Plans for a Chadderton Aldi store have been approved despite nearby residents claiming they would not have bought their homes if they knew about the proposals.
An original application for the supermarket was lodged last year and rejected in February after councillors argued the loss of employment land at the site was not justified.
On Wednesday (October 12) a new application, submitted in July, was approved with only two members of the planning committee voting against the proposal.
One of the major concerns raised in response to the previous application was the supermarket’s proximity to the houses on Cavalier Square.
The store will be a little over 20 metres from the properties.
Speaking on behalf of ward councillors and residents at Cavalier Square during the planning committee meeting, Chadderton Central councillor Eddie Moores said residents’ “anger and frustration” in response to the application was justified and the application had “little merit”.
He said during several meetings held to discuss the plans residents stated they “would not have bought their homes if they had been given any indication that such a proposal was to be considered”.
He added that prior to the original application many residents indicated they would like to see an "improved retail offer in Chadderton town centre" but there was no suggestion that a supermarket was needed in Foxdenton.
Mike Hollis also spoke on behalf of a group of residents living at Cavalier Square and Henrietta Court in Chadderton who have objected to the plans.
He said the loss of a “jewel in the crown employment site” and the “harm” the development would bring to Chadderton town centre was a “negative” and urged the committee to do their “duty” and refuse the “harmful application”.
Speaking on behalf of the applicant, Stuart Parks, regional property director at Aldi, argued the proposal, with an overall investment value of over £5m, was an “ideal solution” for the site which had been marketed since 2013 but attracted minimal interest.
The new application was submitted alongside an employment land marketing report that states the site at Broadway Green Business Park has been marketed for more than eight years with only one party showing an interest in the site before choosing not to pursue the site due to its configuration and proximity to housing.
As part of the new application, the site has been reorientated so the servicing areas, where deliveries will be made, are now shielded away from the nearby homes.
A noise assessment has also been undertaken which concluded the development will have a low impact on residents.
Under the new plans, a proposal for a new acoustic fence has also been put forward as well as a landscape bund that will be situated along the properties to the south of the site.
Mr Parks also confirmed at the meeting that the new store will be open and trading in 18 months and create at least 40 jobs for local people with more jobs created by the planned commercial unit, which is subject to a separate reserved matters application, and the construction of the development.
He also addressed speculation that the commercial unit might become a fast-food restaurant and said the planning condition will restrict the unit to the “type of coffee shop, sandwich shop or bakery” that would be expected at a business park the size of Broadway Green.
Oldham Council received 44 letters in support of the new proposals and the application has garnered 10 public comments on the council website made up of nine objections and one comment in support of the scheme.
The previous application had 127 comments in support of it and 55 which objected.
Ahead of the meeting the planning consultancy firm Nexus Planning advised Oldham Council that there was no reasonable basis to refuse the application.
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 here