(Public Pack)Agenda Document for Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel, 07/06/2018 09:30

Public Document Pack

Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel

Dear Member,

You are invited to attend the meeting of the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel to be held as follows for the transaction of the business indicated. Miranda Carruthers-Watt Proper Officer

DATE: Thursday, 7 June 2018

TIME: 9.30 am

VENUE: Committee Room 4, Salford Civic Centre, Chorley Road, Swinton

In accordance with ‘The Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014,’ the press and public have the right to film, video, photograph or record this meeting.

Members attending this meeting with a personal interest in an item on the agenda must disclose the existence and nature of that interest and, if it is a prejudicial interest, withdraw from the meeting during the discussion and voting on the item.

Please note that there will be a break for Members at approximately 11.15 a.m. until 11.30 a.m.

AGENDA

1 The Panel is asked to consider whether it agrees to the inclusion of the items listed in Parts 1 and 2 of the agenda.

2 Apologies for absence.

3 Declarations of interest.

4 To approve, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held (Pages 1 - 6) on 10th May 2018.

5 Planning applications and related development control issues. (Pages 7 - 14)

9.30 A.M.

5a 17/70871/FUL Land West Of AJ Bell Stadium And North Of The (Pages 15 - 40) Manchester Ship Canal.

5b 17/71147/FUL The Old Fire Station, Clarendon Road, Irlam M44 5ZA. (Pages 41 - 52)

5c 18/71330/FUL Land North Of Senior Street, Springfield Lane M3 7GE (Pages 53 - 80) 5d 18/71512/FUL Land Bound By Hulme Street, Gaythorn Street And (Pages 81 - 110) Upper Wharf Street, Salford.

5e 18/71641/OUT The Spinney, 482 Walkden Road, Worsley. (Pages 111 - 124)

11.30 A.M.

5f 18/71538/FUL Canon Green Drive, Salford M3 7DB (Pages 125 - 152)

6 Planning applications determined under delegated authority. (Pages 153 - 194)

7 Planning appeals. (Pages 195 - 202)

8 Enforcement activity from 1st January to 31st March 2018. (Pages 203 - 210)

9 Urgent business.

10 Exclusion of the Public.

11 Part 2 - Closed to the Public.

12 Urgent business.

Contact Officer: Tel No: 0161 793 2602 Claire Edwards, Democratic Services E-Mail: [email protected] Agenda Item 4 PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

10th May 2018

Meeting commenced: 9:30 a.m. “ adjourned: 11:50 a.m. “ re-convened: 12:05 p.m. “ adjourned: 1.45 p.m. “ re-convened: 2.15 p.m. “ ended: 2.55 p.m.

PRESENT: Councillor Mashiter - in the Chair

Councillors Antrobus, Clarke, Dawson, Hamilton, Hunt, P. Wheeler and R. Wilson

Councillor Burch during consideration of application references 18/71347/COU (6 And 8 Bindloss Avenue, Eccles, M30 0DU), 17/71158/FUL (352 Walkden Road, Worsley, M28 7ER), 18/71548/HH (123 Worsley Road, Worsley, M28 2WG) and 18/71423/FUL (Broadoak Primary School, Fairmount Road, Swinton M27 0EP)

Councillor McIntyre during consideration of all applications with the exception of application reference 18/71423/FUL (Broadoak Primary School, Fairmount Road, Swinton M27 0EP).

Councillor Turner during consideration of all applications with the exception of application references 14/65186/FUL (Newhaven Business Park, Barton Lane, Eccles, Salford, M30 0HH) and 17/70871/FUL (Land West of A J Bell Stadium and north of the Manchester Ship Canal)

Please note that a list of persons in attendance in respect of matters referred to in Minute 97 is included at Appendix A.

94. WELCOME AND APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

The Chair welcomed those present and outlined the procedure for the meeting.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Barnes, Morris and Sharpe.

95. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest.

96. MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

RESOLVED: THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 5th April 2018 be agreed as a correct record.

97. APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

(Full details of the matter referred to in this Minute are contained in the report of the Strategic Director Place (Main Report), as amended in the case of applications marked * in the Amendment Report).

RESOLVED: THAT, following consideration by the Panel, the under-mentioned applications for planning permission were determined, subject to the conditions listed in the above reports, as indicated below –

Application Number/ Site Development Decision Applicant *17/71158/FUL 352 Walkden Road Demolition of existing Deferred for consideration Worsley dwelling and erection of 8 in order for the Panel to be Mr Ryan Little M28 7ER no. semi-detached able to make a decision on dwellings the application at a future meeting. The Panel had voted not to support approval of the application, although there had been no substantive motion to Page 1 refuse the application which had been tabled and voted upon previously, and no reason(s) for a refusal which had been clearly articulated, debated and agreed by the Panel.

18/71423/FUL Broadoak Primary School Siting of a single storey Granted Fairmount Road modular building to be Ms Karen Wild Swinton used as a nursery M27 0EP

*17/70056/FUL Land Formerly Griffin Hotel Erection of a new Please refer to Minute 98 Lower Broughton Road apartment building, below Great Chetham Salford providing 57no. 1 and 2- Developments Limited bedroom apartments together with associated access and parking

18/71347/COU 6 and 8 Bindloss Avenue Change of use of two Granted Eccles properties from C3 Mr Ben Hardman M30 0DU (dwelling) to 12-bed at No. 6 and 13-bed at No. 8 HMO (House in Multiple Occupation) (Sui Generis), installation of dormer window to No. 8, creation of parking area and dropped kerb

18/71548/HH 123 Worsley Road Retrospective application Granted, against the officer Worsley for increasing the height recommendation, by a vote Mr Gary Bethel M28 2WG of existing brickwork of 7 for, 1 against and 3 boundary wall to average abstentions, subject to (a) height of 1800mm and appropriate conditions facing the wall with new being drafted by officers decorative finish. and agreed by the Chair of Retaining the existing the Panel in conjunction gates. with the Assistant Director Housing & Planning, and (b) the inclusion of a condition to ensure that development (finish to wall) is completed within three months of the decision and setting out which drawings have been considered in the assessment of the application for avoidance of doubt.

*16/68858/FUL Oak Court Clifton Business Demolition of existing Granted Park building and formation Mr C Beard Wynne Avenue and laying out of car park, Clifton together with installation Swinton of 2m high railings and M27 8FF gates Re-submission of planning application 16/67858/FUL

*17/70853/FUL Campbell Road Playing Demolition of 2no. Please refer to Minute 99 Fields dwellings and erection of below Mr Mike Stone Campbell Road 241 dwellings (Use Class Swinton C3), laying out of a new M27 5GQ Community Park, Page vehicular2 access, roads and footways, hard and soft landscaping, walls, fences, drainage and associated works

*18/71363/FUL Land At Worrall Street Demolition of existing Please refer to Minute 100 Salford building and erection of a below Mr Lyndon Forshaw M5 4TH building of part 8 / part 9 storeys comprising 86 residential units together with gym, cycle and car parking and associated works

*14/65186/FUL Newhaven Business Park Demolition of existing Please refer to Minute 101 Countryside Properties Barton Lane structures and erection of below (UK) Ltd Eccles 244 dwellings with Salford associated works M30 0HH

*17/70871/FUL Land West Of AJ Bell Construction of an outfall Deferred in order to enable Stadium And North Of The structure into the consideration to be given to United Utilities Manchester Ship Canal Manchester Ship Canal a late representation in and associated works objection to the application. including retaining wall, shaft, temporary access route and temporary construction compound.

98. *17/70056/FUL – LAND FORMERLY GRIFFIN HOTEL, LOWER BROUGHTON ROAD, SALFORD – ERECTION OF A NEW APARTMENT BUILDING PROVIDING 57NO. 1 AND 2 BEDROOM APARTMENTS TOGETHER WITH ASSOCIATED ACCESS AND PARKING

RESOLVED: THAT planning permission be granted, subject to (a) the planning conditions listed in the reports, and (b) the addition of a condition requiring the submission of a flood interpretation scheme to raise public awareness of flood risk mitigation within the scheme and local area, with the authority to approve the details of the scheme being delegated to the Chair of the Panel in conjunction with the Assistant Director Housing & Planning, and that: -

(i) The Strategic Director Place be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act to secure the following heads of terms: -

. A financial contribution to secure £28,295.56 to be allocated to the following: - o Open space - younger and older children’s play provision at Albert Park, Broughton; o Education – Primary School Project B: a scheme of works to enhance or extend existing education facilities, or create new education facilities, for a primary school located within Pupil Planning Area 10; o Public Realm – to provide street scene improvements along Lower Broughton Road and/or Camp Street;

(ii) That the applicant be informed that the Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions stated in the reports, on completion of such a legal agreement;

99. *17/70853/FUL – CAMPBELL ROAD PLAYING FIELDS, CAMPBELL ROAD, SWINTON, MANCHESTER – DEMOLITION OF 2NO. DWELLINGS AND ERECTION OF 241 DWELLINGS (USE CLASS C3), LAYING OUT OF A NEW COMMUNITY PARK, VEHICULAR ACCESS, ROADS AND FOOTWAYS, HARD AND SOFT LANDSCAPING, WALLS, FENCES, DRAINAGE AND ASSOCIATED WORKS

RESOLVED: THAT planning permission be granted, subject to the planning conditions stated in the reports, and that: - Page 3 (i) The Strategic Director Place be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act to secure the following heads of terms: -

. Affordable Housing, . Open Space, . Education, . Public Realm;

(ii) That the applicant be informed that the Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions listed in the reports, on completion of such a legal agreement;

(iii) The authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued (subject to the conditions and reasons listed in the reports) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement. 100. *18/71363/FUL – LAND AT WORRALL STREET, SALFORD M5 4TH – DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDING AND ERECTION OF A BUILDING OF PART 8 / PART 9 STOREYS COMPRISING 86 RESIDENTIAL UNITS TOGETHER WITH GYM, CYCLE AND CAR PARKING AND ASSOCIATED WORKS

RESOLVED: THAT planning permission be granted, subject to the planning conditions listed in the reports, and that: - (i) The Strategic Director Place be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act to secure the following heads of terms: -

. To secure a financial contribution of £146,200 for the following: - o Promote existing bus services; o Review and delivery of traffic regulation orders within the vicinity of the application site; o Lease of a car club vehicle;

(ii) That the applicant be informed that the Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions stated in the reports, on completion of such a legal agreement;

(iii) The authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued (subject to the conditions and reasons stated in the reports) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement. 101. *14/65186/FUL – NEWHAVEN BUSINESS PARK, BARTON LANE, ECCLES, SALFORD M30 0HH – DEMOLITION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES AND ERECTION OF 244 DWELLINGS WITH ASSOCIATED WORKS

RESOLVED: THAT planning permission be granted, subject to (a) the planning conditions listed in the reports, and (b) the addition of a condition requiring upgraded glazing in respect of plots 182-187, and that: -

(i) The Strategic Director Place be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act to secure an appropriate financial contribution towards education, open space, public realm improvements and/or affordable housing, with (a) the agreement on viability and the final details of the projects in which the Section 106 contribution will be invested being delegated for approval to the Chair of the Panel, in conjunction with the Assistant Director Housing & Planning, and (b) the inclusion of a clawback mechanism for viability to be re-tested at 100% completion of the dwellings.

(ii) That the applicant be informed that the Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions stated in the reports, on completion of such a legal agreement;

102. PLANNING APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY

The Strategic Director Place submitted a report containing details of planning applications which he had determined under delegated authority during March and April 2018 and were not, therefore, for consideration by the Panel.

RESOLVED: THAT the content of the report be noted.

103. PLANNING APPEALS Page 4 The Strategic Director Place submitted a report which provided details of appeals that had recently been received and determined.

RESOLVED: THAT the content of the report be noted.

APPENDIX A - ATTENDANCE LIST

9.30 a.m. Session

APPLICATION REF. & IN FAVOUR OBJECTING WARD COUNCILLORS ADDRESS

17/71158/FUL Jason Cartright Dorothy Smethurst Councillor Lindley* 352 Walkden Road Ryan Little Mr. Smethurst Councillor Edwards* Worsley Leo Casey* M28 7ER Veronica Casey Sandra Williams Andrew Eckersley* 18/71423/FUL Karen Wilde* Noel Gaskell* Councillor K. Garrido* Broadoak Primary School Sarah Stephenson Fairmount Road Swinton M27 0EP

17/70056/FUL Jeff Underhill Land Formerly Griffin Keith Mather Hotel Craig Smith Lower Broughton Road Richard Hutchinson Salford

18/71347/COU Tony Lang* Mark Stevenson* Councillor P. Wilson* 6 And 8 Bindloss Avenue Robert Leyland* Eccles Kevin McKever M30 0DU Angela Shepherd*

18/71548/HH Lynn Bethel* Noel Gaskell 123 Worsley Road Gary Bethel* James Broome* Worsley Michael Haselden Anne Gregory M28 2WG Sarah Lyon Ralph Steel*

11.30 a.m. Session

APPLICATION REF. & IN FAVOUR OBJECTING WARD COUNCILLORS ADDRESS

16/68858/FUL Oak Court Clifton Business Park Wynne Avenue Swinton M27 8FF

17/70853/FUL Susan Mottram* Caroline Michael Councillor Dickman* Campbell Road Playing Mr Martin* Noel Gaskell (Ward Councillor and Fields Nikki Lloyd* Holly Deasey representing Rebecca Campbell Road Darren Grimshaw* Natalie Costello Long-Bailey, MP) Swinton Gary Halman* Ian Furness Councillor Fletcher* M27 5GQ James Berggren Cartrina Furness Jason Pirie Margaret Balhan Mike Stone Wayne Smith Page 5 Gordon Purcel James Purcell Alan Hankey Maureen Hankey Joanne Onslow Barry Wooding* Carla Pasiero Andrew Connelly* Laura Clarke Christine Derbyshire Cynthia Harding Roy Harding* Margaret Richardson Alan Richardson Mark Barrett Mr and Mrs Wilkins David Whitnaoo Terry Bromley Alan Moores Susan Higham Michael Breem Paula Bromley Janice McNeive Richard Taylor Janine McDonald C, Corfield Paul Moore Laura Derbyshire* Lee Murphy Anthony Evans Hilary Evans

18/71363/FUL Land At Worrall Street Salford M5 4TH

1.30 p.m. Session

APPLICATION REF. & IN FAVOUR OBJECTING WARD OBSERVER ADDRESS COUNCILLORS

14/65186/FUL Niall Mellan Simon Dodd* Newhaven Business Steve Hughes* Sue Marsden* Park Richard Cookson Barton Lane John Jones Eccles Salford M30 0HH

17/70871/FUL David Sephton Matthew Dugdale Land West Of AJ Bell Tom Rimmer Stadium And North Of Neil Brierley The Manchester Ship Nick McDonald Canal Steven Kenny Jonathan Cartilege Simon Pemberton

* Indicates those who made representations to the Panel.

Page 6 Agenda Item 5

REPORT

Strategic Director Place

To the

Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel

On 7th June 2018

Planning Applications and Related Development Control Matters

(Not considered to contain exempt information)

Non-members of the panel are invited to attend the meeting during consideration of any applications included within the report in which they have a particular interest.

MAIN REPORT

Page1 7

PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972-SECTIONS 100A-100K

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS

The “Background Papers” relating to all reports on Planning Applications appearing in this report are: -

1. The appropriate ‘Development Information Folder’ for each planning application on the Agenda. The contents of the folder include the following documents:

(a) The submitted planning application (forms, plans and supporting documents and Information)

(b) Correspondence with statutory and other consultees;

2. Any previous planning applications and subsequent Decision Notices (if issued referred to in each planning application report on this Agenda.

3. Any Tree Preservation Order referred to in each planning application report on the agenda.

4. Any Conservation Area Plan referred to in each planning application report on the agenda.

5. The “Standard Planning Conditions Etc…’Booklet’.

6. Papers specifically listed under a heading “Other Background Papers” in any planning report on the agenda.

These Background Papers can normally be inspected between the hours of 8.30 am and 4.30 pm on any weekday (except Bank Holidays) at Urban Vision Partnership Ltd reception at Emerson House, Albert Street, Eccles. Whilst background papers will be made available for inspection as quickly as possible, immediate access cannot be guaranteed. It is therefore advisable wherever practical, to make an appointment by telephoning (0161) 779 4852. Alternatively the planning application forms, plans and supporting information is available on the Council’s web site http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/

Publications

In considering planning applications or legal action, the City Council has regard to a wide range of published documents, although not ‘Background Papers’ for the purposes of the Local Government Act 1972 – Sections 100A-100K, are nevertheless important to the consideration of these matters.

The Government in particular has published a large number of circulars and Statutory Instruments in addition to the primary legislation and these are available from Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, which has a bookshop in Manchester.

The following Local Authority publications are available for inspection at Emerson House, Albert Street, Eccles , they can also be viewed on the Council’s web site http://www.salford.gov.uk/planning-policy.htm

Page2 8 If you do not have personal access to the Internet, free access is available to registered members at each of the sixteen libraries in the city.

 Design and Crime – SPD  Trees and Development – SPD  House Extensions – SPD  Housing Planning Guidance  Salford Green Space Strategy – SPD  Nature Conservation & Biodiversity – SPD  Lower Broughton Design Code – SPD  Ellesmere Park – SPD  Hot Food Take Aways - SPD  Telecommunications - SPD  Planning Obligations - SPD  Sustainable Design and Construction SPD  Design SPD

The following Planning Guidance documents have been adopted by the City Council

 The Exchange, Greengate  Mediacity:uk & Quays Point  Housing Planning Guidance  Claremont and Weaste Neighbourhood Plan  Salford City Council - UDP Policy E5: Development in Established Employment Areas  Flood Risk and Development Planning Guidance  Salford central  Irwell City Park  Ordsall Riverside  Pendleton Planning Guidance

Amendments/Additional Information received after the completion of this series of reports

Any amendment/additional information, such as amendments to planning applications, additional information from applicants or consultees, representations from interested parties, etc…. received AFTER the preparation of this series of reports will be reported at the Panel meeting together with any changes to my recommendation.

Page3 9 This page is intentionally left blank PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

Set out below are details of all of the items which will be considered by the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel at their meeting. Some of these applications may be subject to a s.106 legal agreement (planning obligation). Where this is the case it will be stated next to the recommendation using the code ‘S106’ as detailed in the list of codes below.

Ward Members may make representations to the Panel on all items below including those with an associated s.106 legal agreement.

INDEX REPORT

DATE: 07.06.2018

RECOMMENDATION PER = Approve AUTH = Consent REF = Refuse FUL = Full application ADV = Advert Application OUT = Outline Application HH = Householder Application REM = Reserved Matters COU = Change of use LBC = Listed Building Consent CON = Conservation Area Consent S106 = Subject to a S106 Obligation

Irlam

17/70871/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am

PROPOSAL: Construction of an outfall structure into the Manchester Ship Canal and associated works including retaining wall, shaft, temporary access route and temporary construction compound.

LOCATION: Land West Of A J Bell Stadium And North Of The Manchester Ship Canal

APPLICANT: United Utilities

Page 11 Cadishead

17/71147/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am

PROPOSAL: Conversion of existing building into 9 no. apartments, together with erection of a two storey rear extension, and alterations to elevations and car parking facilities

LOCATION: The Old Fire Station Clarendon Road Irlam M44 5ZA

APPLICANT: Mr Fuat Basil

Irwell Riverside

18/71330/FUL RECOMMENDATION:APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am

PROPOSAL: Erection of three residential blocks, comprising of a total of 156 apartments, together with car parking and landscaping

LOCATION: Land North Of Senior St Springfield Lane M3 7GE

APPLICANT: Mr Nathan Cornish

Irwell Riverside

18/71512/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE PAGE

TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am

PROPOSAL: Full application for the redevelopment of the site to create Phase 2 of Outwood Wharf. Erection of three interlinked blocks, of 8, 10 and 23 storeys, to provide 296 dwellings (Use Class C3) and 380sqm of supporting commercial floor-space (to be used flexibly within Use Classes A1, A2, A3, or B1), with associated car parking, landscaping and other associated works

LOCATION: Land Bound By Hulme Street, Gaythorn Street And Upper Wharf Street Salford M5 4PX

APPLICANT: Outwood Developments 2 Ltd

Page 12 Worsley

18/71641/OUT RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am

PROPOSAL: Outline planning application for the demolition of existing property and the construction of 3 detached properties with all matters reserved

LOCATION: The Spinney 482 Walkden Road Worsley M28 2WH

APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs P Plowright

Irwell Riverside

18/71538/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 11.30am

PROPOSAL: External refurbishment and overcladding of Westminster House and Canon Green Court and erection of a part 9, part 11 storey building to accommodate 108 apartments and supporting commercial floor-space, with associated car parking, landscaping and other external works

LOCATION: Canon Green Drive Salford M3 7DB

APPLICANT: Mr Terry McBride

Page 13 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5a

http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstP age

APPLICATION No: 17/70871/FUL APPLICANT: United Utilities LOCATION: Land West of A J Bell Stadium and north of the Manchester Ship Canal PROPOSAL: Construction of an outfall structure into the Manchester Ship Canal and associated works including retaining wall, shaft, temporary access route and temporary construction compound. WARD: Irlam

Introduction This application was deferred at the Planning Panel meeting of 10th May 2018 to enable the Local Planning Authority (LPA) to fully consider the points raised within a late representation that was submitted to them on the morning of Panel.

Page 15

$mewv012a.rtf This application seeks consent for the development of an outfall structure, retaining wall and maintenance hatch, of matching siting scale and design to that which was approved under application 14/64512/FUL. The proposals also include the construction of a temporary access road, linking Stadium Way with the site of the temporary construction compound - which would be adjacent to the outfall structure.

The paragraphs below summarise the objector’s late representation and provide further officer commentary. This should read in conjunction with the main panel report that was published as part of the Agenda for the May 2018 Planning Panel. Due consideration has been given to the points raised within the late representation, however it raises no issues that would cause the LPA to alter its recommendation that planning be granted for this development. The development is considered to represent an acceptable use of land and has raised no objections from independent consultees. It is considered that all relevant matters have been sufficiently considered and addressed to enable this application to be determined.

REPRESENTATIONS

As reported above, Bircham Dyson Bell solicitors submitted a fifth representation on 10th May 2018 on behalf of both the Manchester Ship Canal Company Limited (MSCCL) and Peel Investments (North) Limited (together MSCCL Group). This letter responded to the Officer Report for this application (published as part of the May Panel Agenda) and to the Screening Opinion issued by the LPA in relation to the applicant’s wider programme of works to improve water quality within the Salteye Brook. The issues raised within it, which did not feature within earlier representations, are summarised below and followed by an Officer response.

Key: O = objection; R = applicant response and officer comment

O Criticism of the LPA’s Screening Opinion (SO)  The SO is based on an erroneous understanding of the law, and fails to consider whether the improvement proposed to water quality would lead to likely significant environmental effects in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) terms.  The LPA would not seem to be in possession of sufficient evidence to be able to form an informed SO. Furthermore, MSCCL has submitted evidence that the design of the proposed development would give rise to significant effects on the MSC in the form of intermittent discharges of sludge, but the SO has not properly considered these effects.  There is a complete absence of any assessment of the ecology within the MSC (i.e. aquatic life).

R  The SO is not considered to be legally flawed. It identifies that the likely environmental effects of the development (which does not preclude positive effects) will not be significant and therefore an EIA is not required. Notwithstanding this the initial SO has been updated as part of a wider review, whereby the LPA’s conclusions on this matter have been clarified for the avoidance of doubt.  The LPA are comfortable that they are in possession of sufficient evidence to enable them to issue a robust SO.  The applicant is required to secure an Environmental Permit from the Environment Agency (EA), prior to the development becoming operational and discharging treated flows from Eccles WwTW into the MSC, along with screened storm flows. As part of the Permitting process consideration will be given to whether, as a result of the development, the receiving water body (MSC) will continue to support the type of ecology that could be reasonably expected to be present within it. It therefore follows that the development would

Page 16

$mewv012a.rtf not give rise to significant negative environmental effects with respect to the aquatic ecology within the Canal. Any benefits to aquatic ecology arising from the development are unlikely to equate to significant environmental effects.

O Assessment of Water Quality  The Officer Report (OR) relies on the applicant’s assertion that the dry solids within the tunnel will not settle. The LPA has a legal obligation to form its own independent judgement on the matter or provide a rational / lawful basis for rejecting the concerns of the MSCCL.  The EA are not yet satisfied that the proposed development will meet its requirements to prevent, minimise &/or control pollution. Additional information is required before they can reach this conclusion.  The water quality implications of the proposed development are a technical matter in respect of which the LPA should seek its own independent expert advice.

R  MSCCL’s concerns relate to an element of the applicant’s wider scheme that can be constructed under permitted development and that does not form part of the application that is before the LPA. Notwithstanding this the matter of water quality is regulated by another statutory regime, in this instance the Environment Agency (EA). Whilst the potential for water pollution to occur is a material consideration, so too are the controls available under other regimes (see e.g. Gateshead MBC v Secretary of State for the Environment [1995] Env LR 37, and Hopkins Developments Ltd. v First Secretary of State [2007]). The EA have reviewed the application proposals, and the information submitted by objectors in relation to water quality, and have raised no objections to the development. As such it is not considered to be appropriate to duplicate the detailed controls that would be imposed by the regulator / other statutory regime.  The Environment Agency have raised no objections to the planning application and have noted that the Environmental Permitting process will require the applicant to provide appropriate measures so as to prevent pollution to the environment. It is therefore clear that they are satisfied that planning permission could be granted for this development.  As regulators of water quality, the Environment Agency will provide independent expert advice on the likely effects on water quality generated by the proposed development.

O Assessment of Ground Movement and Engineering License  The OR takes account of an immaterial consideration (inaccurate information) but fails to take into account the likely effects of the proposal submitted by the MSCCL’s advisors within their Ground Movement Assessment. This shows that the proposed works are likely to result in material structural damage to the Lock wing wall.  The effect of the CPO process, if successful, is to remove MSCCL’s legal power to grant (or indeed negotiate or refuse) an engineering licence.

R  A copy of the Ground Movement Assessment referenced above has not been submitted to the LPA for review. The applicant has reported that they are firmly of the view that they have sufficient information to provide an interpretation of the ground profile. Their technical team has reviewed a copy of the above-referenced Assessment and concluded that whilst there is some potential for some minor ground-movement to occur in the canal bank slope in front of the wing wall, the stability of the wall is very unlikely to be affected and it will not suffer any damage due to ground movements from the excavations.  As a matter of general principle, planning is concerned with land use from the point of view of the public interest and is not concerned with private rights as such, albeit the public interest may require the consideration of individual occupiers. In this instance, the interests of MSCCL will be protected by either (i) An Engineering License negotiated and granted by

Page 17

$mewv012a.rtf MSCCL in the event that the applicant does not successfully acquire any CPO rights; or (ii) through the forthcoming public inquiry relating to the applicant’s proposed acquisition of rights in land, whereby the applicant and MSCCL will demonstrate their cases to an independent inspector. The use of the proposed land is considered to be acceptable and the likelihood of the operation of the MSC and its infrastructure being unduly interfered with is considered to be low, particularly given points (i) and (ii) above.

O Conduct of the application  The LPA have failed to disclose a response from the applicant, which has resulted in obvious procedural unfairness.

R  There is no statutory duty for the correspondence referenced above to have been shared with objectors. Notwithstanding this, the response in question did not raise any substantive points that had not already been presented in previous correspondence that had been shared with objectors. Therefore the MSCCL were aware of the applicant’s position on this issue.

REQUIREMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The Local Planning Authority has an on-going requirement to screen development. Following the receipt of additional information in relation to the proposed development, an updated Screening Opinion has been produced and will be published.

FURTHER APPRAISAL

Water Quality

The Environment Agency have confirmed that under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010, an Environmental Permit will be required to discharge treated flows from Eccles WwTW and screened storm flows into the MSC. The permit process is designed to ensure that the applicant / operator will put appropriate measures in place at the site to prevent pollution to the environment. Therefore, a distinct set of regulations have been established specifically to regulate the type of activity proposed by the applicant, which are managed by an independent, competent body in the form of the Environment Agency. Policy 122 of the NPPF states that ‘Local Planning Authorities should focus on whether the development itself is an acceptable use of the land, and the impact of the use, rather than the control of processes or emissions themselves where these are subject to approval under pollution control regimes. Local Planning Authorities should assume that these regimes will operate effectively’. Given that the proposed land use and its resulting impacts are considered by the LPA to be acceptable, it is not necessary or appropriate for the planning process to duplicate the controls that would normally be applied by the Environmental Permitting regime, particularly as they would be applied to structures that do not require planning permission and for which consent is not being sought as part of this planning application.

It is worth reiterating that the purpose of the proposed development is to improve the aesthetic and water quality of the Salteye Brook and the aesthetic quality of the Manchester Ship Canal (MSC). The driver of these improvement works is the requirement for both water courses to meet the Water Framework Directive. The purpose of the Directive is to establish a framework for the protection of inland surface waters (rivers and lakes), transitional waters (estuaries), coastal waters and groundwater. It seeks to ensure that all aquatic ecosystems and, with regard to their water needs, terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands meet 'good status'. Furthermore, as part of the Environmental Permitting process referenced above, consideration will be given to whether the receiving water body

Page 18

$mewv012a.rtf will, as a result of the development, continue to sustain the level of ecology that could reasonably be expected to be present within it. Given the applicant’s on-going obligations to undertake the works reasonably required to comply with the Water Framework Directive, and the scope of assessment associated with the Environmental Permitting process, it is not considered necessary to undertake any further assessment of the potential impacts on the aquatic ecology of the MSC as part of this planning application.

In its function as a statutory undertaker the Environment Agency has raised no objections to the proposed development. The application’s proposed use of land is considered to be acceptable and it is clear that other statutory regimes will restrict and control any potential pollution effects arising from the development as a matter of course. As such, it is considered that there is no reason why planning permission should be withheld for this development on the grounds of water quality.

Ground Movement

In their initial letter of objection (8th December 2017), BDB (on behalf of the MSCCL) stated that the likelihood of a proposed development interfering with the operation of infrastructure that performed an important function in the public interest (like the MSC) was a ‘material consideration’. Normally developers would require an Engineering License from the MSCCL in relation to works in close proximity to the banks of the MSC and/or the infrastructure associated with its operation. BDB’s fifth representation, dated 10th May, states that the effects of a successful CPO process for the applicant would be the removal of MSCCL’s legal power to grant, negotiate or refuse an Engineering License. However, it must be borne in mind that the applicant will only be granted their proposed rights to land through the CPO process if they can demonstrate a ‘compelling case in the public interest’. It therefore follows that, as a ‘piece of infrastructure that operates in the public interest’, the likely effects of the development on the Ship Canal (including from ground movements) will be given due consideration by an independent inspector during the course of the forthcoming Public Inquiry. If for any reason the applicant does not succeed with their CPO application, or chooses to withdraw from that process, MSCCL shall retain the right to grant, negotiate or refuse an Engineering License for any development proposed by the applicant in this location. Therefore, it can be reasonably concluded that the likelihood of construction works unduly interfering with the MSC, through ground movements or any other means, is limited. Furthermore, matters arising from the construction phase of development should not prevent the granting of planning permission and therefore there are no objections to the development in terms of potential ground movements.

******************************************************************************************************************* DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The land to which this application relates is situated in between Barton Locks on the northern bank of the Manchester Ship Canal (MSC) and the southern side of the Liverpool Road (A57) highway. To the east is the AJ Bell stadium and its associated car parks and training pitches, all of which are accessed via Stadium Way. Immediately beyond the stadium is an area of land that benefits from planning permission for a large-scale, non-food retail development. Further to the east is the elevated M60 motorway, which spans the MSC via the Barton High Level Bridge. A newly completed link road between Trafford and Salford, part of the Western Gateway Infrastructure Scheme (WGIS), runs parallel to the M60. The Eccles Wastewater Treatment Works (EWwTW) is located on the eastern side of these two highways.

To the west of the application site is land associated with the Port Salford Masterplan area, which benefits from planning permission for 154,000sqm of distribution warehousing, along with highways works, a new rail link and a shipping wharf. To date one of the distribution warehouses and a supporting access road has been completed.

Page 19

$mewv012a.rtf Much of the land in the immediate vicinity of the application site comprises of scrub, open grassland and self-seeded trees. The Salteye Brook dissects the site at its western end, on its way to discharging into the MSC.

BACKGROUND

The applicant’s supporting statement explains that currently, there are unsatisfactory intermittent discharges (UID) from Eccles Wastewater Treatment Works (EWwTW) and the local combined sewer overflow system into the Salteye Brook, which in turn outlets into the Manchester Ship Canal.

United Utilities (UU) are therefore undertaking works to improve the aesthetic and water quality of the Salteye Brook and the aesthetic quality of the Manchester Ship Canal (MSC) too. The driver of these improvement works is the requirement for both water courses to meet the EU Water Framework Directive, a target which should have been achieved by 2015.

Since 2012 United Utilities have sought to undertake a series of works which, when combined, will ultimately achieve the requirements of the above-referenced directive. Infrastructure is being put in place to enable flows treated at Eccles WwTW, and screened storm flows, to bypass Salteye Brook and discharge straight into the MSC. This infrastructure includes works at Eccles Wastewater Treatment Works; the construction of new chambers close to Peel Green Roundabout; and the construction of new underground sewer pipeline between the Peel Green Roundabout Site, Eccles Wastewater Treatment Works and this site at Barton Locks. To date, much of these improvement works have been implemented, with the exception of the underground tunnel between Eccles WwTW and Barton Locks which, in itself, can be constructed via UU’s permitted development rights (provided through Part 16 of the amended Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995). However, the completion of the improvement works requires the construction of a new sewer outfall into the MSC within the application site, which requires planning consent.

Planning permission for an outfall structure, retaining wall and vehicular access from the A57 has been granted previously in 2013 (13/63513/FUL) and again in 2014, following amendments under application 14/64512/FUL. However these consents were never implemented, with the latter permission lapsing in September 2017.

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

The proposed outfall structure would be set into the northern bank of the MSC, just to the east of the Salteye Brook. It would be set largely underwater with its wing walls flush with the existing profile of the bank. The submitted plans indicate that the structure measures approximately W10.2m x L17.7m and would be of concrete construction.

In order to create a level area for the construction of the outfall pipeline shaft, a new retaining wall measuring D0.5m x L57m would be built to a maximum height of 6.1m (depending on ground level).

Page 20

$mewv012a.rtf Construction of the proposed development would be facilitated by the formation of a new, temporary access road. This would extend in a south-easterly direction from the roundabout on Stadium Way, before turning 90 degrees to follow the northern bank of the MSC up to the working area adjacent to the Salteye Brook and the site of the proposed outfall structure. This first section of access road would be constructed from crushed stone and topped with tarmac surfacing, whilst the remainder, i.e. that which runs parallel to the canal, would be formed from stone and would typically measure 5m – 7m in width.

PUBLICITY

Site Notice: Non HH Affecting public right of way x 2 Posted 3rd January 2018 Reason: Article 13 affect public right of way

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 x 2 Posted 22nd December 2017 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 15 February 2018 Reason: Article 15 Affect Public right of Way

RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

Land to west of Barton Locks, off Liverpool Road, Eccles 14/64512/FUL - Construction of a new outfall into the Manchester Ship Canal (MSC) and temporary construction access off Liverpool Road – Approved with Conditions, 11th September 2014.

13/63513/FUL – Construction of an Outfall Structure into the Manchester Ship Canal and Temporary Construction Access off Liverpool Road – Approved with Conditions, 28th November 2013.

12/62471/FUL - Construction of an Outfall Structure into the Manchester Ship Canal and Temporary Construction Access off Liverpool Road – Withdrawn, 30th May 2016.

Land north of Laburnum Avenue, Eccles 14/64699/FUL – Construction of 2 no. control kiosks, 2 no. pressure relief columns, grasscrete maintenance access track, timber gate, bollards, gatepost, tarmac hardstanding, and temporary change of use of No. 9 Laburnham Avenue as site office during the course of construction – Approved with Conditions, 21st November 2014.

Eccles Wastewater Treatment Works, Peel Green Road, Peel Green 14/64510/FUL - Construction of two Control Kiosks and landscaping works to improve the aesthetic and water quality of Salteye Brook and the Manchester Ship Canal with variation of condition 2 (landscaping) attached to planning permission 12/62462/FUL – Approved with Conditions, 18th July 2014.

Land To The West And East Of Junction 11 Of The M60, Eccles 12/62500/FUL - Erection of a control kiosk, 3no 4m high pressure relief columns, ground level lowering and re-profiling, permanent tarmac hardstanding, erection of impact protection bollards, 2no temporary dropped kerbs and construction of temporary accesses /egresses off the A57 and Northbound / Southbound slip roads of M60. Temporary use of residential curtilage to provide residents parking including provision of temporary hardstanding area – Approved with conditions, 2nd May 2013

Page 21

$mewv012a.rtf Port Salford - Land between Manchester Ship Canal and Liverpool Road, Eccles 17/70437/REM - Details of reserved matters for layout, scale, appearance and landscaping for the provision of one warehouse building accommodating 35,497sqm (GIA) of B8 floor-space, pursuant to planning permission 14/65747/EIAHYB, along with associated gatehouse, car/cycle parking; boundary treatments; landscaping and other external works – Approved with Conditions, 22nd December 2017

17/70438/REM - Details of reserved matters for layout, scale, appearance and landscaping for the provision of two warehouse buildings accommodating 81,189sqm (GIA) of B8 floor-space, pursuant to planning permission 14/65747/EIAHYB, along with associated gatehouses, car/cycle parking; boundary treatments; landscaping and other external works – Approved with conditions, 22nd December 2017.

14/65747/EIAHYB – Variation of conditions 9 (completion of Part WGIS) and 10 (rail link in place) on planning permission 13/63413/EIAHYB – Approved with Conditions, 31st March 2015

03/47344/EIAHYB - Multi-modal freight interchange comprising rail served distribution warehousing, rail link and sidings, inter-modal and ancillary facilities including a canal quay and berths, vehicle parking, hardstanding, landscaping, re-routing of Salteye Brook, a new signal controlled access to the A57 and related highway works including realignment of the A57 and improvements to the M60 (Port Salford). Canal crossing and associated roads and other highway improvements as part of the Western Gateway Infrastructure Scheme (WGIS) – Approved with Conditions, 4th August 2009.

AJ Bell Stadium 15/66923/REM - Application for all matters reserved for the erection of a free standing 21,367sqm of non-food bulk retail development with associated car parking – Approved with Conditions, 11th April 2016

11/60383/HYBEIA - Full application for the erection of a 20,000 capacity community stadium with associated integrated facilities including offices, players facilities, hospitality, concessions and community, executive and media rooms to be constructed in 3 phases; two outdoor sports pitches, (one grass and one artificial); community changing facility; and new access off Liverpool Road together with associated car parking and landscaping. Outline application with all matters reserved for free standing 21,367 square metres of non-food bulk retail development. Variation to condition 13 on previously approved planning application 10/58995/HYBEIA. – Approved with Conditions, 5th October 2011.

CONSULTATIONS

Environment Agency (EA) – No objections. The proposed new outfall will not require a flood risk permit from the EA as the Manchester Ship Canal (MSC) is not a designated ‘main river’. It may require a permit under the Environmental Permitting (England & Wales) Regulations 2016 from the EA for any proposed works structures in, under, over or within eight metres of the bank of Salteye Brook, which is a designated main river.

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit (GMEU) – No objections. Conditions relating to the following matters have been recommended:  Submission of a precautionary pre-commencement survey of Salteye Brook for the presence of Water Voles.  Provision of replacement tree planting.  No vegetation clearance or tree felling required by the scheme to be undertaken during optimum bird nesting season.

Page 22

$mewv012a.rtf  Submission of a Method Statement for controlling the potential spread of invasive plant species.

Peak and Northern Footpaths Society - No comments received to date.

The Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association - No comments received to date.

Ramblers Association – No comments received to date.

Urban Vision Air & Noise – No objections. Air Quality – The scheme is not likely to have a negative impact with respect to the air quality objectives. Post construction traffic generation will be negligible and the proposed outfall would not give rise to significant odour issues for any nearby receptors. No further information with respect to air quality is required from the applicant. Noise – No objections.

Urban Vision Drainage – No objections. The development is water compatible and is suitable for its location.

Urban Vision Environment (Contaminated Land) – No objections

Urban Vision Highways – No objections. Conditions relating to the provision of a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) and the applicant’s compliance with the Considerate Constructor Scheme requested, along with a restriction of 100 HGV movements per day outside of the highway network peak hours during the construction phase of development.

REPRESENTATIONS

 Bircham Dyson Bell solicitors have submitted four letters on behalf of both the Manchester Ship Canal Company Limited (MSCCL) and Peel Investments (North) Limited (together MSCCL Group). This correspondence is dated 8th December 2017; 2nd March 2018; 12th April 2018 and 19th April 2018.

 Indigo Planning have submitted three letters on behalf of both Port Salford Land Limited (PSL) and the City of Salford Community Stadium (CoSCoS). This correspondence is dated 5th December 2017; 21st December 2017 and 5th March 2018.

 In addition to the above, Walker Morris solicitors have submitted a letter on behalf of PSL and CoSCoS dated 21st December 2017.

The issues raised within these representations have been set out below, along within an initial officer response:

Key: O = objection; R = applicant response and officer comment BDB = Bircham Dyson Bell; IP = Indigo Planning; WM = Walker Morris

O The proposal is EIA development on the basis that: raised  Since the previous proposal was screened the regulations governing EIA have by BDB; changed. The new regulations impose new and more extensive requirements as to IP; WM the information to be provided by applicants in order to enable screening decisions to be undertaken and impose new and more onerous requirements in respect of the content of screening decisions. They also identify new and different characteristics in the screening selection criteria set out in Schedule 3.

Page 23

$mewv012a.rtf  The Screening Opinion (SO) issued for the proposals in 2014 was flawed in that it failed to take into account the wider works proposed by UU, of which the outfall is necessarily but one part. It also failed to take into account the cumulative effects with other development and reached conclusions about impacts on the use of natural resources in the absence of any evidence justifying those conclusions. The SO failed to consider the environmental impacts associated with the operation of the development and failed to identify the fact that it is proposed in an area in which environmental quality standards laid down in EU legislation have already been exceeded. There is no consideration of whether or not the development is a change to, or extension to, an existing Schedule 2 development (Wastewater Treatment Plant).  UU consider that the development will have significant beneficial effects for the water quality in the Salteye Brook. If this is the case then EIA will plainly be required.

R The Local Planning Authority (LPA) has undertaken a fresh Screening Opinion under the 2017 EIA Regulations. This considers the proposed outfall structure in combination with the wider scheme of works proposed by UU and concludes that the proposals do not constitute EIA development.

O Conflict with UDP Policy E1: Strategic Regional Site, Barton IP 1) Prejudice of the retail development approved under 15/66923/REM. The uncertainty of when any of the planning / PD works to create a tunnel under the retail site will be undertaken, and the lack of clarity as to how any commercially satisfactory Build-over Agreement (BoA) could proceed, give rise to significant prejudice to the delivery of the permitted retail and other aspects of the Barton development. The receipt from the retail development is the means of funding (enabling) the stadium development and the UU proposals have a direct impact on the ability to implement the enabling retail development. 2) The UU proposals have a direct impact on the ability to operate the (existing) stadium site and to implement its future expansion. - The stadium will not be able to rely on the use of its main car park due to the access rights sought by UU. - The rights along Stadium Way compromise the operation of security and traffic and pedestrian control measures. - Access to the new sewage tunnel will interfere with the use of the training pitches and associated parking areas. - The access rights sought by UU will direct affect the ability of the Stadium to construct the future, consented expansion phases. 3) Effects on delivery of Port Salford (PS). The UU scheme places development compounds in locations that conflict with the PS development in terms of rail infrastructure, brook diversion and warehouse development. This will jeopardise the delivery of the rail link and therefore the balance of the Port Salford tri-modal scheme, contrary to UDP Policy E1. Already significant work has been undertaken, at cost and risk, in progressing with the detailed design and requisite approvals needed to deliver the rail link and this has helped underpin the funding secured to date.

R 1) The details of the BoA are a civil matter for discussion between UU & CoSCoS, which can take part during the forthcoming CPO inquiry. Notwithstanding this it is noted that UU have offered to grant a Build-over Agreement (BoA) that would allow a retail development to be constructed over the line of their proposed tunnel either pre- or post-construction of the tunnel. On this basis the wider UU proposals would not sterilise the land or prejudice the delivery of the retail development.

Page 24

$mewv012a.rtf 2) The potential impacts on the day-to-day operations of the Stadium site would be limited to the construction phase of the development (c.2-3yrs). The applicant has committed to ensuring that the impacts on the stadium (and its events) are minimised, and in line with normal working practices. Notwithstanding that elements of the wider scheme benefit from permitted development rights, the applicant has agreed that these working practices, along with appropriate measures to manage vehicle movements, should be detailed and agreed in a Construction Management Plan. The applicant has confirmed that a BoA could be granted that would enable the expansion of the stadium over the line of their proposed tunnel. Once operational, vehicular access to the site would be required on a very infrequent basis c. every 10yrs), and would be planned, as there are no moving parts to the development. 3) There is no conflict with Port Salford in terms of the permanent works proposed within this application (outfall structure and retaining wall). Whilst there is an overlap between the temporary construction compound for the applicant’s development and the proposed PS rail link, matters arising from the construction phase of development should not prevent the granting of planning permission. The interface between the proposed temporary working area and the PS scheme is a civil matter for discussion between the relevant parties. The wording within UDP Policy E1 does not preclude the proposed development and the applicant has adequately demonstrated that their scheme would not unduly prejudice the delivery of the developments that are envisaged and advocated within the Policy.

