[Accura]

You will therefore know that both Vernons and Penwortham Holmes are used by hundreds of Preston and South Ribble people every day

For Vernon's this is true. However, I dont believe that the size of Vernons is justified for its useage. Plenty of people use the place, but not the entire place. The labour club, fine, the bowling green, fine, the cricket pitch and pavillion, fine, the two inner football pitches, fine. But... the pitches that feel like they're miles from the facility are a waste of space.
For the Holme, this is definitely NOT true. In fact, I think the way that the Holme is managed is disgusting in that it EXCLUDES the people of the local community, restricting it only to the amatuer league teams who play to use it. And even if the people of Penwortham were allowed to use it, I doubt they would because its so badly cut off from the community by the bypass and that massive junction.

with allotments nearby cultivated by devoted gardners: hardly an area of land that is 'underused'.

Many of the allotments are neglected and dont look good at all. In recent years, many have been demolished and land has been cleared.

You will be kicking hundreds of football loving kids off this land

South Ribble Council have already done that.

and substituting it with a 'water sports park' that might get used for a couple of weeks every summer

You place too much emphasis on the watersports aspect of the plan. First and foremost, this will be a public park. This park will contain facilities for watersports, something which neither Preston or South Ribble cater for at the moment.

There is no need whatsoever for 4000 new houses in Preston or South Ribble - as you will see if you read this: Riverworks - The Housing Sums That Dont Add Up. Only in a council like Preston can 0+0=4000.

Depends on the catagory of housing. A couple of years ago, GONW published a report which said that Preston had a problem of housing oversupply (you may remember) which led to the rejection of a scheme which would have turned Oyston Mill into a residential development.
A couple of months later, GONW stated that a massive error in their study meant that the stats were wrong and Preston in fact had a shortage of housing.
You also have to consider demand in different locations of the city. You have included only part of Preston City Council's housing policy in that page (which obviously plays in your favour) and missed out the part where it says that although demand may be fairly steady for housing in the suburbs, demand is much higher in more prime areas of the city such as the Uni, the city centre and the docks. High quality housing in prime locations like this is always going to sell leading to an increase in the population which = more interest, and more jobs!!!

Building a barrage would disrupt this flow and destroy the environment that so many endangered species depend on.

I fail to see how it would disrupt the silt flow. Yes, the tide would be higher, but a vast amount of silt will still wash up on the bank.

Artificially raising the level of the river, so that it is permanently at high tide WILL have consequences for the level of standing water under our houses. Preston City Council cannot be allowed to take such risks with our homes and our environment.

Before doing this, detailed studies will be taken to assess the flood risk. Something that will be far more reliable than a guess from people who are dead set against a project.

What must not be allowed to happen is for Preston City Council to spend public money on studies to test the feasibility of a housing scheme which, under its own planning policy, stands as much chance of coming to reality as Togo have of winning the World Cup.

Thats laughable. Some aspects of the project are already under construction!

[Riversider]

Latest news is that the National Lottery have snubbed the council's bid to fund their feasibilty studies for the Riverworks housing and barrage plans: http://save-the-ribble.blogspot.com/2006/0...-community.html

All the time and money the council spent preparing this unsuccessful bid could have been spent ASKING THE PEOPLE WHAT THEY ACTUALLY WANTED.

It remains to be seen whether this is a fatal blow to the Riverworks ideas - but it is a sign of how much the development ideas stink when the lottery people wont go near it with a barge pole.

As well as sabotaging our football pitches, and ruining the river, Riverworks will destroy valued allotments, here is what Elaine, and allotment keeper had to say on the save the Ribble Blog: Save The Ribble - Allotment keeper speaks out

Elaine, an allotment holder, shares all allotment holders' concerns about the apparent threat to all the allotments on the Penwortham side of the Ribble by ideas for new housing developments shown on Preston City Council's "composite masterplan":

'I am seriously concerned that the proposed development threatens our allotment site. At 139 plots Penwortham Holme West is one of the largest allotment sites in Preston and also one of the oldest. There has been allotments on this site since circa 1913. Our site has a rich and valuable heritage and history. And it is not just Penwortham Holme West which would be affected but the allotment site at Penwortham Holme East as well.

