ITEM 1

Application DC/067192 Reference Location: Elisabeth Mill, Houldsworth Street, North Stockport, SK5 6BU PROPOSAL: Full planning permission for the refurbishment and conversion of Elisabeth Mill to form 163 dwellings and redevelopment of the remainder of the site (formerly occupied by the Friedland Building and temporary contractors / marketing building) with 50 dwellings and community floorspace; plus associated access and car parking (213 dwellings in total equating to an additional 12 units above the previous approval of DC/056881).

Type Of Full Application: Registration 02.10.2017 Date: Expiry Date: 01.01.2018 (Extended) Case Officer: Mr Steven Kirkham Applicant: DE Trafford Estates Ltd Agent: Paul Butler Associated

DELEGATION/COMMITTEE STATUS

Planning and Highways Regulation Committee decision, due to residential development in excess of 100 dwellings. Application referred to Heaton’s and Reddish Area Committee for comment and recommendation.

BACKGROUND

Members will recall consideration to Hybrid planning application DC/056881 relating to the comprehensive redevelopment of the site for residential purposes. This secured full planning permission for the refurbishment and conversion of the Elisabeth Mill building to form 152 dwellings and outline consent (all details excluding landscaping) for the demolition of the Friedland Building and redevelopment of grounds to accommodate 49 dwellings and community floorspace set within 10 blocks across the site. The application was not subject to any affordable housing or public open space contributions.

The previous planning permission was subject to a robust viability appraisal with discussions between the applicant and Authority spanning 18mths. It was agreed at the January 2017 Planning and Highways Regulation Committee meeting that affordable housing and public open space contributions including provisions of clawback be wavered from the scheme (clawback initially proposed to be triggered at 20% profit). This was permitted in lieu of low profit forecast, lending constraints, regeneration/environmental improvements and additional associated costs of renovating a substantial heritage asset within the Houldsworth Conservation Area. In considering the removal of potential clawback arrangements the applicant (De-Trafford) committed to the following:

 To pay the required TRO’s / traffic calming commuted sums early in the development process.  To accept a condition to secure local employment (condition 40).  To assist with community based projects.

The developer has been working with local community groups and has also supported local construction jobs as required by condition no.40. This has been, and continues to be, monitored by the Skills and Employment Officer.

Reserved Matters has been approved for the landscaping details and construction of the site is progressing. The Friedland building has been demolished, site clearance undertaken and foundations laid for the new housing. Elisabeth Mill itself has been stripped with repair works ongoing in advance of its conversion.

The plans appended to the application relate to blocks 1 (Elisabeth Mill) and block 4 (new build fronting Houldsworth Street), all dwellings within the other 9 blocks would remain unchanged from the details previously approved.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The application seeks full permission for the redevelopment of the site consisting of the refurbishment and conversion of the mill building to form 163 units and 50 dwellings with associated community floor space on land to the south of the mill (formerly occupied by the Friedland building).

The application follows a previous planning approvals for a total of 201 units (152 apartments within the mill conversion and 49 new dwellings) on the site. The planning application submitted essentially seeks consent for an additional 12no. units within the site following a review of the design of the development. The main driver of this has been a review of the works to the mill, this simplified the design resulting in a net gain of available floorspace. In addition the relocation of a substation from block 4 has also resulted in additional space.

The 12 units would be accommodated as follows:

Elisabeth Mill building: 11 apartments (5 x 2 bed & 6 x1 bed) Block 4: 1 x 1 bed dwelling

The accommodation would therefore be accommodated within the existing floorspace through the subdivision of the existing building. To clarify no extensions or significant external alterations would be required. The additional accommodation within the mil would be split across the floors as follows:

Ground Floor: 3 x 2 bed First Floor: 1 x 2 bed Second Floor: 1 x 2 bed Third Floor: 2 x 1 bed Fourth Floor: 2 x 1 bed Fifth Floor: 2 x 1 bed

The application has been accompanied with the following reports:

Planning, Design and Access Statement Design and Access Statement Transport Statement Development Viability Appraisal

SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

The site consists of the Elisabeth Mill complex and its associated curtilage which is located within the Houldsworth Conservation Area. Elisabeth Mill is positioned towards the north-eastern corner of the site, and is a four storey red brick mill building of traditional character dating from 1874, the building is also locally listed. Until recently the Friedland building also occupied the site, this was a four storey concrete structure of a similar scale to the mill and was located within the south-western corner of the site. Demolition and associated clearance works have been completed, as such a large proportion of the site is now levelled. Redevelopment of the site is advancing, foundations have been laid for the initial phase of new housing and work is continuing on the repair and restoration of Elisabeth Mill building.

The site is not marked by any significant change in level but falls from east to west by around a couple of metres. There are established trees, shrubs and other vegetation along the western boundary with Houldsworth Golf Course along with metal fencing, and the southern boundary with the golf course's access road which also incorporates a brick wall. To the north is (and associated car parking/ landscaping), which forms part of the same mill complex as Elisabeth Mill, and this mill building has already been converted to flats, this includes an extension at roof level. The eastern boundary is to Houldsworth Street, on the opposite side of the highway there is an area green open space.

