Gladman and Lancaster prepare to lock horns over 644-home plan
The developer and city council will go head-to-head at inquiry next month to fight for and against a 97-acre housing development.
Lancaster City Council refused Gladman Developments permission for a 644-home development on land north-east of Bailrigg Lane last December.
The authority had concerns around infrastructure provision in relation to highways safety, the quality of the scheme’s design, the potential for shadow flicker from a nearby wind turbine, and flooding.
Gladman refutes the reasons for refusal and argues that the scheme should be approved given Lancaster’s housing supply position.
The city council acknowledges it can only demonstrate a 2.5 year supply of homes – the government requires local authorities to have a five-year supply – a fact that could prove crucial when the Planning Inspectorate makes its judgement on the scheme.
The inquiry will begin on 15 October. For more information on the housing project and the plans for a link road that were also rejected, search for application reference numbers 19/01135/OUT and 19/01137/FUL on Lancaster City Council’s planning portal.
Lancaster successfully defended itself at appeal earlier this year. Oakmere Homes sought to overturn refusal of a 129-home project in Morecambe but the Planning Inspectorate sided with the council.
No configuration of the motorway exit, Galgate will be gridlocked, no extra school places , no Dr’s, dentists, the RLI Casualty is already a nightmare and there’s no inpatient beds to cope,flats and houses should not be built on green spaces until all other empty buildings and derelict spaces are used , of which Lancaster has many.
By Anonymous
Good luck Gladman, its about time councils stopped doing everything they can to stop houses being built!
By Anonymous
644 homes with at least twice as many people…..how can our inadequate NHS cope? We meed population slow down not increase.
By Anonymous
Need to build a new hospital first in the Lancaster area, before more plans to build houses.
By Anonymous
It’s absurd to keep using green belt land to build houses on – there should be priority given to building on reclaimed brown field sites .
After all isn’t it just about house builders making money , and the Labour Government are just complying with this to build more and more houses everywhere . As has previously been said the local infrastructures are seriously overloaded and can’t cope with the existing population. So to add potentially another 1500- 2000 people in the local area – it’s just not feasible for the existing residents well-being !!!!
By NWJ
NWJ and other commenters may like to point to where all these oven ready brownfield , empty and gap sites are? Also …this isn’t Green Belt anyway. It’s a green field site within the designated urban area. Unbelievable as it may seem, the majority of houses built in this country were done on the basis that the developer makes a profit. Probably a stunning revelation to NWJ, but true nonetheless. Like it or not, services come after houses…that’s the way we’ve decided to do things in this country. I’m sure when the existing residents’ houses were built the same concerns applied…miraculously everything worked out and the area is populated. A 2.5 year housing supply is grim, constantly missing targets …so the authority needs to get its act together. Hardly think the problems in the NHS can be related to “overpopulation” …it was working perfectly fine 15 years ago. Can’t quite recall what happened to ruin it…
By Sceptic
The Bailrigg ‘village’ idea has been around for decades essentially linking Lancaster, university and Galgate into one linear town. Further south on the A6 you can now find ongoing house construction in every area adjacent to the road all the way to Preston The problem with all these developments is in the inevitable rise in the use of cars at a time when we need to encourage other means of getting about. In Forton people are finding ‘rat runs’ on country roads and yet even more houses are under construction. New ‘affordable’ houses are needed but enabling infrastructure should be put in place before any more are built. Efficient and affordable (preferably free) public transport is a must to avoid inevitable accidents on the main road junctions and all the adjacent country roads
By Neil wigglesworth
The NIMBYs out in force in these comments as per usual. Well said Sceptic.
By Anonymous
Council once again bowing to pressure from self-apppointed busybodies with too much time on their hands
By Anonymous
Great response @Sceptic – although possibly not on board re: 15yr NHS comment!
Nevertheless, goodluck to Gladman, this site has been floating around for over a decade with little progress. Council has failed in it’s obligation to meet the necessary MINIMUM housing targets. Shops, doctors, dentists won’t get built without a demand for them!
By Deja
When will the “anonymous” get their head around the fact that the NHS and Education Authorities have access to population statistics and housing requirements for every local authority. There is a genuine need for housing in this country, why don’t you campaign for them all equally.
By Mr N Imby
Lots of people seem to be labouring under the illusion that housing creates people. Its not how i was taught babies are born. These people exist already, just in unsuitable housing. More housing being built means more people contributing to the delivery of local services through taxation, quite the opposite of the tired NIMBY cliche being trotted out here.
By YIMBY
It’s not nimbyism to have common sense and see what a disaster this will be if it goes ahead , there’s already too much building going ahead or planned in Lancaster and surrounding areas without any infrastructure. It’s too late once they are built the local people suffer. Have the people wishing Gladman well ever been unfortunate enough to be needing help in Casualty or trying to get a Dr’s appointment? It’s nearly impossible without a long wait. This will increase substantially in future.
By Anonymous
I’ve not suffered from the large housing development that has been built near me, if anything the complete opposite is true. Businesses have invested in the area, the highway junction has improved, we have better connectivity and walking routes and the value of my house has increased by 53% in the five years since the development started. Don’t believe all the NIMBY rubbish.
By Anonymous
I grew up on Reading and witnessed the largest private housing estate being built within a mile of my home. Since then all the countryside north of the M4 has been filled in all the way to Bracknell and building on the south of the motorway has accelerated (it was promised that no houses would be built here originally). The upshot of all this building was oversubscribed schools and doctors, unbearable traffic congestion and overcrowded public transport – to name but a few issues. Be careful what you wish for … Also, there were of plenty well-paid jobs in the South East, but where are the residents of this new housing going to work?
By Fed up of building
Can’t believe they want to put the road into this development at the top of Hala Hill,this will become a accident blackspot. Anybody who uses this road round this time of year struggle with low setting sun causing really bad visibility and the same early morning.
By Anonymous
Gladman homes, is owned by Barratt homes!!!!!
Look on companies house, to find out for yourself!!!!
By Anonymous
@3:25 pm By Anonymous – it would be helpful if such claims are backed up by evidence and statistics. Is it REALLY ‘nearly impossible’? Or is that just your perception/what you’ve read somewhere? How many people who attend Dr’s and A+E could help cut waiting times by seeking advice from pharmacists, or minor injury units for symptoms that possibly don’t justify emergency attention.
My personal experience has been positive. With my small children I’ve unfortunately had to rely on the NHS services a few times over the years and where there has been a genuine emergency, it has been dealt with more than adequately…. don’t believe everything you read in the papers.
By Deja