The health and social benefits of allotments and of gardening and growing your own vegetables are well known. Promotion of these benefits has finally being given support and is being widely advertised by government, local and health authorities. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has endorsed its support of allotment gardening and provision of allotment sites. Thanks to short-sited and commercially orientated decisions of many of our local authorities and the depredations of property developers many allotment sites have been sold off and built on. Once these sites go they are lost forever. Currently there is a national shortage of allotments and increased awareness of the value of sites.

Penwortham Holme allotments themselves were threatened by development when South Ribble Council proposed to build a ‘park and ride’ on the site. Following a full public enquiry in 1996, the proposals were resoundingly rejected. At the time of enquiry, Preston City Council raised formal objections! The Inspector’s report cited the importance of the allotments in terms of providing a green corridor and the rich variety of wildlife the allotments have supported.

In my 6 years as a plot holder I have never ceased to marvel at the rich diversity of wildlife and plants that the site supports. The site supports a multitude of birdlife including hawks, finches, and the ubiquitous robins, bats, toads and frogs, ducks, weasels, rabbits, mice and voles (not to mention our allotment cat). The fact that this site and its infrastructure has been used for allotment growing over such a long and continuous period has allowed plant and wildlife unique opportunities to thrive and develop alongside the tenants, and allotment growing gives tenants a unique opportunity to observe it.

It is also a thriving social community – there can be few places where people of all backgrounds, ethnicity, religions and ages mix on a day to day communal basis. The social aspects and the diversity and richness of allotment life cannot be over emphasized. For many tenants with no garden at home, the allotment is the only regular opportunity of connecting with nature, of gardening and of getting out in the fresh air in a rural environment. Plots are not just for vegetable production, but are also used for social, health, and leisure purposes by tenants and their families.

Preston City Council has recently spent thousands of pounds clearing up and bringing parts of the site that were neglected, overgrown and impossible to let back in to use. Thanks to the unstinting efforts of our Site Secretary, our site is currently fully tenanted and we have a waiting list. The tenancy profile of the plot has changed markedly and many of our tenants are women and families whose children are reaping the educational and health benefits of growing and eating vegetables and understanding the link between nature, growing and producing food and healthy eating. It therefore beggars belief that the same Council that has devoted time and resources to regenerating the site now finds that it is expendable – especially when the publicity for the proposed Riverworks projects cites social and environmental benefits as a motivation for the development. I am deeply concerned that our allotments may be under threat. It is not just current tenants who could be affected but future generations who would be deprived of a unique and valuable opportunity. Allotments are a priceless and irreplaceable community asset.'

Elaine

[Accura]

Once again you have failed to paint the whole picture in your argument. This was no ordinary lottery funding bid. This was part of a TV competition. Something which would be far more difficult to secure as opposed to a normal lottery bid.

Its all very well one person having an opinion on something which will affect thousands. I respect her point of view, but in a modern democracy, should her opinion be put above that of the majority.

[Jovahi]

I doubt half the opposition to these plans have actually looked at them. They just hear the word 'Riverside Development' and then straight to action stations... oppose oppose oppose!
They arnt going to be building on the green space on the SR side of the Ribble, they are going to simply be enhancing it so that it will be better for visitors. We're not talking apartments or anything, were simply talking new pathways, cycleways, planting of more trees, better access for visitors etc.
Here is an overall map of the plans:


I dont know how anybody can turn down this plan. This plan actually guaruantees the safety of much of Preston's green space next to the Ribble for the distant future. A whole new county park up at Fishwick, a chance to repair the mistakes at the docks that were made a few decades ago, utilising the old East Lancs line for better transport into the city, extension of the Lancaster Canal along its old route into the city...

And as for putting the Ribble's natural floodplain at risk... I would've thought they would have come up with a more creative excuse than that.

I know this area of the Ribble and I have looked at the plans in your post. You say, "They arnt going to be building on the green space on the SR side of the Ribble, they are going to simply be enhancing it so that it will be better for visitors." BUT, where the new housing areas are marked IS CURRENTLY GREEN space.

Please explain?

[wallasey]

The tramway idea for Preston is a great idea! I hope that goes ahead! Although, it would be nice if it would serve the City Centre and also Deepdale; if this were to happen, Preston would have quite a efficent network to boast about....

