Upload a photo Upload a video Upload an mp3 Upload an event


Plans To Demolish Pub Rejected

Monday February 24 2014

We Are Barnsley We Are Barnsley

PROPOSALS to demolish a pub on the edge of the town centre to make way for new housing have been refused by planning bosses.

Ismail Ghandour had applied to demolish The Fitzwilliam Inn on the junction of Fitzwilliam Street and Sackville Street and build six three-storey terraced houses.

The pub - which has been closed for several years - was built in 1880.

The application said the pub stopped trading in 2005, was boarded up and in a poor state of repair and suffering from historic substance damage.

But the council's planning board felt the development would cause an unacceptable loss of privacy to houses on Coalby Walk because its height, design and orientation.

Leave a comment
comments powered by Disqus
19 Showing 19 comments

Reply Posted by Ginge on Monday February 24 2014 at 16:05
They won't allow this because of 'privacy' but they let them build the massive apartment block which towers well above the houses there? What a poor excuse!

Reply Posted by Ha ha on Monday February 24 2014 at 16:32
Well maybe the developer should consider upping his bribe to the council ha haha

Reply Posted by Steve Clifford ( cry ) on Monday February 24 2014 at 16:39
Bribe the labour council am sure haughton will accept

Reply Posted by Observer on Monday February 24 2014 at 16:54
Here here tom. Proper barnsley name the guy who owns it eh?? Theyre doing this to far too many of our traditional pubs.

Reply Posted by Barnsley Truth on Wednesday February 26 2014 at 18:52
Ignorant racist arse. Traditional pub has been closed for 7 years if it was going to be a viable business it would not need planning permission to replace it with homes, and Frankly I would welcome Mr Ghandour to Barnsley with his expertise and entrepreneurship.

Reply Posted by Julie on Monday February 24 2014 at 17:00
What a good idea. I agree too many of our pubs demolished but drinks are too expensive because of all taxes so people can't afford to go too often

Reply Posted by Ha ha on Monday February 24 2014 at 18:12
Doesn't matter which party is running the council all the party's are bent

Reply Posted by cammi on Monday February 24 2014 at 18:38
absolute classic from BMBC. Permit gateway plaza to be constructed then refuse a smaller development due to loss of privacy to coalby walk. it does make you wonder what goes on in the Council.

Reply Posted by LV on Monday February 24 2014 at 21:01
The windows on the houses on coalby walk aren't overlooked by Gateway Plaza apartments. There's a very big difference between large buildings being built beside a home and large buildings being built facing into a home. I for one wouldn't like to be living in a home overshadowed by a few three-storey buildings.

Reply Posted by Hmbc on Tuesday February 25 2014 at 01:02
Let it be known i work for the people who decided this the building is in talks and have accepted an offer to turn it into houses i dont know where u get rejected from we are barnsley.

Reply Posted by Mad, Bad & Dangerous to Know on Tuesday February 25 2014 at 08:54
There were plans to modernize & reopen "The Fitz" planning was rejected due to lack of parking, there are several car parks in the area, & most puzzling, doesn't a pub car park encourage drink driving? Strange ideas BMBC have

Reply Posted by Tom on Tuesday February 25 2014 at 14:42
Why was my comment suggesting we start some community pubs removed?

Reply Posted by WAB sad on Tuesday February 25 2014 at 15:10
WAB if you don't like people commenting and expressing there opinions.

close the **** site down. instead of removing posts that YOU WAB don't agree with. what happened to free speech and who the heck gives you authority to remove posts?

Reply Posted by Nicky WAB on Tuesday February 25 2014 at 16:50
Actually we only remove comments if they have breached our policies and are defamatory and / or contain profanity. However, due to recent abuse to our commenting system, we've had to make some changes to what the website allows automatically. Once again, the actions of a few small-minded people, who like to use our site to hurl insults at each other, has affected the use of people who want a healthy debate. It is because of these people that we've had to introduce some automatic moderation on the website - and unfortunately the website sometimes gets it wrong. We've noticed it's a particular problem if people accidentally mistype their email address (if it is unverified the website may remove comment) or use lots of block capitals etc etc. It's a shame we've had to enable these auto filters because of the actions of a few but, to be frank, we are fed up of the nasty attitudes. James, your comment was not removed by us - at least not deliberately. But if it had the misfortune of being made at a time when trolls were spamming the site, then the auto filters might have sucked it in. As for the 'WAB sad' ID If you don't like WAB, go elsewhere. Free speech is welcome - but it is our site, and that is what gives us the authority to remove posts if we feel they are abusive.

Reply Posted by WAB sad on Tuesday February 25 2014 at 17:11
No Nicky WAB - You remove posts if the comments are to your liking.

Free speech not bad language.. Just you don,t like FACTS

Reply Posted by WAB sad on Tuesday February 25 2014 at 17:13
are not to your liking.......

Reply Posted by Nicky WAB on Tuesday February 25 2014 at 17:30
Obviously, the point I made above about making personal insults was totally ignored. I don't know why you think it's acceptable to do so - it isn't. If you feel so strongly about how we choose to run our page, I suggest you don't frequent it any more. But I challenge you to find another news organisation that offers as much as we do - with no charge to subscribers and with the wealth of hours we spend on it. I've edited your frankly offensive comment - and I ask you to not make such offensive comments again. You can by all means give your opinion - but calling me names isn't going to help your cause at all.

Reply Posted by Tom on Tuesday February 25 2014 at 18:55
Well it was up yesterday, and it didn't contain any swearing etc. perhaps it could be a website glitch of some sort. On the fb page, somebody said it could be because of a 'toggle' setting?

The amount of comments shown linking to the article was 12, but only 11 appeared upon opening, currently 17/16.

It might not have been censored, it could be a glitch I suppose.

Reply Posted by krissie on Wednesday February 26 2014 at 19:11
let see how long it is before the place is gutted with a "mystery" fire just like Farm Road Club when it was proposed some guy with a name I cant pronounce from Doncaster wanted to build flats there and I bet there are other places too which suffered the same demise.