Anger at homes approval in Garstang town centre

A concerned town councillor is hoping for a clear answer from Wyre planning bosses to explain why they ignored a 5,000-strong petition opposing plans for a major redevelopment in Garstang town centre.

Friday, 28th April 2017, 10:03 am
Updated Tuesday, 9th May 2017, 6:57 pm
Garstang residents protest against the potential development of the Community centre and its car park

The petition was presented to Wyre Council in December 2015 when the proposals by Keyworker Homes were being hotly debated among Garstang residents.

But when Keyworker’s revised plans were approved at last month’s Wyre planning committee, the Garstang petition was not taken into consideration.

Planning bosses told the meeting, a “petition was submitted in December 2015... and the formal planning application was received in June 2016”. Now Coun Liz Webster is determined not to let the matter rest.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

She said: “My question to Wyre is, why wasn’t the petition taken into consideration when it states on their website that they would include all letters already received about the development in the application for consideration?”

A Garstang Business Centre question and answer document on the council website clarifies the situation when submissions are received in advance of a planning application being lodged.

It states: “If a planning application is made we will include all letters already received about the development in the application for consideration. You are welcome to comment at any time up to the date of any decision and you may wish to do so again depending on the details of any planning application.”

Coun Webster is now asking the town council to formally ask Wyre for clarification.

The petition, including 5,936 signatures, was presented to Wyre Council leader Peter Gibson in December 2015.

A Wyre Council spokesman said: “The petition related to the proposed sale of the building by the council.

“It did not relate to or comment in any way on a planning application or development.

“Therefore it could not be considered in determining a planning application.”