O The development will adversely impact on the water quality of the MSC. BDB The design of the outfall pipe is significantly flawed. Its diameter is too large for it to achieve ‘self-cleansing’ velocities. This would result in substantial quantities (5,000 – 6,500 tonnes per annum) of sludge and material settling in the pipe. The subsequent flushing out of the accumulated sediment during high flow conditions will adversely impact the water quality of the MSC, to an extent that would far outweigh any benefit as a result of the reduction in volume of annual spill discharges. The sludge will impose a high oxygen demand on the MSC that could, and probably will, lead to a substantial ‘fish-kill’ when it occurs, due to the depletion of dissolved oxygen in the MSC.

R  The applicant has stated that the design criteria quoted by BDB relates to the design of foul and surface water sewers serving development sites. It is therefore not applicable as the proposed outfall tunnel will carry flows treated at Eccles WwTW and screened storm flows, rather than the raw (untreated) sewage assumed by BDB. The typical ‘self-cleansing’ velocity for foul sewage is not directly relevant here, but the tunnel would achieve such a velocity around seven times a year.  For c.97% of the time the outfall tunnel will only be conveying flows that have been through the treatment process at Eccles WwTW. Sampling of the treated (final) effluent discharging from the WwTW has revealed that it is compliant with the EA’s discharge consent, which stipulates a limit of 45mg/l on the quantity of suspended solids.  Spill flows to the tunnel from the WwTW storm tanks will have passed through the existing 6mm aperture inlet screens and grit removal processes prior to being routed through the storm tanks. The heavier particles then settle out in these tanks and are subsequently removed for treatment elsewhere. A similar process occurs for storm flows from SAL0018 and the Eccles WwtW Inlet.  The applicant has stated that there is no valid justification to support the statement that the outfall tunnel could accumulate 5,000 – 6,500 tonnes of sludge prior to it becoming self-cleansing. They go on to calculate that a typical year’s spill would yield a potential annual solids volume of about 210 tonnes. In practice though, the yield of

Page 25

$mewv012a.rtf potential settlement in the outfall tunnel (as opposed to solids being transported through to the discharge) is not expected to typically exceed 100 tonnes per annum.  In further correspondence, the applicant has stated that there is no evidence to substantiate claims that 100 tonnes of solid particles will equate to 5,000 tonnes of sludge. The suspended solids in question do not settle and form “sludge” as contended, but form a deposit on the bottom of the pipe which will not accumulate in the way that BDB assert.  Any volumes of suspended solids are not additional volumes generated as a result of the scheme, but are solids that currently discharge to Salteye Brook.

It is recognised that the applicant is a specialist in the collection, treatment and conveyance of waste water. They are heavily regulated by a number of bodies, including the Environment Agency who have raised no objections to the proposed development. Given this, and the applicant’s supporting justification, it is considered that there is no reason why planning permission should be withheld for this development on the grounds of water quality.

O This represents an unsustainable form of development. It is not an adequate response simply to divert unsatisfactory flows into the MSC. The short term solution promoted by BDB the proposed development to resolve one problem is simply to exacerbate another into the long term. The appropriate and sustainable solution is to achieve the improvements to Salteye Brook, without having to divert the discharge into the MSC, through preventative treatment measures prior to discharge. Given that the proposed development does not involve any improvements to the treatment of waste water at Eccles WwTW it follows that it cannot deliver a positive improvement to the environment of the MSC.

R The applicant has stated that, as a consequence of the scheme, Salteye Brook will meet the water quality requirements as outlined by the Environment Agency for the Water Framework Directive. It also incorporates the following features that will benefit the aesthetic quality of the MSC:  An approximate 20% reduction in the combined annual untreated spill volume to the canal from the three main overflows;  The screening of all storm overflows at SAL0017 and Eccles Inlet Overflow up to a 1 in 5 year return period in order to remove significant quantities of solid matter having a size greater than 6mm in more than one dimension.

O Inadequate / insufficient information has been submitted with the application to enable the LPA to reach an informed and balanced planning judgement. BDB 1) Ecology – The Planning statement refers to an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and a Water Vole Survey that were undertaken in 2012. The age of the surveys means they are no longer robust and their scope did not extend to include the MSC. 2) The tree survey that underpins the Arboricultural Report was also undertaken in 2012. As such there is no up to date assessment of the value of these trees within the Application. 3) The Validation Checklist requires all development affecting waste handling activities (e.g. sewage treatment works or poultry farms) to be accompanied by an Air Quality Assessment (AQA). The proposed development meets this criterion. When the proposed development is considered as a whole, including by reference to its intended function, it is plain that it should be treated as a modification to the Eccles WwTW. 4) The Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) provided by UU fails to adequately asses the

Page 26

$mewv012a.rtf flood risks for the development. It considers only the additional run-off from the development and not the outfall itself. The design of UU’s new outfall enables the discharge of much larger quantities of water than are currently discharged via the Salteye Brook, as the Brook is a much smaller watercourse. The increased volume of water may lead to an increased risk of flooding to the MSC.

R 1) Ecology – The applicant has drawn GMEU’s attention to the Biodiversity Surveys submitted with the Port Salford Reserved Matters applications in 2017, which also cover Salteye Brook and this stretch of the MSC. GMEU are satisfied that the Brook has a very low potential for containing water voles but have, in any event, recommended that UU undertake a precautionary pre-commencement survey, which would be secured by condition. GMEU are of the view that the development would not affect the functioning of the wildlife corridor and would not affect any habitats of substantive nature conservation importance. A tree replacement condition has been recommended to replace the lost potential of the site to improve ecologically. 2) The applicant has drawn attention to the Tree Surveys submitted with the Port Salford Reserved Matters applications in 2017. These clearly show the location of the outfall structure, shaft and retaining wall, along with two groups of trees that would potentially be impacted by the development. The City Council’s consultant Arborist has confirmed that the information submitted is fit for purpose and has raised no objections to the development. Notwithstanding that the PS developments would necessitate the removal of these trees, a landscaping / tree-replacement condition would be added to any approval. The applicant has agreed to replant / replace any trees uprooted along the route of the temporary access using matching species. 3) The City Council’s consultant Air & Noise officer has confirmed that there is no requirement for an Air Quality Assessment to be submitted with this application. The proposed outfall would not give rise to significant odour issues for any nearby residential receptors and post construction traffic generation would be negligible. 4) Flood Risk – The applicant has stated that the risk of flooding is not materially increased by the development and that the discharge rates and volumes would not be significantly higher than those currently experienced via Salteye Brook. The overall drained volume of storm flows received by the Eccles catchment area and subsequently discharged into the MSC would remain the same. Whilst there may be some acceleration in the rate at which these storm flows are discharged into the canal during extreme events, the peak of these flows would pass down the canal before the Barton Pond reaches its peak volume as a result of the flows from the upstream Irwell catchment. The water level within the MSC is regulated by MSCCL so as to ensure that the canal is passable by vessels that use it. This operation is automated and managed using a series of computer-operated gates. It is understood that discharge into the MSC shall remain within any discharge consent granted by the Environment Agency. The development has been reviewed by both the Environment Agency and the City Council’s consultant Drainage Engineer, with no objections raised. O The development would pose risks to the MSC from ground-movements. The construction of the new outfall and shaft is situated in close proximity to Barton Locks BDB and there is significant risk that it will have an impact on the physical integrity of the existing wall, which forms part of the bank of the MSC and the essential lock infrastructure. The information provided by UU does not demonstrate that the stability of the excavations can and will be managed by allowing for risks such as unexpected ground conditions etc.

R The applicant has engaged specialist tunnelling consulting engineers and contractors in the design and planning of the proposed scheme. Preliminary ground movement

Page 27

$mewv012a.rtf assessments for the tunnelling and shaft sinking works indicate that the predicted ground movements will not have any material impact on the canal infrastructure. The canal basins, lock walls, lock infrastructure and the culverted outfall of the Salteye Brook to the MSC are either outside, or at the edge of, the predicted 1mm settlement contour. Therefore the likelihood of the development impacting on the physical integrity of the MSC is considered to be low, particularly as the applicant will require an engineering license from the MSCCL to undertake any works in close proximity to Barton Locks and the bank of the MSC. It is appropriate for these discussions to take place outside of the assessment of this planning application.

O It is difficult to assess fully or with certainty what the potential impact on the operation and maintenance of the MSC might be as a result of the proposed works – specifically the BDB impact on Barton Locks and MSCCL’s ability to operate and maintain them.

R These are civil matters for discussion and agreement between the relevant parties outside of the planning process. It is not considered that the development would prevent the ‘increased use of the MSC for the movement of freight’, as encouraged by draft Local Plan Policy A5.

O The gas that would be emitted from the sludge could represent a serious hazard during maintenance. Points of ingress are c. 1.1km away, which would be too far to walk with BDB breathing apparatus in an atmosphere that could be low in oxygen and could also contain an explosive mixture of gases. UDP Policy DES 6 requires ‘all waterside development to maintain and preferably enhance, waterside safety’.

R Matters of health and safety are heavily regulated outside of the planning system (e.g. The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974). Notwithstanding this there is no evidence to suggest that the development would unacceptably conflict with the provisions of UDP Policy DES 6 by not maintaining waterside safety. In any event the applicant has stated that remote CCTV can be used to inspect this tunnel across 1km of coverage. Both shafts have been designed to allow a temporary forced ventilation system to be installed and operated to purge any gases from the shafts/tunnels and provide a continuous flow of fresh air during man entry.

PLANNING POLICY

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.

Unitary Development Plan DES6 - Waterside Development This policy states that all new development adjacent to the Manchester Ship Canal will be required to facilitate pedestrian access to, along and, where appropriate, across the waterway. Schemes should incorporate a waterside walkway with pedestrian links between the walkway and other key pedestrian routes and incorporate ground floor uses and public space that generate pedestrian activity. Where it is inappropriate to provide a waterside walkway, an alternative route shall be provided. Development should protect, improve or provide wildlife habitats; conserve and complement any historic features; maintain and enhance waterside safety; and not affect the maintenance or integrity of the waterway or

Page 28

$mewv012a.rtf flood defences. All built development will face onto the water, and incorporate entrances onto the waterfront; be of the highest standard of design; be of a scale sufficient to frame the edge of the waterside; and enhance views from, of, across and along the waterway, and provide visual links to the waterside from surrounding areas.

Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.

Unitary Development Plan EN8 - Nature Conservation of Local Importance This policy states that development that would adversely affect the nature conservation value of a Site of Biological Importance, a Local Nature Reserve, or a priority habitat for Salford as identified in the Greater Manchester Biodiversity Action Plan, will only be permitted where the benefits of the development clearly outweigh the reduction in the nature conservation interest of the site; the detrimental impact has been minimised as far as is practicable; appropriate mitigation measure have been provided. Conditions or planning obligations will be used to ensure the protection, enhancement and management of these sites and habitats.

Unitary Development Plan EN9 - Wildlife Corridors This policy states that development that would affect any land that functions as a wildlife corridor, or that provides an important link or stepping stone between habitats will not be permitted. Conditions and planning obligations may be used to protect, enhance or manage to facilitate the movement of flora and fauna where development is permitted.

Unitary Development Plan EN12 – Important Landscape Features This policy states that development that would have a detrimental impact on, or result in the loss of, any important landscape feature will not be permitted unless the applicant can clearly demonstrate that i) the importance of the development plainly outweighs the nature conservation and amenity value of the landscape feature; and ii) the design and layout of the development cannot reasonably make provision for the retention of the landscape feature. If removal is permitted, a replacement of at least equivalent size and quality, or other appropriate compensation, will be required either within the site, or elsewhere within the area.

Unitary Development Plan EN17 - Pollution Control This policy states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning permission will only be granted where the development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory level of amenity.

Unitary Development Plan EN19 - Flood Risk and Surface Water This policy states that any application for development that it is considered likely to be at risk of flooding or increase the risk of flooding elsewhere will need to be accompanied by a formal flood risk assessment. It should identify mitigation or other measures to be incorporated into the development or undertaking on other land, which are designed to reduce that risk of flooding to an acceptable level.

Unitary Development Plan E1 - Strategic Regional Site, Barton This policy states that one, or a combination of any two of the following types of development will be permitted on the Barton Strategic Regional Site: A) A mix of light and general industry, warehouse and distribution, and ancillary offices and other uses;

Page 29

$mewv012a.rtf B) A multi-modal freight interchange, incorporating rail and water based freight handling facilities, and a rail link to the Manchester-Newton-le Willow- Liverpool railway line C) A sports stadium for Salford City Reds with a maximum capacity of 20,000 spectators, and appropriate enabling development. Proposals must i) make an appropriate contribution towards road and services infrastructure ii) secure improvements to public transport iii) minimise adverse impact on visual amenity, views and vista in the area; enhance the Liverpool Road corridor; v) maintain nature conservation interest of the site vi) have no unacceptable impact on local environmental quality vii) maintain the flood alleviation capabilities of Salteye Brook; viii) provide for a strategic route alongside the Manchester Ship Canal; ix) make appropriate provision for the training and employment of local residents during construction and operational phases.

Unitary Development Plan DEV6 - Incremental Development This policy states that planning permission for incremental development will not be granted on sites within or immediately adjacent to an area identified for major development that would unacceptably hamper or reduce the development options for that wider area.

Unitary Development Plan A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled This policy states that development proposals, road improvement schemes and traffic management measures will be required to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, other people with limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians and cyclists

Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.

Unitary Development Plan R5 - Countryside Access Network This policy states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would result in the permanent obstruction or closure of any part of the Countryside Access Network, unless an alternative route is provided that is equally attractive and convenient. New development that is proposed on a site needed for the provision of a new route or link as part of the Countryside Access Network will be required to incorporate that route/link as part of the development.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG)

Local Planning Policy

It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application

REQUIREMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The LPA has agreed to issue a Screening Opinion for the proposed development under Regulation 8 of the Town and Country Planning (Environment Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017. It is considered that the outfall structure and retaining wall, for which planning permission is required, forms but one component of a wider development which, whilst largely permitted development, is intrinsically linked – i.e. one element would not be delivered and made operational without the other.

Page 30

$mewv012a.rtf Therefore, it is this wider development, as described in the ‘Background’ section of this report, which has been screened by the Local Planning Authority.

The proposed scheme is considered to be covered by the umbrella of ‘Urban Development Projects’, as described within Class 10(b) of Schedule 2. It also falls to be classed as an ‘Installation for the Disposal of Waste’ 11(b)). The scale of the development exceeds the relevant thresholds set out within Column 2 of Category 11(b), but not for Category 10(b).

The wider UU development is not considered to represent a change, or an extension, to an existing Schedule 2 development (i.e. to a Wastewater Treatment Plant), as set out within Category 13(b) of Schedule 2 of the 2017 Regulations.

An assessment of the potential environmental effects that could result from the construction and operational phases of the development has been undertaken by the LPA, and is set out within a formal Screening Opinion, whereby it was concluded that an Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.

APPRAISAL

Context

The applicant has submitted a statement that seeks to provide some further context to the application by explaining the rationale for the location of the outfall structure and the subsequent alignment of the tunnel shaft leading up to it from Eccles WwTW. This latter feature is set to be constructed under UU’s permitted development rights. The statement sets out that the water level in the MSC is regulated by the sluice and lock structures on the canal. Eccles WwTW is located along the northern bank of the Barton Pond of the MSC. The Barton Pond is located between Mode Wheel Locks and Barton Locks. The normal water level in this section of the canal is 17.870m AOD (+/-0.3m). However, the outfalls from the SAL0018 overflow and the Eccles WwTW both discharge by gravity to Salteye Brook. The brook subsequently discharges into the Irlam Pond of the MSC, immediately to the west of Barton Locks. The Irlam Pond is located between Barton Locks and Irlam Locks. The normal water level in this section of the canal is 13.300m AOD (+/-0.3m). The water level in the Irlam Pond regulates the water levels in Salteye Brook. Consequently, water levels in the sewage infrastructure discharging to Salteye Brook can be influenced by the water levels in the canal.

The applicant goes on to explain that connecting to the Barton Pond, with a water level elevated circa 4.50m above the Irlam Pond, would result in flooding at the WwTW and from the connected sewer network. The only means of connecting directly to the Barton Pond would be to pump all the flows that currently discharge to Salteye Brook into the Barton Pond. This would require a substantial pumping station. Therefore, the applicant considers that a new outfall to the Irlam Pond, allowing the flows to discharge by gravity (as they currently do, albeit via Salteye Brook), represents the most sustainable and resilient solution and does not result in any flooding at the WwTW or any increase in flooding from the sewer network.

Principle of Development

This application has been submitted by United Utilities who are required by both the water industry regulator OFWAT and the Environment Agency (EA) to undertake works to existing assets in order to improve unsatisfactory intermittent discharges (UID’s) to watercourses which are causing a water quality deficiency or aesthetic problems.

Page 31

$mewv012a.rtf This development is being proposed in order to improve the water quality flowing into Salteye Brook and the aesthetic quality of both the Brook and the Manchester Ship Canal. It forms the final link in a chain of development being carried out elsewhere within Eccles.

Paragraph 21 of the NPPF considers that planning policy should recognise, and seek to address, potential barriers to investment including poor environment or any lack of infrastructure. The purpose of the development is to improve the local environment through the provision of improved sewage infrastructure leading to a long-term improvement in water quality in the Salteye Brook.

Assessment against UDP Policy E1 The application site is located on land covered by UDP Policy E1 - Strategic Regional Site, Barton. The ‘Development Plan Policy’ section of this report provides a summary of the Policy. The proposed infrastructure does not fall within one of the development types advocated in this location by sections a) – c), however the wording of the policy is not preclusive. The second part of the policy provides a nine-point checklist (i-ix) for new development within the Barton Strategic Regional Site, although it is considered that the criteria within it apply only as far as they are relevant to the development being proposed and, in this case, that part of it that requires planning permission.

The applicant has submitted a statement that seeks to directly address the checklist within Policy E1. In particular, this demonstrates that the development would maintain the overall nature conservation interest of the site; would have no unacceptable impact on local environmental quality; and would maintain the flood alleviation capabilities of Salteye Brook. Further discussion will be given to these matters within the relevant sections of this Appraisal. In relation to point viii), it has been accepted that it will not be possible to provide a Strategic Recreation Route alongside the canal in this location, as it would not be compatible with Port Salford. As such the development is considered to be in compliance with the provisions of Policy E1 of the City of Salford UDP.

The ‘Representations’ section of this report sets out concerns issued on behalf of Port Salford Land Limited (PSL) and the City of Salford Community Stadium (CoSCoS), which indicate that the proposed development would prejudice the delivery of future development that has either been consented or that is advocated by Policy E1. However, notwithstanding that the underground tunnel can be built under permitted development, the applicant has confirmed that a Build-over Agreement would be issued for land upon which a large non-food retail store has been granted (ref: 15/66923/REM); this would enable the building to be constructed either before or after the Shaft 04 tunnel has been installed; thus preventing the applicant’s development from sterilising the site of the retail store or any proposed expansion of the Stadium. CoSCoS and PSL have also expressed concern with how the construction phase of the development would impact upon operations at the stadium, particularly events, and the delivery of the rail link at Port Salford. It is considered that the adoption of best practice construction measures can be secured through the imposition of a Construction Environment Management Plan, whilst a number of the remaining concerns raised relate to civil matters that are not of material consideration in the determination of this application. It is therefore considered that the development would not conflict with the provisions and aspirations set out within Policy E1 of the City of Salford UDP.

On the basis of the paragraphs above, there are no in principle objections to the introduction of sewage infrastructure, designed to improve the water quality of the Salteye Brook, along this alignment within the Barton Strategic Regional Site.

Ecology

The applicant has stated that the overall driver for the scheme is to address water quality and aesthetic issues associated with Salteye Brook by removing all discharges from Salteye Brook for

Page 32

$mewv012a.rtf storm events with a return period of 1 in 5 years or less and in turn achieving compliance with the requirements of the Water Framework Directive. They go on to explain that, on this basis, the development will maintain the overall nature conservation interest of the site and improve the wildlife corridor along Salteye Brook. The purpose of these works has been acknowledged by the Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU).

The applicant’s submission makes reference to a water vole survey of the site, which was undertaken in 2012. This reported that this section of Salteye Brook is sub-optimal for supporting water voles. Reference has also been made to more recent surveys submitted with other planning applications in the vicinity of the site (17/70437/REM & 17/70438/REM) that have reached the same conclusions.

GMEU consider that the construction of the nearby stadium, new roads, and associated infrastructure has caused significant disturbance to some parts of the Brook. They confirm that water voles were not recorded during the course of surveys undertaken to inform these developments and they were not recorded during the course of the works themselves. Furthermore the Brook has very limited connectivity to known extant water vole populations on the moss land to the north. As such GMEU have also concluded that the Brook has a very low potential for supporting water voles and consider that carrying out a precautionary pre-commencement survey of the Brook would be a proportionate response to the very low risk of harm to the species that could arise from the development. This would be secured via condition.

The outfall structure would be set into the banks of the MSC and, upon reinstatement of areas affected by construction, continued movement of flora and fauna around the structure would be possible. GMEU have confirmed that they do not consider that the development will, in itself, significantly affect the functioning of this wildlife corridor.

With particular reference to the access track, GMEU consider that the development will affect young trees and scrub, newly planted trees, species-poor grassland and a small area of riparian habitat along the Brook. They note however that none of these habitats are of substantive nature conservation importance and as such have recommended that a condition for replacement tree planting be attached to any permission, as replanting trees lost to the scheme would replace the lost potential of the site to improve ecologically. An informative would also be added to ensure that no vegetation clearance or tree felling required by the development is undertaken during the optimum period for bird nesting (March to July inclusive).

GMEU have stated that the invasive plants Himalayan balsam and Japanese knotweed are frequent in this area. As such they have recommended a condition requiring the submission and subsequent implementation of a Method Statement for controlling the potential spread of these plants during the course of any approved works. This requirement can be incorporated into the Council’s standard Construction Environment Management Plan condition.

Trees

As part of previous planning applications for the outfall structure the applicant submitted an Arboricutural Survey (2012) that covered the majority of the site, with the exception of the proposed access through the stadium area. Upon receipt of planning permission 14/64512/FUL a high proportion of the vegetation on the application site was cleared. The applicant has referred also to more recent surveys submitted with other planning applications in the vicinity of the application site (17/70437/REM & 17/70438/REM). These indicate that two groups of trees (one of moderate quality and the other of low quality) would be potentially impacted by the proposed outfall and retaining wall. The applicant has therefore committed to providing an appropriate tree-replacement scheme for these two groups of trees.

Page 33

$mewv012a.rtf The only area of the site that was not covered by the 2012 survey relates to landscaping works associated with the A J Bell Stadium, which were planted in c.2012. The trees planted here are typically silver birch saplings that are circa 5 to 6 years old. The applicant has stated that the proposed temporary access will be routed where practicable to avoid these trees and their root protection areas. In certain limited areas where the planning boundary narrows, to minimise land take and disruption to the stadium, it may not be possible to completely avoid the removal of some immature trees and bushes installed as part of the landscaping works for the Stadium. The applicant has committed to replacing any trees and bushes in this area, subject to the agreement of the landowner, following completion of the proposed development and removal of the temporary access road.

The City Council’s consultant Arborist has confirmed that the information submitted is fit for purpose and has raised no objections to the development. A landscaping / tree-replacement condition would be added to any approval to ensure that any harm resulting from the loss of trees is adequately mitigated.

Access and Highways

Construction Phase Construction of the proposed development would be facilitated by the formation of a new, temporary access road. This would extend in a south-easterly direction from the roundabout on Stadium Way, before turning 90 degrees to follow the northern bank of the MSC up to the working area adjacent to the Salteye Brook and the site of the proposed outfall structure. The applicant reports that this first section of access road would be constructed from crushed stone and topped with tarmac surfacing in order to limit the potential for dust from construction vehicle movements affecting the training pitches. The remainder of the temporary road, i.e. that which runs parallel to the canal, would be formed from stone and would typically measure 5m – 7m in width.

Part of the temporary access track would cross an informal parking area adjacent to the A J Bell Stadium’s training pitches. The applicant has stated that, in this area, the line of the temporary access route has been selected to avoid a landscape mound associated with the stadium development, which would necessitate the loss of approximately six (unmarked) car parking spaces and two lighting columns. Whilst the loss of this informal parking area is regrettable, it is recognised that it is temporary and that six spaces represents only a very small percentage of the overall level of car parking provision associated with the wider Stadium site. As such there are no concerns with this aspect of the development.

The construction period for the development is estimated to last between two – three years. The applicant anticipates that construction vehicle movements will generally be limited to normal daytime working hours however, if the tunnel is constructed eastwards, from the shaft adjacent to the outfall structure, then 24 hour access will be required for staff and operative vans / cars as tunnelling is normally undertaken on a 24 hour basis (2no. 12 hour shifts). Although the development no longer takes its access directly from the A57, the applicant has committed to limiting the number of heavy goods vehicle (HGV) movements to no more than 100 per day (50 into the site and 50 out again) outside the highway network peak hours - an approach which is consistent with that agreed for application 14/64512/FUL. Very occasionally there would be requirements for a mobile crane to access the site. Furthermore, it is noted also that Stadium Way has historically been used as the access to the main construction compound associated with the recently completed Western Gateway Infrastructure Scheme (WGIS).

Page 34

$mewv012a.rtf The City Council’s Highways consultant considers that this restriction, coupled with the temporary nature of the construction works, means that the development is unlikely to result in a significant material impact on the local highway network. Notwithstanding this a condition should be imposed to secure a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) and comprehensive Traffic Management Strategy, to minimise any off-site disruption as a result of the construction process. The documents would provide measures for the appropriate management of heavy vehicle movements and the containment of any staff parking within the site.

Operational Development The applicant has confirmed that, once operational, there is no requirement for on-going regular maintenance of the outfall structure, shaft or retaining wall as there are no moving parts associated with these aspects. Access to the site for periodic visual inspections would be gained on foot.

Access to the site by heavy vehicles would be required on a very infrequent basis (c. every 10 years) and would be a planned event. Should access be required, it would be taken off the roundabout on Stadium Way and follow the same alignment as the temporary access route before utilising the road that passes through the operational area of Barton Locks.

Given the above, it is not considered necessary to impose any further conditions to control vehicle movements to the site once the development is operational. The development is therefore considered to be in compliance with Policy A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

Flood Risk

The proposed outfall structure would be located within Flood Zone 3, whilst the retaining wall would sit within elements of both Zone 2 and Zone 3. The temporary construction access and development working areas would be within Flood Zones 1 and 2. The development falls to be classified as ‘water- compatible’ and therefore its location within Flood Zones 1, 2 or 3 is appropriate.

In terms of flood-risk elsewhere, the proposed structures will have a negligible impact on the capacity of the flood plain and the conveyance capacity of both the Salteye Brook and the MSC. There is no impermeable hardstanding in the areas around the proposed outfall and retaining wall.

Representations received from objectors have indicated that the new outfall enables the discharge of much larger quantities of water than are currently discharged via the Salteye Brook, as the Brook is a much smaller watercourse. The increased volume of water may lead to an increased risk of flooding to the MSC. In response, the applicant has confirmed that the risk of flooding from the development is not materially increased by the proposals. The overall drained volume of storm flows received by the Eccles catchment area and subsequently discharged into the MSC would remain the same. Whilst there may be some acceleration in the rate at which these storm flows are discharged into the canal during extreme events, the peak of these flows would pass down the canal before the Irlam Pond reaches its peak volume as a result of the flows from the upstream Irwell catchment. This is possible as the MSSCL operate the sluice gates within the MSC to manage flood-risk. The water level within the MSC is regulated by MSCCL so as to ensure that the canal is passable by vessels that use it. This operation is automated and managed using a series of computer-operated gates. It is understood that discharge into the MSC shall remain within any discharge consent granted by the Environment Agency. The development has been reviewed by both the Environment Agency and the City Council’s consultant Drainage Engineer, with no objections raised.

As such the scheme is considered to be compliant with Policy EN 19 of the City Council’s UDP.

Visual Amenity

Page 35

$mewv012a.rtf

The application site is located within an urbanising area between the A57 and the Manchester Ship Canal. The majority of the physical works will be seen within the context of other canal infrastructure, including Barton Locks. A Public Right of Way runs along part of Stadium Way however it is considered that views of the retaining wall and outfall structure would be very limited from this public vantage point. The works would also be visible from the Davyhulme Millennium Nature Reserve, which is located on the opposite bank of the MSC. Again, it is not considered that they would appear unduly out of character in the locality, which already accommodates large urban developments in the form of the first Port Salford warehouse and the A J Bell Stadium and associated infrastructure. It is therefore considered that the development is in accordance with policy DES1 of the UDP.

Residential Amenity

The nearest residential properties to the outfall structure and retaining wall are those on Ripley Crescent, within Trafford – 250m away. Residents of these properties may experience a degree of noise / dust disturbance as a result of vehicle movements during construction and from the construction works themselves. However, these impacts can be reasonably mitigated through the imposition of a Construction Environment Management Plan condition

It is not considered that the operational development would give rise to any noise or odour impacts that would affect residents of Ripley Crescent. Whilst aspects of the development may be visible from their rear-facing, upper floor windows, the visual impact will be extremely limited, given the modest size of the structures and the separation distance referenced above. Therefore the proposed development is considered to be in compliance with Policy DES7 of the City of Salford UDP.

Impact on the Manchester Ship Canal

Water Quality The applicant has confirmed that the main driver for the development is to reduce the frequency of unsatisfactory intermittent discharges (UID) from Eccles Wastewater Treatment Works (EWwTW) and the local combined sewer overflow system into Salteye Brook, with a view to improving its water quality and meeting the Water Framework Directive. This is principally achieved by discharging straight into the MSC, via the new tunnel and outfall shaft, rather than via the Salteye Brook. Therefore, under normal conditions, there would be no material change to the water quality in the MSC as a result of the development. The applicant has indicated that the reduction in annual stormwater spill volumes and additional screening of stormwater flows for solids, which will result from the wider development works, means that there will be no detriment in the water quality of the MSC. There will however be an improvement in its aesthetic quality as larger objects, that previously might have entered the MSC and its banks, will no longer enter the canal and be visible.

Representations received from objectors have suggested that the design of the outfall shaft would lead to large volumes of sludge building up in the tunnel and being deposited into the MSC when it eventually gets cleared, adversely affecting its water quality and potentially leading to a substantial fish-kill. These potential impacts have been strongly refuted by the applicant, as set out in the ‘Representations’ section of this report. It is recognised that the applicant is a specialist in the collection, treatment and conveyance of waste water. They are heavily regulated by a number of bodies, including the Environment Agency who have raised no objections to the proposed development. Given this and the applicant’s supporting justification, it is considered that there is no reason why planning permission should be withheld for this development on the grounds of water quality.

Risks posed from ground-movements

Page 36

$mewv012a.rtf The applicant has stated that they have undertaken preliminary ground investigations to ascertain the ground conditions in and around the development site. The results from these works indicate that the predicted ground movements will not have any material impact on the canal infrastructure. Therefore the likelihood of the development impacting on the physical integrity of the MSC is considered to be low, particularly as the applicant will require an engineering license from the MSCCL to undertake any works in close proximity to Barton Locks and the bank of the MSC. It is appropriate for these discussions to take place outside of the planning system.

Other Matters

Contaminated Land The initial consent for an outfall structure in this area was granted under application 13/63513/FUL. Condition 3 of the permission required the submission of a preliminary risk assessment to assess land contamination at the site. Details submitted for the purposes of complying with this condition were assessed by the LPA and the Environment Agency and the condition was subsequently discharged under application 14/65089/DISCON. No significant risks were identified by the risk assessment and, in any event, the proposed outfall structure would not require man-entry other than for potential 10- year maintenance shutdowns, which would be undertaken with appropriate personal protective equipment. Therefore no permanent gas protection measures were required.

The applicant has confirmed that all materials affected by contamination which are excavated as part of the works are to be removed from site and as such there is no potential to cause significant harm to human health or the environment.

The City Council’s consultant Environment Officer has confirmed that they have no objections to the proposed development with respect to land contamination. As such it is compliant with Policy EN 17 of the City Council’s UDP.

Health and Safety Matters of health and safety are heavily regulated outside of the planning system (e.g. The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974). Notwithstanding this there is no evidence to suggest that the development would unacceptably conflict with the provisions of UDP Policy DES 6 by not maintaining waterside safety.

CONCLUSION

This application again seeks consent for the development of an outfall structure, retaining wall and maintenance hatch, of matching siting scale and design to that which was approved under application 14/64512/FUL. The proposals also include the construction of a temporary access road, linking Stadium Way with the site of the temporary construction compound - which would be adjacent to the outfall structure. The proposed development does however form part of a wider scheme of works by United Utilities that would improve the water quality and ecological status of the Salteye Brook and improve its aesthetic quality also, along with that of the Manchester Ship Canal. The applicant has provided adequate justification for the purpose, location and alignment of the proposals, which would not conflict with the development aspirations set out in UDP Policy E1 for the Barton Strategic Regional Site. Any trees lost to the development would be replaced as part of an appropriate landscaping scheme. The operational outfall would not give rise to any detrimental impacts on visual amenity or residential amenity, particularly with respect to noise and odour. It would generate a negligible number of vehicle movements and subsequently the resulting impacts on air quality would also be negligible. The construction phase of the development has the potential to generate a degree

Page 37

$mewv012a.rtf of noise and dust disturbance, from vehicle movements and the construction works themselves. However these effects would be temporary in nature and could be reasonably mitigated through the adoption of best practice measures set out in a Construction Environment Management Plan. Furthermore the applicant has agreed to restrict the number of HGV movements to no more than 100 per day outside the highway network peak hours.

Overall the proposed development is considered to be in compliance with all relevant Policies set out within the City of Salford UDP and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Recommendation That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

1. The development must be begun not later than three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

7570/80023696/00/97/1012 Rev: B – Manchester Ship Canal Outfall 7570/80023696/00/97/1020 Rev: B – Shaft 04 and Outfall – Overview Plan Sheet 1 of 3 7570/80023696/00/97/1021 Rev: C – Shaft 04 and Outfall – Proposed Site Plan Sheet 2 of 3 7570/80023696/00/97/1022 Rev: C – Shaft 04 and Outfall – Proposed Site Plan Sheet 3 of 3 7570/80023696/00/97/1023 Rev: A – Proposed Indicative Route of Construction Accos Sheet 1 of 2 7570/80023696/00/97/1024 Rev: A – Proposed Indicative Route of Construction Accos Sheet 2 of 2

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3. No development shall take place, including any works of excavation or demolition, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall include: (i) the times of construction activities on site; (ii) the spaces for and management of the parking of site operatives and visitors vehicles; (iii) the storage and management of plant and materials (including loading and unloading activities); (iv) the erection and maintenance of security hoardings including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate; (v) measures to prevent the deposition of dirt on the public highway; (vi) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during demolition/construction; (vii) a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition/construction works; (viii) measures to minimise disturbance to any neighbouring occupiers from noise and vibration, including from any piling activity; (ix) measures to prevent the pollution of the Manchester Ship Canal from accidental spillages, dust and debris; (x) a community engagement strategy which explains how local neighbours will be kept updated on the construction process, key milestones, and how they can report to the site manager or other appropriate representative of the developer, instances of unneighbourly behaviour from construction operatives. The statement shall also detail the steps that will be taken when

Page 38

$mewv012a.rtf unneighbourly behaviour has been reported. A log of all reported instances shall be kept on record and made available for inspection by the local a planning authority upon request. (xi) details of mitigation measures to avoid the possible pollution of the Manchester Ship Canal during the construction period (Reference should be made to Pollution Prevention Guidelines for development close to water courses published by the Environment Agency.) (xii) details of vehicle movements onto and off the local highway network. (xiii) an Invasive Plant Species Management Plan, which shall identify measures to be undertaken to eradicate invasive plant species from the site.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of neighbours in accordance with policies DES7 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. Notwithstanding the details to be submitted as part of condition 3 (Construction Environment Management Plan) above, there shall be a maximum of 100 HGV movements per day associated with the construction phase of the development, between the site and the local highway network. This figure excludes light vehicle movements.

Reason: In the interests of Highway Safety pursuant to policy A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

5. The trees to be felled as part of the development hereby approved shall be replaced in accordance with a Landscaping & Tree Replacement Scheme, which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of: tree species; tree sizes (including the minimum height and circumference of stem at 1m from the ground level); a plan indicating the location of the replacement trees and a timetable for tree planting and details of aftercare. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with approved details and timetable and shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: To mitigate the loss of existing trees and to ensure that the site is suitably landscaped, having regard to Policy EN12 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

6. Within three months of completion of the development hereby approved, the temporary access track and working area required to facilitate construction shall be removed and the land restored to its previous condition, in accordance with a landscaping scheme that shall have received the Local Planning Authority’s written agreement.

Reason: In the interests of the wildlife corridor and the visual amenity of the area, having regard to Policies DES1 and EN9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. No development shall commence until a precautionary Water Vole Survey of Salteye Brook (which has been prepared by a suitably qualified person) has been submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with GMEU. If the survey finds that Water Voles are likely to be affected by the development, a Method Statement must be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, which provides details of measures to be taken to mitigate and avoid any possible harm to Water Voles during the course of the development. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of protected species, having regard to Policy EN8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, the NPPF and the terms of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.

Page 39

$mewv012a.rtf The proposal complies with the development plan and would improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. It therefore comprises sustainable development and the Local Planning Authority worked proactively and positively to issue the decision without delay. The Local Planning Authority has therefore implemented the requirement in Paragraphs 186-187 of the NPPF.

Notes for Applicant:

1. Please note if there are nesting birds it is important that the work is not carried out between March and August to avoid any potential offence under the 1981 Countryside and Wildlife Act.

Page 40

$mewv012a.rtf Agenda Item 5b

http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

APPLICATION No: 17/71147/FUL APPLICANT: Zolger Estates Ltd LOCATION: The Old Fire Station, Clarendon Road, Irlam, M44 5ZA PROPOSAL: Conversion of existing building into 9 no. apartments, together with erection of a two storey rear extension, and alterations to elevations and car parking facilities WARD: Cadishead

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application site is a vacant building, formally utilised as a fire station, located to the southern side of Clarendon Road in Irlam.

The site is surrounded by residential development, and is characterised by modern detached and semi- detached dwellings to the south and west, with Victorian terraced dwellings to the north and east of the site.

The site has a rectangular shape and measures approximately 695m2. Vehicular parking is located to the front of the building, with a yard area to the south and east of the building, accessed off Clarendon Road.

Description of Proposal

Planning permission is sought for the conversion of the existing building into 9 no. apartments, together with the erection of a two storey rear extension, and alterations to elevations and car parking facilities.

The proposed living accommodation would encompass four floors, and would provide 7 x one bedroom apartments (floorspace between 35-50 m2) and 2 x two bedroom apartments (floorspace between 65-70 m2).

Page 41 To the front elevation the existing arches would be retained and fully glazed. To the east and south elevations the existing openings would be altered slightly to offer an improvement and more cohesion to the window positions. The existing staircase on the western elevation would be removed.

The proposed extension would be located to the rear on the southern elevation. It would have a sloping roof and would be constructed of materials similar to those of the existing building. In addition a new stair case would be erected on the eastern elevation which would provide access to apartment No’s 7 & 8.

The proposed plans demonstrate that one car parking space per apartment is proposed, with three spaces to be provided to the front of the building and six within the yard area. Access to the car parking spaces in the yard would be via Clarendon Road whilst the egress is via Richbell Close.

Semi-private amenity space is provided for apartments 1 to 6 at ground floor level.

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Date Displayed: 13 March 2018 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Not Applicable Reason:

Relevant Site History

93/31130/COU - Change of use of rear of ground floor former fire station to workshop. - Refuse - 18 August 1993

Neighbour Notification

Twenty one neighbours were notified of the application.

Representations

Six letters have been received in response to the planning application publicity, the following concerns have been raised:-

 Loss of privacy to the dwellings located at No’s 1-5 Clarendon Road and along Richbell Close.  Loss of light to the No 3 Clarendon Road.  Parking congestion along Clarendon Road and Richbell Close would be increased especially at school drop off and pick up times.  Highway safety when the occupiers of the flats are entering and exiting the site.  Overdevelopment of the site  Headlights shining into the existing dwellings on Richbell Close when exiting the site.  Construction traffic.  What will the proposed boundary treatments be adjacent to No.1 Richbell Close?  Lack of parking provision within the site for the amount of flats.

The above issues will be addressed in the appraisal section of this report.

Consultations

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit - No objections, subject to a condition requiring biodiversity enhancement measures.

Highways - No objection subject to conditions.

Senior Drainage Engineer – All Building work should be undertaken in accordance with Building Regulations Approved Document H.

Page 42 Air & Noise - No objections, subject to a condition to control construction activities.

Land Contamination – No objections, subject to a condition requesting a Phase 2 site investigation.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Parking This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded; and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of safety and security.

Unitary Development Plan DES8 - Alterations and Extensions This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area.

Unitary Development Plan DES9 - Landscaping This policy states that hard and soft landscaping should be provided where appropriate that is of a high quality and would enhance the design of the development, not detract from the safety and security of the area and would enhance the attractiveness and character of the built environment.

Unitary Development Plan DES10 - Design and Crime This policy states that developments must be designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour, and the fear of crime. Development should i) be clearly delineated ii) allow natural surveillance iii) avoid places of concealment iv) encourage activity within public areas.

Page 43 Unitary Development Plan EHC4 - Reuse of Existing Health, Community Facilities This policy states that planning permission for the reuse or redevelopment of existing or former health or community facilities will be granted where there is a clear lack of demand for the existing use, or alternative provision is made and where the development is consistent with the other policies and proposals of the UDP.

Unitary Development Plan H1 - Provision of New Housing Development This policy states that all new housing will contribute toward the provision of a balanced housing mix; be built of an appropriate density; provide a high quality residential environment; make adequate provision for open space; where necessary make a contribution to local infrastructure and facilities required to support the development; and be consistent with other policies of the UDP.

Unitary Development Plan H5 - Residential Accommodation in Existing Buildings This policy states that the subdivision of dwellings or conversion of non-residential properties to residential use will only be permitted when the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties or the character of the area by reason of noise and disturbance: loss of privacy; design and appearance; cumulative effects of concentration and parking and service arrangements.

Unitary Development Plan SPD5 - Design and Crime This policy document contains a number policies used to assess and determine planning applications and is intended as a guide in designing out crime.

Unitary Development Plan SPD12 - Design This document reflects the need to design in a way that allows the city to support its population socially and economically, working with and inviting those affected into an inclusive decision making process. Equally, development must contribute to the creation of an environmentally sustainable city supporting the natural environment minimising the effects of, and being more adaptable to, the potential impact of climate change.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy

Planning Guidance - Housing The purpose of the guidance is to ensure that the residential development coming forward in Salford contributes to establishing and maintaining sustainable communities, tackles the specific housing and related issues that face Salford, and helps to deliver the vision and strategy of the UDP, the Housing Strategy and the Community Plan.

It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application

Appraisal

The main planning issues for consideration are as follows: -

1. Principle of Development 2. Design and Layout 3. Residential Amenity 4. Highways 5. Ecology 6. Contamination 7. Drainage and Surface Water 8. Planning Obligations

Principle of Development

Page 44 i) Loss of community facility

Policy EHC4 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan states that planning permission for the redevelopment of former community facilities will be granted where there is a clear lack of demand for the existing use, or alternative provision is made, and where the development is consistent with the other policies and proposals of the UDP.

In the case of this site, the building is currently vacant and was utilised as a fire station in the past. Irlam has since been provided with alternative fire station provision, with a modern facility located within close proximity.

No planning history is available to confirm alternative uses of the building, however the Local Planning Authority believes it was more recently utilised as a gym. ii) Proposed use

Paragraph 17 of the NPPF states that the planning system should “proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver new homes….that the country needs. Every effort should be made objectively to identify and then meet the housing…needs of an area.” NPPF indicates that this will be achieved first and foremost, by local planning authorities, “using their evidence base to ensure that their local plan meets the full, objectively assessed needs of market and affordable housing in the housing market area,…including identifying key sites which are critical to the delivery of the housing strategy over the plan period.” Paragraph 49 states that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the Local Planning Authority cannot demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites.

In terms of the identified need for housing, Salford has a 5 year housing supply. That said it is considered that the site comprises a building which is in a sustainable location and appropriate for redevelopment. iii) Housing Mix

Policy H1 of the adopted UDP sets out the policy framework for the provision of new housing in the City. Supplementary guidance, in respect of the type of new dwellings is outlined out in policy HOU1 of the Housing Planning Guidance Document. Policy HOU1 states that development within this part of the city should form of houses rather than apartments, in order to protect the existing character of the areas and reflect the generally lower levels of accessibility compared to other parts of the city. An alternative approach may be acceptable having regard to criteria A to H of UDP policy H1.

In the case of this proposal, it is noted that the surrounding area is characterised primarily by houses. The conversion of this building to apartments is considered to be acceptable in principle, given that the proposal would enable the retention of the building, and would add to the mix of housing types within the area. It is therefore considered that Policy HOU1 of the Housing Planning Guidance Document would be satisfied. iv) Size of dwellings

Policy HOU2 of the housing planning guidance states that where apartments are proposed they should provide a broad mix of dwelling sizes, both in terms of the number of bedrooms and the net residential floorspace. Small dwellings (i.e. studios and 1 bed apartments) should not predominate, and a significant proportion of 3 bedroom apartments should be provided wherever practicable. Paragraph 4.31 of the reasoned justification clarifies that the majority of apartments should have two or three bedrooms, with a floorspace typically 57m2 or above. An alternative approach may be acceptable having regard to criteria A to H of UDP policy H1.

The proposed development would comprise 2 x two bedroomed apartments with a floorspace between 65-70m2 and 7 x one bedroomed apartments with a floorspace between 35-50m2. As above, it is noted that the surrounding area is characterised primarily by houses, most providing two or three bedrooms or greater. The number of one bedroomed apartments proposed is considered to be of a small scale, and would add to the mix of housing types within the area. It is therefore considered that Policy HOU2 of the Housing Planning Guidance Document would be satisfied.

Design and Layout

Page 45 Policy H1 sets out the overarching policies against which all new housing development proposals in the city will be assessed against. Point 3 of Policy H1 requires that ‘all new housing development provide for a high quality residential environment and adequate level of amenity in accordance with the design policies of the UDP’.

