REPORT TO SWINTON COMMUNITY COMMITTEE
SWINTON SEWAGE TREATMENT WORKS
9TH DECEMBER 2003
INTRODUCTION
The former Swinton Sewage Treatment Works and adjoining land was allocated in the
First Deposit Draft UDP for the provision of a mix of housing and open space
improvements, together with a link road through the site between the East Lancashire
Road and Rocky Lane (see attached Plan A for the boundary of the allocation and
proposed line of the road).
During the six-week consultation period on the First Deposit Draft UDP, held in
February and March 2003, the City Council received almost 1,400 representations on
the two proposals, the vast majority of which objected to them. This report provides
more details about the site, and explains why the proposals have been retained in the
Revised Deposit Draft UDP.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The total area of the site is 29.4 hectares, and approximately 58% (around 17
hectares) of it was previously occupied by the sewage treatment works. The treatment
works was built in the 19th Century, and was closed in 1991 following the
construction of a new trunk sewer that connected to the expanded Eccles Effluent
Treatment Works. This part of the site is open in appearance, but is not publicly
accessible.
Immediately to the west of the former treatment works are playing fields that were
created in the 1980s and remain in use (approximately 9% of the total site area). To
the west of the playing fields are allotments that appear to date from the 1930s but are
now disused (approximately 6% of the total site area). The thin strip of land between
Rocky Lane and the former treatment works (approximately 2% of the total site area)
is currently open and unused, but part of it has previously been occupied by two shops
and a small number of garages.
Immediately to the east of the former treatment works is an area of open space, part of
which was used as a sports pitch until relatively recently (approximately 14% of the
total site area). To its east, there is an area that has been used as informal open space
and part of it has been planted as a community woodland (approximately 9% of the
total site area). Along the eastern boundary is a former railway line that now forms
part of the footpath network (approximately 3% of the total site area).
SITE OWNERSHIP AND COVENANTS
Records indicate that the ownership of the site is split between the City Council and
United Utilities. Plan B identifies the distribution of ownership.
1
There are covenants relating to some of the land owned by the City Council, and
details of these are provided on Plan C. Further investigation is required with regards
to the site of the disused allotments, and this is currently taking place.
FIRST DEPOSIT DRAFT UDP
There has been some confusion over the exact details of the proposals in the Draft
UDP, so it is worth reiterating them here.
Of the 29.4 hectares site, it is envisaged that at least 13 hectares of land would be laid
out for recreational purposes, and about 12 hectares would be available for residential
development at a minimum density of 35 dwellings per hectare. The rest of the site
would be used for provision of the link road, with any remaining land potentially
being used for additional housing and/or open space. This would result in a much
greater range of recreation opportunities, and more publicly accessible open space on
the site than at present, given that the former treatment works land is not open to the
public. The 12 hectares of housing development would be significantly less than the
17 hectares that previously formed the treatment works site.
A new link road between the East Lancashire Road and Rocky Lane would be a
prerequisite of the housing development. It is envisaged that this would be a single
lane in each direction, and not a dual carriageway or “urban motorway” as has been
suggested. This new road should also help to relieve congestion within the local area,
particularly at the junctions of Worsley Road with the East Lancashire Road and Folly
Lane.
A total of 673 representations were received during the consultation period on the
allocation of the site for a mix of housing and open space (672 objections and 1
support). A total of 686 representations were received on the identification of a route
for a new link road through the site (683 objections and 3 supports).
The representations raised a variety of issues, but the main concerns were as follows:
 Loss of open space, recreation space, greenfield land and views
 Loss of wildlife and woodland
 Increase in traffic congestion, rat running, and reduction in road safety
 Unsustainable location, with poor public transport
 Increase in air and noise pollution, and a resultant negative impact on health
 Reduction in the quality of life for existing residents
 Loss of social life, community identity and local pride
 Insufficient facilities, such as schools, doctors, dentists, etc
 Overcrowding of the site
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT UDP
The two proposals are being retained unaltered in the Revised Deposit Draft UDP,
and the reasons for this are explained in the next section of this report.
2
The consultation period on the Revised Deposit Draft UDP runs from 24th November
2003 to 5th January 2004. Government regulations on producing the UDP mean that,
because the two proposals have not been changed since the first consultation period,
new representations on them cannot be accepted at this stage. This second
consultation period only relates to changes that have been made to the Draft UDP
since the first consultation period.
The representations that were made on the two proposals during the first consultation
period will be considered at a Public Inquiry, which will be chaired by an independent
Inspector. This Public Inquiry is likely to be held in Autumn 2004.
