The Friends of Lever Park

From today’s Chorley Guardian:

Go Ape's letter in the Chorley Guardian - click to enlarge

Mr Sutherland fails to mention that they removed 13 trees without authorisation.

He refers to no undergrowth. There was until some one removed it.

He says only 3 to 5 trees will be removed to complete the course. Which route are they taking, UP and Down so to miss all the others.

Also they forget to mention that chorley’s Arboricultural officer said in his memo that only three trees would be removed, not the 21 that have already been removed.

Is this the same Mr Sutherland that on the planning application stated that there are no trees and hedges on land adjacent to the proposed development.(section 16 on the Town & Country planning Act application form), can I take the opportunity to remind him that there is a Conservation Area, a Wildlife Sanctuary and the Arboretum.

And lets not forget the 1902 Liverpool Corporation Act.

Tags: chorley guardian, Go Ape, letter

If you want to get email updates of our meetings or emergency actions just send an email to mail@leverpark.co.uk - you don’t need to put any text in the email - just send it and we’ll then have an accurate record of everyone’s email address. Don’t worry, we won’t share your email address with any other organisations. If you want to phone us, the Lever Park hotline is 07598 973054.

Car Park Plans

We expect United Utilities to formally apply to Chorley Council for planning permission for their new car park and traffic management at some time during December or early January. We must make sure that the application for objections doesn’t get lost in the Christmas holiday rush.

So I invited United Utilities to publish their proposals on this site to make sure that they had the chance to present their proposals properly. I haven’t heard back from them, so here’s the notes I made immediately after their public consultation back in August:

United Utilities propose:

• to create a new pay and display car park in a field adjacent to the Lower Barn on land that is legally not part of Lever Park.
• to make the all the current car parks in Rivington pay and display
• to charge between 50p and £1 for parking (probably 50p for a couple of hours and a pound for all day parking, with a season ticket option for £60-£70 pa)
• to close the car parks at 5.00pm
• to introduce a one way system forcing up along the road to the top barn, then down an existing bridleway back to the main road
• to improve the road surfaces on the new one way system

The open day was well attended. The United Utilities staff who attended are very professional and obviously very dedicated to the upkeep of Rivington. However, most people I spoke to were sceptical. Here were some of the criticisms voiced by myself and others:

• The land was given to the people of Bolton and Chorley by Lord Leverhulme for free access. This right is enshrined in the relevant by-laws, so United Utilities cannot charge for car parking on any of the current car parks.
• At peak times, more people will park on the public highway (i.e. the main road to Rivington and street off Lever Park Avenue and Sheephouse Lane) rather than pay for parking.
• The only peak times are between 11.00am and 4.00pm on Saturday, Sunday and Bank Holidays. Extra car parks will be redundant at all other times and days.
• Will the money raised by car parks be spent on the Lever Park area? If so, how much money do they expect to raise.
• Will the money be publicly accountable?
• What is the environmental impact of converting a field into a car park. What wildlife is in the field currently? What is the visual impact of field of tarmac or gravel?
• If the changes make Lever Park more popular, the number of car journeys into the park will increase at a time when Greater Manchester is considering wide-ranging strategies to reduce car journeys. So why no public transport options within the plans? No improvements to the cycle paths? A bus service used to run at weekends from Horwich.
• Horwich, Bolton and Chorley have a large number of people without access to a car. For the less able-bodied, Rivington is currently out of reach (there being no public transport into the area) - why are these people not being addressed by these plans?
• Alternatively, car park charges could make Lever Park less popular. Car park charges in nearby Bolton town centre have proved contentious. If fewer people visited the park, clearly this would run against Lord Leverhulme’s original vision.
• The proposed one-way system forces cars to return to the main road at a dangerous spot.
• There is currently a lack of clarity of the way in which money raised from the car parking charges would be re-invested. United Utilities need to be very clear about what the money will be spent on.
• Concerns were also expressed that the planning process for the recently approved ‘Go Ape’ centre didn’t give enough people chance to make their feelings known.

The public consultation was back in August. Many of the people who attended completed the feedback forms and made the suggestions above, but so far we have no indication that United Utilities have made any changes to their original plans.

All the plans are on display at the Great House Information Centre (if it’s open, and if you can get up the stairs). Its a shame that United Utilities hasn’t put the plans on-line where more people can see them.

United Utilities need to tell us:

1. When will the plans go before the full planning committee (no delegated decisions please!)
2. Have UU taken any account of the views expressed by members of the public?
3. What changes have UU made to the original plans? Or was this just another example of meaningless, sham ‘consultation’?