The host building is currently vacant, but was previously utilised as a fire station. Although the building is not nationally or locally listed by designation, it is considered that it carries some visual merit and would be considered as an undesignated heritage asset. The building is of brick construction and is three storeys in height.

To the front elevation, a plaque at second floor level identifies the former use of the building as a fire station, and the first floor windows include stone cills and headers, with additional detailing to the headers. At ground floor, three uniform arched openings remain (albeit blocked and rendered currently), which would have been previously utilised by fire engines as vehicular entrances and exits. The significance of the asset relates to its former use, and the main features of this are located to the front of the building.

The proposed plans display that the openings and features of interest (i.e. stone surrounds and original plaque) to the upper floors of the building would be retained. At ground floor level, it is proposed to retain the three arched openings, and to unblock the current modern rendered finish and openings within these arches, and replace with glazing. This is considered to represent an appropriate modern intervention, which retains the features of importance, and is considered as an improvement over the current appearance of this elevation.

The side elevations would remain largely as existing, albeit with replacement of window openings, as displayed on the submitted elevational drawings. The alterations proposed to these elevations are considered to be appropriate with regard to visual design and appearance.

To the rear would be a relatively small two storey rear extension. It would have sloping roof and would be constructed out of materials similar to the existing building.

The future occupiers of apartments 1 to 6 would benefit from semi-private amenity space in the form of small yard / terrace areas at ground floor level.

A number of car parking spaces would be provided directly to the front of the site and also along the north eastern boundary adjacent to No.5 Clarendon Road.

The existing concrete sectional fencing along the north eastern and south western boundaries of the site would remain along with a small section of a brick wall along Richbell Close.

A bin and cycle store would be located adjoin the side elevation of the existing building fronting onto Richbell Close.

Given the above, the proposal is acceptably designed with reference to the original building and the wider area in accordance with UDP policies DES1 and DES8and the Design SPD. i). Design and Crime

The apartments would be accessed by entrances on the front and side elevations. The front elevation is clearly delineated, and allows for a degree of natural surveillance from Clarendon Road and would avoid places of concealment. As access to some of the apartments would be taken from the side, a condition has been attached requesting details of an external lighting system. The scheme would therefore acceptably comply with UDP policy DES10 and the Design and Crime SPD.

Residential Amenity i) Impact on neighbouring properties

Loss of privacy/overlooking

The proposal would introduce a number of new windows in the northern, eastern, southern and western elevations.

Page 46 The new windows in the western elevation would be located at ground, first and second floor level with the existing windows at second floor level being retained, albeit now in residential use. In order to prevent any unacceptable impact on the residential amenity of No.7 Clarendon Road in terms of loss of privacy, a condition has been attached to ensure that the windows facing the rear garden area of No 7 are obscurely glazed. These windows serve a communal staircase, the sitting room of apartment No.8 and the bedroom in apartment No.1. Whilst obscurely glazing habitable room windows are not entirely desirable the layout of the apartment No.8 is open plan and it is considered that the additional window serving the kitchen in the front elevation would provide sufficient light and outlook. In addition, the bedroom to apartment No 1 would receive light and outlook from the window in the front elevation of the building.

The windows located in the eastern elevation at first and second floor level are annotated on the submitted plans as being obscurely glazed. The windows at first floor level serve a wardrobe within apartment 3 and a communal staircase which are deemed to be non-habitable rooms and therefore obscure glazing in these windows is considered acceptable.

The three windows at second floor level would serve habitable rooms within apartment No.9. Whilst having obscurely glazed windows serving habitable rooms is not entirely desirable, the floor layout of apartment No.9 is open plan and has a window in the front (northern) elevation which would provide an element of light and outlook. In addition there are 4 roof lights proposed within the eastern roof slope which would provide a satisfactory level of light to the rooms in apartment No.9. Subject to a condition obscurely glazing the windows within the eastern elevation it is considered that there would not be any unacceptable loss of privacy/overlooking to the residents of No.1-5 Clarendon Road.

The windows located at first and second floor level in the southern elevation would be approximately 5.6m from the rear boundary wall beyond which is the head of the cul-de-sac.

The windows located in the front northern elevation would not directly face any residential dwellings along the northern side of Clarendon Road. They would overlook the rear car park area of the commercial property at 610 Liverpool Road.

Loss of light/overbearing

The proposed two storey extension would be located on the rear elevation. It would be approximately 2.7m in length, 2.6m in width and would be approximately 6m in height at its highest point. It would have a sloping roof which would tie into the existing roof slope in the elevation. It would be sited approximately 9m from the north eastern boundary (at its nearest point) and approximately 3.2m from the south western boundary.

Given the size and siting of the proposed two storey rear extension and the interface distances in relation to the nearest adjacent residential dwellings at No’s 1 & 4 Richbell Close, it not considered that this element of the proposal would result in any unacceptable loss of light or be overbearing on these dwellings.

In conclusion the proposal would not result in any unacceptable impact upon the residential amenity of neighbouring dwellings in accordance with policy DES7 of the adopted UDP. ii) Residential amenity of future occupiers

All new development should provide future occupants with a good level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. In addition, development should not have a detrimental impact on the amenity of occupiers of neighbouring properties (UDP Policy DES7).

With regards to the occupants of the units, the proposed conversion and refurbishment would offer adequate light and outlook for the units located at ground, first and second floor level. In respect of apartments 8 & 9 which are located at second floor level, (which would have obscurely glazed windows in the western and eastern elevations) it is considered that the windows in the front elevation would offer sufficient light and an acceptable level of outlook to these apartments. It is considered that this would provide an adequate level of amenity for potential future occupiers of this apartment.

The submitted site layout indicates that semi-private amenity space is provided for apartments 1 to 6 at ground floor level. Apartments 7, 8 and 9 would also have an area of amenity space within the yard area. Given the size and siting of the amenity space allocated for apartments 7, 8 and 9. It is highly likely that this space would only

Page 47 be realistically utilised by the occupiers of apartment No.7. Notwithstanding this the amount of amenity space is considered to be appropriate given the public amenity space available within close proximity, noting that the majority of apartments would be one bedroomed and suited to single or twin occupants rather than families. In addition, some public amenity space such as Caroline Street Play Area, and Prince’s Park to the north east of the site, are located within relatively close proximity, providing facilities for residents. iii) Air and Noise

The proposed development is not within the Greater Manchester Air Quality Management Area. The scale and nature of the development is not likely to have a significant impact on traffic. As such the Local Planning Authority has no objections to the development on Air Quality Grounds.

The proposal is for a residential use on a site located within a residential area; therefore the proposed use of the property in this context is considered acceptable and would not give rise to any material noise impacts.

With any development there will be an element of noise and disturbance during the construction phase. In order to ensure the amenity of the adjacent residential dwellings is protected, a condition has been attached which would ensure that noise generative construction hours are restricted.

It is considered that the development would have an acceptable amenity and privacy impact for the occupants and surrounding properties and therefore would be acceptable with reference to UDP policies DES7 and DES9.

Highways

The application is for 9 residential units within a mixed use area, surrounded by residential properties. As such there is no likelihood of significant impact from increased traffic generation. The National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 32) states that development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.

Paragraph 36 of the National Planning Policy Framework then sets out that all developments which generate significant amounts of transport movement should be required to provide a Travel Plan and that Local planning authorities must make a judgment as to whether a proposed development would generate significant amounts of movement on a case by case basis. The Local Planning Authority having regard to the above and the size of the proposed development is of the opinion that the proposed would not generate significant amounts of movements and therefore a travel plan is not deemed to required.

The key highway issues to be addressed are therefore accessibility, parking provision and highway safety.

The proposed plans demonstrate that one car parking space per apartment is proposed. There would be two spaces to be provided to the front of the building and six within the yard area and one adjacent to the western elevation. Access to the car parking spaces in the yard would be via Clarendon Road whilst the egress is via Richbell Close.

The proposed level of parking provision is considered to be acceptable, noting that on-street parking is available within the vicinity with few restrictions. Furthermore, the site lies within close walking distance of Liverpool Road, where bus services operate serving wider destinations, and Irlam railway station, providing regular train services. This would encourage future occupiers to use transport methods other than the private car. As above, it is noted that the majority of apartments would be one bedroomed and suited to single or twin occupants rather than families, and therefore car ownership is likely to be lower.

A bin store and secure cycle store for 4 cycles would be provided on the western elevation. The doors to these stores would open up over the existing pavement which is not considered acceptable. A condition has therefore been attached to ensure that a revised layout for the bin and cycle store is submitted to the Local Planning Authority prior to the first occupation of the apartments.

The Councils Highway Engineer has reviewed the scheme and has no objections to the proposal subject to conditions to secure alterations to the cycle and bin store. Given the above the proposal is considered to be in accordance with polices A2, A8 and A10 of the adopted UDP.

Page 48 Ecology

The information submitted with the application includes a Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment. The survey found the building to have low potential to support bats and considered it highly unlikely that the works would impact on bats. Therefore no further action in relation to bats is required in this case. However, given the intensification of the use of the site and that the submitted plans indicate that bird nest boxes are proposed it is recommended that a biodiversity scheme is submitted which would provide bat and bird boxes within the proposed development

Greater Manchester Ecology Unit has been consulted who have recommended that the proposal should provide biodiversity enhancement measures for the site. A condition has been attached to requiring this.

Contamination

The site has a history of use as a fire station with associated offices. As such there is a potential for land contamination to exist.

The proposed end use is for residential units, which are considered a sensitive end use with respect to land contamination risk.

The applicants have submitted the following in support of the planning application:- 1. Phase 1 Geo-environmental Assessment, February 2018, Ref: A2392/18, Earth Environmental 2. Phase 2 Intrusive Investigation, May 2018, Ref: M18042/ACV/2018.05.18, Patrick Parsons

The reports conclude that the development will be entirely hard standing therefore there is no risk to future end users as this will break any pathway between underlying soil and the end user. This is accepted providing that the design does not include areas of soft landscaping. A watching brief is required during development with respect to any unidentified contamination. A condition has been attached to ensure that if any contamination is found on site that has not previously been identified that further details would have to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for consideration.

As such the Local Planning Authority has no objections to the application subject to the above condition. The proposed development would have an acceptable land contamination impact with reference to UDP policy EN17.

Drainage and Surface Water

The site is not located within flood zone 2 or 3. The Local Planning Authority considers that subject to all drainage works being undertaken in accordance with Building Regulations Approved Document H the proposal would not be at risk of flooding or would increase the risk of flooding elsewhere in accordance with policy EN19 of the adopted UDP.

Planning Obligations

The development would not trigger a planning obligation, given the number of units proposed, in accordance with the Council’s Planning Obligations SPD.

Other Issues

The site is for residential development and as such would not materially alter light levels outside the development site and/or have the potential to adversely affect the use or enjoyment of nearby dwellings.

Recommendation

Approve

1. The development must be begun not later than three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Page 49 Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2. The external materials used in the extension of the building shall match those of the existing building so far as practicable.

Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policies DES1 and DES8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.

3. Notwithstanding the approved plans and prior to the first occupation of the development, details of a lighting scheme, to be installed shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall be installed prior to the first occupation of the development and retained thereafter.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with policy DES 7 and DES10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. The windows in the eastern elevation at first and second floor level which serve a wardrobe, communal staircase, the living space of apartment 9 and the bedroom in apartment No.1 and which face the common boundary with 5 Clarendon Road shall be fitted with, and permanently glazed, in glass whose obscuration level is at least 3 on the Pilkington scale of 1-5 (where 1 is clear and 5 is completely obscure).

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of residents in accordance with policy DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

5. Notwithstanding the details shown on the drawings hereby approved, details of a bin store shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first occupation of the development. The approved bin store shall be implemented and made available for its intended use prior to first occupation of the development and shall be retained thereafter.

6. Notwithstanding the approved plans and prior to first occupation of the development, a scheme for cycle parking stands/lockers (sufficient for 4 cycles) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed details prior to first occupation of the development and thereafter retained.

Reason: To encourage more sustainable modes of travel in accordance with policies ST14, A2 and A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. a) Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, the development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until full details of both hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include the formation of any banks, terraces or other earthworks, hard surfaced areas and materials, boundary treatments, external lighting, planting plans, specifications and schedules (including planting size, species and numbers/densities), existing plants / trees to be retained and a scheme for the timing / phasing of implementation works.

(b) The landscaping works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme for timing / phasing of implementation or within 18 months of first occupation of the development hereby permitted, whichever is the later.

(c) Any trees or shrubs planted or retained in accordance with this condition which are removed, uprooted, destroyed, die or become severely damaged or become seriously diseased within 5 years of planting shall be replaced within the next planting season by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted, unless the Local Planning Authority gives its consent in writing to any variation.

Page 50 Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development and in accordance with Policies DES1 and DES9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

8. Prior to the occupation of the apartments hereby approved a scheme for the Biodiversity Enhancement Measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation of the development (or in accordance with a phasing plan which shall first be agreed in writing with the local planning authority) and shall be retained thereafter.

Reason:-In the interest of biodiversity enhancement in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework paragraphs 109 and 118.

9. During the period of construction, should contamination be found on site that has not been previously identified, no further works shall be undertaken in the affected area. Prior to further works being carried out in the affected area, the contamination shall be reported to the Local Planning Authority within a maximum of 5 days from the discovery, a further contaminated land assessment shall be carried out, appropriate mitigation identified and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the agreed mitigation scheme.

Reason: In the interest of residential amenity in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

10. Noise generative construction activities (works likely to generate noise beyond the site boundary) shall be restricted to the following hours;

Monday - Friday: 08:00 - 18:00 Saturday:09:00 - 14:00 Sunday and Public Holidays - No noise generative working / deliveries

Reason:- In the interest of residential amenity in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

11. The windows in the western elevation at second floor level which serve the communal staircase and sitting room of apartment 8 and which face the common boundary with 7 Clarendon Road shall be fitted with, and permanently glazed, in glass whose obscuration level is at least 3 on the Pilkington scale of 1-5 (where 1 is clear and 5 is completely obscure).

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of residents in accordance with policy DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

12. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

193 P/01 - Site location plan dated Dec 2017 193 P/02 - Existing site plan dated Dec 2017 193 P/03 - Existing ground floor plan dated 2017 193 P/04 - Existing first floor plan dated Dec 2017 193 P/05 - Existing second floor plan dated Dec 2017 193 P/06 - Existing roof plan dated Dec 2017 193 P/07 - Existing north elevation dated Dec 2017 193 P/08 - Existing east elevation dated Dec 2017 193 P/09 - Existing south elevation dated Dec 2017 193 P/10 - Existing west elevation dated Dec 2017 193 P/11 - Proposed site plan dated Dec 2017 193 P/12 - Proposed ground floor plan Rev A dated Dec 2017 193 P/13 - Proposed first floor plan Rev A dated Dec 2017 193 P/14 - Proposed second floor plan dated Dec 2017 193 P/15 - Proposed third floor plan dated Dec 2017 193 P/16 - Proposed north elevation dated Dec 2017

Page 51 193 P/17 - Proposed south and east elevation dated Dec 2017 193 P/18 - Proposed west elevation dated Dec 2017

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

13. The vehicle parking, servicing and other vehicular access arrangements shown on the approved plans to serve the development hereby permitted shall be made available for use prior to the development being brought into use (or in accordance with a phasing plan which shall first be agreed in writing with the local planning authority) and shall be retained thereafter for their intended purpose.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety and the free flow of traffic and in accordance with policies A2, A8 and A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Notes to Applicant

1. STANDING ADVICE - DEVELOPMENT LOW RISK AREA

The proposed development lies within a coal mining area which may contain unrecorded coal mining related hazards. If any coal mining feature is encountered during development, this should be reported immediately to the Coal Authority on 0345 762 6848.

Further information is also available on the Coal Authority website at: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/the-coal-authority

This Standing Advice is valid from 1st January 2017 until 31st December 2018

2. The applicant is advised that they have a duty to adhere to the regulations of Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and the current Building Control Regulations with regards to contaminated land. The responsibility to ensure the safe development of land affected by contamination rests primarily with the developer.

3. All drainage works being undertaken in accordance with Building Regulations Approved Document H.

Page 52 Agenda Item 5c

http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

APPLICATION No: 18/71330/FUL APPLICANT: Urban Splash LOCATION: Land North Of Senior Street, Springfield Lane, Salford PROPOSAL: Erection of three residential blocks, comprising of a total of 156 apartments, together with car parking and landscaping WARD: Irwell Riverside

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to an area of land off Springfield Lane that extends to approximately 0.35 hectares. The site is bounded to the east by the River Irwell. To the south the site is bounded by Trinity Way with the Chapel Street East mixed use area on the opposite side of the road. To the west the site is bounded by Springfield Lane and to the north are the residential dwellings approved under application 15/66199/FUL which are currently under construction. The dwellings to the west, on the opposite side of Springfield Lane front onto Evans Street and back onto an access road which runs adjacent to Springfield Lane but which is screened to some extent by large foliage at the back of the pavement. The apartments at Springfield Court are side on to Springfield Lane with their main access taken from Dean Road. The site is not allocated on the Unitary Development Plan Proposals Map. Access is taken from Trinity Way onto Springfield Lane adjacent to the south west corner of the site. Springfield Lane slopes downwards from the junction with the site itself being set at a lower level than Trinity Way.

Page 53 Background

This application site forms part of a wider site for which permission was granted under application 15/66199/FUL for 71 houses and 100 apartments. The approved houses are currently under construction and this application relates to the area of land where the 100 apartments were previously proposed. The applicants are seeking to amend the apartment blocks following the recent approval of a 44 storey block on the opposite side of Trinity Way which is under construction and largely complete.

The apartments proposed under this application would largely be in the same location in the wider site as those already approved but proposes an increase in numbers from 100 to 156 split over three blocks that would increase in height towards the river.

Description of Proposal

Permission is sought for the erection of three apartment blocks comprising a total of 156 apartments together with car parking and landscaping.

The blocks would front Trinity Way and would slope upwards increasing in height towards the river. Block A would be sited at the junction of Springfield Lane and Trinity Way. It would be 4 storeys at the junction rising to 7 storeys to the northern elevation. Block B would sit adjacent to block A and would be 5 storeys in height rising to 8 storeys. Block C would sit adjacent to block B and would be 8 storeys rising to 11 storeys adjacent to the boundary with the river Irwell.

The following mix is proposed: 78 x 1 bed units 78 x 2 bed units

Vehicular access would be provided off Springfield Lane between the rear of the apartment blocks and the dwellings approved under the extant permission that are currently under construction.

25 car parking spaces on the opposite side of the access road are proposed to serve the apartments as approved under the extant permission. There is no change to the provision of these car parking spaces and access road and as such they are excluded from the red line boundary for this application.

In addition 19 parking spaces including 4 disabled spaces would be provided at lower ground level. A pedestrian route down to the riverside would also be provided to the front and side of the apartments similar to that of the extant permission.

Cycle storage for 156 cycles would be provided as well as bin storage areas within the lower ground floor level for each of the proposed apartment buildings.

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Date Displayed: 7 March 2018 Reason: Article 13

Site Notice: Non HH setting of listed building Date Displayed: 7 March 2018 Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 8 March 2018 Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 15 February 2018 Reason: Article 15 Standard Press Notice

Neighbour Notification

Neighbours notified: on the 09/2/2018

Page 54 Representations

Five letters of objection have been received to date. The letters raise the following: - Impact on terraced housing adjacent by reason of; - Shadowing, loss of light - The development will add to the shadowing caused by Exchange Court - The report by GIA shows that houses will fail to meet winter sunlight targets; only 43% of the rooms will be compliant for APSH sunlight. The previous application didn’t impact the houses nearly as much. - Impacts on the existing houses in terms of waste; noise and general mobility - Loss of privacy to garden areas - Overlooking of gardens and houses - Nuisance from additional vehicles created by apartments - Increased parking demand and increased traffic flow to Springfield Lane and on street parking - No pedestrian crossing on the road across Trinity Way and pedestrians will be at further risk. The riverside underground tunnel to the city centre is still closed - This a substantial change from the previous plans which showed a five storey block - Decrease in sunlight and increased shadowing to houses nearest to Trinity Way - The previous application didn’t impact the houses in close proximity to the proposed block nearly as much - This scheme is completely different from the original and is not in keeping with the design of the new houses. - Residents of the new houses have not been informed of the redesign of the proposals - architecturally the apartments look out of place and not designed with the thought of the surround area. The reason the house works is that it forms a functional and as aesthetically in keeping ideology with the natural shape of the river and tree while urban for a city landscape. The new design has none of this.

Relevant Site History

15/66199/FUL – Erection of 71 terraced houses and 100 apartments with associated external works. Permitted 29/7/2016

12/61649/OUT – Outline application with all matters reserved for a foodstore (A1 Retail) and up to 40 dwellings with associated car parking. Resolution to approve, decision not issued as waiting legal agreement. Application withdrawn 29/7/2016

05/51317/OUT – Outline application for the erection of 469 flats, a 171 bed hotel and 3407 sq.m of retail/commercial space (Option 3). Permitted 23/12/2005

05/51524/OUT – Outline application for the erection of 540 flats and 4029 sq.m of retail/commercial space (Option 1). Permitted 23/12/2005

05/51525/OUT – Outline application for the erection of 555 flats and 2437sq.m of retail/commercial space (Option 2). Permitted 15/12/2005

04/48283/COU – Change of use of vacant land to temporary car park and erection of fencing and siting of cabin. Permitted 6/07/2004

03/46054/OUT – Outline planning application for a residential development. Permitted 6/08/2003.

Consultations

Highways - No objections subject to conditions. Please refer to Highways and Parking section of report for further discussion.

Senior Drainage Engineer - No objections subject to conditions

Page 55 Design For Security – The proposed development should be designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations contained within section 3.3 of the submitted Crime Impact Statement dated (18/12/2017 – URN:2015/0189/CIS/02) and a planning condition should be added to reflect the physical security specification listed within section 4 of the appendices within the submitted Crime Impact Statement. (Please see www.designforsecurity.org/secured-by-design/ or www.securedbydesign.com for more information).

Environment Agency - No objection subject to conditions. Please refer to ecology, contaminated land and drainage and flood risk sections of the report below for further discussion.

PSSC Canal And River Trust – There is no requirement for you to consult us in our capacity as a Statutory Consultee.

City of Manchester - No comments received to date

Urban Vision Environment (Air And Noise) – No objections subject to conditions. Please refer to Air and Noise sections of the report below for further discussion.

Urban Vision Environment (Land Contamination) - No objections subject to conditions. Please refer to land contamination section of the report for further discussion.

Greater Manchester Ecology Unit – No objections subject to conditions. Please refer to Ecology section of the report for further discussion.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan ST1 - Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods This policy states that development will be required to contribute towards the creation and maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods.

Unitary Development Plan ST12 - Development Density This policy states that development within regional centres, town centre and close to key public transport routes and interchanges will be required to achieve a high density appropriate to the location and context.

Unitary Development Plan ST14 - Global Environmental This policy states that development will be required to minimise its impact on the global environment. Major development proposals will be required to demonstrate how they will minimise greenhouse gas emissions.

Unitary Development Plan DES2 - Circulation and Movement This policy states that the design and layout of new development will be required to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site safely, be well related to public transport and local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

Unitary Development Plan DES3 - Design of Public Space This policy states that development should include the provision of public space; designed to have a clear role and purpose which responds to local needs; reflects and enhances the character and identify of the area; is an integral part of and provide appropriate setting and an appropriate scale for the surrounding development; be attractive and safe; connect to establish pedestrian routes and public spaces and minimise and make provision for maintenance requirements.

Unitary Development Plan DES4 - Relationship Development to Public Space This policy states that developments that adjoin a public space shall be designed to have a strong and positive relationship with that space by creating clearly defining public and private spaces, promoting natural surveillance and reduce the visual impact of car parking.

Page 56 Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.

Unitary Development Plan H4 - Affordable Housing This policy states that in areas that there is a demonstrable lack of affordable to meet local needs developers will be required by negotiation with the city council to provide an element of affordable housing of appropriate types.

Unitary Development Plan H8 - Open Space Provision with New Housing This policy states that planning permission will only be granted where there is adequate and appropriate provision for formal and informal open space, and its maintenance over a twenty-year period. Standards to be reached will be based upon policy R2 and guidance contai8ned within Supplementary Planning Documents.

Page 57 Unitary Development Plan EN19 - Flood Risk and Surface Water This policy states that any application for development that it is considered likely to be at risk of flooding or increase the risk of flooding elsewhere will need to be accompanied by a formal flood risk assessment. It should identify mitigation or other measures to be incorporated into the development or undertaking on other land, which are designed to reduce that risk of flooding to an acceptable level.

Unitary Development Plan R2 - Provision of Recreational Land Facilities This policy states that planning permission for recreational development will be granted unless the development would have an unacceptable impact on residential amenity, have an unacceptable impact on highway safety, fail to make provision for cyclists, pedestrians and disabled people, have an unacceptable impact on the quiet enjoyment of the countryside, have an unacceptable impact on sites or features or archaeological ecological, geological or landscape value, or have an unacceptable impact on existing recreational facilities. The policy seeks to ensure that all households are within set distances of a range of facilities, and that there is at least 0.73ha of high quality managed sports pitches per 1,000 population, 0.25ha of equipped children’s play space per 1,000 population, and adequate amenity open space.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy

Supplementary Planning Document - Sustainable Design and Construction This policy document expands on policies in Salford’s Unitary Development Plan to provide additional guidance for planners and developers on the integration of sustainable design and construction measures in new and existing developments.

Supplementary Planning Document - Design This document reflects the need to design in a way that allows the city to support its population socially and economically, working with and inviting those affected into an inclusive decision making process. Equally, development must contribute to the creation of an environmentally sustainable city supporting the natural environment minimising the effects of, and being more adaptable to, the potential impact of climate change.

Supplementary Planning Document - Greenspace Strategy This policy document expands on the policies of the Unitary Development Plan relating to the issues of open space and recreation, and seeks to ensure that all stakeholders have a clear understanding of how those policies should be implemented and their desired outcome. This should help to ensure that the green space needs of Salford are successfully met; delivering safe, high quality open spaces that are well-located, well- designed, well-managed, and meet the aspirations of local communities.

Supplementary Planning Document - Nature Conservation and Biodiversity This policy document expands on the policies of the Unitary Development Plan relating to the issues of nature conservation and biodiversity, and seeks to ensure that all stakeholders have a clear understanding of how those policies should be implemented and their desired outcome.

Supplementary Planning Document - Design and Crime This policy document contains a number policies used to assess and determine planning applications and is intended as a guide in designing out crime.

Supplementary Planning Document - Trees and Development The policy document has been prepared to give information to all those involved in the development process about the standard that the Local Planning Authority requires for new development proposals with specific reference to the retention and protection of trees.

Page 58 face Salford, and helps to deliver the vision and strategy of the UDP, the Housing Strategy and the Community Plan.

Planning Guidance - Salford Central Salford Central

Planning Guidance - Irwell City Park This guidance relates to the intention to establish the Irwell City Park as an exciting and unique waterfront location within the Regional Centre.

Planning Guidance - Flood Risk and Development The overarching aim of the planning guidance is to ensure that new development in areas at risk of flooding in the city, is adequately protected from flooding and that the risks of flooding are not increased elsewhere as a result of new development.

It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application

Appraisal

The main planning issues to be considered in determination of this application are as follows:-

 Principle of development i) Residential use ii) Residential amenity iii) Housing mix iv) Planning obligations  Design and layout  Design and crime  Amenity  Daylight/sunlight  Air Quality  Noise  Contaminated Land  Highways and parking  Drainage and flood risk  Ecology  Waste

Principle of Development i) Residential use

The principle of the development of this part of the site for apartments has been established by the granting of extant permission 15/66199/FUL. There have been no significant changes on site or to planning policy which would warrant a different view being reached at this time with regards to the principle of the development of the site for residential purposes. As such the principal of the re-development of the site is acceptable subject to compliance with other relevant planning policies. ii) Residents amenity

The submitted plans make reference to ‘residents amenity’ at lower ground floor level of building C. This is intended to provide a residents gym. The agents have confirmed that it would be for use by residents only, accessed from the concierge and maintained by the estate. The gym area would be small in scale, would be for residents only and would not be open to the general public and as such is considered acceptable in this regard. iii) Housing mix

Type of dwellings

Page 59 UDP policy H1 requires that all new housing developments will be required to contribute towards the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area in terms of type and size. In determining whether the proposed mix and density of dwellings on a site is appropriate and acceptable, regard will be had to criteria A to H of UDP policy H1.

Policy HOU1 of the housing planning guidance states that within this part of the city, new developments should provide a broad mix of dwelling types with apartments only being the predominant form of provision on sites in the most accessible locations. The reasoned justification to the policy clarifies that houses should typically account for around 50-60% of the units or 70-80% of the land area.

The current proposed development is for 156 apartments. However it is important to note that this sits alongside the 71 dwelling houses approved under application 15/66199/FUL that are currently under construction. The number of apartments would increase from 100 (as per the extant permission) to 156 meaning that the scheme would deliver 228 dwellings with only 32% being houses. It is considered that additional apartments on the site, to that previously consented, are acceptable given the design context and physical characteristics of the site as well as the location of the site on the edge of the regional centre with high levels of public transport accessibility and given that they would be in the same location as those of the extant permission.

Although houses would account for only 32% of the total units, they would actually account for around 85% of the total site area. The proposed mix in terms of type of dwellings is considered appropriate. Having regard to this, together with the extant permission, the proposed apartments are considered acceptable.

Density

The extant scheme offered a relatively low density given the location of the site and its proximity to the city centre however this was due to the desire to provide family dwellings with gardens in an accessible area close to, but outside of, the nearby city centre.

The density of the development was discussed in detail throughout the consideration of the extant scheme and was considered to be acceptable in this location having regard to the river frontage and in contrast with high rise developments, the mix of housing and apartments offered a good diversity of accommodation and the potential for a wide mix of occupants.

The current scheme would increase the density of the site as a whole from approximately 101 units per hectare to approximately 134 units per hectare which is considered acceptable. It is considered that the amendments to the apartment scheme alongside the extant permission for the houses would continue to offer a wide mix of housing choices including family accommodation within close proximity to the city centre.

Size of dwellings

Policy HOU2 of the housing planning guidance requires that the majority of new houses should have at least three bedrooms. Where apartments are proposed they should provide a broad mix of dwelling sizes, both in terms of the number of bedrooms and the net residential floorspace. Small dwellings (i.e. studios and 1 bed apartments) should not predominate, and a significant proportion of 3 bedroom apartments should be provided wherever practicable. Paragraph 4.31 of the reasoned justification clarifies that the majority of apartments should have two or three bedrooms, with a floorspace typically 57 square metres or above. An alternative approach may be acceptable having regard to criteria A to H of UDP policy H1.

The proposed development comprises 78 x 1 bed apartments and 78 x 2 bed apartments. The submitted plans indicate that the 1 bed apartments would have a floor space of 51m2, whilst the two beds would be 74.2m2 and is considered acceptable.

A 50/50 split between 1 and 2 bedroom units is considered acceptable in this instance. It is not considered necessary for the development to provide 3 bed apartments given that the need for larger accommodation will be met by the provision of at least 50% of the houses on the site having 3 bedrooms (condition 3 of the extant permission). iv) Planning obligations

Page 60 The Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) explains the city council’s overall approach to the use of planning obligations, and sets out detailed advice on the use of obligations to ensure that developments mitigate their impacts by making an appropriate contribution to projects that will ensure the needs generated by the development are met.

The application site is located within a mid-value area and as such the proposed apartment only scheme would not trigger any additional contributions over and above those already sought under the previous application for the wider site, i.e. open space, education, public realm and affordable housing commuted sum. A controlled traffic light junction was also originally requested during the assessment of the extant permission, however, following further discussion with the applicant it was agreed that this was not necessary and that tactile paving etc., as set out in condition 22 of the extant permission, is appropriate. Urban Vision Highways remain of the view that improved pedestrian facilities are required and have sought a financial contribution under the current application. This is acknowledged, however the viability appraisal submitted alongside the application does not support the monies required for these facilities. A financial contribution and clawback mechanism have been agreed with the applicant and improved pedestrian facilities have been identified as a potential project as set out below.

A viability report was submitted as part of the extant permission and was reviewed by consultant surveyors. The surveyors acknowledged that at that time there were a number of unknown variables that would have a large impact on whether or not the scheme would make a surplus or deficit and that any surplus within the scheme could easily change should any of the key variables change slightly. A S106 agreement was entered into on the basis that the viability of the scheme would be re-tested following 90% disposal of the dwellings with any clawback monies being directed either towards the riverside walkway (up to a value of £100,000) or affordable housing.

The existing S106 agreement includes the area of land to which this planning application relates and a new viability appraisal has been submitted with this application which updates the costs etc. for the houses within the wider site and includes the revised apartment scheme currently proposed. This has been reviewed by the council’s surveyors and a payment of £150,000 has been agreed with the applicants as well as a claw back mechanism using the same trigger point of 90% disposal of units. The initial sum and claw back monies would be directed towards any of the following projects: 1. Improved crossing facilities across or under Trinity Way, 2. The Riverside Walkway between East Philip Street and New Bridge Street. 3. Off-site affordable housing.

Discussions are ongoing with legal to ensure the above are appropriately secured, whether this be via a variation to the extant S106 or a new S106 agreement.

Design and Layout

The proposed apartment blocks would run from east to west along the southern boundary of the wider site. They would have a frontage to Trinity Way although due to the levels differences between the application site and Trinity Way this side would only be accessible by pedestrians with car parking areas and main entrances proposed on the northern side accessed via Springfield Lane and the new access road which sits between the houses and the proposed apartments.

The extant permission which is currently being developed on site included two and three storey dwellings and ten apartment blocks, five storeys in height along this southern part of the site.

The revised scheme proposed under this application would range from 4 storeys in height close to the junction of Springfield Lane and Trinity Way and would increase in height up to 11 storeys adjacent to the riverside. Trinity Way currently appears to provide a clear divide between the taller buildings on its southern side with predominantly lower buildings on its northern side. That said it is acknowledged that there are some taller buildings on the northern side but nothing as significant as those on the southern side, the most recent of which is currently under construction and once completed will be 44 storeys in height.

The proposed apartments would be split across three blocks with each one sloping upwards from west to east. It is considered that the rising heights of the apartment buildings would be respectful to the contour of the road and would assist in providing a better balance within the street scene ensuring the apartments at the Springfield Lane site are not dwarfed by the high rise buildings on the opposite side of Trinity Way.

Page 61 The sloping roofs of the apartments would mean that rooftops are visible from various points along Trinity Way as well as from taller blocks in the immediate surrounding area and would appear almost as a fifth elevation. The scheme has been designed with this in mind and the roof tops are proposed to provide private and shared amenity areas for residents and would include areas of planting, seating and photovoltaic trays.

The buildings are to be constructed using various grey coloured cement board cladding and concrete effect cladding panels which whilst not the same as the materials used for the houses would be of a similar appearance and a range of grey colours that would complement the houses and allow the apartments and houses to still appear as one development. Windows and doors would be aluminium frames and roof amenity areas would be timber decking. Coloured powder coated metal cladding is proposed to the central cores within the roof top area, however the colour is yet to be confirmed and will be considered through the recommended materials condition.

Following discussions with the agents the southern elevations of the blocks have been amended to improve the entrance points to each of the buildings. The entrances have been increased in size and would be constructed in glass with back lit illumination at night between the pedestrian entrances and the service entrances to create a more visible entrance feature and encourage use of this side of the building. In addition ‘entrance portals’ are proposed which would provide a coloured surround around the entrance point making the entrances more visible within the elevation and which will assist in encouraging their use for those residents and visitors that arrive on foot from the Trinity Way side of the development. The gates that were originally proposed to this walkway have also been removed and ramped access down to the riverside walkway would be provided, similar to that of the extant scheme to allow access for all down to the riverside. Windows would be provided within the side elevations of the blocks to add detail and interest as well as allowing for natural surveillance. The proposed resident’s gym would be at ground level within block C and would front the riverside. In addition, the apartments in this side of building C would be provided with balconies overlooking the river. The presence of the residents gym and balconies would provide an element of amenity space for residents but also ensure natural surveillance and an active frontage in this location.

The applicant was asked whether the footpath to the entrances on the southern façade could be increased in width; however the applicant has advised that due to the form of the terrain and differences in levels it was considered more appropriate to create a shallow slope and narrow path rather than to excavate extensively to widen the access. If a vertical (90 degrees) excavation had been chosen, this would have caused substantial to serious risk to operatives constructing the development.

In conclusion it is considered that the introduction of the proposed development would be a positive new addition to the street scene and would respect the existing character of the area.

Design and Crime

The application is supported by a Crime Impact Statement (CIS) which has been reviewed by Design for Security.

The statement concludes that the scheme is well considered from a crime prevention perspective and will add activity, natural surveillance and interest to this emerging residential quarter of the city. The proposed residential use is appropriate, and it will positively contribute to this emerging neighbourhood and is supported by Design for Security.

Design for security have recommended that the development should be designed and constructed to Secured by Design standards and accredited prior to first occupation. They also advise that the development should be constructed in line with the recommendations contained within section 3.3 of the submitted Crime Impact Statement and a planning condition to reflect the physical security specification listed within section 4 of the appendices within the submitted Crime Impact Statement. Where these sections relate to measures such as boundary treatments, lighting and landscaping these will be considered as part of the recommended landscaping condition. These sections also relate to physical security including locking systems, audio visual links, specifications of doors, windows alarms etc. However this level of technical detail is beyond the scope of planning control and as such an informative is recommended to draw the applicant’s attention to the recommendations made by Design for Security.

Page 62 Given the above it is considered that the development has been designed to discourage crime, anti-social behaviour and the fear of crime, and support personal and property security in accordance with DES10 of the UDP and the Crime and Design SPD.

Amenity

Habitable rooms within each of the proposed apartments would be provided with adequate sized windows to allow for sufficient light and outlook to be provided for future residents. The extant permission did not include any designed amenity space for residents of the apartments, however the current proposed scheme includes a number of private and shared roof terraces across all three buildings. The development would also provide both ramped and stepped accesses for direct pedestrian access to the adjacent riverside walkway which is accessible for members of the public to use.

There is an advertisement hoarding currently sited at the corner of Springfield Lane and Trinity Way which is indicated on the submitted plans as being retained. The hoarding would be visible from a number of the adjacent apartments within block A and would retain a distance of between approximately 4.6m and 9m from the closest windows. The advertisement is angled from the windows and whilst oriel windows were originally proposed it was considered that this would unduly restrict the outlook from adjacent apartments. The oriel windows have since been removed and more conventional windows proposed which will allow for increased light and outlook in both directions.

It is considered, therefore, that the proposed development would provide future occupiers with an acceptable level of amenity in accordance with UDP policy DES7.

The apartment blocks would not front Springfield Lane and the dwellings of Evans Street back on, but are separated from the road by a landscaped verge and a rear access way. The separation maintained to dwellings outside the site is considered acceptable and it is not considered that the proposed development would result in an unacceptable impact on the amenity currently enjoyed by the occupiers of surrounding residential properties in accordance with UDP policy DES7.

It is not considered that the proposed development would compromise the operating conditions of the nearby commercial units or that their operations would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of future residents in accordance with UDP Policy EN17 particularly when regard is had to the fact that they already operate alongside residential units.

Daylight/sunlight

In terms of the impact of the proposed apartment buildings on occupiers of the dwellings that form part of the wider development site a daylight/sunlight study has been submitted in support of the application.

The assessment considers the potential impact of the proposed development in terms of daylight and sunlight levels to phase 1 of the development i.e. the houses to the north of the proposed apartments which are currently under construction and a number of which are already occupied.

The BRE guidelines (2011) site layout planning for daylight and sunlight states: “The guide is intended for building designers and their clients, consultants and planning officials. The advice given here is not mandatory and this document should not be seen as an instrument of planning policy. Its aim is to help rather than constrain the designer. Although it gives numerical guidelines, these should be interpreted flexibly because natural lighting is only one of many factors in site layout design (see Section 5). In special circumstances the developer or Planning Authority may wish to use different target values. For example, in an historic city centre, or in an area with modern high rise buildings, a higher degree of obstruction may be unavoidable if new developments are to match the height and proportions of existing buildings".

The report acknowledges that the orientation between the two phases of development means that it will always be difficult to maintain current levels of sunlight. It concludes that on the whole, rooms will continue to receive good levels of summer sunlight, however a small number would fail to meet the winter sunlight targets. That said it is acknowledged that due to the low level nature of the winter sun and the surrounding urban density, sub urban winter sunlight targets are always difficult to achieve in a city centre.

The results of the report are summarised in the table below:

Page 63 % of rooms compliant % of rooms compliant % of rooms compliant Current proposed for Average Daylight for No Sky Line (NSL) for Annual probable development Factor (ADF) sunlight hours (APSH)

Phase 1 (houses) 71/71 (100%) 71/71 (100%) 3/7 (43%)

% of rooms compliant % of rooms compliant % of rooms compliant Extant permission for Average Daylight for No Sky Line (NSL) for Annual probable Factor (ADF) sunlight hours (APSH)

Phase 1 (houses) 71/71 (100%) 70/71 (98.59%) 5/7 (71%)

BRE recognises that sunlight is less important than daylight. The report details that for the current proposed apartment scheme 100% of the windows assessed will meet the Average Daylight Factor (ADF) targets. In respect of the second daylight methodology ‘No Sky Line’ (NSL) the report details again that 100% of the rooms will meet the recommendations.

The BRE Guide states that only main living rooms with windows that face within 90 degrees of due south require detailed assessment for sunlight. Only 7 of the houses analysed have windows facing within 90 degrees of due south, plots 52, 60, 61, 62, 66, 71 and 72. The main living room windows in plots 52, 61, 62, 71 and 72 all face within 90 degrees of due south (just), and so have been analysed, and plots 60 and 66 have small secondary windows in the gable walls that face almost due south, so these rooms have been assessed, although the main living room window does not face within 90o of due south. The main living room windows to plots 59 and 60 do not face within 90o of due south, so these rooms have been excluded entirely.

Yellow indicates the 7 surveyed properties with windows facing within 90 degrees of due south

When the living rooms to Phase 1 are assessed, 3/7 of the rooms assessed will meet the targets. Except for one room, all of the living rooms will exceed the annual Probably Sunlight Hours target in the proposed scenario. The four rooms that do not comply with the criteria will fall slightly short of the winter sunlight hours. Due to the low level nature of winter sun, and the surrounding urban density, the sub-urban winter sunlight hour’s targets are always difficult to achieve in a city centre.

The concept of the housing development is such that purchasers are able to choose the layout of the dwelling meaning that living areas could be located on different levels. The applicant’s daylight/sunlight consultant (Gia)have confirmed that their sunlight assessment is based on the potential layout with the living room on the ground floor, as this creates the worst-case scenario. If the “Loft Living” option had been used, with the living rooms located on the first or second floor, then the results would improve. Their report also confirms that the annual sunlight levels are very good for a city centre location, and so overall, the results are acceptable.

Page 64 The report sets out that Phase 1 of the proposed development is not currently occupied (the applicants have advised that of the 71 houses, 41 are completed and sold and 39 of these are occupied), and therefore it has a lower sensitivity to changes in daylight and sunlight. Gia have only assessed the gardens (23 surveyed) nearest the proposed development, and sunlight levels will improve further north into the development. The gardens will also receive good levels of direct sunlight in the summer months, when they are more likely to be utilised.

In the existing scenario of no development on the site of the proposed apartments only 4 of the rear gardens would meet the BRE targets. This is due in part to the presence of Exchange Court and Norton Court in the baseline scenario, and the narrow terraces between the houses in Phase 1. This means that only modest obstructions to gardens with low levels of direct sunlight will cause the gardens to fall short of the BRE targets.

A further analysis was run to understand the overshadowing levels for the extant permission and this indicated that 15/23 of the rear gardens would meet the BRE targets. In terms of impact on garden areas the report sets out that the level of direct sunlight in the gardens would be comparable between the extant permission and the proposed development.

The results of the Sun Hours on Ground overshadowing analysis indicate that with the development proposed under this application, 8 of the 23 rear gardens would meet the BRE targets, with the areas either receiving at least 2 hours of sun on the 21st March, or the proposed area values are within 0.8 times of the existing area values. This means that 8 of the gardens wouldn’t be reduced by a perceivable amount and whilst the remaining gardens would have similar reductions given the low starting point as set out above only modest obstructions will cause them to fall short of the BRE targets.

The report concludes that it is inevitable when constructing buildings in an urban environment that alterations in daylight and sunlight to adjoining properties can occur. It is well-established and accepted that the BRE Guidelines, which set out the numerical benchmark for daylight and sunlight assessments, are predicated on a relatively low rise suburban environment. When these factors are considered, the overshadowing impact is considered appropriate. It goes on to say that the daylight assessment shows full compliance with the BRE targets and whilst the sunlight analysis has some deviations from the targets, the annual levels of sunlight are very good for an urban development.

Having regard to the above it is considered that there will be some impact upon the sunlight received by a number of dwellings within phase 1 of the development however it is not considered this will be to a degree which will unacceptably impact the living environment of neighbouring residents to warrant refusal of the planning application.

Air Quality

The application site is located within the Greater Manchester Air Quality Management Area (AQMA), and as such introduces new sensitive receptors into an area where air pollution (nitrogen dioxide – NO2) is known to be above EU and UK health based limit values. It is further acknowledged that for particulate pollution (PM10 and PM2.5) there is no safe threshold with respect to the impact on human health.

As such there is a potential for future occupants to be exposed to levels of air pollution (Nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter) which will give rise to a negative impact on health and quality of life.

An updated Air Quality Impact Assessment submitted with the previous scheme (15/66199/FUL) has been supplemented with an Air Quality Technical Note (December 2017, Arcadis). The Technical Note confirms that, whilst a number of technical updates, changes to standards and new monitoring data has become available since the 2015 report, the conclusions of that report remain valid, and this is accepted by Urban Vision Environment.

