PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
Dear Member, You are invited to attend the meeting of the Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel to be held as follows for the transaction of the business indicated. Ben Dolan Proper Officer
DATE: Thursday 16th July, 2015
TIME: 9.30 a.m.
VENUE: The Salford Suite, Civic Centre, Chorley Road, Swinton.
In accordance with ‘The Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014,’ the press and public have the right to film, video, photograph or record this meeting.
Members attending this meeting with a personal interest in an item on the agenda must disclose the existence and nature of that interest and, if it is a prejudicial interest, withdraw from the meeting room during the discussion and voting on the item.
Please note that there will be a break for Members at approximately 11.15 a.m. until 11.30 a.m. ______
AGENDA
1. The Panel is asked to consider whether it agrees to the inclusion of the items listed in Parts 1 and 2 of the agenda.
2. Apologies for absence.
3. Declarations of interest.
4. To approve, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on 18th June 2015 – Page 3.
5. Planning applications and related development control matters:-
9.30 a.m. . 14/65708/FUL – Land On Green Lane, Eccles M30 0RP – Page 13. . 14/65411/COU – 43 Cross Lane, Salford M5 4BN – Page 45. . 14/65501/FUL – 43 Cross Lane, Salford M5 4BN – Page 54.
11.30 a.m. . 15/66381/FUL – Brentnall Primary School Northumberland Street, M7 4RP – Page 62. . 15/66487/FUL – Willow Tree Primary School, 2 Greenland Street, M6 5TJ – Page 70. . 15/66404/REM – Land Adjacent To Premier Inn, South of Stanley Street – Page 78.
6. Planning applications determined under delegated authority – Page 90.
7. Planning and enforcement appeals – Page 125.
Page 1 of 130
8. URGENT BUSINESS
Business which, due to special circumstances, the Chair of the meeting is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency.
9. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
Officers consider that the following items contain exempt information as provided for in the Local Government Access to Information Act and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. Members are recommended to agree the necessary resolutions excluding the public from the meeting during consideration of these items.
10. PART 2 – CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC
No items.
11. URGENT BUSINESS
Business which, due to special circumstances, the Chair of the meeting is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency.
Access to Information A copy of this agenda, the reports and the background documents shown in those reports (except those in Part 2) are open to inspection by members of the public. Further information is available from the contact officer named below.
NOTE: At the conclusion of the Panel, Members will convene in a briefing session to reflect on any issues arising during the meeting, the notes of which will be submitted at a future Chair’s Briefing.
Contact Officer: Claire Edwards Title: Senior Democratic Services Officer Phone: 0161 793 2602 Email: [email protected]
Page 2 of 130
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
18th June, 2015
Meeting commenced: 9.30 a.m. “ ended: 11.45 a.m.
PRESENT: Councillor Mashiter - in the Chair Councillors Antrobus, E. Burgoyne, Hunt, Lewis, Morris and Murphy
Councillor Burch during consideration of all items with the exception of applications 15/66151/FUL (Walkden High School, 211 Old Clough Lane, Worsley M28 7JB) and 14/65708/FUL (Land On Green Lane, Eccles M30 0RP).
Please note that a list of persons in attendance (including any Ward Councillors) in respect of matters referred to in Minutes 4 and 7 is included at Appendix A.
1. WELCOME AND APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
The Chair welcomed those present and outlined the procedure for the meeting.
Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Dawson, K. Garrido, Lea, Turner and R. Wilson.
2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
There were no declarations of interest.
3. MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
RESOLVED: THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 14th May, 2015, be agreed as a correct record.
4. APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
(Full details of the matters referred to in this Minute are contained in the report of the Strategic Director for Environment & Community Safety, as amended, in the case of the applications marked * in the amendment report).
RESOLVED: THAT, following consideration by the Panel, the under-mentioned applications for planning permission were determined, subject to the conditions listed in the above report(s), as indicated below:-
Application Number/ Site Development Decision Applicant
15/65998/FUL 162-170 Partington Change of use of part of the Granted, subject to (a) the Mr. Zakir Niamut – Lane ground floor from shop (A1) to addition of a condition Zarr Enterprise LTD Swinton create a separate hot food requiring the submission of a Salford takeaway (A5) together with crime prevention plan, (b) the M27 0WN alterations to elevations and addition of a condition construction of new external omitting the car parking staircase at the rear of existing spaces from the rear yard, first floor flat and (c) informative 4 in respect of the alley-gating scheme to the un-adopted passageway on Stockton Page 3 of 130
Application Number/ Site Development Decision Applicant
Street being amended to reflect the applicant’s commitment to fund the order.
15/66124/FUL Peel Park Environmental improvements Granted Ms Annie Surtees Crescent to Peel Park, including new Salford and realigned footpaths, M5 4WT parking bays, access ramp, tree management and landscaping, relocation of playground and seating area
15/66151/FUL Walkden High School Erection of 2.4m high mesh Granted. Walkden High School 211 Old Clough Lane fence and associated gates Worsley It was agreed that officers M28 7JB would liaise with both the Head Teacher and objectors, in order to establish whether the proposed management and creation of a specific area for Year 7 pupils would conflict with any conditions regarding the location of playgrounds attached to the original planning permission for the school.
*14/65708/FUL Land On Green Lane Erection of 142 Dwellings and Deferred, in order for further Mr. Nigel Smith Eccles associated works information to be provided M30 0RP regarding the apartment mix on site, as the Panel considered the mix to be contrary to the housing planning guidance, therefore requiring further justification or amendments.
5. PLANNING APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY
The Strategic Director for Environment & Community Safety submitted a report containing details of planning applications which he had determined under delegated authority during May and June 2015 and were not, therefore, for consideration by the Panel.
RESOLVED: THAT the content of the report be noted.
6. PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS
The Strategic Director for Environment and Community Safety submitted a report which provided details of two appeals that had recently been received.
