Peel developers hit out (From Warrington Guardian)
Text us your news! Start your message Warrington News and send any photos or videos to 80360
Peel developers hit out
7:00am Wednesday 17th October 2012 in News
DEVELOPERS behind plans to build homes on Peel Hall have voiced their disappointment at no talks with politicians opposed to their scheme.
Satnam Millennium has put forward a planning application to build up to 150 homes on the site off Mill Lane and addressed members of Winwick Parish Council.
But the company says it also wanted to talk to councillors from Poulton North and Warrington North MP Helen Jones, who are all opposed to the plans.
Colin Griffiths of Satnam said: “We are disappointed that the local ward councillors and Helen Jones MP, despite their opposition to these plans, have refused to engage with us. We are committed to working with all interested parties on this development to ensure that the best possible scheme is delivered.
“Our open invitation for them to meet with us and discuss their issues and concerns still stands.”
Satnam will invest more than £1million on the playing fields at Windermere Avenue working with Winwick Athletic Football Club should the plans be approved.
Mr Griffiths added: “We were grateful for the opportunity to present our proposals to the parish council and we hope that we were able to address some of their concerns, such as the status of the site.
“Some members of the council seemed to be under the impression that the site is in the green belt, which it is not nor has it ever been. We were also able to answer other questions such as those on the provision of affordable housing and how the local highways network will cope with the development.”
Comments(27)
grey_man
says...
9:17am Wed 17 Oct 12
If they want to talk to an MP, couldn't they discuss it with their own in Cheltenham? His name is Martin Horwood.
Reader
says...
9:33am Wed 17 Oct 12
ent control members base their decisions on the applicants formally submitted application and supporting documentation. Presumably if they meet with the developers for private chats that 'could' mean they have to disclose some sort of interest and loose their vote at decision time. There's more than enough info in the application docs so what's the point in private chats and answers which others will not hear? It should all be done in writing and added to the application file..... open and transparent !!
Nick Tessla
says...
11:50am Wed 17 Oct 12
Reader wrote:I would have thought that Councillors Settle and Lines-Rowland have aleady shown "some sort of interest" in their actions and statements they have (quite rightly) made. I am no fan of Councillor Settle but I applaud him in his activities on this issue.
Councillors/developm ent control members base their decisions on the applicants formally submitted application and supporting documentation. Presumably if they meet with the developers for private chats that 'could' mean they have to disclose some sort of interest and loose their vote at decision time. There's more than enough info in the application docs so what's the point in private chats and answers which others will not hear? It should all be done in writing and added to the application file..... open and transparent !!
I would have thought that a meeting would strenghten the position of the two councillors as it shows a willingness to listen to both sides and make an informed decision.
I certainly so no reason why the MP could not hold a meeting as it is an issue which is of such concern to her constituents.
Gorsedd
says...
11:54am Wed 17 Oct 12
grey_man
says...
12:02pm Wed 17 Oct 12
It's also worth bearing in mind that the Director of Environment and Regeneration at WBC is Andy Farrall who has a very colourful track record that includes waving through the development of a large industrial plant while working at Chester without any planning permission or environmental certification. Not to mention the various debacles he is associated with at WBC.
This isn't a fair fight to begin with. So I couldn't give a stuff if our councillors and MP don't fall for Satnam given the sneaky way they have started to sell this project. But that is up to them.
hillbilly 73
says...
12:48pm Wed 17 Oct 12
Nick Tessla
says...
1:12pm Wed 17 Oct 12
hillbilly 73 wrote:?
i live on the grasmear - greenwood estate, and my problem with this devlopment is the fact that ( than £1million on the playing fields at Windermere Avenue working with Winwick Athletic Football Club should the plans be approved. ) when has wickwick been apart of the grasmear - greenwood estate, what about the locals and i do belive the feilds are own by the council
gazhopley
says...
1:23pm Wed 17 Oct 12
I have spoken to someone in the planning department. do you know why all this is happening with winwick athletic? when the applications were being written, They couldn't find what parish our area is actually in so they "guessed" and if you google "winwick sports club" guess what comes up first? Final note to Satnam who if they have a half decent P.R dept. they will be reading these. "Usually when making these applications, sweeteners are really common, but you could have at least tried to make a sweetener that worked, Instead all you have done is angered the locals even more. Now that's what I call a "Wicked Backfire"
Richard Nixon
says...
1:39pm Wed 17 Oct 12
grey_man
says...
1:47pm Wed 17 Oct 12
Farrall must be nostalgic for the heady days when he could just wave through industrial plants with no permission and his appearances in the High Court as a result. He must have been horrified when the people of Warrington first stood up to his attempts to give away Walton Hall to a developer based on fictitious accounts.
grey_man
says...
1:48pm Wed 17 Oct 12
Richard Nixon wrote:And their decision will be based on information supplied by a department with a proven track record of misinforming them.
The Councils Development Management Committee will decide. This committee is made up solely of elected Cllrs. The power is vested with them to make the decision. End of story.
Geoff Settle
says...
