Brethren submit 3rd application to build on greenbelt.

A RELIGIOUS group hoping to build a church on green belt land have submitted plans for a third time.

Previous applications for a Plymouth Brethren Christian place of worship at Common Lane in North Anston were rejected in 2013 and 2015.

Rotherham Borough Council said the loss of the green belt could not be justified and planning board members raised road safety concerns. Now applicants Elsworth Acres have returned with another proposal – this time including a multi-million centre for Anston Rangers Junior Football Club.

A spokesman said: “The development proposed is submitted following a diligent search for a suitable site to serve the local community over many years. “This statement also supports the football club requirements, as they have outgrown their existing facilities with numbers of young people provided for continuing to increase. “The proposed development is a sensitive response to the site, constraints, locality and landscape. “Designs have been adjusted following detailed consultations with the public and local authority to deliver a sustainable, beneficial and safe development.”

Plans for the 18-acre site include a church and 211 parking spaces. Elsworth said the church had outgrown its previous premises in Sheffield and was now using another hall in Doncaster temporarily.

The football facilities, including six pitches, a clubhouse and a further 120 parking spaces, would be sited to the north of the site, next to Thornberry Animal Sanctuary.

One businesswoman, based at the nearby North Anston business centre, said: “My objection is purely on traffic and road safety. “An application with parking for over 300 vehicles, which will use the premises predominantly at weekends has got to adversely affect the road infrastructure and cause danger to residents and other road users.”

Previous versions of the plan included a Brethren school but the campus on Hellaby industrial estate has now been expanded instead.

Rangers said they approached Elsworth about the plan after seeing membership rise to 200 since the club’s formation in 2011.

Anston Parish Councillors objected to the application and at a site meeting in 2015 RMBC Councillors also objected to the plans to build on the greenbelt. Objections to the plans are nothing to do with the religious beliefs of the Brethren. The proposal to build on land fronted by a narrow road close to a crossroads is wrong for the reasons stated.

There is land available within 1/2 mile of Common Rd. which would be suitable for the Brethren’s plans. Perhaps the Brethren overlooked it?

Objections to the plans can be lodged online. Ref.No.RB2017/1192.  email development.management@rotherham.gov.uk

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Community News, Parish Council News and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to Brethren submit 3rd application to build on greenbelt.

  1. Patriot says:

    I challenge anyone to google the Plymouth Brethren and read all of the information on there and then say that this is not a cult. This religion meets all of the criteria that the top two universities in this country describes as a cult. To the people who call me a bigot I suggest they look at themselves and ask if they are not also a bigot for encouraging this “religion” to invade our neighbourhood. What next, The Moonies in Dinnington? When you or your family are affected by the Brethrens actions in the future don’t say you were not warned.This will be my last post on this thread as I believe I have made my point.

    Like

  2. greg says:

    I find some of the comments quite disturbing. Instead of concentrating on the tangible pros and come of the planning application, they concentrate on outsiders coming into Anston and accusations of ‘evil’ cults taking over the minds of our children. These are not considerations for planning applications. When the planning board meet to discuss the application a legal framework has to be followed and it has to be judged on the merits of this application. Previous applications will not be taken into consideration. If the application is refused proper reasons have to be given to justify the decision otherwise, upon appeal, the secretary of state could overturn the decision. This has happened on occasion before, such as development on Penny Piece Place. Please base all the discussions on proper reasons not scaremongering about evil cults, not exactly David Koresh are they. Also, The Brethren are not outsiders, as many of the members are functioning members of our community. Litter picking in Anston and marshalling the firework display for Anston Parish Council are but a few of the local volunteering actions done by members of the Plymouth Brethren. So let’s have some credible comments for and against the development and have a proper discussion. Is it good for the children of Anston, yes. Is it on greenbelt land, yes. Will there be increased traffic, yes. Will there be road improvements, yes. Will it regenerate an unsightly area of Anston, yes. Will it preserve 12 acres of greenbelt by keeping it grassland, but marked out as football pitches, yes. Come on let’s have some good justification., for and against and have some healthy friendly debate. A.P.C.W. I this helps to keep the thread on the subject in question.