The wider area is dominated by mill buildings associated with the Houldsworth Conservation Area. The wider area is predominantly residential in character comprising of terraced properties.

POLICY BACKGROUND Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires applications/appeals to be determined in accordance with the Statutory Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

The Statutory Development Plan includes:-

 Policies set out in the Stockport Unitary Development Plan Review (SUDP) adopted 31st May 2006 which have been saved by direction under paragraph 1(3) of Schedule 8 to the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004; &

 Policies set out in the Stockport Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document (CS) adopted 17th March 2011.

N.B. Due weight should be given to relevant SUDP and CS policies according to their degree of consistency with the National Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’) issued on 27th March 2012 (the closer the policies in the plan to the policies in the NPPF, the greater the weight that may be given); and how the policies are expected to be applied is outlined within the Planning Practice Guidance (‘PPG’) launched on 6th March 2014.

The site falls within a Predominantly Residential Area as identified on the Proposals Map of the SUDP Review.

Saved policies of the SUDP Review

HC1.1 Demolition & Tree Felling in Conservation Areas HC1.3 Special Control of Development in Conservation Areas HC1.4 New Uses for Buildings in Conservation Areas L1.1 Land for Active Recreation L1.2 Children's Play L1.10 Canals & Disused Railways CTF1.1 Development of Community Services & Facilities CDH1.2 Non Residential Development in Predominantly Residential Areas CDH1.9 Community Facilities in Predominantly Residential Areas

LDF Core Strategy/Development Management policies

CS1 - Overarching Principles: Sustainable Development - Addressing Inequalities & Climate Change SD1 - Creating Sustainable Communities SD3 - Delivering the Energy Opportunities Plans - New Development SD6 - Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change CS2 - Housing Provision CS3 - Mix of Housing CS4 - Distribution of Housing H1 - Design of Residential Development H2 - Housing Phasing H3 - Affordable Housing CS5 - Access to Services CS8 - Safeguarding & Improving the Environment SIE1 - Quality Places SIE2 - Provision of Recreating & Amenity Open Space in New Developments SIE3 - Protecting, Safeguarding & Enhancing the Environment CS9 - Transport & Development CS10 - An Effective & Sustainable Transport Network T1 - Transport & Development T2 - Parking in Development T3 - Safety & Capacity on the Highway Network

National Planning Policy Framework Conformity

The Planning Advisory Services’ National Planning Policy Framework Compatibility Self-Assessment Checklist has been undertaken on Stockport’s adopted Core Strategy. This document assesses the conformity of Stockport’s adopted Core Strategy with the more recently published NPPF and takes account of saved policies from the Unitary Development Plan where applicable. No significant differences were identified.

Supplementary Planning Guidance

Supplementary Planning Guidance (Saved SPG’s & SPD’s) does not form part of the Statutory Development Plan; nevertheless it does provide non-statutory Council approved guidance that is a material consideration when determining planning applications.

Affordable housing The Design of Residential Development Recreational Space Open Space and Commuted Sums Transport and Highways within Residential Areas

Stockport Historic Environment Database

Description: -

Part of a group of buildings founded by Sir William Houldsworth which form a prominent local landmark and contribute to the character of the area as part of a later nineteenth- century industrial community and have group value with neighbouring buildings including the listed Houldsworth Mill, the school, former rectory and church of St Elisabeth.

Historic Asset Description Cotton spinning mills built 1870-5 by the Reddish Spinning Co. Two of three original blocks, known as Victoria Mill, south, and Elizabeth Mill, north. Victoria Mill was built in 1870 probably to the designs of A.H. , Elizabeth Mill was built in 1874-5 by A.H. Stott of Stott & Sons.

The buildings are of brick, of four storeys. Victoria Mill, south, has an internal structure of cast-iron columns and timber floors, Elizabeth Mill is of fireproof construction with cast-iron columns an rolled iron beams, a system patented in 1871 by Stotts and one of the earliest mills to employ it. The mills form an L-shaped block. In the inner angle a five-storey water and stair tower has a pyramidal roof with a flat cap and triplets of angled stair windows with round heads. The mills are of similar external design with large windows with slightly cambered heads and somewhat Italianate details, including Lombard friezes. Rooftop extensions being added at the time of survey in connection with conversion to flats.

National Planning Policy Framework

Paragraph 6 states: “The purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development”.

Paragraph 7 states: “There are three dimensions to sustainable development: economic, social and environmental”.

Paragraph 11 states: “Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise”.

Paragraph 13 states: “The National Planning Policy Framework constitutes guidance for local planning authorities and decision-takers both in drawing up plans and as a material consideration in determining applications”

Paragraph 14 states: “At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking”.