[preston_guy]

The tramway idea for Preston is a great idea! I hope that goes ahead! Although, it would be nice if it would serve the City Centre and also Deepdale; if this were to happen, Preston would have quite a efficent network to boast about....

It's funny how it's gone full circle: we had loads of trams, ripped them all up and now want to put them down again! I think it is a very good idea though and would help ease congestion. I'd certainly use a tram if there was one! Preston would benefit from a transport system similar to Toronto's where you can hop on a streetcar, get off and then get on a bus (going in the same direction) with one ticket. For example, i could get a bus from Penwortham to the tram station then a tram into the city centre. Then in time they could rip up the Ringway ;-)

[fez]

By the time these outdated schemes manage to pay for themselves we'll be "flying" around the public transport systems... anyone seen "Back to the Future"

p.s. trams need their OWN roads. If they share car roads, they will get stuck in the same traffic.

A bit like bus lanes. Ohhhhhhh, why put tram lines down. Who still thinks it is a good idea????

[Riversider]

Johavi - I think you have spotted the fatal flaw in Accura's argument - a new housing estate is always going to be a housing estate, and can not be honestly described as an 'enhanced green space' - however much our council officials think they can torture the English language.

[Riversider]

South Ribble Borough Council's rejection of the 'Expansion and growth at all costs' merger with Preston City Council is a big setback to the Riverworks proposals. It will mean that any developments on the Southern bank of the Ribble will still need to be cleared by South Ribble Borough Council and Lancashire County Council (As well as the Environment Agency, who are very anti building in flood plains).

Preston City Council should now admit they got it wrong, and withdraw their threat to barrage the Ribble and build 4000 houses in it's floodplain - a threat that is causing consternation and alarm among local people and environmentalists.

[preston_guy]

Arena forms part of £800m riverside plans
Preston could get a landmark new building and a concert arena as part an ambitious £800m scheme to transform the area.
A vision for the Riverworks scheme, a 20-year plan to create jobs, homes, shops, leisure, and a city park, centred on the river and canal, is being pulled together by planners.

Among the proposals are a landmark building at the marina end of Preston Dock and a performance arena in the same area.

On the east side of the city, centred on Fishwick and Brockholes Brow, plans are in the pipeline for a "major outdoor leisure resource".

Projects leaders have split the scheme into five sections, known as Quality Riverside, Docklands, Canalside, Central Park and Riverside East.

The Quality Riverside area, between the M6 in the east and the River Douglas to the west, would include the building of a controversial barrage, at a cost of up to £60m.

Council leaders say the barrage would keep the water level constant to "establish Preston as a national centre for water-based leisure activities." Part of the plan is to create a new Ribble Estuary Regional Park.

But this has attracted opposition from a number of areas, particularly the Save The Ribble Campaign group, which is strongly opposed to the barrage and the lack of consultation.

Save the Ribble campaigners believe the construction of a barrage would create flooding risks and bring "disastrous consequences" for the environment, particularly the 250,000 birds which inhabit the Ribble estuary.

There has also been concern raised by residents worried about how the development would affect Penwortham Holme Recreation Centre and the neighbouring allotments.

Mike Brogan, assistant director of city projects at Preston Council, said: "The councils (Preston and South Ribble) do not, at this stage, wish to raise false hopes or fears by carrying out public consultation on ideas which have yet to be developed."

The plan for Preston Dock, described as "an area of immense untapped potential," is to possibly relocate or redevelop the existing shops.

It would also incorporate possible plans for a landmark building at one end of the dock.

This ambitious £190m scheme will cover an area of 68 hectares and would include homes, shops, restaurants and bars, with the centrepiece being a landmark civic area, such as an arena.

Meanwhile, the city's canal network would also benefit with the restoration of a section of the Lancaster Canal close to the university.

The idea behind the £350m Central Park is to bring together both sides of the river with moorings and jetties and a new pedestrian bridge at the lower river level to link the north and south banks.

The east side of Preston would also benefit, with proposals to link the river to surrounding neighbourhoods across 172 hectares.