What do you think about the car park? Vote in our new on-line poll:

 Loading ...

Tags: car park, united utilities

If I was to go into Astley Park (Chorley) this weekend with a chain saw and trim one of their trees to the ground, how long would it be before the law was taking me before the courts.

So come on Chorley tell us how long it is going to be before you take go-ape to court for the unlawful removal of trees from Lever Park.

After all they were not given authorisation to remove the ammount of trees that have been felled, so what they did was an illegal act and surely you must proceed with a prosecution against them.

If chorley fail to prosecute go-ape it will only add strength to the feeling of ” What the hell is going on here”.

So I challenge Chorley to prove me wrong and take out a prosecution against go-ape, just like they would against any citizen who would without authorisation dare to fell a tree in Chorley’s own back yard.

Chorley have said all along that they have done everything correctly, then go ahead and prove it and tell go-ape that they can’t remove anymore trees than the three that was sanctioned by Chorley’s Arboricultural officer. Prove it Chorley and tell them to abide by figures set out by your own Arboriculturist. This statement of three trees by chorley’s own staff was used as a letter of support on the application, its beginning to look as if someone has said ” Lets get it through then you can do what you want “.

I may be wrong and I hope I am, So go on Chorley prove me wrong and tell go-ape that they can’t remove any trees over and above those agreed by Mr Keith Winstanley Chorley’s Arboricultural officer, who incidently numbered the trees 755, 757 and 758 on the site map.

Letter in Chorley Guardian

Click on the image to enlarge it.

I cast my mind back to what is probably one of the most important events in this whole charade, namely the Rivington Parish Council meeting at which GoApe gave there presentation, ably assisted and supported by United Utilities, the day before the deadline for objections to the planning application. Take note GoApe and UU, the best way to avoid objections is don’t tell anyone what you are doing. 

As previously stated I was one of only three members of the general public who were lucky enough to find out about it, and the day after tried to sound the alarm. I remember the presentation being very professionally delivered, by I believe, Tristan Mayhew, with added weight supplied by Neville Kidd (UU) in support. Whether or not I was impressed at the time is irrelevant. What I do remember are two questions levied at each of the aforementioned that may be of interest to both sides of the support camp. Both questions came from the RPC committee after the presentation, the first of which was to Neville Kidd (UU). 

Q. “Did GoApe approach United Utilities or did you approach them”?  The answer in as many words, with some hesitation was, “We approached GoApe”. Confirmation I believe of UU’s persistant efforts to commercialise Lever Park.

The second question was put to GoApe.

Q. “Who uses your activity”?  The answer, which surprised me at the time was “well I’m almost embarrassed to say, predominately middle class”.

Now forgive my naivety, but haven’t GoApe maintained that this is a facility for all. We already know that you cannot just roll up, pay and play, even if you can afford to. The truth is that given the choice the corporate clientele must be the preferred option because the revenue is maximised. It surely has to be, because UU will want there cut anyhow.

I think that both parties ought to be extremely embarrassed at the way they have colluded, to steer this project, with definate intent of avoiding public scrutiny. If democracy exists, then you will fail. If not, greed wins, yet again.

Website stats

Here is the graph showing the weekly number of visitors to the site. You can see that over the past couple of weeks we’ve had over three thousand visits per week. Our busiest day on the website was 17th November when we had 1620 visits! In total, since the website went online at the beginning of September, we have had 14,000 visits.

It just shows how our message is getting through to the people of Bolton, Horwich and Chorley.

The first meeting of the friends of Lever park was attended by over 70 people, the next two meetings were attended by nearly 100 people. We estimate that over 300 people attended the demonstration, plus 15 horses!

Our next meeting has been relocated to a new venue, to accommodate the extra people who will attend.

Yes, we’ve come a long way since September!

Several people have asked for a short summary of our case against Chorley Council. Here it is:

1) Chorley’s Use of Delegated Powers.

Delegated powers allow planning decisions to be made by a small group of three council officers, rather than a full planning committee which would include elected members. They are designed to be used for small scale planning applications, typically extensions to residential properties, conservatories and so on.

Chorley disregarded their own rules on the use of delegated powers to approve planning applications. The rules specify that developments over 1 hectare must go to a full planning committee, rather than the group of three non-elected officers who operate under delegated powers. All the planning application documents state that the development is over 3 hectares. In spite of this, the final decision was still made under delegated powers.

