PRESTWICH is to benefit from a £20 million shopping and apartments complex, and up to 70 jobs, after councillors gave the go-ahead by ONE vote.
Members of Bury's planning committee were split "six for and six against" the plan to transform the former Sainsbury's site.
But chairman of the committee, Coun Tony Cummings, gave the casting vote on Monday in favour of the revised scheme.
He said: "We asked that the scheme should be no bigger than the original and now it has been reduced. On this site we are going to have a substantial building and I think it is perfectly acceptable."
His comments were greeted with shouts of "Shame on you!" from the public gallery after a selection of residents had taken their turn to address the committee with their objections.
Included in the objectors was Monsignor John Allen, of Our Lady of Grace Church, who complained the scheme was even larger than before, despite the developers' claims it had been reduced above ground by five per cent and specifically facing Fairfax Road by 14 per cent.
The residents' comments were supported by a number of committee members who agreed the application was an over-development of the site.
Coun Yvonne Creswell said: "Prestwich has a village feel to it and this development would look better in Manchester city centre or even Bury. What concerns me is that if we allow this development to go through, is Prestwich going to become what I would call a Tower Hamlet? Is it going to bring other developments of this size?"
The point of whether Prestwich was in fact a village or a town was greatly debated, with Coun Keith Grime saying: "To say Prestwich is a village is a hangover from the past. It is not a village. It is five miles from the city centre and has attracted investment because of that.
"However, I think this particular development is too big. It is in the right place but the scale of the development is not suitable for the site. The whole project is, in essence, good but the way it has come back to us is inappropriate. It is not what I was expecting."
Speaking in favour of the application, Coun Mike Connolly, said: "This revised application does comply with our requests. The developer has indeed responded to the concerns of this committee and the residents of Prestwich. I think this is a modern, innovative and exciting development that will contribute positively to the borough as a whole and will have a positive effect on the economic regeneration of Prestwich.
"Let's get rid of this nonsense that Prestwich is a village: it is part of the urban conurbation."
Richardson Developments (with MCO Developments) and Countryside Properties submitted revised plans for the former Sainsbury's site in the Longfield Centre following a deferment by councillors in April.
The developers were asked to amend the scheme to reduce the impact on Fairfax Road which they did by lowering the elevation directly opposite the church and presbytery.
The first floor car park was relocated to the basement and the number of flats increased from 123 to 145.
The building at its highest point, facing the library and Longfield centre car park, is now ten storeys high instead of the original eight but the apartments facing the church are only four storeys high on top of a retail level.
The revised plans received 175 individual letters of objection, with 14 handed in on the day of the meeting, and a petition of 165 names.
Support for the scheme came from one local resident and Prestwich Business Forum, which represents more than 150 members.
Comments from a survey in Prestwich Library amounted to 41 against and one in favour.
Coun Cummings added: "If we rejected this scheme a second time we might have run the risk of losing an appeal but it is important to stress that we now believe this is the right scheme for the area."
Simon Miller of MCO Developments said: "We are very pleased with the decision and are going to continue working with officers of the local authority and residents on a scheme that Prestwich can be proud of. It did look in the balance at one point but we are delighted with the outcome."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article