Moorlands and City Railway

A refusal on technical grounds that can, with a bit more work, be overcome. A re-submission with the reasons for refusal addressed should be successful.

 

Most disappointed after 16 years on the pway and approaching 73, was looking forward to finally laying the track back into Leek but life goes on, will have to make do with the 5.5 mile CVR line and the 4.5 miles up to Ipstones. Plus of course the 2 annual forays down to Endon on the weedkilling expeditions.

 

Chin up Jeff, never say never ........

 

can the project not go ahaed without the houses?
are trains intended to return to alton towers any time and if so is the extant station to be used?

 

Indeed, the article in the Leek Post is not very informative but as I said on my earlier post it reads to me as though more information is required on the mitigation of particular issues, (e.g. mitigating the risk of contamination of the sewage works(!) - I assume something to do with stuff draining off the track). It also bears repetition that the Barnfields site was approved 11 -1 a few weeks after being rejected 9 -3, and as far as I could tell there were only small changes to the plan in between. All very frustrating, especially for those involved with the application, more work needed than just a few tweaks and some word-smithing on what is, after all, a very complex application, but it also seems to be a lot less than an outright rejection. The more I see of the planning system the more arcane it seems but a station in Leek is part of the council's strategy for the Barnfields area and Leek more generally (at least based on public info).

Nil desperandum, after all Sybil is with us.

 

I thought ripping up the Oakamoor and Cauldon bits was to find the leek bit?!!!

 

I think there's a bit more detail here:

http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/Rail...lan-rejected/story-29118135-detail/story.html

If the issues were easily addressed they would surely have withdrawn the application and made the necessary changes.

 

I think you are getting MCR and CVR projects mixed. I believe the argument for the removal of the CVR Oakamoor rails was to help fund the purchase of the rails etc (but not track bed) to Ipstones so that CVR would be able to continue to run trains up the bank. The removal of the Cauldon to Ipstones rails funded something MCR wanted do do, which may have been anything, including the planning application for houses at Leekbrook.

 

There is.

 

I said as much in post 2341. I have drafted plenty of "outright refusals" where the wording makes it clear that the proposal is totally unacceptable. I have also drafted many where every separate reason for refusal was carefully worded to contain clear guidelines as to what had to be done to overcome it. This is very useful in limiting what can be argued about the next time round. Having issued a refusal on stated grounds the Local Planning Authority cannot introduce fresh areas of objection the next time. "Over my dead body" residents groups and wayward councillors can sometimes try this. So it's a matter of getting to work on the specifics of the refusal and working out how to overcome them.

 

MCR did, and yet they still rejected it. Now SMDC "also" want £62k to be put into the playing fields at Leek as well as over £120k towards provision of Education. And then they want a more in-depth investigation into the affect on local biodiversity despite given the impression that the current one was sufficient. Oh and there also now concerns over land contamination which they want more detail over as they've deemed the original papers insufficient, despite MCR doing all that was requested.

And this is all before we even get to building the physical railway into Leek, which is what the finance from the scrapped rails is reserved for as detailed in the original submission.

 

It could go ahead, but only if another source of finance can be found to pay for the track restoration. Answers on a postcard please.
Alton Towers is still in the pipeline, but no details have been released. All efforts are concentrating on Leek at present.

 

I thought there would be.....

 

I take it then that after 11 years the project is now dead and buried?
Such a shame if that's the case. I was really looking forward to not just seeing the line reopen but also travelling along it before I shuffle off this mortal coil.

 

Did you not read all the posts? We're working on Plan B. Feel free to show us a quicker way if you know how.

 

Moneystone Park (Oakamoor) is back on.

According to its Facebook page, Moneystone Park now has outline planning permission. Could be time to dust off the plans for a new station at the old sand sidings.

 

Let's get Leek back on track first, Moneystone is now the third (?) "big" application to have been given the green light despite an initial rejection. I'd hate to see how the Staffs Moorlands Planning Committee work, as they certainly seem to enjoy giving themselves extra work...

 

You're not kidding. According to the Burton Mail, one of the changes made to get the plans accepted, to prevent right turning onto Eaves Lane, has been rejected.

 

Is anyone actually going to advise the share holders "who actually put the money in" what plan "B" is. Or are we going to carry on with the buck passing blame game?