3:43pm Wed 17 Oct 12
For anyone wanting to read more about the outline planning application they can go on the WBC planning web site and search for 2012/20610 or go on the Facebook site 'Fight Against Peel Hall Development'
grey_man
says...
3:54pm Wed 17 Oct 12
Geoff Settle
says...
4:32pm Wed 17 Oct 12
blueted
says...
5:32pm Wed 17 Oct 12
old-codger
says...
6:48pm Wed 17 Oct 12
What part of NO dont you understand, Is it the N or is it the O or maybe you cant put two letters together to make a word that you dont want to hear. Satnam Millennium is not entitled to instruct the council where they want to build, The local residents dont want you. So take a hike..
D-Unit
says...
7:07pm Wed 17 Oct 12
Eyerate
says...
7:09pm Wed 17 Oct 12
Eyerate
says...
7:22pm Wed 17 Oct 12
grey_man wrote:I have seen stuff that tells us they are still doing what they have always done, and your mate too. Like leopards and spots and all that sort of thing, they won't change until they are told to shove off. Old habits die hard.”
Richard Nixon wrote:And their decision will be based on information supplied by a department with a proven track record of misinforming them.
The Councils Development Management Committee will decide. This committee is made up solely of elected Cllrs. The power is vested with them to make the decision. End of story.
Mr Grey
says...
9:54pm Wed 17 Oct 12
Geoff Settle
says...
10:14pm Wed 17 Oct 12
“Some members of the council seemed to be under the impression that the site is in the green belt, which it is not nor has it ever been. We were also able to answer other questions such as those on the provision of affordable housing and how the local highways network will cope with the development.”
It was deemed a Greenbelt twelve years ago until it went to the high court and was judged to be a 'Green Field' site.
A green field site still has greater protection than brown field sites when it comes to development.
I don't know of anyone on the council who still thinks that the land is a Greenbelt. That dream was shattered 12 years ago?
Are Satnam saying that they know more about our roads than our Highways Department, especially as the local residents are fed up to the back teeth with the amount of traffic and bottle necks on the roads surrounding the proposed development?
Geoff Settle
says...
10:14pm Wed 17 Oct 12
“Some members of the council seemed to be under the impression that the site is in the green belt, which it is not nor has it ever been. We were also able to answer other questions such as those on the provision of affordable housing and how the local highways network will cope with the development.”
It was deemed a Greenbelt twelve years ago until it went to the high court and was judged to be a 'Green Field' site.
A green field site still has greater protection than brown field sites when it comes to development.
I don't know of anyone on the council who still thinks that the land is a Greenbelt. That dream was shattered 12 years ago?
Are Satnam saying that they know more about our roads than our Highways Department, especially as the local residents are fed up to the back teeth with the amount of traffic and bottle necks on the roads surrounding the proposed development?
Geoff Settle
says...
9:01am Thu 18 Oct 12
Mr Grey wrote:Mr Grey highlights another area of concern - outside bodies attempting to dictate local policy potentially using oustide labour and leaving if approved with a legacy of costs to be born by local people in order for an outside football team to use. I wonder what other gems this grey insider has to offer.
The £1 million plus investment sweetener from Satnam probably also needs a little more scrutiny. The project cost may well in in excess of £1m, but the value of the resource will be a fraction of the total project cost, and here's why. Consultancy, manpower, tools and materials will eat into the budget, most of this going to companies outside of Warrington, so nothing for the locals. If built the facility will probably have a true value of less than 10% of the budget. If built, it would be handed over to WBC, who will then need to pay for all maintenance for many many years to come. So not really a sweetener more of a sour taste!
SickAndTired2
says...
1:14pm Thu 18 Oct 12
No you're committed to grabbing as much land as you can, despite what the people of this town want so that you can line your fat greedy self serving pockets.
Tell you what Colin Griffiths, go and take your plans with you to the toilet and use them to wipe you backside with.
Paul Kennedy
says...
3:39pm Thu 18 Oct 12
Richard Nixon wrote:Not quite, the applicants can Appeal a refusal to the Planning Inspectorate.
The Councils Development Management Committee will decide. This committee is made up solely of elected Cllrs. The power is vested with them to make the decision. End of story.
Geoff Settle
says...
5:11pm Fri 19 Oct 12
Paul Kennedy wrote:Quite true Paul so if any refusal is put forward it will have to stand up to scrutiny from the Planning Inspectorate otherwise it could get quite expensive.
Richard Nixon wrote:Not quite, the applicants can Appeal a refusal to the Planning Inspectorate.
The Councils Development Management Committee will decide. This committee is made up solely of elected Cllrs. The power is vested with them to make the decision. End of story.
I wonder what Prince Charles would make of the property design, location and impact. Maybe somebody could run the plans by him when they next meet up for a game of Polo?
Geoff Settle says...
8:59am Wed 17 Oct 12
However Cllr Billy Line-Rowlands did attend and their marketing compnay based in Manchester kindly sent me copies of their material which I have put up in the Cinnamon Brow Farm Community Centre windows for all to see.
I also seem to have missed the presentation at the Poulton with Fearnhead Parish Council meeting that is referred to in the article, can the Guardian reporter tell me when it took place please?