AGENDA ITEM NO. 4
REPORT TO: Development Control and Licensing Committee
DATE: 26 th June 2002
REPORTING OFFICER: Executive Director, Environment and Development
SUBJECT: Planning applications to be determined by the Committee
WARDS: Boroughwide
The following applications for planning permission are submitted to the Committee for consideration with a recommendation in each case. Those applications marked * are considered to have significant employment implications.
Those applications now before the Committee in which the planning issues are clear will be included in a List (No. 1) to be circulated at the meeting. Unless a Member objects to a particular application on that list it is RECOMMENDED that each of the applications on List No. 1 be approved subject, where appropriate, to the conditions printed on the Agenda.
Those applications now before the Committee in which the planning issues are clear but in respect of which objections have been received and/or which are recommended for refusal will be reported to the Committee and if no Member wishes to discuss an application further, it is RECOMMENDED that each of the applications on List No. 2 be either approved, subject, where appropriate, to the conditions printed on the Agenda, or refused for the reasons given on the Agenda.
The remaining applications not included in Lists 1 and 2 and those about which further information is required by Members will be considered following consideration of those lists
In addition, any planning application on which proper notification has been received from a member of the public to speak will normally be excluded from lists 1 and 2.
PLAN NUMBER: 01/00714/HSC
APPLICANT: Westlink Storage & Shipping Co Ltd.
PROPOSAL: Application for Hazardous Substance Consent for the Storage of 12000 Tonnes of Ammonium Nitrate
ADDRESS OF SITE: Weston Point Docks, Runcorn.
WARD: Mersey
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION:
Refuse.
CONSULTATION AND REPRESENTATION:
The application has been widely advertised on both site and in the local press. Numerous statutory bodies have been consulted and the Council's retained technical consultants DNV Ltd asked to appraise and review the application. As a consequence of this consultation process the following comments/representations have been received:-
The Manchester Ship Canal Company, British Waterways and the Environment Agency raise no objection in principle. Similarly the Council's Highway and Drainage Engineers raise no objection.
The Environmental Health Officer recommends that a detailed assessment be carried out. The Health & Safety Executive have concluded that the risks to the surrounding population arising from the operation are sufficiently high to justify advising against the granting of hazardous substances consent on grounds of safety - but have not quantified the increased risk to the public.
The assessment/observations given by DNV Ltd on behalf of the Council are given in the observations section of this report and a copy of their findings appended to the rear of the agenda.
SITE/LOCATION:
55 acres of dockland, including various buildings, bounded to the west by the Manchester Ship Canal, to the north and north-east by Salt Union and to the south by Ineos Chlor. The housing in Weston Point is approximately 250 metres to the south- east.
RELEVANT HISTORY:
In April 2001, Westlink were given a temporary/personal permission to store up to 10000 tonnes of Ammonium Nitrate on the site, as a temporary measure due to the excess of the material not used as a consequence of the then imposed foot and mouth restrictions (App No 01/00014/HSC, refers). That permission expired in October 2001 and since that time the continued use of the site for this purpose has been unauthorised. Both this Council and the HSE have agreed that no action would be taken against this unauthorised activity until such time as this current application has been determined.
LOCAL PLAN DESIGNATION, KEY POLICIES AND SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES:
The policies of the Halton Local Plan seek to restrict new hazardous substance development that is likely to cause an unacceptable impact on the surrounding land
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH uses and will not impose development restrictions in terms of off-site accidental risk assessment on surrounding land uses. (Policy P1 & P7). These general objectives have been refined, developed and carried forward within the emerging policies of the Unitary Development Plan. Policy GS4 Runcorn Docklands is also of relevance.
OBSERVATIONS:
This is an application for a hazardous substance consent to store up to 12000 tonnes of Ammonium Nitrate on part of Weston Point Docks - see book of maps for precise location. The use, albeit the amounts of Ammonium Nitrate being store at anytime have varied, started initially in the spring of 2001 to meet the needs of a manufacturer in a nearby district who had an excess of stock due to foot & mouth restrictions imposed at the time.
The storage of the product at Weston Docks has proven to be beneficial to both the manufacturer and the applicant and as such this application seeks to regulate and authorise the continuation of the current operation.
The site was formally visited by officers and Members of the Council in February this year. Discussions were held with the applicant so that all parties could have a clear understanding of the issues involved and the characteristics of the operation.
Ammonium Nitrate is widely used in the UK as an agricultural fertiliser. Stocks are held in various places. Stock levels vary according to season, with levels tending to be high in the spring and autumn. In the UK, all stocks of Ammonium Nitrate of 500 tonnes or more are notified to HSE under the COMAH regulations. The threshold was set based on the knowledge of its harmful properties at the time which relate to the (remote) chance of explosion and toxic fire hazard.
In September 2001, there was a major incident in Toulouse (France) which has caused this threshold to be challenged throughout Europe. The Toulouse incident led to 30 deaths (22 inside the premises, 8 outside) and 2,500 injuries. Thousands of properties were damaged upto a 4 kilometre radius. Although that site involve actual manufacture of Ammonium Nitrate and not just storage the building concerned held between 300 and 400 tonnes of different compositions of Ammonium Nitrate. As a consequence of this incident it is likely that revised regulations regarding the levels of permissible storage of Ammonium Nitrate in this country will be introduced tightening up on thresholds and associated controls.
