Rawtenstall restaurant plan in doubt

4:20pm Wednesday 27th August 2008

Comments (0)   Have your say »

A LANDMARK building would be the perfect spot for a new restaurant in Rawtenstall, a councillor has insisted.

Plans have been put forward to Rossendale Council for the former Groundwork centre, next to Hardman’s Mill, at New Hall Hey, by the Hurstwood Group.

But planning chiefs say the eaterie would harm trade in Rawtenstall town centre, claiming that alternative sites have not been considered for the venture.

Sites at New Hall Hey have previously been identified as prime employment land and although the restaurant would generate 40 new positions, planning experts are adamant that it will damage the ‘vitality’ of central Rawtenstall.

Coun June Forshaw has called upon fellow councillors on the borough’s development control committee to overturn that recommendation when they meet, at Hardman’s Mill, next Monday.

She said: “The restaurant would be good for the valley and a similar restaurant that was on the site was very popular.

“If we are serious about tourism the location is ideal.”

The two-storey old Groundwork building overlooks the River Irwell and is located next to the grade II listed mill.

In recent years the building has had a chequered history, with various long-term answers brought forward for its reuse.

Last year alone saw four separate bids drawn up for the building, with proposals for a children’s creche, residential institution, bicycle shop and tourism facility all finding favour with councillors.

But proposals for a cafe/restaurant, also including a bike shop, were turned down, for similar reasons to the current application.

Twenty full-time and 20 part-time jobs would be generated by the new plans, which would require 21 parking spaces and be open around the clock.

Two letters of objection have been received, one saying that the parking situation there was ‘dire’ and would only worsen if the restaurant was given the go-ahead.

Stephen Stray, Rossendale council’s planning unit manager, says in a report: “The applicant has not demonstrated any flexibility in seeking alternative sites, and rather provides details of why they think alternative sites do not fit in with what they propose.”