Bolton: Still no costs figure for Grizedale Close refusal

The homes had been planned for land off Grizedale Close in Smithills but were twice thrown out by the planning committee after concerns from residents.

Government inspectors upheld the council’s decision but still ordered it to pay costs to developers Watson Homes, the amount of which has still not been decided on.

Cllr Hamid Kurram, cabinet member for planning, housing and highways, said: “The request for costs has been received and officers have been liasing with the applicant in accordance with the process and in consultation with officers in our legal services team to agree the costs.

“As such I am currently unable to detail the amount of costs as they have not yet been agreed between the parties.”

Questions about costs were asked at Bolton Town Hall (Image: Newsquest)

The new homes would have been spread across a block of flats and eight houses, which developers Watson Homes argued would help Bolton meet its need for housing stock.

But opponents said that the houses could do damage to the environment and lead to the loss of the area’s distinctive character.

The plans were turned down twice by Bolton Council, a decision the UK Planning Inspectorate upheld saying that they would have a damaging effect on the “character of the area and site.”

But having found ‘unreasonable and wasted expenses’ in the appeals process, Timothy Burnham also ruled that it should fall on the council to pay costs to Watson Homes.

Cllr Kurram confirmed that a figure for costs had not yet been agreed at a meeting of Bolton Council last week.

But he said that once they had come to a figure, it would be reported to the planning committee.

He had been responding to a question put by Cllr Garry Veevers, who represents Smithills.

ALSO READ: Cheers as plans to develop 'pointless apartments thrown out - again

ALSO READ: Campaigners win battle to have homes plans thrown out after a year long fight

ALSO READ: Developer asks for ruling on home plans to be delayed

He had hoped to understand why there had been such a “lengthy delay” to agreeing these costs.

Cllr Veevers said: “In his decision published on January 10 2023 the Inspector upheld the council’s decision.

“However, he did award costs against the council for failing to inform the applicant until very late in the day that certain reasons for refusal would not be defended.

“The level of those costs were to be agreed between the parties.”