Samlesbury & Cuerdale Parish Council
In the Borough of South Ribble
Access to this site is either by Nabs head lane or Spring lane, neither of which are capable of safely carrying the extra traffic this development would create. The comment that
” Samlesbury is like no other village as it has a huge geographical spread with no centre or heart.”
Ok, Samlesbury is huge but to say we have no centre or heart ?? Who ever wrote this has no idea who we are and if they think they can build us a heart by development and making are roads more dangerous they obviously think they know what we need better than we do, because I have not yet heard anyone speak in favor of this development, so far %100 have been against it.
Whilst the proposals addresses some issues, however what can’t be mitigated is increased traffic on the local lanes.
It is noted Nabshead Lane, Further lane & Goosefoot Lane are regularly used as ‘rat runs’, traffic short cutting to the M65.
Goosefoot Lane is in a particular poor condition with many blind corners.
Further Lane is narrow in parts with blind corners.
Both Lanes in recent times carry traffic they were not designed too.
This development would make matters worse.
As part of their implementation of Central Lancashire’s core strategy, both the Ribble Valley and South Ribble Councils have committed via their Local Plan/LDP to retaining the natural character and benefits of the green belt until 2026. They have done so by implementing the following measures:
• Existing Green Belt areas will be protected;
• Fundamentally there is a presumption against exceptional substantial strategic change;
• Being sympathetic to existing and proposed land use in terms of its size, intensity, nature and scale;
• Consideration of the effects of development on existing amenities;
• Consideration of the potential traffic and car parking implications;
• Protection of SSSIS, Country Heritage, Local Nature Reserve, BAP habitats and species, Green Corridors and other sites of nature conservation;
• Having regard to the importance of open space on the landscape or townscape of an area;
• Introduction of a general presumption against inappropriate development in the Green Belt.
• As set out in the NPPF, planning permission will not be given for the construction of new buildings unless there are very special circumstances;
• Within the Green Belt, planning permission will only be given for development that is compatible by maintaining its fundamental open nature;
• Permission will not be granted to inappropriate development in the Green Belt which adversely affects the openness of the land.
• Introduction of burden on the applicant to demonstrate that very special circumstances exist which clearly outweigh the harm that would be caused to the openness of the Green Belt;
• Presumption against inappropriate development on Protected Open Land;
• Maintenance, enhancement and extension of the existing green corridor/green wedge network across South Ribble to deliver a green corridor network which performs the role of important natural buffers between all urban areas and new development;
• Emphasis on protecting the attractiveness of the borough and enable communities to access these corridors for recreational purposes
The Central Lancashire Core Strategy states there will be no Green Belt review during the Plan period. Since implementation, nothing has changed to alter the Council’s strategic objectives of maintaining Green Belt integrity and avoiding widespread development which affects the local area.
The proposed developments, most obviously on Blue Slate Farm, do not sit within the South Ribble Council’s LDP or the NPPF for the following reasons:
1. Infilling of countryside;
2. Destruction/reduction of open, country, agricultural and recreational areas;
3. Development on Green Belt;
4. Increased strain on already fraught road networks on Nabs Head Lane and Spring Lane, particularly given the presence of dog walkers, livery stables, and complete absence of pavements for pedestrians;
5. Encouraging the use of cars instead of environmentally protective forms of transport;
Furthermore, the developments will affect I see no reason for the Council to amend its strategic objectives to which it has committed until 2026, which would render all proposed developments outside of the narrow remit implemented by the Council, save for the Samlesbury Aerodrome Enterprise Site which has its own uniquely identified status.