In addition to the storage of Ammonium Nitrate, the Westlink site stores other non- nitrate fertilisers, salt, caustic soda and glass silicate on the site, both externally and in buildings.
In respect of the Westlink hazardous substances proposal the activity only involves storing the product in bags externally and cannot be directly compared to the circumstances as they existed at Toulouse. Ammonium Nitrate is in itself not combustible, but can promote burning of other materials. The material is insensitive to friction encountered in normal handling, but can be detonated under certain conditions. If mixed with other organic matter the probability of explosion is greatly
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH increased. Under fire conditions, Ammonium Nitrate may also melt and decompose, giving off toxic fumes.
A number of safeguards are required to ensure Ammonium Nitrate is stored safely. In particular, the risk of explosion is increased by a combination of the heating of the product or its involvement in a fire, the product becoming contaminated or the product becoming confined i.e in drains or enclosed equipment. The storing and handling of Ammonium Nitrate is therefore the subject of detailed controls by the HSE which need to met to safely operate an Ammonium storage facility.
From the report from DNV’s investigation from the site visit referred to earlier in the report and from subsequent visits it was observed that the guideline for storage were not being strictly adhered to. Pallets were being stored and propped against the Ammonium Nitrate. The product was being stored close to existing propane tanks on the site used for drying other stored products. Cars were parked close to stored product, required gaps between storage areas of Ammonium Nitrate were not always kept clear.
Without prejudice to the current application the applicants have indicated that they are in the process of implementing numerous site management improvements, to overcome some of these difficulties. It should however be noted that storage has now been taking place for over 12 months.
The Council's Technical Adviser - DNV, have made a number of recommendations: These include: • Certificates of conformity should be obtained with each load/delivery to ensure quality/percentage content of Nitrogen being delivered; • Permission to store off grade or contaminated Ammonium Nitrate products on the site should be reviewed; • Storage and location of all new materials should be notified; • The Nitrate stored on the site is 34.5% Nitrogen Content. This may be considered an explosive; • Storage of combustible materials should be well away from Ammonium Nitrate; • All operators working on site should undergo specialist training; • The Council should give consideration to the reports and recommendations following the Toulouse incident regarding 'Greater Regulation of Urban spread near Plants'.
Although the advice from DNV does not go as far as recommending that the application for consent should be opposed, it does raise a significant number of concerns and in particular points to the need to look at land use patterns and proximity to urban areas, especially proximity to dwellings.
The site is within 250 metres of the nearest dwellings and any significant incident, based on the Toulouse experience, will clearly have serious consequences for these properties and their occupants. Matters of public safety are clearly of the up most importance, and although rejecting the present proposal will have certain economic and employment implications, these cannot override this principle objective. The presence of the operation will also have a potential impact upon the future land use pattern of the area and could undermine future investment in the area. The Health &
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH Safety Executive has echoed the concern over safety and risk to the surrounding population and accordingly advise against the application.
The 55 acre redundant dockland site at Weston Point is leased by British Waterways to Westlink. Employment generated by all the storage uses on this extensive site has not yet reached double figures. The site forms part of one of the proposed UDP regeneration areas. To override the proper safety and risk concerns from this particular storage use continuing would leave an additional obstacle to the ultimate improvements that may come about through other regeneration proposals.
On the basis of the evidence available and in consideration of the recommendation of the Health & Safety Executive, it is concluded that the proposal is contrary to Policy P1 & P7 of the Halton Local Plan and is accordingly recommended for refusal.
RECOMMENDATION:
Refuse - Contrary to Policy P1 & P7 of the Halton Local Plan.
PLAN NUMBER: 02/00020/FUL
APPLICANT: Persimmon Homes (NW) Ltd.
PROPOSAL: Residential development comprising 131 two, three and four storey dwellings
ADDRESS OF SITE: Land off Trentham Street, Dukesfield, Runcorn.
WARD: Mersey
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION:
Approve with conditions.
CONSULTATION AND REPRESENTATION:
Dukesfield Residents, Dukesfield Action Group, Percival Lane Residents Group, Cheshire County Council, English Nature, Health & Safety Executive, Environmental Agency, Manchester Ship Canal Company, The Independent Living Centre, Principals of Halton and Widnes Sixth Form Colleges, Cheshire Fire Brigade and Police Architectural Liaison Officer have been consulted and the application has been advertised on site and in the local press. 47 letters of objection have been received on the following grounds:
• Loss of public open space; • Inadequate replacement of open space; • Overlooking and loss of privacy; • Increased noise nuisance; • Inadequate pre-application consultation with local residents;
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH • More houses will aggravate existing parking problems and create traffic congestion; • Loss of a recreational area; • Impact on wildlife; • No-one wants to live in flats (3 & 4 storey dwellings); • Inadequate local facilities; • Lack of local availability of plans; • Loss of healthy trees; • Contaminated Land; • Adverse impact of 2 storey dwellings on existing houses in Trentham Street; • Failure to comply with the Council's guidance on minimum privacy distances; • Development in proximity to a major hazard; and • The proposal is contrary to Local Plan Policies NE1 and R1.