If the allocations are retained by the Inspector, it is intended that a “development
brief” would be prepared for the site, setting out in more detail the exact location and
form of the housing development, and the details of the open space, recreation
facilities and wildlife habitats that would be provided as part of that development. The
local community would be consulted on this development brief.
REASONS FOR RETAINING THE TWO PROPOSALS
Recycling Land
The 58% of the site that was formerly used as a sewage treatment works falls under
the definition of previously-developed land. It is also known to be contaminated, and
there is evidence that the majority of the rest of the site is also contaminated, and this
is thought to be either directly or indirectly related to activity at the former sewage
treatment works. Further survey work is currently being commissioned to provide
more detailed information on the exact nature, extent and severity of this
contamination.
There is a very strong emphasis in Government policy on reusing previouslydeveloped land, particularly for housing, and on tackling the problems of
contaminated land. The proposals in the Draft UDP would help to address the
contamination issues, and to bring the whole of the site into a more beneficial use. As
mentioned above, although the site is open in nature, a significant part of it is not
currently accessible to the public, and the recreational value of the remainder is
limited.
Difficulties of Retaining the Existing Recreation Allocation
The site is currently allocated in the Adopted UDP for recreation use (policy R12/6).
This allocation seeks to secure the provision of additional playing fields, changing
rooms, and informal open space. However, this allocation has not been implemented,
and it is considered that there is little likelihood of this happening in the foreseeable
future, because of issues of funding, need, land ownership and contamination. This
makes it difficult to justify retaining the recreation allocation, and, in the face of
objections from one of the site owners, it is questionable whether an Inspector would
support its retention at a Public Inquiry.
Furthermore, the type of recreation identified in the Adopted UDP is no longer
considered appropriate. A major audit of recreation facilities in the city has recently
been conducted, together with an assessment of the demand for playing fields. This
3
indicated that there was no need for the provision of any playing fields on the site,
because there is sufficient already existing elsewhere within the city. However, this
part of the City is deficient in the provision of neighbourhood parks and equipped
play areas, but, because of limited funding, the City Council is generally only able to
secure new/improved parks and equipped play areas as part of new housing
developments.
Therefore, the City Council is left with a situation where, at present, more than half of
the site (i.e. the former treatment works) is currently publicly inaccessible and has no
beneficial use, with very little chance of changing this situation under the Adopted
UDP allocation. The remainder of the site is accessible to the public, but provides
only limited recreational opportunities. There is a shortage of parks and equipped play
areas in the local area, but no clear way of rectifying this situation.
The Case for Housing Development
Permitting housing development on part of the site would enable the contamination
problems to be addressed, and would fund the provision of significant improvements
in the recreation opportunities on the site. This would include the provision of a
neighbourhood park, incorporating both equipped play areas and large areas of high
quality informal open space. Given that the former sewage treatment works is not
open to the public, the total amount of publicly accessible open space would be
slightly increased by the proposal, and it would provide improved facilities and
recreation opportunities.
If the site was not allocated for a mix of housing and open space in the Draft UDP, a
developer could still apply for planning permission to build houses on part of the site.
It is considered that it may be difficult to justify refusing any planning application for
housing development on the 58% of the site that was formerly used as a sewage
treatment works. If the City Council did refuse such an application, the applicant
could appeal and would have a good chance of securing planning permission from the
Government. Although the site is currently allocated in the Adopted UDP for
recreation use, as set out above, there is no evidence that this allocation is ever likely
to be implemented, and the details of the allocation are no longer appropriate in terms
of the provision of playing fields. As a result, the allocation is likely to be outweighed
by the fact that the housing development would be on previously-developed land and
would help to tackle a contamination problem.
The City Council could continue to resist housing development on the site, but given
the likelihood of such development proceeding irrespective of the council’s position,
it is considered that it is more appropriate to take a positive and proactive approach, in
order to ensure that the highest quality scheme is secured and that the benefits for the
local community are maximised as far as possible.
Nature Conservation
The site does not benefit from any national or local nature conservation designations.
However, as a result of the concerns raised by objectors, the City Council
commissioned the Greater Manchester Ecology Unit to conduct an ecological
assessment of the site.
4
The resulting ecological report indicates that the site does have some nature
conservation benefits, particularly the former sludge lagoons, but that these are not of
major significance. It concludes that the direct loss of habitats could be adequately
compensated for by creating and enhancing habitats elsewhere on the site. For
example, the diversion of Folly Brook could allow improved habitats to be provided
for wildlife, particularly water voles. The report states that the provision of a large,
single area of public open space would be preferable to a series of isolated areas. It
also recommends that planting should aim to provide links to hedgerows, lines of
trees and areas of woodland, to help compensate for any disruption to bat flightlines
that may result from the new road.
