A FORMER greengrocer in Greenfield will be demolished and replaced with an entirely new structure containing four flats if plans get the go ahead.
And after seeing other attempts to convert J Stanford on Greenbridge Lane turned down, Stanford Developments believe removing the current structure, despite their desire to keep it, could help get it through.
According to reports supporting the Diggle-based applicant’s bid to Oldham Council: “It has now been agreed in principle via pre app discussions that the council would be more accepting of a separate building as proposed in this application.”
The applicant wanted to knock down the standing property and construct a new building housing four flats.
Oldham Council said no last year, as it did with a previous application to build above the current structure in 2020.
But a new attempt is being made to convert the area, with documents adding: “A previous inspector’s decision has stated, with regards to the retail unit and its retention, ‘The scheme would re-use a vacant site whilst retaining a small commercial unit in an accessible location close to services and facilities. However, this attracts only limited weight as it is accepted in principle that the site is suitable for residential redevelopment, and this is not necessarily dependent solely on the scheme before me.’
“Given that the Council and the Inspector gave limited weight to the retention of the retail unit, it is removed as part of this scheme.”
Each unit would have its own amenity space on private balconies, as well as communal open space and parking is located under the building itself.
Concerns a new build would dominate existing properties were also allayed, with a statement adding: “The elevations facing the gardens of the dwellings along Chew Valley Road will not have any windows, removing any potential impact of overlooking.
“Similarly, the elevation facing the dwelling next door on Greenbridge Lane does not have any windows in positions that will result in overlooking.
“The proposals will not result in any unacceptable impacts on neighbour amenity due to the positioning of the development at an angle away from surrounding residential development.
“No overshadowing will occur as the height of the proposed extensions do not exceed the height of the other buildings along Greenbridge Lane.
“It is considered that the proposed development would not have an unacceptable impact on residential amenity, in regards to both existing residents and future occupants of the proposed development.”
The once popular shop closed in April 2020 after Jill and Jim Stanford called time on their fish, fruit and veg business after nearly 35 years.
Saddleworth Parish Council also objected to the previous plans, stating the two additional storeys would be, ‘visually overbearing and detrimental to character and appearance of street scene, particularly looking up Greenbridge Lane from the south.’
Oldham Council’s planning committee will decide whether to grant or refuse permission.
OH MY GOD. Why won’t they leave this poor site alone, it’s the FOURTH time they’ve tried to get this horrible scheme through and every time the council see sense and turn it down. You have to admire their persistence but PLEASE give it a rest and hire a proper architect to do the job.
Wow, if only you knew.
Ok Cal, what would you suggest we try?
Hello Jill, it seems that you haven’t listened or learnt anything from the planning advice OMBC gave you the last three times you tried to push the same project through. And a fourth time with a revised facade makes no difference, it’s as if you don’t want to hear professional advice.
Your proposed scheme’s massing it too much for the small site, 4 flats with underground parking, it’s too big and too greedy. I’m sure if you reapplied for a single luxury house with a garden it would sail through. But people can only try to help, it’s up to you to listen
Whilst I agree that this subject should be discussed in the context that racism is not acceptable, it is also not acceptable to condemn the school and the council for their no comment replies , as it is their responsibility to protect the young people in their care. Further more think about the impact that this has on the families of those students who are involved, I would suggest that they are horrified that their children have followed what will have been instigated by just two or three immature individuals who considered it fun. However we should be careful not to blow this out of proportion in what is a major problem caused by social media and the internet, which was not a problem for many adults who grew up in a much smaller world compared with the youth of today.
After the difficulties of the scheme, regardless of anyone’s individual opinion, would it be preferred to redevelop an existing under utilised plot or put even more on greenbelt applications? When someone has worked tirelessly in the community and spent 35 in business on that site, it’s their perogative what they do with it.
Its much easier to judge from a distance. Has it crossed the minds of some individuals that there’s been a drawn out process for which an original ambition has perhaps been curtailed in the minds of planners and that the cost of doing anything needs to be balanced commercially?
At least its being progressed, it’s been a long time getting Iver the mark.
I clearly remember this shop when it was the Co-op bakery. My granny used to send me there for muffins.
I never figured out why she always called it the Co-op cafe because it wasn’t a cafe