The objections are similar to these raised on previous planning applications. The letters of objection include a representation made by Patwa Solicitors on behalf of Mr & Mrs Moores of 6 Trentham Street, who instigated the unsuccessful judicial review of the earlier Beazer Homes application (Ref 01/00010/FUL). Grounds of objection by Mr & Mrs Moores are primarily related to non compliance with Local Plan Policies R1 & NE1, impact of two storey dwellings, loss of privacy and Health & Safety Executive issues relating to Tessanderlo.
Two petitions with 85 signatures have also been received. One has been signed by all occupiers of houses in Trentham Street. The grounds of objection are primarily as above.
A meeting was held on 28th March 2002 at the Waterloo Centre in Dukesfield and attended by a representative group of local residents, the applicants, Councillors Polhill & Middlemas and Council Officers. The purpose of the meeting was to listen to the concerns of local residents, which included lack of consultation, loss of open space and the inadequacy of the promenade and former canal locks as a replacement. Subsequent to that meeting, the applicant submitted amended plans incorporating a 10m wide open space along most of the Trentham Street frontage and a reduction in the number of dwellings from 139 to 131. Dukesfield residents and Dukesfield Action Group were then consulted on the amended proposals. One further letter of objection has been received on the grounds that residents still do not want houses and the intimation that the "open space" is inadequate.
The Health and Safety Executive has objected to the proposals on health and safety grounds because of its proximity to Tessanderlo chlorine storage at the Westbank estate and advise against the granting of planning permission but has not asked the Secretary of State to “call in” the application. The HSE has also stated that it is unable to quantify the individual risk of death at the development site as it is not part of its decision making process. On the earlier Miller Homes application the HSE's quantified level of risk of death was 1.4 chances per million per year.
Cheshire Fire Brigade and English Nature raise no objections, Cheshire County Council raise no objections subject to a condition relating to the implementation of a programme of archaeological work. The Environment Agency raise no objections
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH subject to conditions relating to floor levels being set at a minimum level of 7.80m AOD and foul and surface water disposal scheme and protection measures for the River Mersey during the construction phase.
The Council's Drainage Section advises that a sewer crosses the site. The Highways and Transportation Department and Landscape Services Division have made various suggestions in relation to improved layout though raise no objections in principle. It is envisaged that the various issues will be resolved before the meeting, The Council's Trees and Woodlands Officer advised that on the original layout most of the trees can be classified as either unsuitable for retention in a housing development because of their species or condition or could be replaced by a suitable landscape scheme. In respect of the amended layout, he notes the retention of two further trees and the opportunity to plant replacement trees on the proposed open space fronting Trentham Street. Against this background, he recommends that any permission should be conditional upon the agreement of a landscaped scheme. The Council's contaminated Land Officer recommends a detailed ground contamination assessment is carried out before development commences on site.
SITE/LOCATION:
The area comprises open space to the front of Trentham Street which wraps around existing allotment gardens into Leinster Street. The site adjoins an existing pumping station at the eastern end and has a long frontage along the Manchester Ship Canal and Promenade. The line of the old canal locks with the new college campus beyond is directly to the south west.
RELEVANT HISTORY:
Outline permission for residential development of 180 dwellings and public open space, together with the provision of an access road to the proposed college from Mersey Road was granted in September 1997 (ref: 97/00141/OUT). The application has been the subject of two further detailed applications for 36 dwellings (ref: 97/00554/FUL and 98/00103/FUL) and has been implemented. Reserved matters for 97/00141/OUT were approved in March 1999 for 90 dwellings and flats (ref 99/00028/REM). A further application for 22 No. two storey dwellings along the Trentham Street frontage was approved in March 2001. These dwellings were intended to replace the bungalows approved by unimplemented permission 99/00028/REM. The last application was the subject of an attempted Judicial Review which was unsuccessful. The applicants were granted the right to appeal but this was subsequently withdrawn. The grounds for the Judicial Review and the Council's response are considered to be too lengthy to reproduce in this report though some reference is made later. Copies of the Review documentation can be made available to Members on request.
LOCAL PLAN DESIGNATION, KEY POLICIES AND SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES:
Part Greenspace (Public Open Space and Allotments) and part Proposed Housing Development Site.
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH H1 Housing Land Allocations; H3 New Residential Development; R1 Protecting Recreational Open Space; NE1 Protecting Urban Greenspace; R3 Protecting Areas of Local Importance for Children's Play; BE3 Environmental Priority Area; and GS4 Runcorn Docklands.
The proposal will result in the loss of Greenspace (public open space) though this will in part be replaced by a smaller area of greenspace fronting Trentham Street. However, the application forms part of a larger development integrated with other SRB funded open space improvement schemes such as the Promenade and the line of the old locks, the overall effect of which is to increase the overall quality and layout of open space available to the public. That open space will also be adequately maintained for open space purposes. The application does not, therefore, conflict with the sustainability objectives of the Local Plan and realises wider overall benefits to the local community.
In the Second Deposit Version of the Halton Unitary Development Plan, the application site is designated as a proposed Housing Development Site. Only the adjoining allotments are designated as Greenspace. No representations have been made to this designation at the First and Second Deposit Stages.
