Lancashire TelegraphCelebrations as Clitheroe residents win planning battle (From Lancashire Telegraph)

When news happens, text LT and your photos and videos to 80360. Or contact us by email or phone.

Celebrations as Clitheroe residents win planning battle

CLITHEROE residents are celebrating after defeating plans to construct 345 houses following a 15-month battle.

A government inspector dismissed the plans after a consortium of landowners appealed Ribble Valley Borough Council’s decision to refuse the original application last year.

A residents group formed to contest the appeal, which was held in Clitheroe late last year, after the borough council withdrew following legal advice.

The applicants, which included The Huntroyde Estate and Clitheroe Auction Mart Co Ltd, have six weeks to appeal against the decision to the High Court.

In a report detailing the inspector’s decision, which was published yesterday, a spokesman for the department for communities and local government, said: “The experience for those using and viewing the area would be devalued by the proposed development.

“There would be unresolved highway and flooding issues in relation to the Waddington Road access.

“The adverse impacts of allowing the appeal proposal would significantly and demonstratively outweigh the benefits.”

Clitheroe town councillor, Kevin Horkin, said: “This is a fantastic victory for people power and the residents have done a great job in getting this appeal dismissed.

“The borough council must now sit up and listen to the people and if in the future they believe that there is case to be fought then to defend their decisions.

“It’s embarrassing for them that they pulled out of defending their original decision and the residents have done a tremendous job.”

Roland Hailwood, who was one of the members of the Back Commons Action Group who spoke at the appeal, said: “There is going to be a big party tonight because this is fantastic news.

“Every member really worked hard and did their homework ahead of the appeal.

“Common sense has prevailed and it’s great that the residents of Clitheroe have won a victory against the developers.”

Comments (9)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:22pm Sat 25 Jan 14

MerlinTheVoiceofReason2 says...

NIMBYS 1 Progessives Who'd Like To Live Locally 0
NIMBYS 1 Progessives Who'd Like To Live Locally 0 MerlinTheVoiceofReason2
  • Score: -17

8:21pm Sat 25 Jan 14

charmed-one says...

Actually Merlin, having read all 80 pages of the report, the Govt Inspector is quite scathing of Lancashire Highways Authority who pulled their original objection to the scheme at the 11th hour. In the report, he says this decision by the LHA is 'difficult to understand' and talks about the junction at Castle View/Bawdlands as having 'sub-standard visibility' - it is on a bend (on a railway bridge) and cars making a left turn out of the junction have to move out into the road to have a clear view, and have to cross the central line to complete the turn. This is at the same time as traffic from town passing this junction, has to cross the central line on their side to make their turn around the bend.
He goes on to say that the 'traffic and environmental impact of the Kirkmoor Rd/Castle View access transgresses the 'severe' criteria evinced by the National Planning Framework and cannot be supported.' He himself stated that their would be an extra 875 car journeys per day, on already congested roads, with vey few passing places.
So how does this make local residents NIMBYs?? We are not. There have been about 10 smaller developments in this 'giant cul-de-sac' (as we have only one access for 700+ properties) - every bit of brownfield site and greenfield site has been built upon. As far back as 2008, LHA said they could not support any more developments in this area until the access was improved. Nothing has improved, in fact, we have more dwellings than ever.
So in this case, it would appear that the Govt Inspector is the voice of reason, rather than yourself!
Actually Merlin, having read all 80 pages of the report, the Govt Inspector is quite scathing of Lancashire Highways Authority who pulled their original objection to the scheme at the 11th hour. In the report, he says this decision by the LHA is 'difficult to understand' and talks about the junction at Castle View/Bawdlands as having 'sub-standard visibility' - it is on a bend (on a railway bridge) and cars making a left turn out of the junction have to move out into the road to have a clear view, and have to cross the central line to complete the turn. This is at the same time as traffic from town passing this junction, has to cross the central line on their side to make their turn around the bend. He goes on to say that the 'traffic and environmental impact of the Kirkmoor Rd/Castle View access transgresses the 'severe' criteria evinced by the National Planning Framework and cannot be supported.' He himself stated that their would be an extra 875 car journeys per day, on already congested roads, with vey few passing places. So how does this make local residents NIMBYs?? We are not. There have been about 10 smaller developments in this 'giant cul-de-sac' (as we have only one access for 700+ properties) - every bit of brownfield site and greenfield site has been built upon. As far back as 2008, LHA said they could not support any more developments in this area until the access was improved. Nothing has improved, in fact, we have more dwellings than ever. So in this case, it would appear that the Govt Inspector is the voice of reason, rather than yourself! charmed-one
  • Score: 25

