Virtual Lancaster

Even as the Council reels from the fallout of a disastrous Inquiry into the proposed development for Lancaster’s Canal Corridor, it has just approved plans for a new Science Park, which have already courted controversy and been changed to accommodate concerns from local residents.

Based at Bailrigg next to Lancaster University, the new science park, first mooted back in 2006, has just been granted planning permission by the City Council, which it says will provide homes to technology and knowledge based businesses.

The Council says it has the potential to support over 1,000 jobs, boosting the local economy. The Council also claims the new Park will also boost the Lancaster district’s reputation as one of the country’s leading areas of scientific research.

“The development of a science park at Bailrigg has been a major ambition for a number of years,” commented Coun Evelyn Archer, Cabinet member with responsibility for economic development. “Lancaster University is one of our biggest economic assets, with an international reputation for the quality of its research in new technologies.

“The science park will provide a place where businesses can grow alongside this,” she argues. “It will create new businesses and new jobs, and provide high level jobs, which means that skilled local people, and the many graduates who pass through our two universities, can continue to stay here and work here.”

The project is a collaboration between Lancaster City Council, the North West Development Agency and Lancaster University.

Although many welcome the Park, some local residents objected to the proposed location, describing it as “wholly inappropriate”, not least because it will be built on greenbelt land.

“Sites affecting the Green Belt and other rural areas should only be considered as a last resort,” argued Tom Roberts in his objection to the plans. “Any such proposals would require exceptional justification on a basis broader than that of individual development plans.

“I find it difficult to reconcile Lancaster City Council’s commitment to sustainable development, alongside the proposal in its current location,” he continued. Indeed the site scored badly – a mere 40%, ranking 23rd out of 25 possible sites in a study of NW Regional Investment Sites.

“There is very little reason for the site to be located alongside the university, as there is a very good public transport network that links up areas of the district, and telecommunication advances mean that it is not always necessary to be physically located next door,” he argued in a detailed objection to the plans. “I would have thought that such a project would have been very exciting precisely because of the re-development opportunities it offers in terms of regenerating any number of Brownfield sites that are currently so ripe for re-development in the Lancaster and Morecambe district. (Luneside East / West take your pick!).”

Back in 2007, objections were also raised that concreting over such a large area of land will greatly increase water run-off, at the risk of flooding the University’s rugby and football pitches, and even at some times the A6. University staff newsletter subtext reported that “Others are sceptical about the expressed commitment to the use of ‘low carbon / environmentally sound build construction technology and techniques’, especially given recent developments on campus, which have been regulation-compliant but not exactly cutting edge. The Design Statement makes no mention of generating or using renewable energy on the site, and does not exactly inspire confidence that the development will showcase cutting-edge eco-design.”

The Council points out that the latest proposals are a revised version of plans which were drawn up a few years ago but subsequently withdrawn due to the need for further work to manage the potential impact of the development on the road network, in view of problems which already exist to the south of Galgate.

There is no mention in its press release of changes to counter concerns about run-off or use of alternative energies, but the planning consent does have a number of conditions attached to it to deal with the anticipated extra traffic that the science park will generate.

It is likely to be built in a number of phases over a 15-20 year period, and strict conditions have been imposed to ensure that the traffic impact is minimised before future phases can go ahead, including improvements to the road and traffic signals in Galgate village.

Improvements to public transport and cycling, and the development of a travel plan for businesses occupying the science park to encourage car sharing and alternative forms of transport will also have to be put in place before the full park can be developed.

The next stage of the project is to review the impact of the planning conditions and make a business case for the project that assesses capacity, demand and affordability in the current economic climate. If funding is approved, construction of the first building, which will be a 4,000 square metre Innovation Centre to support growth of new small businesses, is currently expected to start in 2012.