For decision-taking this means (unless material considerations indicate otherwise):

 approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and  where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless: i) any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or ii) specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted”. Paragraph 17 states: “Within the overarching roles that the planning system ought to play, a set of core land-use planning principles should underpin both plan-making and decision-taking. These 12 principles are that planning should:

 be genuinely plan-led, empowering local people to shape their surroundings, with succinct local and neighbourhood plans setting out a positive vision for the future of the area. Plans should be kept up-to-date, and be based on joint working and co-operation to address larger than local issues. They should provide a practical framework within which decisions on planning applications can be made with a high degree of predictability and efficiency;

 not simply be about scrutiny, but instead be a creative exercise in finding ways to enhance and improve the places in which people live their lives;

 proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes, business and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs. Every effort should be made objectively to identify and then meet the housing, business and other development needs of an area, and respond positively to wider opportunities for growth. Plans should take account of market signals, such as land prices and housing affordability, and set out a clear strategy for allocating sufficient land which is suitable for development in their area, taking account of the needs of the residential and business communities;

 always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings;

 take account of the different roles and character of different areas, promoting the vitality of our main urban areas, protecting the Green Belts around them, recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and supporting thriving rural communities within it;

 support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate, taking full account of flood risk and coastal change, and encourage the reuse of existing resources, including conversion of existing buildings, and encourage the use of renewable resources (for example, by the development of renewable energy);

 contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural environment and reducing pollution. Allocations of land for development should prefer land of lesser environmental value, where consistent with other policies in this Framework;

 encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value;

 promote mixed use developments, and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas, recognising that some open land can perform many functions (such as for wildlife, recreation, flood risk mitigation, carbon storage, or food production);

 conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of this and future generations;

 actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable; and

 take account of and support local strategies to improve health, social and cultural wellbeing for all, and deliver sufficient community and cultural facilities and services to meet local needs”.

Paragraph 187 states “Local planning authorities should look for solutions rather than problems, and decision-takers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible. Local planning authorities should work proactively with applicants to secure developments that improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area”.

Paragraph 196 states “The planning system is plan-led. Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. This Framework is a material consideration in planning decisions”.

Paragraph 197 states “In assessing and determining development proposals, local planning authorities should apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development”.

Paragraph 215 states “………..due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with this framework (the closer the policies in the plan to the policies in the Framework, the greater the weight that may be given)”.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

DC/066014:- Approval of landscaping reserved matters associated with DC056881 (as amended): Replacement of the Friedland building and temporary contractors/ marketing building with 49 dwellings and community floorspace; plus associated access and car parking. Approved: 5th September 2017 DC/065937:- Erection of an electricity substation fronting Houldsworth Street Approved: 26th July 2017

DC/065247:- Non material amendment to DC/056881 which involved rationalisation of several design elements of the scheme including fenestration, parking and garden areas.

Changes included: 1. Existing steel and existing mill structure retained. 2. Steel strengthening works added where required. 3. Addition of a glazed roof light over the existing roof opening. 4. Remove car parking from the basement and ground floor atrium and relocate on site. Including an increase in cycle parking to 229 cycle parking spaces (design of which to be agreed by condition). 5. Existing stair cores retained and modified to comply with current regulations. 6. Minor increase to floor area of apartments. 7. Creation of additional communal amenity space in the ground floor and upper floor levels.

Approved: 5th May 2017

DC/056881:- Hybrid application seeking full planning permission for the refurbishment and conversion of Elisabeth Mill to form 152 dwellings and the demolition of the Friedland Building and a temporary contractors/ marketing building; and outline planning permission (with 'landscape' reserved) for the replacement of the Friedland building and temporary contractors/ marketing building with 49 dwellings and community floorspace; plus associated access and car parking.

Approved: 9th February 2017

DC/045743:- Non material amendment to DC012448 for alterations relating solely to Elizabeth Mill (Phase 2) for a reduction in unit numbers, internal alterations providing different apartment types and mix, removal of one additional floor to the roof of the building, partial demolition of the existing extension on the southern elevation, creation of garden areas, alterations to the landscaping layout, alterations to ground floor windows, addition of balustrading to roof and amendments to access and parking layout, Elisabeth Mill, Houldsworth Street, North Reddish

Approved 15th December 2010

DC/042522:- Change of use from distribution centre (B8 use class) to training centre for construction skills (D1 Educational use), Former Friedland Building, Houldsworth Street, Reddish. Approved: 2nd February 2010

DC/012448:- Residential Development of 486 apartments comprising of conversion & extension to existing mills to provide 318 units, extension to existing warehouse to provide 80 units and erection of 88 units in six-storey block, erection of multi-storey car park with associated car parking, landscaping & access works. (This application also encompassed the adjacent Victoria Mill site)

Approved 3rd August 2004

DC012353:- Screening Opinion. Not EIA development 05/08/03

NEIGHBOUR'S VIEWS

The application has been advertised by way of a site and press notices (Major development within Conservation Area) in addition the owner/occupiers of neighbouring properties (183) have been notified by letter.

A single representation has been received from the & Stockport Canal Society. They do not object to the development of the mill as proposed but comments raised are as follows:

 The application makes no mention of the line of the Stockport Branch of the Ashton Canal which passes just within the western boundary of the site.  We have recently made a submission to the Stockport Local Plan where we recommend that the canal in this section of the Conservation Area be considered for development in the medium term as a nature refuge and recreational area whilst other stretches of the canal are released from their present uses to allow the restoration of the canal to its full navigable length.  The scheme will complement similar successful redevelopments which have taken place in neighbouring buildings. Indeed the redevelopment of the canal should enhance the mill refurbishment scheme providing a water feature of local historic significance to compliment this Conservation Area by recreating something of Stockport’s industrial past.  We would ask in the first instance that no underground services are constructed over the line of the canal which would impede its eventual restoration in coming years.  If within the powers of the Planning Authority we would ask that the line of the canal be protected.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

In recognition of the extant planning permission that has established a clear precedent at the site consultations have been limited as follows: Arboricultural Officer:-

No objections subject to landscaping conditions. There is an opportunity to increase the number of trees to improve the greening and screening of the development along Houldsworth Street frontage, as well as greening the boundaries through the site.

