Posted by 
A plan for business units on a Longridge farm site in the Ribble Valley ha
s been described as over-development, not needed, visually unattractive and being ‘fanciful’ in claiming similarities with a previous but different proposal.
Applicant David Holmes of Ribble Valley Properties Ltd wants permission to build 34 units, battery storage and maintenance units, car parking and road access at Higher College Farm on Lower Road, Longridge.
It has prompted 29 objection letters to Ribble Valley Council plus objections from a parish council. However, 21 letters of support have been sent, citing benefits to the local economy and job opportunities.
Mr Holmes’ address is given as the same location in his application to Ribble Valley Borough Council. He is working with agent Michael Sproston of Preston-based PWA Planning. The site is earmarked for employment and described in a borough council report as being associated with the former farm.
But the plan has prompted many objections from Hothersall Parish Council. These include the number of units proposed, ‘shed’ designs rather than architecture reflecting local stone buildings and queries about the economic need for the development locally.
According to Ribble Valley planning report, Hothersall Parish Council has stated: “The key to the developer’s new application can be found in the planning statement. It is a desire to substitute a cheaper alternative than the one already approved that is behind this application. A shrunken portion of the site is now to have higher-density, cheaper, uniform, windowless units in place of the previously approved proposal. ”
The parish council adds: ” The planning statement claim that the current application is ‘broadly the same as the approved scheme’ is fanciful. The previous application accommodated 40 units, of varying sizes, over an area of 5,265 sq metre. The current proposal will provide 40 units over little more than half that size, 2,788 sq metres, greatly increasing the density.
“In the proposal already approved, the units were varied in size and outlook to accommodate a wide range of business uses. Given that the site has been designated for employment and is a speculative development, it made sense to have a variety of premises.
“However, the new planning statement while referring to the need for flexibility, contradicts itself where it justifies the units’ uniformity with a claim that each unit is to be utilised for the same purpose.”
The parish council also says that because the site’s location is in the countryside, within Hothersall rather than Longridge itself, development are required to be essential to the local economy. The parish acknowledges the land is zoned for employment but can find no evidence that a business needs survey has been done by the applicant.
The parish council adds: “While understanding the principle of business confidentiality, the parish council has been given assurances of need in the past which turned out to be fictitious. We are therefore sceptical of the need for 40 units ‘to be utilised for the same purpose’.”
However, Ribble Valley Council planning officers are recommending councillors to approve the plan with conditions. They say it will not result in any significant adverse impacts nor any significant measurable conflicts with the aims of the Ribble Valley core strategy to justify refusal.