Amusingly, when challenged over the size of the development, Chorley now say that the development is less than one hectare, because most of the development is in the trees, not on the ground. Chorley also insist that the development is a leisure development, not a commercial development and that this also allows them to use delegated powers. We have been unable to find any reference to leisure development being treated in any different way to commercial development under delegated powers.

2) Consultation

Chorley’s consultation process was flawed from the start:

2.1 Consultations or Presentations

Go Ape made presentations to Rivington Parish Council, to the Rivington and Brinscall Advisory Group and to Rivington Heritage Group. Attendees at those meeting have confirmed that they felt they were being invited to informal presentations, not formal consultations. They would have given different responses had they felt that a formal consultation was being made. They also confirm that some factual claims made for Go Ape were incorrect. Chorley Council themselves were not at the presentations and no minutes or meeting notes seem to have been kept. Its also worth noting that Rivington Heritage Group is a group almost entirely composed of United Utilities appointees.

2.2 Local Residents

Chorley have confirmed that only three properties were notified of the plans:

• Great House Barn
• Great House Barn Information Centre
• Gilsbrook Cottage

The Barn and Information Centre are commercial properties whose landlord is United Utilities. Gilsbrook cottage is three quarters of a mile from the site area. There are many properties closer to the site than this one, they include the vicarage, the primary school, the church and many more dwellings. The nearest dwelling to the site is Great House Cottage which is next door to the Barn, and yet they were not notified.  The site notices stated that “it has not been possible to contact all the nearby residents directly.” But all the local residents are on Chorley’s own electoral roll.

2.3 Ecology Consultants

Chorley insist that they took due regard to ecological reports from qualified consultants before approving the plan. However, Go Ape’s own research into wildlife in the area concluded that ”breeding birds are not affected by people in trees”!

2.4 Chorley’s Own Officers

We have copies of several internal memos and emails by Chorley’s own officers recommending that the development should be rejected.

2.5 Notifications

The three site notices referred to Go Ape as being 250m from a place called ‘Great House Green’. Rivington and Lever Park does not contain any place called ‘Great House Green’ - it does not exist. It was therefore difficult to understand where the proposed location for Go Ape was.

3) The Lever Park Act 1902

The Act (drafted by Lord Leverhulme) specifically forbids commercial developments. Chorley has consitently maintained that this act is not relevant to the planning process and insists that no thought was given to the act as the planning application was approved. However it is Chorley’s duty to ensure its action comply with the law and it cannot shirk its responsibilities so lightly. The question has now gone to the House of Commons.

If there are any errors in this document, please let me know and I’ll correct them. Any errors or omissions are entirely my fault.

Tags: chorley, delegated powers

Having just read the article in this weeks Chorley Guardian, I can’t help thinking that CBC, GoApe and United Utilities have decided upon a media strategy early doors and shipped it out en masse to all concerned, to insert into any article that may question there actions. Well frankly their  response is becoming a little tiresome,hence the title, particularly in light of the gross inaccuracies contained within that response, from all parties involved. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you will, but well well.

Interestingly, GoApe state that they held an open meeting with Rivington Parish Council. What do they mean by ‘open’? Surely Tristan Mayhew isn’t naive enough to believe that a meeting that was unpublicised, so much so that only three members of the public attended ( maybe by mistake that Chris, Tony and myself found out about it), qualifies in any way shape or form as an ‘open meeting’. Tristan, you are an intelligent and highly qualified person, you alone should have known that this was a woefully inadequate attempt at a public meeting. Sadly, as a result of this, you now play the retro card by ‘publically welcoming all opportunities to discuss concerns with individuals and groups’. You attempt to ingratiate yourself to the reading masses by offering an ‘olive branch’, which continues to mislead all into believing that GoApe is good for Lever Park and your development is not only not detrimental, but indeed beneficial. Sadly it gets worse because it would appear you have convinced CBC.

As for CBC, well they do say that if you say something often enough you will begin to believe it and in this case I do believe that we are close to that point. Unfortunately CBC, we know the truth, and you know we know.

As the ground swell of support for the cause continues to grow, all concerned should be concerned as to there accountability to members of the public they either serve or hopefully value as customers. The fight goes on.

The next meeting of the Friends of Lever Park will be on Tuesday 2nd December 2008 at Horwich Liberal Reform club on Winter Hey Lane. 8.00pm start. Note that this is a new venue (as our numbers have grown, Horwich Conservative Club was unable to offer us a larger room). Here a link to a map of the new venue.