Rivington, Lancashire

29/08/2026

Good news so far today, but beware they have tried to get rid of their maintenance responsibilities of Lever Park since Leverhulme died. The corporation - now UU the water firm tried to demolish this in the 70s. Chorley Council took them to court, the Pike Tower then became a listed building along with the Terraced Garden structures which were also under threat. Rivington Pike hill and brown hill ARE part of Lever Park. After that court battle Chorley was gifted that land to protect from corporate greed.

Just a few days left to see the Rivington Pike exhibition at the Horwich Heritage Centre. The exhibition, looking at all aspects of our favourite landmark will end on Thursday September 3rd at 4pm.

Our opening times are Mon-Fri 2-4pm and Saturday 10am-12.30pm

See you there

29/08/2026

MPs were mobilized and our page requested parliamentary investigation into UU and its blatant disregard of its responsibility to Lever Park, under statutory protection.

Controversial plans to introduce parking charges around two reservoirs that are popular walking spots for people from Blackburn and Chorley have…

22/08/2026

🚨 ANGLEZARKE CAR PARK — SEE THIS APPLICATION FOR WHAT IT IS

Planning application 26/00667/FUL concerns the installation of ANPR at Anglezarke Car Park.

There is an important distinction people need to understand:

⚠️ Anglezarke Car Park is not within Lever Park and is not afforded the protections associated with the Liverpool Corporation Act 1902.

That means the case against this application needs to stand firmly on what could happen on the ground if established free parking becomes controlled and charged.

🚗 WHERE WILL PEOPLE PARK IF THEY DON'T WANT TO PAY?

That is the question that needs answering.

Anglezarke is surrounded by narrow rural roads and other places where people can potentially park.

If some motorists decide not to pay and instead park elsewhere, the result could be:

• more roadside parking;
• greater pressure on Moor Road, Knowsley Lane and surrounding roads;
• reduced visibility and usable road width;
• increased risks for walkers, cyclists and horse riders; and
• difficulties for ambulances, fire engines and other large vehicles.

And what about the viewpoint further up the hill from Anglezarke Car Park?

That is already another location where vehicles stop and park.

Has anybody properly assessed what happens there if motorists start avoiding the main car park because they have to pay?

Could the viewpoint and other informal parking locations simply absorb displaced vehicles?

If not, what happens next?

🚫 MORE YELLOW LINES?

If charging causes parking to migrate onto surrounding roads, will councils then be expected to introduce Traffic Regulation Orders, double-yellow lines, signs and enforcement?

Who pays for that?

There is a serious question about whether a revenue-generating parking scheme could create consequences which then require public money to control.

And yellow lines don't necessarily make displaced cars disappear.

They can simply push them somewhere else.

💷 ANOTHER COST FOR AN OTHERWISE AFFORDABLE DAY OUT

Anglezarke is a valuable recreational asset.

People can walk, exercise, enjoy the reservoir, take children out, walk their dogs or simply spend time in the countryside without needing an expensive attraction or activity.

Parking charges change that.

For somebody with plenty of disposable income, another parking charge might seem insignificant.

For a family or individual struggling with the cost of living, it can be another reason not to go at all.

A valuable countryside resource risks becoming less accessible to those with the least means.

⏰ And enjoyment changes too.

Instead of going for a walk and returning when you're ready, people can find themselves keeping one eye on the clock, worrying about their parking period or cutting a walk short.

🏢 AND WHO OWNS THE LAND?

United Utilities is a major company with substantial financial resources.

So people are entitled to ask:

Why does this established countryside car park need to become a source of visitor revenue at all?

What demonstrable public benefit does charging provide?

And does that benefit outweigh the potential consequences for affordability, displaced parking, rural-road safety and emergency access?

📷 THIS APPLICATION MAY SAY "ANPR CAMERA" — BUT LOOK AT THE BIGGER PICTURE

An ANPR camera is not being installed simply to photograph number plates.

It enables a parking-control system.

The important planning question is therefore what that system could cause:

ANPR + PARKING CHARGES
⬇️
SOME MOTORISTS AVOID THE CAR PARK
⬇️
VEHICLES SEEK FREE ALTERNATIVES
⬇️
ROADS, LANES & VIEWPOINT PARKING COME UNDER PRESSURE
⬇️
POSSIBLE YELLOW LINES, TROs & ENFORCEMENT
⬇️
POTENTIAL PUBLIC COST + EMERGENCY ACCESS & SAFETY CONCERNS

That chain of consequences needs properly assessing before the scheme is introduced, not after problems appear.

📣 ANGLEZARKE NEEDS PEOPLE TO SPEAK UP FOR IT

Don't rely on arguments about the 1902 Act for this particular car park.

