Please find enclosed copies of the letters I have sent to United Utilities, Chorley Borough Council and the Ombudsman; and I will be in touch when I receive replies.

It is worth noting that a member of staff, once again, visited Lever Park; and had a good look round the area with the Chair and Vice Chair of Friends of Lever Park. I was deeply concerned to learn of the current state of the site and hope that the organisations involved recognise the scale of anger and upset this project has provoked; and review their positions.

If Go Ape feels that they need to submit and application for new planning permission – then I am concerned as this then suggests that the original planning permission, granted under delegated powers, was not appropriate for the site/project. If new planning permission is not required – then why have a number of trees been identified with blue dots.

I am aware of some comments on the blog/forum which indicate concern at the level of support from myself. I can only make it clear that despite the fact planning is a matter solely for the local authority, I have been heavily involved with researching the 1902 Act with DCLG, liaising with CBC when the original application was submitted – indeed I wrote to the council seeking an extension of the consultation process. My office has attended meetings at the Town Hall and on site at Rivington.

As shown in the contents of the attached letters, I continue to support Friends of Lever Park and would urge any residents to contact me directly on 01257 271 555 should they wish to discuss the matter further.

Kind Regards

Mike Gaskill
On Behalf of Lindsay Hoyle MP

Mr P Greene

Chief Executive

United Utilities

Dear Mr Greene

Re: Go Ape

I am writing to you on behalf of the residents of Rivington and indeed all of those who enjoy visiting Lever Park.

I have been advised by the local authority in Chorley that as the land owner at Rivington, United Utilities is responsible for the conduct and work carried out by Go Ape.

I have recently visited the Go Ape site and for a number of reasons, I am deeply concerned by the state of the site. It would appear that there are two trees, with strapping on, which are outside the permitted development area. Can you confirm whether or not this is the case?

Secondly, it is clear that the construction of one zip-wire in particular is not feasible; due to poor planning on the part of Go Ape – as a result, a number of trees have been felled or pruned unnecessarily. I would be grateful if United Utilities could advise on many trees have been felled or pruned, which are no longer in the pathway of zip-wures. Similarly, how many trees have been felled despite not having specific permission from the council?

As I have mentioned, as the land owner United Utilities has responsibility for Go Ape as the designated developer – which organisation is responsible for any breach of planning permission and what action is currently being taking to clarify this matter.

Fourthly, I am aware that Go Ape are considering submitting a second planning application in order to fell more trees, due to the errors made in the original plan for the site. After visiting the area I have identified around fourteen trees which appear to have been designated for pruning or felling. These trees have been sprayed with a large blue dot.

If Go Ape submits an application to remove more trees I believe it would be deeply detrimental to the area; therefore, I would ask that United Utilities does not allow Go Ape to submit an application to remove, fell or prune any more woodland.

Finally and most importantly – during my visit I identified a number of low level metal zip-wires; there is currently a clear threat to health and safety on the site and I must ask what United Utilities is doing to remedy this situation.

I feel that the decision making process for Go Ape has been deeply flawed and as a result the original plan has now been rendered obsolete, despite the felling of trees; and a new plan is being considered to fell even more trees.

I ask, therefore, if you believe the current state of the site is acceptable and similarly what action United Utilities is able and prepared to take to resolve this matter.

I look forward to your reply.

Yours Sincerely

Lindsay Hoyle MP

Ms Donna Hall

Chief Executive

Chorley Borough Council

Dear Donna

Re: Go Ape

I am writing to you on behalf of the residents of Rivington and indeed all of those who enjoy visiting Lever Park.

Further to your conversation with Mike, from my office, I thought it would be useful to write formally to provide my views on the situation.

Firstly, I appreciate that the Go Ape development has caused significant level of consternation for local residents and visitors to the park, who do not feel that under the Liverpool Corporation Act 1902 that the venture should go ahead.

