Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Friday, 25th July 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the n/a site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Barrage plan put on ice



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
07 November 2007
A controversial plan for a barrage across the River Ribble has been put on hold.
Council bosses are to completetly rethink the £800m Riverworks project, replacing the original plan with three distinct schemes, called Quayside, Canalside and Riverside, which will be examined separately.

And the Riverside part of the scheme – which contains the most controversial elements of Riverworks – has been "put on hold" for the time being, according to council leader Ken Hudson.

The move was today being held up as a victory for public pressure and comes following the Save the Ribble campaign group's two-and-a-half-year battle against the construction of a Ribble barrage and the development of hundreds of homes on river floodplains.

Campaigners have claimed building a barrage could lead to a flooding disaster similar to that seen in Hull this year. It is claimed the scheme would create a permanently high river along a floodplain which stretches from Penwortham Holme to Fishwick Bottoms which would overload drains and spark flash floods in heavy rain.

Instead, ideas such as a mini-tram system around Preston and floating water taxis through the city centre look set to move a step closer after Coun Hudson revealed money is to be spent on top-level probe into the ideas.

Jane Brunning, of of the Save the Ribble campaign, which was set up to oppose Riverworks, said: "It is as well they have split them because it stops the whole project being tarred with the same brush. It makes sense because the other elements have a lot going for them."

Coun Hudson said the decision to put the barrage idea on hold is "due to insufficient consultation with residents of Preston and South Ribble."

For more on this story and further details of the other elements of the project, see Wednesday's Lancashire Evening Post.

The full article contains 311 words and appears in n/a newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 07 November 2007 10:32 AM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Preston
 
Prev
1
Next
1

Samtwist,

Preston 07/11/2007 12:51:36
Well done Save the Ribble campaign. I have not been able to take part because of ill health but have been following your campaign. As a resident for 56 years I have been extremely upset by the proposals to develop our beautiful river side. It is a disgrace that any councillors should even consider backing greedy developers who have no conscience. There are plenty of brown field sites in the area without disturbing the precious natural habitat which we do have.
2

River,

Broadgate 07/11/2007 18:56:39
'Put on hold' does not mean scrapped forever. this could be a piece of clever 'spin' to put residents minds at ease, then when the Save The Ribble Campaign and all the other local environmental campaigners, allotment keepers, footballers, anglers, birdwatchers and cyclists have relaxed and packed away their placards, the council reintroduces this scheme, or something very much like it, through the back door. Hudson must make this pledge "We will NEVER build a barrage on the Ribble, and we will NEVER allow housing to be built all over the greenbelt and floodplain land beside the Ribble". Only then willl local residents be able to feel safe from the depredations of the greedy developers.
Prev
1
Next

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.