Last Updated: 25 May 08Supporting Sustainable Development

Objecting to Planning Applications 2007

Introduction

Up to date (25th April), Centros Miller has submitted 14 planning applications in support of its plan to demolish the buildings at Stonewell, build an 800-space multi-storey car park and carry out other work in support of its huge shopping centre development on the Canal Corridor site (what they call Castle View).

We urgently need your help to prevent the Centros Miller scheme and provide the opportunity to re-think – with your input – development in the Canal Corridor. You can make a real difference by writing or emailing your objections so that planning officers and the Planning Committee have no doubt as to your feelings. Details of how to do this are given further on in this message. This development can only be defeated by showing how it does not correspond to government policy and the published planning policy of Lancaster City Council itself.

A well-structured letter using key points and references to planning policy will be much more effective than an angry letter, no matter how sincere, and a lot more weight is given to your objection if you can support your case in this way. This recent flyer gives a number of grounds for objection and more are given further down the page.

As of 25th May, though the council website planning section lists the bare details of the applications submitted so far, there are no detailed planning documents . The pdf documents in our 'Planning Applications' and 'Planning Documents' sections were provided to us by the council on CD and you can use the planning application reference numbers listed in the 'Planning Applications' section on this site to search for particular planning applications on the council website if you wish.

How To Object

You can object to a specific application or all the applications as a group. More weight will be given to objections which specify that a planning application does not conform to the Council's Local Plan adopted on 16th April 2004 or the Core Strategy adopted 4th May 2007. You will find links to these in the Council Documents section of this site.

  1. You can object to specific planning applications in detail quoting the application reference number and giving details of your objections. Click on the planning applications tab above then click on the application ref number if you want to see the plans and documents for each application lodged so far.
  2. You can object to all of the applications submitted by Centros Miller regarding the Canal Corridor North site as a group (in detail or in general) in which case you should make this clear and quote all the application reference numbers. For a general objection, you should give your reasons on the grounds that they are all part of the same development which would result in e.g. increase in traffic and air pollution, threat to existing city centre, demolition of historic buildings in a conservation area, lack of consultation etc. Outline Application number 07/00672/OUT gives an overview of the development.

Here is a basic template for a letter of objection to start you off and a checklist for objections.

Time Limit for Objections

The official date for objections to the planning applications has passed, but it is still worth sending an objection in up till the end of June as we have been told that they will still be considered.

Address your objection by letter or email:

  1. Write to Mark Cassidy, Planning Officer, Palatine Hall, Lancaster, LA1 1PW
  2. Email - dcconsultation@lancaster.gov.uk

Please make sure you keep a copy of your objection with the date that is was submitted.

Stopping this development depends on you!

If you care about our city and take the time to object, the planning committee will take note!

More Information on Grounds for Objection

LACK OF CONSULTATION

The Canal Corridor North (CCN) Development Brief emphasizes close consultation with local people in the development of the proposals and states that public consultation is an essential element of the development of plans for the regeneration of the Canal Corridor North (sections 2.4, 2.7 & 4.14) but there has been no consultation conducted by Lancaster City Council about this site since 2001.

  • Section 2.4 states “the regeneration of the area must be carried out in close consultation with local people and address their needs and aspirations”. We believe that Centros Miller have failed to consult local people properly; consultation has not included enough people, and consultation results which asked for a cultural quarter and not retail were disregarded.
  • Section 2.7 states “extensive public involvement in the development of the proposals”
  • Section 4.14 states “The Council intends to progress the development of the area in such a way which maximises the involvement of local people and which reflects local concerns as much as possible. This could mean involving local residents in the nature and detailed design of the proposed improvements and hopefully engendering a sense of ownership in the outcome”.
  • Section 4.14 also states “The council will continue to consult widely as the proposals are developed and involve many different bodies in the process”. In fact consultation was not conducted by the council or an independent third party employed by the council but by Halogen which is the PR company employed by Centros Miller.
  • The LCC Consultation strategy (March 2006) “ recognises and welcomes the fundamental importance of consulting effectively with local people” to ensure that “there is increased public participation in the decision making process.”
  • Clearly Centros and LCC have not fulfilled the criteria on consultation and therefore this contravenes the terms of the Development Plan Brief.

DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS

The Lancaster District Local Plan (LDLP) (Chapter 5 5.7.18) states clearly that consent for the demolition of buildings in a conservation area will not be given unless there are acceptable and DETAILED plans for redevelopment.