OBSERVATIONS:
This application seeks permission for 131 dwellings comprising a mix of two, three and four storey dwellings. The number of dwellings has been reduced from the original 139 to enable the incorporation of a 10m wide linear open space along the Trentham Street frontage. The house types include 74 two bed two, three and four storey flats ranging from 3 pairs of semi detached style two storey units to two blocks of three and four storey apartments. The balance of 57 dwellings of two and three bed houses, are grouped to provide an "enclosure and sense of place", whilst the three and four storey apartments along the Ship Canal frontage and at the junction of Collier Street and Trentham Street are intended to take advantage of the river view and serve as local landmarks for the development. The development also makes full use of the topography, stepping down the hillside from 2 storey properties next to Trentham Street to the 3/4 storey apartments along the Ship Canal frontage. The layout is constrained by an existing sewer which crosses the site and the need to provide the road link from the end of Collier Street to the boundary with Halton College. Two distinctive parcels of land are the result with the narrower strip adjacent to the canal presenting an ideal opportunity to produce a strong and distinctive design, i.e three and four storey apartment blocks. These blocks are principally three storey but punctuated at either end or on the corner of an 'L' shaped footprint by four storey elements. It is intended that the proposed dwellings and apartments will be of traditional construction, using facing brickwork and concrete tiling for the roofs. Some art-stone and render may be introduced into the apartments along the canal frontage to help break up their mass.
The road layout comprises a combination of collector and shared surface roads. The choice of materials and colours for the surfacing of the roads will play an important
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH role in creating visual awareness of the character of the road and thereby promoting safety for both pedestrians and drivers alike. Additional safety features, such as traffic calming measures, will be incorporated into the road layout at agreed locations. Car parking is to be provided at the rated of 200% per 2 and 3 bedroom dwelling and ranging from 125% - 150% for the apartments.
The HSE objected to previous housing development proposals for which this Committee was minded to grant permission. The same considerations apply to this revised proposal in that the likely quantified risk levels are below those in the approved Local Plan and therefore no policy issue applies to justify refusing planning permission.
Due to the proximity of the existing large areas of public open space which contain an equipped play area and kickabout area, no provision for public open space is being made on site, other than the 10m wide strip fronting Trentham Street between the allotments and Suffolk Street. The development will, however, be subject to a comprehensive landscape scheme, the design objective of which will be to provide a planting scheme which will compliment and enhance the built form and provide planting interest in the form of colour and shape throughout each season. Tree species will be chosen on the basis of what space will be available for them as well as optimising wildlife potential. The dense form of development and limited space around buildings will also require the scheme to be of the highest quality.
In relation to privacy distances, garden areas and open space provision the proposals in part fall short of meeting the Council's minimum standards for ordinary new residential development. The layout is, however, a reflection of the nature and character of the adjoining high density terraced housing area and of the requirements of PPG 3 to try to develop new housing at higher densities whenever possible and appropriate. Issues relating to controlling extensions and outbuildings can be dealt with by appropriate conditions. Regarding Policies NE1 on Protecting Urban Greenspace, R1 on Protecting Recreational Open Space and R2 on Minimum Standards for Open Space, the loss of existing open space and shortfall in provision of new open space is partly off set by the proposed greenspace fronting Trentham Street. It is recognised that this provision falls below what would normally be required for new development and does not provide alternative provision of equivalent community benefit.
However, in policy terms, the proposed development has to be considered in the context of the wider regeneration of Dukesfield and Runcorn-on-the-Mersey. The Single Regeneration Budget has funded the creation of the Promenade, reclamation of 1.7ha of derelict and contaminated land for public open space and other open space improvements such as the former line of locks, to value of some £lm. Considerable SRB monies have also been spent on or allocated to other regeneration projects, such as the Mersey Road extension, Post Education Centre ( to assist with the education of local people), relocation of the powder shed at Runcorn Docks (to facilitate environmental improvements and assist the college development) and housing renewal in Dukesfield (demolition, refurbishment and new build by housing associations). SRB expenditure (actual/allocated) is in the order of some £6m. The Persimmon development should be seen as just one piece in the greater Dukesfield/Runcorn-on-the-Mersey jigsaw and that the private sector investment that
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH it represents, is a significant element of the complementary private sector funding which the SRB initiative seeks to draw into the area. It is an important element of the "return" on the large amount of public funding in the SRB area and demonstrates the confidence in renewal and regeneration efforts. The overall community benefits will be considerable in supporting a transformed Dukesfield fit for the 21 st century.
In the attempt at a Judicial Review of permission 01/00010/FUL (which was withdrawn by the claimant), the claimant in essence objected to the granting of permission on the grounds that the Council had failed to properly determine whether the proposal had satisfied the requirements of policy NE1 and that the Council had specifically it had failed to ask relevant questions on whether the circumstances were "exceptional".
A balance has to be reached which will in the long run give wider overall benefits, particularly in respect of achieving the wider regeneration of Dukesfield and Runcorn- on-the-Mersey. In this respect, and given the above background, it is considered that the public interest in recommending approval of this application is more than sufficient to outweigh the concerns expressed by objectors, particularly those raised in the attempted judicial review. It would also be difficult to sustain a refusal of permission for housing development, given the earlier permissions, and the UDP housing allocations to which there have been no registered objections.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve subject to the following conditions: amended plans, materials, construction of vehicle access/service and parking area; tree protection/replacement, landscaping, boundary treatment, ground condition survey, permitted development restrictions relating to extensions, outbuildings and frontage boundary treatments, site levels, Environment Agency and archaelogical conditions referred to in the report, provision of wheelwash facility during construction phase.