    Like

    • greg says:

      Sorry, I did not proof read before postind. Only a couple of grammatical errors. It should read ‘pros and cons of the planning application’ and ‘I hope this helps to keep the thread on the subject in question’. I think my spell checker needs a holiday.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Thank you for your comments and welcome to Anston Parish Council Watch.

      Like

  3. David says:

    Your comment has been deleted because you don’t follow the rules.

    Like

  4. S Thornton says:

    William is very well informed. My bet is that he is a Member of the Church.
    Of those who support this application, and the list is big, the vast majority of them seem also to be from the Church ( yes I have read them) Its quite clear if you go through them that there is a “theme” running through the e-mails. I could suggest that this list has been coordinated, because of the content. Most only say how nice it would be, they do not give any actual “planning reasons” in their support. The dead give away is that a large number of Supporters are giving addresses from way outside the Parish area.
    I would also guess some of those who “support” are also those who stand to gain from the playing fields.
    To the football teams, from the information I have been given in the last few years, I would not trust some of the Church Members . Be Careful.
    S Thornton

    Like

    • dillon says:

      I am quite interested what Parish Councillor Thornton’s information is that he has received about The Brethren. If he is not forthcoming with the information, I suggest that there is not any information and it is again just scaremongering. Sorry this has gone off the subject, statements need to be justified and backed up with fact.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Lose the personal attacks and stick to the subject.This forum is not for you nor anyone else to question posters.

      Like

    • dillon says:

      I would still like to know what information Parish Councillor Thornton has about this religious movement.

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Irrelevant to the thread

      Like

  5. William says:

    Having viewed the planning website, this development for children and residents of our village and neighbouring villages has massive support. Over 200 supporting letters and only 10 objections. Clearly, the support totally outweighs the objections. I hope the planning board take this into consideration. Plus the junction improvements, redirection of traffic through the trading estate, the easing of gridlock on a Sunday around the residential area and shops at pond corner(Greenlands Park) and the precedent set by R.M.B.C. by allowing commercial building on 250 acres of greenbelt at Aston.

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      I can see you are in favour of this development-which is your right-but 200 letters of support from a total population in Anston of almost 10,000 people can hardly be classed as ‘massive support’.

      Like

    • Patriot says:

      Anston Rangers JFC has 481 members. According to their website. Seems like more than half can’t be bothered to support this. Or is it that more than half have googled the Plymouth Brethren cult and are asking the same question as me, IE why are they doing this? If you seriously think that this development is for the children and residents of our village & neighbouring villages benefit then you must be one of the blind ones that I mentioned in my previous post. Open your eyes man! This is for the Plymouth Brethrens benefit, nothing else. Anston Rangers will be lucky to get a seasons use of this land. It is after all the Brethrens land and it wont be long before they want it back.

      Like

    • Harrison says:

      I find the use of the word cult, to describe The Plymouth Brethren, is being used in a derogatory way. It not only shows patriot up as bigot but also a simpleton, as he or she obviously does not know the English language. Oxford English Dictionary states a cult is a system of religious devotion toward a particular figure or object. In this case Church of England, Methodists, Catholics, Islamists, Buddhists, Toaists and all other religions are cults. To use the word cult in such a negative way is not only discriminatory and bigoted, but also poor English. The point of this thread is the planning application, the facts, not the religious beliefs of the applicant, Elsworth Acres.

      Like

    • Patriot says:

      Definition copied and pasted from the Cambridge English dictionary. cult noun (RELIGION) ​
      [ C ] a religious group, often living together, whose beliefs are considered extreme or strange by many people:

      Their son ran away from home and joined a religious cult.