Reference was made to the appeal regarding Application 13/64081/OUTEIA – Land To The North Of Middlewood Street And East Of Oldfield Road, Salford (Middlewood Locks). Members agreed with the recommendation but requested that rather than ‘not contest’ the appeal, the inspectorate be informed that the Council support it.
Page 4 of 130
RESOLVED: THAT it be noted that the Panel confirmed that the City Council support the above- mentioned appeal and confirmed to the Planning Inspectorate its support for the granting of planning permission with a revised condition allowing a seven year period to bring forward all of the reserved matters.
7. 14/65810/REM – LAND BOUNDED BY CLEMINSON STREET, GREAT GEORGE STREET, BANK STREET, ST PHILIP’S PLACE AND ENCOMBE PLACE, SALFORD – DETAILS OF RESERVED MATTERS APPLICATION FOR ACCESS, APPEARANCE, LANDSCAPING, LAYOUT, AND SCALE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PLOT F4 FOR ERECTION OF 36 TOWNHOUSES (USE CLASS C3); TOGETHER WITH ASSOCIATED SERVICING, ACCESS, PARKING, LANDSCAPING, AND PUBLIC REALM, PURSUANT TO OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION 09/57950/EIAHYB – APPROVAL OF MATERIALS
The Panel considered options regarding the brick to be used in respect of the above development.
RESOLVED: THAT approval be granted with regard to the use of a Wienerberger Lavagrijs lightly creased grey moulded stock brick.
Page 5 of 130
APPENDIX A - LIST OF ATTENDEES
MINUTE 4
APPLICATION NO/ OBJECTOR IN FAVOUR ADDRESS
15/66151/FUL Mr. Cross* Simon Lennox* Walkden High School Mrs. Cross 211 Old Clough Lane Worsley M28 7JB
15/65998/FUL Shirley Hicks* Rob Booth* 162-170 Partington Lane S. Hiley Zakir Niamut Swinton M27 0WN
15/66124/FUL Jackie Ashley* Peel Park Crescent Salford M5 4WT
14/65708/FUL Thomas Relph Land On Green Lane Steve Hughes* Eccles Nigel Smith M30 0RP Mr. Jones*
MINUTE 7
APPLICATION NO/ IN ATTENDANCE ADDRESS
14/65810/REM Phil Mayall* Land Bounded By Councillor Ord* Cleminson Street, Great George Street, Bank Street, St. Philip’s Place and Encombe Place, Salford
OBSERVING
Jane Ransley Pupils and staff from The Canterbury Centre Councillor Walsh
* Indicates those who made representations to the Panel. Page 6 of 130
REPORT
Of
Strategic Director for Environment and Community Safety
To the
Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel
On
16th July 2015
Planning Applications and Related Development Control Matters
(Not considered to contain exempt information)
Non-members of the panel are invited to attend the meeting during consideration of any applications included within the report in which they have a particular interest.
MAIN REPORT
Page 7 of 130
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972-SECTIONS 100A-100K
LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS
The “Background Papers” relating to all reports on Planning Applications appearing in this report are: -
1. The appropriate ‘Development Information Folder’ for each planning application on the Agenda. The contents of the folder include the following documents:
(a) The submitted planning application (forms, plans and supporting documents and Information)
(b) Correspondence with statutory and other consultees;
(c) Letters and other documents from interested parties.
2. Any previous planning applications and subsequent Decision Notices (if issued referred to in each planning application report on this Agenda.
3. Any Tree Preservation Order referred to in each planning application report on the agenda.
4. Any Conservation Area Plan referred to in each planning application report on the agenda.
5. The “Standard Planning Conditions Etc…’Booklet’.
6. Papers specifically listed under a heading “Other Background Papers” in any planning report on the agenda.
These Background Papers can normally be inspected between the hours of 8.30 am and 4.30 pm on any weekday (except Bank Holidays) at Urban Vision Partnership Ltd reception at Emerson House, Albert Street, Eccles. Whilst background papers will be made available for inspection as quickly as possible, immediate access cannot be guaranteed. It is therefore advisable wherever practical, to make an appointment by telephoning (0161) 779 4852. Alternatively the planning application forms, plans and supporting information is available on the Council’s web site http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/
Publications
In considering planning applications or legal action, the City Council has regard to a wide range of published documents, although not ‘Background Papers’ for the purposes of the Local Government Act 1972 – Sections 100A-100K, are nevertheless important to the consideration of these matters.
The Government in particular has published a large number of circulars and Statutory Instruments in addition to the primary legislation and these are available from Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, which has a bookshop in Manchester.
The following Local Authority publications are available for inspection at Emerson House, Albert Street, Eccles , they can also be viewed on the Council’s web site http://www.salford.gov.uk/planning-policy.htm
Page 8 of 130
If you do not have personal access to the Internet, free access is available to registered members at each of the sixteen libraries in the city.
Design and Crime – SPD Trees and Development – SPD House Extensions – SPD Housing Planning Guidance Salford Green Space Strategy – SPD Nature Conservation & Biodiversity – SPD Lower Broughton Design Code – SPD Ellesmere Park – SPD Hot Food Take Aways - SPD Telecommunications - SPD Planning Obligations - SPD Sustainable Design and Construction SPD Design SPD Education Contributions SPD
The following Planning Guidance documents have been adopted by the City Council
The Exchange, Greengate Mediacity:uk & Quays Point Housing Planning Guidance Claremont and Weaste Neighbourhood Plan Salford City Council - UDP Policy E5: Development in Established Employment Areas Flood Risk and Development Planning Guidance Salford central Irwell City Park Ordsall Riverside Pendleton Planning Guidance
Amendments/Additional Information received after the completion of this series of reports
Any amendment/additional information, such as amendments to planning applications, additional information from applicants or consultees, representations from interested parties, etc…. received AFTER the preparation of this series of reports will be reported at the Panel meeting together with any changes to my recommendation.
