AN angry councillor at Warrington is demanding that a gun club which has forced a controversial public inquiry should pay the £75,000 costs if its planning appeal is unsuccessful.
Cllr Russ Bowden (pictured), the borough council’s lead member for corporate resources, claims the club has shown scant regard for the planning process and has continued develop a site at Rixton without planning consent.
He says the cost of the inquiry is likely to be around £75,000 and it would be unacceptable for the council to bear the cost of a “frivolous appeal.”
The council refused planning consent for a clay pigeon shooting range at Prospect Farm, Rixton, in February.
The decision was welcomed by local residents and by other objectors, including Birchwood Town Council, Rixton-with-Glazebrook Parish Council, the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, Warrington Nature Conservation Forum, Risley Moss Action Group and Woolston Eyes Conservation Group.
But the Prospect Target Club has appealed and a public inquiry will be held in November.
Cllr Bowden said: “This shooting club is not needed or welcome, since it would have a devastating impact on Risley Moss – a Site of Special Scientific Interest – as well as the residential amenity of many hundreds of homes in Birchwood and Rixton.
“That view was supported by the planning committee and so it was very disappointing to see that the applicant didn’t get the message. They have shown scant regard for the planning process and have continued to develop the site without consent.
“The council must now press for the applicant to meet the costs of the planning inquiry if the refusal is upheld by the planning inspector.
“At a time when we are dealing with savage government cuts in funding, it would be simply unacceptable for the council to foot the bill for this frivolous appeal. I will therefore be pressing for the full costs of the inquiry to be met by the applicant in the event that their appeal is refused. ”
More than 350 individual objections were received to the application, plus two petitions signed by a total of 269 people.
Clay pigeon shooting on the site is permitted on 28 days in a year without planning consent – and has been going on for some time. But permission is required for the club to operate throughout the year.
The shooting club say the development would provide essential and secure training for amateur and professional shooters.
There are 300 members of the British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) in Cheshire but only one accredited BASC facility in the county.
Ten new jobs would be created and five existing jobs retained and the facility would attract £400,000 a year in consumer expenditure at local hotels, food, retail and leisure outlets.
Council should not have to pay for gun club's 'frivolous' appeal
99 Comments
Share.
About Author
Gary Skentelbery
Experienced journalist for more than 40 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with three in-house titles and on-line daily newspaper for Warrington. Experienced writer, photographer, PR consultant and media expert having written for local, regional and national newspapers. Specialties: PR, media, social networking, photographer, networking, advertising, sales, media crisis management. Chair of Warrington Healthwatch Director Warrington Chamber of Commerce Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.
9 Comments
I note the “savage government cuts” got its usual mention.
No matter how savage the cuts they always find there’s enough in the kitty to pay well above the norm salary increases to senior managers, whilst pleading the cuts have limited pay increases to those on the front line.
Waiting for some wearisome individual to whitter on with some irrelevancy about different budgets being involved. It’s all our money folks!
By exercising their statutory right to go to an appeal surely the gun club are following the planning process to the letter. Just because some councillors with an overinflated sense of their own importance don’t like it is no reason to deny anyone their legitimate rights.
typical….. that bloody democracy thing getting in the way of the Council knowing best again!
But they shouldn’t expect everyone else to pay for it if they lose then, should they?
Democracy as we know it in Warrington means “government by discussion but it is only effective if you can stop people talking”
You obviously don’t live anywhere near the proposed site then because it will be hell for people who live near by
Why will it be hell for people living near by?