53am Wed 26 Sep 12

Billy

Some people in the planing department have lied in the past, possibly to cover up corruption. If you feel generous towards them you could argue they they lied to cover up for incompetence. That's all in the public domain.

Whatever reason you ascribe, the people opposing this development should bear it in mind and not trust anything they are told by the planning department.

Report this post »

Dustin says...
2:29pm Wed 26 Sep 12

grey_man wrote:
Billy

Some people in the planing department have lied in the past, possibly to cover up corruption. If you feel generous towards them you could argue they they lied to cover up for incompetence. That's all in the public domain.

Whatever reason you ascribe, the people opposing this development should bear it in mind and not trust anything they are told by the planning department.
They are still doing it and show no signs of putting a stop to the malpractice, since it is ingrained. Any generosity however well intentioned would therefore be misplaced. My advice would be trust no department and you won't be disappointed.

Report this post »

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