Reader’s letters - Tuesday May 19, 2015

A 200 year-old barn which would be demolished to make way for a diner (see letter)
A 200 year-old barn which would be demolished to make way for a diner (see letter)
Have your say

An old barn worth saving

I read with interest the article regarding the planning application in relation to a Billy Bob American Style Diner at Myerscough south of Garstang (LEP May 7).

The Wyre Borough Council web page details the application and makes extremely interesting reading. As part of the application agents Rural Solutions commissioned an Historic Building Survey and Assessment Report by Oxford Archaeology North on North Planks Barn which will have to be demolished if the application is granted.

This excellent and in depth report states the barn appears to be in a good structural condition and that it was almost certainly depicted on the Ordnance Survey Map of 1846-47 and may also be the same barn that was noted on the 1833 Commissioners Map.

The report further states that although a relatively large number of combination barns remain in this area of Lancashire, the survival of its 19th century interior, including its arrangement, internal fixtures and fittings, indicates the building to be of local/borough importance when assessed against the scheduling criteria employed by the Secretary of State.

Oxford Archaeology states heritage assets such as this are considered to be “a finite, irreplaceable and fragile resource” and their final recommendation states, “This heritage assessment has identified the barn at North Planks Farm to be a heritage asset of Local/Borough significance that will inevitably be subject to a substantial adverse impact if it were allowed to be demolished”.

Britain’s leading art critic of the Victorian era, John Ruskin, was a vocal advocate of architectural preservation who believed historic buildings were important cultural expressions of the age in which they were built.

He also believed in the role of property owners as custodians, and wrote in his book The Seven Lamps of Architecture, “...it is again no question of expediency or feeling whether we shall preserve the past times or not. We have no right to touch them.

“They are not ours. They belong partly to those who built them and partly to all the generations of mankind who are to follow us”.

This land belongs to the Duchy of Lancaster. I believe they of all people should be setting an example.Myerscough does not need an American Style Diner. This will be a full/major development. It is completely out of character with the beautiful area in which we live and the Duchy should not allow this heritage barn to be demolished.

Angela Washington, Bilsborrow

Warning over parking invoice

I’m writing to warn readers about car parking fines being issued by private companies who ‘manage’ many of the supermarket car parks in the local area.

My wife recently received a parking charge notice for staying longer than the permitted one hour 30 minutes at Aldi, in Leyland,while out shopping.

These invoices are apparently being issued on a large scale for all manner of minor parking misdemeanours. While it is not illegal for car park management companies to issue such notices, people need to be aware that these are not official parking ‘fines’ as issued by the police or local authorities. My wife saw the letter and its legal jargon, assumed it was something to do with the police, panicked and paid it. Anybody who receives such a letter through the post should certainly take legal advice first before paying.

Private firms are not legally allowed to fine or penalise drivers for ‘misusing’ private land and can only impose the charge for potential losses or damages.

Parking at a supermarket carpark is an arrangement between you and the owner of the land only (usually the supermarket) and shoppers can certainly take their business elsewhere if they feel that their goodwill is being abused by those who manage the car parks on behalf of supermarkets like Aldi.

Paul Dodenhoff, Leyland

Terry is a good councillor

I read with some concern that Terry Cartwright has been removed from the planning committee and feels he is no longer going to have the same input in council matters (LEP May 15).

I know nothing of the workings of Preston City Council so cannot comment on why this has happened.

What I do know is how well Terry serves the people he has been elected to serve. He lives in the area, is always about so people can approach him easily with any concerns they may have - and he immediately acts on these concerns.

It would be a great pity if he were not allowed to represent the people of Deepdale as he feels he should.

Marian Vaughn, Deepdale

Act in interests of community

With regard to the plan to build 56 new homes in Mawdesley (LEP April 23), Chorley Council’s development control committee has no fear, it seems, in illustrating to the electorate just whose interests they are supporting in this matter.

I think it’s fair to say it is not the electorate of Mawdesley, or Chorley. It is made clear by parish councillor Martin Boardman that this development by Bloor Homes goes against Chorley Council’s own local development plan, and yet this unwanted and, apparently, destructive expansion has been given the go ahead.So whose interests is the development control committee looking after?

I know whose interests they are supposed to be looking after, but apparently they take a different view.

The time of councils riding roughshod over the legitimate concerns of local people, in favour of nebulous outside interests, are drawing to a close and this kind of council arrogance (if that is all it is), can only hasten that conclusion.

Name and address supplied

Grassing up the ban busters

As California is gripped by drought, stars are angering locals by keeping their own vast lawns green and immaculate. But why don’t they swap their sprinklers for fake grass?

After all, Hollywood loves plastic surgery. Why not plastic grass, too?

Darryl Ashton, Blackpool