The planning application submitted by Wainhomes Limited is not acceptable and should be refused in its present form for the following reasons:

1- The current issues with flooding and drainage and the Victorian sewers and pipework could not support such a large development.
2.The three storey style flats / apartment
s proposed are not in keeping with the area, there are no other three storey buildings in the vicinity , therefore , not in keeping with the local area and will be visable from Churchtown Conservation area

3. The local schools are already full and cannot take any further children

4. The development is so large that it will start in Churchtown and end up in Crossens,also that the building of 200 homes only 32 of them affordable, in Churchtown and encroaching into Crossens is against the policy set down by government,especially when you take into consideration the proposal to build a large number of houses on Brownfield land very near the development

5. There is a park entrance on Bankfield Lane, which is also an entrance used by parents taking their children to Churchtown Primary School, so at rush hour and school run time, the road is subject to extremely busy traffic, children crossing, parked cars etc, the school is one of the largest in Europe, and has 1200 primary school children, so as you can imagine the entrances to the school can get very busy at the start and end of the day.
The Botanic gardens are very busy at the weekends and during the week with the bowlers too and when the brass bands play during the summer, Bankfield lane is full of cars parked, and the road it a main artery into the town coming from the Plough roundabout and is as a result extremely busy.
The buses cannot pass easily now, and often have to give way to on coming traffic in order to manouver around the speed bumps, if a cyclist was on the road too then the traffic would simply come to a halt


6. The developer has a poor history of abiding to planning conditions in developments in Cornwall and therefore cannot be trusted to adhere to the conditions relating to the water voles etc.

A planning application has been received by Sefton Council, DC/2017/00821 | HYBRID application comprising (1)

Application for full planning application for residential development of 106 dwellings on 4.6ha and (2) Outline planning application for residential development (all matters reserved for subsequent approval other than access) for up to 200 dwellings on 5ha | Land Off Bankfield Lane, Churchtown, Southport.

Councillor John Dodd said I am against building on green belt land/farm land and I am supporting the online petition. If you too, oppose these plans, I would urge you to follow the link below and sign the petition.
Have Your Say!!


Follow the link below to show support:
https://www.change.org/p/planning-de...ail_responsive

NIMBY 's

A much needed development needed to help drive down prices in the local area to help make homes more affordable.
If the developer has a poor record that is the responsibility of the Planning Authority to ensure the rules are adhered to.

I suspect that any protests will be a wasted exercise. When we were about to purchase a property in the area a couple of years ago, we were alerted to possible building development. I enquired of the estate agent and they weren't aware of this possibility but suggested I enquire at the town hall, which I did. I was told that this was possibly something to do with the government's directive that each council in the country had been ordered to put forward proposals for plots of land (green belt included) which could house approx. 500 homes. Accordingly, the officer at the town hall believed that this area could indeed be one of those sites offered as potentially suitable. He concluded that this might come to nothing but on the other hand, could be built on in six months, six years or whenever......... In other words, a ticking time bomb. Needless to say, we bought a property elsewhere.

Originally Posted by Alikado

NIMBY 's

A much needed development needed to help drive down prices in the local area to help make homes more affordable.
If the developer has a poor record that is the responsibility of the Planning Authority to ensure the rules are adhered to.

It isn't a much needed development for the people that already live here. Churchtown has a big problem with flooding due to a Victorian sewer system, this will only be made worse with a bigger strain on it. How will local schools, doctors and dentists cope? The roads in Churchtown struggle to cope with rush hour traffic already.

Originally Posted by melanieb

I suspect that any protests will be a wasted exercise. When we were about to purchase a property in the area a couple of years ago, we were alerted to possible building development. I enquired of the estate agent and they weren't aware of this possibility but suggested I enquire at the town hall, which I did. I was told that this was possibly something to do with the government's directive that each council in the country had been ordered to put forward proposals for plots of land (green belt included) which could house approx. 500 homes. Accordingly, the officer at the town hall believed that this area could indeed be one of those sites offered as potentially suitable. He concluded that this might come to nothing but on the other hand, could be built on in six months, six years or whenever......... In other words, a ticking time bomb. Needless to say, we bought a property elsewhere.

Councils are led by money. There are huge financial benefits in new house building projects, though people do have the "Right to Contest" https://www.gov.uk/government/public...house-building.
A form can be found on this web site, there is also much information with regards to the financial incentives to councils and building companies. As more and more development is introduced to an area, more residents feel the need to move out of it. There is no mention of the protection of wildlife, natural habitats etc in the government papers, although as such, these are vital to the resources that we all require. Destroying the areas continually will have devastating results on our food and produce supplies. Also this plot is Green Belt land, priority is given to Brown belt land in the Government information - once green belt land is built on, it is gone for good and the once beautiful pastures of the country side will continue to shrink. There must be a limit - house building at this rate cannot continue. In the future, as the population increases to huge numbers, when all the land is built on for housing in the UK - the country will not attract visitors, no-one will want to visit a country full of generic houses. Then where will the ever increasing population be housed? it would have to stop then - so why not now?

Originally Posted by said

Councils are led by money. There are huge financial benefits in new house building projects, though people do have the "Right to Contest" https://www.gov.uk/government/public...house-building.
A form can be found on this web site, there is also much information with regards to the financial incentives to councils and building companies. As more and more development is introduced to an area, more residents feel the need to move out of it. There is no mention of the protection of wildlife, natural habitats etc in the government papers, although as such, these are vital to the resources that we all require. Destroying the areas continually will have devastating results on our food and produce supplies. Also this plot is Green Belt land, priority is given to Brown belt land in the Government information - once green belt land is built on, it is gone for good and the once beautiful pastures of the country side will continue to shrink. There must be a limit - house building at this rate cannot continue. In the future, as the population increases to huge numbers, when all the land is built on for housing in the UK - the country will not attract visitors, no-one will want to visit a country full of generic houses. Then where will the ever increasing population be housed? it would have to stop then - so why not now?

I agree with you completely! Sefton Council have actually had this land changed from Green Belt to Brown, so that it can be built on. It's scandalous. There is a site down Balmoral Drive, the old Phillips factory site, this i feel is ok to build on, but not those beautiful fields at the back of Bankfield.

There doesn't seem to be any strong planning grounds listed to refuse this application.

Every application has its plusses and minuses but the need to house our growing population is compelling.

Can't thing of a big reason not to have houses there. No body WANT housing developments on their door step, But the fact is we need more housing. The only irony is the speed bump put in to reduce traffic, yet this will increase it again.

What happened to the development of the old Philips factory? I'd have though that would be prime land for development.

Originally Posted by local

There doesn't seem to be any strong planning grounds listed to refuse this application.

Every application has its plusses and minuses but the need to house our growing population is compelling.

There is practically a whole village being built on the Town Lane site

well done Wainhomes More work for local people!! I see George Drive is kicking off well done Sovini