In line with the Greater Manchester Air Quality Action Plan, and with consideration of the cumulative impact of development within the City region, Urban Vision Environment recommend mitigation measures in line with the Principles of Good Practice from the EPUK / IAQM Guidance (Land-Use Planning and Development Control: Planning for Air Quality) which has been updated since the 2015 application. They recommend the attachment of a condition requiring two electrical charging points for residential use. The recommended condition has been attached.

Page 65 A Travel Plan condition is also recommended which will ensure that sustainable modes of transport are encouraged and will help to contribute towards minimizing any impact. It is considered that the proposed development would provide its users with an adequate level of amenity in accordance with UDP Policy EN17 and would not unduly impact on the amenity of surrounding residential properties by reason of air quality.

Noise

The application is supported by an environmental noise study (December 2017, Ref: P1633-REP02-JPR, Sol Acoustics). The dominant noise source is road traffic from Trinity Way.

The report uses measurement and computer modelling to calculate noise levels at the façade of the proposed residential units and in the external amenity areas (roof gardens). Mitigation is designed to achieve satisfactory noise levels in habitable rooms and external amenity areas in line with BS8233:2014 (Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction from Buildings).

The mitigation proposed includes;  Acoustic glazing requirements (Table 4)  Acoustically upgraded treatment of wall construction, and Mechanical Ventilation and Heat Recovery system.  Mechanical Ventilation and Heat Recovery to certain habitable rooms (to avoid the need to open windows).

Calculations have also been undertaken to predict noise levels in the roof garden areas. One location of one garden is shown to be 1dB above the upper outdoor daytime noise limit of 55 dBLAeq 16-hour. This is considered to be imperceptible and as the majority of the external amenity spaces are compliant Urban Vision Environment consider that there is no requirement for further mitigation.

The conclusions of the report are accepted by Urban Vision Environment who raise no objections to the proposed development subject to conditions in relation to the installation of the uprated glazing as specified in the submitted noise report; submission of full details of the proposed ventilation scheme and external wall specification in zones A and B as identified in the report; the submission of site completion statements confirming that the agreed measures have been installed and a construction environmental management plan. The recommended conditions have been attached.

The extant permission included balconies to all buildings on the Trinity Way elevations and the report set out that these apartments were such that the balconies could be excluded from the 55dB LAeq daytime external noise standard, given that they were small in size and therefore limited in terms of how intensely they would be likely to be used. The current scheme proposes balconies to the eastern elevation of building C overlooking the river. Again these are limited in size but would offer an element of amenity space for residents should they choose to use them. As with the extant permission it is not considered that the introduction of the balconies in this location would unduly compromise the living conditions of future occupiers of the apartments.

With regards to the proposed resident’s gym, a condition is recommended to limit its use to residents of the apartment blocks only, its hours of use and requiring uprated floor/ceiling details to be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

Subject to conditions it is considered that the proposed development would provide its users with an adequate level of amenity in accordance with UDP Policy EN17 and would not unduly impact on the amenity of surrounding residential properties by reason of noise.

Contaminated Land

A preliminary risk assessment was submitted and agreed as part of the 15/66199/FUL application. This application is supported by a phase 2 site investigation report (Geo-Environmental Site Investigation, June 2015, Ref: 46010P1R1,

The submitted report identified raised levels of naphthalene, and other polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH’s), together with some elevated levels of CO2 during gas monitoring. A revised conceptual model has been produced based on the findings of the site investigation and the scope of further works has been identified including more detailed delineation of the naphthalene hot spot.

Page 66 The conclusions of the site investigation are accepted by Urban Vision Environment and as such there is no objection on land contamination grounds, subject to a number of recommended conditions from Urban Vision environment which have been attached.

The Environment Agency have also reviewed the application in relation to contaminated land and raises no objections subject to the submission of verification reports for the written approval of the Local planning authority demonstrating the completion and effectiveness of the works set out in the remediation strategy including sampling and monitoring to demonstrate that the remediation criteria have been met and a condition is attached in this regard. The Environment Agency also recommend a condition in relation to no piling or other penetrative foundations designs without the express consent of the Local Planning Authority where it can be demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to ground water. The recommended condition has been attached.

Highways and parking

The application site is located on a vacant parcel of land bordered by Springfield Lane to the west, the A6042 Trinity Way to the south and the River Irwell to the north and east.

In terms of the accessibility, the site is located in an area that can be made more sustainable, it is within close proximity to the Regional centre and therefore well served by public transport and within walking distance of local amenities.

It is also noted that the Trinity Way Riverside Walkway connecting the site to New Bridge Street is currently an unattractive route, not used to its full potential. Urban Vision Highways consider that there should be a signal controlled pedestrian crossing scheme at the Springfield Lane / Trinity Way signal junction to ensure pedestrians can safely cross Trinity Way and to encourage people to use more sustainable modes of travel. This has been discussed with the applicants who consider it is not necessary, particularly when regard is had to the extant permission (Planning Application 15/66199/FUL) for 71 houses and 100 apartments. This current application refers to the southern part of the site only and seeks approval of 156 residential apartments, equating to a net increase of 56 units, when compared to the extant consent and this is acknowledged. The applicants have submitted a viability appraisal with the application and a payment of £150,000 has been agreed by the applicants with a clawback mechanism for the scheme to be re-assessed at 90% disposal of units. The initial sum and claw back monies would be directed towards any of the projects identified above, which includes improved crossing facilities across or under Trinity Way,

Trip Generation

In comparison to the extant permission which proposed 100 apartments, the current proposed scheme would result in an additional 14 two-way trips in the am peak hour and 17 two-way trips in the pm peak hour. This represents an insignificant increase in trips compared to the extant permission. It can therefore be concluded that as this development will result in an insignificant increase in vehicular trip generation compared to the extant permission, the impact upon the highway network will be minimal and cannot be considered severe as defined within Paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Site Layout and Proposed Pedestrian Access Arrangements

Vehicular Access Arrangements as approved in the extant permission is 5m wide and is intended to serve the site from Springfield Lane and is acceptable to cater for two way traffic into and out of the site. It is noted that the submitted plans indicate pedestrian provision and therefore recommend the applicant to provide dropped kerb with tactile paving at the proposed entrance and a condition is attached in this regard.

In terms of pedestrian access within the site, a 1.5m footway to the front of the apartment blocks is proposed. Access from Trinity Way to the footway would be via steps at either end of the footpath. Ramped access down to the footpath from Trinity Way is not possible due to the difference in levels and the need for a retaining wall, however the footpath would link to the proposed ramped access down to the river at the eastern end of the site and level access would be provided from the northern side of the apartment buildings in between the apartment blocks.

To the north of the proposed development is a narrow 1.2m wide footway which can be used by the wheelchair bound occupants or visitors. It is however noted that footways can be further narrowed down by on-street

Page 67 parking which forces pedestrians to walk in the carriageway. Following discussions the applicant has agreed to the widening of this footpath to 1.8m and a condition is attached requiring the submission of a scheme to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. A condition is also attached in relation to highways works including the provision of a traffic management scheme to assist in the safe use of the proposed access junction and driveways and to prohibit on-street parking.

Sightline Visibility

In terms of sightline visibility from the new vehicle access points, submitted drawing 2065-F01 demonstrates the recommended visibility splays of 2.4m x 43m in both directions. This is in line with guidance contained within Manual for Streets and is therefore acceptable.

Servicing

In terms of the intended servicing arrangements for the site, drawing 2065-SP01 and drawing 2065-SP02 demonstrates the appropriate swept path analysis for a refuse vehicle and fire appliance within the site and is acceptable.

Proposed Parking Provision

With reference to drawing 1708MP SKM (00) 100 P01, the car parking is not designed in accordance with conventional standards but has been reviewed by Urban Vision Highways who consider it to be acceptable.

In terms of cycle parking provision, the Transport Statement sets out that the applicant is looking to provide 100% secure cycle parking provision which equates to 156 cycle parking spaces. Cycle storage provision is proposed at ground floor level which each of the apartment blocks and this is welcomed.

External Highway Works

Given the increase of new residents from the proposed development together with that of the wider consented development which is currently under construction a financial contribution towards a controlled pedestrian facility at the junction of Springfield Lane/Trinity Way was sought from the applicants. Whilst this was initially requested during the consideration of the extant permission the applicants considered it wasn’t necessary and following discussions this was accepted by TFGM and Urban Vision Highways and did not form part of the extant permission. Whilst it is considered that a pedestrian crossing would be of significant benefit to the scheme a whole (this current scheme as well as the houses being built out from the extant permission) the lack of this provision by the applicants is not sufficient to warrant the refusal of the application given that the current proposed scheme only proposes an additional 56 apartments.

That said the applicants have agreed to a S106 payment of £150,000 and a clawback mechanism with this money and any additional money to be put towards improvements to the riverside walkway, crossing facilities across or under Trinity Way or affordable housing.

In conclusion, Urban Vision Highways raise no objections to the proposed development subject to conditions in relation to dropped kerbs and tactile paving, visibility splays, traffic management scheme, renewal of footway and carriageway and submission of a travel plan. The recommended conditions are attached.

It is considered, therefore, that the proposed development would not result in a severe impact on the highway network and that the proposed development and parking provision is acceptable and in accordance with the thrust of UDP policies A2, A8 and A10.

Ecology

The application site is located next to the River Irwell which identified as a Wildlife corridor key area of search on the UDP proposals map.

The Environment Agency have reviewed the application and supporting documents and advise that land alongside watercourses is particularly valuable for wildlife, as well as an key landscape and recreational resource, and it is essential this is protected, and where feasible enhanced through removal of redundant hard standing or boundary walls, the retention and expansion of existing green space corridor and use of high quality

Page 68 hard and soft landscaping. The Environment Agency are generally supportive of the submitted Landscape Strategy (DEP Dec 2017) and emphasis of creating naturalistic planting and use native species to attract wildlife, and would recommend this is clearly demonstrated though detailed landscaping and planting schedule for public realm areas. Full landscaping details will be agreed and secured through condition.

The application and supporting documents has also been reviewed by the Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU). The application site forms part of the wider that that was previously considered under application 15/66199/FUL and ecology issues relating to the site resolved through the extant permission. GMEU raise no objections subject to similar conditions relating to the River Irwell, invasive species and ecological enhancements being applied to any planning permission.

Appropriate conditions have been re-attached and/or re-worded where necessary. Informatives are also recommended to advise the applicants of the protection afforded to nesting birds, kingfishers and otters.

It is considered that subject to conditions the proposed development would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact upon the landscape or wildlife interest at the site or the adjacent wildlife corridor in accordance with UDP policies EN9 and EN12.

Flood risk and drainage

The application site is located within flood zone 2 and as such the application is supported by a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) (JBA ref: Draft v1.0 December 2017). The development is classed as More Vulnerable owing to its proposed residential use however it is deemed to be appropriate in this flood zone. The submitted FRA has been reviewed by the Environment Agency (EA) and the councils Drainage Engineers.

The EA have indicated in previous consultation responses regarding this site that flood risk from extreme 0.1% AEP events would be severe. Policy FRD4 of the Flood Risk & Development Planning Guidance refers to development in high risk flood zone 3 areas. However, regarding the essence of the policy, the EA recommend that development in flood zone 2 is checked against the requirement for no more than 600mm of flooding to dwellings in an extreme 0.1% event.

The submitted FRA confirms that in the extreme event flooding depths of up to 1.75m could occur. As indicated in the FRA, such depths represent “danger for all” and safety of occupants during an extreme event would be reliant on prior evacuation or refuge at upper levels.

The submitted plans indicate that the residential accommodation within the three buildings is set at first floor level and above being approximately 4.5m above ground level with the ground floor level housing entrance lobbies, bike stores, plant etc. The applicants have confirmed that the development would utilize flood resilient construction measures and a condition is recommended in this regard.

The EA have been made aware of this and raise no further comments. They have advised that the Local Planning Authority should ensure it is comfortable with the potential depths of flooding during an extreme 0.1% AEP event and that a feasible emergency evacuation plan can be subsequently provided by the applicant and recommend that the emergency planner is consulted. A condition has been attached in this regard.

Following initial comments from EA and the Council’s drainage engineer the drainage statement was updated and the EA have confirmed that they raise no objection to the provision of an additional surface water outfall for phase 2 subject to approval of the detail and this is to be secured by condition.

The council’s drainage engineer raises no objections subject to conditions to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the flood mitigation measures as described in the submitted Flood Risk Report and the submission of flood resilient construction details and surface water drainage strategy for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The recommended conditions have been attached. They have confirmed that information has been provided which demonstrates that the site should be classed as a brownfield site with little potential for infiltration. In this instance it is appropriate for a surface water connection to be granted to the watercourse as this is the most sustainable option.

A condition is also recommended requiring the submission of a flood interpretation scheme to be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority to provide awareness and a physical reminder of the location of the site in a flood risk area.

Page 69 Surface water would be dealt with through infiltration of landscaped areas and discharge to the adjacent watercourse. Full details are to be agreed and secured by way of condition. The extant permission included conditions in relation to floor levels; flood resilient construction measures; provision and management of a buffer zone from the river bank top of the River Irwell and the built development; surface water drainage scheme. A floor levels condition is not required in this instance given that all residential accommodation would be at first floor level and approximately 4.5m above ground level. However conditions in relation to flood resilient construction measures, provision and management of a buffer zone from the river bank top of the River Irwell and the built development and surface water drainage scheme have been attached.

Recommendation Approve

Planning permission be granted subject to the following planning conditions and that:

1) The Strategic Director of Environment and Community Safety be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act to secure the following heads of terms:

A financial contribution to secure £150,000 and a claw back mechanism at 90% disposal of units with monies directed towards any of the following projects:

1. Improved crossing facilities across or under Trinity Way, 2. The Riverside Walkway between East Philip Street and New Bridge Street. 3. Off-site affordable housing.

2) That the applicant be informed that the Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions stated below, on completion of such a legal agreement;

3) The authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued (subject to the conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement;

Conditions

1. The development must be begun not later than three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

1708 SKM (EX)003 P00 – Site plan existing 1708 SKM (EX)002 P00 – Site block plan existing 1708MP SKM(EX)201P00 – Masterplan GA elevation north existing 1708MP SKM(EX)202 P00 – Masterplan GA elevation east existing 1708MP SKM(EX)203 P00 – Masterplan GA elevation south existing 1708MP SKM (EX)204 P00 – Masterplan GA elevation west existing

1708 SKM (00)001 P00 – Site location plan 1708 SKM (00)003 P00 – Site block plan proposed

1708ZZ SKM (20)203 P00 – Typical façade bay @ terrace – west elevation 1708ZZ SKM (20)202 P00 – Typical façade bay @ gf – west elevation 1708ZZ SKM (20)201 P00 – Typical façade bay @ terraces – north/south 1708ZZ SKM (20) 200 P00 – Typical façade bay @ gf – north

1708BC SKM (20)201 P00 – Typical façade bay @ roof – BC east elevation 1708BC SKM (20)200 P00 – Typical façade bay @ gf- BC east elevation

1708ZZ SKM (20)101 P00 – Building a-b-c-unit type 01

Page 70 1708ZZ SKM (20)102 P00 – Building a-b-c-unit type 02 1708ZZ SKM (20)103 P00 – Building a-b-c-unit type 03 1708ZZ SKM (20)104 P00 – Building a-b-c-unit type 04 1708ZZ SKM (20)105 P00 – Building a-b-c-unit type 05 1708ZZ SKM (20)106 P00 – Building a-b-c-unit type 06 1708ZZ SKM (20)107 P00 – Building a-b-c-unit type 07 1708ZZ SKM (20)108 P00 – Building a-b-c-unit type 08 1708ZZ SKM (20)109 P00 – Building a-b-c-unit type 09

Building A 1708BA SKM (00)100 P01 – Building a – GA plan level 00 1708 SKM (00)101 P01 – Building a – GA plan level 01 1708 SKM (00)102 P01 – Building a – GA plan level 02 1708 SKM (00)103 P01 – Building a – GA plan level 03 1708 SKM (00)104 P01 – Building a – GA plan level 04 1708 SKM (00)105 P01 – Building a – GA plan level 05 1708 SKM (00)106 P01 – Building a – GA plan level 06 1708 SKM (00)107 P01 – Building a – GA plan level 07 (roof)

1708BA SKM (00)201 P01 – Building a – GA elevation north 1708BA SKM (00)202 P01 – Building a – GA elevation east 1708BA SKM (00)203 P01 – Building a – GA elevation south 1708BA SKM (00)204 P01 – Building a – GA elevation west

1708BA SKM (00)301 P01 – Building a – GA section aa 1708BA SKM (00)302 P01 – Building a – GA section bb 1708BA SKM (00)303 P01 – Building a – GA section cc

Building B 1708BB SKM (00)100 P00 – Building b – GA plan level 00 1708BB SKM (00)101 P00 – Building b – GA plan level 01 1708BB SKM (00)102 P00 – Building b – GA plan level 02 1708BB SKM (00)103 P00 – Building b – GA plan level 03 1708BB SKM (00)104 P00 – Building b – GA plan level 04 1708BB SKM (00)105 P00 – Building b – GA plan level 05 1708BB SKM (00)106 P00 – Building b – GA plan level 06 1708BB SKM (00)107 P00 – Building b – GA plan level 07 1708BB SKM (00)108 P00 – Building b – GA plan level 08 1708BB SKM (00)107 P01 – Building b – GA plan level 09 (roof)

1708BB SKM (00)201 P01 – Building b – GA elevation north 1708BB SKM (00)202 P01 – Building b – GA elevation east 1708BB SKM (00)203 P01 – Building b – GA elevation south 1708BB SKM (00)204 P01 – Building b – GA elevation west 1708BB SKM (00)301 P01 – Building b – GA section aa 1708BB SKM (00)302 P01 – Building b – GA section bb 1708BB SKM (00)303 P01 – Building b – GA section cc

Building C 1708BC SKM (00)100 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 00 1708BC SKM (00)101 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 01 1708BC SKM (00)102 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 02 1708BC SKM (00)103 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 03 1708BC SKM (00)104 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 04 1708BC SKM (00)105 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 05 1708BC SKM (00)106 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 06 1708BC SKM (00)107 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 07 1708BC SKM (00)108 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 08 1708BC SKM (00)109 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 09 1708BC SKM (00)110 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 10

Page 71 1708BC SKM (00)111 P01 – Building c – GA plan level 11 (roof)

1708BC SKM (00)201 P01 – Building c – GA elevation north 1708BC SKM (00)202 P01 – Building c – GA elevation east 1708BC SKM (00)203 P01 – Building c – GA elevation south 1708BC SKM (00)204 P01 – Building c – GA elevation west 1708BC SKM (00)301 P01 – Building c – GA section aa 1708BC SKM (00)302 P01 – Building c – GA section bb 1708BC SKM (00)303 P01 – Building c – GA section cc

Masterplan 1708MP SKM (00)100 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 00 1708MP SKM (00)101 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 01 1708MP SKM (00)102 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 02 1708MP SKM (00)103 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 03 1708MP SKM (00)104 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 04 1708MP SKM (00)105 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 05 1708MP SKM (00)106 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 06 1708MP SKM (00)107 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 07 1708MP SKM (00)108 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 08 1708MP SKM (00)109 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 09 1708MP SKM (00)110 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 10 1708MP SKM (00)111 P01 – Masterplan – GA plan level 11 (roof)

1708MP SKM (00)201 P01 – Masterplan – GA elevation north 1708MP SKM (00)202 P01 – Masterplan – GA elevation east 1708MP SKM (00)203 P01 – Masterplan – GA elevation south 1708MP SKM (00)204 P01 – Masterplan – GA elevation west 1708MP SKM (00)300 P01 – Masterplan – GA section aa 1708MP SKM (00)301 P01 – Masterplan – GA section bb

1708 SKM (00)004 P01 – Site levels plan proposed 1708 SKM (00)005 P01 – Site building references plan

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3. Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application no above ground construction works shall take place until samples or full details of materials to be used externally on the building(s) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include the type, colour and texture of the materials. Only the materials so approved shall be used, in accordance with any terms of such approval.

Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. a) Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, the development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until full details of both hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include the formation of any banks, terraces or other earthworks, hard surfaced areas and materials, boundary treatments, external lighting, planting plans, specifications and schedules (including planting size, species and numbers/densities), existing plants / trees to be retained and a scheme for the timing / phasing of implementation works.

Page 72 those originally required to be planted, unless the Local Planning Authority gives its consent in writing to any variation.

Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development and in accordance with Policies DES1 and DES9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

5. No development shall take place until a scheme for the provision and management of a minimum 10 metre wide buffer zone, from river bank top, alongside the River Irwell shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme and any subsequent amendments shall be agreed in writing with the local planning authority. The buffer zone scheme shall be free from built development (new residential blocks) including domestic gardens; and continue to form a vital part of green infrastructure provision and an improved recreational and biodiversity resource. The scheme shall include:

o Plans showing the extent and layout of the riparian buffer zone o Details of all retained riparian trees. o Details of any proposed new planting scheme including planting schedule largely based on native species, and including ground flora as well as trees and shrubs. o Details demonstrating how the buffer zone and River Irwell will be protected during scheme construction, and preferably enhanced as part of development. o Details of control of any remaining non-native invasive Japanese knotweed and Giant hogweed, identified on site in earlier phases of Springfield Lane development. o Details how riparian zone will be managed/maintained over the longer term including adequate financial provision and named body responsible for management plus production of detailed management plan o Details of any proposed new or improved footpaths, fencing, and wildlife sensitive lighting etc. along riparian corridor and key ecological network.

Reason: Development that encroaches on watercourses and their riparian habitat has a potentially severe impact on their ecological value. It is essential that they is protected, and enhanced where feasible. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraph 109 recognises that the planning system should aim to conserve and enhance the natural and local environment where possible.

6. Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and to ensure the safe development of the site in the interests of the amenity of future occupiers in accordance with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as details of flood resilient construction measures have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning authority.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

8. No development shall take place until a scheme for surface water drainage for the site using sustainable drainage methods and which includes details of how water quality will be improved, and how existing surface water discharge rates reduced, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation or use of the development hereby approved unless alternative timescales have been agreed in writing as part of the strategy.

Page 73 Reason: To ensure a satisfactory method of surface water disposal to reduce the risk of flooding elsewhere in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and seeks to provide betterment in terms of water quality and surface water discharge rates and meets requirements set out in the following documents; o NPPF, o Water Framework Directive and the NW River Basin Management Plan o The national Planning Practice Guidance and the Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage Systems (March 2015) o Manchester, Salford, Trafford Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) (2011) and associated technical guidance o Environment Agency Pollution Prevention Guidelines (now withdrawn) o Flood Risk Assessment/SuDS Requirements for new developments (Salford's SuDS Checklist)

9. No development, site clearance, earth moving shall take place or material or machinery brought on site until a method statement to protect the River Irwell from accidental spillages, dust and debris has been supplied to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority. All measure will be implemented and maintained for the duration of the construction period in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area and to prevent pollution of the water environment and to ensure the safe development of the site in the interests of the amenity of future occupiers in accordance with policies DES1 and EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

10. A landscape and ecological management plan (LEMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the development. The content of the LEMP shall include but not be limited to landscape measures to intercept and slow run-off from the development site to the River Irwell.

11. Prior to any earthworks a method statement detailing eradication and/or control and/or avoidance measures for Japanese knotweed and giant hogweed should be supplied to and agreed in writing to the Local Planning Authority (LPA). The agreed method statement shall be adhered to and implemented in full unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason - It is an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 to introduce plant or cause to grow wild any plant listed in Schedule 9 part 2 of the Act. Species such as Himalayan balsam, giant hogweed, rhododendron and Japanese knotweed are included within this schedule.

12. An ecological enhancement plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, prior to commencement of development. The content of the plan should include elements to: - Enhance the eastern boundary with the riverside path through thinning and under-planting with native species - Control of invasive species listed under schedule 9 part 2 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) - Enhancement along the Trinity Way boundary - Provision of bird and bat boxes The approved plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area and to ensure that the development would not affect the function of the wildlife corridor in accordance with policies DES1 and EN9 of the UDP and the National Planning Policy Framework.

13. Prior to occupation of the development the applicant shall provide two electric vehicle charging points for residential use. The charging point shall be capable of Type 2 "Fast" charging, and wired to a dedicated 30A spur to provide 7KV charging capacity.

Page 74 Reason: In accordance with paragraph 35 and 124 of the NPPF, to encourage the uptake of ultra-low emission vehicles and ensure the development is sustainable. To safeguard residential amenity, public health and quality of life.

14. Prior to occupation of the development the acoustic glazing specified in Sol Acoustics Report, December 2017, Ref: P1633-REP02-JPR shall be installed in accordance with the zoning plan of Figure 6 of the report and as a minimum shall achieve the sound reduction index in table 1 below:

Glazing Configuration Minimum sound Reduction Index (dB) @ Octave Band Centre Frequency (Hz) 63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K Glazing Type 1 * 26 29 36 42 44 47 59 (e.g. 10-16-16.8mm) Zone A Bedrooms Glazing Type 2 * 21 23 26 35 43 48 55 (e.g. 6.8-16-6.8mm) Zone A Living rooms Glazing Type 3 * 20 25 22 33 40 43 44 (e.g. 10-12-4mm) ) Zone B Bedrooms Glazing Type 4 * 19 24 20 25 35 38 35 (e.g. 4-16-4mm) ) Zone B Living Rooms and Zone C including rooftop glazed doors Table 1: Minimum Sound Reduction Index - Glazing

Glazing type and location of each zone is defined in Table 4 and figure 6 of the above report. The acoustic glazing shall be retained as such thereafter.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of future occupants of the development hereby approved in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

15. Prior to above ground development commencing, full details of the proposed ventilation scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The agreed ventilation scheme shall be designed to ensure that background ventilation in accordance with Building Regulations Approved Document E is achieved without the need to open windows and compromise acoustic integrity. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed ventilation scheme and maintained thereafter.

16. Prior to above ground development commencing, full details of the external wall specification in zones A and B as defined in figure 6 of acoustic report Sol Acoustics Report, December 2017, Ref: P1633-REP02- JPR shall be submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority. The materials used in combination shall achieve the minimum sound reduction index as specified in table 2 below:

External Wall Minimum sound Reduction Index (dB) Construction Type @ Octave Band Centre Frequency (Hz) 63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K External wall – Zone A 15 30 46 58 66 63 61 External wall – Zone B 15 28 38 45 50 51 50 Table 2: Minimum building envelope acoustic performance requirements

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed building envelope specification.

Page 75 17. Prior to occupation of any residential unit in each block, the developer shall submit and agree with the Local Planning Authority a site completion statement confirming that the acoustic mitigation as required by conditions 14 to 16 above have been installed as per the agreed specifications and details.

18. No development shall take place, including any works of excavation or demolition, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall include:

(i) the times of construction activities on site which, unless agreed otherwise as part of the approved Statement, shall be limited to between 8am-6pm Monday to Friday and 9am-2pm Saturday only (no working on Sundays or Bank Holidays). Quieter activities which are carried out inside buildings such as electrical works, plumbing and plastering may take place outside of agreed working times so long as they do not result in significant disturbance to neighbouring occupiers; (ii) the spaces for and management of the parking of site operatives and visitors vehicles; (iii) the storage and management of plant and materials (including loading and unloading activities); (iv) the erection and maintenance of security hoardings including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate; (v) measures to prevent the deposition of dirt on the public highway; (vi) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during demolition/construction; (vii) a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition/construction works; (viii) measures to minimise disturbance to any neighbouring occupiers from noise and vibration, including from any piling activity; (ix) measures to prevent the pollution of watercourses; and (x) a community engagement strategy which explains how local neighbours will be kept updated on the construction process, key milestones, and how they can report to the site manager or other appropriate representative of the developer, instances of unneighbourly behaviour from construction operatives. The statement shall also detail the steps that will be taken when unneighbourly behaviour has been reported. A log of all reported instances shall be kept on record and made available for inspection by the local a planning authority upon request.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of neighbours in accordance with policies DES7 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the NPPF.

19. Prior to development commencing the applicant shall submit and agree with the Local Planning Authority a contaminated land remediation strategy, including the finalised gas monitoring results and any revised gas protection proposals. The strategy shall be prepared by suitably competent persons. The development shall thereafter be carried out in full accordance with the duly approved remediation strategy or such varied remediation strategy as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

20. Prior to first occupation a Verification report demonstrating the completion of works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the local planning authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met.

21. If, during the course of development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present, no further works shall be undertaken in the affected area and the contamination shall be reported to the Local Planning Authority as soon as reasonably practicable (but within a maximum of 5 days from the

Page 76 find). Prior to further works being carried out in the identified area, a further assessment shall be made and appropriate action agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

22. Any soil or soil forming materials to be brought to site for use in garden areas or soft landscaping shall be tested for contamination and suitability for use prior to importation to site. Prior to occupation, evidence and verification information (for example, laboratory certificates) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

23. Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted an Emergency Planning Statement that details how the development will incorporate flood warning and evacuation procedures appropriate to the type and scale of the development and level of flood risk shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of how future occupiers will be made aware of the Environment Agency's Flood Warnings/Alert system and encouraged to sign up. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed details.

Reason: To reduce the risks associated with flooding on future occupants in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

24. Prior to first occupation of the development herby permitted, details of a flood interpretation scheme to be incorporated into the development shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Such scheme shall promote public awareness and provide a physical reminder of the location of the site within a flood risk area. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter."

Reason: To ensure adequate provision is made to educate residents and members of the public of the location of the site within a flood risk area and reduce the risks associated with flooding on future occupants in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

25. The gymnasium shall be for the sole use of residents and operate between the hours of 08:00 to 21:00 Monday to ~Saturday, and 08:00 – 20:00 Sunday and public holidays.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of existing, neighbouring and/or future occupants of the development hereby approved in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

26. Prior to above ground development commencing a scheme of upgraded floor / ceiling shall be submitted to and agreed with the local planning authority. The sound reduction index of the completed ceiling design (including any uplighters or other penetrations) shall be designed to ensure that noise levels within the dwellings above the gym achieve the following internal noise levels;

LOCATION 07:00 – 23:00 23:00 – 07:00 23:00 – 07:00

dB LAEQ 16-Hour dB LAEQ 8-Hour dB LAMAX Bedrooms 35 (40) 1 30 (35) 1 45 (50) 1,2 Living rooms 35 (40) 1 - - Dining Rooms & Dining Kitchens 40 (45) 1 - - External Private Amenity Spaces 50 (55) 1,3 - -

Page 77 Reason: To safeguard the amenity of existing, neighbouring and/or future occupants of the development hereby approved in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

27. Notwithstanding the details submitted within the Travel Plan, the development hereby approved shall not be brought into first occupation until an updated Travel Plan has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

Following 50% occupation of the development, a further updated Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The agreed Travel Plan shall be implemented and reviewed in accordance with the timetable embodied therein.

Reason: To ensure that the travel arrangements to the development are appropriate and to limit the effects of the increase in travel movements in accordance with policies ST14 and A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework

28. Visibility splays of 2.4x43m (Right Splay) and 2.4mx31m (Left Splay) shall be provided from the proposed site entrance and nothing shall be subsequently erected or allowed to grow to a height in excess of 0.6m within them. The visibility splays shall be implemented prior to first use and shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of the safe and efficient operation of the highway network and to minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users in accordance with policies DES2, A2 and A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

29. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, the development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a scheme for the provision of a 1.8m wide footway to the northern side of the apartment buildings has been submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved scheme and retained as such thereafter.

30. A scheme to cover works to the adopted highways which will be secured under Section 278 of the 1980 Highways Act shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This agreement will cover works which shall include but not limited to: i) Full construction details of the new site access point on Springfield Lane with dropped kerbs and tactile paving; ii) Associated footway renewal and resurfacing works of footways and carriageways; iii) Traffic Management scheme to assist in the safe use of the proposed access junction, driveways and to prohibit on-street parking

Such scheme as is agreed shall be implemented on site in accordance with the approved drawings.

31. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the flooding mitigation measures described within the ‘JBA Consulting - 2017s7090 – Springfield Lane Development Site Flood Risk Report’.

32. Any drainage in the basement should not be connected directly to sewers as this may result in a backflow, but should be pumped.

Page 78 Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

33. Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 2 Classes A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking, re-enacting or modifying that Order) no gates, walls, fences or other means of enclosure shall be erected without first obtaining planning approval from the Local Planning Authority.

Notes to Applicant

1. STANDING ADVICE - DEVELOPMENT LOW RISK AREA

Further information is also available on the Coal Authority website at: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/the-coal-authority

This Standing Advice is valid from 1st January 2017 until 31st December 2018

3. With respect to gas protection measures the applicant's attention is drawn to BRE 414, Protection Measures for Housing on Gas-Contaminated Sites. In addition the verification requirements of BS8845:2015 Code of Practise for the design of protective measures for methane and carbon dioxide ground gases for new buildings. Verification of gas protection systems needs to be undertaken during the construction process, or the applicant may have difficulty with the final discharge of the conditions.

4. In relation to condition 19 (remediation strategy) the applicants attention is drawn to the comments from the Environment Agency dated 21st February 2018.

5. The applicant is reminded that Kingfishers are protected under schedule 1 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). It is an offence to take, injure or kill a black redstart or destroy its nest, eggs or young. It is also an offence to recklessly disturb the birds close to their nest during the breeding season. If a kingfisher is found to be nesting on or near the site during the development work should cease and a suitably experienced ecologist employed to how best to safeguard the kingfisher(s).

6. Whilst there is only a low risk of otter being present, the applicant is reminded that under the Habitat Regulation it is an offence to disturb, harm or kill otter. If an otter is found during the development all work should cease immediately and a suitably licensed amphibian ecologist employed to assess how best to safeguard the otter(s). Natural England should also be informed.

7. Demolition works, together with works to trees, hedgerows and scrub, including site clearance, should not be undertaken in the main bird breeding season (1st March to 31st August), unless nesting birds are found to be absent by a suitably qualified person immediately prior to clearance. It is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to intentionally damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird whilst in use or being built.

Page 79 8. The applicants are advised that in relation to condition 27 (Travel Plan) the Travel Plan should include information about the budget set aside for the travel plan implementation and monitoring, full details of the Travel Plan Coordinator (TPC) and information regarding travel surveys. Travel surveys should be done at 50% occupation and new targets set. The Travel plan should be reviewed every year for a period of 5 years. The TPC should work with Salford City Councils Sustainable Transport Planner to successfully execute the targets.

9. The applicants are advised that in relation to condition 7, in order to discharge the condition the applicant will be required to submit a schedule or drawing of the flood resilience measures that will actually be implemented in the development.

10. The applicants are advised that in relation to condition 8, an approved Detailed Drainage Strategy that demonstrates how the above elements will be achieved within the developments constraints will be required for this development prior to commencement of the works. The detailed drainage strategy should consist of a written Drainage Design Statement document that explains how the drainage system(s) are proposed to work supplemented by appended calculations and drawings. Where possible/appropriate the Drainage Detailed Drainage Strategy should be supplemented with industry standard drainage design software network model files as this will greatly accelerate the approval process.

We recommend that the applicant considers the use of source control SuDS techniques as part of the required sustainable drainage strategy for this site e.g.  The use of rainwater harvesting  The use of green/ blue roofs  The use of permeable paving with sub-base storage for private drives and non-trafficked private hard paved areas  The use of multifunctional green surface storage and conveyance systems in public areas

Also we recommend that the applicant take cognisance of the 2010 Water Act that requires any drainage system that serves more than one property or crosses an ownership boundary that ultimately communicates water to the public sewer system to be adopted by the sewerage undertaker (in this case United Utilities), who will have their own rules on what SuDS systems they will adopt.

Page 80 Agenda Item 5d

http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

APPLICATION No: 18/71512/FUL APPLICANT: Outwood Developments 2 Ltd LOCATION: Land Bound By, Hulme Street, Gaythorn Street And, Upper Wharf Street, Salford, M5 4PX. PROPOSAL: Full application for the redevelopment of the site to create Phase 2 of Outwood Wharf. Erection of three interlinked blocks, of 8, 10 and 23 storeys, to provide 296 dwellings (Use Class C3) and 380sqm of supporting commercial floor-space (to be used flexibly within Use Classes A1, A2, A3, or B1), with associated car parking, landscaping and other associated works WARD: Irwell Riverside

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

This application relates to a vacant site, broadly rectangular in shape and 0.44ha in size. It is bound by highways on three sides, including Hulme Street to the north. This separates the site from The Crescent Conservation Area and a large-scale residential development currently under construction, which comprises of c.400 units within five – 21-storey buildings (planning ref: 15/67356/FUL). The eastern boundary of the application site fronts onto Gaythorn Street, a cobbled service road. This runs parallel to the A5066 – Oldfield Road, which links Chapel Street / The Crescent to the north, with Regent Road to the south. Gaythorn Street is separated from Oldfield Road by a narrow strip of land that accommodates large advertisement hoardings and a series of self-seeded trees. To the south is

Page 81

$3dqypmlr.rtf Upper Wharf Street, and beyond that a former waste transfer site that is owned by the Canal and River Trust. Immediately to the west of the application site is a plot of similar size and shape, upon which the first phase of a development known as ‘Outwood Wharf’ (OW1) is being constructed, following the grant of planning approvals 15/66823/OUT and 16/68405/REM. This residential scheme comprises 263 dwellings within a horseshoe of buildings, with the open end adjoining the boundary with the application site. The three blocks would range between six and 18 storeys in height, with a series of townhouses incorporated into lower floors.

The site itself is vacant, level and cleared of all structures, with the exception of a small electricity sub- station adjacent to Gaythorn Street. Previously the land accommodated a series of industrial buildings surrounded by hardstanding.

The character of the wider area is mixed. A number of industrial uses are located to the east and south-west. The most notable of these is CEMEX, a major producer of cement, concrete and other building materials. Historic buildings within The Crescent Conservation Area are located to the north, including several to the north-west which form part of the University of Salford campus. The wider area is, however, in a state of rapid change, with a number of large residential developments emerging, including X1 - The Landmark; Middlewood Locks and Adelphi Wharf, in addition to those already referenced at the start of this report.

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

This application seeks Full planning permission for the construction of Outwood Wharf Phase 2 (OW2). The residential-led scheme would provide 296 dwellings within a horseshoe of three buildings that mirror the layout of Phase 1 and connect together to complete the urban block and create an enclosed central courtyard.

The design ethos set by OW1 has also been carried forwards into the present scheme; townhouses are again proposed along each of the three street frontages, to enclose ground-level car parking set beneath a podium courtyard of communal open space. The Hulme Street and Upper Wharf Street sections are of comparable height (8 – 10 storeys) and matching design to the adjoining elements of Phase 1. The Gaythorn Street frontage comprises of a 23-storey tower that incorporates a ‘crown’ feature to its upper two floors, whereby a series of duplex apartments are set back behind an expressed brick frame. Its street frontage would incorporate three commercial units (Use Class A1-A3 or B1) totalling 380sqm of floor-space. The largest of these would be spread over two-floors, within a cut-back north-eastern corner, that subsequently provides opportunities for outdoor eating / drinking.

The proposed mix of dwellings is as follows:  118 x 1-Bed Apartments – 39.8%  157 x 2-Bed Apartments – 53.0%  4 x 2-Bed Duplex Apartments – 1.4%  6 x 3-Bed Duplex Apartments – 2.0%  4 x 2-Bed Townhouses – 1.3%  7 x 3-Bed Townhouses – 2.4%

Vehicular access into the 47-space car park would be achieved via Hulme Street.

Red brick remains the principal external material for the scheme, with the recessed townhouses on the lower floors to be picked out in a contrasting blue engineering brick.

Whilst it is envisaged that OW1 and OW2 will likely operate together as a single development, they have been designed so that each phase can function independently of the other, in the event that they are owned and managed by two different developers.

Page 82 PUBLICITY

Site Notice: Non HH within Conservation Area Date Posted: 29th March 2018 Reason: Planning App affecting Conservation Area

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Date Posted: 29th March 2018 Reason: Wider Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH setting of listed building Date Posted: 29th March 2018 Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 12 April 2018 Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 29 March 2018 Reason: Article 15 Standard Press Notice Planning App in Conservation Area

RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

Outwood Wharf Phase 1

16/68405/REM – Application for the approval of reserved matters for the Appearance, Landscaping, in pursuant of planning permission 15/66823/OUT for the erection of three residential blocks of 6, 8 and 18 storeys to provide 246 no. residential units with associated car parking – Approved with Conditions, 12th October 2016

15/66823/OUT – Outline application for the demolition of existing buildings; the erection of three residential blocks of 6, 8 and 18 storeys to provide 246 no. residential units with associated car parking and landscaping. Details of access, layout and scale submitted for approval with all other matters reserved – Approved with Conditions, 24th March 2016

18/71438/NMA - Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 16/68405/REM to revise the material of the balconies – Approved with Conditions, 29th March 2018

16/69265/NMA - Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 15/66823/OUT to increase the number of dwellings from 246 to 263 (as a result of a small decrease in the size of dwellings allowing an additional one-bed apartment on a total of 17 floors in blocks 2 and 3) – Approved with Conditions, 21st December 2016

The Crescent

15/67356/FUL - Erection of residential-led mixed-use development within part 5, part 16 and part 21 storey building comprising 399 units (Use Class C3) and 826sqm commercial floorspace (Use Classes A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, B1, D1) together with car parking, hard and soft landscaping and associated works including demolition of the former Black Horse Hotel – Approved with Conditions, 7th April 2016.

CONSULTATIONS

Canal and River Trust – In light of the potential canal related archaeology on the site, a more detailed heritage assessment should be undertaken prior to the determination of this application. In design terms, the development provides an opportunity to interpret and present a positive narrative of

Page 83 the site’s heritage. For example, the footprint or former location of the wharf could be highlighted within the materiality of the development or cobbled areas re-established within the design to add interest and interpretation. It is considered that the form and unbroken mass of the 23-storey tower could be visually overbearing in this location and that the scheme would benefit from an overall reduction in height and massing. A more varied mix of materials at the upper levels may also assist with visually breaking up the overall mass.

Design for Security (Greater Manchester Police) - No objections. Recommendations relating to the detailed design of the scheme have been provided, along with a request for it to be built to ‘Secured by Design’ standards.

Environment Agency (EA) – The site is located in a relatively sensitive location, being above a Principal Acquifer and within 150m of a watercourse. It has a historical land-use which has led to elevated concentrations of contamination in the ground and groundwater. The EA disagree that no further assessment is required in terms of the risks to the water environment, as one round of groundwater sampling is insufficient for fullest characterisation. The following conditions are therefore recommended, should planning permission be granted for the development:  Submission of a Remediation Strategy;  Submission of a Verification Report; and  Not to permit piling or other foundation designs using penetrative methods without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority (LPA).

Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS) - No objections. A Written Scheme of Investigation should be secured from the developer by way of planning condition.

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit - No objections. The following standard conditions have been requested:  Submission of a landscaping scheme to mitigate for the loss of trees, shrubs and bird nesting habitats; and  Submission of a bat emergence survey in relation to the sub-station to be demolished.

Manchester, Bolton & Bury Canal Society – Two sets of comments have been submitted on behalf of the MBBCS. These states that a detailed heritage assessment should be submitted before permission is granted as there could be a lot of canal heritage on the site. The ideal would be to create a water feature which would be very attractive, or the outlines of the wharves could be marked out in various materials. Additionally, the brick northern bridge parapet with stone capping should be retained and preserved, along with any features of the bridge. As this falls outside of the footprint of the building, it should be easily achievable. The main building at 23 storeys seems very large and would overshadow the canal. If it were stepped down it would be less overpowering.

United Utilities – No objections. Standard conditions relating to the drainage of foul and surface water recommended.

Urban Vision Air & Noise Air – No objections subject to the provision of 10no. type 2 “fast” electric vehicle charging points and the implementation of a robust Travel Plan.

Noise – No objections, subject to the following conditions being attached to any planning permission:  Submission of a plan / scheme identifying which balconies will not exceed 500mm in depth, in accordance with the recommendations set out in the submitted Noise Impact Assessment (NIA).  Implementation of the building envelope acoustic mitigation scheme set out in the submitted NIA.  Compliance with maximum noise standards for any externally mounted plant and equipment.  Opening hours for each of the proposed commercial units to be agreed in writing with the LPA.  Submission of a standard Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP).

Page 84  Submission of a Site Completion Report to confirm that all necessary noise attenuation measures identified in the NIA have been implemented.

Urban Vision Drainage Engineer - No objections. Conditions requested relating to the provision of a final Surface Water Drainage Strategy and restrictions on the rate at which surface water should be discharged.

Urban Vision Environment – No objections. Standard conditions requested to secure the provision of a Remediation Strategy and a subsequent Verification Report and accompanying Plan. Urban Vision Highways - No objections. The restrictive car parking associated with this development may serve to influence people’s travel patterns; however the applicant should also implement measures to discourage on-street parking and to promote sustainable travel from the outset. On this basis, it is considered unlikely that the proposed development would impact on the operational capacity of the local highway network.

Conditions relating to the following matters to be attached to any permission:  Submission of a Final Travel Plan;  Submission of a scheme of highways improvement works and a traffic management scheme.  Submission of a Refuse Collection and Service Management Plan  Submission of final details of layby parking and highway improvements along Gaythorn Street.  Provision of short and long-stay cycle parking.

NEIGHBOUR CONSULTATION AND REPRESENTATIONS

A total of 195 notification letters were sent out to neighbouring residents and businesses on 20th March 2018.

Two representations of neutral content have been received in response to the application, the content of which can be summarised as follows:

 The developer should ensure that some areas for social interaction are provided, since this is a very large development and social interaction is known to benefit the interests of both the developer and the health and well-being of residents. If this is not practicable, the developer should be asked to make a contribution to the maintenance and improvement of allotments in the City by completing a Section 106 agreement.  A representative of the RSPB has recommended the installation of internal Swift Bird Bricks within the development. Swifts are a building dependent species and are suffering a sharp decline in the UK, including Salford.

PLANNING POLICY

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Parking

Page 85 This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded; and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of safety and security.

Unitary Development Plan CH2 – Development Affecting Setting of Listed Building This policy states that development will not be granted that would have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building.