PLAN NUMBER: 02/00288/FUL
APPLICANT: Elliot Maunders Homes Limited.
PROPOSAL: Erection of 12 two storey dwellings and access road.
ADDRESS OF SITE: Land adjacent to 149 Main Street, Runcorn.
WARD: Castlefields.
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS:
Approve subject to conditions.
CONSULTATION AND REPRESENTATION:
The application has been advertised in the press and on site, numerous individual letters have been sent to local residents and local groups.
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH As a consequence 150 individual letters objecting to the revised proposal have been received. The letters make a number of points which can be summarised as:- the development is close to the Conservation Area and should be designed with more care, there are restrictive covenants on the site to prevent wilful damage, the development will adversely affect the historic character of the area, the proposal will increase traffic on local roads, the existing barns and chestnut tree on the site have already been lost and that any further proposals for this site should be resisted and the land protected as green space.
Two additional letters from the Halton Village Society and Halton Castle Conservation Society have also been received which make the additional points; the landscaping of the site is unacceptable, with mature trees needed to replace those lost, the mix of properties should be greater involving smaller affordable properties, the development is not sustainable and does not reflect the heritage of the area.
The Highway and Drainage Engineer raise no objection to the principle to the proposal subject to a number of minor technical amendments which are incorporated into the amended plan. The Fire Brigade raise no objection to the proposals. The Landscape Officer recommends the replacement of trees with specific mature trees.
Since the receipt of these comments an amended plan has been submitted and further consultation undertaken. Any comments received in respect of the revised proposal will be reported orally to the Committee.
SITE/LOCATION:
The site is situated on the south side of Main Street and to the east of the Halton Village Conservation Area.
RELEVANT HISTORY:
See observations below.
LOCAL PLAN DESIGNATION, KEY POLICES AND SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES:
The site is shown as being allocated for residential purposes in the Halton Local Plan. The Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance Note on New Residential Development Planning Policy Guidance Notes 1, 3 and 13 are relevant in the consideration of this application.
OBSERVATIONS:
The applicant seeks permission for the erection of 12 dwellings on land adjacent to 149 Main Street in Halton Village.
The site was originally used as a coal yard and more recently as an extended garden to the property at 149 Main Street. There was originally a sandstone wall along the front boundary of the site and an unused red brick and slate roofed barn on the front part of the site. There was also a large horse chestnut tree in the centre of the site which was
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH protected by a Tree Preservation Order. There are still a number of other smaller trees on the site which are not protected. The barn and the chestnut tree have now been removed.
Prior to its removal, the barn on site was inspected and was not considered worthy, of 'listing'.
The application site is allocated for residential development in the Halton Local Plan. Outline planning permission was granted for the erection of 14 two storey dwellings in 1995, and this application was subsequently renewed in 1998 and 2001. An application for the approval of reserved matters was refused in September 2001 on the grounds that the proposed development failed to reflect the character of the Halton Village Conservation Area. The subsequent approved scheme for 14 dwellings on the site address this deficiency.
The site although not being situated within the Halton Village Conservation Area is very close to it and the design of the proposed dwellings is therefore important. The current application is a variation to that approved earlier this year and utilises the house types and designs previously agreed.
The current application has been amended since its original submission to include a mix of detached dwellings and semi-detached dwellings which better reflect the character of existing dwellings in the Halton Village Conservation Area. In support of the application the applicants prepared and submitted a design statement and pictorial survey of the village. The statement highlights how the revised proposal reflects the character and style of the adjoining properties and promotes a high quality design and sense of place, and a distinctive style which reflects the local vernacular. The statement also demonstrates how the proposal complies with the policies of the Halton Local Plan and guidance within PPG1 and 3. The elevational detail of the proposed dwellings have been specifically designed for the site and pick up on the architectural detail of existing dwellings in the village. An existing sandstone wall situated at the front of the site will be retained and additional sandstone walls will be provided to the frontage of the semi-detached properties within the site development. The Council's Highway Engineer has been consulted and has raised no objection to the application and has confirmed that a traffic calming scheme will be implemented in Halton Village before the end of the current financial year.
The development of this 1 acre site for 12 dwellings is in terms of its principle, acceptable. The density reflects that sought by PPG3 i.e. 30 to the hectare and general policy guidance within PPG1 which encourages better design. Of equal importance is the site’s history. The principle of development has been long established by three successive outline permissions and a subsequent approval in detail for 14 dwellings. The latter permission effectively agreed the design principles now proposed in this revised application.
The proposed development also complies with the Council's standards for New Residential Development as outlined in the Supplementary Planning Guidance Note on New Residential Development. It is considered that the amended proposals which incorporate a greater level of detail which reflect the characteristics of the adjoining Conservation Area can now be recommended for approval.
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH
With regard to the comments made by local residents and groups. Those specifically with reference to heritage and design whilst being appropriate and relevant, fail to acknowledge that the site already benefits from an approved scheme for 14 dwellings which is largely of the same design and style as that now proposed.
