Planning Applications

katex said:
Eeew .... lookee, Park :

Application No:11/11/0313Registration Date:13 Jul 2011Location:22 HASLINGDEN OLD ROAD BLACKBURN BB1 2DY Development:Householder: Single storey rear extension (retrospective)

Case File
Click to expand...

That is a laugh (retrospective), the brickwork on the kitchen extension is up to roof level. I would put a stop on the whole project and make them take it all down including the detached single storey building, and the entrance walls, nothing like the drawings that were approved. Some people think they can do as they please :eek: It is a question of how strong Hyndburn's development control and enforcement section are.
If the property owners are not made to pull it down then, I see no need for a planning department at all, let people build what they want where they want
 
So, what have we got lately .. not a lot.

Slight amendment to Owl Hall plans:

Application No:11/11/0353Registration Date:11 Aug 2011Location:OWL HALL PLANTATION ROAD ACCRINGTON BB5 2DQ Development:ERECTION OF TWO NO DWELLINGS AND SUB-DIVISION OF OWL HALL. (RESULTING IN NO INCREASE IN HOUSE NUMBERS AS APPROVED UNDER PLANNING APPLICATION 11/08/0390

Case File

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

St. Christophers 2 (!) 6 A side football pitches ... what happened to Netball courts ??? :(

Application No:11/11/0344Registration Date:05 Aug 2011Location:ST CHRISTOPHERS C E HIGH SCHOOL QUEENS ROAD WEST ACCRINGTON LANCS BB5 4AY Development:CREATION OF 3G SURFACE 6 A-SIDE PITCHES AND EXTENSION TO CAR PARK INCLUDING EXTERNAL WORKS AND ASSOCIATED LIGHTING

Case File

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Alley Gates got passed .. will now open the Flood Gates :

http://planning.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/W...e1&contentType=application/msword&pageCount=1

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

A refusal .. suppose was bound to happen being the oldest known property in Accrington :

http://planning.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/W...e1&contentType=application/msword&pageCount=1
 
katex said:
So, what have we got lately .. not a lot.

Slight amendment to Owl Hall plans:

Application No:11/11/0353Registration Date:11 Aug 2011Location:OWL HALL PLANTATION ROAD ACCRINGTON BB5 2DQ Development:ERECTION OF TWO NO DWELLINGS AND SUB-DIVISION OF OWL HALL. (RESULTING IN NO INCREASE IN HOUSE NUMBERS AS APPROVED UNDER PLANNING APPLICATION 11/08/0390

Case File

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

St. Christophers 2 (!) 6 A side football pitches ... what happened to Netball courts ??? :(

Application No:11/11/0344Registration Date:05 Aug 2011Location:ST CHRISTOPHERS C E HIGH SCHOOL QUEENS ROAD WEST ACCRINGTON LANCS BB5 4AY Development:CREATION OF 3G SURFACE 6 A-SIDE PITCHES AND EXTENSION TO CAR PARK INCLUDING EXTERNAL WORKS AND ASSOCIATED LIGHTING

Case File

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Alley Gates got passed .. will now open the Flood Gates :

http://planning.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/W...e1&contentType=application/msword&pageCount=1

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

A refusal .. suppose was bound to happen being the oldest known property in Accrington :

http://planning.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/W...e1&contentType=application/msword&pageCount=1
Click to expand...
The chap who applied for this is a friend of mine and even if he wasnt the decision stinks , the cottages are the oldest listed buildings in in accrington but they have all been extended several times . The extension they wanted would not be seen by anybody other than the householders themselves , the conservation officer got a bee in his bonnet about the extension covering an original window.The window was not being altered covered or removed but he was of the opinion that it was detrimental to the simple linear line of the building which has about five additions on it already.I dont get it its 2011 not 1628 people have to live in these buildings and modern life is different. Anyway rant over sorry:(
 
S'okay for your rant, Walkinman, did feel slightly sympathetic to this myself, I know extensions have to fit in with surrounding, etc., but feel it was more of a political decision.

