A HISTORIC site is set to make way for a 42-home development despite concerns over Tyldesley’s heritage.
The Grade II-listed Garrett Hall farmhouse will be turned into flats, but its surrounding farm buildings will be demolished in the process – which an opponent and councilors disputed.
The application by Redrow Homes Lancashire and Peel L&P Developments Ltd has come up against opposition from Andy Brown, a resident of Mosley Common, who believes the site has historic value and is significant enough to enter a bend style and make people pay to go see it. .
He addressed the planning committee for Wigan Town Hall, pointing to the historic value as well as the possible addition to congestion in the area.
“It is absolutely staggering that we are allowing this when 950 homes are being built in the area and not all of them have been sold,” Mr Brown said. “The road infrastructure cracks at the seams.
“In Mosley Common Road, it will be more difficult for you to drive to work. I am of the opinion that this would seriously harm the road network.
He explained that this proposed site is very close to another development at Mosley Common where 1,100 houses are proposed to be built – with the same road feeding them to East Lancs.
He mentioned that the site itself can date back to medieval times and has a rich history for the area.
Planning committee advisers were unaware of the history and potential for archaeological finds at the site, and hoped to be reassured that if such significant finds were detected, work would be halted so that archaeologists could enter.
Officers gave this assurance, but felt this was unlikely given the archaeological report provided by the Greater Manchester Archeology Unit.
Their report said: ‘The Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS) has been consulted on this application and agrees with the conclusions reached in the DBA and accepts that any surviving underground archaeological remains will not be of national significance. or regional in need of preservation. in situ, although a program of archaeological investigation and recording is required prior to the removal of archaeological remains during the proposed construction works.
Councilor Kathleen Houlton said: ‘If it hadn’t been for this gentleman, we wouldn’t have known anything.
Councilor Jim Ellis asked who considered the site to be of no value and suggested that it could be brought back into use with the right funding.
“We must look forward”
Need to look ahead
In response to these claims of historical significance and funding for the site, Councilor John Harding said the site had been subject to vandalism and fires had also broken out in the past – a matter of public safety.
“In my opinion, if [Andy Brown] knew the site, so others knew it too and if it was that great, there would already be a turn there,” said Councilor Harding. “We have to look forward.”
The report said the listed building would actually be put back into use as three apartments, but the surrounding buildings would be demolished as they are not considered significant.
Earl Stuart Gerrard moved that the claim be refused on the grounds that it would be a significant loss to heritage.
The vote was cast and the decision was made to approve the development.