Biodiversity Officer:-

The proposed changes do not involve any alterations to the landscaping plans, I have no comments relating to biodiversity/ecology other than previous comments for the previous application for this site (DC056881). I would however ask (as per my previous comments) that detailed plans showing proposed specification and locations of bat and bird boxes are submitted to the LPA for approval. This was one of the recommendations in the ecology reports submitted for proposed development and would be required to mitigate for loss of potential roosting/nesting features and also as an enhancement measure (as per NERC Act and NPPF)

Conservation Officer:-

No objections to the mill conversion this would not have a harmful impact upon the external appearance of the Mill building. The materials palette have been agreed for all works to the restoration, conversion of the mill in addition to the new build dwellings. The appearance of the Mill building and special character of the Conservation Area will not be effected.

Contaminated Land Officer:-

No objection to the proposals. It is confirmed that the developer has had to undertake extensive remedial works at the site. The remedial works include cover systems, removal of hotspots of contamination and gas mitigation measures within the basement which will possibly include an active ventilation system. There are other issues too which has been / is being dealt with such as controlled water contamination, hotspots, TCE contamination. Environmental Health:-

The noise report submitted with the previous application remains relevant and addresses relevant issues.

Highways:-

No objections subject to recommended conditions also seek clarity on the payment of the TRO monies. Recommended conditions are typically identical to those imposed on the previous application, these have been reworded where appropriate to reflect the current progress on the application. The travel plan will also make direct reference to the need for a Car Club and Electric charging points. The conditions relate to: Highways Construction details, Reconstruction of Footways, Controls on boundary treatments, Provision of sprinkler systems, Provision of parking as identified and management of these spaces, Cycle parking details, Off Site footway improvements and wayfinding signage, Construction Method Statement, Community Room Method statement.

ANALYSIS

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that planning applications be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

The current position is that the Development Plan consists of the saved policies and proposals maps of the Unitary Development Plan, the Local Development Framework Core Strategy and the Greater Manchester Joint Waste Plan Development Document.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is also an important consideration. The NPPF states that a presumption in favour of sustainable development should be at the heart of every application decision. For planning application decision taking this means:-

• approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and • where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, granting planning permission unless:- - any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole; or - specific policies in the Framework indicate development should be restricted.

Principles of Development:

The site benefits from a full planning permission by virtue of the approved Outline and Reserved Matters planning applications DC/056881 and DC/066014. These decisions established the acceptability of the sites comprehensive redevelopment to accommodate 201 residential apartments and dwellings.

Development is currently advancing on the implementation of the above permissions. This is a welcomed position, the sites planning history extends over 10 years, during this period the physical condition of the mill building and environment had declined considerably and was attracting significant anti-social behaviour issues which was impacting negatively upon the locality. The long-term retention of this significant heritage asset is now secured, this will also yield significant regeneration benefits to the Houldsworth Conservation area, in addition to providing much needed local housing. In land use policy terms the proposals there are no conflicts raised by the proposals. The site has an extant permission for residential development which is wholly compatible with the land use allocation which the UDP identifies as a predominantly residential area. The acceptability of the principle for the change of use of the site to residential and conversion of Elisabeth Mill is therefore firmly established.

The approved Outline and Reserved Matters applications application were subject to a number of conditions. Pre-commencement requirements have been successfully met and the applicant is also advancing the discharge of other requirements, through separate discharge of condition applications. Where details have been approved these would need to be referenced on the decision notice for this application.

In terms of material considerations these are largely limited to matters relating to sites Viability, Highways and Heritage. The ability to accommodate the proposed additional dwellings has been achieved by amendments to the internal arrangements of the mill that were dealt with as a non-material-amendment under application DC 065247. Essentially these amendments allowed for less intervention to be made into the buildings fabric. The original inclusion of basement parking necessitated the relocation of the internal stairwells located at either end of the building. The omission of this parking in replacement of a ground floor and rooftop communal garden (13 parking spaces have been relocated elsewhere) means that the stairwells are retained on their present location, essentially resulting in less physical alterations/interventions having to take place to the locally listed building and also freeing up otherwise circulation space.

As well as the heritage benefits to the revisions it is considered that the amendments also secured a qualitative benefit to the overall residential environment of its future residents. The interface of ground floor residents to the communal garden is far more desirable than that of the previous car park. The proposals also secured a marginal increase/improvement to the apartment size by 5.7sqm, from 44sqm to 50sqm (approx). The increase to the apartment’s size was achieved internally within the existing buildings footprint not having a material influence upon the external aesthetic of the Mill. The resulting improvement to the accommodation that would occur is aligned with the Council’s aspirations for raising housing quality standards.

