Pendle councillors have backed a draft fourth edition of the borough’s local plan, which has lower house-building targets than potentially higher targets the new Labour government may want.

The local plan sets-out Pendle Council preferences for topics including future housing, employment and green spaces. Currently, a policy in it means enough local land is allocated to meet a proposed 148 new dwellings per year, up to 2040. That would equate to a total of just over 3,000 new homes by 2040.

However, the new government is currently consulting on possibly raising the minimum figure to 382 units per year. A decision is due in December.

The lower Pendle target is supported by population data, planning officers say. But there is flexibility and a slightly higher target of 162 dwellings per year could be achieved. Planning officers said the council can either put forward the latest draft with its preferred lower figure or wait until next year to write a new one.

Public consultation on a previous version was held in summer 2023. Now, a six-week consultation is due on the fourth edition this autumn. The draft will be sent to the government for independent scrutiny by the national Planning Inspectorate.

Pendle Council’s latest full meeting backed the fourth draft.

READ MORE: ​Inside cosy cottage with period features and ‘masterfully created’ kitchen

 

READ MORE: ​Modernist home in Reedley is on market for £1.2m

Lib-Dem Coun Tom Whipp, said: “We are at a critical point with government changes to planning. If this plan does not go ahead now it will unfortunately have to be scrapped. It’s imperative that we act.

“We have an all-party working group on the council and the executive has agreed this is a plan we can take forward. The potential changes in national planning policy would disregard local demographics and economics. It’s ludicrous.”

Independent Coun Asjad Mahmood, leader of Pendle Council, supported approval of the local plan too. He said: “This will steer the right developments in the right places, supported by strong evidence. Development would be focused along the M65 corridor. Rural areas such as West Craven would see appropriate growth that supports them.  The borough will get the houses it needs without building on green fields. Over 50 areas will be included as local green spaces and flood risks and climate change are considered. It also seeks to limit the number of takeaways around schools and encourage tourism that does negatively impact on the environment.”

Conservative Coun Martyn Stone said: “I echo the comments made by others. However, it’s also important to point out the changes. The target of 382 units per year is absurd. Pendle in all its history has never produced anywhere near 382 units in a single year. To have this burden imposed on us without any regard to Pendle’s needs or economic development is absurd. The council has been put in a very difficult position with the planning policy and government changes and deadlines.  We have to try to get this local plan through and hope some sanity prevails on the new government. ”

Lib-Dem Coun David Whipp, Pendle Council’s deputy leader, said: “This local plan we are going to consult upon could be short-lived. We may afford some protection to green fields in the short term but there is no guarantee it will hold in the long term. Planning officers have worked really hard to reflect the council’ ambitions in this. The 148 unit figure is supported by Pendle’s demographics. The government figure is very blunt, based on the number of buildings.

“In the past, there was an excess of new houses here. Developers could not sell them all. Houses ended-up being rented out. I feel if we had a too-high number it would impact on green fields and we would have a situation like in the past.

“I don’t think the local plan is perfect. But we have to compromise. Let’s not pretend  we don’t need new homes. We do. But let’s hope this new plan gets through consultation.”

Conservative opposition group leader Coun Nadeem Ahmed said: “The council is in a difficult position. We have to make a decision. It may not be the best plan but it’s the best we can do. With the change of government, the target of 348 units is ridiculous. We hope this plan sticks. If it does not, the risks will be that we are back to the higher figure and our countryside will be under threat from the new Labour government.”