Castle Hill plans recommended for refusal by Kirklees Council planners

Mar 13 2010 by Joanne Douglas, Huddersfield Daily Examiner

1
2
next

Castle Hill

PLANS for a new pub and hotel on Castle Hill look set to be refused.

Chief planners at Kirklees Council described the hotel plan (pictured) as being an ‘inappropriate development’ in a green belt area and recommended the application for refusal at next week’s planning committee.

They say any development would have an adverse effect on the setting of Victoria Tower.

But the final decision will lie with the councillors on Thursday.

Last year the Thandi Partnership, run by brothers Mick and Barry Thandi, applied for permission for a scheme that is an almost identical replica of the former Castle Hill Hotel.

Costing between £750,000 and £1m to build, the hotel would have seven bedrooms, a bar, restaurant and public toilets. There would also be a room for educational use, including information about the history of the hill.

Although only 16 letters of objection were submitted to Kirklees Council, many local groups called on the council to refuse the application.

English Heritage, West Yorkshire Archaeology Advisory Service, Huddersfield Civic Society, Honley Civic Society, Almondbury (Castle Hill) Civic Associates, Huddersfield and District Archaeological Society, Campaign to Protect Rural England and the Northern Earth Group all opposed the plans.

In the final planning report, it says: “...this proposal is recommended for refusal.

“The proposal is for a new building within the Statutory Green Belt and would constitute inappropriate development as defined by Green Belts.

“No very special circumstances have been demonstrated to justify a departure from the normal presumption against inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Moreover, the proposal would detract from the openness of this area of Green Belt and hence from visual amenity.”

“It is considered that the proposed development would have an adverse effect on the setting of the Victoria Tower (Grade 2 Listed building).”

While the Highways department described traffic accommodation as ‘far from ideal’, adding that the applicant had provided no further details of predicted traffic generation since 2002.