URL: https://democracy.ribblevalley.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=1516

Decision Maker: Planning and Development

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose:

Content: RESOLVED THAT COMMITTEE:   REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION for the following reasons:   1.         The proposed development would result in large scale residential development in an unsustainable location which would fail to provide satisfactory opportunities for walking, cycling and public transport leading to a dependence upon private motor vehicles contrary to Key Statement DMI2 and Policies DMG1, DMG3 of the Ribble Valley Core Strategy 2008 -2028 as well as the National Planning Policy Framework which supports sustainable patterns of development.   2.         The proposed development, by virtue of its overall scale and resultant loss and reduction of hedgerow adjacent to the road frontage would result in the introduction of an incongruous, unsympathetic, and discordant form of development, of an overtly suburban appearance, particularly when viewed from public vantage points along Longsight Road (A59) when approaching the site from both the western and eastern directions and from Public Footpaths FP0304060, FP0304061, FP0304062, FP0304063 and FP0304064 which cross the site. This would result in adverse long-terms and permanent visual and landscape harm. The resultant impact fails to respond positively to the inherent visual character of the area contrary to Policies DMG1, DMG2, DME2 and DMB5 of the Ribble Valley Core Strategy 2008 – 2028.   3.         The proposal fails to demonstrate that would not result in harm to protected species as outlined in the submitted Ecology Report. In particular there are concerns about outstanding bat activity surveys and that the submitted certificate (DLL) for Great Crested Newts relates to a different type of development. Therefore, the proposal fails to demonstrate that it would adequately protect and enhance protected species and habitat on the site contrary to Key Statement EN4 and policy DME3 of the Ribble Valley Core Strategy 2008 -2028 as well as the National Planning Policy Framework.   4.         The proposed development would result in the loss of existing habitat, hedgerow and watercourse units, with insufficient details being submitted to demonstrate an appropriate strategy for achieving the statutory requirement for Biodiversity Net Gain contrary to Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (inserted by the Environment Act 2021) can be achieved.   5.         The proposal fails to demonstrate that the proposed site access arrangements are safe and suitable to serve the development as such there are highway safety concerns contrary to Policy DMG1 of the Ribble Valley Core Strategy 2008 - 2028 as well as the National Planning Policy Framework.   6.         The proposal fails to demonstrate that the proposed site can provide appropriate drainage within the site that would ensure that the proposal does not result in flooding on or off the site contrary to Policy DME6 of the Ribble Valley Core Strategy 2008 – 2028 as well as the National Planning Policy Framework.   7.         The proposal fails to demonstrate that future occupants of the proposed development would not be subject to unacceptable noise levels contrary to Policy DMG1 of the Ribble Valley Core Strategy 2008 – 2028 as well as the National Planning Policy Framework.  

Date of Decision: July 23, 2026