Page 9 of 130
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
Set out below are details of all of the items which will be considered by the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel at their meeting. Some of these applications may be subject to a s.106 legal agreement (planning obligation). Where this is the case it will be stated next to the recommendation using the code ‘S106’ as detailed in the list of codes below.
Ward Members may make representations to the Panel on all items below including those with an associated s.106 legal agreement.
INDEX REPORT
DATE: 16.07.2015
RECOMMENDATION PER = Approve AUTH = Consent REF = Refuse FUL = Full application ADV = Advert Application OUT = Outline Application HH = Householder Application
REM = Reserved Matters COU = Change of use LBC = Listed Building Consent CON = Conservation Area Consent
S106 = Subject to a S106 Obligation
Eccles
14/65708/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE PAGE 13
TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am
PROPOSAL: Erection of 142 Dwellings and associated works.
LOCATION: Land On Green Lane Eccles M30 0RP
APPLICANT: Mr Nigel Smith
Page 10 of 130
Langworthy
14/65411/COU RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE PAGE 45
TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am
PROPOSAL: Alterations to the southern elevation and change of use of part of the ground, the first and the second floor for use as 4 one bedroomed and 2 two bedroomed, self-contained flats
LOCATION: 43 Cross Lane Salford M5 4BN
APPLICANT: Mrs Zenab Bibi
Langworthy
14/65501/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE PAGE 54
TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am
PROPOSAL: Proposed change of use of vacant units to a shop (A1) and a hot foodtakeaway (A5) together with new shop fronts and internal roller shutters
LOCATION: 43 Cross Lane Salford M5 4BN
APPLICANT: Mrs Zenab Bibi
Kersal
15/66381/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE PAGE 62
TIME OF MEETING: 11.30am
PROPOSAL: Installation of two temporary classroom Modular Buildings in existing playground area.
LOCATION: Brentnall Primary School Northumberland Street Salford M7 4RP
APPLICANT: Childrens Services
Page 11 of 130
Langworthy
15/66487/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE PAGE 70
TIME OF MEETING: 11.30am
PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey modular building to provide two classrooms together with play area and erection of 2m high weld mesh fence.
LOCATION: Willow Tree Primary School 2 Greenland Street Salford M6 5TJ
APPLICANT: Childrens Services
Ordsall
15/66404/REM RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE PAGE 78
TIME OF MEETING: 11.30am
PROPOSAL: Details of reserved matters for access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for development of Plot A5 for erection of an 11-storey building to provide 90 apartments (use class C3); together with associated ancillary facilities, servicing, access, parking, landscaping and public realm, pursuant to outline planning permission 09/57950/EIAHYB.
LOCATION: Land Adjacent To Premier Inn South Of Stanley Street Salford
APPLICANT: Mr Phil Mayall
Page 12 of 130
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL PART I SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 16th July 2015
APPLICATION No: 14/65708/FUL APPLICANT: Mr Nigel Smith LOCATION: Land On Green Lane, Eccles, M30 0RP, PROPOSAL: Erection of 142 Dwellings and associated works. WARD: Eccles
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
Members will recall that this application was before them on the 16th June 2015 and was deferred by members for further information. At the time of publication the draft minutes state:
“Deferred, in order for further information to be provided regarding the apartment mix on site, as the Panel considered the mix to be contrary to the housing planning guidance, therefore requiring further justification or amendments”.
In response the applicant has prepared additional information to support the proposed mix. This response outlines the policy requirements, provides information in respect of the housing mix to demonstrate that there are a varied mix of dwellings in the immediate area and across the site. The Page 13 of 130
applicant has also sought to demonstrate there is a strong demand for housing in this area by referencing the Salford Strategic Market Assessment (SHMA) (2012) which highlights that Eccles is becoming a popular residential location for commuters and by referring to evidence from property agents. The property agents have confirmed that there is a strong demand for apartments (including the rental market) in the locality and that the proximity to Patricroft train station is a strong attraction for potential renters in this location. Further they state that despite this demand no new apartments have been built in Eccles in the last 12 months. This information has been reviewed by the City’s Spatial Planning Team and their comments are incorporated into these additional observations.
To clarify the proposed mix across this development as proposed would be:
40 x 1 bed apartments 34 x 2 bed apartments 25 x 2 bedroom houses 35 x 3 bedroom houses 8 x 4 bedroom houses
As discussed in the panel report the proposal would be contrary to the Housing Planning Guidance however there is flexibility in the policy which clearly states that alternative approaches on individual sites may be permitted where there are specific circumstances that justify this, particularly having regard to criteria A-H of UDP Policy H1 which are:
A. the size of the development; B. the physical characteristics of the site; C. the mix of dwellings in the surrounding area; D. any special character of the surrounding area that is worthy of protection; E. the accessibility of the site, and its location in relation to jobs and facilities; F. any specific need for, or oversupply of, residential accommodation that has been identified; G. the strategy and proposals of the Housing Market Renewal Initiative; and H. any other relevant housing, planning or regeneration strategies approved by the city council.
The officer report sought to justify the provision of apartments having regard to the recent approvals in the area for houses and that the inclusion of apartments in this scheme would contribute to a diverse mix of dwelling types across this site but also the wider area.