Challenge 26/00667/FUL on what could actually happen at Anglezarke.

Ask for evidence about displacement.

Ask what happens at the viewpoint.

Ask about Moor Road and Knowsley Lane.

Ask about emergency access.

Ask whether future yellow lines and TROs are actually secured.

Ask who pays for consequential highway restrictions.

Ask what assessment has been made of lower-income visitors.

And above all:

ASK WHAT THE PUBLIC ACTUALLY GAINS FROM THIS PROPOSAL.

📅 CONSULTATION CLOSES 31 AUGUST 2026

📧 Send representations to the Chief Planning Officer at Chorley Council:

[email protected]

Please quote:

26/00667/FUL

🌳 KEEP ANGLEZARKE ACCESSIBLE, SAFE AND AFFORDABLE FOR EVERYONE.

21/08/2026

🚨 KEEP LEVER PARK FREE — TIME IS RUNNING OUT TO OBJECT

⚠️ PETITIONS ALONE WILL NOT STOP THESE PLANNING APPLICATIONS.

United Utilities have indicated that petitions will not change their position on introducing parking charges. That makes submitting formal PLANNING OBJECTIONS to Chorley Council particularly important.

Many members of the public appear to have become aware of these THREE planning applications only very recently — and the consultation CLOSES ON 31 AUGUST 2026.

⏰ TIME IS TICKING. If you oppose the proposals, please make sure your concerns reach the authority actually considering these applications.

A petition demonstrates public feeling, but a properly reasoned planning objection puts the issues directly before Chorley Council as part of the planning process.

⚠️ DON'T JUST WRITE “I DON'T WANT PARKING CHARGES”

Chorley Council has to consider planning matters when deciding these applications. The Parish Council has already raised substantial concerns about highways, displaced parking, road safety, heritage, accessibility, businesses and consultation.

🚗 HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORT

The Parish Council has raised concerns that the Transport Assessment is incomplete, including:

• No adequate assessment of weekend peak periods or seasonal variations.
• No modelling showing where vehicles may relocate if parking charges are introduced.
• No adequate assessment of impacts on road safety, congestion or access for residents, farms and businesses.
• Horrobin Lane, Sheep House Lane, Knowsley Lane, Moor Road and other rural roads could face increased parking pressure.
• No adequate mitigation has been proposed for this potential displacement.
• The Assessment relies upon possible future Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs), which are not guaranteed.
• Concerns have been raised about safety conclusions based on incomplete collision information, particularly for vulnerable road users.

🚨 WHERE WILL THE CARS GO?

If people avoid the charged car parks, could vehicles simply be displaced onto surrounding rural roads, affecting road safety, congestion, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, emergency access, residents, farms and local businesses?

If you know these roads, tell Chorley Council what happens on sunny weekends, bank holidays and other busy periods.

🚶 ROAD SAFETY

If you have witnessed dangerous parking, restricted visibility, congestion, near misses or difficulties getting past parked vehicles, tell the Council WHERE and WHAT HAPPENED.

♿ ACCESSIBILITY & SOCIAL IMPACT

The Parish Council has raised concerns about potential barriers for lower-income households, young people and older residents who use Rivington for free outdoor recreation and well-being. People with disabilities or limited mobility may also depend upon convenient vehicle access. Explain any practical accessibility consequences.

🏛️ HERITAGE & LEVER PARK'S SPECIAL STATUS

The Parish Council has requested clarification about whether introducing parking charges is compatible with the historic protections and public-access provisions associated with the Liverpool Corporation Act 1902 and Lever Park Act 1969.

The 1902 legislation contains important provisions concerning the maintenance and management of Lever Park and securing the public's “free and uninterrupted enjoyment”.

Explain how the proposed development could affect public access, recreational use, accessibility, heritage and the character of Lever Park.

📷 ANPR CAMERAS, PAYMENT MACHINES & SIGNS

Ask Chorley Council to consider the location, appearance and cumulative impact of ANPR cameras, poles, payment machines, signs and associated infrastructure within Rivington's rural and historic landscape.

🏪 LOCAL BUSINESSES

The Parish Council has raised concerns about businesses reliant upon visitor footfall. If you own, work for or use a local business, explain how changed parking behaviour could affect it.

🏫 CONSULTATION CONCERNS

The Parish Council has highlighted that Rivington Primary School, St Peter's Church, Rivington Chapel and local businesses reportedly say they were not consulted.

Many members of the wider public also appear to have become aware of these applications only recently. With consultation closing on 31 August, THERE IS VERY LITTLE TIME LEFT.

🔗 THREE APPLICATIONS — CONSIDER THEIR COMBINED EFFECT

Ask Chorley Council to consider the cumulative impact across Rivington: traffic displacement, highway safety, rural-road parking, pedestrian and cyclist safety, accessibility, landscape, heritage, businesses and public access.

