STRONG opposition to allocating land off Ben Lane for future housing development was voiced when Barnoldswick Town Council hosted the annual town meeting on Monday.

Often a poorly attended affair, this year's meeting was the exception, with the Civic Hall packed with residents deeply concerned about the housing land allocation.

As previously reported, Pendle councillors are required to identify land which can realistically be developed for housing over the next five years. In West Craven, an extensive consultation exercise was carried out to gauge opinion on several potential sites.

When Pendle Council's West Craven committee met last week, its members had the unenviable task of identifying that land. They stressed repeatedly that it was a decision they didn't want to make - they would rather see no new housing in Barnoldswick.

But it was a job they could not shirk. If they failed to make the decision, then it would be made for them by outside developers who would come in and cherry pick prime greenfield sites.

After long and sometimes heated debate, the members had passed a resolution identifying a 1.44 hectare plot next to Fernbank Mill and a one hectare site to the north of Ben Lane, subject to a new access directly off Skipton Road. If that access proves impossible, then there would be further consultation with a view to developing land off Valley Road, to the rear of Ethel Street.

That resolution was due to go to Pendle's policy committee for confirmation last night (Thursday), and residents opposed to the site off Ben Lane were due to attend and protest.

But before that they made their views known at Monday's Barnoldswick town meeting, and sought the support of the town council in their fight.

Michael Scothern, who lives in the Ben Lane area, said he and other residents had been disappointed at last week's meeting, feeling the decision had been made prior to it.

"It didn't matter what was said that night, the decision had already been made," he said.

"Many valid points were brought up about Ben Lane but they were pushed to one side."

Town council chairman Roger Schofield stressed it was a Pendle Council decision and the town council did not have the power to overturn it.

But fellow town councillor Sally Lambert said the town council could still make sure the views of residents were known when Pendle's policy committee met.

Another resident said the town was already congested and it was ridiculous to talk of building 200 new houses when there was probably already that number for sale throughout the town.

Lockfield Drive resident Peter Owen said a new access off Skipton Road would only add to existing traffic problems in that area, which Pendle Council was already trying to sort out. He said it was "ridiculous" to talk about building more houses there given the existing problems.

Another resident ridiculed the claim that the site off Ben Lane was already built up on three sides and its development would be "rounding off" the town's edges.

But one of the most compelling arguments came from Leonard Brown, the clerk to Earby and Salterforth Internal Drainage Board. He told the meeting that he lived in Ghyll Meadows, a low-lying area on the opposite side of Skipton Road that was already prone to flooding.

If the site on the higher ground on the other side of Skipton Road was developed, it could only worsen those problems and put too much strain on the sewerage system in the area, he said.

Furthermore, if any development there looked like going ahead, he would go to court in a bid to stop it.

It was Ian Scothern who asked if the town council would take forward a resolution to Thursday's meeting of Pendle's policy committee on behalf of the residents.

"Perhaps if it was the voice of the councillors it would be better heard," he said.

Coun Lambert replied: "As a town council we have always opposed any development in the town and on the same grounds, such as drainage. If there was a resolution we could make sure it goes to Thursday's meeting."

On that advice, Ian Scothern successfully proposed a resolution that "any development of the land off Ben Lane is strongly opposed and it should be removed from the housing allocation list for the many reasons stated in previous objections".

Two other sites previously considered for housing allocation, but ultimately rejected, were off Greenberfield Lane.

Jennifer Purcell, who lives nearby, led a strong campaign against developing those sites, and was also at Monday's meeting.

She wanted a resolution to go the Pendle's policy committee that the settlement boundary of Barnoldswick should be redrawn in that area and moved inwards to exclude the Greenberfield land from any future consideration of housing land.

Town and Pendle councillor Frank Neal explained that it would be extremely unlikely to be discussed at Thursday's meeting as those sites were no longer on the agenda.

He advised Mrs Purcell to put her proposal first to the town council, which could then take it to Pendle's West Craven committee for full discussion.

Mrs Purcell said she was prepared to do that, but didn't want it to take another 12 months.

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.