LAST Thursday, the Borough Council’s Planning Committee met to discuss two planning applications relating to Edge Hill.
The first was an extension of its facilities into the Green Belt for the provision of new sports & recreation complex incorporating: erection of sports building and outdoor sports facilities, pitches and games courts, associated landscaping, lighting and boundary treatments. Formation of new signal-controlled junction with the A570 St Helens Road and internal access road to serve as the principal entrance to the whole campus. The provision of permanent car parking (708 from temporary to permanent and 230 new permanent spaces) and associated lighting and landscaping. Creation of woodland planting, wetland pond and trim-trail. Engineering works to re-profile the site and to facilitate the development.
The second application considered was plans to build student accommodation (384 units) comprising six separate three storey blocks including associated landscaping.
The public gallery was pretty full and a number of representations were made by local residents and community groups, as well as Cllr Adrian Owens, who all made some extremely valid points and were congratulated on their submissions by the Leader of the Council.
Representations were made on behalf of the applicant, who I questioned in detail about concerns over floodlighting pollution and also about concerns that a new junction could push traffic further up St Helens Road and therefore encourage ‘rat running’ down Scarth Hill Lane, Altys Lane and Blackmoss Lane.
Following the submissions, there was a lengthy debate where many councillors raised issues.
For my own part, in relation to the first application, I moved a recommendation to the Committee that the application be deferred pending the outcome of the consultation process into the Borough Council’s Draft Local Plan, as part of the consultation covers the expansion of Edge Hill. I countered that it would be appropriate to wait to hear what the public had to say on the strategy as a whole before considering the application, an application which I told the Committee I had a number of concerns about.
However, when it went to the vote, my recommendation was refused so when the vote came recommending that planning permission be granted, I could not support it.
The second application relating to the provision of more student accommodation also raised concerns. Having looked at all the information, and listening to the representations, I suggested to the committee that there was a slightly ‘Utopian’ feel being put across, in the sense that if these blocks are built, it will solve the problem of HMOs (Homes in Multiple Occupancy) in Ormskirk. As I told the Committee, it would be fanciful to think that if the proposals were passed, streets with high numbers of HMOs would suddenly become deserted by students relocating to campus.
The report did consider it inappropriate development into the Green Belt, and for that reason, as well as other concerns I raised during the debate, I voted against it.
Posted by David Sudworth 