In order to strengthen this argument and demonstrate compliance with criteria C of UDP policy H1 the applicant has provide additional information on the proposed housing mix in this scheme together with the proposed mix on the former GUS and Mitchell Shackleton sites. This is as follows:
Site No. Units No. Tenure Site Mix% Overall Mix% Bedrooms Former GUS 156 3 House 89 34 Former GUS 15 4 House 9 3 Former GUS 4 2 House 2 1 Mitchell 40 2 House 29 9 Shackleton Mitchell 92 3 House 66 20 Shackleton Mitchell 8 4 House 5 2 Shackleton Green Lane 40 1 Apartment 28 9 Green Lane 34 2 Apartment 24 7 Green Lane 25 2 House 18 5 Green Lane 35 3 House 25 8 Green Lane 8 4 House 5 2 Total 457
In taking a wider perspective as identified in policy H1 this table clearly shows that the total number of apartments across these three recent residential schemes equates to 16% which is in accordance
Page 14 of 130
with policy HOU1 which states that 80%-90% of dwellings on individual sites should be in the form of houses rather than apartments.
In respect of the size of the apartments it can be seen in the table above the one bedroom units equate to a 9% of the overall mix and the two bedroom units equate to 6% of the overall mix. As stated in the panel report it is considered in the context of the wider ward of Eccles the provision of one bedroom units would help to diversify the size of new accommodation.
In addition the 2011 Census shows that the average number of bedrooms in the ward of Eccles is 2.6, with this being slightly above the Salford average of 2.5. Again the provision of 1 bed apartments will provide increased choice for those who want / can only afford to live in smaller accommodation. The government’s latest 2012 based household projections which show that the average household size across Salford will fall from 2.20 at the 2012 base, to 2.16 by 2022 and then 2.12 by 2032. Although this does not necessarily mean that households will require accommodation with fewer bedrooms in the future, it is clear that the needs of some of these households needs will be met by smaller accommodation.
The development in isolation, due to its size, has been able to provide a mix of units which is supported by UDP policy H1 criteria A. The evidence above has also demonstrated that when viewing this development in the context of the wider area, as outlined at criteria C of UDP policy H1, the scheme delivers a range of sizes that can meet a range of needs and contributes to the creation of mixed and sustainable communities. This view is supported by the City’s Spatial Planning Team. The development is therefore compliant with the Development Plan policy H1. Furthermore, given that a five year supply of deliverable housing sites has not been identified within the City, the National Planning Policy Framework paragraphs 14 and 49 are clear that any adverse impacts that would prevent granting planning permission would have to significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the scheme. In this case it is not considered that there any significant impacts that would outweigh the benefits. Therefore, the recommendation is still to approve subject to conditions set out at the end of this report.
The remainder of the report is that which was presented to the panel on the 16th June 2105 together with the Amendment Sheet that was circulated on the day.
The following is the Amendment Report as presented to panel on the 16th June 2015
Since the original report was published an Archaeological and Historic Building Assessment has been submitted in support of the application, given the lateness of this report it content has not been assessed.
The applicant has commented on the wording of the proposed conditions and provided additional information in respect of some of the conditions. Those conditions and the additional information will be set out below:
Condition 4 (Site Investigation)
To allow flexibility the applicant has requested that the contaminated land condition is reworded to allow some demolition works to take place prior to the submission of additional site investigation works. Urban Vision Environment is happy with this approach and as such the condition has been reworded as follows:
4. No development approved by this planning permission other than demolition works shall take place until a remediation strategy that includes the following components to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority:
1. Additional site investigation scheme, (based on ground investigation already undertaken) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.
Page 15 of 130
2. The results of the site investigation and the detailed risk assessment referred to in (1) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken.
3. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (2) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.
Reason: To ensure a safe form of development that poses no unacceptable risk of pollution to controlled waters. in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 14 (Disabled parking provision)
This condition was recommended to secure car parking provision for disabled drivers. Since the original report was published the applicant has submitted a revised layout plan showing 4 of the car parking spaces for the apartment block as being allocated for disable use. This level of provision would accord with the minimum standards as outlined the UDP and as such is considered to be acceptable. It is therefore considered that this condition is reworded to read:
14. Prior to occupation of each dwelling, the car parking spaces shown on drawing number SK352- PL-01 Rev E and associated with that dwelling shall be constructed and retained for the parking of vehicles thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure adequate provision for disabled people in accordance with policies A2 and A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 2004-2016.
Condition 15 (Cycle Provision)
This condition was recommended to secure the provision of 15 secure cycle spaces for use by the apartments. The applicants have provided details of this which should be read in conjunction with the revised layout plan. These details have been assessed by the City’s Highway Officer and considered to be acceptable. In light of this it is recommended that condition 15 is removed and plans submitted in respect of this condition are noted in the approved plans condition.
Condition 16 (Archaeology)
This condition was recommended by GMAAS to secure archaeological works at the site. As stated in the original report the applicant has concerns with point 2 of this condition as drafted. Point 2 reads:
A scheme for public engagement to include making the fieldwork investigations open and providing public interpretation. The scheme should consider what can be done during the fieldwork and what could be designed and left as a public legacy.
The applicant has drawn the LPA attention to paragraph 141 of the NPPF which makes no reference to applicants having to undertake public engagement but simply requires evidence to be made publicly accessible. The footnote in this respect of this point states that this involves depositing any evidence with the relevant Historic Environment Record, and any archives with a local museum or other public depository. There is nothing within the NPPF which states that investigations should be open to the public and the applicant considers that this would create health and safety issues in respect of an operational construction site. They also do not considered that this condition is not precise enough to make it clear what is expected of applicants in seeking to satisfy and discharge this element of the condition, leaving a potentially open ended timescale.
In light of the wording in the NPPF it is considered that this condition is reworded to read the following
16. No development shall take place until the applicant or their agents or successors in title have secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological works and developed a scheme for making evidence collated publicly accessible. The works are to be undertaken in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) submitted to and approved in writing by Salford Planning Authority. The WSI shall cover the following: Page 16 of 130
1. A phased programme and methodology of investigation and recording to include: - a desk-based documentary study - a site walkover survey and a building/ structure assessment - archaeological building recording (at levels of detail identified as appropriate in the assessment) - a scheme of targeted archaeological evaluation, possibly leading to - open area excavation and recording 2. The programme should consider what can be done during the fieldwork and what could be designed and left as a public legacy. 3. A programme for post investigation assessment to include: - analysis of the site investigation records and finds - a detailed analysis of the fieldwork records - production of a final report on the significance of the archaeological and historical interest represented. 4. Deposition of the final report with the Greater Manchester Historic Environment Record and dissemination of the results in a manner commensurate with their significance, making it publicly accessible. This may include production of a volume in the Greater Manchester’s Past Revealed series, and a report in a more academic journal. 5. Provision for archive deposition of the report and records of the site investigation. 6. Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the approved WSI.