Whilst the principle has, and remains established it is noted that the proposals are also aligned to the Council’s Mills Strategy. The associated regeneration and residential occupation is also in line with recent guidance published by Historic England.

To conclude the general principle of housing, the reuse of land and buildings in this area for residential purposes is acceptable. The proposal complies with Core Strategy Policies CS2 (Housing Provision), CS3 (Mix of Housing) and CS4 (Distribution of Housing). Consequently there is no objection to the proposal in term of the general principle and the provision of an updated scheme at the site is welcomed in order to bring forward the development of much needed housing units in the area. Viability:-

The requirements of Policy H-3 ‘Affordable housing’ are subject to financial viability. Reddish falls within a 20/25% area although consideration to Vacant Building credit associated with the reuse of existing floorspace reduced this to 12.5% on the previous appraisal. In terms of public open space contributions/policy SIE-2 the additional units would raise the population capacity of the site from 564 to 593 (29 persons), the uplift in population would equate to a contribution of £18,858 above £366,769 (£385,627) equated to the scale of the previous development. However, no contributions were secured on the extant consent.

The application for an additional 12 units necessitates the re-visiting of the viability associated with the scheme. The viability appraisal is also able to incorporate updated and detailed costs which have been developed since the previous appraisal in 2014 which identified a low profit base of 14%. The extant planning approval which is currently being implemented was not subject to affordable housing or public open space contributions. Owing to lending constraints demonstrated by the applicant requirements of a reappraisal to secure potential ‘clawback’ was also removed from the consent. Since the approval the applicants have delivered on their commitments to commence on site without delay, pay Traffic Regulation Orders, promote local employment initiatives and support local community projects.

The previous application DC/056881 was presented to Stockport MBC Planning and Highways Regulatory Committee in January 2017, with a recommendation to remove the clawback provision for affordable housing and open space. This was on the basis that evidence was provided by the applicant demonstrating that lender funding to finance the development would not proceed with the clawback provisions remaining.

Since the previous appraisal further survey work has been undertaken following initial preparation works on site. Additional abnormal costs have been identified associated with following elements of the development:

 Structural Condition: Years of moisture ingress arising from vandalized roofs and windows has driven what are now substantial costs associated with approximately 3000m² of screed and embedded rotten timbers replacement to the existing upper floors.  Full window and external door replacement: It was originally hoped that 50% of the existing aluminium doors could be retained extensive damage/vandalism has resulted in the need for full replacement.  Existing structure: Costs assigned to the repair and renovation of the existing structure have also risen significantly. The period during which the inner parts of the building were exposed to the elements has seen an increase in the necessary restorative works and associated drying out works now generally required.  Contamination: Additional remediation has had to be undertaken to address historic contamination associated with previous uses and additional hotspots. In addition to the treatment of these areas full tanking of the basement has to be undertaken to address gas migration issues.  Additional Surveys have uncovered several live services that need to be diverted.  Relocation of substation.

As identified within the report on the previous application the applicant has presented a viability case that the scheme would not be financially viable and therefore deliverable if the full policy requirements were to be delivered in respect of open space and affordable housing. It has been presented by the applicant that the additional units will help to offset the additional abnormal costs attributed to the development. The applicant has submitted a viability report which at the time of writing is still under consideration. The details of the report are commercially sensitive. Whilst an outstanding matter Members will be updated in due course at the meeting of the Heatons and Reddish Committee.

Housing Supply:-

In terms of housing development, the Council cannot demonstrate a deliverable five year supply of housing land. It is therefore recognised that the NPPF is a material consideration that carries substantial weight in the decision making process. Assuming the development is considered sustainable, paragraph 49 is clear that where no five year supply can be demonstrated, the presumption in favour of sustainable development identified at paragraph 14 of the NPPF should be used to determine planning applications.

Policy CS4 seeks to set out the spatial priorities for the distribution of housing across the plan period. Whilst pre-dating the NPPF the policy is aligned its principles and therefore complimentary to its objectives. During periods of under-supply policy H-2 ‘Housing Phasing’ applies, this identifies that accessible sites outside of the spatial priority areas can be considered for development where they achieve regeneration benefits. The re-use of Previously Developed Land (PDL) or vacant buildings is identified as specific circumstances where this would apply. This is consistent with paragraph 49 of the NPPF which is clear that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development unless the adverse impacts of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies of the NPPF as a whole.

Recognising the extant planning permission it remains that the proposals complies with CS4, which amongst other things gives priority to previous developed land within urban areas such as those within the pedestrian catchment of Large Local Centres. It remains that the development constitutes brownfield development, which is consistent with the overarching principles of sustainable development, and the efficient use of land, the proposal therefore adhere the spatial strategy identified within Core Strategy Policy CS4 and H2.

