Last updated 13:28, Thursday, 08 May 2008

HAVING followed, for over a year, via this newspaper’s columns and elsewhere, the story of Carlisle City Council’s readiness to proceed with plans to redevelop Rickergate against the wishes of its residents, I wish to express my view.

Renaissance scheme graphic

Readers will recall the events of January 8, 2005 and the devastating effect the flood had on thousands of the city’s residents.

The most severely affected included those living and working in Rickergate.

No sooner had the affected homes been painstakingly restored and re-inhabited, than the council began planning their destruction.

A consultation process on the proposed development eventually produced a report by the Local Planning Inspector recommending the council rethink its plans in favour of a scheme taking cognisance of the residents’ position.

Roll on six months and we find the Conservative-led council has elected to ignore the inspector’s report and has, indeed, begun a process of buying up properties in the area.

How is it possible to circumvent due process in this way?

What right does the council claim in pursuing a path to literally bulldoze its plan forward, against the expressed wishes of those citizens most affected?

As citizens, we entrust elected representatives to act in the interests of local people at all times, and to take due care in ensuring that council business is conducted in a way that is transparent, consistent and above reproach.

Inter alia, the council might find difficulty in defending a position whereby, having entered into a legally-recognised process in apparent good faith, it dismisses its findings when they are not helpful to its original design.

Rickergate residents’ Save Our Streets campaign is marked by the resourcefulness and staying power of its members.

In discounting or undermining the contributions of this group the council is underestimating the determination of the residents to win redress, should this prove necessary.

The council, in pursuing its grandiose and under-supported redevelopment plan, has to remember its position as the elected responsible body – out-of-town developers, while seeking to gain most from the enterprise, will not be there to explain away the city’s incautious approach at the denouement, in whatever arena this takes place.

IAN MITCHELL
Dalston Road
Carlisle

• In this time of economic downturn, I am amazed that Carlisle City Council is pushing ahead with these plans, buying up property in Rickergate with public money.

I wonder whether these purchases are even legal in view of the Local Planning Inspector’s recent report which asks for the red line surrounding the Rickergate are to be removed from the current plans.

He also states that there is no case for compulsory purchase of residential properties.

There now seems to be doubt whether the inner ring road is going ahead, which is essential if Rickergate is to be ‘transformed’ so why is our money being wasted on house purchases?

The local media reports that new-build flats and apartments in the city are not selling, Persimmon is postponing its development plans, house prices are falling.

How can private and public expenditure on this ‘facelift’ be justified?

CAROL BARBER
Chiswick Street
Carlisle

• It was intriguing to see council leader Mike Mitchelson celebrating with successful “Save Our Lonsdale” Tory candidate Fiona Robson (News & Star, May 3).

But don’t get too pally with him, Fiona.

Mike’s the leader of the organisation which seems to want to demolish your Lonsdale and raze Rickergate to the ground.

K HILL
Carlisle