Condition 18 (Bin Stores)
This condition was recommended to secure the provision of suitable bin storage for the apartments. The applicants have provided details of this which should be read in conjunction with the revised layout plan. These details have been assessed and are considered to be acceptable. In light of this it is recommended that condition 15 is removed and plans submitted in respect of this condition are noted in the approved plans condition.
Condition 2 (Approved Plans)
In light of the additional information submitted the approve plans condition (2) has been updated to reference new information/plans submitted and this condition will read:
2. Notwithstanding the layout of the car parking for the apartments, the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan SK352-LP-0 Planning Layout SL352-PL-01 Rev E Proposed Street Scenes (Sheet 1) SK352-SS-01 Rev B Proposed Street Scenes (Sheet 2) SK352-SS-01 Rev A Topographical Survey with Red Line Boundary SK352-TOPO-01 The Walbrook - Floor Plans WALB-01 The Walbrook - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) Brick WALB-6.6-SEMI The Walbrook - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) FCT Brick WALB-6.6-FCT-SEMI The Walbrook - Elevations 6.6 (3 Block) Brick Alt WALB-6.6-3MEWS(A) The Walbrook - Elevations 6.6 (4 Block) Brick Alt WALB-6.6-4MEWS(A) The Weaver - Floor Plans WEAV-01 The Weaver - Elevations 6.6 (Detached) Brick WEAV-6.6-DET The Weaver - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) Brick WEAV-6.6-SEMI The Ellesmere - Floor Plans ELLE-01 The Ellesmere - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) Brick Alt ELLE-6.6-SEMI(A) The Lyn - Floor Plans LYN-01 The Lyn - Elevations 6.6 (Detached) LYN-6.6-DET The Lyn - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) LYN-6.6-SEMI The Grantham / Weaver - Ground Floor Plans GRANT-01 The Grantham / Weaver - First Floor Plans GRANT-02 The Grantham / Weaver - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) GRANT-6.6-SEMI Sales Area Garage Details WWGS-(SIG10)-S04-6.6 450sqft Standard Apartment (Alternative Entrance) S-1-A-450 (SIG) 613sqft Standard Apartment (Alternative Entrance) S-1-A-613 (SIG) Page 17 of 130
Apartments - Plots 119 - 142 - Floor Plans SK351APT-01-1 Apartments - Plots 119 - 142 – Elevations SK351APT-01-2 Rev A Apartments - Plots 69 - 118 - Floor Plans SK351APT02-1 Apartments - Plots 69 - 118 - Floor Plans SK351APT02-2 Apartments - Plots 69 - 118 – Elevations SK351APT02-3 Rev A Wall Types: 1 to 4 NSD 9001 Fences Types: A to D NSD 9102 Hoop Top Railings NSD 9202 500mm Dwarf Wall with 700mm Hoop Top Railing Detail NSD 9002 760mm High NG2 rated crash barrier NSD 9204 Engineering Appraisal 880640 10-01 Rev P1 Cycle Store Detail SK352/DET/03 Bin Store A Detail SK352/DET/01 Bin Store B Detail SK352/DET/02
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
The following is the same report as presented to the panel on 16th June 2015:
Description of Site and Surrounding Area
This application relates to a 2 ha site on the west side of Green Lane in Eccles. The site is known as the Business and Technology Centre and is currently within employment use and is located within an established employment area. The west boundary of the site is formed by the Bridgewater Canal and the southern boundary is formed by the Manchester to Liverpool railway line. The Queens Arms, a Grade II listed building is located at a higher level in the south east corner of the site and in the south west corner is Bridge 119 over the canal and to the east is the Naysmyth’s Steam Hammer which are both locally listed. There are a number of buildings located within the site and the remainder of the site is hardsurfaced and used informally for servicing and car parking.
The area is predominantly commercial in nature with Naysmyth Business Park to the east. To the west on the opposite side of the Bridgewater Canal is currently being developed for housing. It is also important to note that planning permission has been granted for residential development on the former Mitchell Shackleton site. The Mitchell Shackleton site includes a parcel of land adjacent to the application site detached from the main site.
Description of Proposal
Planning permission is sought for the demolition of all the buildings on site and the erection of 142 dwellings. This would be in form of 68 dwellings and 74 apartments. The proposed layout shows there would be a mix of detached, semi detached and terraced dwellings and two blocks of apartments.
The proposed mix of dwellings would be 40 x 1 bed apartments 34 x 2 bed apartments 25 x 2 bedroom houses 35 x 3 bedroom houses 8 x 4 bedroom houses
In terms of layout there would be an access road along the canal bank and dwellings would be orientated to front the canal. Access to the road along the canal would be via by two roads off Green Lane; these roads would have dwellings fronting them. There would be two cul-de-sac /car parking courtyards fronted by dwellings again with access off Green Lane. The proposed dwellings are two storey in height and would have a traditional appearance constructed from brick with either a gable or a hipped pitched roofs. All dwellings would have private outdoor amenity space and their own car parking provision either within curtilage or in a communal car parking courtyard.
The two apartment blocks would be located to the south of the site, one would front the canal and the other would front Green Lane. The block fronting Green Lane would be three storey and the block fronting the canal would be three storey stepping up to four. The blocks would be constructed from Page 18 of 130
brick and would have flat roofs. Car parking for the apartments will be provided in a communal car park between the block which would be accessed from the new internal road into the scheme. Amenity space would for future residents will be provided in space around the dwelling.