✍️ USE YOUR OWN EXPERIENCE

Don't simply copy somebody else's objection. Tell Chorley Council which roads and car parks you use, what happens on busy weekends, where vehicles already cause problems, any accessibility concerns and how the proposed infrastructure could affect Rivington.

📧 ACT NOW — CONSULTATION CLOSES 31 AUGUST 2026

Planning references: 26/00668/FUL, 26/00665/FUL and 26/00666/FUL

Send representations to the Chief Planning Officer at Chorley Council:

📧 [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])

Please quote the relevant application number in all correspondence.

Applications concern car parks at Rivington Lane, Belmont Road, Great House Barn and opposite Knowle House, Rivington.

⏰ CONSULTATION: 10–31 AUGUST 2026

PETITIONS ALONE WILL NOT STOP THESE APPLICATIONS. If United Utilities will not change its position, the immediate opportunity available to the public is to make sure Chorley Council hears the planning case against the proposals before the consultation closes.

DON'T ASSUME SOMEBODY ELSE WILL OBJECT.

🌳 KEEP LEVER PARK, RIVINGTON FREE FOR ALL — 📢 PLEASE OBJECT. PLEASE SHARE. TIME IS TICKING.

21/08/2026

21/08/2026

Help for objectors to formulate correspondance to Chorley Council.

21/08/2026

Horwich Town Council has agreed to make a submission to Chorley Council to refuse planning permission to introduce car parking charges at Rivington Reservoir by United Utilities. We believe it will take far more to stop
UU.

We wish to thank Councillor Stephen Rock for raising this at Horwich. Everyone needs to voice opposition to these plans, UU will press ahead, the park must remain free and UU is legally obliged to maintain it. Planning Consulation is 10th to 31st August 2026 at Chorley Council
Please send objections to the planning officer, planning references 26/00668/FUL, 26/00665/FUL, and 26/00666/FUL. Representations should be sent to the Chief Planning Officer and can be sent by email to [email protected] Please quote the application number in all correspondence.
Site Locations: Car Parks at Rivington Lane, Belmont Road, Great House Barn, and opposite Knowle House, Rivington, quote the application number in all correspondence.

There are strong feelings about the plans

19/08/2026

Planning Consulation is 10th to 31st August 2026 at Chorley Council
Please send objections to the planning officer, planning references 26/00668/FUL, 26/00665/FUL, and 26/00666/FUL. Representations should be sent to the Chief Planning Officer and can be sent by email to [email protected] Please quote the application number in all correspondence.
Site Locations: Car Parks at Rivington Lane, Belmont Road, Great House Barn, and opposite Knowle House, Rivington, quote the application number in all correspondence.

19/08/2026

18/08/2026

Pike snack shack

🚨 RIVINGTON PARKING CHARGES: SHOW US THE LEGAL POWER

Before we debate how United Utilities might spend money raised from parking charges, shouldn’t we establish whether they have the legal authority to charge in the first place?

📜 1902

The Liverpool Corporation Act 1902 protected Lever Park for public enjoyment “for ever” and referred to securing the:

“free and uninterrupted enjoyment by the public”

The Act also placed responsibility for the maintenance and management of Lever Park on the Corporation.

🏛️ 1997

North West Water then promoted a Lever Park Bill through Parliament.

During the controversy, Chorley’s then MP Den Dover told the House of Commons:

“We object because Lord Leverhulme… gave that land, and did not want it commercialised or entry or parking charges made.”

He added:

“The Bill’s spirit is to over-commercialise the park.”

Those words aren’t Facebook folklore.

They’re in Hansard.

The Bill faced repeated Parliamentary opposition and never became law.

📅 2026

Now we’re discussing parking charges, ANPR cameras, payment machines and raising money from visitors to maintain the estate.

So we think United Utilities should answer three simple questions:

❓ What precise legal power are you relying upon to charge for parking?

❓ How is charging compatible with the 1902 protection of the public’s “free and uninterrupted enjoyment” of Lever Park?

❓ If maintenance and management of Lever Park is an inherited statutory responsibility, why should visitors now be asked to fund it through parking charges?

We’re not claiming a court has ruled parking charges unlawful.

We’re asking United Utilities to show the public the legal basis on which it believes it can introduce them.

Because before we discuss where the money goes, surely we should establish whether the money can lawfully be charged in the first place.

🌳 Rivington has been protected for generations. Let’s keep it that way.

KEEP RIVINGTON ACCESSIBLE.
PROTECT LEVER PARK.
SHOW US THE LEGAL POWER.

Please share. 📢

Anglezarke UnitedUtilities