      Copied and pasted from Oxforddictionaries.com
      A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or as imposing excessive control over members.

      So quoting definitions from both Oxford and Cambridge dictionaries is bigoted? I think not matey. What is bigoted is using children in an attempt to overturn the planning applications that have already been turned down twice. After Children related events in Rotherham in the recent past RMBC should wash their hands of this by turning down the application for the third time and when they say no more applications will be entertained in this matter they should mean it. This cult will walk over anyone to get what they want. They should stop blackmailing kids to get their way. RMBC, ARE YOU LISTENING?

      Like

    • Watchman says:

      Can I remind you all to stick to the thread; The Planning Application by the Brethren.
      For example: What will be the immediate benefits to Anston if the application succeeds?
      What are the environmental impacts of this application?

      Like

  6. David says:

    It’s looking like the big issue is football pitches wich is in this application and the fact of green belt so can apc provide the picth s no let’s ask why because the pitch on anston recreation ground is unfit and as been for years something apc have not rectified then we have crowgate now left as a wild medow and let’s not forget some cllrs did not want to renew the lease so it’s clear that the teams will want this chance of new pitches so the only real issue is green belt and that must be made by rmbc planning offices

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      If you take the time to read the planning application the issue is not just ‘football pitches’.
      Why have you raised the subject of Crowgate when we are discussing Common Lane? Is it because you are congenitally incapable of sticking to the thread? Again.

      Like

    • Edward says:

      Anston Rangers approached Anston Parish Council with regard to a 25 year lease of Rackford Meadows 2 years ago. They offered to put water and power to the field and build a pavilion. Also access for the public to use the area would have been given. Only a third of the field would be used, so dog walkers would still have 20 acres to use. This would have offset the payments on the field, saving the taxpayer money. Maybe if the parish council had considered this, instead of dismissing the idea, these discussions about Anston Rangers would not be happening. Very short sighted A.P.C.

      Like

  7. Anonymous says:

    Hello I am really new to all of this and tend not to get publically involved in things like this but I would like to say that the same link shared above can be used to “support” the proposal. It seems a little one sided for the main article to only comment on the deadline date being to “object”. Although I do recognise one respondant has alluded to it. All 3 of my children play for Anston Rangers JFC, which is based at the moment at Greenland’s Park for home matches. On training and match days the car park is extremely busy (even more so if it also coincides with the annual OAP flu immunisation Saturdays that my parents attend at the doctors’ surgery). I know cars to be parked all the way out onto the pond shops and beyond. Is this residential area better suited to accommodate the high volume of traffic? I find the tone of some of the threads sullied at times with the choice of language used and which is directed at people who live within our community. There is enough hatred in this world and things which give me sleepless nights. Why do we have to troll each other when we live side by side?

    Like

    • Watchman says:

      The land earmarked by the Brethren is in the Greenbelt and RMBC decided on two previous occasions not to allow this development.
      Thanks for your comment and welcome to Anston Parish Council Watch.

      Like

  8. Patriot says:

    The Plymouth Brethrens plans for football pitches and facilities to be built on their land and paid for by them is fantastic news for the people of Anston and Dinnington, especially the youngsters and their parents. In fact it is so fantastic that it is almost unbelievable. Even if the football club is being asked to help finance this project you may well ask why would this “religion” go to all of this expense to provide facilities for a community which they had no previous connection with whatsoever. I suggest that people read between the lines at the real ulterior motive behind this third application. The first two failed applications had no mention of football facilities for the youngsters. The reason for this? simple, they don’t give a fig for our youngsters, people or community, they are using the kids, their parents and the coaches to get a foothold in our village and as soon as they can the football part of their plans will be dropped like a hot potato. If you cannot see this then you must be blind. I love kids and I love football but to allow 300+ vehicles to suddenly converge on our roads is unthinkable, and this would not be just on a Sunday. They assemble anytime of the week, day or night. Their first planning application included a coach/bus park in addition to a car park for hundreds of cars. Oh, and by the way, don’t be under the impression that you can pop into the “church” for a quick prayer It’s not that kind of “religion” and you wouldn’t get past the wire mesh fence or the security guards on the gate. If you think I am talking bull**** then Google Plymouth Brethren and see for yourself. Then send your objection to the RMBC link. Or you, your children & grandchildren might regret that you didn’t when you had the opportunity. PS your objections can only be based on environmental/road safety/greenbelt issues, not on the practices of this “cult” ?