Unitary Development Plan CH5 – Archaeology and Ancient Monuments This policy states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would have an unacceptable impact on an ancient monument, or site or feature of archaeological importance, or its setting. Where planning permission is granted for development that will affect known or suspected remains of local archaeological value, planning conditions will be imposed to secure the recording and evaluation of the remains and, if appropriate, their excavation and preservation and/or removal, prior to the commencement of the development.

Unitary Development Plan CH7 - Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal This policy states that planning permission will be granted for the restoration of the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal. Development that would prejudice the reinstatement of the canal and its towpath will not be permitted. Developer contributions will be sought where the restoration or improvement of the canal or towpath is necessary to enable development.

Unitary Development Plan DES9 - Supplementary Planning Document - Landscaping

Page 86 This policy states that hard and soft landscaping should be provided where appropriate that is of a high quality and would enhance the design of the development, not detract from the safety and security of the area and would enhance the attractiveness and character of the built environment.

Unitary Development Plan DEV5 - Planning Conditions and Obligations This policy states that development that would have an adverse impact on any interests of acknowledged importance, or would result in a material increase in the need or demand for infrastructure, services, facilities and/or maintenance, will only be granted planning permission subject to planning conditions or planning obligations that would ensure adequate mitigation measures are put in place.

Unitary Development Plan EN18 - Protection of Water Courses This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on surface or ground water.

Unitary Development Plan EN22 - Resource Conservation This policy states that development proposals for more than 5,000 square metres of floorspace will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the impact on the conservation of non-renewable resources and on the local and global environments, has been minimised as far as practicable; and full consideration has been given to the use of realistic renewable energy options, and such measures have been incorporated into the development where practicable.

Unitary Development Plan EN23 - Environmental Improvement Corridors This policy states that development along any of the city’s major road, rail and water corridors will be required to preserve, or make a positive contribution to the corridor’s environment and appearance.

Unitary Development Plan E5 - Development in Established Employment Areas This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for the reuse or redevelopment of sites or buildings within an established employment area for non-employment uses where the development would not compromise the operating conditions of other adjoining employment uses, and where one or more of the following apply: a) The developer can demonstrate there is no current or likely future demand for the site for employment purposes b) There is a strong case for rationalising land uses or creating open space c) The development would contribute to the implementation of an approved regeneration strategy or plan for the area

Page 87 d) The site is allocated for another use in the UDP.

Unitary Development Plan MX1 - Development in Mixed-use Areas This policy states that a wide range of uses and activities (housing, offices, tourism, leisure, culture, education, community facilities, retail, infrastructure, knowledge-based employment) are permitted within the identified mixed use areas (Chapel Street East. Chapel Street West, Salford Quays, Ordsall Lane Riverside Corridor).

Unitary Development Plan ST7 - Mixed-use Development This policy states that mixed use development schemes that minimise the need to travel will be focused towards specific areas including Lower Broughton.

Unitary Development Plan ST14 – Global Environment This policy states that development will be required to minimise its impact on the global environment. Major development proposals will be required to demonstrate how they will minimise greenhouse gas emissions.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

- National Planning Policy Framework - National Planning Policy Guidance

Local Planning Policy

Page 88 Supplementary Planning Document - Design This document reflects the need to design in a way that allows the city to support its population socially and economically, working with and inviting those affected into an inclusive decision making process. Equally, development must contribute to the creation of an environmentally sustainable city supporting the natural environment minimising the effects of, and being more adaptable to, the potential impact of climate change.

Supplementary Planning Document - Established Employment Areas This document contains a number of polices that promotes sustainable economic growth, which both enhances prosperity and reduces inequalities. The document encourages the provision of a wide range of employment opportunities, having regard to evidence based conclusions on need and demand.

Supplementary Planning Document - Planning Obligations This policy document expands on the policies in Salford’s Unitary Development Plan to provide additional guidance on the use of planning obligations within the city. It explains the city council’s overall approach to the use of planning obligations, and sets out detailed advice on the use of obligations in ensuring that developments make an appropriate contribution to: the provision of open space; improvements to the city’s public realm, heritage and infrastructure; the training of local residents in construction skills; and the offsetting of greenhouse gas emissions.

Planning Guidance – Crescent Development Framework The purpose of the guidance is to provide a vision for the area and a framework for its development. It provides more detailed information on the mix of uses that are appropriate with the aim of maximizing the full potential of the area through the comprehensive development of vacant and underused sites and buildings.

It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application

APPRAISAL

Principle of Development

High-Density Housing The principle of developing this site for housing was effectively set when consent was granted for a residential scheme on the adjoining site to the west that left its eastern side open to enable the completion of a larger urban block at a future date. In any event, the site is covered by UDP Policy MX1, which advocates the delivery of new housing, and is located on previously developed (brownfield) land in an accessible location. Chapel Street and The Crescent are within easy walking distance and they provide high levels of public transport into and out of the regional centre and beyond. Various commercial uses, capable of meeting the day-to-day top-up needs of future residents are also starting to establish themselves in the area.

The Crescent Development Framework was adopted in May 2104. With regards to this site it identifies that the primary use is likely to be residential and considers the wider area to be an ideal location to create a new residential quarter. It states that the area provides an opportunity to build larger family dwellings, including three bedroomed houses. The site also sits within the boundary of the draft Crescent Masterplan area, which has been recently produced. Although it is yet to be adopted, the Masterplan proposes significant levels of high-density residential development to the south of The Crescent, including on the application site.

Page 89 One of the core principles of the NPPF is that planning should proactively drive and support economic development to deliver homes that the country needs (paragraph 12). The proposed development will contribute significantly to boosting the supply of housing in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 47 of the NPPF. Overall, the principle of delivering a high-density residential development on this site is considered to be acceptable.

Housing Mix Paragraph 50 of the NPPF sets out that local planning authorities should deliver a wide choice of high quality homes and create sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities. Policy H1 of the UDP states that all new housing developments will be required to contribute towards the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area in terms of size, type, tenure and affordability. This policy is supported by policies in the Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance. Policy HOU1 of this document states that within the Regional Centre, the very high level of accessibility; the scale of the existing buildings; and the need to support the areas development as a vibrant city centre location means that apartments will normally be the most appropriate form of housing provision. Policy HOU2 of the Guidance seeks to ensure that where apartments are considered appropriate they should provide a broad mix of dwelling sizes, both in terms of number of bedrooms and the net residential floorspace. Studios and one bed apartments should not predominate and a significant proportion of three bedroom apartments should be provided. The reasoned justification clarifies that the majority of apartments should have two or three bedrooms with a floorspace of 57sq.m or more.

The Crescent Framework also sets out that family housing will form part of the mix of dwellings provided in the area. The proposal includes 11 townhouses with front doors to the street and a further two units that also benefit from access directly out onto the internal courtyard. Overall 4.4% of the dwellings would provide three-bedrooms whilst 39.8% would comprise of 1-bed units. Whilst the proportion of three beds has reduced relative to OW1 (9.5%), it is appreciated that Phase 2 benefits from a reduced street frontage and also includes commercial floor-space at street level. It should also be noted this is a taller scheme that provides more units than Phase 1 and that high-level apartments do not necessarily lend-themselves to family-living.

Table 1: Mix of Dwellings

Unit Type No. Bedrooms Average Unit Size Unit Total Mix (%) Apartment 1-Bed 39sqm – 51sqm 118 39.8% Apartment 2-Bed 60sqm – 71sqm 157 53% Duplex 2-Bed 108sqm 4 1.4% Duplex 3-Bed 110sqm 6 2.0% Townhouse 2-Bed 67sqm 4 0.5% Townhouse 3-Bed 86sqm – 106sqm 7 2.4%

Table 1 above shows that the development will deliver a varied mix of dwellings that accord with the size standards set out in Policy HOU2 of the Housing SPG. Overall, it is considered that the development would be in accordance with UDP Policy H1.

Commercial Uses The proposed development provides 380sqm of commercial floor-space, within three units, to be used flexibly within Use Classes A1, A2, A3 and B1. Policy MX1 of the City Council’s UDP advocates the provision of offices, retail and food and drink uses within the areas it identifies as being appropriate for ‘Mixed-Use’ schemes. In this instance it is considered that the proposed uses would contribute towards securing activity along Gaythorn Street / Oldfield Road; would be compatible with the uses on adjacent sites; and would contribute positively to the regeneration of the wider area into a distinctive new residential neighbourhood. The level of commercial floor-space proposed is considered to be

Page 90 proportionate to the scale of the development to which it relates and in-line with the City Council’s aspirations for increased commercial activity in this area.

Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal (MBBC) UDP Policy CH7 seeks to protect the line of the MBBC and states that development that would prejudice the re-instatement of the canal will not be permitted. It is important to highlight that the application site contains a branch of the MBBC (known as Gaythorn Wharf) but that this has been filled in for many years. Delivery of the application scheme would remove opportunities for any future re-instatement of the historic wharf. However, the development does not impact on the main route of the canal to the south and so restoration and reinstatement of the main MBBC route would still be feasible in the future – in line with the provisions of Policy CH7. Layout and Active Frontages

UDP Policy DES1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires developments to respond to their physical context and respect the positive character of the local area. In assessing applications regard should be had to the existing landscape; the character scale and pattern of streets and building plots; the relationship to existing buildings; the impact, on and quality of views; the scale of the proposed development; the improvement of the existing townscape and public space; the quality of proposed materials and their appropriateness; and the functional compatibility with adjoining land uses.

The proposed buildings have been arranged to mirror the layout of OW1 and create continuous built frontages along the length of Hulme Street and Upper Wharf Street. This approach to complete the urban block is fully supported. At street-level, the commercial units have been appropriately located within the Gaythorn Street frontage, to maximise activity along this stretch of the Oldfield Road corridor. In particular, the north-eastern corner of the development has been cut-back to provide opportunities for outdoor eating and drinking, which in-turn serves to animate the space. This area would also link-in well with the public route proposed through The Crescent development to the north.

The vast majority of the development would display active frontages onto the surrounding highways, through the provision of a large, glazed entrance foyer; the above-referenced commercial units; and 11 townhouses within the ground-floor. These dwellings would be set back from the footway behind small front gardens. These would serve to provide residents with a private amenity area and some defensible space, but also have the potential to create an attractive green setting to the development at street level if supported by appropriate landscaping. Car parking is hidden within the centre of the development and even where short sections of in-active frontage are proposed, for example to provide access to sub-stations or refuse stores, the overall design approach of recessing areas of contrasting blue brick within a red-brick frame has been maintained. Therefore the layout of the development has been well-considered and its highway frontages provide numerous opportunities for activity and animation at street level.

Scale and Massing

In addition to those policies that relate to design within the UDP and the Design SPD it is also important to bear in mind the Guidance on Tall Buildings originally issued by the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE – now part of the Design Council) and English Heritage (now Historic England). It states that in the right place, tall buildings can make positive contributions to city life and can serve as beacons of regeneration and stimulate further investment. In contrast though, it also points out that by virtue of their size and prominence, such buildings can also harm the qualities that people value about a place and that in many cases one of the principal failings is that many were designed with a lack of appreciation about the context in which they were to sit.

The Development Framework sets out that development along The Crescent frontage should respect the scale of adjacent buildings but that there are opportunities for increasing the scale of development

Page 91 on sites further to the south, which includes this site. It also considers that the site to the south of Upper Wharf Street should accommodate a linear park. Towers extending up to 16-storeys and 21- storeys are currently under construction on the site to the north, within The Crescent Conservation Area.

This proposed development comprises of three adjoining blocks, two of which interlink with OW1 to complete the urban block. The proposed Hulme Street element would maintain the uniform eight storey height set by Phase 1. Greater variation in height would be set along the Upper Wharf Street frontage. Here the current proposals would facilitate a step-up, from six to eight storeys, at the point the two phases meet. To a degree this mirrors the approach adopted for the western end of OW1. Phase 2 would however step-up again, to 10-storeys at its eastern end, adjacent to the main tower fronting Gaythorn Street / Oldfield Road. This approach is considered to be appropriate as it serves to reinforce the hierarchy set to be created within the overall development, whereby the tallest tower and adjoining elements are positioned to address the principal road frontages and areas of potential future public realm.

The tallest element of the scheme comprises a 23-storey tower facing onto Gaythorn Street and, importantly, the A5066 - Oldfield Road. Although the intervening land between these two highways is currently under third-party ownership, the Council’s draft Masterplan for public realm along the Oldfield Road corridor identifies an aspiration for this area to deliver short-stay car parking and high- impact street trees. Thus the area would remain open, allowing the main tower within OW2 to front onto the Oldfield Road highway. At 23 storeys, the tower would be the tallest element of the wider Outwood Wharf scheme. Its scale is however considered to be appropriate given that it addresses a principal highway and would be set back from the Oldfield Road footway, behind an open area, by approximately 23m. The Local Planning Authority do not, therefore, share the view expressed by the Canal and River Trust that the main tower would appear overbearing. The decision to make the Phase 2 tower taller than its counterpart at the western end of OW1 is logical, again because of its setting behind a future area of public realm and a principal highway. Over longer distance views the OW2 tower will mark the location of Oldfield Road, an important route linking Chapel Street / The Crescent to the north, with Regent Road to the south.

The impact of the development, including the main tower, on the adjacent Conservation Area is considered further in the ‘Heritage’ section of this report. However it is worth noting that it would be set 120m back from The Crescent frontage, which exceeds the distance retained by the OW1 tower. This element of the proposals would be clearly visible from the adjacent Conservation Area, and would form the backdrop to the historic, lower-rise buildings along The Crescent frontage. This is considered to be part of the ‘urban drama’ of cities, including Salford, and significant weight is attributed to the good quality of design and materials proposed for OW2. Given that the site is set further away from The Crescent frontage than the site to the north, the modest increase in height, relative to the 21-storey building approved under application 15/67356/FUL, is considered to be acceptable.

Overall the layout, scale and massing of the development is considered to be acceptable and in accordance with Policy DES1 of the City of Salford UDP.

Design and Streetscene

The design of the proposed development closely follows that which was approved for OW1 under application 16/68405/REM. This is appropriate, as it enables the two schemes to be read as a holistic urban block. As with the previous phase, the proposed townhouses are again considered to be a particularly attractive feature of the scheme. The approach to recessing them slightly within a frame of red-brickwork has also been applied to the commercial units and the main entrance foyer within OW2, which is welcomed. The external balconies would comprise of glass-faced panels that display a motif

Page 92 derived from the nearby Salford Museum and Art Gallery. Following approval of application 18/71438/NMA, this feature of the scheme accords with the latest proposals for OW1.

Unlike its counterpart within Phase 1, the footprint of the proposed tower within OW2 does not stand proud of the lower-scale blocks that it adjoins. It is considered however, that this element of the scheme would still be read as an elegantly-proportioned tower by virtue of the columns of external balconies that draw the eye downwards. As with OW1, the main tower has been suitably ‘capped’ through the provision of a brick framework ‘crown’.

Overall it is considered that the proposed scheme achieves a high quality of design for this important site. A condition would be attached to any permission to ensure that the materials used on the exterior of the building match those that are being used to construct OW1. The development is considered to be in compliance with Policy DES1 of the City of Salford UDP.

Heritage

Above-ground heritage Local Planning Authorities have a special statutory duty imposed by Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to pay, "special attention in the exercise of planning functions to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area." The statutory duty provided by section 66(1) of the same Act treats the preservation of the setting of a listed building as presumptively desirable. The effect of the statutory requirement is to impose a duty on decision-makers to give considerable importance and weight or high priority to the desirability of preserving listed buildings and their settings.

Paragraph 131 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that in determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of:  The desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation;  The positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality; and  The desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness.

Paragraph 132 states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the assets conservation. It goes on to point out that significance can be harmed or lost through development within its setting.

Paragraph 133 states that where substantial harm occurs permission should be refused, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh the harm or where a number of criteria apply that includes where the harm is outweighed by the benefit of bringing the site back into use.

Paragraph 134 states there where a development proposal leads to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use.

Policy CH2 of the UDP states that permission will not be granted for development that would have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building.

In this instance the site lies to the immediate south of The Crescent Conservation Area. Within the vicinity are a number of nationally and locally listed heritage assets:  The buildings that form The Crescent (Grade II)  17 Crescent (Grade II)

Page 93  The Crescent Public House (Grade II)  Islington Mill (Grade II)  Lancashire Fusiliers Memorial (Grade II)

The area within the Conservation Area that is nearest, and most affected by, the development is a construction site, upon which the development approved under application 15/67356/FUL is being built. This incorporates 16-storey and 21-storey towers as part of a high-density residential-led scheme.

The Crescent Development Framework sets out that the scale of development will rise on sites away from the main road frontage. This is echoed also in the emerging Masterplan for The Crescent area, which currently remains in draft. It is considered that the location of the proposed 23-storey tower is such that it would be viewed as rising above the listed buildings on The Crescent frontage. However, this is considered to be part of the ‘urban drama’ of cities, including Salford, and significant weight is attributed to the good quality of design and materials proposed for OW2 (and OW1). Furthermore, the distances and perspectives are such that harm to the setting of these buildings is less than substantial. The rear of buildings that comprise the listed Crescent will be viewed in the same context as the proposed development in views west along Hulme Street; however as the rear of these buildings has been substantially altered and is of lesser significance than the frontage it is considered that the impact upon the setting of these buildings also equates to less than substantial harm. The impact of the development on the memorial and the mill is also considered to be acceptable given the distances retained and that their significance is principally derived from their historic interest.

For the reasons set out above it is considered that the proposed development has a less than substantial harm on the setting of the crescent conservation area and designated heritage assets.

Below-ground Archaeology The application is supported by a Heritage Statement that identifies that the site was historically occupied by ‘Outwood Wharf’, one of the coal wharves associated with the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal. In providing comments generally on the application, the Canal and River Trust (CRT) and Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal Society (MBBCS) have advised that a more detailed heritage assessment should be submitted, in light of the potential for canal-related archaeology within the site. However, comments received from the Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS) confirm that, following consultation with their own records and archives, the potential heritage assets that may be affected by the development are not of national significance and can therefore be dealt with through condition.

GMAAS have consequently requested that a programme of archaeological mitigation be carried out prior to any development taking place. This would be in the form of a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI), comprising of a Desk-Based Assessment that enables an informed decision to be made regarding the need for further mitigation (such as excavation). The WSI would be secured by planning condition.

CRT and MBBCS have also indicated that the proposals provide an opportunity to interpret and present a positive narrative of the site’s heritage. Highlighting the location of the former wharf within the materiality of the development or re-establishing cobbled areas or the former canal bridge have been cited as examples of how this might be achieved. Given the site’s history and its location adjacent to a conservation area, a condition should be attached to any permission requiring the applicant to submit a scheme for the LPA’s written agreement that commemorates the area’s heritage within the new public realm.

Overall the proposed development is considered to comply with the provisions of Policies CH2, CH5 and DES1 of the City of Salford UDP and Chapter 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 94 Residential Amenity

Impact on surrounding developments At the time of writing ‘The Crescent’ development approved under application 15/67356/FUL was under construction on land to the north of the application site, on the opposite side of Hulme Street. A separation distance of approximately 16m would be retained between facing windows of the respective developments. This is comparable to the privacy distances approved between OW1 and The Crescent and is considered to be reasonable in areas identified for high-density urban living.

The applicant has commissioned an External Daylight & Sunlight Study (EDSS) to model the potential effects on the outlook of neighbouring residential dwellings. The submitted Study considers that there would be a negligible impact on windows within the southern elevation of The Crescent scheme, as these windows would continue to receive over 25% of annual sunlight hours and over 5% of sunlight hours in the winter months, which accords with recommendation within the BRE Guidelines.

A separation of 41m would be retained between the development’s 23-storey tower and existing apartments within the western elevation of 41 Oldfield Road, on the opposite side of the highway. An Internal Average Daylight Study, designed to provide a more detailed assessment of natural internal luminance than the EDSS, predicts that the ‘worst-affected’ rooms within 41 Oldfield Road would retain 74% of their former internal daylight value, which equates to a ‘minor’ impact under the standard BRE guidelines. The same study considers that the worst-affected room within Carpino Place, to the north-east of the development, would retain 91% of its former internal daylight value. This falls to be classed as a ‘negligible’ impact under the Guidelines.

The EDSS has also modelled the potential impact on windows within the inner elevations of OW1. On average it is considered that the development would have a ‘minor’ impact on the daylight afforded to apartments within the lower eight levels. Those within the upper floors of the western tower would remain largely unaffected. A minimum distance of 51m would be retained between facing windows in the western block of OW1 and OW2’s eastern tower.

Overall it is considered that the proposed development would not unduly impact upon the amenity afforded to residents of surrounding residential properties, including those currently under construction within The Crescent scheme and OW1, and therefore it is in compliance with Policy DES7 of the City of Salford UDP.

Level of amenity afforded to future residents Following assessment of the plans and supporting documents submitted with the application, it is considered that an acceptable level of amenity would be afforded to habitable rooms within the proposed apartments, with particular respect to outlook, privacy and access to natural daylight. Of particular note, most of the townhouses are dual aspect at first-floor with private front and rear gardens. All but two of the apartments would be provided with an external balcony. The duplex units within the upper-floors of the main tower would benefit from a full-width terrace behind the brickwork ‘crown’ feature that caps the building.

All residents would benefit from an area of communal amenity space within the internal courtyard. If the development remains independent of OW1 then this space would measure c.740sqm. A high wall would run along the boundary between the two schemes. However, if both phases were to function as a single development, which is preferable, then the area of communal space available to all residents would increase to a generous 2,128sqm.

It is therefore considered that future residents of the development would be afforded a good level of amenity and as such it is again considered to be in compliance with Policy DES7 of the City of Salford UDP.

Page 95 Noise

The application site is affected by noise from road traffic along Oldfield Road (A5066) and The Crescent (A6), and also by nearby industry in the form of the CEMEX site. A Noise Impact Assessment (NIA) has been submitted with the application, which assesses noise from these sources and uses measurement and computer modelling to predict noise levels at the facade of the proposed residential units.

In response to results from this assessment, a mitigation scheme has been proposed by the applicant, which achieves adequate indoor noise levels in accordance with BS8233:2014 (Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction from Buildings). With respect to outdoor areas, the communal amenity space has been centrally located and is therefore screened by the proposed buildings (and those under construction on OW1).

The outward-facing elevations of the development include external balconies. Those that would be affected by noise from the CEMEX site would be limited to a maximum depth of 500mm, although no spatial details have been provided as to which balconies this would apply to. This information is to be secured by condition and therefore, subject to this further detailed review, the outdoor living areas are considered to be compliant.

No assessment has been undertaken in relation to the potential for noise generation from the non- residential uses associated with the development - in particular, noise and disturbance generated by customers attending / leaving the businesses; deliveries and collections; and from the commercial activities themselves. The City Council’s Consultant Air & Noise Officer considers that the proposed use classes (A1, A2, A3, B1) should be capable of operating in close proximity to residential dwellings, however it is appropriate to control the hours of such uses. As the operator of each unit is not known at this time, and to avoid future occupiers having to apply to vary conditions, it is proposed that a condition be attached to any permission that requires the operators of each unit to agree the opening hours in writing with the LPA.

The City Council’s Consultant Air & noise Officer has raised no objections on noise grounds, but has requested that the following conditions be added to any grant of planning permission, in addition to those already described above.  Compliance with the measures identified within the building envelope acoustic mitigation scheme set out within the submitted Noise Impact Assessment.  Submission of a Site Completion Report, prior to the occupation of the residential units, which confirms that all necessary noise attenuation measures identified in the assessment have been properly implemented.  All externally mounted plant and equipment to be designed so as not to exceed the relevant noise levels; and  Submission of a Construction Environment Management Plan

Subject to compliance with the conditions set above, the proposed development would be in compliance with Policy EN 17 of the City of Salford UDP and Paragraphs 109 and 120 of the NPPF.

Air Quality

The application site lies partly within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and as such would introduce new, sensitive receptors (future residents) into an area where air pollution (nitrogen dioxide – NO2) is known to be above EU and UK health-based limit values, which could give rise to a negative impact on health and quality of life. There is further potential for road traffic associated with

Page 96 the development to increase levels of air pollution within the city, particularly when the effect of cumulative impact is considered.

The application is supported by an Air Quality Assessment (AQA), which suggests there will be a small increase in levels of NO2 as a result of the development, including at receptors within the AQMA. The Assessment has not taken into account the cumulative impact of nearby developments, which total c.667 residential units within three extant permissions in the immediate vicinity of the site. This is likely to exacerbate the impact identified above, although the City Council’s Consultant Air & Noise Officer is satisfied that it would not be ‘significant’ in magnitude according to the current Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) assessment criteria.

The applicant’s AQA recommends no specific mitigation, however states that in line with current air quality guidance the development should incorporate principles of good design. The UK Government expects development to be in accordance with the Local Air Quality Action Plan, which aims to reduce levels of pollutants within the AQMA. As such it is considered the development should incorporate elements of good design to provide a level of mitigation with respect to air quality.

It is noted from the applicant’s Transport Assessment that 10 of the 47 car parking spaces are to be provided with electric vehicle charging points. A residential Travel Plan has been submitted and therefore the development would meet two of the criteria of good design principles.

In light of the above, the City Council’s Consultant Air & Noise Officer has raised no objection to the development on the grounds of air quality, subject to the imposition of a condition that secures the provision of 10 type 2 ‘fast’ electric vehicle charging points. A Travel Plan condition should also be attached to any permission.

It is considered that dust generated during the construction phase can be adequately managed through the provision of a Construction Environment Management Plan, secured by condition.

Subject to compliance with the conditions set above, the proposed development would be in compliance with Policy EN 17 of the City of Salford UDP and Paragraphs 109 and 120 of the NPPF.

Access, Highways and Parking

The applicant has submitted a comprehensive Transport Assessment (TA) and Travel Plan (TP) with their application.

As noted previously in this report, the site is situated in an accessible location, within easy walking distance of Chapel Street and The Crescent, which provide high levels of public transport into and out of the regional centre and beyond.

Access and Car Parking Vehicular access into the development’s car park would be achieved via a 4.5m wide entrance from Hulme Street. The Local Highway Authority has requested that visibility splays be provided to confirm that the detailed position and design of this entrance is acceptable.

The residents’ car park would accommodate 47 parking spaces within the interior of the development, beneath the courtyard podium. This equates to a provision of 16% across the site, or 0.16 spaces per unit. Following amendments to the scheme, the layout of the car park is now considered to be acceptable. The City Council’s Highways consultant considers the restrictive car parking provision to be appropriate in this accessible location, however this approach would need to be combined with the introduction of additional Traffic Regulation Orders to prevent the streets in the vicinity of the site from being unduly occupied by residents’ cars. The cost of providing these Orders should be borne by the applicant and secured by a s106 agreement.

Page 97 The red-line boundary for the application site extends around Gaythorn Street as the applicant intends to remodel and re-surface this adopted highway to provide parking, servicing and an appropriately landscaped frontage to the development. Given the subsidiary nature of this road it is considered appropriate to formally introduce a one-way Traffic Regulation Order to provide sufficient width for the parking bays and ensure the safe operation of the highway. The direction of this one-way order remains to be determined by the City Council but the cost of providing it should be borne by the applicant as part of a s106 agreement. The submitted plans show that short-stay layby parking for four cars could be provided outside of the commercial units on Gaythorn Street. Whilst short-stay parking is welcomed here, the bays and re-modelled highway require further detailed design to ensure that they are fit for purpose and can accommodate a satisfactory level of soft landscaping. It is again worth highlighting that, notwithstanding the scheme submitted to date, the City Council’s future aspirations for this frontage incorporate a larger parcel of land, between Gaythorn Street and Oldfield Road, for use as short-stay car parking surrounded by high quality landscaping and public realm. Trip Generation The restrictive car parking associated with this development may serve to influence people’s travel patterns; however the applicant should also implement measures to discourage on-street parking and to promote sustainable travel from the outset. On this basis, it is considered unlikely that the proposed development would impact on the operational capacity of the local highway network.

Given the above, and in order to maximise the benefits of the site’s accessible location, the developer should ensure that the pedestrian and cycling environment around the site is designed to be as safe, attractive and convenient as possible. For example, redundant vehicle access points / crossing should be reinstated and tactile paving installed where appropriate. Areas of footway and the surfacing on adjacent roads should be renewed and road markings refreshed. A condition should therefore be added requiring the applicant to undertake a scheme of highways works, following a review of the footways and roads in the immediate vicinity of the site.

Servicing and Deliveries Servicing for the commercial units and refuse collection would be undertaken directly from the public highway on Hulme Street and Gaythorn Street. The submitted plans show that a layby for servicing etc. would be provided along this latter highway, however it should also be supplemented by a loading bay on Hulme Street. The provision of this facility could be secured by an appropriately worded condition.

Cycle Parking The submitted plans indicate a series of cycle stores within the interior of the development, adjacent to the car parking areas. The TA indicates that they would provide capacity for c.216 cycles. This level of provision (73%) is considered to be acceptable and should be secured by condition.

Short-stay cycle parking spaces should be provided on the footway surrounding the development for visitors of the commercial units on Gaythorn Street. The final number of spaces to be provided, and the exact location of the short-stay spaces, should be concluded as part of an appropriately-worded cycle parking condition.

Overall there are no objections to the development on highways grounds, subject to the submission of further, detailed designs for the Gaythorn Street frontage and providing that an appropriate package of Traffic Regulation Orders are implemented on the roads surrounding the application site. Therefore the development is considered to be in compliance with Policies A2, A8, A9 and A10 of the City of Salford UDP and the relevant sections of the NPPF.

Ecology

Page 98 It is understood that the application site was cleared of buildings and structures as part of the demolition works that preceded construction works on OW1. A small sub-station remains at the eastern end of the site, adjacent to Gaythorn Street. This has been assessed as having only a very low risk of occasional summer roosts (i.e. temporary). The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) have recommended that a precautionary emergence survey should be undertaken prior to the demolition of the sub-station. This should be submitted to the LPA for their written agreement and secured by way of a planning condition.

Section 109 of the NPPF states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment. The development would result in the loss of a number of semi-mature trees and some scrub. Whilst the impact is negligible at the district level, without mitigation there would still be a negative impact at the site level. Some form of mitigation through appropriate replacement planting, green roofs or green walls is therefore warranted and should be secured as part of an appropriately worded condition.

Trees & Landscaping

Trees An Arboricultural Report has been submitted with the planning application. This identifies that five groups of trees and five individual specimens are located around, or in close proximity to, the perimeter of the site. ‘T3’ has been given Category B status (moderate quality and amenity value), with the rest classed as Category C (low quality and amenity value) stock. All trees recorded are to be removed to facilitate the new development.

The Council’s Consultant Arborist has acknowledged that the retention of existing trees is not possible, given the footprint of the buildings, the available space and the earthworks proposed which requires a change of levels. The proposed removal of the category B tree (T3) is considered acceptable as the loss can be mitigated with replacement planting. The remaining trees proposed for removal are rated category C and should not be allowed to constrain the development.

An indicative tree-replacement scheme has been submitted. This shows a number of specimens planted within the front gardens of the town houses; along the eastern side of Gaythorn Street and within the new public realm that would surround the buildings. Notwithstanding the information submitted to date, the Arborist has requested that a more detailed tree-replacement scheme be secured by condition. As a minimum, semi-mature specimens should be proposed for the trees located within the public realm around the building.

Landscaping Urban Vision’s Landscape Team prepared the Oldfield Road Corridor Plan in 2017 to guide future infrastructure and public realm improvements along Oldfield Road. The Corridor Plan proposes the improvement of land at Gaythorn Street (which is currently occupied by advertising hoardings) through the provision of high quality public realm, short-stay parking, large statement trees, and potentially a SUD’s planting scheme. This land does not form part of the application but the landscape proposals contained within the application would not appear to have any impact on the ability to deliver such a scheme in the future.

In light of the above, indicative landscape proposals have been submitted as it is hoped that an extended area of public realm, between the development and the Oldfield Road highway, will be delivered in future. The interim landscape proposals are generally acceptable in principle, but lack detail and therefore a condition will be required to secure specifications for hard surfacing and a detailed planting plan etc. It is worth noting that the City Council, through its 'Green City Programme', is introducing Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDs) within its public realm schemes (where feasible) and is encouraging developers to do the same. The developer should therefore look to introduce rain gardens within the scheme (if feasible) to reduce/manage surface water run-off.

Page 99 Contaminated Land

The application has accommodated various industrial uses in the past and as such there is an identified risk from possible land contamination to future end users. A Geo-Environmental Appraisal Report has been submitted with the application and this considers the potential for pollution linkages between each identified source and receptor. The report recommends further works and potential remediation options, a conclusion that the City Council’s Consultant Environment Officer agrees with.

The above-referenced Appraisal has also been reviewed by the Environment Agency (EA), who have confirmed that the site located in a relatively sensitive location above a Principal Aquifer and within 150m of a watercourse. The historical land-uses have also led to elevated concentrations of contamination in the groundwater. The EA also consider that further assessment or action will be required to fully understand the impact on controlled waters.

No objections have been raised by the EA or the City Council’s Consultant Environment Officer; however, the following conditions should be attached to any planning permission to ensure that development on this site does not pose an unacceptable risk to the environment or sensitive receptors (future residents):

 Submission of a Remediation Strategy for dealing with the risks associated with contamination of the site.  Submission of a Verification Plan and Report to enable the applicant to demonstrate compliance with the works agreed within the Remediation Strategy.  Any piling or other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Subject to compliance with the conditions set above, the proposed development would be in compliance with Policy EN 17 of the City of Salford UDP and Paragraphs 109 and 120 of the NPPF.

Design and Security

The applicant has sought to reduce opportunities for crime through the layout and design of the buildings and landscaping. A Crime Impact Statement has been submitted with the application to demonstrate this. Officers within Design for Security (Greater Manchester Police) consider that the scheme has been very well designed from a crime prevention perspective and will add much needed activity, natural surveillance and interest to this emerging residential quarter of Salford. Positive aspects of the scheme include:  The orientation of buildings and uses within them - promoting activity and surveillance in the most appropriate areas;  Locating secure entrances to the residential and commercial elements of the scheme in very public positions;  The proposed concierge service;  The range of residents’ amenity spaces and facilities; and,  The provision of secure car and cycle parking.

The layout and design of the proposed development is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policy DES10 of the City of Salford UDP. An Informative would be added to any grant of permission, recommending the applicant to construct the development in accordance with Secured by Design Standards and the detailed recommendations set out within the Crime Impact Statement.

Drainage

Page 100 The application site is located in Flood Zone 1 and therefore is at very low risk of flooding. It is, however, a major development and therefore a surface water drainage strategy should be provided for the site. The City council’s consultant Drainage Engineer has advised that this information can be secured as part of a pre-commencement condition. Furthermore they have requested that a further condition be added to any consent requiring the restriction of surface water discharge to 50% of the existing rate, in accordance with Salford City Council’s Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.

Energy and Sustainability

 In-line with the Council’s SPD Sustainable Design & Construction (2008) the development will seek to achieve a reduction of at least 25% from 2006 building regulations standards. Initial modeling indicates that a 31% reduction can be achieved;  Optimise the extent of glazing to improve access to natural daylight whilst preserving heating within the properties.  MVHR ventilation to minimise heat loss, improve air quality and assist with summer cooling.  Air Source Heat Pumps (to the retail spaces only);  Photovoltaic Panels to reduce CO2 emissions;  Water saving fittings and appliances (dual-flush toilets and restricted flow-rates); and  With respect to materials, the majority of major elements (walls, floors, roof) will achieve an ‘A’ or ‘A+’ rating in the BRE’s Green Guide to Specification.

On the basis of the above, it is considered that the development will meet the City Council's aspirations in terms of sustainability and the requirements of its SPD: Sustainable Design and Construction.

Planning Obligations

The application proposes the redevelopment of the site to provide 296 residential units, 13 of which would meet the Council’s definition of townhouses.

Given the scale of the development, an assessment of its impact on nearby transport infrastructure, public realm, open space and education provision is required in accordance with UDP Policy DEV5 and the Planning Obligations SPD (2015). If considered necessary, planning obligations will be sought to mitigate the impact of the development.

It is noted that, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 204) planning obligations should only be sought where they are necessary to make a development acceptable in planning terms, directly related to the development; and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

The development is likely to result in increased demand for access to public realm and public open space within the vicinity of the site, as a result of the increase in residents. Planning obligations have therefore been sought to mitigate against this impact. With regard to education and affordable housing contributions, the level of planning obligations required in this case is applied to the 13 townhouse units only. In accordance with the Planning Obligations SPD, education and affordable housing contributions are not applied to the apartments within the scheme.

A review of the applicant’s viability appraisal undertaken by the City Council’s consultant surveyors concluded that the applicant’s assertions that the scheme cannot support the full level of contribution sought is sound. On this basis the applicant and the City Council have agreed a contribution of

Page 101 £864,000. This contribution would be secured via Section 106 agreement and would be directed towards projects that have been agreed in writing with the Chair of Planning Panel.

It is also recommended that a clawback mechanism be included in the Section 106 agreement. This would secure a further contribution from the applicant, up to the maximum contribution identified, should the viability of the development increase in the future. It is recommended that any clawback monies be directed towards the projects identified above.

The above contribution is considered to be acceptable, taking into account the infilling of the former canal wharf; the development of a long under-utilised site; the provision of new homes and the continuing regeneration of the wider area.

Conclusion

Overall it is considered that the proposed development would make a significant, positive contribution towards the on-going transformation of The Crescent Masterplan area into a distinctive new neighbourhood. Subject to compliance with the various conditions set out below, the development is considered to be in compliance with all relevant Policies set out within the City of Salford UDP and the National Planning Performance Framework.

Recommendation

Planning permission be granted subject to the following planning conditions and that:

 a financial contribution of £864,000 towards projects to be agreed in writing with the Chair of Planning Panel.

 a clawback mechanism to secure an increase in the level of contribution up to the maximum level required by the Planning Obligations SPD should the viability of the development increase in the future as the scheme is delivered. Clawback monies to be directed towards projects agreed in writing with the Chair of Planning Panel.

2) That the applicant be informed that the Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions stated below, on completion of such a legal agreement;

3) The authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued (subject to the conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement;

Conditions

1. The development must be begun not later than three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Location Plan - 50319-IBI-P2-WS-XX-PL-A-100-001 Rev: P1

Page 102 Existing Site Plan – 50319-IBI-P2-EX-XX-PL-A-200-001 Rev: P1 Proposed Site Plan (Level 0) – 50319-IBI-P2-WS-00-PL-A-200-001 Rev: P1 Proposed Site Plan (Level 1) – 50319-IBI-P2-WS-01-PL-A-200-001 Rev: P1 Proposed Floor-Plans Level 0 & 1 – 50319-IBI-P2-WB-ZZ-PL-A-200-001 Rev: P1

Proposed Floor-Plans Level 2 & 3-7 – 50319-IBI-P2-WB-ZZ-PL-A-200-002 Rev: P1 Proposed Floor-Plans Level 8-9 & 10-20 – 50319-IBI-P2-WB-ZZ-PL-A-200-003 Rev: P1 Proposed Floor Plans Level 21-22 – 50319-IBI-P2-WB-ZZ-PL-A-200-004 Rev: P1 Roof Plan – 50319-IBI-P2-WB-ZZ-PL-A-200-006 Rev: P1 Proposed Elevations – 50319-IBI-P2-WB-XX-EL-A-200-001 Rev: P1 Hulme Street Elevation (North) – 50319-IBI-P2-WS-XX-EL-A-200-001 Rev: P1 Gaythorn Street Elevation (East) – 50319-IBI-P2-WS-XX-EL-A-200-002 Rev: P1 Upper Wharf Street Elevation (South) – 50319-IBI-P2-WS-XX-EL-A-200-003 Rev: P1 Podium Level Elevation (West) - 50319-IBI-P2-WS-XX-EL-A-200-004 Rev: P1 External Works, Ground Level – 50319-IBI-P2-WS-00-PL-A-100-001 Rev: P1 First-Floor External Works Plan – 50319-IBI-P2-WS-01-PL-A-100-001 Rev: P1 Material Palette – 50319-IBI-P2-XX-ZZ-DT-A-200-002 Rev: P1 Balcony Detail – 50319-IBI-P2-XX-ZZ-DT-A-200-001 Rev: P1 Ground-Floor Railing – 50319-IBI-P2-WS-00-DT-L-700-002 Rev: P1 Ground-Floor Brick Wall with Railing, Front Boundary – 50319-IBI-P2-WS-00-DT-L-700-001 Rev: P1

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

Details to be submitted prior to the commencement of development (including excavation/demolition)

3. No development shall take place, including any works of excavation or demolition, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall include: (i) the times of construction activities on site which, unless agreed otherwise as part of the approved Statement, shall be limited to between 8am-6pm Monday to Friday and 9am-2pm Saturday only (no working on Sundays or Bank Holidays). Quieter activities which are carried out inside buildings such as electrical works, plumbing and plastering may take place outside of agreed working times so long as they do not result in significant disturbance to neighbouring occupiers; (ii) the spaces for and management of the parking of site operatives and visitors vehicles; (iii) the storage and management of plant and materials (including loading and unloading activities); (iv) the erection and maintenance of security hoardings including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate; (v) measures to prevent the deposition of dirt on the public highway; (vi) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during demolition/construction; (vii) a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition/construction works; (viii) measures to minimise disturbance to any neighbouring occupiers from noise and vibration, including from any piling activity; (ix) measures to prevent the pollution of watercourses; and (x) a community engagement strategy which explains how local neighbours will be kept updated on the construction process, key milestones, and how they can report to the site manager or other appropriate representative of the developer, instances of unneighbourly behaviour from construction operatives. The statement shall also detail the steps that will be taken when unneighbourly behaviour has been reported. A log of all reported instances shall be kept on record and made available for inspection by the local a planning authority upon request.

Page 103 Reason: In the interests of the amenity of neighbours in accordance with policies DES7 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. Prior to the commencement of development, a Contaminated Land Remediation Strategy shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The Remediation Strategy shall incorporate the results from further investigations identified in the submitted Geo- Environmental Appraisal Report, February 2017, Ref: 10/0741/003, Clancy Consulting and shall be prepared by suitably competent persons. The development shall thereafter be carried out in full accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy.

5. Pursuant to condition 4 and prior to first use or occupation a verification report, which validates that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed with the Local Planning Authority, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

6. No development shall take place, including any works of excavation or demolition, until a programme of archaeological works in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall not be occupied until the programme of archaeological works has been completed in accordance with the approved WSI. The WSI shall cover the following: (a) A phased programme and methodology of site investigation and recording to include: - targeted field evaluation trenching - (depending upon the evaluation results) a strip map and record exercise - targeted open area excavation (b) A programme for post investigation assessment to include: - analysis of the site investigation records and finds - production of a final report on the significance of the archaeological and historical interest represented. (c) Provision for publication and dissemination of the analysis and report on the site investigation. (d) Provision for archive deposition of the report, finds and records of the site investigation. (e) Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the approved WSI.

Reason: To protect the significance of any archaeological remains on the site in accordance with Policy CH5 of the city of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. Notwithstanding the information submitted to date, prior to the demolition of the electricity sub- station, a Bat Emergence Survey shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with GMEU. If the survey finds that bats are likely to be affected by the development, a Method Statement must be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, which provides details of measures to be taken to mitigate and avoid any possible harm to bats during the course of the development. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Page 104 Reason: To protect the interests of any protected species that may be present on site in accordance with policy EN9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

8. If piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods are proposed, prior to the commencement of development details demonstrating that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a safe form of development which poses no unacceptable risk of pollution, having regard to Policy EN 17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

9. No development shall take place, including excavations and works below ground, until a scheme for surface water drainage for the site using sustainable drainage methods and which includes details of how water quality will be improved, and how existing surface water discharge rates reduced, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation or use of the development hereby approved unless alternative timescales have been agreed in writing as part of the strategy.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory method of surface water disposal to reduce the risk of flooding elsewhere in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and seeks to provide betterment in terms of water quality and surface water discharge rates and meets requirements set out in the following documents;  NPPF,  Water Framework Directive and the NW River Basin Management Plan  The national Planning Practice Guidance and the Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage Systems (March 2015)  Manchester, Salford, Trafford Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) (2011) and associated technical guidance  Environment Agency Pollution Prevention Guidelines (now withdrawn)  Flood Risk Assessment/SuDS Requirements for new developments (Salford's SuDS Checklist)

Details to be submitted prior to commencement of above-ground works

10. Prior to the commencement of any above ground works a scheme and plan demonstrating that all external balconies on façades where the noise level exceeds 55 dB LAEQ 16-hour shall have a maximum depth of 500mm shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the agreed scheme.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of future occupants of the development hereby approved, in accordance with Policies DES7 and EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

11. Notwithstanding the details submitted to date, no above-ground works shall commence until the detailed design of the car park entrance has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Authority. The details submitted shall include visibility splays based on a lightly trafficked street that is subject to a 30mph speed limit. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the development and shall be retained thereafter Reason: In the interests of highway safety, having regard to Policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 105 12. Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application no above ground construction works shall take place until samples or full details of materials to be used externally on the building(s) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include the type, colour and texture of the materials. Only the materials so approved shall be used, in accordance with any terms of such approval.

Details to be submitted prior to occupation/first use

13. Prior to occupation of the first residential unit, a Site Completion Report confirming that all necessary noise attenuation measures identified in the approved Noise Impact Assessment (Hann Tucker Associates, February 2018 – Ref:23707/NIA1 Rev: 2) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of future occupants of the development hereby approved, in accordance with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

14. No business shall commence operating from the commercial units within the development hereby approved until its operating hours (including delivery and collection hours) have been submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The business shall operate in accordance with the approved opening hours thereafter.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of residents, in accordance with policy EN 17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

15. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved, a scheme to commemorate the heritage of the site and adjacent area within the new public realm shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the development and retained thereafter.

Reason: In accordance with Policy CH5 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and Policy NPPF Section 12, Paragraph 141 - To make information about the archaeological heritage interest publicly accessible.

