ANGRY residents have relaunched their campaign against controversial plans to widen a bridleway in Walmersley.

It comes after a fresh restrospective planning application by Mr Stewart Sivvery has been submitted.

Mr Sivvery has widened a path leading from Halsall Close to the disused Gorse Quarry which he owns.

Residents say that during the last year, hedges and banks have been destroyed, trees removed, while land ‘around the size of a football pitch’ has been flattened at the quarry, which comes under green belt land.

They fear the plan’s approval may pave the way for a commercial development at the quarry.

But Mr Sivvery’s agent, Gary Dearden, denied this.

He said: “One of Mr Sivvery’s friends owns a nearby farm and his mother-in-law, who is old, struggles to gain access to it.”

“Mr Sivvery has widened the path as a favour to his friend out of the goodness of his heart.”

Mr Simon Holder, of Chestnut Drive, is one of more than 50 nearby residents who have submitted written objections to the plans.

He said: “I strongly object to the widening of the bridleway. I live locally and regularly use the path for walking and cycling. The bridleway is, or rather was, a pleasant country lane which greatly enhanced the natural beauty of the area.”

He said the widening of the path has killed a large amount of wildlife and removing the vegetation has adversely affected the drainage causing larger amounts of water and debris to flow down the bridleway onto Halsall Close.

“This is a bridleway and by definition its main use is for walkers, horse riders and cyclists. There is no logical or understandable reason provided for the widening work.”

But Mr Dearden said an ecology appraisal has shown no direct harm has been caused in widening the track and that compensatory measures will made for any damage caused.

He said: “A drainage channel is to be installed along the widened part, containing the currently uncontrolled flow of surface water across the track.”

Mr Sivvery withdrew an original application earlier this year because it was unclear who owned the track.