The application was supported by:
Design and Access Statement Phase 1 Habitat Survey (updated during the course of the application) Bat Survey (updated during the course of the application) Air Quality Assessment Noise Report CEMP Crime Impact Statement Flood Risk Assessment Heritage Statement (updated during the course of the application) Phase I and II Geo Environmental Report Planning Obligations Proforma Viability Report Employment Land Report Planning Statement Sustainability Checklist Transport Statement Travel Plan
Publicity
Site Notice: Non HH Article 13 Date Displayed: 20 January 2015 Reason: Article 13
Site Notice: Non HH setting of listed building Date Displayed: 20 January 2015 Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building
Press Advert: Salford Advertiser Date Published: 15 January 2015 Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building
Press Advert: Salford Advertiser Date Published: 11 December 2014 Reason: Article 13 Standard Press Notice
Relevant Site History
There are no applications which are of direct relevance to the proposal.
Neighbour Notification
28 neighbouring residents were notified of this planning application on the 3rd December 2014. Amended plans were received and letters informing residents of this were sent on 13th May 2015.
Representations
A letter has been received on behalf of Friends of Patricroft Station (FrOPS). Issues raised are summarised below: The site has an important industrial history as the location of the James Nasmyth original foundry. This should be recognised by possibly naming streets that reflect its origins and /or by displaying interpretation panels at prominent locations. Four vehicle access points onto Green Lane would not be satisfactory in terms of highway safety. The scheme could offer the opportunity to bring a bus service back along Green Lane. The bus times could connect with the train times at Patricroft Station to encourage public transport.
Page 19 of 130
Consultations
Environment Agency - No objection to the principle of the proposed development. Recommended a contaminated land condition and offer advice in respect of contamination, model procedures and good practice, waste on site and Flood Risk.
Design For Security - No comments received to date
Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management - A FRA has been included which generally satisfies the conditions stated below. A supplementary email has been provided which explains that the site is unsuitable for SUDs techniques and the surface water will be passed to sewers and attenuated. The FRA states that a discharge rate of 40l/s has been agreed with United Utilities; the criterion being applied to derive this figure is that the discharge should be equal to or less than the existing discharge to the sewers. The existing discharge has not been stated, so compliance with Salford's 50% reduction for brownfield sites cannot be confirmed on the data provided, therefore a surface water drainage condition is recommended.
Highways - No objection subject to conditions, more detail can be found in the officer report below.
PSSC Canal And River Trust – The application does not fall within the remit of the statuary consultation regime, therefore do not wish to make any comments.
Greater Manchester Ecological Unit - No objection subject to conditions, more details can be found below.
Transport For Greater Manchester (TFGM) – Have concerns with the sites accessibility, more detail can be found in the officer report below. Recommend that a Travel Plan be secured.
Urban Vision Environment (Air And Noise) – No objection to the proposal subject to conditions, more detail can be found in the appraisal section of the report.
Urban Vision Environment (Land Contam) – Recommend a full contaminated land condition.
GMAAS - Consider that an archaeological desk-based assessment should have been submitted with the planning application, prior to determination, given the sites historic and archaeological significance and recommend that the application is not determined until this has been received. It is noted that if the LPA are minded to determine the application an archaeological condition is recommended to secure a programme of archaeological works and public engagement.
Network Rail - Believe that a financial contribution in the regional of £70,000 should be made toward upgrading shelters and customer information screens at Patricroft Station. They note that Network Rail is a public body and therefore it is not reasonable to expect Network Rail to provide mitigation measures as a result of third party commercial developments. Enhancements to railway station should be considered in the same way as highways funding by developers. They note that access to the railway line via the road adjacent to the Queen Arms pub should be kept available for access at all times. They recommend a risk assessment and method statement (RAMS) be prepared for the scheme and that method statement for any vibro-impact works i.e. piling. They also want to ensure that appropriate mitigation measures have been employed within the development to protect future occupiers from noise and vibration from the railway line.
Bridgewater Canal Company – Object to the proposed development as there are concerned that the development will impact on the integrity of the canal given its proximity to the canal in terms of during construction and in the following years. They considered that aspirations fall short of the Bridgewater Canal Vision and Masterplan as the development isolates itself from the Canal and the towpath and the applicant makes no provision for a footbridge across the canal. They believe that the canal corridor should be opened up at this location with life and activity brought to the water’s edge through moorings for boaters. They consider the boundary treatments and planting along the canal edge to restrict the use of the canal for the mooring of boats. They would like to see plans amended to include facilities for the mooring of craft and would like to be afforded parking spaces within the site. They request that planting adjacent to the canal be removed as they will lead to a future maintenance issue for the Bridgewater Canal Company. In sufficient information has been included within the planning Page 20 of 130
submission for a full assessment of the extent of the engineering works and whether these will impact on the canal and their engineer has made the following observations:
• BCCL require assurances from the Applicant that the proposals will not impact upon the integrity of the Canal Wall and any works to strengthen this will have to be agreed with the BCCL ahead of commencement. All assurances will need to be supported by a full engineering opinion. • Details of all works within the proximity of the Canal, either above or below ground level, will need to be submitted to BCCL for approval ahead of commencement. These works will need to be supervised (by BCCL engineers) with costs paid by the Applicant. • The proposals, as submitted, include a roadway running parallel to the Canal. BCCL will require assurances that the proposed fencing is of a suitable and substantial construction to prevent vehicles entering into the Canal. • The Applicant is reminded of the dangers associated with developing near open water. The Applicant will need to agree safe working practices with BCCL ahead of the commencement of any onsite works. • A number of disused intake chambers and outfalls are located along this section of the Canal. The Applicant will need to discuss and agree with BCCL, how these items are to be removed I reused as part of the development of the site. • BCCL, including its consultants and contractors, require unimpeded access through the site to the Canal edge to undertake routine inspections, maintenance and, where necessary, emergency works. The Development needs to be set back from the Canal Edge and include an undeveloped strip to allow for access. • BCCL request that the Applicant provides the appropriate Health and Signage along the Canal Edge, informing residents of the dangers associated with this waterway. BCCL have an agreed format of which can be used.