Couldn't really see what harm it was doing, like you say, particularly as similar to what has been passed before.

I love our old buildings, but sometimes they have to move on.
 
Quite a large proposed development this :

Application No:11/11/0395Registration Date:20 Sep 2011Location:HAMBLEDON MILL MARLBOROUGH ROAD ACCRINGTON LANCSDevelopment:Major outline application: Proposed mixed use development comprising employment and residential development and demolition of existing buildings

Case File
 
A resubmission here after the first PA was rejected :

Application No:11/11/0428Registration Date:04 Oct 2011Location:THOMPSON COURT, OFF BANK STREET, ACCRINGTONDevelopment:ERECTION OF FOUR DWELLINGS (RESUBMISSION)

Case File
 
katex said:
A resubmission here after the first PA was rejected :

Application No:11/11/0428Registration Date:04 Oct 2011Location:THOMPSON COURT, OFF BANK STREET, ACCRINGTONDevelopment:ERECTION OF FOUR DWELLINGS (RESUBMISSION)

Case File
Click to expand...

This is a very strange one. No-one can believe how anyone in their right mind would want to build properties in this area of town, BUT, its supposed to be part of the Town Conservation Area, so how can this be? At the moment, the only access would be up the back alley by what used to be THE LUCKY SHOE SHOP. The people in the vacinity want help by members of the public to STOP this and are asking folk to go up to the Planning Office and make an objection, or at least ask to see the plans!
 
Here is a view of the old property in question
 

Attachments

  • Thompsons Court rear of Warner Street and Bank Street.jpg
    Thompsons Court rear of Warner Street and Bank Street.jpg
    504.4 KB · Views: 27
Atarah said:
This is a very strange one. No-one can believe how anyone in their right mind would want to build properties in this area of town, BUT, its supposed to be part of the Town Conservation Area, so how can this be? At the moment, the only access would be up the back alley by what used to be THE LUCKY SHOE SHOP. The people in the vacinity want help by members of the public to STOP this and are asking folk to go up to the Planning Office and make an objection, or at least ask to see the plans!
Click to expand...
The plans can be seen from the link Katex posted
http://planning.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/W...lume1&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1

Why do you object to development of a brownfield site?
Whatever is built there wont be visible from Bank St.
 
But this is a "re submission" - they were NOT given planning permission before, now new plans mentioning 3 storey buildings have materialised. This has been a quiet "back water" for goodness knows how many years. How would you like that facing your windows? Am only trying to get support for a friend of mine.
 
I agree that three storeys may well be inappropriate.
I agree that the photo of dereliction you posted is not a good view either.
 
Atarah said:
But this is a "re submission" - they were NOT given planning permission before, now new plans mentioning 3 storey buildings have materialised. This has been a quiet "back water" for goodness knows how many years. How would you like that facing your windows? Am only trying to get support for a friend of mine.
Click to expand...
Show your friend the design statement, Atarah ... only 2-story buildings.
Shows old documents too which is really interesting.

http://planning.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/W...lume1&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1
 
Hi Katex, the old documents on this particular plan are more than interesting, they are FASCINATING. I really need to be able to look at plan 11/11/0428 in connection with this property. Would you be able to help me find that one please?
 
The one I have put up is application no. 11/11/0428. Just hit the wording 'Case File' ... it is all there. Here it is again anyway.

Case File

Go into the ones headed CAD drawing .. shows the plans of the proposed development.
 
sorry, the posting 773 which I looked at this morning said 427, so thats all I saw. (sorry, hadnt looked at posting 767) my mistake.
Have been to see the person today who is "battling" with this, all very upsetting for them.
 
Atarah said:
At the moment, the only access would be up the back alley by what used to be THE LUCKY SHOE SHOP.
Click to expand...

They are making Nos 29 and 31 Bank street into 1 and making the back ally wider.




Atarah said:
.....Have been to see the person today who is "battling" with this, all very upsetting for them.
Click to expand...

Why dont they want this if it will get rid of that eyesore in the picture?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top