Castle Hill amended planning application

Victoria Tower, Castle Hill, Lumb Lane, Almondbury.

Amended plans. Erection of restaurant/café/bar, six guest rooms, exhibition/interpretation room, WCs, terrace, car parking and ancillary accommodation.

Submission for and on behalf of Huddersfield Civic Society regards Castle Hill application 2024/62/93494/W (click on link to see full application).

New comments from Huddersfield Civic Society added on August 21, 2025.

Huddersfield Civic Society note Historic England’s response to the Castle Hill consultation and that they still maintain concern over the site’s likely impact.

We wish to stress that we haven’t seen any details or heard of any consultations by the Community Interest Company with the communities affected or how a CIC will operate to address and maintain a long term viable organisation delivering protection to the site. There needs to be good understanding and accountability within the CIC.

Huddersfield Civic Society (HCS) also question whether a CIC is an appropriate vehicle for such a venture and whether a CIC can really meet the public interest test in this situation which we understand is what Historic England have changed their mind on. 

We stress the importance of a rigorous assessment of the business case and think it should be open to the public to comment, given it is a CIC.

We request that this material change in Historic England’s position after the end of the formal consultation period should mean that the consultation period itself needs to be kept open in order for others to re-comment.

We have continuously questioned why such an organisation would need a ‘hotel’ and ‘restaurant’ in this form on top of such a sensitive site.

We note that Historic England hasn’t reversed its stance on harm to the scheduled ancient monument. However, there appears to be more clarity in how the benefit could overcome the balance of harm.

We need to understand whether the proposed CIC really can deliver a better visitor experience and interpretation.

The planning process needs to be strong and robust in ensuring the public benefit can be met over the long term and that requires conditions with teeth across all aspects of the application, including not allowing them to start until everything has been agreed.

That still leaves many other issues regarding road access, security, new drainage, lighting etc.

We suggest that Kirklees Council planners and elected members consider them in adding effective conditions to a consent.

Not only that, the proposed room sizes are too small to host a school class visit. Surely that is a key requirement for any intended educational facility?

HCS is dubious about the financial viability of the (quite small) visitor element and question what would happen in the event of its, quite possible, financial failure.

If this is approved, there is no going back.

The consequence and harm may be with the district for a long time to come and so, we as a community, need to be sure the decisions being made are the best one for the site and Kirklees (if not the country).

We need to bear in mind that Stonehenge visitor Centre is 1.5 miles from the monument and has no accommodation, the Window on Lindisfarne is 0.5 miles from the Castle and has no accommodation.

Both have been located and designed so as not to impaction the silhouette of either location.

Previous comments from Huddersfield Civic Society.

Further to our submission with regards to the above application, we, as a local civic society would like to reiterate our concerns with regards to the Castle Hill development and to support the stance Historic England has taken.

HCS concerns stem from the nature and scale of commercial development (beyond simple visitor welcome/shelter facilities), archaeology disturbance, inadequate location access/egress, issues around commercial viability and role of proposed community interest company.
 
Following the extension of the planning application period we would also like to express concerns with regards to the additional information that has been added with regards to the business case, which we find does not add clarity or reassurance that the business case outweighs the harm from the perspective of Greenbelt or Heritage.

In addition, we have concerns following the recent fire on Castle Hill with regards to health, safety, and evacuation procedures, should such a development go ahead.

It feels like the BNG proposal does not take into full consideration the full context of the natural surroundings and the inevitable impact on wildlife without adequate protection.