Trafford suffers defeat in 450,000 sq ft industrial appeal
BlackRock UK Property Fund has secured permission for the 450,000 sq ft second phase of Voltage Park after the authority withdrew its demand for £14.6m of infrastructure contributions to support the delivery of the New Carrington masterplan.
Trafford rejected BlackRock’s plans in late 2024 after the developer refused to pay the £14.6m, branding the council’s financial demands “not necessary, reasonable or proportionate to the scale of the development proposed”.
BlackRock appealed and, following an inquiry held in October, the Planning Inspectorate has found in its favour. BlackRock was advised by BNP Paribas.
It appears that Trafford’s case collapsed during the inquiry.
A decision notice signed by inspector Beth Davies says that the council ended up not defending its decision to refuse permission for the 450,000 sq ft industrial scheme after its evidence over the financial contributions fell apart “under cross examination”.
The appellant was represented by planning barrister Chris Katkowski.
It was also decided that issues around biodiversity and pipeline protection – two of the four reasons for refusal – could be dealt with through planning conditions, according to the decision notice.
The inspector’s decision comes after Peel NRE defeated Trafford at appeal last year under similar circumstances.
The developer successfully argued it should not have to contribute £5.4m towards infrastructure within the regeneration zone.
Peel had originally pledged £1m and refused to up its contribution, prompting Trafford to reject its plans for a 167,000 sq ft industrial scheme on a 26-acre former landfill site.
Trafford has previously said it would challenge that decision.
In order to fund the delivery of infrastructure, including a relief road, and unlock land for redevelopment in New Carrington, Trafford uses a formula to calculate how much developers need to contribute.
The steep increase in the level of financial contributions Trafford is looking for from developers is the result of this formula, adopted in February 2024.
It seeks £346.80 per square metre of gross floorspace for employment schemes such as the ones proposed by Peel and BlackRock.
In the case of BlackRock’s Voltage Park, the amount Trafford sought from the developer for its planned 450,000 sq ft scheme was £14.6m.
The formula used for calculating contributions in New Carrington was adopted to ensure that development could come forward while making sure funds are being collected to deliver various infrastructure projects down the line.
A wider masterplan for New Carrington, earmarked for 5,000 homes and 3.7m of industrial space, which would include policy around financial contributions, has yet to be adopted, prompting the need for the interim formula.
The inspector said that the Voltage Park development “could have been required to make a further contribution, had the masterplan been in place”.
Trafford has previously said that failure to provide the amount stipulated by the formula would “obstruct future infrastructure provision in New Carrington”.
To learn more about Voltage Park phase two, search for reference number 112794/FUL/24 on Trafford Council’s planning portal.
A spokesperson for Trafford Council said: “The council is naturally disappointed with the outcome of the appeal. The Council remains committed to delivering necessary infrastructure at Carrington which is vital to the existing communities at Carrington and Partington. Developments which provide no or minimal contributions to infrastructure undermine its ability to do so. We are currently considering our options.”
Heads should roll in the Council’s Highways team, or whoever was responsible for this, given how much it is costing taxpayers, and hurdling investment.
By Anonymous
And we are off to a flyer for the 2026 competition to identify the Council with the worst Planning function in the North of England.
Having lost to Peel some officers clearly don’t recognise the point at which the white flag is hoisted.
By Anonymous
Strange how the Trafford leadership still can’t see how damaging their stance on planning has become. It’s uninvestable for a number of parties and will continue down this path until something changes. Manchester, Salford and Stockport will all benefit….
By Anonymous
Trafford really shouldn’t underestimate how much this puts investors off pursuing projects. The way they have behaved on this project alone will be raised as a ‘red’ risk on future project due diligence for years to come.
By Anonymous
This area in Carrington is surrounded by greenbelt land and peat known as Carrington moss. Which has an abundance of rare wildlife Such a shame to see it going to be destroyed by Andy Burnham’s stupid housing schemes. They is already plenty of housing in south Manchester and such a scheme that is planned is nothing but greed from Trafford and Manchester councils. Totally despicable
By Anonymous
I would be fascinated to know why the Council’s evidence on financial contributions “fell apart under cross examination”. On the face of it, it appears the Council have been caught out trying to strong arm developers into making unreasonable contributions …..
By Depressed Latic
Other LPAs should take note – just because you have put a methodology for contributions into an SPD or similar document doesn’t mean it miraculously becomes compliant and lawful – even if it undergoes public consultation, it still needs to be robustly tested against the relevant regulations. It was clear to anyone with any sliver of knowledge of Reg 122 that Trafford’s formula fell short. Whether it was arrogance, ignorance, or malevolence really doesn’t matter.
By Anonymous
Anonymous at 12.34pm – read the article. Nothing to do with housing.
By Anonymous
In reponse to the comment regarding Carrington Moss, I’m pretty sure investigations into the ‘peat’ determined that it is actually ‘Victorian Stool’ i.e. effluent from 19th Century Manchester. Anyway, back on topic, another shocker from Trafford.
By abolsute pile of...
Wondering how many of these comments were written by individuals with suspicious work allegiances?
By Concerned Citizen
Having lost their case, Trafford MBC are still not obliged to provide any of the infrastructure sought. Whether this impacts the attractiveness of the site to tenants remains to be seen.
By WayFay
Not sure who was advising the Council on viability and contributions policy but they seem to have sold them false confidence.
By YIMBY
Concerned citizen – I have no suspicious work allegiances to any of the parties involved in this case – public or private. I have an interest in seeing good decision making being made by public authorities.
By refusing this application and allowing the appeal to get this far it is clearly a misuse of public money given the success of Peel in their appeal on similar grounds in 2025.
By Anonymous
And Trafford Council have confirmed Council tax will rise 5% every year until 2029. At least it is being well spent!!
By Eco realist
Yet again, we see a local authority stumble. I comment on these failures regularly, and the pattern is always the same: a naïve Council, supported by what can only be described as a poorly directed professional team, making decisions that simply don’t stand up.
Take Trafford Council. When defeated, their response wasn’t reflection or accountability, it was to cry foul, stamp their feet, and threaten to obstruct future infrastructure provision in New Carrington. Brilliant strategy for job creation, isn’t it?
And let’s not forget Tameside Council, who turned away Rolls Royce when they sought to build SMRs in a borough crying out for investment. Another masterclass in short-sighted decision-making.
So, what’s the common denominator? Councils that are ideologically rigid, blind to opportunity, and seemingly unwilling to act in the best interests of their constituents. Decisions like these aren’t just mistakes—they’re symptoms of a broken system. It’s time for real change in local planning governance.
By Steve5839
Trafford do not get anything right everything they touch either falls behind or runs out of funding or just agree to hideous developments that don’t suit or improve our areas. They have no taste and just drain any developer of as much funding possible which usually comes off the quality of the developments just look at what’s been built in Partington and the same will happen in Carrington aswell look how badly they have handled the redevelopment of Partingtons leisure centre way behind totally badly run council.
By Partington resident
Local elections very soon so make it count.
By Petermufc11
Refuse to pay council tax. Why should multi million pound companies with better lawyers refuse to pay and expect the tax payer to foot the bill. Disgraceful.
By Joanne
To Absolute Pile of ……..
Natural England describe Carrington Moss as an irreplaceable habitat with peat deposits up to 3 metres deep – not Victorian Stool.
By Anonymous
Sounds like a catalogue of incompetence on the part of the council eg Not having the masterplan in place. Or do they have a plan?
By Anonymous
Is this why Trafford are about to go bankrupt another fine mess
By Anonymous