Plans to transform an empty plot of land into a car sales site, with a portable cabin office, 30 vehicle spaces, plus staff and customer bays, have been refused.

The application, submitted to Rossendale Council by Mariam Ali in November last year, was for the former Stepping Stones site in Warner Street, Haslingden.

The site currently comprises a disused plot of land where a building known as Stepping Stones was formerly located, and the area surrounding the plot of land holds a car parking area for the adjacent NHS building and row of housing.

The proposal was to use the site for car sales with access from Warner Street, with a secondary access adjacent to Greenfield Gardens for staff parking.

The development would have included 30 car sales spaces, a portacabin as an office, and parking spaces for staff and customers.

The application described the business as car sales, with most negotiations taking place online via Auto Trader.

A statement submitted alongside the plans explained that the majority of customers would view a car online and then have it delivered to their home, rather than attending the site.

The statement read: “So this means we don't have large number of potential car buyers visiting the car sales site.

“We envisage the odd two or three visits in a whole month. These in-person visitors are either local to the area or visit via public transport train or bus so that they can purchase the vehicle and drive away the vehicle in person.”

Eleven objections were received from neighbouring residents, as well as one from Lancashire County Council’s highways department.

The objections raised concerns over congestion, noise and banging; as well as issues around vehicles to and from the site already causing parking problems and access for residents.

There were also concerns raised about the impact on parking at Greenfield Gardens causing more problems and congestion; the impact on visual amenity from the residents of Greenfield Gardens; the impact on air quality; and the use of land not being in keeping with the area.

A report to the planning committee read: “Whilst the proposed development would provide an additional two jobs in the area, this does not outweigh the harm in terms of impact on conservation area, neighbouring amenity, and highway safety.

“The proposed development would appear out of place within the street scene and at odds with the special interest of the conservation area, and as a result would cause less than substantial harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area.

“The proposed development would be detrimental to the residential amenity of the occupiers of Greenfield Gardens by way of noise nuisance outside of normal working hours.

“Insufficient information has been submitted in terms of traffic speeds and visibility splays to demonstrate that the site can operate without having a negative impact on highway safety on the surrounding highway network.

“The proposal would not comply with the development plan and would not improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area.

“There were no amendments to the scheme, or conditions which could reasonably have been imposed, which could have made the development acceptable, and it was therefore not possible to approve the application.”

The plans were refused last week.