Controversial plans for a budget superstore on the gateway to Cockermouth will kill off independent trade and “destroy” what makes the Georgian market town “unique”, a planning inspector has been warned.

Objectors to plans for a B&M store implored the Government official to back Allerdale council’s original decision to reject the scheme.

The proposal was knocked back in February by the council’s planning panel for the second time amid claims the development would spoil the area’s character and lead to a loss of precious employment land.

But agents for the developer then appealed the decision, with the hearing held today (September 24), though the decision is not expected for several weeks.

The eight-strong team representing the applicants was made up of a barrister, surveyors, drainage, lansdcape and heritage experts.
Meanwhile, fighting Allerdale council’s corner was the chairman of the planning committee Nicky Cockburn, Coun Joan Ellis and Rachel Lightfoot of PFK.

But they had vocal support from the public galley including representatives from the Cockermouth Civic Trust, Chamber of Trade and Cockermouth Vision, all which are strongly opposed to the scheme.

Speaking at the meeting, Main Street trader Jonty Chippendale told the planning inspector Graeme Robbie that he was “their last hope”.

He warned also of the “damage” the development would cause, claiming that an “out-of-town development” of this scale would “destroy the viability of the town centre.”

He said: “We have argued this before the planning committee on two occasions – and on both occasions we were successful in persuading them that the scale of this development was inappropriate and that the damage it would do to the vitality of Cockermouth was disproportionate.

“We feel badly let down by the planning officers. At the time of the refusal they recommended to the committee some very weak grounds for the refusal – and that those grounds did not reflect the balance of the argument at committee.

“We would strongly advise you to use the powers that you have to look at the other grounds for refusal not to rely on the rather poor grounds for refusal that the planning officers supplied to the committee.

“As a trader in Cockermouth, I cannot stress to you how we are hanging on. Nobody’s making much money.

“The town is unique.  It does not reflect the majority of town centres now in this country: there are very few nationals. Most of the shops are individuals run by people who live and work in the town – and the money that crosses our tills goes back into the town.”

But he also stressed that traders did not object to a B&M in the town per se, merely to its scale and location.

“What we object to is an out-of-town development and this development is out of scale, out of town and will destroy the very thing that the people of Cockermouth value,” Mr Chippendale added.

Other concerns include traffic congestion, the felling of trees to make way for the development and the impact on Cockermouth’s status as an historic market town.

However, the formal grounds for refusal included the loss of employment land and visual amenity.

Jeremy Williams, speaking on behalf of the applicant Opus Land North (Cockermouth) Limited, said the development would create up to 65 jobs – though he was unable to confirm how many of these would be full-time roles.