Calls have been made for Fylde Council to “shout long and hard” about problems with the Government’s planning policy.
Coun Liz Oades made the plea before the council’s development management committee, on which she sits, approved a plan for 13 new homes on countryside on the edge of Warton.
But the committee also deferred a decision on a proposal for up to 30 houses on a greenfield site in Staining in order to provide a “robust” argument to reject the plans, after eight people spoke out against it.
Debating the proposal for the plans at Kings Close, Staining, Coun Oades said: “We’re regularly bullied into not refusing things on this committee because of the possibility of the award of costs against us.”
The Government’s National Planning Policy Framework currently requires local authorities to deliver a five year housing supply.
Coun Oades, the Independent representative for Kirkham South, added: “It worries me greatly for locals in Staining.
“We’re seeing our communities being ruined because the Government is failing to get population under control.
“It’s a short-sighted policy.
“We are having the housing supply thrown at us and used as a stick against us.
“It’s time this council shouted long and hard at the Government about what it’s doing.”
Representations were made to the council about problems including flooding, traffic, loss of countryside and a lack of places at local schools by those speaking against the Kings Close plan.
But Kate McClean, planning manager at developer The Co-Operative Group, told the meeting at St Annes Town Hall on Wednesday, the plans “represent sustainable development”.
The committee approved plans for 13 homes at Nine Acres Nursery, in Warton, but deferred matters surrounding an already approved plan for 240 homes on the former Marconi site in the village.
Speaking against the 13 home proposal, resident Jessica Ashworth said: “Warton should not be seen as a dumping ground for your five year housing supply.
“We care about Warton and want to maintain our village status.”
However, the proposal was passed with nine councillors voting in favour of the plan, five against it, and one abstention.