The surprising reason Preston councillors couldn't decide on a controversial new housing estate
A decision on plans to build a new housing estate on a former farm in rural Preston has been delayed – because not enough councillors were present at the meeting to take a vote on the proposal.
A bid for permission to create up to 95 properties on the disused Swainson House Farm, in Goosnargh, was due to be considered by Preston City Council’s planning committee last Thursday (5th June).
The controversial blueprint had attracted 72 public objections – as well as opposition from Whittingham and Goosnargh parish councils – including over concerns about the potential impact on roads surrounding the Goosnargh Lane site and the character of the area.
However, as the proceedings got under way, one committee member declared an interest in the proposed development – a procedure councillors are obliged to follow if they have any connection to an application which could be seen to influence their decision.
Cllr Harry Landless said he had “a personal and, therefore, prejudicial interest” in the housing plans – and declared he would be leaving the room while his colleagues discussed and voted on the matter.
However, that would have left only six members left to make the decision – below the level required for the meeting to be legally ‘quorate’. At full strength, the committee has 11 members – and the rules state at least seven must be present for items to be decided upon.
Cllr Landless’s enforced departure for the Swainson House Farm proposal meant the item had to be deferred until the next planning committee meeting on 3rd July.
A decision on the plans had already been postponed the last time they were due to be decided in May, because councillors voted to go on a visit to the site to see for themselves some of the objections raised by locals. The council’s planning officers had recommended the application be approved on both occasions.
The dual delay meant that the city council would have breached the maximum length of time it has to determine planning applications according to government legislation. In those circumstances, an applicant can appeal directly to the independent Planning Inspectorate for a decision – bypassing the local authority altogether.
However, the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) understands that planning bosses agreed an extension of time with applicants Gillian Wells, Thomas Swarbrick and Lynn Johnson to a point beyond the date of the next meeting, in order to avoid that scenario.
The planning committee has seven ‘reserve’ members who can usually be used as substitutes when any of their colleagues are unable to attend.
Committee chair Javed Iqbal said the authority had been “trying all week” to ensure the meeting would be quorate.