A retrospective planning application to allow a community self-storage facility at the White Moss Nursery And Garden Centre South Lane, Cuerdley near Penketh, has been rejected by Warrington planners.
The application involved the retention of 87 existing shipping containers and a change of use from land associated with the garden centre to self-storage facilities.
The application site is related to land at White Moss Nursery and Garden Centre, at the far western edge of the boundary of the borough. The site is located on the northern side of South Lane which connects the A562 with Widnes. The site is also to the south of the railway embankment.
The applicant’s agent confirmed that the applicant also owns White Moss Nursery and Garden Centre and stated it was important to recognise the application had no connection to the business occupying the site.
Retrospective consent was being sought for 87 shipping containers on the site to be used as self-storage units described as ‘Proposed Community Units.’
In order to fully understand the proposal, the Case Officer asked the applicant’s agent if a more appropriate description of development would be “Retention of existing containers and change of use from land associated with the garden centre to self-storage facilities”. The agent agreed this would be a more appropriate description.
The agent confirmed that there were 87 community storage units on the site and the community storage units were presently in use with a waiting list of local people who want to rent storage space. The agent confirmed that the storage units were former shipping containers that have been adapted to provide a dry secure storage facility, This has been achieved by lining the internal unit with 12mm thick ply sheeting panels.
The agent also advised that the reason that the units are referred to as community units is due to the fact that the site has 24-hour security and is managed by the applicant. In addition, the applicant conducts monthly meetings with a representative core of users (committee) to discuss any (community) issues with the facilities on site and address matters accordingly and has stated that this is significantly different to standard self-storage facilities.
Ward Cllr Andy Heaver objected stating: “A decision has already been made at both application and appeal against using this green belt site for self-storage units.
Changing the title to community units changes nothing, it’s still self-storage. This is green belt and the usage is inappropriate”.
Highways also opposed the scheme stating parking provision and manoeuvring space appeared constrained.
There was also concern regarding visibility.
The plan was rejected by Warrington Borough Council under delegated powers for the following reasons.
1. The development does not meet any of the exceptions within Paras 149 or 150 of the NPPF and is, therefore, ‘inappropriate’ development within the Green Belt, which is by definition harmful to the Green Belt and which can only be granted in very special circumstances. The circumstances put forward do not justify allowing inappropriate development in the Green Belt in this instance.
Accordingly, the development would cause harm to the Green Belt and the purposes for including the land within the designation, contrary to Policy CS5 of the LPCS and the NPPF.
2. The proposed use of the land for container storage is considered to be harmful to the visual amenity of the locality and the rural character of the area, by virtue of the harsh and industrial character of this use within a rural and verdant area. The proposals are therefore contrary to Policies QE7, MP3 and CC2 of the adopted Local Plan 2014 and the NPPF.
3. Insufficient information has been submitted to overcome concerns including how the facility would operate, increased traffic, lack of parking provision, constrained manoeuvring space and the poor level of visibility caused by the wall to the front of the site. The proposals are therefore contrary to Policies QE6, MP 1 and MP3 of the Local Plan Core Strategy; the adopted Parking Standards SPD; and the NPPF
3 Comments
I rent a container on this site and it is immaculate! The aerial shot in the other post doesn’t show people what an amazing job has happened to this land from what is was. Was an absolute mess and now they have made it into something the community actually want! Go down and have a look yourselves instead of listening to comments or accusations. Hope this gets overturned!!
I also rent a cabin there as do other locals I know, that is not a real time picture of the site. If you think it’s an eyesore then go down and have a look yourself
Don’t believe everything you’re shown on here. You can’t even see the site from the road and inside is a perfectly stoned, level lovely laid out storage facility that also has great CCTV security.
How can it be “hurtful to the green belt”, when they have removed all the waste, removed the eyesore that was there by the last tenants.
How can it be “harmful to the visual amenity of the area” when it cant be seen from the road. there are conifers that are about 25ft high, which actually looks very impressive.
Increased traffic ? you open the gate, go to your container, drop off or collect then leave!
Parking ? you park next to your container, there is no parking outside ?
As far as I’m concerned this is false news. Politicians wanting votes !!!!!!