I am not, in
principle, opposed to the application to develop a Football facility on the
Charnock Richard, 18 hole, Golf Course land, especially as change of use from
agricultural to what it is today went largely unopposed when the planning
application for the Golf Course was approved.
I do
however have several concerns regarding the plans that have been submitted and
their impact on the Green Belt. I hope these concerns will be taken into
account by the Planning Officers, when making a recommendation, and the members
of the Development Control members Committee, when making a decision.
In common
with all golf courses, Charnock Richard Golf Course comprised areas of finely
tended greens, regularly mowed fairways and significant areas of rough, with
long grass, hedgerows, trees and natural flora and fauna, much of which was
left untended, the golf course was frequently unplayable due to it being
waterlogged. The result was a significant area of natural wildlife habitat and
also a landscape in keeping with the surrounding fields. In its current state,
the many acres that were the Golf Course is even more of a wildlife haven.
The
proposed football academy involves the generation of a large area of
uninterrupted, finely tended and drained, football pitches, which will not only
be without any features but will also employ a grass not endemic to, or in
keeping with, the surrounding area.
The change
can be clearly seen when comparing pages 5 and 6 of the Design and Access
Statement. Page 5 is as it was when the golf course existed and looks in
keeping with the surrounding area, page 6 is the proposed layout where all the
natural features have been destroyed leaving a featureless, flat, uninterrupted
expanse of unnatural grass and artificial turf.
During its
existence several planning applications were submitted to alter the Golf
Course, many were approved, some withdrawn and some refused. Those refused
include the application for a temporary pay kiosk at tee 1 and extensions to
the existing buildings. The extensions to the existing buildings were less than
that part of the current application that alters the existing buildings, the
refusals were because the applications were inappropriate in the Green Belt.
The
temporary kiosk application was refused, as it was also considered
inappropriate in the green belt and the land was described by the planning
officer, not only as being in the green belt but, as an area of special
landscape located within the green belt.
The
proposed building alteration and the addition of a new indoor pitch, regardless
of whether it is full size or not, result in a volume increase in excess of
that suggested in planning policy, as it is volume that has an impact on
openness of green belt not floor area.
There is no
doubt that the application, not only the existing building alteration and
in-particular the indoor pitch, but also the significant change to the openness
that would come about through removal of natural breaks in the landscape which
feature throughout the surrounding area, is inappropriate
in the green belt. The applicant has therefore to demonstrate that there are
very special circumstances that outweigh the harm to the green belt. Provision
of outdoor sport may be considered a very special circumstance and we need to
question whether an indoor pitch is essential for what is an outdoor sport, it
might be good to have but is it essential? A vast expanse of uninterrupted
playing fields and a large number of pitches simulating potential opposition
grounds, enabled through the removal of natural breaks, may be good to have,
but are they essential?
Football is
an outdoor sport, as is Golf, and whilst planning policy may have changed the
need to protect green belt not only remains but is increasingly important. The
land remains the same land, on which a temporary kiosk was refused, so must
still be an area of special landscape, worthy of protection.
There must
be some way that a football academy can be developed whilst retaining many of
the existing features, that Chorley Council Planners have previously confirmed
to be part of an area of very special landscape. Pitches must be able to be
laid out such that they are separated by existing, or even replanted, hedgerows
and lines of trees, thereby retaining wildlife corridors and natural habitats.
It must also be possible to provide some community use or benefit, previously
there was a restaurant, retail golf shop and a sporting facility, open to
anyone who chose to join, or pay to play; this football academy proposal does
nothing even similar.
In summary,
the application being inappropriate in the green belt is without question what
is at question is whether the applicant can demonstrate very special
circumstances that outweigh harm to the green belt, provision of outdoor sport
being one of those very special circumstances.
I have
little doubt that with some modification to the plans, to provide community use
or benefit, obviously respecting the need for privacy of the elite players, and
to protect the area, as described by Chorley Council’s Planning Officers as an
area of special landscape, the application could become appropriate in the
green belt.