They also note that the FRA states that the discharge of surface water to the canal is not feasible. Bridgewater Canal Company has not been approached about this matter and are willing to discuss draining surface water into the canal with the applicants. Finally they support the use of S106 monies to be directed towards the Bridgewater Canal.
Planning Policy
Development Plan Policy
Unitary Development Plan ST1 - Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods This policy states that development will be required to contribute towards the creation and maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods.
Unitary Development Plan ST14 - Global Environmental This policy states that development will be required to minimise its impact on the global environment. Major development proposals will be required to demonstrate how they will minimise greenhouse gas emissions.
Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.
Unitary Development Plan DES2 - Circulation and Movement This policy states that the design and layout of new development will be required to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site safely, be well related to public transport and local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.
Unitary Development Plan DES6 - Waterside Development This policy states that all new development adjacent to the Manchester Ship Canal will be required to facilitate pedestrian access to, along and, where appropriate, across the waterway. Schemes should incorporate a waterside walkway with pedestrian links between the walkway and other key pedestrian Page 21 of 130
routes and incorporate ground floor uses and public space that generate pedestrian activity. Where it is inappropriate to provide a waterside walkway, an alternative route shall be provided. Development should protect, improve or provide wildlife habitats; conserve and complement any historic features; maintain and enhance waterside safety; and not affect the maintenance or integrity of the waterway or flood defences. All built development will face onto the water, and incorporate entrances onto the waterfront; be of the highest standard of design; be of a scale sufficient to frame the edge of the waterside; and enhance views from, of, across and along the waterway, and provide visual links to the waterside from surrounding areas.
Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.
Unitary Development Plan DES9 - Landscaping This policy states that hard and soft landscaping should be provided where appropriate that is of a high quality and would enhance the design of the development, not detract from the safety and security of the area and would enhance the attractiveness and character of the built environment.
Unitary Development Plan DES10 - Design and Crime This policy states that developments must be designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour, and the fear of crime. Development should i) be clearly delineated ii) allow natural surveillance iii) avoid places of concealment iv) encourage activity within public areas.
Unitary Development Plan H1 - Provision of New Housing Development This policy states that all new housing will contribute toward the provision of a balanced housing mix; be built of an appropriate density; provide a high quality residential environment; make adequate provision for open space; where necessary make a contribution to local infrastructure and facilities required to support the development; and be consistent with other policies of the UDP.
Unitary Development Plan H4 - Affordable Housing This policy states that in areas that there is a demonstrable lack of affordable to meet local needs developers will be required by negotiation with the city council to provide an element of affordable housing of appropriate types.
Unitary Development Plan H8 - Open Space Provision with New Housing This policy states that planning permission will only be granted where there is adequate and appropriate provision for formal and informal open space, and its maintenance over a twenty-year period. Standards to be reached will be based upon policy R2 and guidance contai8ned within Supplementary Planning Documents.
Unitary Development Plan E5 - Develop. in Established Employment Areas This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for the reuse or redevelopment of sites or buildings within an established employment area for non-employment uses where the development would not compromise the operating conditions of other adjoining employment uses, and where one or more of the following apply: a) The developer can demonstrate there is no current or likely future demand for the site for employment purposes b) There is a strong case for rationalising land uses or creating open space c) The development would contribute to the implementation of an approved regeneration strategy or plan for the area d) The site is allocated for another use in the UDP.
Unitary Development Plan A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled This policy states that development proposals, road improvement schemes and traffic management measures will be required to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, other people with limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians and cyclists
Unitary Development Plan A4 - Railways
Page 22 of 130
This policy states that improvements to the city’s railways stations, rail infrastructure and rail services will be secured through i) continued development and improvement of Salford Central and Salford Crescent Station ii) refurbishment of the existing railway stations iii) provision of new railway stations to serve existing communities iv) provision of new railway stations to serve major new development v) measures to improve safety, speed and capacity. Planning obligations will be used to secure these measures.
Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.
Unitary Development Plan A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Park This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded; and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of safety and security.
Unitary Development Plan EN8 - Nature Conservation of Local Importance This policy states that development that would adversely affect the nature conservation value of a Site of Biological Importance, a Local Nature Reserve, or a priority habitat for Salford as identified in the Greater Manchester Biodiversity Action Plan, will only be permitted where the benefits of the development clearly outweigh the reduction in the nature conservation interest of the site; the detrimental impact has been minimised as far as is practicable; appropriate mitigation measure have been provided. Conditions or planning obligations will be used to ensure the protection, enhancement and management of these sites and habitats.
Unitary Development Plan EN9 - Wildlife Corridors This policy states that development that would affect any land that functions as a wildlife corridor, or that provides an important link or stepping stone between habitats will not be permitted. Conditions and planning obligations may be used to protect, enhance or manage to facilitate the movement of flora and fauna where development is permitted.
Unitary Development Plan EN12 - Important Landscape Features This policy states that development that would have a detrimental impact on, or result in the loss of, any important landscape feature will not be permitted unless the applicant can clearly demonstrate that the importance of the development plainly outweighs the nature conservation and amenity value of the landscape feature and the design and layout of the development cannot reasonably make provision for the retention of the landscape feature. If the removal of an important existing landscape feature is permitted as part of a development, a replacement of at least equivalent size and quality, or other appropriate compensation, will be required either within the site, or elsewhere within the area.