Core Strategy Policy CS3 relates to the efficient use of Housing Land and Accessibility. The location of the site is within an accessible suburban location and achieves an accessibility score of 59. The increased units would achieve an overall housing density of 177uph (previously 167.5) which, is demonstrable of the efficiencies of apartment accommodation. The density is also substantially above the minimum 30uph identified by the policy. This density is directly comparable to the conversions undertaken to Houldsworth and Victoria Mill complexes nearby. The additional 12 units would represent an efficient use of a sustainable brownfield site, in a period of recognised housing undersupply this should apportioned significant weight in the decision making process. In the absence of no demonstrable harm occurring elsewhere the prospect of securing additional housing at the site is welcomed.

Highways

The additional accommodation would be provided by a reconfiguration of the floorplates of the extant permission. No changes are proposed to the site’s access arrangements or internal site layout, highway issues for consideration are therefore limited to the impact that any additional vehicle movements generated by the additional 12 dwellings will have on the local highway network, parking demand, and provision, and the implications of changes to the detailed design of the development. The application has been accompanied with a Transport / Highways Technical Note which has been reviewed by the Highways Officer.

Traffic and highway impact.

Based on the associated traffic demand the extant consent would generate 66 two-way vehicle movements during the AM peak, 64 vehicle movements during the PM peak and a total of 578 vehicle movements each day. Based on this same methodology, the proposal would be expected to increase this to 69 two-way vehicle movements during the AM peak, 67 vehicle movements during the PM peak and 609 vehicle movements each day. This would equate to just 3 additional vehicle movements per hour at peak time, which the highways officer noted will not have a noticeable impact on the local highway network.

A Travel Plan was conditioned on the previous approval and it is accordingly recommended that such a condition is reapplied. In line with good practice the Travel Plan would introduce measures to encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport to reduce reliance upon the use of private vehicles. The site is within an accessible location with public transport, cycle and pedestrian routes to hand in addition to a host of amenities, employment opportunities and services. The provision of a resident car club scheme could be assessed through the Travel Plan process in addition to electric charging points. The extant consent was subject to a section 106 agreement that secured off-site a number of offsite highway improvements including junction improvements for pedestrian and cyclists, implementation of new TRO’s in addition to traffic calming measures. The total cost of these works amounted to £102k, this has been paid in full by the developer to the Council, works can therefore be undertaken prior to the first residential occupation at the site.

Following consideration to the above the additional units give no rise to highway safety issues and there is sufficient capacity on the local network. Mitigation secured on the extant consent had been financed and works will be completed within a timescale that compliments the residential occupation.

Parking

Parking for a total of 148 cars (including 21 spaces for disabled badge holders) was proposed as part of the original scheme. This equated to an overall level of parking of 74% although the applicant outlined that the 3 and 4 bedroom houses would have 150% provision, the 2 bedroom houses 100% provision and the apartments 57% provision.

Parking for a total of 144 cars (including 18 spaces for disabled badge holders) is proposed as part of this revised scheme. This equates to an overall level of parking of 68% (slightly less than the previous scheme) although the applicant notes that 81 of the spaces will be allocated to the apartments, equating to a 49% provision. Provision for the houses would be 126%. As such, as with the previous scheme, it is expected that some occupiers and their visitors will be unable to park within the site, resulting in some parking taking place on surrounding streets. The nature of local highways network and particularly Houldsworth Street is such that this could be easily accommodated without giving rise to disturbance to existing residents. The Transport Note submitted in support of the application has reviewed whether the surrounding streets could accommodate this level of parking and outlines that, based on evening parking surveys carried out, this level of parking could be accommodated on street in locations that would not result in any safety or operational problems. Demand would be minimised through robust travel plan measures (including the operation of a car club) on this basis the Highways officer is supportive of the proposals and does not support an objection.

It is noted that levels of cycle parking have been increased (224 spaces) which includes a dedicated 196 space store within the basement of the Mill building. The highways Officer observes that locations are not as evenly distributed as was previously. To some extent this would affect accessibility, it is therefore recommended that condition is applied to ensure a wider distribution is made a cross the site. In addition to this further conditions are required to increase the number of spaces for disabled badges (from 18- 21) as well as some dedicated electric charging points.

Subject to relevant conditions, the scheme is in compliance with Core Strategy DPD policies CS9 (Transport & Development), CS10 (An Effective & Sustainable Transport Network), T1 (Transport & Development), T2 (Parking in Development) and T3 (Safety & Capacity on the Highway Network).

Design, Layout & Visual Amenity

One of the 12 core planning principles of the NPPF is to always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings (paragraph 17). Paragraph 56 of the NPPF states that the Government attaches great importance to the design of the built environment - good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning, and should contribute positively to making places better for people. Paragraph 64 of the NPPF states that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions.

Policy H1 of the Core Strategy states that the design and build standards of new residential development should be high quality, inclusive, sustainable and contribute to the creation of successful communities. It goes on to advise that proposals should respond to the townscape and landscape character of the local area, reinforcing or creating local identity and distinctiveness in terms of layout, scale and appearance.

Policy SIE-1 of the core strategy states development that is designed and landscaped to the highest contemporary standard, paying high regard to the built and/or natural environment, within which it is sited, will be given positive consideration.

These policy requirements are reiterated in the Design of Residential Development SPD, which provides advice and guidance on the design of new development with the aim of (a) promoting high quality inclusive design; (b) ensuring efficient use of resources; and (3) endorsing developments that make a positive contribution to the townscape and landscape character of the local area.