[Riversider]

We just got hold of some of the Vision Board's minutes - read more here: LUNCH IS ON US

[Accura]

If anything, that 'article' tells me that Save the Ribble is running out of ammo and is turning to deperate tactics. In that article, all you have done is 2+2=5. You have taken the whole 'City Vision' thing out of context, backing up your arguments with lies and speculation, nothing more. You have no real evidence that the board is making decisions for the city. The board was commissioned to offer advice and strategies on how to best develop the city's economy from a range of perspectives, not make decisions. All planning decisions made in Preston are made by the Planning Department.

[Riversider]

Here's an article explaining what people living on the Fylde think about Preston's Riverworks Proposals

[Paul]

And here's an article by LEP columnist Phil Widdows

A snippet

I've had an idea. It's a great scheme, a brilliant brainwave, and if we all just agree to go ahead with it, it will bring loads of jobs, help the environment, and make where we live into a much better place.
Here we go then, this is the plan. We dig a great big tunnel straight down from the middle of Lancashire until we come out somewhere in Australia! Think of how much better it would be to travel by tunnel to Oz than spewing out greenhouse gas with a great big airplane.

In fact, you could fall half the way there, for free! How would we do it? I don't know. Where would we put the tunnel? Search me! How much would it cost? Well, I could make a wild guess, but that would just be silly.

Full article
Is the barrage a pipe dream?

[Riversider]

I've a lot of admiration for Phil Widdows, and his article on the barrage went right to the heart of the matter - it is not HOW but WHY - why on earth do we need it? What possible benefit could it bring to anyone?

One thing I think he is wrong about is that he is underestimating the determination of some elements within and without the council to push this barrage project through, no matter what the evidence is against it, or how many people oppose it. There are huge vested interests at stake here and huge opportunities for profit, and some people will do anything, no matter how ridiculous, stupid or damaging to make a fast buck.

[El Toro]

Riversider......

Looks as if your and all your collegues hard work ( and a modicumof common sense ) and an act of the good lord above......has made a difference!

Well done all!! Its a start!

http://www.lep.co.uk/news?articleid=2995255

Be safe!

[Mr Fell]

Lets hope that the good old common sense of the people prevails.

[Riversider]

With 74% of local people against this scheme, there is clearly no mandate for the barrage or the floodplain housing scheme.

We at Save The Ribble will not be starting our celebrations yet - there are still huge potential profits to be made, and this can drive businesses and councils to do stupid, irresponsible and unpopular things.

I fear that Preston people may have many battles to come if we are to finally defeat these developer-driven ideas.

It can be done though, and in other areas protesters using legal action in the courts and direct action in the fields and trees have considerably delayed many environmentally unsound projects, and doubled or tripled their already considerable costs.

With the huge amount at stake, the environment and the flood risk to our homes, I think many people would find lots of imaginative ways to resist these proposals.

[Paul]

With the huge amount at stake, the environment and the flood risk to our homes, I think many people would find lots of imaginative ways to resist these proposals.

I'd have loved the 'idea' of the barrage, a watersports facility on my door step, a new central park area and extensive areas for outdoor leisure would have been brilliant, and I answered the LEP's survey as such. But in my opinion, mainly formed by your ramblings Riversider, I feel I would have to vote against it on mainly environmental and flood risk grounds.

[Riversider]

It's a testament to the power of the internet (and the power of our case) that a small group of amateurs with no money and very busy lives like 'Save The Ribble' could win the public opinion debate, even when faced with the Preston Vision Board, with all their professional backing from overpaid consultants, their funding (with taxpayers money) from the North West Development Agency and the Council and all their glossy pamphlets full of developers' doublespeak.

The tide has certainly turned against this development, it remains to be seen whether the council, like King Canute tries to ignore the tide, or whether they actually learn that THEY NEED TO START LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE.

Instead they seem to be trying to insulate themselves further from the people and their representatives, here is a comment that Councillor Jack Davenport just posted on our blog:

Cllr Jack Davenport said...
It is also worth noting that both the Tories and Lib Dems backed and passed proposals to move the power and decision making over large grants from the Council to the City Centre Committee. This effectively means that in the future most Councillors will not be able to get a say in large scale projects (for example, the feasibility study for the Barrage). This removes the bulk of democratic opposition (or support) to any project and renders voter representation virtually mute on the subject. The report presented to Council mentioned the Vision Board frequently and it looks increasingly likely that the Committee will become a rubber stamping body for whatever the Vision Board wants to do or recommends.

You can read the blogpost and Jack Davenport's comments here