16. a) Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, the development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until full details of both hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include the formation of any banks, terraces or other earthworks, hard surfaced areas and materials, boundary treatments, external lighting, planting plans, specifications and schedules (including planting size, species and numbers/densities), means for enhancing biodiversity, existing plants / trees to be retained and a scheme for the timing / phasing of implementation works.

Page 106 size and species to those originally required to be planted, unless the Local Planning Authority gives its consent in writing to any variation.

Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development and in accordance with Policies DES1, DES9 and EN8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

17. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a Landscape Management Plan, which includes a timetable for its implementation, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

18. The trees to be felled as part of the development hereby approved shall be replaced in accordance with a Tree Replacement Scheme, which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of: tree species; tree sizes (including the minimum height and circumference of stem at 1m from the ground level); a plan indicating the location of the replacement trees and a timetable for tree planting and details of aftercare. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with approved details and timetable and shall be retained thereafter.

19. i. Notwithstanding the details submitted within the Travel Plan (Mayer Brown, Feb 2018 OD2LOutwoodP2.1), the development hereby approved shall not be brought into first occupation until an updated Travel Plan has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

ii. Within six months of the development hereby approved being brought into first occupation, a further, updated Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The agreed Travel Plan shall be implemented and reviewed in accordance with the timetable embodied therein.

20. Notwithstanding the details submitted to date the development hereby approved shall not be brought into first occupation until details of short-stay cycle parking and 216 long-stay cycle parking spaces have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved cycle parking shall be implemented and made available for its intended use prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved and shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: To encourage more sustainable modes of travel in accordance with policies ST14, A2 and A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework

21. Prior to the first occupation of the development, the developer shall provide 10no. Type 2 “fast” electric vehicle charging points within its car park. The charging points shall be retained thereafter.

Page 107 Reason: To encourage the uptake of ultra-low emission vehicles and ensure the development is sustainable, and to safeguard residential amenity, public health and quality of life, having regard to Policies EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and Paragraphs 35 and 124 of the NPPF.

22. Notwithstanding the details submitted to date, the development hereby approved shall not be brought into first occupation until detailed plans showing the location and arrangement of layby / on-street car parking along and loading arrangements along Gaythorn Street and Hulme Street has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and be retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian safety and the safe operation of the highway network, having regard to Policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

23. Notwithstanding the details submitted to date, the development hereby approved shall not be brought into first occupation until a Refuse Collection and Service Management Plan has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. From first occupation, the development shall proceed in accordance with the details within the approved Plan.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian and highway safety, having regard to Policies A2 and A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

24. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved, a scheme for the provision of onsite and off-site highway improvement works, together with any traffic management measures, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with a timetable that has first been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Compliance Conditions

25. The vehicle parking, servicing and other vehicular access arrangements shown on the approved plans to serve the development hereby permitted shall be made available for use prior to the development first being brought into use (or in accordance with a phasing plan which shall first be agreed in writing with the local planning authority) and shall be retained thereafter for their intended purpose.

26. Notwithstanding the provisions of Condition 8, the rate of discharge of surface water from the development shall be restricted to 50% of the existing discharge rate (or to green-field runoff, whichever is greater), as per Salford City Council's SFRA, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Page 108 Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage of/disposal of surface water from the site, in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

27. The building envelope acoustic mitigation scheme as defined in the submitted Noise Impact Assessment, February 2018, Ref: 23707/NIA1 (Rev 2), Hann Tucker Associates shall be implemented in full, and maintained throughout the life of the development.

28. Any externally mounted plant and equipment (with the exception of plant required for emergency situations such as standby generators, smoke extract equipment etc) associated with the development hereby approved shall be designed so as not to exceed the following noise levels, assessed in accordance with BS 4142: 2014 with corrections applied for any plant emitting noise of a tonal or irregular quality. o 07:00 – 23:00 - 40 dB LAEQ 1-hour o 23:00 – 07:00 – 35 dB dB LAEQ 15-Minute

Notes to Applicant

1. If, during any works on site, contamination is suspected or found, or contamination is caused, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified immediately. Where required, a suitable risk assessment shall be carried out and/or any remedial action shall be carried out in accordance to an agreed process and within agreed timescales in agreement with the Local Planning Authority.

3. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) makes it an offence (with certain limited exceptions and in the absence of a licence) to intentionally to kill, injure or take any wild bird, or intentionally to damage, take or destroy its nest whilst it is being built or is in use, or to take or destroy its eggs. Further, the Act affords additional protection to specific species of birds listed in Schedule 1 of the Act. In respect of these species it is unlawful to intentionally or recklessly to disturb such a bird whilst it is nest-building or is at or near a nest with eggs or young; or to disturb their dependent young. You are therefore advised to seek the advice of a suitably qualified ecologist before commencing works on site.

4. The applicant is advised to construct the development in accordance with the recommendations set out in the submitted Crime Impact Statement (Design for Security 2015/0445/CIS/02 dated 22/02/2018).

5. Any drainage in the basement should not be connected directly to sewers as this may result in a backflow, but should be pumped.

Page 109 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5e

http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

APPLICATION No: 18/71641/OUT APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs P Plowright LOCATION: The Spinney, 482 Walkden Road, Worsley, M28 2WH PROPOSAL: Outline planning application for the demolition of existing property and the construction of 3 detached properties with all matters reserved WARD: Worsley

Description of Site and Surrounding Area The site to which this application relates is located within a predominantly residential area of Worsley which is characterised by detached dwellings of varying styles within sizeable curtilages with mature natural screening to the boundaries. The application site contains a centrally positioned two-storey detached dwelling set back from the front boundary and constructed in brick with rendering to the elevations underneath a hipped tiled roof. A single storey outrigger with lean to and garaging is located to the northern aspect with dual access driveway from Walkden Road. The site is heavily screened by extensive hedgerow and mature tree coverage to the boundaries, with a significant number of trees protected by Tree Preservation Orders No. 415 (2010) and No. 528 (2016).

As viewed within the street-scene the site is distinguishable by its open nature and spaciousness between neighboring occupiers. In this respect, the property lies approximately 30m south of an adjoining infill development permitted in 2007 consisting of three generously scaled two/three storey detached properties. The remaining northern and eastern boundaries lie adjacent to the residential estate of The Warke containing two- storey detached dwellings sited between 23m – 36m away. To the south is St Mark’s Conservation Area with an un-adopted road leading to a small residential enclave and car park entrance to St Mark’s Church. The western boundary faces onto Walkden Road with a locally listed building lying approximately 24m to the west.

Page 111 The heritage asset is a residential lodge historically used in association with Worsley Old Hall which is constructed in red clay brick dressed in red/pink sandstone with timber braces and rendering under a welsh slate roof.

Description of Proposal The application seeks outline planning permission for the demolition of the existing dwelling and the construction of three detached dwellings.

All details relating to access, appearance, scale, layout and landscaping are reserved for determination at a later date via the submission of reserved matters application(s) and so this application only seeks the principle of redevelopment.

In demonstrating that the principle of redevelopment to provide three dwellings could be acceptable, the application has been accompanied by the following supporting documents: -  Heritage Assessment;  Tree Assessment;  Land Contamination Assessment; and  Preliminary Ecological Appraisal.

An indicative layout has been submitted alongside the application to demonstrate how the site could be developed.

Publicity Site Notice: Non HH setting of listed building Date Displayed: 24 April 2018 Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 26 April 2018 Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building

Relevant Site History 15/67521/OUT - Outline application with all matters reserved for the demolition of the existing property and erection of up to 5 detached properties, together with car parking and access.

This application was refused on 28 July 2016 for the following reason: “The proposed scheme for five detached dwellings would represent over development of the site which would significantly harm the character of this area which sits adjacent to St Mark's Church Conservation Area and both locally and statutorily listed buildings. The indicative information was considered insufficient to demonstrate that the quantum of development was appropriate on this constrained site. The application is therefore considered contrary to policies DES1, H1 and CH3 of the UDP and NPPF”

The decision was appealed, reference 16/00009/REF and the appeal was dismissed. The Inspector stated: “…the development would unacceptably harm the character and appearance of the area contrary to development plan policies which are consistent with the Framework”.

The appeal is discussed in more detail in the appraisal below.

17/69818/TPO - Fell six trees (Oak -T4, Sycamore - T10 and T11, Horse Chestnut - T12 and T13, Lime - T15). Pollard four lime trees at 5m (T27, T28, T29 and T30) - Approve - 20 July 2017

17/70662/OUT - Outline application with all matters reserved for the demolition of existing property and the construction of 4 detached properties with garages, off road parking and private access way - Application Withdrawn - 1 December 2017

Neighbour Notification 28 neighbours were notified by letter dated 19th April 2018. The neighbours immediately adjoining the site were notified as well as those who submitted representations on the previous application.

Representations

Page 112 Twelve representations have been received; 9 objections and 3 in support. The representations can be summarised as follows:

Objections • Worsley is losing its ‘country feel’, spacious nature and character; • New builds have a token number of affordable homes; • No care for the environmental impact of extra vehicles, adding to local traffic congestion and pollution; • No valid argument for the houses to be built; • The adjacent dwellings are vacant and an eye-sore; • Replacing one dwelling with three will add to overcrowding of the area; • Currently dwelling is a beautiful old house; • The property lies on the edge of St Mark’s Conservation Area and modern dwellings will detract from the character of the area; • The development fails to meet one of the Council’s pledges to protect and enhance historic assets. • Introducing an additional private access adjacent to the existing private access road towards St Mark’s Church will be hazardous. • Concerns raised with the location of the access; • The development constitutes overdevelopment; • Trees have been removed from the site and questions raised over consent • Detrimental impact on local services (schools, doctors, dentists etc.) • Insufficient external amenity space; • The development will involve the loss of trees

Support • There is ample space within the site for three dwellings with appropriate access; • Additional two dwellings will not impact traffic; • There will be no impact on the trees; • The proposal addresses all of the reasons for refusal on the previous submission.

The issues raised by the objections are considered and assessed in the appraisal section of this report below. The applicant has also provided a letter of response to the objections.

Consultations Air Quality, Noise, Contaminated Land - No objection subject to conditions and clarification of documents to be submitted at reserved matters stage.

Senior Drainage Engineer - No comments have been received during the consideration of this application, however, the comments received during the determination of the previous application are still applicable for this development. Previously, Urban Vision’s Flood Risk Engineer advised that a Flood Risk Assessment is not required but no development should take place until a strategy of surface water drainage for the site using sustainable drainage methods has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. A condition will be attached accordingly.

Highways - No objection.

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit - No objection subject to clarification of documents to be submitted at reserved matters stage.

United Utilities - Developer Services & Planning - No objection subject to conditions

Sustainable Regeneration Directorate (Heritage) - No objection.

Arboricultural Consultant - No objection to the principle of development however a detailed Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Tree Protection Plan should be submitted at the reserved matters stage.

Planning Policy Development Plan Policy Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.

Page 113 Unitary Development Plan DES2 - Circulation and Movement This policy states that the design and layout of new development will be required to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site safely, be well related to public transport and local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

Unitary Development Plan EN12 - Important Landscape Features This policy states that development that would have a detrimental impact on, or result in the loss of, any important landscape feature will not be permitted unless the applicant can clearly demonstrate that the importance of the development plainly outweighs the nature conservation and amenity value of the landscape feature and the design and layout of the development cannot reasonably make provision for the retention of the landscape feature. If the removal of an important existing landscape feature is permitted as part of a development, a replacement of at least equivalent size and quality, or other appropriate compensation, will be required either within the site, or elsewhere within the area.

Unitary Development Plan EN13 - Protected Trees This policy states that development which would result in an unacceptable loss of, or damage to protected trees will not be permitted. Where the loss of trees is considered acceptable adequate replacement provision will be provided.

Unitary Development Plan EN17 - Pollution Control

Page 114 This policy states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning permission will only be granted where the development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory level of amenity.

Unitary Development Plan CH2 - Dev. Affecting Setting of Listed Building This policy states that development will not be granted that would have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building.

Unitary Development Plan CH8 - Local List of Buildings of Archectural Interest This policy states that the impact of development on any building, structure or feature that is identified on the council’s local list of buildings, structures and features of architectural, archaeological or historic interest will be a material planning consideration.

Other Material Planning Considerations National Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy Supplementary Planning Document - Sustainable Design and Construction This policy document expands on policies in Salford’s Unitary Development Plan to provide additional guidance for planners and developers on the integration of sustainable design and construction measures in new and existing developments.

It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application

Appraisal Following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) it is necessary to consider the weight which can be afforded to the policies of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan (paragraph 215 NPPF 27th March 2012).

Page 115 In terms of this application it is considered that the relevant policies of the UDP can be afforded due weight for the purposes of decision making as the relevant criteria within the UDP policies applicable to the proposed development are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.

Principle of Development The NPPF advocates a presumption in favour of sustainable development with paragraph 7 of the NPPF advising that there are 3 dimensions to the creation of sustainable development – economic, social and environmental. Accordingly, the paragraph emphasises the role of the planning system to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities by providing a supply of housing necessary to meet the needs of present and future generations and by creating a high quality built environment with accessible local services that reflect the community’s desires and support its health, social and cultural wellbeing. Where proposals accord with the development plan the application should be approved without delay unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

The importance of development being sustainable and the requirement for the provision of a wide choice of high quality homes is reiterated within Section 4 of the NPPF which relates to promoting sustainable transport and Section 6 of the NPPF, which relates to housing.

In terms of housing, paragraph 49 of the NPPF states that housing applications should be considered in context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development with paragraph 50 reiterating that local planning authorities should deliver a wide choice of high quality homes to create sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities.

This is corroborated and remains consistent with the relevant local plan policies within the Development Plan and associated planning guidance which can be afforded due weight in the determination of this planning application.

In respect to the classification of the site, the NPPF defines previously developed land as land which is, or was, occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure (although it should not be assumed that the whole curtilage should be developed). However, the definition of previously developed land excludes private residential gardens.

The site is positioned within a sustainable residential location close to a range of amenities. The building and associated curtilage represents an attractive frontage, however is not a heritage asset as defined by the NPPF and whilst lying adjacent to the St Mark’s Conservation Area, is not located within a conservation area boundary and remains a viable redevelopment site.

To this end, it is considered that the principle of development is acceptable providing the development accords with the relevant policies within the UDP, the guidance contained within Supplementary Planning Documents and the objectives of the NPPF.

Housing Mix UDP Policy H1 seeks to ensure that new housing developments are built at an appropriate density throughout the city and should contribute towards the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings in terms of size, type, tenure and affordability. It goes on further to state that in determining whether the proposed mix and density of dwellings on a site is appropriate and acceptable, regard will be had to 8 factors (criteria A to H). Policy H1 of the UDP has been supplemented by policies in the adopted Housing Planning Guidance.

Policies HOU1 and HOU2 of the Housing Planning Guidance state that within this part of the city the large majority of dwellings within new developments should ideally be in the form of houses rather than apartments with at least three bedrooms.

In this regard it is recognised that the proposal is for three dwellings, in the form of detached houses. The application form suggests that the dwellings will each feature 4 or more bedrooms and therefore the development complies with the stipulations of Policy HOU1 and, despite being a matter for consideration through a separate reserved matters application, the requirements of HOU2.

It is important to note that this application only seeks approval for the principle of constructing three dwellings on the site. The housing mix, type and density will be influenced by the Council's relevant development plan policies, the housing planning guidance policies and the housing market at the time of delivery. This would be

Page 116 determined at a later date through the submission of reserved matters application(s) should outline planning permission be granted.

An objection has been received in relation to the lack of affordable houses proposed. The quantum of development proposed is such that it does not trigger the requirement to provide affordable forms of housing.

Site Layout and Impact on Trees Although the proposal is in outline with all matters reserved for a separate application, it is necessary to consider the site constraints together with the indicative layouts to gain a level of certainty that the quantum of development proposed can reasonably be accommodated on the site.

UDP Policy DES1 states that development will be required to respond to its physical context, respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards local identity and distinctiveness. The policy advises that in assessing the extent to which any development complies with this policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings and landscape, the character, scale and pattern of streets and building plots, and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.

UDP policy H1 indicates that all new housing should contribute toward the provision of a balanced housing mix; be built of an appropriate density; provide a high quality residential environment; make adequate provision for open space and where necessary make a contribution to local infrastructure and facilities required to support the development.

An indicative layout has been submitted which provides an iteration of how the site could be developed to accommodate three dwellings. This represents an improvement from the plan submitted for consideration with the previous applications and shows how three dwellings can be situated and oriented within the site around a central access point and private driveway. Two of the dwellings have been shown in a location that respects the building line established by the existing dwelling with frontages addressing Walkden Road. One dwelling would be situated behind with little presence in the street scene.

It is recognised that the site is constrained by extensive tree coverage to the boundaries and this was acknowledged in the dismissal of the previous appeal where the Inspector noted that the tree coverage reduces the effective development area. Trees were proposed for removal with the former scheme but the current scheme proposes the retention of all trees, subject to suitable protection during construction, three dwellings could be constructed in these locations without detriment to the trees. A full Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Tree Protection Plan would be required with the reserved matters application(s). It is noted that consent to undertake work to protected trees on the site was applied for and granted under application ref: 17/69818/TPO. The Inspector also concluded that the redevelopment of the site for 5 dwellings, as previously proposed, could not be achieved whilst retaining the character of the wider area as a result of the provision of unduly small gardens and significantly smaller plots than those located to the north and east. The current indicative layout shows how the plot can be sub-divided to accommodate three dwellings, each with a good building to plot ratio and with the ability to provide a large area of private amenity space, comparative to the neighbouring plots, if not larger.

To this end, the principle of three dwellings on the site is considered achievable and addresses the concerns raised by the Inspector in the appeal dismissal. The final design in terms of scale, layout and appearance will be subject to further assessment at reserved matters stage where the applicant will need to demonstrate that the height, scale and design of the properties will assimilate with, and promote local distinctiveness within the area.

Subject to an acceptable design being considered at reserved matters, the proposal has the ability to satisfy policies CH2, CH8, DES1 and H1 of the UDP and associated supplementary planning guidance.

Impact on Heritage Assets The development will include the demolition of The Spinney, a large detached dwelling. Opposite The Spinney on the western side of Walkden Road is the locally listed 206 Walkden Road (Lodge to Worsley Old Hall). To the South of the application site is St Marks Conservation Area which includes the locally listed St Marks Vicarage (Crossfield Drive) and the Grade I Listed Church of St Mark.

Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that when considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting “special

Page 117 regard” will be given to the “desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses”.

One of the core planning principles of the NPPF which was published in March 2012, is to “conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance”. Paragraph 132 of the NPPF states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. It then continues that significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting and that as heritage assets are irreplaceable any harm or loss “should require clear and convincing justification”. Paragraph 133 states that where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, permission should be refused unless it can be demonstrated that substantial harm or loss is outweighed by substantial public benefits. Paragraph 134 states that where a proposal leads to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.

Paragraph 138 describes that “loss of a building (or other element) which makes a positive contribution to the significance of the Conservation Area or World Heritage Site should be treated either as substantial harm under paragraph 133 or less than substantial harm under paragraph 134, as appropriate, taking into account the relative significance of the element affected and its contribution to the significance of the Conservation Area or World Heritage Site as a whole”.

The significance of a heritage asset relates to the value of the asset because of its heritage interest which may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. However, significance derives not only from an asset’s physical presence but also from its setting.

In the annex to the NPPF the setting of a heritage asset is described as “the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral”.

Saved UDP Policy CH2 states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building. The site in question is outside of the conservation area boundary and so, as recognised by the Inspector in his appeal decision; saved UDP Policies CH3 and CH4 are not applicable. However, the guidance under Saved Policies DES1 and H1 are relevant in respect of their requirements in relation to local character.

The St Marks Conservation Area was designated in 1981 and comprises the Worsley Horseshoe, St Mark's Church and the adjacent vicarage. As recognised in the previous appeal decision on this site, an important feature of the conservation area is that it is heavily wooded. The part of the conservation area closest to The Spinney is the wooded grounds to St Marks Church. The mature trees to the application site’s boundaries contribute to the setting of the conservation area, adding to the mature tree cover found at this point to the east and west of Walkden Road. There are two Tree Preservation Orders covering parts of the application site.

The approach to the conservation area from the north, along Walkden Road, is characterised by large detached dwellings interspersed with dense mature woodland. To the immediate north of the application site is a development of three detached dwellings on the site of a former dwelling, approved in 2007.

Whilst the existing dwelling is an attractive building in-keeping with the area, it sits outside of the conservation area boundary and is not itself protected as a heritage asset. Provided that a high quality development, sensitive to the area can be secured in its place, its loss would not be considered to unduly harm the nearby conservation area.

The indicative site plan shows three detached dwellings in generous plots which are generally in-keeping with the character of the area and will allow for the retention of the mature trees and other planting at the site’s boundaries. The Tree Preservation Orders in place provide an element of control in this regard.

Given the above, it is considered that the redevelopment of the site for three detached dwellings can be achieved without harming the setting of St Mark’s Conservation Area. The proposal is considered to be

Page 118 acceptable under the guidance in the NPPF regarding conservation areas and their settings, and Saved UDP Policies H1 and DES1 as applied to the conservation area.

In respect of the impact on the nearby locally listed buildings, 206 Walkden Road is a former lodge to Worsley Old Hall and the development will be viewed together with this building in some views, although Walkden Road and mature vegetation provide an element of visual separation. Subject to the retention of the existing boundary planting along the frontage, and sensitive design along the Walkden Road frontage the development will not be considered to harm the setting of this property.

St Mark’s Vicarage is a residence associated with the Grade I listed St Mark’s Church. It is set within a heavily wooded area and views between the Vicarage and the development site are restricted. Subject to the retention of the trees along the southern boundary the redevelopment of the site as proposed is not considered to harm the setting of this building. The proposal is considered to be acceptable under the guidance in the NPPF relating to non-designated heritage assets and their settings.

The Grade I listed St Mark’s Church is situated approximately 160m from the southern boundary of the application site. Views of the church from the application site are restricted by the mature tree cover within the site itself and the conservation area. Given the distance and extensive tree cover the arguments above in respect of the conservation area and locally listed buildings are equally applicable to the setting of the listed building. The proposal is considered to be acceptable under the guidance in the NPPF regarding designated heritage assets and their settings along with Saved UDP Policy CH2.

Subject to the qualifications above being addressed at reserved matters stage, the proposal is not considered to harm the nearby heritage assets or their settings and the proposal is acceptable under the guidance in the NPPF in relation to heritage assets, Saved UDP Policy CH2 and Saved UDP Policies DES1 and H1 as applicable to the conservation area.

Neighbouring Amenity Policy DES7 of the UDP states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.

As the application is in outline with all matters reserved, the application only seeks approval for the principle of development and detailed matters of amenity are to be determined at the reserved matters stage. Notwithstanding this, consideration has been given to the indicative layout. As currently identified, the dwellings are situated at such a distance away from neighbouring dwellings to be unlikely to adversely impact upon the amenities of neighbouring properties to any discernible degree.

It is acknowledged that habitable room windows are likely to face onto Walkden Road and The Warke, however these are likely to be at a sufficient distance to meet the Council’s recommended separation distances and the level of tree coverage along the boundaries will also help to mitigate any overlooking or overbearing effect the proposal may have on adjoining occupiers, subject to the final layout of the dwellings.

Residential Amenity In respect of the amenities of future occupants on the site, Urban Vision’s Environmental Consultant raises no objection to the scheme, however, it is recognised that the site lies in close proximity to Walkden Road and future residents could be subject to high levels of road traffic noise unless suitable mitigation is designed into the scheme. In principle, there are no objections to the redevelopment of the site in the manner proposed and it is considered that suitable mitigation can be provided to address any potential noise concerns. As such, the application for reserved matters should be accompanied by a Noise Impact Assessment. It is not considered necessary or reasonable to require this assessment at outline stage as the assessment should be carried out when the final design of the scheme has been agreed. A condition will be attached requiring the assessment to be submitted with the reserved matters application.

Land Contamination NPPF paragraph 121 states that planning decisions should ensure that the proposed site is suitable for its new use taking account of ground conditions, including pollution arising from previous uses and any proposals for mitigation including land remediation or impacts on the natural environment arising from that remediation.

Page 119 A Preliminary Risk Assessment has been submitted in support of the application (Envirosmart Desktop Study, February 2016, Ref: 64623R1, Geosmart). The document aims to identify potential environmental issues that may represent a constraint to the development of the site. The report concludes that an intrusive site investigation is not required, however a watching brief should be kept during excavations and ground works for signs of contamination (visual or olfactory evidence).

The conclusions of the report are accepted, and there is no objection to the development on contaminated land grounds subject to conditions requiring work to cease if unexpected contamination is found. The findings shall be reported to the Local Planning Authority by the submission of an updated contaminated land assessment with an appropriate remediation strategy.

The desktop study has also identified that a coal mining risk assessment is required due to the potential for shallow mine workings in the area, however it is noted that as the site is not within the development high risk area, there is no planning requirement to submit one. An informative has been added for the applicants attention.

Highways, Parking and Access Policy DES2 of the UDP states that the design and layout of new development will be required to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site safely, be well related to public transport and local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

The planning application is submitted with all matters reserved and therefore matters relating to access will be dealt with at the reserved matters stage.

Notwithstanding this, the applicant has submitted indicative details of how the site could be accessed via a single drive off Walkden Road. Urban Vision’s Highway Engineer has assessed the indicative access arrangements and is satisfied that three dwellings can be accommodated within the site with suitable access and parking arrangements. In this respect, a number of recommendations have been made in relation to the access and parking design which will be addressed as reserved matters stage. An informative will be attached to draw the applicant’s attention to these matters.

Subject to the final design of the access and layout at reserved matters stage, the proposal is considered acceptable in principle.

Flood Risk and Drainage Policy EN19 of the UDP states that any application for development that it is considered likely to be at risk of flooding or increase the risk of flooding elsewhere will need to be accompanied by a formal flood risk assessment. It should identify mitigation or other measures to be incorporated into the development or undertaking on other land, which are designed to reduce that risk of flooding to an acceptable level.

The site is located within Flood Zone 1, where the likelihood of being affected by river flooding in any one year is less than 0.1% (1 in 1000). The Council’s Level 2 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) however identifies that the site is located within a Critical Drainage Area (Northwest Drainage Area).

No objections were raised by Urban Vision’s Drainage Engineer during consideration of the previous application, subject to a condition requiring the submission of a surface water drainage strategy for the site and it is considered that this still applies for the current proposal. The proposal complies with policy EN19 of the UDP and relevant paragraphs of the NPPF.

Ecology and Trees The NPPF incorporates measures to conserve and enhance the natural and local environment, including 'Biodiversity and Geological Conservation'. Paragraph 118 of the NPPF requires that in determining planning applications the following principles are applied to conserve and enhance biodiversity:-  Significant harm resulting from a development should be avoided, adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort compensated for; and  Opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments should be encouraged.

The applicant has submitted a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal and Phase 1 Survey which was undertaken in February 2016. The Ecologist acknowledges that this date is outside the optimum time to undertake such a

Page 120 survey however further to consideration by the Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) no objection is raised given the nature of the site.

The appraisal indicates that no presence of bats was found at the time of the survey and the property was considered to have a negligible potential to support roosting bats and that no roosting potential was identified in any of the trees. This study is supported by the GMEU who considers that further survey work is not necessary. However, GMEU requested that any lighting to be erected during construction and post development be directed away from any of the retained trees to reduce the impact of artificial lighting on the feeding and commuting behaviors of bats. Given that the lighting will be designed with the final layout, this is more appropriate for the reserved matters application.

In respect to birds the site is capable of supporting nesting sites and therefore a condition has been recommended for their protection between the months of March and July. However, it is not considered that a condition is reasonably necessary given that nesting birds are protected under the terms of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and an informative has been attached for the applicant’s attention instead.

Recommendation Approve

1. Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates: (a)The expiration of three years from the date of this permission; or (b)The expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters, or in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The approval of the Local Planning Authority shall be sought in respect of the following matters before the development first takes place - the access; appearance; landscaping; layout; and scale.

Reason: The application is granted in outline only under the provisions of Article 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 and details of the matters referred to in the condition have not been submitted for consideration.

3. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the principles established in the following approved plan:

Location Plan shown on drawing reference PM3D/A3/0491 dated 11 April 2018.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

4. No development shall take place, including any works of excavation or demolition, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall include:

Page 121 (viii) measures to minimise disturbance to any neighbouring occupiers from noise and vibration, including from any piling activity; (ix) measures to prevent the pollution of watercourses; and (x) a community engagement strategy which explains how local neighbours will be kept updated on the construction process, key milestones, and how they can report to the site manager or other appropriate representative of the developer, instances of unneighbourly behaviour from construction operatives. The statement shall also detail the steps that will be taken when unneighbourly behaviour has been reported. A log of all reported instances shall be kept on record and made available for inspection by the local a planning authority upon request.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of neighbours in accordance with policies DES7 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the NPPF.

5. No development shall take place until a scheme for surface water drainage for the site using sustainable drainage methods and which includes details of how water quality will be improved, and how existing surface water discharge rates reduced, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation or use of the development hereby approved unless alternative timescales have been agreed in writing as part of the strategy.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory method of surface water disposal to reduce the risk of flooding elsewhere in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and seeks to provide betterment in terms of water quality and surface water discharge rates and meets requirements set out in the following documents; O NPPF, o Water Framework Directive and the NW River Basin Management Plan o The national Planning Practice Guidance and the Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage Systems (March 2015) o Manchester, Salford, Trafford Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) (2011) and associated technical guidance o Environment Agency Pollution Prevention Guidelines (now withdrawn) o Flood Risk Assessment/SuDS Requirements for new developments (Salford's SuDS Checklist)

6. Foul and surface water shall be drained on separate systems.

Reason: To secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of flooding and pollution in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. During the period of construction, should contamination be found on site that has not been previously identified, no further works shall be undertaken in the affected area. Prior to further works being carried out in the affected area, the contamination shall be reported to the Local Planning Authority within a maximum of 5 days from the discovery, a further contaminated land assessment shall be carried out, appropriate remediation identified and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the agreed remediation measures.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the environment and to ensure the safe development of the site in the interests of the amenity of future occupiers in accordance with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

8. Pursuant to condition 7 and prior to first use or occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, a verification report, which confirms that contamination was not found, or validates that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed within the remediation plan approved by condition 7 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 122 9. Any reserved matters application for layout and scale shall be accompanied by an assessment of noise likely to affect the application site. The assessment shall provide details of noise attenuation measures required to ensure that the following standards are attained with respect to residential accommodation on the site as stipulated in BS8233:2014 - Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings: (i) internal noise levels of less than 30 dB LAeq,8hour within bedrooms between 23.00 hours and 07.00 hours (ii) internal noise levels of less than 35 dB LAeq,16 hour within living rooms between 07.00 hours and 23:00 hours (iii) internal noise levels of less than 40 dB LAeq,16hour within dining rooms between 07.00 and 23.00 hours (iv) external noise levels of less than 55 dB LAeq,16 hour in gardens, patios and private communal gardens between 07.00 and 23.00 hours (iv) typical individual noise events from passing road traffic shall not be in excess of 45 dB LAmax in bedrooms between 23.00 and 07.00 hours

The use of ventilation measures which removes the need for future residents to open windows for background trickle and boost ventilation shall be identified and incorporated into the noise assessment report. The ventilation measures identified shall ensure the above standards are not compromised.

10. Any reserved matters application for layout and scale shall be accompanied by a site lighting scheme. The scheme shall demonstrate how lighting (during construction and post development) shall be directed away from any of the retained trees within and around the site. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full and the lighting maintained and retained thereafter.

Reason: To protect the feeding and commuting behaviour of bats in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

Notes to Applicant

1. STANDING ADVICE - DEVELOPMENT LOW RISK AREA

Further information is also available on the Coal Authority website at: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/the-coal-authority

This Standing Advice is valid from 1st January 2017 until 31st December 2018

2. All species of bats found in the UK receive a high level of legal protection under the terms of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. Bats roost in a variety of places and will use cracks, crevices and holes in trees. They are mobile in their habits and can turn up in the most unlikely places at any time of year. Precautions should be taken throughout works, at any time of year, with the possible presence of bats borne in mind. If bats are found at any time during works, then work should cease immediately and advice sought from Natural England or a suitably qualified bat worker.

Page 123 You are therefore advised to seek the advice of a suitably qualified ecologist before commencing works on site.

4. When preparing an application for the approval of layout at reserved matters stage, the design shall take the following into account:  The provision of a single electric vehicle charging point for all residential properties with off road parking. The charging point shall be capable of Type 2 "Fast" charging, and wired to a dedicated 30A spur to provide 7KV charging capacity; and  The provision of 2 off-street vehicle parking spaces per dwelling.

5. When preparing an application for the approval of access at reserved matters stage, the design shall take into account the following recommendations from Urban Vision's Highways Consultant:  The access point shall be 4.2m in width with a radius of 6m to accommodate 2-way vehicular movement.  The plan shall identify how a visibility splay of 2.4m x 43m can be achieved at the site access point.  A swept path analysis shall be submitted to identify how a 9.86m long refuse vehicle can access and manoeuvre within the site.

6. Whilst there is no requirement to submit a Coal Mining Risk Assessment, the desktop study submitted with this application has identified the potential for shallow mine workings in the area.

7. If any existing lighting columns and/or utility services will need to be relocated to accommodate the site access, the applicant shall obtain the appropriate agreement in writing by the Local Highway Authority and the relevant utility providers prior to construction.

8. When preparing information for the Noise Impact Assessment (condition 9), the assessment methodology to be used, including measurement positions, shall be agreed with Urban Vision's Environmental Consultant prior to the commencement of noise measurements.

Page 124 Agenda Item 5f

http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

APPLICATION No: 18/71538/FUL APPLICANT: Mr Terry McBride LOCATION: Canon Green Drive, Salford, M3 7DB PROPOSAL: External refurbishment and overcladding of Westminster House and Canon Green Court and erection of a part 9, part 11 storey building to accommodate 108 apartments and supporting commercial floor-space, with associated car parking, landscaping and other external works WARD: Irwell Riverside

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

This application relates to two social housing apartment blocks and their associated land, which is located immediately to the south-west of the A6041 – Blackfriars Road. The buildings are known as ‘Westminster House’ and ‘Canon Green Court’ and are understood to date from c.1957. The site is bound by West King Street to the south and St. Stephen Street to the west, with low-rise housing located on the opposite side of both highways. To the east is the ‘Stay Inn’ Hotel and car park, which addresses the A6042 - Trinity Way. In January 2016 the City Council’s Planning Panel resolved to grant planning permission (subject to the signing of a s106 agreement) for the hotel to be extended. To the north-east is a three-storey parade of commercial units that front onto Blackfriars Road.

Page 125

$djud2phk.rtf Vehicular access into the site is achieved via Canon Green Drive, a spur road extending northwards from West King Street. It follows the line of the site’s eastern boundary before diverting into its centre to service the car parking areas that are shared by both apartment blocks. Pedestrian access onto the site can also be achieved from Richmond Street and Hodson Street, via Blackfriars Road.

Westminster House is the smaller of the two buildings, with 33 apartments provided across its three- storeys. It occupies an ‘L’-shaped footprint that runs broadly parallel to the St. Stephen Street highway. Canon Green Court fronts onto West King Street, albeit it is set well back from the highway behind a grassed area and a line of mature trees. It extends to eight storeys in height and provides 110 units of accommodation. Both buildings are principally of concrete and brick construction topped by flat roofs. Coloured cladding has been installed on balcony balustrades and in-between some windows.

Aside from the internal estate road and car park, the land surrounding the buildings is generally laid out as grass, with the resulting areas functioning as informal communal amenity space for both buildings. Included within this is a large banked area, topped by mature trees, which runs adjacent to Blackfriars Road.

The character of development along Blackfriars Road is mixed. Within the vicinity of the site is domestic-scale family housing and modern apartment buildings, including a five-storey block to the west and the five-eight storey Delta Point, which is located opposite the site on the northern side of Blackfriars Road. Directly to the east of Delta Point is a large car dealership.

BACKGROUND

As part of a wider stock transfer agreement with the Council in 2015, Salix Homes Ltd. committed to making improvements to both Westminster House and Canon Green Court in order to bring them up to the Government’s Decent Homes Standards by 2020. Both buildings are in need of comprehensive internal and external refurbishment; more specifically they suffer from excessive condensation, poor ventilation, lack of thermal insulation and cold bridging. Following detailed surveys Salix have identified a need to generate additional funding to complete the refurbishment works. To generate sufficient borrowing capacity to fund the works required to Canon Green Court and Westminster House, the applicant proposes to erect a new apartment building on vacant land within the application site. The various works for which planning permission is now being sought are described in more detail within the next section of this report.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

This application seeks Full planning permission for the following development:

Works to existing buildings The ground-floor of both Westminster House and Canon Green Court would be clad in brick slips, with an insulated, coloured rendering system applied to their upper floors. New windows would be installed within canon Green Court and glazed ‘winter gardens’ would replace its existing open balconies. These works would not be replicated at Westminster House as reportedly its windows have recently been replaced.

The proposed internal refurbishment works would not result in the creation of any additional units within Canon Green Court or Westminster House.

Proposed Building – ‘Blackfriars block’ Planning permission is also sought to erect an apartment block along the Blackfriars Road frontage to the site, following the removal of a mound of mature trees. This ‘building would range between eight and 11-storeys in height and would accommodate 108 apartments (18 x 1-Bed and 90 x 2-Bed). At

Page 126

$djud2phk.rtf ground-floor level, three small commercial units, two flexible meeting spaces and a central entrance foyer would front onto an extended footway. The ground-floor level would also provide parking for nine cars and storage for 128 bicycles. Vehicular access into the development would be achieved via Richmond Street, off Blackfriars Road.

Patinated terracotta tiles have been identified as the primary external material for the new building, with its ground-floor constructed in a dark brick.

The applicant has confirmed that the new build units would be offered on an intermediate rent-to-buy basis. This is a scheme that allows working households to rent a home at 80% of market rent and purchase the property at year five if they wished.

Highways, Landscaping and Other External Works

The Richmond Street spur would be opened up to create a continuous vehicular route that connects into Canon Green Drive. This would necessitate the removal of an existing set of gates, bollards and section of raised footway.

Some of the existing grassed areas around the site would be re-landscaped to create enhanced amenity spaces for the resident community. New tree planting would be introduced across the site, including within an extended public footway along Blackfriars Road.

A new sub-station, designed to serve the proposed Blackfriars building, has been proposed adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site.

AMENDMENTS / VALUE ADDED

During the course of pre-application discussions and the application process itself the proposed scheme has incorporated the following positive amendments:  Enhancements to the design of the proposed Blackfriars block;  Provision of an active frontage at street level along Blackfriars Road through the introduction of communal resident’s facilities and three commercial units within the proposed Blackfriars block.  Delivery of a wider footway along Blackfriars Road that incorporates new tree planting and associated SUDs scheme.  Improvements to the communal amenity areas associated with Canon Green Court and Westminster House, including the provision of new tree and shrub planting.  Increased privacy distances between the proposed Blackfriars block and surrounding residential properties.

PUBLICITY

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Date Displayed: 29 March 2018 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 29 March 2018 Reason: Article 15 Standard Press Notice

RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

55 Blackfriars Road 15/66862/OUT - Outline application including means of access for the phased demolition and expansion of existing hotel (class C1) to create 190 rooms with associated/ancillary uses including bar, cafe, restaurant, gym, spa, conference and function facilities, car parking (49 spaces) and

Page 127

$djud2phk.rtf landscaping works and new retail unit (150 sqm) (classes A1, A2, A3) – Minded to grant, subject to s.106 agreement (January 2016 Planning Panel)

CONSULTATIONS

Design For Security - No objections.

Environment Agency - No objections. Development should proceed in accordance with EA standing advice.

Greater Manchester Ecology Unit – No objections. No significant ecological constraints were identified by the developer’s ecological consultant. Issues relating to, bats, invasive species, nesting birds and landscaping can be resolved via condition and or informative.

Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS) - No objections. A Written Scheme of Investigation should be secured from the developer by way of planning condition.

United Utilities – No objections. Standard conditions relating to the disposal of foul and surface water recommended.

Urban Vision Air & Noise Air Quality – No objections, subject to the imposition of the following conditions;  Provision of electric vehicle charging points within the proposed parking bays.  Standard Construction Environment Management Plan

Noise – No objections, subject to the imposition of the following conditions;  Compliance with maximum noise criteria for external plant and equipment.  Detailed noise mitigation scheme for the building envelope to be submitted and agreed in writing by the LPA.  Individual operators for the commercial units to submit their proposed opening hours to the Local Planning Authority for written agreement.  Prior to occupation of the residential units a Site Completion Report confirming that all necessary noise attenuation measures have been fully implemented.

Urban Vision Drainage Engineer - No objections. A condition relating to the provision of a final Surface Water Drainage Strategy has been requested.

Urban Vision Environment (Contaminated Land) – No objections. There is a potential for land contamination to exist in made ground and from demolition residue associated with previous buildings. The interim assessment has been reviewed and requires additional information, however this can be included in a future site remediation and verification plan. As such the following conditions would be imposed.  Submission of a Remediation Strategy prior to commencement of development.  Submission of a Verification Plan and Report, which validates the work that has been undertaken on site.  Any soil or soil forming materials to be brought to site for use in garden areas or soft landscaping shall be tested for contamination and suitability for use prior to importation to site.

Urban Vision Highways - No objections subject to conditions. See ‘Access, Highways and Parking’ section of this report for further detail.

NEIGHBOUR REPRESENTATIONS

Page 128

$djud2phk.rtf A total of seven letters have been received from six address points. The points raised can be summarised as follows:

Objections Four letters of objection have been received raising the following concerns:  Development would result in the loss of communal green-space, which is is used for recreational activity by residents of the high-rise blocks.  St. Stephen Street is already congested and the development will exacerbate this.  Inadequate provision for car parking within the scheme. Development will lead to additional on- street parking. There is already a severe shortage of parking spaces within the site.  The existing buildings do not need to be re-clad – this takes time and causes significant disruption. The building has become an iconic piece of architecture and its current appearance could be easily corrected by a simple paint job.  The proposed building is too high and too long and is not in-keeping with any other structures in this site. It will overshadow neighbouring properties.  The public walkway adjacent to the Stay Inn will be severely closed-in by the building.  Not clear what the refuse strategy is for the new building.  The applicant is marketing the development as market housing, not for the purpose of affordable social housing provision, which is urgently required.  Request for further consultation sessions to be held.

Neutral One letter has been received from a member of the public requesting that bird bricks be incorporated into the scheme, to improve the chances of attracting urban birds to the area.

Support One letter of support has been received from a resident within Canon Green Court, who states that the refurbishment works will be of benefit to the area.

PLANNING POLICY

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Park This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded; and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of safety and security.

Page 129

$djud2phk.rtf Unitary Development Plan DES2 - Circulation and Movement This policy states that the design and layout of new development will be required to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site safely, be well related to public transport and local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

Page 130

$djud2phk.rtf ensure that there is no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory level of amenity.

Unitary Development Plan EN21 - Renewable Energy This policy states that planning permission for renewable energy development will be granted provided that the impact on environmental quality and amenity does not outweigh the benefits of the development’s potential contribution to reducing carbon dioxide emissions, diversifying the country’s energy supply and meeting national targets for the production of renewable energy.

Unitary Development Plan S4 - Amusement, Restaurants, Cafe, Drinking This policy states that proposals for hot food shop uses would not be permitted by the Council where the use would have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of surrounding residential occupiers by reason of noise, disturbance, smells, fumes, litter, vehicular traffic movements, parking or pedestrian traffic and the vitality and viability of a town centre and visual amenity.

Page 131

$djud2phk.rtf Unitary Development Plan EHC3 - Provision, Improve of Health, Community This policy states that planning permission will be granted for the provision of new, and improved existing, health and community facilities by public, private and voluntary agencies, provided that the development would: not have an unacceptable impact on residential amenity and character; not have an unacceptable impact on environmental quality; be accessible to the community it serves by a range of means of transport; not give rise to unacceptable levels of traffic congestion, or have an adverse impact on highway safety; have the potential to act as a community focus and encourage linked trips wherever possible; and be consistent with other policies and proposals of the UDP.

Unitary Development Plan CH5 - Archaeology and Ancient Monuments This policy states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would have an unacceptable impact on an ancient monument, site or feature of archaeological importance, or its setting. Planning conditions will be imposed to record and evaluate, excavate and preserve remains of local archaeological value, prior to the commencement of the development.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

- National Planning Policy Framework - National Planning Policy Guidance

Local Planning Policy

Page 132

$djud2phk.rtf It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application

APPRAISAL

Principle of Development

Works to existing buildings The proposed refurbishment works to Canon Green Court and Westminster House are welcomed, particularly if they are able to improve the quality of the existing housing stock; increase the thermal performance / energy efficiency of the buildings and enhance their external appearance.

Proposed Housing Mix The application site is located within ‘Central Salford’, just outside of the Regional Centre. Policy HOU1 of the City Council’s Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance states that apartments should only be the predominant form of provision on sites in the most accessible locations within Central Salford. Given that Salford Central and Manchester Victoria railway stations are within walking distance, along with a series of amenities contained within the Regional Centre, the site can be considered to be situated in a highly accessible location and therefore there are no objections to the provision of an all-apartment scheme.

The applicant has stated that they intend to offer the units within the new Blackfriars block on an intermediate rent-to-buy basis. They explain that this would allow working households to rent a home at Intermediate Rent, providing the opportunity to go on and purchase their first home. The rent would be calculated at a maximum of 80% of market rent for an initial tenancy of less than two years. At year five, the applicant could sell the property to the tenant if they wished to purchase it, or alternatively they could continue to let at affordable rent.

Policy HOU2 of the Housing SPG states that where apartments are proposed, they should provide a broad mix of dwelling sizes, both in terms of the number of bedrooms and the net residential floorspace of the apartments. Small dwellings should not predominate and a significant proportion of three bedroom apartments should be provided wherever practicable. The submitted scheme shows that only a modest amount of small dwellings (18 x one bedroom units) would be provided within the new Blackfriars block, which accords with the policy. However, three-bedroom units do not feature at all within the proposed housing mix, as the applicant considers that this type of high-rise accommodation is not suitable for families. The 90no. two-bed units provided would range between 61sqm – 67sqm in size, which accords with the Council’s size standard for apartments containing two or more bedrooms.