  • In many cases Centros have only submitted outline planning applications.
  • The height of many blocks in the scheme is out-of-scale with the surrounding area (and much higher than we could have expected) which will be detrimental to the townscape. This contravenes LDLP Policy E35 which states, “Development proposals which would adversely affect important views into and across a conservation area or lead to an unacceptable erosion of its historic form and layout, open spaces and townscape setting will not be permitted.”
  • It involves the demolition of the buildings at Stonewell (including Stonewell post office) and the bottom end of Moor Lane all inside the City Conservation Area. Centros Miller has produced only an outline planning application for the replacement of this area, not a detailed architectural submission. This contravenes LDLP Policy E37 which states "Proposals to demolish any building within a conservation area will only be approved where detailed planning permission has been given for a scheme of redevlopment which would preserve and enhance the conservation area including effective guarantees of early completion"

IMPACT ON TRAFFIC & AIR POLLUTION

  • It will add thousands of extra cars each day on to our main roads and lead to an increase in traffic on Derwent Rd., Ullswater Rd. and Moor Lane. This contravenes LDLP (Lancaster District Local Plan) Policy T17 which states, “Where the developer is unwilling to meet reasonable targets for minimising the proportion of journeys made to this site by car, development will not be permitted.”
  • The 800 space multi-storey car park contravenes LDLP (Lancaster District Local Plan) Policy T13 which states, “Proposals for additional shopper/ visitor car parking will only be allowed where this is accompanied by an equivalent reduction in the all day commuter parking.”

RETAIL

  • Centros Miller is now seeking permission for a shopping centre even bigger than Fishergate in Preston. It will undermine Lancaster Market and retailing in Morecambe. It will double the shopping space we already have in the existing Lancaster city centre and so undermine its vitality and viability. Centros Miller has utterly failed to justify this increase in the Retail Assessment published with the planning applications. This contravenes government PPS 6. (Planning Policy Statement no.6.) It also contravenes LDLP (Lancaster District Local Plan) Policy S2.
  • The proposed retail development extends far beyond that envisaged in the Canal Corridor Development Plan Brief (the Mitchells Brewery site) to the canal-side. Referring to land between Alfred St./Edward St. and the canal, Paragraph 7.8 of the Development Plan Brief states that “The Council would not wish to encourage retail, commercial, leisure, food and drink uses and other uses likely to attract a lot of people.”

EFFECT ON CITY CENTRE

  • Centros Miller is now seeking permission for a shopping centre one third bigger than Fishergate in Preston. It will undermine Lancaster Market and retailing in Morecambe. It will double the shopping space we already have in the existing Lancaster city centre and so undermine its vitality and viability. Centros Miller has utterly failed to justify this increase in the Retail Assessment published with the planning applications. This contravenes government PPS 6. (Planning Policy Statement no.6.) It also contravenes LDLP (Lancaster District Local Plan) Policy S2.

LACK OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES

  • The CCN Development Brief emphasizes throughout the importance of the area’s cultural facilities (see sections 2.4, 2.8, 4.4, 5.7, 6.14). The Brief states that “the area’s cultural facilities are an essential part of its and the City’s character and should be retained and reinforced as part of the development of the area” (Section 5.7). The CM plans do not reinforce the existing cultural facilities, but may indeed prove a threat to them. The proposed enhancements to the Grand Theatre and Musician’s Coop are not guaranteed but depend on outside funding (not provided by CM). There are no guarantees that the new Coop will be viable in terms of rent or facilities. There have been no plans for how the Coop will be relocated while the build takes place. The CM plans do not guarantee the retention of the Musician’s Coop.
  • Furthermore, the Brief also makes reference to the development of a Cultural Quarter as identified in the City Centre Strategy (Section 4.4). This conforms with local people’s aspirations for the use of the site as per the Real Planning for Lancaster consultation and the CM residents survey. The CM plans do not constitute the development of a cultural quarter. They make some minor enhancements to the Dukes and Grand Theatres and replace the existing Musician’s Coop. These facilities are not linked but are divided by a retail development. The fundamental emphasis of the CM scheme is on retail not cultural facilities. No new cultural facilities are included, although the Brief identifies that “leisure or community leisure uses, such as health and fitness centres are amongst the fastest growing development sectors in the country. The area could provide a suitable location for such uses” (5.8). This again reflects local people’s desire for facilities such as a swimming pool (see RPfL consultation) but is not reflected in the CM plans. No new community facilities of any kind are found in the CM plans.

More Advice on Objecting to Developments

The Campaign for the Protection of Rural England gives advice on How to respond to planning applications in their series of pages on How to Stop or Improve a Bad development. This page includes a sample letter which you can work on in preparation for a formal objection to the planning application due to be made by Centros.

Knowing your rights and how best to use them can be of huge benefit to any campaign. In this 4 page How To: Use Your Rights in Planning Applications, the Friends of the Earth Rights and Justice Team set out some of practical advice on how to make best use of your rights.

The Friends of the Earth 12 page Planning Applications: A Campaigners Guide is concise and easy to read.

Another link on how to object with more useful information on getting your objection right so that it will not be rejected by planning officers.