Jump to content

Bolton Gun Club - Planning Apllication


enumber
 Share

Recommended Posts

Bolton Gun Club have a planning application in for a new site 75yrds away from the original site of the club. The decision is due any day now.

 

If anybody is interested the application is available online.

http://www.planningpa.bolton.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=neighbourComments&keyVal=DCAPR_80663&neighbourCommentsPager.page=1

 

They propose several DTL layouts, a skeet and a few sporting/practice stands. Hopefully this will provide an alternative to Worsley or the long drive to Fauxdegla.

 

They were forced to move after 37 years (also the site of the A6 club) after the land was sold from underneath them. Hopefully it will be approved and the club can continue providing somewhere to shoot at a reasonable cost. Bolton was where I learnt to shoot and I know of many other people who were introduced to the sport here. The clays were cheap and guns and instruction were provided free of charge.

 

I have nothing against the Worsley's of this world (I use it often) but this sport need clubs like Bolton to introduce new blood. Without this the commercial grounds have a bleak future. Personally I probably wouldn't have taken it up if I had been forced to pay £50/25 clays for tuition at a commercial ground.

 

Some of the objections make depressing reading, you would have thought if they were so anti-noise (read shooting) they would have purchased properties elsewhere rather than near an established clay ground. The A6 used to shoot here midweek evenings and on weekends, so contrary to what the objections state there is no actual increase in hours. Also they harp on about it being green belt land, one of the stated aims of greenbelt land is to promote the participation in country sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Some of the objections make depressing reading, you would have thought if they were so anti-noise (read shooting) they would have purchased properties elsewhere rather than near an established clay ground. The A6 used to shoot here midweek evenings and on weekends, so contrary to what the objections state there is no actual increase in hours. Also they harp on about it being green belt land, one of the stated aims of greenbelt land is to promote the participation in country sports.

Hopefully the case was well put, Whats happening to the old site? I did hear another ground recovered the spent lead and it made a profit on the "clean up" operation quite a tidy profit.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully the case was well put, Whats happening to the old site? I did hear another ground recovered the spent lead and it made a profit on the "clean up" operation quite a tidy profit.....

 

Not sure, apparently the sale fell through so the current owners still have it, minus two successful clay clubs paying them thousands in rent every year. Serves them right if you ask me.

 

The farmer ploughed it up without consulting the club while they were still tenants. Not sure if that would prevent an extraction company reclaiming the lead? What it did do was leave a muddy field covered in plastic wads and bits of broken clay, which looks a lot worse than the same debris hidden in the long grass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure, apparently the sale fell through so the current owners still have it, minus two successful clay clubs paying them thousands in rent every year. Serves them right if you ask me.

 

The farmer ploughed it up without consulting the club while they were still tenants. Not sure if that would prevent an extraction company reclaiming the lead? What it did do was leave a muddy field covered in plastic wads and bits of broken clay, which looks a lot worse than the same debris hidden in the long grass.

LOL if the planning is still in place ask to go back at much reduced rent due to the state of the place! Hope the application all goes well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Application Refused!

 

On the grounds that it is too near to residential properties. Apparently the Environment Agency recommend a minimum distance of 1-1.5km from any houses. Not sure how many locations actually exist in the England that don't have any houses within that distance!

 

It seems the fact that the other ground had been in almost exactly the same location for 37 years was lost on Bolton Council. The old ground had an exception granted in 2001 as it had been in operation for over ten years and I suppose anybody buying a property would be doing so in the full knowledge that the ground existed. There were also issue of rights of way and objections about building a club house on green belt, though the regulations state that exceptions can be made for essential facilities for outdoor sports.

 

Not sure where they will go from there, appeal or look for another site? Another option would be to operate for less than 28 days in a year. Keeping under this threshold means no planning consent is required. Though I doubt they would be able to build skeet towers and a club house. Probably have to settle with a sporting layout and a DTL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We moved in 2007, only about 300yards but still had to put full planning permission in,

 

Only 1 objector, (bought the house as a derelict pub and converted it, but knew we were already there)

 

tried various ways to get us closed even when he found out we were moving further away,

 

noise tests were taken and we passes with flying colours, we are about 500 yards from his house, 3 other houses and 2 caravan parks.

 

We shoot every Sunday and also Wed. nights in the summer if we want to.

 

I would consider an appeal if not too costly because i know of at least 3 other local grounds within the 1- 1.5 distance to other houses. (different councils obviously but enviroment agency should be the same)

 

If they decide to go down the 28 day rule, then rather than build a clubhouse, why not go down the steel offices and container route, still need planning but not as bad as full construction, same with skeet towers, no reason why planning wouldnt be given for them.

 

Good luck

 

:shaun:

Edited by shaun4860
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know a few of the lads from Bolton Gun Club. They are a thoroughly decent bunch of people who would help anyone. I sincerely hope that they find some way of continuing on the same ground without planning permission - not sure if they can change applications at this stage - or find somewhere else. I was talking to a few of the members at Rishton last Sunday. A real shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Application Refused!

 

On the grounds that it is too near to residential properties. Apparently the Environment Agency recommend a minimum distance of 1-1.5km from any houses.

I would get this clarified with the EA as it needs to be clarified exactly why 1km is suitable (I would suggest noise tests).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would get this clarified with the EA as it needs to be clarified exactly why 1km is suitable (I would suggest noise tests).

 

 

Our noise tests cost £600 but our landlord paid for them to help compensate for our move.

 

Gets it back in rent though, it went from £300 per year to £1000 per year. :cry1:

 

one of our biggest yearly expenses

 

:shaun:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Application Refused!

 

On the grounds that it is too near to residential properties. Apparently the Environment Agency recommend a minimum distance of 1-1.5km from any houses. Not sure how many locations actually exist in the England that don't have any houses within that distance!

 

This seems odd as I would have thought the Environment Agency would not be a statutory consultee on this type of site :hmm: . It is not regulated by the Environment Agency, so the noise guidance for waste facilities would not be relevant.

 

Its more likely to be Environmental health.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Met a few of the Bolton members this morning. Not good news. They have lost the planning application.

 

As Steve pointed out - the noise aspect would have been Environmental Health, not the Environment Agency.

 

The main problem being a footpath rather than the noise.

 

A genuine shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apologies for the Environmental Health/Agency mixup.

 

Regarding footpaths I'm sure there would be a way to manage access during shooting hours. I agree people shouldn't be stopped from using a footpath but they can't expect to have access 24/7 365. What is stopping the farmer putting a bull in the field? I'm sure as hell that would temporarily stop people using the rights of way.

 

There must be countless rifle ranges that use the red flag system to stop people straying into harms way. If necessary shooting could be suspended while ramblers used the footpath and re-commenced once they were out of the area. It would be an interesting exercise to mount a few motion activated trail cameras on the footpaths to see how often they were actually used, especially as one of them appears to be a dead end. I'm sure the club would bend over backwards to accommodate reasonable measures if the council was prepared to enter a debate about it.

 

The council seems rather eager to say no. Well it is a Labour majority council and as a party they don't have the best record on shooting to say the least!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...