Whilst it is acknowledged that high-rise developments do not readily lend themselves to the delivery of large numbers of three-bed units, there are a number of tall developments across the City where a proportion of this dwelling type has been accommodated within the lower floors. The range of different two-bed units to be provided is also considered to be quite limited, although their overall size is acceptable. Overall the Blackfriars block would not provide a particularly broad mix of dwelling sizes; however, when considered in the context of the existing housing stock in this area, and that currently under construction (particularly in the Regional Centre), it is considered that the delivery of 108 intermediate rent-to-buy units would make a much needed contribution towards addressing an identified gap in the market in this part of the City. On this basis, the development would not cause conflict with UDP Policy H1 or policy HOU2 of the Housing SPG.

Commercial Floor-space The proposals for the new Blackfriars Road building incorporate three small commercial units (Use Classes A1, A2, A3, B1, D1) within the ground-floor, ranging from 39sqm – 46sqm in size. These units would be sited in an ‘edge-of centre’ location and their modest scale indicates that they would be

Page 133

$djud2phk.rtf designed to serve local needs. Blackfriars Road experiences a reasonable level of footfall, from people travelling into, and out of, the Regional Centre and therefore the introduction of commercial units within this frontage is considered to be appropriate. Moreover it is hoped that they will add to the existing offer that exists within the adjacent parade of shops and enhance the vitality of this stretch of Blackfriars Road as a result.

Trees and Landscaping

Loss of Trees and Green Infrastructure The erection of a new apartment block immediately at the back of the Blackfriars Road footpath would necessitate the loss of an area of green space and the removal of 26 mature trees, including a group of London Planes and Limes adjacent to the north-eastern boundary of the site. These trees are not formally protected but they do make a positive contribution to the character of this part of Blackfriars Road; they provide relief to the ribbons of built form and hard landscaping that exist to either side and beyond, towards the Regional Centre. Upon reviewing the submitted Arboricultural Report and visiting the site, the City Council’s consultant Arborist has questioned the applicant’s categorisation of the trees fronting Blackfriars Road. As noted above a high amenity value is placed on this group and they appear to be in an acceptable condition; therefore they should fall to be classed as Category B, rather than Category C specimens.As such the impact to the streetscene that would result from the loss of these trees is considered to be significant and one that warrants robust justification and substantial mitigation.

In justifying the siting of the proposed Blackfriars block, the applicant has stated that there is a need to erect a new apartment building within the site to generate sufficient borrowing capacity to fund the works required to Canon Green Court and Westminster House. In determining the location of this building, the applicant has stated that regard has been had to the need to retain sufficient separation and privacy distances to the existing apartment buildings on the site and that direct accessibility to the development from the public highway is also considered to be important. The applicant’s rationale behind the building’s siting is acknowledged and as such the harm that would result from the loss of trees should be properly mitigated through the implementation of a good quality tree-replacement and landscaping scheme.

Proposed Landscaping The applicant has proposed to replace the 26 trees to be lost to the development with 54 replacement specimens, of similar species, within the grounds that surround Canon Green Court and Westminster House. Generally this new planting would be located close to the southern and western boundaries, far enough away from existing buildings to enable them to mature without block out light. This level of provision is in accordance with the City Council’s Tree Replacement Standards.

In addition to the above, eight semi-mature trees would be planted along a widened Blackfriars Road footway, within a continuous tree pit. Fastigated varieties have been selected to ensure that they do not unduly disrupt the outlook for future residents, although they are still considered to be of sufficient size to have an impact within the streetscene upon first being planted. The applicant has also committed to diverting rainwater run-off from the building into the trees along Blackfriars Road and indicated that they are keen to engage with the City Council to discuss how else the new building could be incorporated into its Green City Programme.

As well as the replacement tree planting, the applicant’s Landscaping scheme indicates how the existing communal amenity areas around Westminster House and Canon Green Court could be enhanced to increase their quality and, importantly, their usability. The plans currently identify new areas of seating, paving, shrub planting and feature lighting, although it is understood that the final scheme would be developed following consultations between residents, a community artist and a landscape architect. The Local Planning Authority are satisfied that a final, detailed landscaping scheme and management plan can be secured by condition; it is however expected that it will, as an

Page 134

$djud2phk.rtf absolute minimum, deliver the extent of planting and associated facilities shown on the current scheme, in order to properly mitigate the harm caused by the loss of existing trees and comply with Policy EN 12 of the Salford UDP.

Siting, Scale and Massing

The footprint, form and massing of the building is largely derived from its internal layout, which comprises of two parallel rows of apartments. This approach is replicated on each level with the exception of the ground-floor, which comprises of commercial floor-space, communal facilities and resident parking.

The proposed apartment block would occupy much of the site’s Blackfriars Road frontage and would be situated 3m from the back of the public footpath, following amendments to the scheme. This distance is now considered to be sufficient to enable a row of semi-mature trees to be installed within an extended public footway. These trees, coupled with a widened footway (c.6.4m) and an active ground-floor frontage along Blackfriars Road will provide the development with a human scale at street-level which, it is considered, will prevent its massing from having an unduly overbearing impact on pedestrians moving past the building.

The submitted elevations indicate that the Blackfriars block would step up in height, from nine to 11 storeys, at the mid-point of its frontage. The nine storey element would sit comfortably next to the existing apartment building on the opposite side of Richmond Street, which is six-storeys high. To the other side, the proposed building would be seen next to a three-storey terrace of properties, dating from the late Victorian era. Whilst there would be a significant step up in height between these future neighbours, it is considered that sufficient space has been retained between them (c.12.5m) to prevent this increase from appearing unduly incongruous within the streetscene. It is worth noting that a maximum height of 10 storeys has been approved under application 15/66862/OUT on the Stay Inn site. The scale and massing of this development is considered to be reflective of the need to make efficient use of land in this area, to capitalise on its proximity to transport links and other amenities within the regional centre.

Active Frontages

The applicant has amended the ground-floor layout of the proposed apartment block during the course of the application, in an effort to increase the potential level of activity displayed towards Blackfriars Road at street level. Three glazed commercial units are situated at the northern end of the building, whilst an entrance lobby and two resident meeting rooms are located within the southern half. Each of these spaces has been designed to enable views into and out of them, which is positive, however the extent to which the building delivers a truly active frontage is dependent on the spaces being used. To assist with this, it is recommended that a Management Plan for the use of the meeting rooms be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority to ensure that they are readily available, for a range of flexible uses, to residents of all three buildings. To assist with this, it is recommended that a Management Plan for the use of the meeting rooms be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority to ensure that they are readily available, for a range of flexible uses, to residents of all three buildings. During the course of the application the range of proposed use classes for the commercial units has been expanded to include A2 (Financial & Professional Services); A3 (Restaurants & Cafés); B1 (Offices); and D1 (Non-Residential Institutions), in addition to the originally proposed A1 (Shops). Businesses operating within these use- classes could occupy the units on a flexible basis, without the need to apply for planning permission each time, and it is hoped that this will enhance their marketability. As the appreciation of activity within the commercial units is dependent on visibility into them, a condition should be added to any permission that requires each of them to retain a generally open shop front.

Page 135

$djud2phk.rtf Design and Streetscene

Design approach to existing apartment blocks The external appearance of both Canon Green Court and Westminster House has become dated and therefore proposals to rejuvenate them, as well as improve their thermal insulation, are welcomed. The existing buildings would have grey-coloured brick slips added to their ground-floor, which would match the corresponding level of the new Blackfriars block. The existing balconies within Canon Green Court would be enclosed through the installation of glazing to create ‘winter gardens’. This would provide additional space for residents that is warm and useable and is considered to be a particularly positive feature of the proposed refurbishments.

The upper-floors of both buildings would be overclad in coloured render. The applicant has submitted a statement to support the use of this material on the buildings. This seeks to highlight the benefits of render, which include its thermal performance; durability /resistance to wind loads; behavior in relation to fire; and low risk of condensation. The applicant has also reported that during recent consultation events render has emerged as the preferred material of choice for existing residents.

The use of render on these properties is not considered to be ideal, as it generally requires regular maintenance to ensure it displays a clean and uniform colour. It is however recognised that the elevations of the existing buildings are in need of enhancement and that the blocks are set to remain within the applicant’s ownership after the works have been undertaken, which would assist with future maintenance. The use of a coloured render would reduce the prominence of any staining or wear and tear that may occur. Therefore there are no objections to the use of render in this particular instance.

Design approach of the proposed apartment block

The form and massing of the Blackfriars block is relatively simple, however its long elevations are sufficiently broken up by a change in materials, with slate grey tiles serving to highlight the core of the building. Large windows set within deep reveals (150mm) punctuate the facades. Further articulation and interest is provided by the terracotta cladding tiles, which are patinated (as seen at Salford Royal Hospital) and arranged in a brick-bond style. This is considered to be a particularly attractive feature of the scheme and one that will help the building sit comfortably in the streetscene, given the hues displayed by other buildings in the immediate vicinity. Recessed grey panels have been positioned between some of the columns of windows to give the elevations a more vertical emphasis and a dark material (brickwork) has been proposed to the ground-floor of the block to ground the building. Legibility into the building has been improved through the introduction of an entrance canopy.

The applicant has indicated that the proposed bin store could be constructed in dark brickwork to tie- in with the appearance of the base of the main Blackfriars block. The detailed design of the proposed bin store will however be agreed as part of a planning condition.

The appearance of the proposed building has evolved during the course of the application and it is now considered that it would achieve the level of design quality that is expected by the City Council along this important arterial route. Therefore this aspect of the scheme complies with Policy DES1 of the City of Salford UDP and its supporting Design SPD also.

Residential Amenity

Relationship between new development and Westminster House and Canon Green Court The separation distances from habitable room windows within Westminster House and Canon Green Court to the new development have been measured and assessed. Accounting also for the

Page 136

$djud2phk.rtf orientation of the three buildings, it is considered that the proposed Blackfriars block would have an acceptable impact on the outlook and amount of daylight afforded to residents of the existing buildings within the site.

As previously identified, the proposed building would be located on what is currently an area of communal amenity space for residents of Westminster House and Canon Green Court. Whilst the functionality of this space may be relatively limited, it nevertheless provides a visual amenity benefit, with numerous trees providing a green screen (in spring / summer months) to the busy road beyond. The introduction of an 11-storey building on this land would therefore result in a degree of harm to the visual amenities currently enjoyed by existing residents, which requires mitigation, principally as part of the landscaping proposals. This is given further consideration within the ‘Trees and Landscaping’ section of this report.

Relationship between new development and other existing residential schemes The proposed apartment block would retain 21.5m across Blackfriars Road to the facing Delta Point building, a distance that is considered to be acceptable from a privacy perspective.

The applicant has submitted a Daylight & Sunlight Study, which considers the impacts of the development on the facing apartments within Delta Point. With the proposed apartment block in place, the assessed windows within Delta Point would achieve, on average, 89% of the Vertical Sky Component Levels (VSC) levels expected within the BRE guidance. This is considered to be acceptable in a high-density urban environment, given that the guidance is predicated on a relatively low-rise sub-urban environment. More specifically, 15 properties within Delta Point would contain open-plan living/kitchen/diners (LKDs) that, as a result of the development, do not meet the target VSC levels. The Study notes that the LKDs are single-aspect rooms in a building built to the full extent of its boundary and that consequently they place a high burden on any development opposite. It is acknowledged that it would be difficult for any development of a similar siting, scale and massing to Delta Point to be built on the application site and achieve high levels of daylight. As such the impact of the proposed development on the daylight afforded to properties within Delta Point, which is situated in a high-density urban area, adjacent to the Regional Centre, is considered to be acceptable. The sunlight results for the same Delta Point properties were found to be excellent, with 99% compliance.

Approximately 16.5m would remain between the facing habitable windows located within the north- western elevation of the proposed development and those within the south-eastern end of the development on the opposite side of Richmond Street. This distance is considered to be acceptable across a side street in an urban area, particularly as all of the rooms in question also benefit from additional windows / forms of outlook in alternative directions.

Access, Highways and Parking

The applicant has submitted a Transport Statement (TS) and Travel Plan (TP) with their application.

As noted previously in this report, the site is situated in an accessible location, within easy walking distance of the Regional Centre, which provides high levels of public transport and a number of shops and services capable of meeting residents’ day-to-day needs.

Access Arrangements The entrance into the ground-floor car park associated with the new Blackfriars block would be accessed from Richmond Street, off Blackfriars Road. At present both sides of the Richmond Street highway are often congested with parked cars, which would potentially obstruct access for larger vehicles. Furthermore there is no vehicular access through onto Canon Green Drive, due to the presence of gates, bollards and a raised footway. This infrastructure would be removed as part of the proposals to create a continuous highway linking Richmond Street with Canon Green Drive. A condition should be added to any grant of permission to secure these works prior to the first

Page 137

$djud2phk.rtf occupation of the Blackfriars building. Traffic Regulation Orders (no waiting restrictions and junction protection) would need to be installed along the length of Richmond Street to enable vehicles to access the new building in a safe and efficient manner. The cost of providing these Orders should be borne by the applicant and secured as part of a s.278 Highways Agreement.

Trip Generation and Car Parking The originally submitted scheme incorporated 16 parking spaces within the secure car park at ground- floor level, although this has been reduced down to nine spaces during the course of the application. The City Council’s Highways Consultant considers that the restrictive car parking provision associated with the scheme should serve to influence people’s travel patterns; however, they have also noted the applicant should deliver measures to discourage on-street parking (TRO’s) and promote sustainable travel to residents from the outset. The submission of a full residential Travel Plan (TP), which builds upon the measures set out in the submitted Framework TP, would assist with this and should be secured by condition. On this basis it is considered unlikely that the proposed development would impact on the operational capacity of the local highway network.

Servicing and Deliveries Servicing for the commercial units and refuse collection for the Blackfriars block would be undertaken directly from the public highway on Richmond Street. The developer should provide a 2.5m x 14m loading / servicing bay as part of the scheme to ensure that operatives have an appropriate location to undertake these activities. The provision of this facility could be secured by an appropriately worded condition.

The applicant has submitted a plan showing the intended route for refuse vehicles, which would enter the site from West King Street and leave via Richmond Street / Blackfriars Road. This plan should feature within a Refuse Collection Management Plan that would be secured by planning condition. The RCMP would identify measures for managing the site in a way that prevents bins being left on the public highway for collection.

Cycle Parking The ground-floor layout of the new Blackfirars block would include 128 cycle parking spaces, which equates to a provision of 119%. This is considered to be an acceptable number and should therefore be secured by condition. Short-stay cycle parking spaces should be provided within the extended Blackfriars Road footway for visitors of the commercial units. The final number of spaces to be provided, and the exact location of the short-stay spaces, should be determined as part of an appropriately-worded cycle parking condition.

Overall there are no objections to the development on highways grounds, subject to the implementation of an appropriate package of Traffic Regulation Orders on the roads surrounding the application site. Therefore the development is considered to be in compliance with Policies A2, A8 & A10 of the City of Salford UDP and the relevant sections of the NPPF.

Air Quality

Page 138

$djud2phk.rtf The application site lies within the Greater Manchester Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and as such introduces new sensitive receptors into an area where levels of air pollution (nitrogen dioxide – NO2 and particulate matter PM10 PM2.5) will give rise to a negative impact on health and quality of life.

The application is supported by an Air Quality Assessment (AQA) which uses detailed dispersion modelling, verified against local monitoring, to assess the exposure of future residents and also whether there will be a significant impact on future air quality due to the additional traffic generated as a result of the development. Significance is assessed against IAQM and EPUK guidance “Land-Use Planning and Development Control: Planning for Air Quality”, 2017.

The Assessment concludes that levels of NO2 (the pollutant of concern) will be below EU and UK limit values at the façade of the new units closest to Blackfriars Road, and that road traffic generated as a result of the development will not have a significant impact on air quality in the region. Notwithstanding this the AQA recommends a baseline mitigation scheme, in line with relevant guidance, which includes the provision of electric vehicle charging points for residential use. This is considered to be good design practice, as it will encourage sustainable ultra-low emission vehicle take-up. Therefore there are no objections to the proposed development on the grounds of air quality, subject to the imposition of a condition to secure the provision of electric vehicle charging points within the application site. On this basis the proposals are in compliance with Policy EN 17 of the City of Salford UDP.

Noise

The site is subject to road traffic noise from Trinity Way (A6042) to the south-east and Blackfriars Road (A6041) immediately to the north-east. There is also the potential for fixed plant / equipment associated with the Blackfriars block (particularly the commercial element) to impact upon future residents.

The application is supported by a Noise Impact Assessment (NIA), which includes baseline noise measurements confirming that ambient noise levels across the site are above the standards contained within BS8233:2014 (Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction from Buildings); as such mitigation will be required within the new building to ensure that noise levels within habitable rooms are reduced to acceptable levels.

The NIA confirms that with suitable glazing in place, indoor noise levels can be mitigated to acceptable levels, and plant noise limits are specified to enable the future selection of equipment. However the report also states that the calculations given are indicative only, and are based on the provided room dimensions. Detailed calculations may be undertaken once the proposed scheme layout and façade design have been developed to ensure that the indoor ambient noise levels are satisfied. On this basis a condition should be added to any grant of approval to secure a detailed scheme of mitigation.

The opening hours of the commercial element will also need to be agreed to ensure there is no significant impact on amenity.

Overall there is no objection to the application on noise grounds subject to the following conditions;  Compliance with maximum noise criteria for external plant and equipment.  Individual operators for the commercial units to submit their proposed opening hours to the Local Planning Authority for written agreement.  Submission of a detailed noise mitigation scheme for the building envelope (roof, walls, windows) and internal features (ceilings, floors etc) to ensure that internal noise levels comply with BS8233:2014  Submission of a Site Completion Report confirming that all necessary noise attenuation measures have been implemented.

Page 139

$djud2phk.rtf Subject to compliance with the conditions set above, the proposed development would be in compliance with Policy EN 17 of the City of Salford UDP and Paragraphs 109 and 120 of the NPPF.

Contaminated Land

The application site was historically occupied by a former public baths and various other buildings, which have since been demolished. As such there is a potential for land contamination to exist in made ground and from demolition residue.

The interim geo-environmental report submitted with the application has been reviewed by the City Council’s consultant Environment Officer, who has raised no objections to the development, but requested that the following conditions be attached to any grant of planning permission:  Submission of a Remediation Strategy prior to commencement of development.  Any soil or soil-forming materials to be brought to site for use in garden areas or soft landscaping shall be tested for contamination and suitability for use prior to importation to site.  Submission of a Verification Plan and Report, which validates the work that has been undertaken on site. Subject to compliance with the conditions set above, the proposed development would be in compliance with Policy EN 16 of the City of Salford UDP and Paragraphs 109 and 120 of the NPPF.

Drainage

The application site is located in Flood Zone 1 and therefore is at very low risk of flooding. It is, however, a major development and therefore a surface water drainage strategy should be provided for the site. The City council’s consultant Drainage Engineer has advised that this information can be secured as part of a pre-commencement condition. Subject to compliance with this condition, the development is considered to be in compliance with Policy EN19 of the City of Salford UDP and the NPPF.

Design and Security

The applicant has sought to reduce opportunities for crime through the layout and design of the new building and landscaping. A Crime Impact Statement has been submitted with the application to demonstrate this. Officers within Design for Security (Greater Manchester Police) consider that the scheme has been reasonably well designed from a crime prevention perspective and will add activity, natural surveillance and interest to this important route into the City Centre. Positive aspects of the scheme include:  The orientation of buildings and uses within them - promoting activity and surveillance in the most appropriate areas;  Locating entrances to the residential and commercial elements of the scheme in very public positions;  The proposed concierge service;  The range of residents’ amenity spaces and facilities; and,  The provision of secure car and cycle parking.

Archaeology

The Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS) have reviewed the Historic Environment Record and identified that the application site was formerly occupied by a 19th Century

Page 140

$djud2phk.rtf public baths, along with back-to-back workers’ housing. The Blackfriars Road Baths was opened in 1880 and comprised two swimming pools, 33 slipper baths and one vapour bath. The baths and early housing have been demolished but the buried remains of the foundations and associated deposits/features are of potential archaeological interest. It is, however, likely that the proposed new building and associated works will have a negative and destructive impact on the remains.

Whilst the archaeology needs to be recorded and the site’s heritage commemorated, GMAAS consider that in this instance the remains are not nationally significant warranting preservation in situ and can therefore be dealt with through a conditioned scheme of mitigation. Consequently GMAAS have requested that a programme of archaeological mitigation be carried out prior to any development taking place. This would be in the form of a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI), comprising of a Desk-Based Assessment that enables an informed decision to be made regarding the need for further mitigation (such as targeted excavation). The WSI would be secured by planning condition. Subject to compliance with this condition, the proposed development is considered to comply with the provisions of Policy CH5 of the City of Salford UDP and Chapter 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Ecology

An Ecological Assessment has been submitted with the application as the proposed development includes a series of refurbishment works to the fabric of two existing buildings. The Assessment found no evidence of bats roosting within Canon Green Court or Westminster House, but it did identify a number of features that could provide bat roosting opportunities. The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) consider that as the buildings are being refurbished, rather than demolished, harm to any bats present could be avoided by retaining the feature or by the timing of the works. The precautionary measures identified within the Ecological Assessment are considered to be acceptable and therefore a condition should be added to any permission requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with this document.

GMEU are satisfied that the submitted landscaping scheme includes adequate provision for enhancing the natural environment, in accordance with Paragraph 109 of the NPPF.

Energy and Sustainability

The applicant has submitted an Energy and Sustainability Statement with their application, which indicates that the following sustainable and energy efficient measures would be incorporated into the development:  The proposed Blackfriars block incorporates large window openings to maximise the use of passive solar gain.  A key feature of the refurbishment works to the existing buildings is the application of external insulation to the apartments, to improve their energy efficiency.  Building fabric performance on the Blackfriars block will be beyond Building Regulations compliance (e.g. targeting a U value of 0.18 for external walls).  ‘Winter gardens’ will be introduced within Canon Green Court to the existing open balconies to provide shelter during extreme weather events.  Approximately eight semi-mature trees would be planted along an extended Blackfriars Road footway within a continuous tree pit, which enables surface rain water to drain into it, including from the new Blackfriars block.  Internal, secure, cycle storage will be incorporated into the ground-floor level of the new apartment block. On the basis of the above, it is considered that the development will meet the City Council's aspirations in terms of sustainability and the requirements of its SPD: Sustainable Design and Construction.

Page 141

$djud2phk.rtf Planning Obligations

In addition to the refurbishment of the existing buildings, the application proposes to erect an apartment block that would create 108 new apartments.

Given the scale of the development, an assessment of its impact on nearby transport infrastructure, public realm and open space is required in accordance with UDP Policy DEV5 and the Planning Obligations SPD (2015). If considered necessary, planning obligations will be sought to mitigate the impact of the development.

The development is likely to result in increased demand for access to public realm and public open space within the vicinity of the site, as a result of the increase in residents. Given its scale and location adjacent to the Regional Centre, planning obligations have been sought to mitigate against this impact. Whilst it is noted that the applicant is proposing a 100% affordable housing (intermediate rent-to-buy) scheme, the Planning Obligations SPD confirms that there is no policy requirement for any affordable housing (or education) to be provided within apartment schemes in this area.

The applicant has submitted a viability appraisal in response to the Local Planning Authority’s request for planning obligations. A review of the appraisal undertaken by the City Council’s consultant surveyors concluded that the scheme would be able to deliver the full extent of public realm and public open space contributions if the apartments were to be sold on the open market. However, the delivery of a development comprising of 100% affordable units would render it financially unviable and unable to make any form of financial contribution.

Therefore the applicant’s proposed development would not mitigate against the additional demand for access to public realm and public open space, which would result in a moderate level of harm to existing facilities in the vicinity of the site. However, it is recognised that the applicant has demonstrated that in not providing contributions towards open space and public realm improvements that are able to deliver a development that comprises entirely of affordable housing, that exceeds the affordable housing requirements for apartment schemes in this part of the City by 100%. Furthermore, the dwellings would be located in a highly sustainable location. A clear need for affordable accommodation has been identified within the area and within the City generally. As such the benefits of providing this type and level of residential provision, over and above the Council’s normal policy requirements, are considered to be sufficient to outweigh the moderate harm associated with the absence of planning obligations.

On the basis that the applicant is only unable to provide financial contributions if they deliver a scheme comprising of solely affordable accommodation, it is relevant and necessary to secure the provision of 100% affordable housing through a s106 legal agreement.

Conclusion

As part of a wider programme of refurbishment works, the proposed development would deliver a series of external enhancements to Westminster House and Canon Green Court, which would contribute towards the buildings being brought up to Decent Homes Standards. The applicant intends to part fund these works through the development of a new apartment block fronting Blackfriars Road.

Page 142

$djud2phk.rtf The new building would result in the loss of a group of trees adjacent to Blackfriars Road, which are considered to make a positive contribution to the amenity of the streetscene. Their loss would be mitigated by the delivery of replacement tree planting, including along the Blackfriars Road frontage, and through enhancements to the communal amenity spaces available to residents of the wider site. Subject to compliance with the relevant conditions that have been recommended, the proposals would raise no issues in relation to air quality, noise, land contamination, residential amenity, drainage, archaeology, ecological impact, residential amenity or opportunities for crime. The new building is considered to achieve the level of design quality that is reasonably expected of new development along this important route into the City. The site is situated in an accessible location and as such the restricted car parking provision for the new building is considered to be acceptable. The applicant has submitted a viability appraisal with the application that demonstrates it would not be viable to deliver any financial contributions towards planning obligations on the basis that the Blackfriars block will comprise entirely of affordable housing units. However, the benefits associated with the delivery of 108 affordable apartments in this part of the City are considered to outweigh the moderate harm associated with the absence of any financial contributions and resulting conflict with UDP Policy DEV 5. On balance, it is considered that the proposed development is acceptable and is therefore recommended for approval, subject to the signing of a s106 agreement.

Recommendation

Planning permission be granted subject to the following planning conditions and that:

 The delivery of 108 units of affordable accommodation (as defined by Annex 2 of the National Planning Policy Framework or any future guidance that replaces it) within the Blackfriars block hereby approved;

2) That the applicant be informed that the Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions stated below, on completion of such a legal agreement;

3) The authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued (subject to the conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement;

Conditions

1. The development must be begun not later than three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Location Plan – 17227-0301 Rev: P-00 Blackfriars Block, Proposed Ground-Floor Plan – 17227-0307 Rev: P-03 Blackfriars Block, Proposed First to Eighth Floor Layout Plan – 17227-0308 Rev: P-02 Blackfriars Block, Proposed Ninth to Tenth Floor Layout Plan – 17227-0309 Rev: P-02 Blackfriars Block, Proposed Roof Plan – 17227-0310 Rev: P-02 Canon Green Court, Proposed Elevations AA, BB – 17227-0311 Rev: P-00 Canon Green Court, Proposed Elevations CC, DD, EE – 17227-0312 Rev: P-00

Page 143

$djud2phk.rtf Westminster House, Proposed Elevations AA, BB, CC, DD – 17227-0313 Rev: P-00 Blackfriars Block, Proposed Elevations AA, CC - 17227-0314 Rev: P-05 Blackfriars Block, Proposed Elevations BB, DD - 17227-0315 Rev: P-04 Blackfriars Block, Proposed Street Elevation (Blackfriars Road) – 17227-0318 Rev: P-04 Landscape General Arrangement – 1801/p/01

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of neighbours in accordance with policies DES7 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. No development shall be started until all the trees within (or overhanging) the site, with the exception of those trees clearly shown to be felled on the submitted plan, have been surrounded by substantial fences which shall extend to the extreme circumference of the spread of the branches of the trees (or such positions as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority). Such fences shall be erected in accordance with a specification to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall remain until all development is completed and no work, including any form of drainage or storage of materials, earth or topsoil shall take place within the perimeter of such fencing.

Reason: To safeguard existing trees within the site and to ensure that adequate provision is made for their protection whilst the development is carried out, having regard to Policy EN12 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, the Salford City Council Trees and Development Supplementary Planning Document, and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 144

$djud2phk.rtf 5. Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application, no development in relation to Westminster House or Canon Green Court shall commence until samples and full details of materials to be used externally on the buildings have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include the type, colour and texture of the materials. Only the materials so approved shall be used, in accordance with any terms of such approval.

6. With the exception of the approved refurbishment works to Westminster House and Canon Green Court, no development shall take place, including any works of excavation or demolition, until a programme of archaeological works in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall not be occupied until the programme of archaeological works has been completed in accordance with the approved WSI. The WSI shall cover the following: (a) A phased programme and methodology of site investigation and recording to include: - targeted field evaluation trenching - (depending upon the evaluation results) a strip map and record exercise - targeted open area excavation (b) A programme for post investigation assessment to include: - analysis of the site investigation records and finds - production of a final report on the significance of the archaeological and historical interest represented. (c) Provision for publication and dissemination of the analysis and report on the site investigation. (d) Provision for archive deposition of the report, finds and records of the site investigation. (e) Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the approved WSI.

Reason: To protect the significance of any archaeological remains on the site in accordance with Policy CH5 of the city of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. With the exception of the approved refurbishment works to Westminster House and Canon Green Court, no development shall take place, including excavations and works below ground, until a scheme for surface water drainage for the site using sustainable drainage methods and which includes details of how water quality will be improved, and how existing surface water discharge rates reduced, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation or use of the development hereby approved unless alternative timescales have been agreed in writing as part of the strategy.

Page 145

$djud2phk.rtf 8. The trees to be felled as part of the development hereby approved shall be replaced in accordance with a Tree Replacement Scheme, which shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of works associated with the Blackfriars Block. The scheme shall include details of: tree species; tree sizes (including the minimum height and circumference of stem at 1m from the ground level); a plan indicating the location of the replacement trees and a timetable for tree planting and details of aftercare. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with approved details and timetable and shall be retained thereafter.

9. Prior to the commencement of development associated with the Blackfriars block hereby approved, a Contaminated Land Remediation Strategy shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The Remediation Strategy shall be prepared by suitably competent persons and shall incorporate updated gas monitoring and an assessment of soft landscaping areas in addition to the measures proposed in the submitted Phase I and II Report. The development shall thereafter be carried out in full accordance with the approved Remediation Strategy.

10. Pursuant to condition 9 and prior to the first occupation of the Blackfriars block, a verification report, which validates that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed with the Local Planning Authority, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

11. a) Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, no development in relation to the Blackfriars block hereby permitted shall commence until full details of both hard and soft landscaping works have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The details shall include the formation of any banks, terraces or other earthworks, hard surfaced areas and materials, boundary treatments, external lighting, planting plans, specifications and schedules (including planting size, species and numbers/densities), existing plants / trees to be retained and a scheme for the timing / phasing of implementation works.

Page 146

$djud2phk.rtf Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development and in accordance with Policies DES1 and DES9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

12. Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application, no above ground construction works shall take place in relation to the Blackfriars block until samples and full details of materials to be used externally on the buildings have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include the type, colour and texture of the materials and shall include the use of a red patinated Terreal tile. Only the materials so approved shall be used, in accordance with any terms of such approval.

13. No business shall commence operating from the commercial units within the Blackfriars block hereby approved until its operating hours (including delivery and collection hours) have been submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The business shall operate in accordance with the approved opening hours thereafter.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of residents, in accordance with policy EN 17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

14. Prior to the first occupation of the Blackfriars block hereby approved, a scheme for the provision of onsite and off-site highway works, together with any traffic management measures, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with a timetable that has first been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

15. Notwithstanding the details submitted to date the Blackfriars block hereby approved shall not be brought into first occupation until details of short-stay and covered long-stay cycle parking have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved secure cycle parking shall be implemented and made available for its intended use prior to first occupation of the Blackfriars Block and shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: To encourage more sustainable modes of travel in accordance with policies ST14, A2 and A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework

16. Prior to the first occupation of the Blackfriars block hereby approved, an updated Travel Plan shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The agreed Travel Plan shall be implemented and reviewed in accordance with the timetable embodied therein.

17. Prior to the first occupation of the Blackfriars block, a scheme for the provision of electric vehicle charging points within its car park shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local

Page 147

$djud2phk.rtf Planning Authority. The charging points shall be installed in accordance with the approved scheme prior to first occupation of the Blackfriars Block and retained thereafter, unless other agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To encourage the uptake of ultra-low emission vehicles and ensure the development is sustainable, and to safeguard residential amenity, public health and quality of life, having regard to Policies EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and Paragraphs 35 and 124 of the NPPF.

18. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved, a scheme for the provision of onsite and off-site highway improvement works, together with any traffic management measures, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with a timetable that has first been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

19. Prior to the commencement of above-ground works for the Blackfriars block hereby approved, a detailed noise mitigation scheme for the building envelope (roof, walls, windows) and internal features (ceilings, floors etc) shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority to ensure that noise levels within internal living, dining and bedrooms comply with BS8233:2014 (Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction from Buildings). The scheme shall include a means of ventilation to obviate the need for opening windows to achieve ventilation (including purge ventilation) in accordance with Building Regulations Approved Document F. The mitigation measures shall be installed within the Blackfriars block in accordance with the approved Scheme prior to its first occupation and shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring occupants of the development hereby approved in accordance with policies S4 and EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

20. Prior to the first occupation of the Blackfriars block hereby approved, a Noise Completion Report shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The NCR shall confirm that all of the necessary noise attenuation measures identified in the Noise Mitigation Scheme required by condition 19 have been properly implemented.

21. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a Landscape Management Plan, which includes a timetable for its implementation, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

22. Prior to the first occupation of the Blackfriars block hereby approved, evidence and verification information (such as laboratory certificates) for any soil, or soil-forming materials to be brought to site for use in garden areas, or soft landscaping shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by,

Page 148

$djud2phk.rtf the Local Planning Authority. The submitted information shall demonstrate testing for contamination and suitability of use in relation to the presence of sensitive receptors (future residents).

Reason: To ensure the safe development of the site in the interests of the amenity of future occupiers in accordance with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

23. The Blackfriars block hereby approved shall not be brought into first use or occupation until a scheme showing the provision and storage of waste and recycling facilities associated with the building have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The submitted scheme shall include details of the proposed bin stores and identify the number and type of refuse bins to be provided for the residential and commercial uses hereby approved. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation of the building and shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: In order to encourage waste recycling, and in the interests of visual amenity, in accordance with Policy DES1 of the City of Salford UDP and the Salford City Council Sustainable Design and Construction Supplementary Planning Document.

24. Notwithstanding the details submitted to date, the Blackfriars block hereby approved shall not be brought into first occupation until a Refuse Collection and Service Management Plan has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter development shall proceed in accordance with the details within the approved Plan.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian and highway safety, having regard to Policies A2 and A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

25. Prior to the first occupation of the Blackfriars block hereby approved, a Meeting Room Management Plan (MRMP) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority in relation to the two residents’ meeting rooms on the ground-floor of the building. The MRMP shall include details relating to allowable uses; access (including for those residents of Westminster House and Canon Green Court); means of booking; and any charges. Thereafter the rooms shall be used in accordance with the approved MRMP unless otherwise agreed in writing.

Reason: To encourage the flexible use of residents’ facilities and to assist with the provision of an active frontage, having regard to Policies DES1 and EHC3 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

26. The mitigation measures contained within Chapter 5 of the submitted Ecological Assessment (The Environment Partnership – ref: 6584.003, March 2018) shall be implemented in full and retained thereafter.

Reason: To mitigate against the impacts of the development and to secure opportunities for the enhancement of the nature conservation value of the site in accordance with Policy EN10 of the City of Salford UDP and the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012).

27. The vehicle parking, servicing and other vehicular access arrangements shown on the approved plans to serve the Blackfriars block hereby permitted shall be made available for use prior to the first occupation of the Blackfriars block and shall be retained thereafter for their intended purpose.

Page 149

$djud2phk.rtf Reason: In the interest of highway safety and the free flow of traffic and in accordance with policies A2, A8 and A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

28. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any other order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), the commercial units within the Blackfriars block hereby approved shall operate within Use Classes A1 (shops); A2 (Financial & Professional Services); A3 (Restaurants & Cafés); B1 (Offices); and D1 (Non-Residential Institutions) and for no other purpose, including any other purpose within the Schedule of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order.

Reason: To enable a full assessment of any alternative uses, which could harm local character, neighbouring amenity, and/or impact upon the local highway network, having regard to Policies DES1 and DES7 of the City of Salford UDP.

29. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any other order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), the commercial units and meeting rooms hereby approved within the ground-floor of the Blackfriars block shall retain an open window display onto Blackfriars Road at all times. Any proposed internal or external alterations to the windows onto Blackfriars Road shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that an attractive and active frontage is retained in a manner appropriate to the location, having regard to Policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

30. Any externally mounted plant and equipment (with the exception of plant required for emergency situations such as standby generators, smoke extract equipment etc) associated with the Blackfriars block hereby approved shall be designed so as not to exceed the following noise levels (assessed in accordance with BS 4142: 2014 with corrections applied for any plant emitting noise of a tonal or irregular quality): . 07:00 – 23:00 - 41 dB LAEQ 1-hour

. 23:00 – 07:00 – 33 dB dB LAEQ 15-Minute

Notes to Applicant

1. If during any works on site, contamination is suspected or found, or contamination is caused, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified immediately. Where required, a suitable risk assessment shall be carried out and/or any remedial action shall be carried out in accordance to an agreed process and within agreed timescales in agreement with the Local Planning Authority.

2. No works to trees or shrubs shall occur between the 1st March and 31st August in any year unless a detailed bird nest survey by a suitably experienced ecologist has been carried out immediately prior to clearance and written confirmation provided that no active bird nests are present which has been agreed in writing by the LPA.

3. It is an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, as amended to introduce, plant or cause to grow wild any plant listed in Schedule 9 part 2 of the Act. Species such as Rhododendron ponticum and various Cotoneaster species are included within this schedule. If

Page 150

$djud2phk.rtf any such species will be disturbed as a result of this development a suitably experienced consultant should be employed to advise on how to avoid an offence.

Page 151

$djud2phk.rtf This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 6

ITEM NO.

REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR PLACE

TO THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

ON 7th June 2018

TITLE: PLANNING APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY

RECOMMENDATION: That the report be noted

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To set out details of applications determined by the Strategic Director for Environment and Community Safety in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS: (Available for public inspection) Details of the applications are available on the Council’s Public Access Website http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/default.aspx If you would like to access this information in an alternative format, please contact the planning office on 0161-779 6195 or e-mail [email protected]

KEY DECISION: NO

DETAILS: See attached schedule

KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: Performance Management

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND IMPLICATIONS:N/A

ASSESSMENT OF RISK:N/A

SOURCE OF FUNDING: N/A

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A

OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED:N/A

Page 153

CONTACT OFFICER: Liz Taylor – 0161 779 4803

WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S): As specified in the attached schedule

Recommendation

PER = Approve AUTH = Consent REF = Refuse NO OBJECTION = Allow the scheme as no objections have been received. An example would be used in response to consultations from neighbouring authorities or in relation to prior approvals when no objections have been received DISCON = Discharge of condition – an example would be that the submitted information is approved PDIS = Part discharge of conditions requested – an example of this would be that negotiations are still on-going with regard to some of the requested conditions or the condition is a multi staged condition and part is acceptable NDIS = Not Discharging condition requested – an example would be the submitted information is not acceptable and the decision is to refuse

Application Type

FUL = Full application ADV = Advert Application OUT = Outline Application HH = Householder Application REM = Reserved Matters COU = Change of use LBC = Listed Building Consent CON = Conservation Area Consent DISCON = Formal Discharge of Condition NMA = Non-Material Amendment MMA = Minor material Amendment DEMCON = Demolition Consultation TPO = Tree Application TEL56 = Telecommunication Notification ART16 = Art16 Notification PDE = General Permitted Development Extension

Page 154 DELEGATED DECISIONS BY DCM

APPLICATION No: 18/71553/ART16 DATE VALID: 16.03.2018

APPLICANT:Richard Gore

LOCATION: Article 16 Development Site Old Trafford Phase 2, Pomona Strand, Old Trafford,

PROPOSAL: Article 16 consultation received from Trafford Council (Application number 93779/FUL/18)

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

APPLICATI ON No: 18/71574/TPO DATE VALID: 22.03.2018 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr Lee Faragher

LOCATION: Street Record Thistledown Close Eccles

PROPOSAL: Crown lift to 2.5m one birch tree (T902). Crown lift to 3m and clear street furniture to give 1m clearance one sycamore tree (T904).

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71644/ART16 DATE VALID: 12.04.2018

APPLICANT:Janet Lawless

LOCATION: Article 16 Unit 16 Cheetham Hill Shopping Centre 40 Bury Old Road Manchester M8 5EL

PROPOSAL: Article 16 consultation from Manchester Council (Application Reference 118867/FO/2018) for the change of use of mezzanine from Class (D1) to community use class (D2) for a temporary period of 3 years of mezzanine area

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 2 May 2018 ______

Page 155 APPLICATION No: 18/71726/ART16 DATE VALID: 25.04.2018

APPLICANT:Tom Parkinson

LOCATION: Article 16 Mode Wheel Locks Trafford Wharf Road Trafford Park

PROPOSAL: Article 16 consultation received from Trafford Council (Application number 94205/FUL/18) for the Hydropower scheme and associated infrastructure, includingrepurposing of the existing pump house as a turbine house,construction of hydropower channels, installation of mechanical and electrical equipment, and construction of an electrical substation.

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/70060/OUT DATE VALID: 07.09.2017 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr M O'Mahoney

LOCATION: M And J Motors Barton Lane Eccles M30 0HX

PROPOSAL: Outline planning application with all matters reserved (except access and layout) for the erection of eight dwellinghouses, following demolition of existing buildings

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71206/HH DATE VALID: 02.03.2018 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr M Cope

LOCATION: 18 Stanley Road Eccles M30 7HL

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

Page 156 APPLICATION No: 18/71346/DISCON DATE VALID: 05.02.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Mike Stone And Ellenbrook LOCATION: Land Off Highclove Lane Boothstown Salford M28 1ZQ

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 12 (surface water) attached to planning permission 17/70025/REM.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71429/HH DATE VALID: 27.02.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Higson And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 4 Wyre Drive Worsley M28 1HH

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey front extension, infill existing door and new window to the front elevation

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71475/HH DATE VALID: 04.03.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Malcolm & Amy Shiels And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 65 Border Brook Lane Worsley M28 1XJ

PROPOSAL: Two storey side extension to existing dwelling

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

Page 157 APPLICATION No: 18/71482/HH DATE VALID: 03.03.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mrs Nofie Johnston And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 8 Portside Close Worsley M28 1YY

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of two storey side and rear extension and new roof to entire property (resubmission of 17/69652/HH)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71483/HH DATE VALID: 03.03.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Paul Taylor And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 60 Greylag Crescent Worsley M28 7AB

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey front and rear extensions, part single/part two storey side extension, conversion from hipped to gable roof, dormer to the rear, new windows to front and rear, and loft conversion.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71506/CLUDP DATE VALID: 15.03.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Luke Street And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 6 Goldcrest Close Worsley M28 7XB

PROPOSAL: Certificate of lawfulness for removal of existing glazed conservatory and replacement with facing brick extension with flat roof to provide an extended kitchen and dining area with level access to rear garden.