The issue regarding the provision of affordable housing again, whilst being a legitimate planning concern, would be inappropriate in this case, having regard to the sites history and the policy of the Local Plan.
The general issue of restrictive covenants is not a matter for the Council to consider. In practice the present application seeks to develop the site for only 12 dwellings rather than the 14 earlier approved which is not the issue concerning the restrictive covenant. The covenant seeks to control other matters outside planning control.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Approve , subject to conditions relating to the following materials (bricks and roofing materials) boundary treatment, landscaping including replacement tree planting, details of drainage and amended plan.
PLAN NUMBER: 02/00297/COU
APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs Roberts, 2 Rose Cottage, Northwich Road, Dutton, WA4 4JZ
PROPOSAL: Change of use of land from public open space to Grazing Land
ADDRESS OF SITE: Land adjacent to St Bertiline's School, Windmill Hill, Runcorn.
WARD: Norton
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION:
Refuse.
CONSULTATION AND REPRESENTATION:
The application has been advertised on site and numerous letters sent to nearby residents. In response the following representations have been received;
Objections from:-
Councillor Mrs Cargill supports local residents objecting to the scheme, the Windmill Hill Residents Association is preparing a plan for the Area Panel and are intending to apply for formal play equipment on the land, 3 local residents and the community group also raise the following objections:-
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH Loss of a 'green area', loss of an open play area, children will play on roadway as an alternative, repercussions for other open green space area at the bottom of Nortonwood Lane, area is 'financially and amenity impoverished' and losing too may green areas already.
1 local resident supports the application believing that the land suffers from rubbish dumping and the proposed use would ensure the land is well managed and an improved visual amenity.
Mike Hall MP raises objection to the loss of this green space facility used for play.
SITE/LOCATION
The Council currently owns the land and the applicant has negotiated a leasing agreement for grazing of horses. The site is situated as the southern end of the Windmill Hill estate and is accessed from Norton Lane and Nortonwood Lane. The site lies between two pieces of existing grazing land on the north and south boundaries, which is in the ownership of the applicant. The land is bounded on the east by the Busway and beyond this Norton Village. To the west lies Nortonwood Lane, beyond this, Hornbeam Close and Whitebeam Close, which are residential area on Windmill Hill, comprising 144 properties.
The site is bounded on three sides, north, east and south by mature hedgerow with the central area grassed. A public footpath runs alongside the open boundary on the west, leading to the residential area on Windmill Hill and to Norton Lane to the south.
The land is designated as Greenspace within the Halton Local Plan and emerging Unitary Development Plan. The applicant does have a right of access across the land to and from the existing grazing areas to the north and south.
RELEVANT HISTORY:
No relevant history.
LOCAL PLAN DESIGNATION, KEY POLICIES AND SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES:
GS10 NE1 R1
OBSERVATIONS:
Although the applicant originally applied for a change of use to 'grazing land' the primary purpose for the application is to create an enclosure for a more secure access across the piece of land between the two grazing area to the north and south which the applicant owns.
The two main issues to consider are; the impact of the proposed use upon the visual quality of the Greenspace and the loss of open space for recreation.
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH
In the first instance, whilst the proposal would involve the erection of fencing, the applicant has described the form of fencing to be used as 'post and rail,' which would enable views through to the space beyond. As the land will remain open with no buildings proposed, the change of use will have only a minimal adverse impact upon visual amenity.
In the second instance, the separation of the land from what remains of the Greenspace will result in the loss of a space available for informal play. The value of the land's use for this purpose is based on its location value, lying directly adjacent to a densely populated housing area of 144 homes. There are other areas of Greenspace in the wider vicinity, however the largest is some 140m from the closest house on Nortonwood Lane. Of the nearer areas, one has been left overgrown and the other maintained as a more formal play space and has permanent '5 a Side' goal post.
Urban Greenspace is open land within the built up areas of the Borough, which has important amenity value. It is therefore not allocated for development and the general presumption is in favour of retaining urban Greenspace as open space.
The proposal would not cause material harm to the purpose of the land's allocation as Urban Greenspace in terms of its landscape value, nature conservation or its functional value in forming a buffer and screening provision. However it will adversely affect to varying degrees, its visual quality and its recreational value.
The designation of the application site within both the Halton Local Plan and the emerging Unitary Development Plan is that of Greenspace. The policies seek to prevent development, which would result in the loss of that Greenspace.
The applicant and supporter have cited instances of illegal tipping and general poor maintenance of the lane. These are matters for the Council to deal with in other ways and not relevant to the determination of this application. It is however noted that objections to this proposal involve proposals which would introduce more formal open space activities on to the site.
The proposal will result in the loss of a designated Greenspace, which conflicts with the Council's commitment to protecting urban Greenspace as an essential element of urban areas and is contrary to policies GS10, NE1 and R1 of the Halton Local Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
Refuse.
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH PLAN NUMBER: 02/00304/FUL and 02/00307/LBC
APPLICANT: Keys Child Care Services.
PROPOSAL: Proposed repairs to boundary walls, formation of new car park and playground
ADDRESS OF SITE: Halton House, 31-33 Main Street, Halton Village, Runcorn.
