The latest bid to halt a ‘cruise liner’ warehouses development in Wigan borough has failed

The Astley Warehouse Action Group marched into Wigan two weeks ago to demand that work on building four warehouses, towering 60ft high over hundreds of homes in the Astley area of Tyldesley, be paused.

They have accused the council of avoiding the “most serious evidence,” citing support from Labour, the Conservatives, the Greens, Reform UK and more than 10,000 residents.

However, the local authority says it is confident that the granting of planning permission for the development in June 2024 “aligns with national planning policy.”

Residents claim to have uncovered evidence that the noise and visual mitigation used to justify the planning approval of the warehouses at Astley Business Park “could never legally have been built.”

A statement released by the group, which has about 3,000 members on Facebook, said the local authority had “avoided every major issue raised.”

Claim Number One: At the centre of residents’ concerns is a high-pressure Cadent gas main that runs along the boundary of the development.

They say planning approval relied on three to 5m earth bunds to screen the warehouses and reduce noise for neighbouring homes and a primary school.

However, they point out that Cadent legally restricts bund height to just 1.8m, a constraint known to the developer and the council before the noise assessment was carried out.

“This evidence showed the warehouses were approved on the basis of mitigation that was impossible from day one,” the group said. “The council’s response did not acknowledge this contradiction or explain how the noise assessment can still be considered valid.”

Responding to this specific claim, the council said that the developer, PLP, has confirmed that the bunds in the vicinity of the pipeline, in particular the length along the boundary with Thistle Croft where the pipeline is close to the edge of the site, will conform to the heights stipulated in the approved planning drawings.

They also say the noise assessment “did not make any specific reference to bund heights.”

Claim Number Two: Residents have also raised concerns about transparency after discovering that more than 25 revised drawings were uploaded to the planning portal five months after public consultation had closed.

The late amendments included reductions to the bunds and alterations to the landscaping scheme – the very features used to justify approval.

They say that under national planning rules, material changes made after consultation require fresh public notification.

They say no such consultation took place, and they say the council has not explained why.

On this, the council says there were no amendments to reduce the bunds or landscaping. “The plans the council relied on to assess the heights of the bunds were the cross-section plans and were ‘approved plans’.

The authority’s statement goes on: “No material changes were made. In any event, a stop notice can only be served where a breach of planning control has occurred.

Claim Number Three: A further issue, still unaddressed by the council, relates to drainage and flood risk.

They point to an approved drainage strategy based on 2015 pre-bund topographical data, meaning the design never accounted for the large earth bunds now being constructed.

These bunds don’t appear in any of the drainage or flood documentation, even though they significantly alter ground levels and surface water flow.

Several residents and a path to the local primary school say they have already experienced flooding for the first time, something the group describes as a direct result of the development being built in a way that doesn’t match the assessed plans.

Responding to this, the council said the planning permission included a condition which required further details of the site drainage arrangements to be submitted for approval.

The council said: “This was done via a [separate] condition discharge application which contained detailed engineering reports and designs for the site drainage and that the council approved this application.”

They also said the council does not accept that the "approved drainage model” does not reflect the site as built.

The protest group’s statement goes on: “We issued a well-researched, detailed Stop Notice Request backed by all political parties.

“It has taken eight days to receive a response – and not one of our core issues has been addressed.

“The council must now explain why they approved a development reliant on mitigation that cannot be delivered, why residents were not reconsulted on major changes, and why the drainage plans do not reflect the actual development being built.”

The group has now written back to Wigan Council, demanding direct answers and calling for construction to be paused while the evidence is properly reviewed.

They are also asking the council to commission a retrospective Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA), ‘given the reliance on mitigation that is no longer achievable’.

A town hall spokesperson said: “Following careful examination of the legislation and a further site visit this week, we have found no grounds to lawfully issue a temporary stop notice.

“As there has been no breach of planning control, there is no legal basis to enact such a request and to do so would not only be unlawful, but risk incurring significant adverse costs to the taxpayer.

“We are confident that the decision to grant planning permission aligns with national planning policy. Nonetheless, we fully acknowledge the concerns being raised, and we have committed to carrying out an independent audit of the planning process to ensure additional transparency. We will remain in dialogue with the group as that progresses.”