Peel prevails over Trafford in dispute over 167,000 sq ft industrial
The £5.4m contribution the council was seeking towards infrastructure work within the New Carrington allocation was “not justified”, according to the presiding planning inspector.
Trafford Council rejected Peel NRE’s plans for a 167,000 sq ft industrial scheme on a 26-acre former landfill site in Carrington because of a disagreement with the developer about how much the it should contribute towards the construction of the £76m Carrington Relief Road and other infrastructure needed to unlock the site.
Trafford claims the amount offered by Peel NRE to support infrastructure projects in the New Carrington allocation – earmarked in the Greater Manchester joint plan for 3.7m sq ft of industrial space and 5,000 homes – was not sufficient.
In order to fund the delivery of the Carrington Relief Road and unlock land for redevelopment, Trafford uses a formula to calculate how much developers need to contribute.
It was adopted in early 2024, almost two years after Peel’s original application was submitted.
In determining the appeal, planning inspector Tim Burnham said the formula, which seeks £346.80 per square metre of gross floorspace for employment schemes, “was not subject to detailed costing and viability sensitivity testing [or] public consultation”.
These are expected as part of a wider masterplan for New Carrington, which is yet to materialise.
The lack of a masterplan means that the “design and infrastructure specifications for the New Carrington allocation do not appear to be known…[and] the location and cost of supporting infrastructure is also unknown”, according to the inspector’s report.
“This makes assessing a proportionate contribution extremely difficult,” the report adds.
Peel NRE was contacted for comment.
A spokesperson for Trafford Council said: “Trafford Council are naturally disappointed in the outcome of this appeal which hinged around developments in Carrington sharing the costs of the infrastructure necessary to support ongoing growth in the area.
“We will not be able to see the growth that Trafford or the City Region needs without supporting infrastructure – and unfortunately decisions of this nature only makes that provision harder. It is all too easy to ‘cherry pick’ obligations on individual sites, but this will not enable future developments to progress. We are now considering next steps in relation to this appeal decision – and in the meantime will continue working to complete the master planning for the area.”
Stantec advised Peel during the inquiry.
Greg Dickson, planning director at Stantec, said: “We are incredibly proud to have supported our client, Peel NRE, in demonstrating that the development will not give rise to unacceptable impacts and that in the absence of the masterplan for New Carrington the contributions sought would not meet the tests set out in national policy.
“The inspector also rightly acknowledged the benefits that will be created through the supply and delivery of new employment floorspace. Looking ahead, the decision provides certainty on the role that the site can play in meeting the economic growth aspirations for the New Carrington Area.”
The outcome of the appeal does not bode well for Trafford Council as it heads to a second inquiry with another developer over a similar issue.
BlackRock UK Property Fund’s plans for the 450,000 sq ft second phase of Voltage Park were refused late last year after Trafford Council demanded £14.6m from the developer to support the delivery of infrastructure within the growth location.
is Trafford Council development or investment friendly ?
By TJL
There is a definite sense that Peel want to make the fullest use and largest gain from local infrastructure, whilst avoiding actually contributing towards it. Of Course time will tell if they can have their cake and eat it, if the authority cannot afford to make the relief road happen because businesses like peel refuse to contribute, their development may become less viable.
By Andrew
Here we go again. Cart before the horse. More development and no new infrastructure to support it . Carrington is already congested and it looks like it won’t be getting any better anytime soon. What happened to all the promises made about improving the place. Why isn’t there a masterplan? It’s OK if you can afford to move away but if you can’t you just have to live with it. I guess it’s ‘build, build, build’ and suffer the consequences
By Anonymous
Sounds like a fudge up by RTPI’s NW Local Planning Authority of the Year
By Anonymous
Why produce and adopt a formula for contributions with no evidence base and no consultation? Surely even a graduate planner at Trafford could have advised that this would be open to challenge. Did they just hope nobody would question it? Whoever decided to proceed on that basis instead of getting the masterplan and evidence base sorted first should be held responsible, not the developers who are only under obligation to their shareholders!
By Anonymous
I can’t believe Peel won, they never get permission for anything. The council will have to ask Santa for the money plus a bit extra to fix the roads they’ve already got and stop hitting residents with massive council tax increases and bin charges
By Anonymous