WARD: Castlefields
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION:
Approve with conditions.
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION:
The applications were both advertised on site and extensive neighbour consultations were carried out. Halton Civic Society, Ward Councillor, English Heritage and the Highways Engineer were all consulted. There has been one letter of objection received from a neighbour who has concern over the noise generated by additional cars parked on the site. Any other comments will be reported orally at the Committee.
SITE/LOCATION:
The site is a children's home located in Main Street, in Halton Village Conservation Area which is a Grade II Listed Building in Runcorn.
RELEVANT HISTORY:
The most recent planning applications of relevance Application No 99/00732/FUL – proposed a new window in the gable wall elevation and the formation of a new car park (Approved February 2000), Application No 99/00733/LBC Listed Building Consent for new window in gable wall elevation and formation of new car park (Approved February 2000), and Application No 00/00208/LBC Listed Building Consent to re-roof property and remove and rebuild two chimneys (Approved May 2000).
LOCAL PLAN DESIGNATION, KEY POLICIES AND SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES:
The site is allocated as a Primarily Residential Area in the Halton Local Plan. It is also located within Halton Village Conservation Area. Policies BE8 Protecting the Setting of Listed Buildings, BE10 General Development Criteria - Conservation Areas, BE1, Quality of Design and BE2 Quality of Design Matters are of relevance.
The site is a grade II listed building located on Main Street in the Halton Conservation Area.
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH The proposal is for repairs to the boundary walls, laying of a new car park and playground within the grounds of the listed building.
The applicant is looking to increase the height of the wall by 3 courses and its width by one brick using reclaimed Cheshire Bricks to match existing. This is not considered unreasonable or detrimental to the setting of the building or the amenity of neighbours. A condition will be added to ensure that a brick sample is provided prior to works starting on site.
The proposed playground area is adjacent to the main buildings with access from the buildings by ramps and steps to the garden area. A fence is to be provided to section off the playground and garden area from the car park.
The car parking area is to be provide for 12 car parking spaces. Due to the expanse of the tarmac area, landscaping is to be provided adjacent to the wall with number 29 Main Street. This will provide greenery and help break up the hard surface areas. A condition will be added to control the provision of landscaping. The application subject to the conditions listed below is recommended for approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve subject to condition regarding vehicle parking in accordance with the approved plan, materials (brick sample to be agreed) disabled parking provision, and landscaping scheme.
PLAN NUMBER: 02/00313/HBC
APPLICANT: Halton Borough Council
PROPOSAL: Provision of bus turnaround within site for four school buses and creation of a temporary car parking area.
ADDRESS OF SITE: The Heath School, Clifton Road, Runcorn
WARD: Heath
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION:
Approve subject to conditions.
CONSULTATION AND REPRESENTATION:
Nearby residents have been notified of the application. Three letters have been received from nearby residents although these do not raise any objections to these proposals. Comments regarding other issues such as the plan not varying and past works on the site were made.
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH SITE/LOCATION:
The Heath School, situated on the northern side of Clifton Road.
RELEVANT HISTORY:
N/A
LOCAL PLAN DESIGNATION, KEY POLICIES AND SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES:
The site is shown as Greenspace (school playing fields) in the Halton Local Plan.
OBSERVATIONS:
The applicant seeks permission to provide a bus turnaround point within the grounds of the Heath Comprehensive School.
The proposal will involve the widening of an existing internal access road at the front of the school and the construction of a turning point at its north western end. The bus turning area will serve up to 4 buses which will park along the widened access road.
The facilities will be constructed on an area of land which is currently used for parking. To ensure there is sufficient car parking within the site the proposals also involves the provision of a temporary overflow car parking area on a small grassed area on the eastern part of the site.
It is considered the proposal will result in a reduction of traffic congestion outside the school during school opening and closing times and is accordingly recommended for approval. The need for the longer term retention of the temporary car parking area can be reviewed as part of the management of the site and removed if not considered necessary. However, it would also be prudent because of the car park's construction and temporary nature to control the long term retention of the car parking area by planning condition. Its retention, in respect of the amenity of the area or impacts upon neighbouring properties, can therefore be reviewed and controlled.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve, subject to temporary condition for 12 months for the car parking element of the proposal.
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH PLAN NUMBER: 02/00320/FUL
APPLICANT: Fordgate Industrial Ltd.
PROPOSAL: Proposed erection of an industrial unit with integral office accommodation
ADDRESS OF SITE: Brindley Road, Astmoor Industrial Estate, Runcorn.
WARD: Castlefields
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION:
Approve with conditions.
CONSULTATION AND REPRESENTATION:
The application was advertised on site and in the press. Neighbour consultation was carried out, the Environment Agency and Highways Engineer were also consulted.
The Environment Agency has no objection in principle to the proposed development. The Highways Engineer has raised no objections in principle, but make a number of technical recommendations.
SITE/LOCATION:
The site is a disused car park, off Brindley Road in Astmoor Industrial Estate, Runcorn.
RELEVANT HISTORY:
There are no applications of relevance for this site.
LOCAL PLAN DESIGNATION, KEY POLICIES AND SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES:
Local Plan Policies E4 & E6 are of particular relevance.