The approved scheme included the retention of a substation within block 4 which at the time was considered to be in live use. The substation has now been decommissioned and the substation relocated to standalone installation on the opposite side of Elisabeth Mill (approved under DC/065937). The separation of the substation from the properties within block 4 in terms of general amenity considerations is preferable. The relocation effectively creates a void within the block, the utilisation of this space with a single one bed terrace works to the established design, albeit for minor fenestration changes which are in keeping with the presiding design. Viewed in the context of the wider development the additional terrace would not be readily distinguishable.

The remaining 11no. dwellings would be provided as apartments within the envelope of the existing retained mill building. The availability of space for the additional apartments has arisen as a result of the amended proposals to convert the existing mill building. The amended proposals include re-using the existing installed circulation cores where previously new circulation areas (landings/stairwells) were required, this has largely be achieved through the relocation of basement parking. The space where new circulation was originally proposed is now available to be used as residential accommodation, this would be served by existing opening and landing accesses which includes access to communal lifts between the floors making the accommodation fully accessible.

The consented development is locally distinctive, the design references the industrial heritage of the area. The provision of the 12 additional units would be entirely accommodated within the floorspace of the consented scheme. The additional units would therefore not be readily distinguishable as the layout and fabric would remain unaltered albeit for relevant internal subdivision. The accommodation is of an equal standard to that of other approved apartments within the consented scheme and does not represent a compromise on quality.

Heritage

Elisabeth Mill is a building of local importance and is a Locally Listed (undesignated) heritage asset. The site forms an important component of the Houldsworth Conservation Area, and although they have been divided, it is intrinsically linked with the adjacent Victoria Mill, with which it shared a boiler house. It also forms part of the setting of and has group value with the other key buildings within the Conservation Area. Some of these are Listed in Grades 2* and 1, and are thus of the highest national significance, and potentially significant in an international context (including Houldsworth Mill (II*), the Working Men's Club (II*), St Elisabeth's Church (I), school & rectory (II*)). Although unlisted, Elisabeth Mill - which was built in 1874 by AH Stott - makes a positive contribution to the Conservation Area, its retention and conversion is of significant importance.

It was established by English Heritage & the Conservation Officer on the extant application that the industrial aesthetic of the new build elements responded positively to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

The new accommodation would be provided within the envelope of the previously consented development. The principles therefore remain unchanged and do not raise any issues above those previous considered from a heritage/conservation perspective. The proposed works remain wholly positive and will ensure the long-term stewardship of an important heritage asset, in addition to significant environmental improvements, which would benefit the setting of the Elisabeth Mill and the general character of the Conservation Area as a whole.

Overall the benefits for heritage are considered positive and that the scheme accords with paras. 137 and 140 of the NPPF and policies SIE-3 (Protecting, Safeguarding and Enhancing the Environment) of the Core Strategy DPD and HC1.3 (Special Control of Development in Conservation Areas), HC1.1 (Demolition & Tree Felling in Conservation Areas) and HC1.4 (New Uses for Buildings in Conservation Areas). Materials approved on the previous scheme will be carried to ensure a consistent finish. Residential Amenity

The Council's standards, as set out in the Design of the Residential Development SPD (which supports Core Strategy DPD policies SIE1 (Quality Places) and H1 (Design of Residential Development). In accordance with the provisions of the SPD. The layout of the development remains unchanged. In terms of consideration to separation distances it was previously accepted on design grounds that their rigid application was not necessary. The case presented was one that the design of the development is locally distinctive and clearly based on its industrial heritage which required a degree of intimacy between buildings. Dwellings across the site benefit from either private or communal areas of amenity space. A previous non-material amendment allowed for additional 234m² of communal space to be located within the ground floor of the mill, this provides additional space commensurate to the demand/needs associated by residents of the additional dwellings. It also remains that there is immediate access to open space and equipped play space located on Houldsworth Street. Elsewhere communal space remains as; Third floor terrace in Elisabeth Mill, amounting to 392m², 3 communal garden areas, amounting to 401m², Open spaces and square amounting to 324m².

Recognising that the layout of the development remains unchanged. The addition of the units raises no material considerations in terms of consideration to separation distances or amenity considerations or residents within and outside of the development.

Landscaping, Trees & Biodiversity

The approved layout dictates areas which can be allocated for landscaping. Allowing for the sites internal access arrangements this is largely limited to peripheral areas across the frontage to Houldsworth Street and Eastern boundary in addition to the private enclosed courtyards.

Trees- There would be a total of 45 trees planted across the site the planting mix includes; Silver Birch, Hawthorne, Beech, Cherry, Pear, Oak and Rowan. The trees would all be heavy stemmed and planted in a structured manner along the sites access roads and boundaries. The planting schedule and mixture has been negotiated with consultees when details of Reserved Matters (Landscaping) were considered. The approved details represent a balanced approach between native, ornamental and fruit trees to achieve landscaping and biodiversity objectives. The overall provision is considered to be acceptable, trees would be planted at key nodes to provide balance to the overall appearance and massing of hard surfaced areas.

