Browse Sections

• Education
• Special reports

Second 'no' for mail order expansion

Lee Sykes
27/ 8/2008

PLANS for a huge new warehouse and car park at a Shaw mail order firm have been turned down for a second time – to the delight of locals who strongly opposed the scheme.

However, planning chiefs, who recommended approval, warned the application would almost certainly go to appeal and possibly a public inquiry.

JD Williams is based at Lilac Mill in Beal Lane and had hoped to spend £41M on improvements and create 40 new jobs. The firm’s original application had been turned down in March and on this occasion they submitted a revised application without phase three – a 19m-high warehouse. The plans still included a 39m warehouse and a multi-storey car park with 364 spaces.

The planning committee received 158 letters of objection from locals – most of whom turned up to the meeting.

After more than two hours of debate, councillors voted to reject the plans by seven votes to six. The vote went on party political lines, with the Liberal Democrats voting against and the four Labour and two Conservative councillors voting in favour.

The main concern had been the height of the buildings and the increase in the number of HGVs using surrounding roads.

Shaw and Crompton parish councillor Hazel Gloster was the first to address the panel.

She said the buildings were ‘inappropriate for a densely-populated area’ and would impact on the view. She also thought there would be an increase in traffic and problems with access. She said the scheme was not sufficiently different from the one already rejected.

Ian Carr, representing JD Williams, said the business was important to the economy of Shaw as it employed more than 1,000 people – 40 per cent of whom lived within three miles. He said the new buildings were essential to improve the efficiency of the operation and would actually result in a reduction in traffic. He said a lot of investment and training had gone into the Shaw site and they wanted to improve employment opportunities in the area.

Councillor Howard Sykes addressed the panel in his capacity as a Shaw councillor. He said the decision would be ‘a finely-balanced judgement’ but argued that the issues were no different to those in the previous application. He said surveys showed that Beal Lane was the second most polluted road in the borough and already had too many HGVs using it. He said the proposed building was far too large and resembled a ‘five or six storey mill.’

Councillor Mike Buckley said the existing buildings dominated the view and the planned new one would make it even worse. He added: "People don’t want a great lump like that in the middle of their town."

Councillor John Hudson pointed out that the existing buildings were not going to go away no matter which way the vote went. He added: "If we refuse, this will go to appeal and could cost the ratepayers a lot of money.

Councillor Steve Bashforth agreed the buildings were ‘horrible’ but added: "I don’t want to see JD Williams chased out of Oldham."

Councillor John McCann warned that although there may be fewer vehicles being used, the type of vehicle would change and there would be more large lorries.

There were loud cheers from the residents when the plans were rejected. Committee chairman Councillor Roger Hindle thanked the residents for behaving well in what had been an ‘emotive’ application.