OBSERVATIONS:
The site is located on Astmoor Industrial Estate in between Brindley Road, the Busway and Brindley Court.
The site area is 9630 square metres with the proposed building to cover 3716 square metres. The highest point of the building will be 9.5m and 6.6m to the top of the eaves.
There are two accesses shown on the proposed plan. The Highways Engineer has suggested that only one access is used which will allow car parking to be relocated and enable turning space within the site for articulated lorries. The visibility splay
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH will also be required to be increased to 35 metres. These matters are to be controlled by condition.
There are 75 car parking spaces and 3 disabled shown on the application. 75 car parking spaces is the maximum car parking that should be provided. Cycle parking areas are also shown and there are public transport links with the busway and bus stop adjacent to the site.
The storage area and refuse area are shown to the rear of the building which is adjacent to the existing landscaped area.
The landscaping is already established on the industrial estate. There are no landscape details shown for within the site.
The proposed hours of operation are 6.00 am - 10.00 pm 6 days a week.
The proposed details are general of a good quality and comply with Local Plan Policies E4 Primarily Employment Areas and E6 New Industrial and Commercial Development.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve subject to conditions ie; materials, car parking layout and access, disabled parking, cycle parking, visibility splay, drainage, oil interceptors, boundary treatment, landscaping and condition from Environment Agency.
PLAN NUMBER: 02/00375/HBC
APPLICANT: Halton Borough Council.
PROPOSAL: Proposed formation of recreational open space, nature conservation, canal restoration, amelioration basin and associated footpaths and fence construction (Phase 2)
ADDRESS OF SITE: Wigg Island, Runcorn.
WARD: Castlefields
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION:
Approve with conditions.
CONSULTATION AND REPRESENTATION:
The application was advertised on site and in the press. The Environment Agency, Manchester Ship Canal Company, Highways Engineer, Drainage Engineer and Environmental Health Officer were also consulted. Any comments will be reported orally at Committee.
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH SITE/LOCATION:
The site forms part of Wigg Island adjacent to the River Mersey.
RELEVANT HISTORY:
There is one application of relevance 00/00353/HBC for formation areas of public open space including model aircraft flying area, car parks, footways, gates and fencing (phase 1) which was approved 22nd August 2000 on adjacent land to the west.
LOCAL PLAN DESIGNATION, KEY POLICIES AND SUSTAINABILITY OBJECTIVES:
The site is allocated as Greenspace (public open space), and lies within Greenbelt. The site is within an Environmental Priority Area. Policies NE1 Protecting Urban Greenspace, GS6 Green Belt: Control and Development and BE3 Environmental Priority Areas are of relevance.
OBSERVATIONS:
The development seeks to re-open and improve areas of open space on the eastern part of Wigg Island following the very successful opening of re-claimed open space on the western part of the island (Phase 1).
The scheme will include the improvement of public access around the site, including continuing the footpath network established in Phase I, the restoration of the Runcorn/Latchford Canal Spur as a landscape/ecological feature and the creation and management of an area for nature conservation.
Works will include improving the existing car park area, the creation of footpaths, new fencing, areas of new planting. The footpaths would be laid around the site to improve access for the public linking in to the existing network of footpaths in Phase I. There will be some thinning and removal of existing vegetation.
A view point with a screen will be provided overlooking the disused Runcorn/Latchford Canal, the Salt Marsh and Mersey Estuary, for bird watching enthusiasts. The Runcorn/Latchford Canal will be restored for its visual amenity value as a freshwater habitat for wildlife and education and its heritage merit. Reclamation works to achieve this is based on certain innovative techniques agreed with the Environment Agency which will ensure the recreated water feature will have acceptable water quality.
The main area of land on Phase 2 is to be retained and managed for its nature conservation value. A footpath network will be created around the existing grassland and maturing woodland areas which will be enclosed with a 2.4 metre high fence of a lightweight construction and coloured green. Public access will be allowed for pre- arranged groups, such as schools and colleges, wildlife groups etc; for educational; and conservation purposes. Screens/bird hides will be constructed in suitable locations.
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH
The main issues for this proposal are its location in the Green Belt, and the potential impact on nature conservation interests.
In relation to Green Belt issues, Policy GS6 Green Belt: Control over Development of the Halton Local Plan indicates that outdoor recreation is a suitable use within the Green Belt. The openness of the Green Belt will not be adversely affected and these proposals will enhance the visual amenity of the area.
The woodland and grassland within the site which are areas of nature conservation interest will be enclosed with fencing. There will be limited controlled access. This access will be for educational and conservation purposes which will allow the areas with specific nature conservation interest to be protected and reduce any adverse impact on the areas.
The area is allocated as public open space in the Halton Local Plan and is therefore considered an appropriate use. The proposal will not have an adverse impact on the Green Belt and complies with the Supplementary Planning Guidance in the Natural Assets Strategy, and also helps meet the targets in the Council's Biodiversity Action Plan. The proposal is therefore recommended for approval and is to be greatly welcomed as another Council step to enhancing the effective use of new areas of greenspace following the sites successful reclamation.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve subject to conditions relating to landscaping, details of fencing, details of seating/viewpoint area and for Halton Borough Council's benefit only.
DEV/26/6/9185/SAH