Shrubs/flowers- In addition to the structure of the tree planting there would be extensive areas of shrub and wildflower planting across the site. These would provide strong soft boundaries to site and complement the setting and appearance of the structured tree planting. The native wildflower planting would also provide biodiversity enhancement across the site. The existing hedgerow to the sites boundary would also be retained, this will provide both visual interest as well as an important wildlife corridor.

Hard Landscaping- Condition 7 applies to the construction details of all roads, paths and areas of public realm within the development. General principles have been approved in terms of the material palette, this will comprise of block paved homezone environments designed to Conservation Standards. Details of boundary treatments include a mixture of decorative railings, weldmesh fencing and close boarded fencing, these details would provide a desirable finish to the development.

The landscaping was reviewed by both the landscape architect, arborist and Biodiversity Officer who recommended approval. Conditions have been previously applied relating to implementation of the landscaping scheme and relevant replacement/management of soft landscaping should it fail to establish, such a condition would be reapplied as part of the current proposals. The details therefore continue to accord with H1 and SIE1 of the Core Strategy, the Design of Residential Development SPD and the design policies in the National Planning Policy Framework.

Ground Conditions

The comments of the Contaminated Land officer confirm that elevated levels of contamination have been found within the site. These matters are currently being addressed as part of a broad package of site remediation works. The overall strategy has been approved under the discharge of conditions 19, 20 and 22 of DC/056881 which were reviewed by the Council and Environment Agency as being acceptable. The undertaking of this remediation and land gas mitigation remains a requirement of the development. The proposals would therefore not change this situation.

Drainage

The Environment Agency Flood Zone mapping shows that the site is within Flood Risk Zone 1. This is assessed as having a low probability of flooding in any year.

In terms of assessing drainage and flood risk Policy SD-6 ‘Adopting to the Impacts of Climate Change’ applies. United Utilities have confirmed that the foul water drainage flows from the development can be accommodated into the existing network.

Conditions 41 and 42 of extant permission required a foul and surface water drainage strategy to be submitted and agreed prior to development commencing. The proposals would not increase the level of run-off across the sit e, subject to the safeguarding of the conditions on the previous application the proposals would satisfy the requirement of policy SD-6.

Other Matters Noise:- The majority of noise is transport based. The consented development had been assessed in line with recognised guidelines. It has been established that internal noise levels would meet the standards. The EHO is satisfied with this approach and recommends a condition that secures the identified glazing standards is also applied to the current proposals. In terms of noise generated from the development of the site this would be controlled via the requirement of a Construction Method Statement.

Energy:- An Energy Statement was submitted with the previous application detailing the proposed energy efficiency measures. The statement indicated that a 'fabric-led' approach would be taken to achieve carbon saving. In accordance with Core Strategy DPD policies CS1 (Overarching Principles: Sustainable Development - Addressing Inequalities & Climate Change), SD1 (Creating Sustainable Communities), SD3 (Delivering the Energy Opportunity Plan) and SD6 (Adapting to Climate Change) the requirements of this report would be conditioned.

Stockport Branch Canal:- The comments of the canal society are noted. The accommodation requires no alterations to the buildings footprint. The Canal Line itself ran parallel to the sites western boundary, the channel and associated towpaths have been removed/infilled are no longer distinguishable. The line is currently not protected and does not serve as a functioning recreation route, the consented development will introduce car parking and landscaping to the previous alignment will allow for a visual/historic interpretation of its route to be maintained. The objectives of SUDP L1.10 are therefore not prejudiced by the proposals.

CONCLUSIONS

The main consideration has been the impact of the additional 12 units upon the overall viability of the Elisabeth Mill development. This matter is subject to continued discussions however, the Viability Appraisal submitted would appear to demonstrate that the development remains marginally viable owing to the associated additional abnormal costs encountered. It remains that market conditions have not increased significantly since approval was issued on application DC/056881 in February 2017, this demonstrated a marginal profit. The additional value associated with the units is considered against the abnormal costs encountered with the remediation of the site and conversion of the heritage asset.

It remains that the principle of the sites redevelopment is firmly established, the commencement of development demonstrates an extant consent, this present s a ‘fall back’ position which is a material consideration. The redevelopment of the Elisabeth mill complex has been a long-term aspiration, the applicant’s commitment to the delivery is welcomed recognising the significant social, environmental and economic benefits this will secure.

In the context of the approved development the proposals amount to a relative minor increase in the number dwellings to the site. These can be accommodated without having a harmful impact upon the heritage asset or the special Character of the Houldsworth Conservation Area.

The additional units would make a positive contribution to housing supply, the quality of the internal and external amenity space of the additional units would be directly comparable to that of dwellings which are consented at the site. This represents a more efficient reuse of a brownfield site.

It has been demonstrated that the revised scheme will not have any significant impact upon parking provision and the safe function of the surrounding highway network with appropriate mitigation secured through the payment of the Traffic Regulation Orders and recommended conditions.

Subject to final confirmation on the sites viability it is not considered that there are any adverse impact associated with the increase in units at the site.

To conclude, in considering the planning merits against the NPPF as a whole the proposal represents sustainable development. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that the application be granted subject to conditional control.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant, subject to conditions.