UP to 75 new jobs could soon provide an employment boost in Pendle and help lift the gloom after the area was hit by hundreds of redundancies.
Councillors are poised to give engineering firm Mal Tool the go ahead for the 3,485 sq metre extension at its works in Cotton Tree Lane, Colne, on Thursday despite objections from nearby residents.
It would be a welcome jobs boost in an area hit by the recent announcement of redundancies blows at Lear Corporation, Colne, and Buoyant Upholstery, Nelson, affecting up to 800 workers.
The extension would be used as offices and extra work space to meet demand from customers in the aircraft industry. The firm, a part of US group TFX Sermatech, supplies parts to aero engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce and is hoping to use the extra space to diversify into supply parts for the gas turbine industry.
A council planning report says the scheme will create up to 75 new jobs.
Mal Tool managing director Colin Twells said: "We've already created 30 new jobs in the past three months and this extension will create more new jobs at the site," he said. "We're looking to expand our production and we want to look at diversifying slightly into gas turbines. It will create new jobs and it will be good news for the area." The company employs 130 staff at Colne and Manchester Road, Dunnockshaw, Burnley.
Pendle Council's Colne area committee is recommended to grant planning permission for the single storey extension subject to a number of conditions. They include the firm calling in a specialist acoustics expert to make sure the extension meets industry standards on noise insulation before it is built to prevent noise nuisance for neighbours.
The planning report says the proposed extension will have a significant impact on the landscape of the area. But it adds that the site is, however, an existing industrial site and landscaping could be used to soften the impact."
Opponents claim the extension would go against undertakings given when the site was first developed and would add to traffic and pollution dangers in the area. They sent a 10-name petition and three letters to the council objecting to the plan.
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article