However, I have been in touch with the Department for Communities and Local Government, which has advised that it is unable to state that the act has not been violated. If residents wish to pursue this specific issue, then it is a matter for the courts therefore I would ask if Chorley Borough Council would consider assisting Friends of Lever Park with this endeavour.

Secondly, I have recently visited the Go Ape site and for a number of reasons, I am deeply concerned by the state of the site. It would appear that there are two trees, with strapping on, which are outside the permitted development area. Can you confirm whether or not this is the case?

Thirdly, it is clear that the construction of one zip-wire in particular is not feasible; due to poor planning on the part of Go Ape – as a result, trees that have already been felled or pruned are now not in the path of the zip-wire. I would be grateful if the planning department could advise on many trees have been felled or pruned, unnecessarily. Similarly, how many trees have been felled despite not having specific permission from the council?

United Utilities are the land owners and Go Ape is the designated developer – which organisation is responsible for an breach of planning permission and what action is Chorley Borough Council taking against the appropriate company.

Fourthly, I am aware that Go Ape are considering submitting a second planning application in order to fell more trees, due to the errors made in the original plan for the site. After visiting the area I have identified around fourteen trees which appear to have been designated for pruning or felling.

If Go Ape submits an application to remove more trees I believe it would be detrimental to the area and indeed make a mockery of the planning process; therefore, I would ask that if such an application is made – then it is put before full committee and not considered under delegated powers.

Finally and most importantly – during my visit I identified a number of low level metal zip-wires; there is currently a clear threat to health and safety on the site. Whilst I appreciate that this is the responsibility of LCC, I must ask how Chorley Borough Council working to make the site safe.

I aware that there is a strong feeling that the planning and decision making process for Go Ape has been deeply flawed and as a result the original plan has now been rendered obsolete, despite the felling of trees; and now a new plan is being considered to fell even more trees.

I ask, therefore, if you believe the current state of the site is acceptable and similarly do you still believe that the original planning application for Go Ape should have been considered under delegated powers?

I look forward to your reply.

Yours Sincerely

Lindsay Hoyle MP

Mrs Anne Seex

Local Government Ombudsman

Dear Mrs Seex

Re: Go Ape Development – Rivington, Chorley

I am writing to you in response to your letter dated 10^th March 2008 sent to my constituent, Mr Dootson, in his capacity of Chairman of Friends of Lever Park.

The correspondence you have sent is the provisional view of the Local Government Ombudsman; regarding the complaint made by Friends of Lever Park.

Having read the document, I am deeply concerned, as are members Friends of Lever Park – that the LGO does not feel it should investigate any further.

The decision to pass the original planning application under delegated powers, was clearly not in the best interests of the area.

Indeed, your letter notes that the area was not clearly recognised as a Historic Park; however, it is clearly identified on the Chorley Borough Council’s website as such a site.

Since you issued your provisional response – work has continued and indeed work has gone beyond the agreed development site. A large number of trees have been identified for either removal or trimming, subject to a second planning application. These trees have been sprayed with a large blue dot.

To conclude, the original planning permission which was granted under Delegated Powers has now been proven to be inappropriate; as the project simply can not be completed in line with the agreed planning permission.

In order for the project to be completed, more trees will have to be felled and pruned in order to re-route the zip wire. If the planning authority permits this, then it will support the view that the original planning permission was flawed.

I would be grateful if you could advise me as to why you do not feel that the above points are relevant, and why you do not feel they support the complaint made by the Friends of Lever Park.

I look forward to your reply.

Yours Sincerely,

Lindsay Hoyle MP

Share/Bookmark

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/lindsay_hoyle/chorley

Alternatively,

From www.lindsayhoyle.com:

35-39 Market Street
Chorley
Lancashire
PR7 2SW

Chorley Constituency telephone:  01257 271555
Chorley Constituency fax:  01257 277462

House of Commons telephone:  020 7219 3515
House of Commons fax:  020 7219 3831

e-mail:  hoylel@parliament.uk

Share/Bookmark