Layout
If the housing development took place on the former sewage treatment works, then
this would result in the remaining open space being split into a number of relatively
awkward shapes, which would limit the recreation benefits and their accessibility, and
would reduce the potential wildlife value. By allocating the wider site, and looking at
it as a whole, a better layout could be achieved, which would allow a good range of
high quality recreation opportunities to be provided, whilst also allowing the nature
conservation benefits to be maximised.
Site Access
Access to any housing development could potentially be taken in part from a number
of existing residential roads around the site. However, the City Council considers that
the impact on existing residents would be too great, and it would have a detrimental
impact on the quality of the housing layout that could be achieved.
A single access from Rocky Lane would concentrate all of the traffic in one location,
worsening local congestion, as well as creating an overlong cul-de-sac. A single
access from the East Lancashire Road would have similar problems, and would not
have any benefits in terms of traffic flow on the East Lancs, which would need to be
demonstrated to justify the introduction of another set of traffic lights on that major
road.
Therefore, the provision of a new access road through the site, between the East
Lancashire Road and Rocky Lane is considered to be the most appropriate option.
This avoids the problems of the other options, as well as providing a new route
between two main roads. A full assessment of the traffic implications of the new road
is currently being undertaken, and initial results indicate that it would reduce local
traffic congestion as well as accommodating the traffic that would be expected from
the proposed housing development. In terms of road safety, the careful design of the
road and its junctions should enable any risks to be reduced to an acceptable level.
Improvements to public transport would be sought as part of any development, but it
is not envisaged that this would require the introduction of bus lanes.
Other Key Issues
 The provision of an attractive, high quality area of recreational open space should
help to enhance pride, social life and the identity of the area rather than reduce
them.
 Any shortfall in local amenities and facilities that would be created by the
development would need to be met at the developer’s expense. However, at this
5


time, there would appear to be a significant number of surplus places in some of
the local primary schools, such as Moorside County Primary School. If there is a
need for additional doctors and dentists, then it may be possible to secure
accommodation for them as part of the new development, although their actual
provision would be the responsibility of the Primary Care Trust.
The careful design of the road, and high quality landscaping along it, would help
to minimise any pollution impacts.
A density of 35 dwellings per hectare would enable a high quality development to
be provided, offering a range of housing types including detached and semidetached residences, town houses, and apartments.
OTHER AMENDMENTS IN THE REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT UDP
Given the level of interest in these proposals, members of the Community Committee
may also wish to consider the implications for this site of changes to other policies of
the Draft UDP that have been made between the First Deposit and Revised Deposit
stages.
Policy ST11 (Location of New Development) has been significantly amended, and
now sets out the “sequential approach” as it will be applied in Salford. This seeks to
locate new development on previously-developed land wherever possible, but does
allow for the development of greenfield site in limited circumstances, for example
where the greenfield land would effectively be replaced nearby as part of the
development. The proposals relating to the former treatment works and adjoining land
are consistent with the revised draft Policy ST11.
The City’s Strategic Recreation Routes (Policy R5 of the Draft UDP) are now shown
on the Proposals Map. One of these routes runs along the eastern boundary of the site
that is the subject of this report. Any proposals relating to the site would need to retain
this Strategic Recreation Route, or make alternative provision that is equally attractive
and convenient.
A new policy (EN7E) has been added to the Draft UDP relating to the protection of
species. Any proposed development that would have an adverse impact on legally
protected species would need to incorporate mitigation measures that would maintain
current population levels of those species. In the case of the former sewage treatment
works site, it is likely that this could be achieved through habitat creation as part of
the open space improvements.
SUMMARY
It is recognised that there are very significant local concerns regarding the two
proposals for the site, particularly relating to the loss of the openness of part of the
site, and the potential impacts of the road.
However, it is considered that the proposals should be retained, because:
 There would be more publicly accessible open space, which would be of a higher
quality, provide a wider variety of recreation opportunities, meet an identified
6




need for a neighbourhood park and equipped play areas, and potentially provide
higher quality and more diverse wildlife habitats.
The contamination of the site would be dealt with.
It would be difficult to resist housing development on the former sewage
treatment works, but, by working proactively with the landowner, the benefits of
any development for the local community can be maximised.
The road is necessary to support the residential development, and should help to
relieve rather than add to local traffic congestion.
Without any development, the site would be likely to remain in its current
condition, providing only limited recreation benefits for the local community.
David Evans
Development Planning Manager
Salford City Council
7