PLANS for a two-storey house on a protected site next to a vicarage have narrowly been given the green light despite strong opposition from villagers.

The three-bedroom house is set to be built on green belt land off Ainsworth Hall Road with a one-bedroom "granny annexe", detached garage and private garden.

But the parish vicar, who lives at the adjacent Christ Church vicarage, said residents are opposed to the development, citing concerns over the visual impact on the area, loss of wildlife and trees.

Rev David Thomson, who was speaking on behalf of the Ainsworth Community Association, told the planning committee that the village would feel like the "thin edge of the wedge", referring to other parts of the countryside being earmarked for housing.

He said: “This is within a piece of land in the Ainsworth conservation area and the green belt. What’s the point of the conservation area and what’s the point of the green belt protection if this is approved? People are already concerned that the green belt is under threat by the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework."

Cllr Jackie Harris agreed. She said: "In certain cases we can allow infilling in green belt areas. I would argue that this property doesn’t do that. It’s completely against the principles of conservation. It doesn’t enhance the area at all. It has a negative impact."

She proposed refusing planning permission on these grounds but her motion was voted down.

Cllr Cristina Tegolo was prepared to accept a house on this site but said this one was too big.

She said: “For me it’s a question of size and massing of the building. It would be appropriate if the building size was appropriate and mass is reduced in size. For me something that’s small and doesn’t encroach on the adjoining building. We are building a four-bedroom house. It doesn’t need to be so grand and such a scale."

She proposed deferring a decision so that the applicant could be asked whether she would consider changing the design.

The vote on deferral was split and planning committee chair Gavin McGill, who had the casting vote, did not support it.

He said: “I think we have enough information in front of us tonight. I don’t think we need to go there."

The planning application was approved after a third vote took place in which six voted in favour of the proposal with five against.

Cllr Tony Cummings was among those who voted in favour of the development.

He said: “It’s no less appropriate or inappropriate than the existing houses on that road."

Radcliffe North councillor Paul Cropper said he had never heard so much opposition to an application in his ward since he was elected in May 2018.

He said: “Ainsworth is a small village. It’s a tight-knit community. Anybody who knows Ainsworth knows the area know they don’t want this application to go ahead."

Cllr Cropper also accused previous landowners of acting with "impunity" by removing trees and shrubbery without consent from the council.

Planning chief Dave Marno confirmed that the actions of the previous applicant result in court action.

He said the work completed by the current owners was done with consent from the council.

Objectors also accused the landowner Janet Leach, who is related to two members of staff at Bury Council including a senior planning officer, of an "inside job".

Responding to the allegations, planning agent Richard Gee said: "The family of my client may work for the council, but this does not prevent an application being submitted and any applications should be subject to the rules and procedures put in place by the council to regulate such cases.

"In this case, there is no question whatsoever that there has been absolute adherence to those rules and procedures. My client has been open and honest from the outset, and have gone diligently through due process.

"So it is entirely lacking credibility and substance for any party to try to argue that my client has somehow cheated the system or been awarded special dispensation."

Both council officers who are related to the applicant completed a conflict of interest declaration and the application was assessed without their involvement, according to the council.