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 14 May 2018 ______

Page 158 APPLICATION No: 18/71525/NMA DATE VALID: 20.03.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Ms Sophie Maton And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 25 Queen Anne Drive Worsley M28 1ZF

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 17/70666/HH for removal of door side window and building up of opening in brickwork to match existing brickwork.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71542/HH DATE VALID: 16.03.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Theo Pentefountis And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 6 Langtree Close Worsley M28 7XT

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of a single storey rear extension together with velux roof lights.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 9 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71550/HH DATE VALID: 21.03.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Nigel Underdown And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 103 Leigh Road Worsley M28 1LG

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension (re-submission of 17/71013/HH).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 May 2018 ______

Page 159 APPLICATION No: 18/71563/HH DATE VALID: 29.03.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Dean Crawford And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 2 Ashford Avenue Worsley M28 1JJ

PROPOSAL: Demolition of conservatory and erection of single storey rear extension and first floor rear dormer

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71301/FUL DATE VALID: 28.02.2018 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr Imtiaz Awan

LOCATION: Rear Of 53 Broughton Lane Salford M8 9UE

PROPOSAL: Erection of first floor extension on brick pillars to existing warehouse unit over existing car spaces

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71412/HH DATE VALID: 07.03.2018 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mrs Klein

LOCATION: 304 Great Clowes Street Salford M7 2HD

PROPOSAL: Ground floor rear extension with front and rear dormers and new entrance on front boundary wall

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 May 2018 ______

Page 160 APPLICATION No: 18/71441/HH DATE VALID: 06.03.2018 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr E Steinhart

LOCATION: 4 Tully Street Salford M7 4PA

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey rear extension, construction of dormer to the rear, raising of the roof ridge height of side extension, new windows to the side elevation, infilling of garage door and replacement window to the front elevation.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71481/HH DATE VALID: 16.03.2018 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Grossberger

LOCATION: 15 Ashbourne Grove Salford M7 4DB

PROPOSAL: Erection of first/second floor rear extension, two storey front extension and loft conversion with dormers to front and rear.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71555/FUL DATE VALID: 20.03.2018 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr L Tager

LOCATION: 340 Great Clowes Street Salford M7 2FT

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 May 2018 ______

Page 161 APPLICATION No: 17/71071/FUL DATE VALID: 06.03.2018 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Mr Hugh Shacklock

LOCATION: Land To The Side Of 246 Liverpool Road Cadishead Irlam M44 5DX

PROPOSAL: Erection of a detached dwelling, together with car parking and construction of dropped kerbs

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71178/HH DATE VALID: 08.01.2018 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs KELLY

LOCATION: 3 Fairfield Road Cadishead Irlam M44 5HX

PROPOSAL: Erection of a ground floor side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 2 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71265/FUL DATE VALID: 13.03.2018 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Abda Koser

LOCATION: 600 Liverpool Road Irlam M44 5AA

PROPOSAL: Change of use from vacant Public House (A4) and flat (C3) to Children's Day Nursery (D1)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 May 2018 ______

Page 162 APPLICATION No: 18/71534/FUL DATE VALID: 15.03.2018 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Mr James Cooper

LOCATION: The Old Station House Station Road Irlam M44 5ZR

PROPOSAL: To build a Heritage Midland Signal Box based on the designs from the late 19th century. This is to be used as a local railway heritage centre and placed within the car park area of the recently restored station house building.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71628/DISCON DATE VALID: 03.04.2018 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Mr Steve Hassall

LOCATION: Former Fit City Cadishead Lords Street Cadishead Irlam M44 5EH

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 8 (verification) attached to planning permission 16/68886/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 14 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71640/PDE DATE VALID: 09.04.2018 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Mr Daniel Pinkney C/o Mr Joseph Lockley

LOCATION: 268 Liverpool Road Irlam M44 6NA

PROPOSAL: Ground floor rear extension

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 14 May 2018 ______

Page 163 APPLICATION No: 18/71473/HH DATE VALID: 02.03.2018 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Mrs Maria Lynch

LOCATION: 37 Overlinks Drive Salford M6 7PF

PROPOSAL: Single storey rear extension including changes to elevations.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71494/HH DATE VALID: 07.03.2018 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Sarah Gilmour

LOCATION: 34 Bolton Road Pendlebury Swinton M27 8XB

PROPOSAL: Erection single storey side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 14 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71590/ADV DATE VALID: 27.03.2018 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Salford City Council

LOCATION: Ingleside Swinton Park Road Salford M6 7PA

PROPOSAL: Proposed freestanding sign to be installed at the entrance of the site

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 May 2018 ______

Page 164 APPLICATION No: 18/71610/HH DATE VALID: 03.04.2018 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Mr Martin Turner

LOCATION: 8 Oxford Road Salford M6 8LR

PROPOSAL: Proposed two storey side and single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71001/COU DATE VALID: 04.01.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr John Eddison

LOCATION: Unit A2 Lyntown Trading Estate Old Wellington Road Eccles M30 9QG

PROPOSAL: Change of use from Class B1/ B2/B8 (Employment Use) to Class D2 (Assembly and Leisure) to allow the unit to be used as a Crossfit Gym.Re- submission of 17/70590/COU

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71010/HH DATE VALID: 12.01.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Mark Smeeton

LOCATION: 44 Ellesmere Road Eccles M30 9JH

PROPOSAL: Demolition of conservatory, sunroom, side porch, garage and erection of a two storey side extension to both side elevations, a single storey side extension to both side elevations, single storey front extension, construction of canopy to the rear and changes to elevations.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

Page 165 APPLICATION No: 18/71223/HH DATE VALID: 12.01.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr tony lawton

LOCATION: 2A Willan Road Eccles M30 0WT

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 9 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71386/HH DATE VALID: 05.03.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Sam Liptrott

LOCATION: 12A Westminster Road Eccles M30 9EB

PROPOSAL: Partial demolition of existing garden stores and garage, erection of a two storey front extension and single storey side extension, including renewal of roof tiles, external wall finishes and replacement of existing windows and doors.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71402/HH DATE VALID: 23.03.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Ms Lesley Fair

LOCATION: 13 Mirfield Drive Eccles M30 9LH

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing chimney and erection of single storey rear and side extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 May 2018 ______

Page 166 APPLICATION No: 18/71427/HH DATE VALID: 14.03.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Julian Goodman

LOCATION: 70 Bradford Road Eccles M30 9FT

PROPOSAL: Erection of 10.5m amateur radio aerial mast with antenna

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71450/COU DATE VALID: 28.02.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Miss Gayle Harrop

LOCATION: 165 Monton Road Eccles M30 9GS

PROPOSAL: Removal of condition 5 (No amplified music or voices shall be played within the premise at any time) attached to planning permission 15/66558/COU.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71452/HH DATE VALID: 26.02.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Lee Camilleri

LOCATION: 15 Nansen Avenue Eccles M30 8AT

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of single storey side/rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

Page 167 APP LICATION No: 18/71502/DISCON DATE VALID: 06.04.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Mark Sweeney

LOCATION: 13 Park Road Eccles M30 9JQ

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (materials) , 4 (contamination 1), 5 (contamination 2) and 6 (hard and soft landscaping) attached to appeal 17/00011/REF (planning permission 16/69233/FUL).

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71510/HH DATE VALID: 13.03.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs R Murphy

LOCATION: 25 Snowdon Road Eccles M30 9AS

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 9 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71521/HH DATE VALID: 13.03.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Jones

LOCATION: 27 Ravensdale Gardens Eccles M30 9JD

PROPOSAL: Removal of existing rear extension and rear detached garage and construction of a single storey rear extension and front porch

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

Page 168 APPLICATION No: 18/71545/FUL DATE VALID: 26.03.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Abdulmalek Abdo

LOCATION: 60 Liverpool Road Eccles M30 0WA

PROPOSAL: Application for variation of condition 4 (hours) attached to planning permission 13/63433/FUL for change of opening hours to 10:00 AM to 01:00 AM Monday to Thursday and 10:00 AM to 01:30 AM Friday to Sunday

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 14 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71547/TPO DATE VALID: 27.03.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Gerry Jaques

LOCATION: Queenscroft Victoria Road Eccles M30 9QQ

PROPOSAL: Reduce first main lateral branch back to the first secondary branch to leave a length of 4.5m one ash tree (T8).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71715/TREECA DATE VALID: 27.03.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Gerry Jaques

LOCATION: Queenscroft Victoria Road Eccles Manchester

PROPOSAL: Crown reduce to leave a height of 11m and a spread of 5m (to the west), crown raise to provide a 4m clearance from ground level and 10% crown thin one sycamore tree (T1). Fell one goat willow (T2), one rowan (T3), two holly (T6 and T7). Reduce to leave a height of 13m and prune to provide a 2m clearance from building one robinia (T4). Crown lift to provide a 4.5m clearance from the ground level (by removing 5.no secondary branches) one sycamore tree (T5).

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

Page 169 APPLICATION No: 18/71591/HH DATE VALID: 29.03.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Miss Jill Rutherford -Davies

LOCATION: 29 Westminster Road Eccles M30 9EA

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey side extension, conversion of existing living room window into a bay window, alterations to roof to extend the first floor and the erection of a rear dormer (resubmission of application ref: 17/70836/HH)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71432/HH DATE VALID: 20.02.2018 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Brookes

LOCATION: 4 Sunflower Meadow Irlam M44 6TD

PROPOSAL: Construction of a dormer to the rear, conversion of hipped roof to gable, loft conversion and new velux windows to the front.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71533/HH DATE VALID: 22.03.2018 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Mrs Lesley Segelit

LOCATION: 12 Ferryhill Road Irlam M44 6DD

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear glazed extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 May 2018 ______

Page 170 APPLICATION No: 18/71540/HH DATE VALID: 28.03.2018 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Mr Steve Henderson

LOCATION: 13 Ratcliffe Avenue Irlam M44 6WD

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing porch and erection of single storey side extension, replacement of existing window with a new door to front elevation.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71074/DISCON DATE VALID: 12.12.2017 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr G Jones Riverside

LOCATION: 30 Frederick Road Salford M6 6NY

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 8 (travel plan) attached to planning permission 16/67659/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71218/FUL DATE VALID: 23.01.2018 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Darren Ogden Riverside

LOCATION: Willow Bank Works Whit Lane Salford M6 6JJ

PROPOSAL: Change of use of outbuilding from B2 (General Industrial) to Class B8 Storage and Distribution with an ancillary retail element

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 May 2018 ______

Page 171 APPLICATION No: 18/71416/FUL DATE VALID: 06.03.2018 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Darren Kibble Riverside

LOCATION: Car Park Frederick Road Campus, M6 6PU

PROPOSAL: Erection of a 4 storey building to house Energy House 2.0 (a new research facility comprising research chambers, offices, meeting rooms, lecture area, a workshop, control room and associated ancillary and welfare spaces) together with associated external plant and waste storage areas, parking and landscaping.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71428/DISCON DATE VALID: 22.02.2018 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Tom Pool Riverside

LOCATION: Land North Of Senior Street Springfield Lane Salford

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 4 (landscaping), 12 (noise) and partial compliance of condition 17 (verification report) attached to planning permission 15/66199/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71592/DISCON DATE VALID: 09.04.2018 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Tom Pool Riverside

LOCATION: Land North Of Senior Street Springfield Lane Salford

PROPOSAL: Request for partial confirmation of compliance of condition 17 (verification) for phase 2B attached to planning permission 15/66199/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

Page 172 APPLICATION No: 18/71353/FUL DATE VALID: 21.03.2018 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Henry

LOCATION: 23 And 24 Ainsdale Avenue Salford M7 4LS

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the conversion of two storey maisonette into two self contained apartments

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 14 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71389/FUL DATE VALID: 21.02.2018 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Stonwhite Ltd

LOCATION: 458 Bury New Road Salford M7 4LH

PROPOSAL: Erection of 6 three storey semi-detached dwellings.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71436/HH DATE VALID: 21.03.2018 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr D Levine

LOCATION: 4 Mayfield Road Salford M7 3WZ

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey side extension, decking with access stairs to the rear.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 May 2018 ______

Page 173 APPLICATION No: 18/71464/PDE DATE VALID: 15.03.2018 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Miss Jaspreet Walia C/O Mr Kevin Rippinghall

LOCATION: 11 Blyton Lane Salford M7 3BR

PROPOSAL: Proposed single storey rear extension with pitched roof.

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71581/TPO DATE VALID: 21.03.2018 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Jamie Hilley

LOCATION: 65 And 67 Upper Park Road Salford M7 4JB

PROPOSAL: Reduce to leave a height of 8m, crown clean, crown lift to provide a 3m clearance from the surrounding ground level, reduce side branches by 2m in accordance with photograph one prunus tree (T1). Reduce branches to provide a 3m clearance from phone lines and property, reduce one limb by 2/3m as per photograph one prunus (T2).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/7 1122/FUL DATE VALID: 09.02.2018 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Mr Shloime Eckstein

LOCATION: Salford Discount Carpets And Beds 38 Fitzwarren Street Salford M6 5JF

PROPOSAL: Part demolition and alterations to existing showroom to include construction of new flat roof and car park, together with erection of six dwellings.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

Page 174 APPLICATION No: 18/71480/FUL DAT E VALID: 29.03.2018 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Mr Simon Stott

LOCATION: Fitzwarren Court Rosehill Close Salford M6 5LN

PROPOSAL: The enhancement of the existing elevations with insulated render and brick slip cladding and new windows and external doors.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/70340/FUL DATE VALID: 02.03.2018 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Mr Ian Murray

LOCATION: Wharton Primary School Rothwell Lane Little Hulton M38 9XA

PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for erection of an additional meeting room and small office extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71514/HH DATE VALID: 14.03.2018 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Mr Rees Shaw

LOCATION: 12 Derwent Close Worsley M28 0TR

PROPOSAL: Erection of a part first floor/part two storey side extension together with Juliette balcony and alterations to elevations.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 14 May 2018 ______

Page 175 APPLICATION No: 17/70391/FUL DATE VALID: 15.08.2017 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Andy Williamson

LOCATION: 2 Merchants Quay Salford M50 3XR

PROPOSAL: Proposed extensions and alterations to existing office building. Alterations include remodelling the pitched roof to a flat roof with additional floorspace created at first floor level.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71151/REM DATE VALID: 03.01.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Scarborough Development Group

LOCATION: Middlewood Locks Land North Of Middlewood Street And East Of Oldfield Road Salford M5 4GU

PROPOSAL: Details of reserved matters application for the landscaping of Phase 1 (Plots F, I, J & O) of Middlewood Locks, pursuant to 16/67987/OUTEIA (revisions to details approved under 15/67135/REM).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 2 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71449/DISCON DATE VALID: 26.02.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Richard Frain

LOCATION: The Rectory 101 Hulton Street Salford M5 3WQ

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (landscaping), 4 (cycle), 5 (bins) and 9 (windows and doors) attached to planning permission 17/69545/FUL and conditions 4 (Windows and Doors) and 7 (Boundary Treatment) attached to planning permission 17/69546/LBC.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 May 2018 ______

Page 176 APPLICATION No: 18/71 463/P3JPA DATE VALID: 27.02.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Beech Holdings

LOCATION: Brookland House 3-5 Vere Street Salford M50 2GQ

PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the change of use from B1(a) (Office) to C3 (Residential) living accommodation for 25 apartments

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71478/COU DATE VALID: 07.03.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Ms Heather Boulton

LOCATION: Unit 1 Trinity Row Irwell Street Salford M3 5EN

PROPOSAL: Change of use from vacant unit to Fitness Studio (D2)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 2 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71498/FUL DATE VALID: 08.03.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Loebinger

LOCATION: Fresh 138 Chapel Street Salford M3 6AF

PROPOSAL: Installation of a new shop front.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 May 2018 ______

Page 177 APPLICATION No: 18/71515/ADV DATE VALID: 15.03.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Moundhir Baaziz

LOCATION: Ferguson House 11 Blackfriars Road Salford

PROPOSAL: Display of two non illuminated flat cut letters on brass locators.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 14 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71532/F UL DATE VALID: 15.03.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:c/o agent

LOCATION: Brookland House 3-5 Vere Street Salford M50 2GQ

PROPOSAL: External alterations to the building including installation of rooflights, replacement of existing windows on all elevations and door to west elevation, removal of air conditioning and air handling units on east elevation, removal of redundant personnel door and replace with window to east elevation and other associated alterations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71578/DISCON DATE VALID: 23.03.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:TH Real Estate

LOCATION: Waterfront Quay Salford M50 3XW

PROPOSAL: Retrospective request for confirmation of compliance of condition 1 (time limit) attached to planning permission 17/69389/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

Page 178 APPLICATION No: 18/71583/NMA DATE VALID: 26.03.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Vernon Hailwood

LOCATION: Erie Basin Salford Quays

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 16/69216/FUL for revision to the ground floor layout, changes to communal space and gym to create larger tenant lounge and reduction of car parking spaces.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/70999/FUL DATE VALID: 01.12.2017 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd

LOCATION: Land To The North Of Bridge Carrying Agecroft Road (A6044) Over Manchester-Bolton Railway Line

PROPOSAL: Installation of Overhead Line Equipment gantries and palisade fencing, required in connection with electrification of railway

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71474/DISCON DATE VALID: 01.03.2018 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Marshalls Group Dev. Ltd

LOCATION: Units 5 And 6 Overman Way Agecroft Salford M27 8UJ

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance with conditions 3 (Materials), 4 (Landscaping), 5 (Suds), 6 (Foul water Scheme), 7 (Land Contamination), 9 (CMS), 10 (Coal Investigation), 11 (Cycle Parking), attached to planning permission 17/70833/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

Page 179 APPLICATION No: 18/71609/HH DATE VALID: 29.03.2018 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mr Darren Cunliffe

LOCATION: 17 Westbourne Avenue Clifton Swinton M27 6NN

PROPOSAL: Extension to the existing front and rear dormers together with alterations to elevations.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71051/DISCON DATE VALID: 01.12.2017 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Stuart Clarke North

LOCATION: The Poplars Medical Centre 202 Partington Lane Swinton Manchester M27 0NA

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (materials), 5 (investigation and risk assessment), 6 (verification) and 7 (control working conditions) attached to planning permission 17/69928/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71493/HH DATE VALID: 06.03.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mrs L Cassidy North

LOCATION: 6 Safflower Avenue Swinton M27 9LA

PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 May 2018 ______

Page 180 APPLICATION No: 18/71613/DISCON DATE VALID: 04.04.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mrs Kathryn Davies North

LOCATION: 202-204 Moorside Road Swinton M27 9LE

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 4 - Travel Plan and 5 - Cycle Parking attached to planning permission 17/70982/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71309/HH DATE VALID: 05.03.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Plamen Lambov South

LOCATION: 52 Dorchester Road Swinton M27 5NX

PROPOSAL: Proposed two storey side extension with attached single storey side garage, single storey rear extension leading to raised decking and front porch extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71326/HH DATE VALID: 19.02.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mrs lisa katongo South

LOCATION: 22 Maple Road Swinton M27 5GU

PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for erection of two storey side extension and part single/part two storey rear extension, extension of roof ridge line to create second floor and rear dormer (re-submission of 17/70406/HH).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 April 2018 ______

Page 181 APPLICATION No: 18/71451/HH DATE VALID: 05.03.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Stephen Hope South

LOCATION: 9 Hardy Grove Swinton M27 0DA

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey rear extension and front porch.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71476/FU L DATE VALID: 23.03.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr M A Taher South

LOCATION: 125 Partington Lane Swinton M27 0NS

PROPOSAL: Change of use from shop (A1) to hot food takeaway (A5), alterations to front elevation and installation of flue to the rear

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71477/HH DATE VALID: 06.03.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Child South

LOCATION: 9 Morley Avenue Swinton M27 0DU

PROPOSAL: Single storey front extension, including garage conversion and replacement flat roof to pitched roof

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 May 2018 ______

Page 182 APPLICATION No: 18/71491/FUL DATE VALID: 06.03.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Stuart Parks South

LOCATION: Aldi 51 Swinton Hall Road Swinton M27 4BL

PROPOSAL: Extension to sales floor and staff amenity area, new cantilevered entrance canopy over new trolley store, alterations to elevations, additional external refrigeration plant and associated car park resurfacing works Re-submission of 17/69494/FUL

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71492/ADV DATE VALID: 09.03.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Stuart Parks South

LOCATION: Aldi 51 Swinton Hall Road Swinton M27 4BL

PROPOSAL: Installation of 1no replacement internally illuminated LED fascia sign to store, 1no internally illuminated totem sign to car park, 1no internally illuminated totem sign to entrance canopy and 1no internally illuminated poster display case adjacent to store entrance Re-submission to 17/69495/ADV

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71615/NMA DATE VALID: 04.04.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr John Heaton South

LOCATION: 105-107 Chorley Road Swinton M27 4AA

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 17/71073/FUL for replacement of the proposed uPVC double glazed doors at basement level with full height uPVC double glazed escape windows.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 2 May 2018 ______

Page 183 APPLICATION No: 18/71245/FUL DATE VALID: 12.03.2018 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Ramsay Healthcare UK Ltd And Seedley LOCATION: Oaklands Hospital 19 Lancaster Road Salford M6 8AQ

PROPOSAL: Part retrospective planning application for re-siting of existing portakabin, and siting of new portakabin above to create two storey unit together with external stair case to upper level

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71288/FUL DATE VALID: 01.02.2018 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Full Circle Events and Exhibitions And Seedley LOCATION: Weaste Trading Estate Weaste Lane Salford M5 5HD

PROPOSAL: Infilling of the reservoir and the erection of a new commercial unit (B1c) with vehicular parking and alterations to existing elevations

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71454/COU DATE VALID: 26.02.2018 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Mr Nadir Khan And Seedley LOCATION: 523 Eccles New Road Salford M50 1DN

PROPOSAL: Change of use from MOT garage to mixed use including MOT garage and hand car wash

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

Page 184 APPLICATION No: 18/71536/HH DATE VALID: 20.03.2018 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Mr Matthew Silcock And Seedley LOCATION: 59 St Georges Crescent Salford M6 8JN

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey side and rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 9 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71582/COU DATE VALID: 21.03.2018 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Mrs Toni Ann Quelcutti Hurst And Seedley LOCATION: 4 Ryecroft Avenue Salford M6 8DS

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the change of use of bottom part of the garden area to use a training area and erection of a canopy shelter

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 14 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71106/HH DATE VALID: 16.02.2018 WARD: Winton APPLICANT:Mr Jack Regan

LOCATION: 39 Guilford Road Eccles M30 7JF

PROPOSAL: Demolition of rear conservatory, erection of single storey rear extension and two storey side extension and two velux windows to the rear.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

Page 185 APPLICATION No: 17/71152/FUL DATE VALID: 08.01.2018 WARD: Winton APPLICANT:Mr Daniel Lonsdale

LOCATION: 337-339 Worsley Road Eccles M30 8HU

PROPOSAL: Change of use from A1 (shop) to C3 (residential) at ground floor level, conversion of existing building into 8 no. apartments, erection of a two storey rear extension and alterations to existing roof ridge height to create a second floor level

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71598/PDE DATE VALID: 26.03.2018 WARD: Winton APPLICANT:Mr C Anderton

LOCATION: 65 Schofield Road Eccles M30 7LU

PROPOSAL: Erection of a rear extension

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 2 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71430/DISCON DATE VALID: 21.02.2018 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Noah Fletcher North

LOCATION: 1-3 Bolton Road And 6-10 High Street Worsley M28 3AX

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 2 (noise) attached to prior notification 17/69598/P3JPA and condition 3 (noise) attached to planning permission 17/69924/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

Page 186 APPLICATION No: 18/71554/PDE DATE VALID: 12.03.2018 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Darren Mc Coy North

LOCATION: 14 Marsh Road Little Hulton M38 9PL

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/69850/DISCON DATE VAL ID: 20.04.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Richard Coffey

LOCATION: Land Formerly 278 Leigh Road Worsley M28 1LH

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (materials), 6 (tree replacement scheme), 7 (access junction) and 8 (construction management plan) attached to planning permission 16/67818/FUL and 18/71283/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/70521/HH DATE VALID: 21.08.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr David Sproston

LOCATION: 167 Worsley Road Worsley M28 2SJ

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing detached garage to facilitate the construction of a single storey side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

Page 187 APPLICATION No: 17/70534/DISCON DATE VALID: 23.08.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:sean walsh

LOCATION: 250 Leigh Road Worsley M28 1LF

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 4 and 5 attached to planning permission 17/69795/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/70798/HH DATE VALID: 16.11.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Chris Wood

LOCATION: 14 Hazelhurst Fold Worsley M28 2JU

PROPOSAL: Extension of property to the roof slope front and rear to create a second floor.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71251/FUL DATE VALID: 20.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Darren Charlesworth

LOCATION: 50 Crossfield Drive Worsley M28 2QQ

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing property and erection of a 4 bedroom house

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 2 May 2018 ______

Page 188 APPLICATION No: 18/71268/FUL DATE VALID: 20.01.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Paul Gill

LOCATION: The Delph Worsley Road Worsley M28 2PB

PROPOSAL: Environmental restoration and access improvements, including de- silting of the main Delph basin and its eastern and western arms; the erection of a multi-level viewing platform and installation of heritage interpretation features. Provision of new lighting, hard and soft landscaping and other associated works throughout. Removal of remains of western and eastern sluice gates and installation of replica western sluice gate. Provision of temporary surfaced track between canal bank and Barton Road car park and temporary use of car park to lay down areas of silt for de-watering prior to removal off-site.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71269/LBC DATE VALID: 20.01.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Paul Gill

LOCATION: The Delph Worsley Road Worsley M28 2PB

PROPOSAL: Listed building consent for the removal of the remains of the western and eastern sluice gates and installation of replica western sluice gate.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 May 2018 ______

Page 189 APPLICATION No: 18/71356/FUL DATE VALID: 13.03.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:JAL Group Ltd

LOCATION: Land Adjacent To 97 Hazelhurst Road Worsley M28 2SW

PROPOSAL: Erection of a pair of semi-detached new dwellings, together with car parking and landscaping

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71373/FUL DATE VALID: 13.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Peter Kiely

LOCATION: Land Adjacent To 99 Hazelhurst Road Worsley M28 2SW

PROPOSAL: Erection of two dwellings and associated landscaping, access and parking

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71393/HH DATE VALID: 27.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Sean Constantine

LOCATION: 19 Kildare Road Swinton M27 0YA

PROPOSAL: Erection of a part two and part single storey side extension (resubmission of 17/70819/HH).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 April 2018 ______

Page 190 APPLICATION No: 18/71488/HH DATE VALID: 15.03.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Tony Wallwork

LOCATION: 249 Kempnough Hall Road Worsley M28 2QP

PROPOSAL: Conversion of existing garage into living accommodation, first floor side extensions, single and two storey side and rear extensions, hip to gable roof extension to front and rear, decking and access stairs to the side, garage to side, infill of door on the side and new window, new canopy and door to the front.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 14 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71497/HH DATE VALID: 14.03.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs K Fong

LOCATION: 8 Lyndene Avenue Worsley M28 2RJ

PROPOSAL: Demolition of the existing conservatory and erection of single storey side and rear extensions.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71526/PDE DATE VALID: 22.03.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mrs Paula Glenn C/O A & S (Designs Ltd)

LOCATION: 31 Alfred Avenue Worsley M28 2TX

PROPOSAL: Demolish existing 5.9m wide/3.1m deep conservatory and construct a 6.9m wide/4.5m deep single storey rear extension. The extension to be of brick construction with glazed panels to the rear and side elevation with a tiled pitched roof. The extension will, in part be built on the footprint of the existing conservatory.

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 May 2018 ______

Page 191 APPLIC ATION No: 18/71520/HH DATE VALID: 16.03.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mrs Amanda Glancy

LOCATION: 158 Greenleach Lane Worsley M28 2TS

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing single storey rear extension, construction of rear roof dormers together with alterations from hip to gable roof and erection of a two storey side extension. Alterations to existing outbuilding from double garage to ancillary accommodation.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71522/HH DATE VALID: 16.03.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Kenneth Davies

LOCATION: 462 Walkden Road Worsley M28 2NF

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension, construction of a new pitched roof to existing bay window and construction of a rear dormer extension together with alterations to elevations.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71573/HH DATE VALID: 23.03.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr David Houghton

LOCATION: 24 Briarfield Road Worsley M28 1GQ

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing garage and erection of single storey rear and two storey side extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 May 2018 ______

Page 192 APPLICATION No: 18/71661/PDE DATE VALID: 12.04.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Michael Bennett

LOCATION: 344 Worsley Road Swinton M27 0EF

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 May 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71653/DISCON DATE VALID: 16.04.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Paul Sweeney

LOCATION: 72 Chatsworth Road M28 2NT

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance with condition 8 (Vehicle Access) attached to planning permission 17/69607/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71385/COU DATE VALID: 12.03.2018 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Jean Platton South

LOCATION: Part Of Ground Floor At 235 Manchester Road Worsley M28 3HE

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the change of use from Sui Generis (Waxing Salon) at ground floor only to C3 (Residential) for use in connection with existing dwelling at 235 Manchester Road

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 May 2018 ______

Page 193 APPLICATION No: 18/71435/HH DATE VALID: 02.03.2018 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Anthony Tudor South

LOCATION: 227 Manchester Road Worsley M28 3HE

PROPOSAL: Demolition of boundary wall, erection of single storey rear extension, raise roof ridge height on existing rear extension, new door and window to the rear.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71461/HH DATE VALID: 02.03.2018 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Miss Adele Down South

LOCATION: 23 Hyde Road Worsley M28 3SE

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 April 2018 ______

Page 194 Agenda Item 7

ITEM NO.

REPORT OF The Strategic Director Place

TO THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

ON 7th June 2018

TITLE: PLANNING APPEALS

RECOMMENDATION: That the report be noted

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To set out details of appeals received and determined

KEY DECISION: NO

DETAILS: See attached schedule

KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: Performance Management

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND IMPLICATIONS:N/A

ASSESSMENT OF RISK:N/A

SOURCE OF FUNDING: N/A

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A

OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED:N/A

Page 195

CONTACT OFFICER: Liz Taylor 0161 779 4803

WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S): As indicated in the attached schedule .

Page 196 PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

REPORT ON PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS DECIDED

APPLICATION No: 17/70605/ADV

APPELLANT: Mr Nathan Still

APPEAL SITE: Pavement Outside Aldine House 30 New Bailey Street Salford

PROPOSAL: Display of a single sided LED illuminated sequential display affixed to the frame of the payphone kiosk.

WARD: Ordsall

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Refuse

APPEAL DECISION: Appeal Allowed

DECIDED ON: 24 May 2018

On the 22 nd December 2017 an application for advertisement consent for the display of a single sided LED illuminated sequential display affixed to the frame of the payphone kiosk was refused under delegated powers for the following reason –

The appearance and siting of the advertisement would appear as an obtrusive feature within the street scene and would create a cluttered appearance which would be harmful to the visual amenity of the area contrary to Policy DEV2 of the Unitary Development Plan and Paragraph 67 of the National Planning Policy Framework .

The applicant appealed the decision.

The appeal site is an existing telephone kiosk located on the pedestrian footway of New Bailey Street, a busy classified road, after the junction with Browncross Street and beyond Salford Central railway station which lies closer to a junction with Chapel Street. The immediate surroundings of the kiosk are predominantly commercial with some residential premises, including a number of tall buildings on the opposite side of the road, together with ground floor commercial units and offices close to the site which are separated by a landscaped area and a separate pedestrian footway. On-street parking bays adjoin the highway edge of New Bailey Street and further to the south is the Grade II listed, Albert Bridge, which crosses the River Irwell.

The Inspector stated that the main issues to consider in the determination of the appeal were the effect on amenity, including the character and appearance of the area, and the effect on public safety.

In respect of amenity the Inspector noted the kiosk where the proposed advertisement would be displayed already houses a non-illuminated six sheet advertisement on its side that is visible when approaching from the Browncross junction, stating that the kiosk is located within close proximity to a BT phone box and a similar kiosk on the opposite side of the road, close to the entrance to Salford Central railway station. They also noted the presence of other street furniture in the area, as well as the presence of a large number of advertisements, including various fascia and projecting signs on buildings with different forms of illumination, together with non-illuminated advertisements on the existing phone box and kiosks. In the light of this they state that the existing advertisement is entirely in keeping with its surroundings.

Page 197

With regards to the replacement advertisement the Inspector states that it has been designed to fit onto the existing frame, being viewed as an integral part of the kiosk structure – there would be no change to the width or height of the kiosk to accommodate the advertisement with the increase in projection to accommodate the internally illuminated unit being limited. Given this the Inspector stated that the change to the appearance of the advertisement display on the kiosk structure during daylight hours would be so minor as to be largely imperceptible in the wider context of the commercial area. They also stated that given the proposal would replace an existing advertisement that already sits amongst a variety of other advertisements; it would not contribute to an increased perception of visual clutter.

During periods of darkness the Inspector acknowledged that the advertisement would be more prominent due to the addition of illumination, however they did not consider that the advertisement would look out of place within its surroundings, which include a brightly lit road and a series of commercial buildings with illuminated signs and lighting, subject to the attachment of a condition to limit the luminance to no more than 300 candelas per sq.m as proposed.

The Inspector stated that the inter-visibility with the Grade II listed building is limited by a slight bend in the road, together with screening afforded by intervening landscaping and buildings, which would ensure no adverse impact of the LED illuminated advertisement on the setting and significance of the Grade II listed, Albert Bridge.

For these reasons they concluded that the proposal would not result in any harm to the amenity of the area.

With regards to public safety the Inspector stated that the addition of the advertisement to the existing kiosk would result in only a marginal change in projection and no change in width to the structure and therefore its addition would not adversely affect pedestrian movement or safety. They also stated that the configuration of the road is relatively uncomplicated, with the kiosk structure lying far enough from the highway edge, a pedestrian crossing and beyond the junction of Browncross Street, so as to not affect sightlines or be confused for a traffic signal, road sign or the headlights of vehicles. Having regard to these facets of the proposal and give that the advertisement would be lit by static internal illumination, in a location where illuminated advertisements are not uncommon in the commercial setting, the Inspector concluded that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable distraction for road users or harm public safety.

The Inspector addressed the concerns that were expressed by the Council over the advertisement being affixed to a kiosk that, according to its records, does not benefit from the necessary planning consent stating that given that the kiosk structure is in-situ, the advertisement would be capable of being installed and, therefore, the planning status of the kiosk is not a factor that would preclude the grant of express consent for an advertisement where no harm to amenity or public safety is identified.

The Inspector concluded that the proposed advertisement would not harm amenity, including the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area, or public safety stating that the proposal does not therefore conflict with Saved Policy DEV2 of the UDP or the NPPF in so far as they are material to those matters. The appeal was therefore allowed and advertisement consent given for 5 years subject to the five standard conditions set out in the Regulations and the following additional conditions: 1) The intensity of the illumination of the advertisement permitted by this consent shall be no greater than 300 candela per square metre. 2) The illumination of the advertisement permitted by this consent shall include no visual effects of any kind when any message is displayed or through the transition of one image to another. The displayed image must not include animated, flashing or intermittent lighting.

Page 198 APPLICATION No: 17/70699/COU

APPELLANT: Mr Khawaja Omer

APPEAL SITE: 92 Phoebe Street Salford M5 3PH

PROPOSAL: Change of use from A1 (shop) to A5 (hot food takeaway) together with installation of external flue

WARD: Ordsall

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Approve

APPEAL DECISION: Appeal dismissed

DECIDED ON: 9 May 2018

On the 13 th December 2017 planning permission was granted (subject to conditions) by Salford City Council for the change of use from A1 (shop) to A5 (hot food takeaway) together with the installation of an external flue.

The applicants disputed condition No.5 of the approval which states that:-

“The development shall only operate between 17:00 hours and 22:00 hours Monday to Friday, 08:00 hours and 22:00 hours on Saturdays and not all on Sundays and Bank Holidays”.

The reason given for the condition was: To safeguard the amenity of existing neighbouring occupants of the development hereby approved and to ensure appropriate healthy eating choices in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, the adopted Hot Food Takeaways Supplementary Planning Document and the National Planning Policy Framework.

The planning inspector considered the main issues in this case was whether the condition is necessary and reasonable in order to :-

1. Support the healthy lifestyle of local school children and,

2. Protect the living conditions of neighbouring residents with particular regard to noise and disturbance.

Healthy Lifestyles

The appeal property is a single storey commercial unit on the corner of Phoebe Street and West Craven Street. It adjoins a four storey block containing commercial units at ground floor and residential units above. These commercial units include shops and service uses. Phoebe Street primarily serves a residential area and directly opposite the appeal property is a primary school. Towards Salford Quays the area has more commercial and other uses, and across Trafford Road there is a secondary school, the Oasis Academy.

The Council has adopted the Hot food takeaway Supplementary Planning Document (the SPD) which provides policy guidance on proposals for hot food takeaways in Salford. Policy HFTA2 of the SPD indicates that where a hot food takeaway is proposed within 400m metres of a secondary school, it will only be granted subject to a condition restricting it not to open before 17:00 Monday to Friday, in order to support the establishment of healthy eating habits in a borough where childhood obesity rates are high. The Planning Inspector afforded Policy HFTA2 of the SPD considerable weight.

Page 199 The Oasis Academy is located across a busy dual carriageway from Phoebe Street, there is a signal controlled pedestrian crossing at the junction of Phoebe Street and Trafford Road which is on the direct walking route between the Academy and the Phoebe Street units. The Inspector concluded that the Academy was located within 400m buffer zone. HFTA2 was therefore relevant and applicable in this case.

The Inspector considered the appellant’s concerns that not being open at lunchtime would affect the viability of his business and that they would employ three people and make a valuable contribution to the local economy. However, the Inspector considered that these benefits would be outweighed by the harm to the health of young people which could result from the proposed development with the altered condition.

The Inspector concluded, for the reasons above that Condition 5 is both necessary and reasonable having regard to the need to support healthy lifestyles of local schoolchildren and that it complies with Policy ST1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan which seeks to support the creation of sustainable neighbourhoods, and Policy HFTA2 of the SPD.

Living Conditions

There are residential apartments above the commercial units in the adjacent block, and terraced housing behind the appeal property and across West Craven Street. The ceasing of the operation of the use at 22:00 Monday to Saturday and not allowing the use to operate on Sundays and Bank Holidays seems necessary and reasonable to the Planning Inspector in order to the protect the living conditions of the occupants of neighbouring residential properties from noise and disturbance.

The Inspector therefore conclude that Condition 5 is both necessary and reasonable for these reasons and accords with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary

For the reasons given above and taking into account all other matters raised, the planning inspector concluded that the appeal should be dismissed.

Page 200 PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

REPORT OF NEW PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS RECEIVED

APPLICATION No: 17/70398/FUL

APPLICATION DECISION LEVEL: Delegated to Officer

OFFICER Refuse RECOMMEND’N:

APPEAL SITE: 483 Bury New Road Salford M7 3NJ

PROPOSAL: Erection of 4 storey block consisting of 7 no. self contained apartments within existing rear garden with associated car parking and communal space.

WARD: Kersal

APPELLANT: Mr James Paul Scott

DATE RECEIVED: 18 May 2018

The application has appealed against refusal of planning application.

The reasons for refusal states:

The Local Planning Authority offered solutions to the applicant in order to make the development acceptable. The applicant was however unwilling to amend the plans. Without these amendments the development would not improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area and therefore does not comprise sustainable development. The Local Planning Authority has therefore implemented the requirement in Paragraphs 186-187 of the NPPF.

The proposed apartment building would result in an unacceptable loss of light and be overbearing to the occupiers of the basement and ground floor flats of the existing apartment building and would result in an unacceptable level of noise and disturbance associated with the comings and goings and general activity associated with the car parking area which would be located directly to the front and rear of the existing building. The proposal is therefore contrary to UDP policies DES7 and EN17 and the NPPF.

The proposed development would not provide future users and occupiers of the apartments with an adequate level of amenity by virtue of a lack of usable outdoor amenity space and by virtue of the close proximity of habitable room windows to common boundaries and garages of surrounding properties which would limit adequate light and outlook contrary to UDP policy DES7 and the NPPF.

The close proximity of habitable room windows to common boundaries means that future occupiers of the development would be reliant on land outside of the development site for light and outlook and as such the development has the potential to restrict the development potential of surrounding sites contrary to UDP Policy DES1.

It is considered that the scale and massing of the proposed building by reason of its siting within the site and close to common boundaries is out of character with the surrounding area contrary to policy DES1 of the Unitary Development Plan, the NPPF and the Supplementary Planning Document: Design.

Page 201

APPLICATION No: 17/71078/FUL

APPLICATION DECISION LEVEL: Delegated to Officer

OFFICER Refuse RECOMMEND’N:

APPEAL SITE: Health Centre Blackcroft Close Swinton M27 0NG

PROPOSAL: Change of use from D1 (Health Care Centre) to C3 (Residential), erection of a first floor extension to accommodate 4no. apartments, conversion of existing garage to include a first floor extension to accommodate 2no apartments, together with car parking at rear

WARD: Swinton North

APPELLANT: Mr ROY BUCKLEY

DATE RECEIVED: 18 May 2018

The application has appealed against refusal of planning application.

The reasons for refusal states:

The proposal would not improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area nor does it comply with the development plan and therefore does not comprise sustainable development. 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 Local Planning Authority has therefore implemented the requirement in Paragraphs 186-187 of the NPPF.

The proposal would provide an unacceptable level of amenity for potential occupiers by virtue of the siting of the ground floor bedroom windows of flats 1 & 2. The siting of these windows would give rise to poor outlook and limited natural light penetration so that flats 1 & 2 would fail to comply with Policy DES7 of this council's adopted Unitary Development Plan.

The proposed development would introduce windows in the rear elevations of the main building which would rely on an outlook over neighbouring land outside of the application site. This would potentially restrict the future development of the land to the rear and is therefore not in the interest of proper planning of the area. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy DES1 of the adopted City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

Page 202

Appeals Received.rtf Agenda Item 8

Part 1 - Open to the Public ITEM NO.

REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR PLACE

TO THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL ON 7TH JUNE 2018

TITLE: A REPORT ON ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY FROM 1st JANUARY 2018 TO 31st MARCH 2018

RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended that Members note the report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

A report into enforcement activity for the months January through March 2018. It analyses current enforcement data in relation to complaints received and complaints closed for the quarter and complaints received by ward, complaints outstanding by ward and prioritisation of complaints.

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS:

Prioritisation of enforcement cases

Planning enforcement cases are prioritised on receipt as follows:

Priority 1 where there is -  Danger to the public  Damage to listed buildings  Works to protected trees or trees in conservation areas

Priority 2 where there is –  A referral from a councillor or an MP  A request from Panel  Development within a conservation area  Serious harm to amenity or loss of amenity (e.g. by noise or odour)  Conditions being breached

Priority 3 where there is –  Any other development giving rise to the complaint (e.g. minor development, sheds, extensions, satellite dishes, etc.)

Page 203 KEY DECISION: NO

DETAILS: See attached report

KEY COUNCIL POLICIES:

Performance Management

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND IMPLICATIONS:

N/A

ASSESSMENT OF RISK:

Risk The failure to have an effective compliance and enforcement system

Consequence Result in inappropriate forms of development which would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance and amenity and the living conditions of local communities in Salford.

Controls required To maintain sufficient resources in planning enforcement and prioritise and co- ordinate the investigation of breaches of planning control.

SOURCE OF FUNDING: N/A

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: Requested

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: Requested

OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED: N/A

CONTACT OFFICER: DAVID BEST TEL NO: 0161 604 7781

Page 204 WARDS TO WHICH REPORT RELATES: ALL

Report into enforcement activity, 4th quarter January – March 2018

New enforcement cases for the above quarter

A total of 60 new cases were received between 1st January and 31st March 2018, comparable with the 58 cases received in the previous quarter.

The following graph shows the total number of new enforcement cases that were received in the months of January (18 cases), February (22 cases) and March (20 cases).

These consist of:

Priority 1 – 7 cases Priority 2 – 6 cases Priority 3 – 44 cases Dangerous tree exempt – 3 cases High hedge – 0 cases Advert – 0 cases

Of the 60 cases received above, 23 cases have been investigated and closed for the following reasons:

Planning breach but not expedient to take enforcement action – 8 cases; No Breach / Not Development – 9 cases; Duplicate – 1 case. Tree imminently dangerous – 4 Tree not imminently dangerous – 0 Tree exempt - 0

Page 205 High hedge NFA – 0 Not S215 – 0 Breach ceased - 0 Exempt – 0 Permitted Development - 1

Enforcement Cases that have been resolved for the quarter

The following graph shows the total number of enforcement cases that were closed during the months of January, February and March of 2018 in each of one of fifteen categories of resolution. The principal categories are; No Breach, Breach – No Further Action, Breach Ceased, Duplicate Case, Not Development, Permitted Development, Tree imminently dangerous – exempt, Breach – Further Action.

The graph also demonstrates that in this quarter the greatest individual number of cases have been closed as ‘Breach No Further Action’, (51), usually because the owner has removed the cause of the breach or because the owner has applied for and has been granted planning permission.

The second greatest category is ‘No Breach’, (16) where it is found that the alleged breach does not require planning permission.

A total of 75 complaints were resolved / closed between 1st January 2018 and 31st March 2018.

Priority 1 – 14 cases Priority 2 – 18 cases Priority 3 – 42 cases Possible dangerous tree 1 High hedge - 0

Page 206 The cases were closed for the following specific reasons:

Breach Further Action - 1 Not Expedient to Take Action – 51 cases; Breach Ceased – 1 cases; Duplicate Cases – 0 cases; No Breach / Not Development – 16 cases; Not S215 – 0 cases 4 year rule – 0 cases Exempt – 0 cases 10 year rule – 0 cases Permitted Development – 1 cases EN complied with – 0 case Dangerous tree imminently dangerous - 3 cases Dangerous tree not imminently dangerous, not exempt - 0 Enquiry NFA – 0 cases Another dept. – 0 cases

Notices Served during the quarter Enforcement Notices – 2 Planning Contravention Notices – 2 S215 Notices – 1 Breach of Condition Notice - 0

Current Enforcement Cases At the time of writing (24.04.2018) this report there were 203 open enforcement cases including those where notices have been issued, and those where planning applications have been submitted but not yet determined, and new cases. This is only a slight reduction from the 210 cases reported at the February meeting.

The following table shows the prioritisation afforded to all current enforcement complaints, in accordance with the prioritisation schedule referred to in the ‘Background Documents’ schedule above.

Page 207 The highest number of current cases falls into Priority 3 Development without Planning Permission category – 69 in total.

Priority 1 – 19 cases Priority 2 – 48 cases Priority 3 – 137 cases Dangerous tree – 6 cases

At present the great majority of cases are being actively investigated and dealt with.

The following table indicates all current enforcement cases by ward.

Page 208 The highest number of current cases are in the wards of Worsley (24 cases) and Broughton (23 cases).

Submission of Retrospective Applications Where development does not appear to be obviously and entirely unacceptable, enforcement officers will give the developer the option to regularise the development by the submission of a retrospective planning application. In these circumstances it is an appropriate enforcement tool. This allows the submission of plans / technical documents and the relevant consultations / notifications to be carried out and a full assessment against national and local planning policy. The number of retrospective planning applications submitted forms a small percentage of the overall number of applications submitted, as below:

All Retrospective Total ADV Retrospec Total Retrospecti Overall % of Planning Planning Apps tive ADV DISCON ve DISCON retrospective Apps Apps Received Apps Apps Apps apps received Received Received received Received Received April 177 4 6 1 26 0 2.26% May 204 4 7 0 28 0 3.43% June 165 2 7 0 21 0 1.21% July 166 6 7 0 32 0 3.61% August 168 7 11 3 28 0 4.17% September 180 2 8 0 33 0 1.11% October 150 7 11 2 32 0 4.67% November 189 8 8 1 26 0 4.23% December 138 12 7 2 18 0 8.70% January 150 12 5 1 22 0 8.67% February 140 6 4 0 21 0 4.29% March 140 8 4 0 18 2 7.14% Total 1967 78 85 10 305 2 4.58%

Table of overall % of retrospective application submitted in financial year 2017-18.

Inputs and Outputs

Received 3rd Resolved 3rd Total received Total resolved ¼ ¼ year year 60 75 269 262

Summary

The record shows that at 24 April 2018 there were 203 enforcement cases in all categories.

Of these 177 were pending consideration, 9 where a notice has been issued, and 11 where an application has been submitted and 6 complaints received (new cases).

Page 209 This page is intentionally left blank