    Like

    • Harrison says:

      Patriot, all the funding for the football development has been raised by Anston Rangers. Funding through Sport England and the F.A. all based on a 125 year lease. The Church are not funding the football. They are leasing the land to Anston Rangers. Read the application before posting, please.

      Like

    • Patriot says:

      This doesn’t alter the fact that they are only doing this to get their church built. Only two things are certain if the application is granted. The Brethren will have won and the football club will have wasted their money as the Brethren will find a way to kick the football into touch. It doesn’t take a genius to work this out.

      Like

  9. S Thornton says:

    The Councillor who seems to think its acceptable to call his fellow councillors “bigots” is Councillor John Ireland. He posted his “approval” for the planning application on the RMBC web page so the information is in the public domain.
    Tonight the Parish Council voted by a big majority to object to the application, so Cllr Ireland is disrespecting most of his fellow councillors. Although he did not attend the meeting tonight, in his submission to RMBC, he forgot to declare that he has attended the Brethren School in the past to present prizes. Also rather odd was that when Cllr Smith was asked if he had had any connection with the Brethren in the past, he said nothing, despite being asked twice.
    To the lady who was shouting out tonight ( one must assume she was a church member) not only were the comments impolite, they were not very christian. Another gentleman, also from the church, decided to “have a go” implying that the decision to object was because they were “Brethren”. I do not recall any councillor making any comments about “religion” during the discussions.
    Using the children of Anston, to build your church is despicable, and one day you may have to answer for your actions to a higher authority.
    Not clever, not Christian.

    Like

  10. Alan says:

    The issue of greenbelt is minor. A precedent was set by granting planning permission on 250 acres of greenbelt, at Aston, for a multi-million pound theme park. It would be unwise to not grant permission for a meeting hall and sporting facilities for the children of Anston. The traffic issue is dealt with by directing all outgoing traffic along Haughton Road to the large junction at the end of the trading estate. Also, the junction of Common Road and Todwick Road is to be altered to give better vision, a benefit to all local road users. Anyway, if anyone wishes to support or object, do so through the R.M.B.C. website.

    Like

  11. David says:

    So is the argument that it’s greenbelt as I understand some of the site is commercial land former scrapyard and builder s yard or at the moment an eye sore was at some point a trading estate planned no thought of traffic then I am sure rmbc will take all steps to ensure the application is delt with the intrest of all involved no matter who says whot

    Like

    • Patriot says:

      How many hundreds of cars and busses converged to the scrap yard and builders yard and what type of buildings were erected on this land? Were any complaints received about any congestion caused? I am sure RMBC will also take this into consideration then refuse this third application which shamefully attempts to exploit our youngsters in their attempts to built their so called church and concrete car parks.

      Like

  12. Christine Sadler says:

    It has been brought to my attention that an APC cllr has commented on the proposed plans for the Brethren Church to build on Common Road, saying I am told that anyone objecting to these plans is a bigot.
    Can this person please explain why it is bigoted to object to an outside body building on OUR greenbelt land, or anyone else for that matter.
    Also why it is bigoted to object to a dangerous traffic situation at the crossroads where the junction cannot possibly cope with increased traffic to the church and the football events.
    If this cllr is who I imagine he is, following his usual practise of no idea what he is on about I suggest some research may be a good thing.
    To anyone interested please note the date to object is extended to September 21.

    Like

Comments are closed.