Tesco at Little Lever - More hurdles to overcome (for them)

E-mail sent to Planning Department 5th March 2012

Planning Application 86999/11

Dear Mr Allen,

May I comment on the Transport Assessment covering letter from Mr Harris posted on the Council Planning website on the 29^th February.

Point No 1

In relation to recent changes to the Highways plan, Mr Harris maintains that a further period of consultation is not required for the reasons he lays out.

Firstly, might I point out that changing part of Lever St into a one way street can only be brought about by a Traffic Regulation Order.

Bolton Council’s own website informs us of the following:-

...............................................................................................................................................................

What must a local authority do prior to implementing a TRO?

The authority must:

• publish a notice of the proposals in a local newspaper;
• allow potential objectors 21 days to make representations;
• take other steps the authority may consider appropriate for ensuring adequate publicity is given to persons likely to be affected by any provision in the order, which may include roadside notices and delivery of letters to premises; and
• hold a public consultation if the TRO would prohibit loading or unloading of vehicles (i) at all times, (ii) before 07.00 hours, (iii) between 10.00 and 16.00; or (iv) after 19.00, or if the passage of public service vehicles would be restricted. (The authority may opt to hold a public inquiry in other circumstances). 

...............................................................................................................................................................

I note from the Plan also posted on 29^th February and from correspondence from Mr McCreesh posted on the 17^th February that is  proposed to widen the footpath on the south side of Lever St for presumably the whole length of the one-way section, thus resulting in the narrowing of the carriageway for that length.

At the moment, the loading/unloading restrictions are partial – presumably 8.00am- 9.00am and 4.30pm – 6.00 pm (although there are no signs on the posts)

The restricted width of the carriageway due to widening of the pavement would logically then require a 24hr restriction on loading/unloading – otherwise nobody could get past a parked vehicle that was doing this.

So, as per the above, not only would 21 days of representations be required but indeed a Public Consultation.

I assume that Mr Harris is suggesting that you give him planning permission and then worry about the TRO afterwards. This I suggest would be illogical and perverse. If this were to happen there is no guarantee that a TRO would subsequently be granted and it should not be assumed that it would.

If, as I previously suggested, a consultation on this matter were to be carried out within this Planning Application and prior to a Committee decision, then the Committee would have an indication at least of the likelihood of success of a subsequent TRO.

I have tabled a question for the Little Lever & Darcy Lever Area Forum of 6^th March on this matter for the consideration of the Ward Councillors.

Secondly, on the matter of Puffin Crossing locations, both bus stops on either side of Ainsworth Rd would need to be moved upwards beyond Crossley St towards Victory Rd. In itself this wouldn’t appear to be problematic.

The location of the Puffin on Market St would seem to be directly opposite the bus shelter outside the Council Offices. Moving this and the one on the graveyard side further towards the Village Centre could be problematic since due to entrances and exits there are very few places for them to be re-located.

The Puffin Crossing across Church St would need to be in the same location as the current Zebra otherwise it could not be seen by traffic approaching from Market St.

Point No 2

I note that Bolton Council has posted a legal notice in the Bolton News at long last confirming that it intends to dispose of the land to the south of Crossley St. (The Tree Plot). I note from looking at the plan at the Town Hall, that this does not include the half of the carriageway of Crossley St that Bolton Council own. This is presumably because Crossley St is to remain an adopted highway.

However, Tesco informed me at their presentation that the intention was to aquire a two metre strip of the Tree Plot adjacent to the carriageway in order to widen the entrance. Furthermore they have introduced into the plan the turn around where Crossley St meets the site boundary.

This necessarily encroaches more into the tree plot.

I now must point out to you that not only are the trees on that plot subject to a Tree Preservation Order but I am informed by the former Chairman of the Planning Committee that the TPO’s were put on these trees specifically to prevent development on this piece of land.

I must now refer you to the response to a FOI request which I submitted to Bolton Council

...................................................................................................................................................

From: Charlton, LauraBolton Metropolitan Borough Council24 March 2011

Dear Mr. Richardson,

Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000

In response to your request for information we have contacted the relevant
department and Bolton Council are happy to supply the information below.

1.Where trees situated on land owned by Bolton Council are subject to
existing Tree Preservation Orders, what are the circumstances and by what
procedures and on whose authority can those Tree Preservation Orders be
rescinded?

Response.

Once a tree is protected by an order confirmed by the Council (via the
Planning Committee) trees may only be removed as a result of the
submission and approval of an application to undertake such work. This
process is set down by the regulations in respect of trees covered by
TPO's. The decision on such applications would be taken by the Director of
Development and Regeneration under the powers conferred on him by the
scheme of delegation from the Council. Permission may also be granted via
an application to develop the land on which the trees stand but consent
would only apply to the trees that are required to be removed to allow
development to take place.

2.Where Tree Preservation Orders are made specifically in order to ensure
that there is no development of the land on which they are situated, under
what circumstances and by what procedures and on whose authority can those
TPO’s be rescinded and development be allowed to proceed?

Response.

This process would normally result in a developer Appealing a decision and
under such circumstances the final decision as to weather (sic) development
proceeds would be taken by a Planning Inspector on behalf of the Secretary
of State.3.If such land owned by Bolton Council upon which are situated are trees
covered by TPO’s should be disposed of by sale, under what circumstances
and by what procedures and on whose authority could the TPO’s be
rescinded.?

Response.

The subsequent owner would be responsible for submitting an application to
develop the said site (ie – the Tree Plot  - not Pennine Pets)and the Council would decide whether to approve or refuse the development. Approval to remove trees as part of an application
would be granted pursuant to an approval of a detail/full application.Should the Council refuse consent then the process would follow that set down in the answer to the second query.

(End of response)
................................................................................................................................................................

It’s pretty obvious why the developer would wish to spend a lot of money purchasing the whole of the tree plot. Widening of Crossley St by two metres  could be carried out by Bolton Council (at the developer’s expense) without the need of selling any of the plot.

However, Tesco will no doubt need to have signage at the junction of Crossley St and Ainsworth Rd and the Tree Plot is the only place it can be.

Although we have yet to discover the Crossley St entrance design, it can be assumed that the increased radius required for the entrance of HGV’s would also encroach on the Tree Plot. 

It’s difficult to see that these, or indeed the turn around, could be done without interfering with the trees. This would require one or more of the above procedures to be followed.

Conclusion.
In relation to the One Way System, the narrowing of the carriageway in Lever St resulting in the need for 24 loading restrictions and the status and purpose of the Tree Preservation Orders, Bolton Council has in place rules and regulations for TRO’s and TPO’s which I have copied above from the Council Website and a FOI reply.
The developer, I suggest, must adhere to these.

                                    The Tree Plot – Crossley St

PS:- I will be responding to the Addendum to the Transport Assessment under separate cover.

Regards

Paul Richardson