8:30pm Sat 25 Jan 14

MerlinTheVoiceofReason2 says...

charmed-one wrote:
Actually Merlin, having read all 80 pages of the report, the Govt Inspector is quite scathing of Lancashire Highways Authority who pulled their original objection to the scheme at the 11th hour. In the report, he says this decision by the LHA is 'difficult to understand' and talks about the junction at Castle View/Bawdlands as having 'sub-standard visibility' - it is on a bend (on a railway bridge) and cars making a left turn out of the junction have to move out into the road to have a clear view, and have to cross the central line to complete the turn. This is at the same time as traffic from town passing this junction, has to cross the central line on their side to make their turn around the bend.
He goes on to say that the 'traffic and environmental impact of the Kirkmoor Rd/Castle View access transgresses the 'severe' criteria evinced by the National Planning Framework and cannot be supported.' He himself stated that their would be an extra 875 car journeys per day, on already congested roads, with vey few passing places.
So how does this make local residents NIMBYs?? We are not. There have been about 10 smaller developments in this 'giant cul-de-sac' (as we have only one access for 700+ properties) - every bit of brownfield site and greenfield site has been built upon. As far back as 2008, LHA said they could not support any more developments in this area until the access was improved. Nothing has improved, in fact, we have more dwellings than ever.
So in this case, it would appear that the Govt Inspector is the voice of reason, rather than yourself!
I agree that development needs to be spread out. I cannot understand why there aren't more new houses in and around Waddington, Dunsop Bridge, Newton and Slaidburn - plenty of room for laying bricks.
[quote][p][bold]charmed-one[/bold] wrote: Actually Merlin, having read all 80 pages of the report, the Govt Inspector is quite scathing of Lancashire Highways Authority who pulled their original objection to the scheme at the 11th hour. In the report, he says this decision by the LHA is 'difficult to understand' and talks about the junction at Castle View/Bawdlands as having 'sub-standard visibility' - it is on a bend (on a railway bridge) and cars making a left turn out of the junction have to move out into the road to have a clear view, and have to cross the central line to complete the turn. This is at the same time as traffic from town passing this junction, has to cross the central line on their side to make their turn around the bend. He goes on to say that the 'traffic and environmental impact of the Kirkmoor Rd/Castle View access transgresses the 'severe' criteria evinced by the National Planning Framework and cannot be supported.' He himself stated that their would be an extra 875 car journeys per day, on already congested roads, with vey few passing places. So how does this make local residents NIMBYs?? We are not. There have been about 10 smaller developments in this 'giant cul-de-sac' (as we have only one access for 700+ properties) - every bit of brownfield site and greenfield site has been built upon. As far back as 2008, LHA said they could not support any more developments in this area until the access was improved. Nothing has improved, in fact, we have more dwellings than ever. So in this case, it would appear that the Govt Inspector is the voice of reason, rather than yourself![/p][/quote]I agree that development needs to be spread out. I cannot understand why there aren't more new houses in and around Waddington, Dunsop Bridge, Newton and Slaidburn - plenty of room for laying bricks. MerlinTheVoiceofReason2
  • Score: -4

8:40pm Sat 25 Jan 14

charmed-one says...

