The Best Guide for the Neston Area

Travellers Will Not Have New Home at Neston's Clayhill

It has been announced that plans for a permanent Gypsy & Travellers site in Neston have been shelved.

Outlined in red, the area suggested for a Gypsy & Traveller site in
Neston.

A meeting of Cheshire West and Chester Council's Conservative Group members last night heard that a business with a substantial existing presence on the Clayhill Light Industrial Park off Liverpool Road, will be given the option to purchase the land that they had previously expressed an interest in.  The site will now be taken off the list going forward to the Planning Committee.

The business concerned, Cheshire Spas and Pools, will be offered the opportunity to purchase the land within a prescribed time scale, with a backstop date for completion of the development, with a view to facilitating additional employment and training opportunities in the area.

When six potential Traveller sites in the Cheshire West and Chester area were announced in early September, the suggestion that one of these be located adjacent to Neston's only industrial park, one of the area's few centres of employment, was roundly criticised. 

A meeting of the Council's Executive on September 7th was 'standing room only' as Council Members explained they had a duty to provide legal sites for the Gypsy and Traveller community, otherwise they would be liable to lose planning appeals against the refusal to grant applications on unauthorised sites.  However, residents, businesses, the Chamber of Trade and local ward Councillor Andy Williams were vociferous in their objections to the site on Buildwas Road being developed.  It also emerged, on the day of the Executive meeting, that Council officers working with consultants Eskogen on drawing up the shortlist, had not been aware of the proposed business expansion onto the land they had earmarked in Neston.

The original article (see below) on AboutMyArea/NESTON sparked a huge debate, with an unprecedented number of comments left by readers.  In addition, a simple survey asking readers to vote 'yes' or 'no' to a site in Neston left no doubt, with a resounding 98% against. 

Residents near the Saughall site, pictured with
Stephen Mosley MP, mounted a robust campaign.

In a further development, the same meeting yesterday heard that due to access issues and the discovery of several species of bat - the common Pipistrelle and other rare breeds including Myotis (either whiskered Brandts or Daubentons) and Noctule, the earmarked transit site at Oakwood Farm, Saughall, must also be taken out of the running. 

Nearby residents had been infuriated at the choice of the green belt location.  Local MP Stephen Mosley said at the time: "I am disappointed that the site appears to be referred to as a ‘former Highways Agency site' when in fact the Council well knows that the site has always been a farm and was only granted temporary permission to change its usage to a Highways Agency site as part of the development of the junction between Parkgate Road and the A5117, specifically on the condition that it would return to its original categorisation as farmland upon completion of the works undertaken by the Highways Agency."

It was also argued that neither the Neston site or the Saughall location met the criteria stated in the consultants' own documentation, relating to proximity to schools, shops and health centres in particular.

This week's Executive meeting (Wednesday November 2nd) will receive a recommendation for the remaining proposed permanent sites on the original list - two in Winsford, one at Bumpers Lane, Chester and one at Rossmore Road Ellesmere Port - to go forward to the Planning Committee for consideration and public consultation.  In addition, an alternative transit site, to replace the Saughall option, will be sought.

Said Councillor Herbert Manley, Executive Member for Prosperity: "We have said from the outset that moving to planning permission was only a stage in the process that would lead to full officer consideration of each site and comprehensive public consultation.

"All the many points made by members of the public would have been considered in full but circumstances surrounding the Neston and Oakwood Farm sites suggest that it would be inappropriate to progress further on either."

"However, it is vital that we continue to address the ‘loophole' in planning law by moving forward with the other sites and also continuing our search for a suitable transit base."

Related content:

Consultants Propose Official Traveller Site in Neston
(This article may take some time to load, due to the sheer volume of comments added).

Gypsy Site in Neston Threatens New Local Jobs

Council Accepts Gypsy Plan for Cheshire West Needs More Work

Report this article as inappropriate

Comments

Mike Shipman

At 11:55 on 2nd November 2011, Mike Shipman commented:

While this is no doubt welcome news for nearly all Neston folk, it does strike me as alarming that this decsion can be taken by one party at its group meeting! Why have Council meetings any more! Invcidentally, it was of course the Tory group that suggested it in the first place!

[Report this comment as inappropriate]

,

At 18:20 on 2nd November 2011, , commented:

Excellent news for Neston and also for Oakwood which I drive past every day.

Local councillors such as Andy Williams and the editors on this site should be congratulated for all their efforts and hard work

As for CWAC as a local authorityand the tory group that proposed this in the first place ... well... not impressed on so many levels would be an understatement !

[Report this comment as inappropriate]

You need to log in before you can do that! It's only a quick registration process to join the AMA network and completely free.