Planning Applications

[park381]

Originally Posted by katex

The 1989 one is for 172, Blackburn Road, Accrington, not Oswaldtwistle..LOL.
See the applicant on the others ... Kirkhams for their coaches.

Must get glasses changed.

It would seem that there is no application for the current project at 172 then

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by katex

FTAO Jaysay re Enforcement Notices.
Looks like this guy will have no extension when he returns from abroad.
An Enforcement notice has been issued.

http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloa...aldtwistle.pdf

Can't open the link Kate ain't got the program its written in

[park381]

Love it, look at the white lines for vehicle parking, think they have made a good job of it.

[katex]

Originally Posted by park381

Must get glasses changed.

It would seem that there is no application for the current project at 172 then

Looks that way.

Can you take a look at this, Park, have they completely withdrawn their plans (see decisions) or maybe drawing up new ones do you think due to its proximity to the culvert ? Didn't appear to be any further correspondense after the Surveyor questioned the Environmental Agency on the run of the culvert.

Application No:11/11/0147Registration Date:15 Apr 2011Location:BRIDGE INN 135 HENRY STREET CHURCH ACCRINGTON BB5 4EPDevelopment:PROPOSED FRONT AND REAR SINGLE STOREY EXTENSIONS AND SIDE TWO STOREY EXTENSION TOGETHER WITH BOUNDARY CHANGES

Case File

[MargaretR]

I drove past the Bridge Inn Church on wednesday.
I noticed some building happening at the front.
I didn't take a good look because I was driving but got the impression of a wall under construction.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by katex

Looks that way.

Can you take a look at this, Park, have they completely withdrawn their plans (see decisions) or maybe drawing up new ones do you think due to its proximity to the culvert ? Didn't appear to be any further correspondense after the Surveyor questioned the Environmental Agency on the run of the culvert.

Application No:11/11/0147Registration Date:15 Apr 2011Location:BRIDGE INN 135 HENRY STREET CHURCH ACCRINGTON BB5 4EPDevelopment:PROPOSED FRONT AND REAR SINGLE STOREY EXTENSIONS AND SIDE TWO STOREY EXTENSION TOGETHER WITH BOUNDARY CHANGES

Case File

its a bit of a balls up kate, the culvert was not running were the authoritys said it did. this was proved by a dig, at the owners request.

[katex]

Originally Posted by cashman

its a bit of a balls up kate, the culvert was not running were the authoritys said it did. this was proved by a dig, at the owners request.

Thanks, Cashy, was looking that way ... so why has the application been withdrawn do you think ?

[cashman]

Originally Posted by katex

Thanks, Cashy, was looking that way ... so why has the application been withdrawn do you think ?

as far as i know, been a change of plan/tactic, due to extra costs incurred.

[katex]

Originally Posted by cashman

as far as i know, been a change of plan/tactic, due to extra costs incurred.

Yeh, thought that may have been the case as they are too committed to back out of improvements now I suppose, having already started work on it. Shame, particularly as it looks like their Surveyor was correct in the first place re. the culvert.. made interesting reading though.

[park381]

Originally Posted by katex

Yeh, thought that may have been the case as they are too committed to back out of improvements now I suppose, having already started work on it. Shame, particularly as it looks like their Surveyor was correct in the first place re. the culvert.. made interesting reading though.

See Agent's letter and EA's letter, the line of the rear extension still falls within the 8m distance of the culvert, even after correct line of culvert established.

[katex]

Originally Posted by park381

See Agent's letter and EA's letter, the line of the rear extension still falls within the 8m distance of the culvert, even after correct line of culvert established.

Yes, read them a few times. Just a gap between the Surveyor asking the EA to withdraw their objection as access to the culvert was still possible even though some of the building would be within 8 metres ... but looked like extra cost may have been involved by the Bridge Inn ?

Loved the bit re. the trees and the Surveyor pointed out that trees had already been planted over the culvert at some stage .. I'm easily amused.

[park381]

Originally Posted by katex

Yes, read them a few times. Just a gap between the Surveyor asking the EA to withdraw their objection as access to the culvert was still possible even though some of the building would be within 8 metres ... but looked like extra cost may have been involved by the Bridge Inn ?

Loved the bit re. the trees and the Surveyor pointed out that trees had already been planted over the culvert at some stage .. I'm easily amused.

Possible new application with layout alterations to keep building line clear of the culvert. Same old problem with the trees, rules change and what is built is not always as per approved plans, once an application is passed the planning have no more involvement it's down to building control.........unless there is a complaint

[Tealeaf]

It looks like an area around India Street and China Street is going to become Alley Gated.

Case File

I can't see in the planning docs

a) What is the cost?

b) Is this part of the Elevate scheme?

c) If not, why has this site been chosen as against others?

d) If successful, is funding in place to extend the scheme?

[katex]

Thanks, Tealeaf, noticed this in applications for Blackburn and Darwen the other week. Lot of reading in there from other councils' experiences, but interesting nevertheless.

The main statement is :

'Helping to reduce crime, fear of crime and nuisance in Lancashire'

Is this a bad area then for back alley crime ?

The applicant is HBC, but doesn't, obviously, state where funding is coming from. Could well be part of some scheme on crime prevention or summat ?

[katex]

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

c) If not, why has this site been chosen as against others?

Reading a little more, does appear that residents have to apply in the first instance.

This is an interesting development for Hyndburn.