MerlinTheVoiceofReas
on2
wrote:
charmed-one wrote:
Actually Merlin, having read all 80 pages of the report, the Govt Inspector is quite scathing of Lancashire Highways Authority who pulled their original objection to the scheme at the 11th hour. In the report, he says this decision by the LHA is 'difficult to understand' and talks about the junction at Castle View/Bawdlands as having 'sub-standard visibility' - it is on a bend (on a railway bridge) and cars making a left turn out of the junction have to move out into the road to have a clear view, and have to cross the central line to complete the turn. This is at the same time as traffic from town passing this junction, has to cross the central line on their side to make their turn around the bend.
He goes on to say that the 'traffic and environmental impact of the Kirkmoor Rd/Castle View access transgresses the 'severe' criteria evinced by the National Planning Framework and cannot be supported.' He himself stated that their would be an extra 875 car journeys per day, on already congested roads, with vey few passing places.
So how does this make local residents NIMBYs?? We are not. There have been about 10 smaller developments in this 'giant cul-de-sac' (as we have only one access for 700+ properties) - every bit of brownfield site and greenfield site has been built upon. As far back as 2008, LHA said they could not support any more developments in this area until the access was improved. Nothing has improved, in fact, we have more dwellings than ever.
So in this case, it would appear that the Govt Inspector is the voice of reason, rather than yourself!
I agree that development needs to be spread out. I cannot understand why there aren't more new houses in and around Waddington, Dunsop Bridge, Newton and Slaidburn - plenty of room for laying bricks.
Now that, I can agree with!! ;-)
[quote][p][bold]MerlinTheVoiceofReas on2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]charmed-one[/bold] wrote: Actually Merlin, having read all 80 pages of the report, the Govt Inspector is quite scathing of Lancashire Highways Authority who pulled their original objection to the scheme at the 11th hour. In the report, he says this decision by the LHA is 'difficult to understand' and talks about the junction at Castle View/Bawdlands as having 'sub-standard visibility' - it is on a bend (on a railway bridge) and cars making a left turn out of the junction have to move out into the road to have a clear view, and have to cross the central line to complete the turn. This is at the same time as traffic from town passing this junction, has to cross the central line on their side to make their turn around the bend. He goes on to say that the 'traffic and environmental impact of the Kirkmoor Rd/Castle View access transgresses the 'severe' criteria evinced by the National Planning Framework and cannot be supported.' He himself stated that their would be an extra 875 car journeys per day, on already congested roads, with vey few passing places. So how does this make local residents NIMBYs?? We are not. There have been about 10 smaller developments in this 'giant cul-de-sac' (as we have only one access for 700+ properties) - every bit of brownfield site and greenfield site has been built upon. As far back as 2008, LHA said they could not support any more developments in this area until the access was improved. Nothing has improved, in fact, we have more dwellings than ever. So in this case, it would appear that the Govt Inspector is the voice of reason, rather than yourself![/p][/quote]I agree that development needs to be spread out. I cannot understand why there aren't more new houses in and around Waddington, Dunsop Bridge, Newton and Slaidburn - plenty of room for laying bricks.[/p][/quote]Now that, I can agree with!! ;-) charmed-one
  • Score: 1

11:42pm Sat 25 Jan 14

Michael@ClitheroeSince58 says...

I just want to say well done to all involved, please pass on your expertise to other groups around town.
I just want to say well done to all involved, please pass on your expertise to other groups around town. Michael@ClitheroeSince58
  • Score: 8

3:16pm Sun 26 Jan 14

ghost of sceptic says...

Well done to the residents action groups fantastic news. RVBC hang your heads in shame the people of the borough have done your jobs for you. Out with the lot the clowns in the ivory tower.
Well done to the residents action groups fantastic news. RVBC hang your heads in shame the people of the borough have done your jobs for you. Out with the lot the clowns in the ivory tower. ghost of sceptic
  • Score: 7

5:57pm Sun 26 Jan 14

drunken donut says...

MerlinTheVoiceofReas
on2
wrote:
NIMBYS 1 Progessives Who'd Like To Live Locally 0
What a loser!!
[quote][p][bold]MerlinTheVoiceofReas on2[/bold] wrote: NIMBYS 1 Progessives Who'd Like To Live Locally 0[/p][/quote]What a loser!! drunken donut
  • Score: 6

1:35pm Mon 27 Jan 14

Birtrumthegreat says...

It's time that heads roll in Ribble Valley Planning Dept and Lancashire Highways Authority, they really are useless. You also have to question the quality of the legal advice that they are paying for with our council tax money. Like I've said before, if they were a school they would be placed in special measure by now and a new head appointed.

Well done to the residents that fought the case, fantastic job. I might deliver some empty cardboard boxes to the council, to help them clear some desks.
It's time that heads roll in Ribble Valley Planning Dept and Lancashire Highways Authority, they really are useless. You also have to question the quality of the legal advice that they are paying for with our council tax money. Like I've said before, if they were a school they would be placed in special measure by now and a new head appointed. Well done to the residents that fought the case, fantastic job. I might deliver some empty cardboard boxes to the council, to help them clear some desks. Birtrumthegreat
  • Score: 3

5:06pm Mon 27 Jan 14

Birtrumthegreat says...

Michael@ClitheroeSin
ce58
wrote:
I just want to say well done to all involved, please pass on your expertise to other groups around town.
Even better, let them take over Ribble Valley Planning Department, they obviously know more about the area than they do.
[quote][p][bold]Michael@ClitheroeSin ce58[/bold] wrote: I just want to say well done to all involved, please pass on your expertise to other groups around town.[/p][/quote]Even better, let them take over Ribble Valley Planning Department, they obviously know more about the area than they do. Birtrumthegreat
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree