Penwortham Aerial
The masterplan was drawn up by 5plus Architects and Avison Young

Taylor Wimpey forced to redraw Penwortham scheme

Dan Whelan

A masterplan for a 244-acre development site in South Ribble, intended to unlock up to 2,000 homes, has been knocked back by the council. 

South Ribble Council’s planning officers had recommended that the masterplan, drawn up by 5plus Architects and consultancy Avison Young, be deferred at a meeting last week. However, councillors voted to refuse the proposals and called on the developer to return with a more comprehensive proposal. 

One of the main reasons for refusal was officers’ concern over the suitability of the Cross Borough Link Road, a proposed road that forms part of the development plan.

The masterplan is intended to guide future development for the entire site, including land owned by Taylor Wimpey and Homes England, as well as land earmarked for development by third parties that includes provision for a village green, play areas, a local centre, primary school and skills centre.

The site, known locally as Pickering’s Farm, was allocated in 2015 by South Ribble Council as a major location for residential-led development in its Local Plan. The site also forms part of the Central Lancashire City Deal. 

As part of the masterplan site, Taylor Wimpey, in conjunction with Homes England, lodged plans for 1,100 homes on the site – a development known as The Lanes – in February. 

The Lanes is a residential-led mixed use scheme that would comprise a mix of housing, as well as 27,000 sq ft of retail space across 53-acres at Pickering’s Farm. 

The residential offer would include one-, two-, three, four- and five-bedroom homes – a mix of semi-detached and detached properties and apartments. Situated to the west of Penwortham Way, that scheme would also include 35 acres of green space and parks, and a primary school. 

A spokesperson for Taylor Wimpey and Homes England said: “While we are disappointed with the decision to refuse the masterplan for proposed development of The Lanes, we understand the importance of listening to feedback.

“We want to ensure that the proposed masterplan will meet the needs of the local community, and will continue our consultation with South Ribble Council, key stakeholders and local people to achieve this.”

Your Comments

Read our comments policy here

The simple fact is that the road system in South Ribble is totally inadequate for this number of house/vehicles. The lack of investment on improvements to the A562 is a major factor too

By Sully

I wouldn’t mind if builders put any real thought into the design of these properties, the majority of them look like bland rabbit hutches and built so close together you can hear next doors snoring almost even in a detached.. Personally I wouldn’t have one given me.. It’s just a money making venture as per.. They should bring some imagination into their building, there are some beautiful builds up at fulwood with stone inlays, beautiful… Shame that alot of builders are just satisfied with a box!!! I would be embarrassed putting my name to some of these development’s, sad.

By Jean walsh

Should not go head. At eny time. Traffic

By Geoff hanlin

No mention of the 4 story homes that they want to build which is totally out of character. No mention of the fact that there is no bungalows even though we are an aging population. No mention of the additional air pollution which 2000 homes would bring to a road already under AQM. No mention of the fact that a number of Consultee’s concerns are NOT addressed. No mention that if this plan went through the area would be a building site for some 15-20 yrs with no commitment for the CBLR or railway bridge to be completed, before completion of homes. Tt’s taken 15 years to get to this stage and it is still not fir for purpose. HE & TW need to let people get on with their lives in peace. This is not for local need as stated at the planning meeting SR has a 10 year housing supply. SR do not need further characterless developments where the children have to play under pylons. Have the developers not heard of climate change and the damage being done to our planet and our wildlife. This is wholly inappropriate use of green fields.

By Jean Berry

I don’t know the area but on the main picture above it looks like a beautiful lot of countryside is going to be lost . Any housing on greenbelt should NOT be allowed. There is plenty of brownfield sites all around the northwest.

By Darren born bred.

There has been no consultation through this whole project. Presentations to the public, locals TOLD what is going to happen, comments against the development [disregarded], TW and council saying it’s happening – get used to it – yes that’s all happened. The residents who currently live in this area don’t even warrant a mention in their ridiculous masterplan. Apparently they are just supposed to accept that their homes will be surrounded by over 2000 houses! We don’t don’t need parks and green spaces – we already have it and it is regularly used by many people in Lostock Hall and Penwortham. Most of the green space/play area they claim they’ll include is under pylons! Please don’t insult us that this is about providing homes for locals etc etc because it isn’t. TW even protested about including ‘affordable’ homes because of the cost. This is purely about profit, nothing more and nothing less. They will bury this beautiful area under bricks and concrete destroying trees, hedgerows, wildlife and then move on. We don’t need your tacky, shoddy, over priced ‘houses’, we have a community and a beautiful green space for everyone to enjoy. Just take your Masterplan and put it where the sun don’t shine !

By Caz Kay

I believe this master build development by taylor whimpy is a must for UK construction and for mixed houses and shops and parks. I am sure any issues can be resolved mutually. Britain needs to make progress and these times are right to make the progress.

By Chandar Khorana

More green space lost . More traffic . More pollution,, NO Thank you

By Christine benson

The road network in South Ribble is appalling in Lostock Hall / Bamber Bridge. This would have compounded terrible congestion. A lack of coordination between Lancashire County Council and South Ribble Council doesn’t help.
The issues of Leyland Road and Bee Lane need to be addressed.

By Katie

Will they ever do anything this century

By Buck

So glad this plan got rejected. The local infrastructure is already under strain, not to mention the environmental impacts of such a significant development, the plan suggested moving or replacing an orchard that is over 150 years old…then there’s the detrimental health consequences that will result from increased traffic flows and standing traffic.
There was also questions raised about the financial sustainability of the plan which could have resulted in significant costs being incurred by SRBC

By elaine robb

Plenty of land in the area has already been granted planning permission, from what I’ve read. But, I suspect, it’s more profitable for the developer to build the biggest estate they possibly can.
A 2,000 property estate in this particular area is excessive. The real people to benefit from this development would probably not be local people, as much as the developers themselves.

This would be another Buckshaw Village size development, but it isn’t a Brownfield site, as Buckshaw was.

It’s harmful to two existing suburban communities to squeeze a huge estate of this type into the last remaining area of countryside lanes, fields, trees, hedges and precious wildlife that forms an important green buffer between them.

I don’t think local people have been adequately consulted.

By Bridget Murphy

The whole concept of a Masterplan on a Moss and prime agricultural land was woefully inadequate. There are major concerns around flooding, access, public transport, roads, service, destruction of hundreds – if not thousands – of meters of ancient hedgerows, trees and orchard.
There is no real necessity for a scheme of this size and makeup in this area on this land. End of.

By Lindsay Catterall