Unitary Development Plan EN17 - Pollution Control This policy states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning permission will only be granted where the development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory level of amenity.
Page 23 of 130
Unitary Development Plan EN19 - Flood Risk and Surface Water This policy states that any application for development that it is considered likely to be at risk of flooding or increase the risk of flooding elsewhere will need to be accompanied by a formal flood risk assessment. It should identify mitigation or other measures to be incorporated into the development or undertaking on other land, which are designed to reduce that risk of flooding to an acceptable level.
Unitary Development Plan EN21 - Renewable Energy This policy states that planning permission for renewable energy development will be granted provided that the impact on environmental quality and amenity does not outweigh the benefits of the development’s potential contribution to reducing carbon dioxide emissions, diversifying the country’s energy supply and meeting national targets for the production of renewable energy.
Unitary Development Plan CH2 - Dev. Affecting Setting of Listed Building This policy states that development will not be granted that would have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building.
Unitary Development Plan CH5 - Archaeology and Ancient Monuments This policy states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would have an unacceptable impact on an ancient monument, site or feature of archaeological importance, or its setting. Planning conditions will be imposed to record and evaluate, excavate and preserve remains of local archaeological value, prior to the commencement of the development.
Unitary Development Plan CH8 - Local List of Buildings , Structures and Feature of Architectural, Archaeological or Historic Interest This policy states that the impact of development on any building, structure or feature that is identified on the council’s local list of buildings, structures and features of architectural, archaeological or historic interest will be a material planning consideration.
Unitary Development Plan R5 - Countryside Access Network This policy states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would result in the permanent obstruction or closure of any part of the Countryside Access Network, unless an alternative route is provided that is equally attractive and convenient. New development that is proposed on a site needed for the provision of a new route or link as part of the Countryside Access Network will be required to incorporate that route/link as part of the development.
Unitary Development Plan DEV5 - Planning Conditions and Obligations This policy states that development that would have an adverse impact on any interests of acknowledged importance, or would result in a material increase in the need or demand for infrastructure, services, facilities and/or maintenance, will only be granted planning permission subject to planning conditions or planning obligations that would ensure adequate mitigation measures are put in place.
Other Material Planning Considerations
National Planning Policy
National Planning Policy Framework National Planning Practice Guidance Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
Local Planning Policy
Supplementary Planning Document - Nature Conservation and Biodiversity This policy document expands on the policies of the Unitary Development Plan relating to the issues of nature conservation and biodiversity, and seeks to ensure that all stakeholders have a clear understanding of how those policies should be implemented and their desired outcome.
Supplementary Planning Document - Design
Page 24 of 130
This document reflects the need to design in a way that allows the city to support its population socially and economically, working with and inviting those affected into an inclusive decision making process. Equally, development must contribute to the creation of an environmentally sustainable city supporting the natural environment minimising the effects of, and being more adaptable to, the potential impact of climate change.
Supplementary Planning Document - Trees and Development The policy document has been prepared to give information to all those involved in the development process about the standard that the Local Planning Authority requires for new development proposals with specific reference to the retention and protection of trees.
Supplementary Planning Document - Design and Crime This policy document contains a number policies used to assess and determine planning applications and is intended as a guide in designing out crime.
Supplementary Planning Document - Planning Obligations This policy document expands on the policies in Salford’s Unitary Development Plan to provide additional guidance on the use of planning obligations within the city. It explains the city council’s overall approach to the use of planning obligations, and sets out detailed advice on the use of obligations in ensuring that developments make an appropriate contribution to: the provision of open space; improvements to the city’s public realm, heritage and infrastructure; the training of local residents in construction skills; and the offsetting of greenhouse gas emissions.
Supplementary Planning Document - Education Contributions This policy document provides guidance on the city council’s approach to raising financial contributions via planning obligations under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). The contributions raised will be directed to funding works associated with addressing the increased pressure on existing school provision that a development will generate.
Supplementary Planning Document - Sustainable Design and Construction This policy document expands on policies in Salford’s Unitary Development Plan to provide additional guidance for planners and developers on the integration of sustainable design and construction measures in new and existing developments.
Planning Guidance - Housing The purpose of the guidance is to ensure that the residential development coming forward in Salford contributes to establishing and maintaining sustainable communities, tackles the specific housing and related issues that face Salford, and helps to deliver the vision and strategy of the UDP, the Housing Strategy and the Community Plan.
Planning Guidance - Flood Risk and Development The overarching aim of the planning guidance is to ensure that new development in areas at risk of flooding in the city, is adequately protected from flooding and that the risks of flooding are not increased elsewhere as a result of new development.
Supplementary Planning Document - Established Employment Areas This document contains a number of polices that promotes sustainable economic growth, which both enhances prosperity and reduces inequalities. The document encourages the provision of a wide range of employment opportunities, having regard to evidence based conclusions on need and demand.
Bridgewater Canal Vision and Masterplan for a Regional Tourist Attraction This report outlines a masterplan for the Bridgewater Canal designed to turn it, over time, into a major visitor destination. This report is in three parts, starting with the vision for the canal before describing the current position and then developing a series of masterplans for each part of the canal.
It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application
Appraisal
Page 25 of 130
Principle of Development
This site is unallocated in the UDP but is part of the Nasmyth employment area, which is considered to be an established employment area for the purposes of policy E5. The introduction of non- employment uses into this area must therefore be considered against the tests set out within policy E5. In response to this and to justify the introduction of a non-employment use the applicant has submitted an employment assessment with the planning application.
The City’s Economic Development unit receives enquires for small (under 6000 square foot) business units and this site does play a role in accommodating small businesses. It currently employs over 30 people who may not be able to afford more modern premises. It is however recognised that the current situation is not sustainable.
With regard to criterion 1 of UDP policy E5, the applicant has submitted a Noise Assessment which assesses the likely noise impacts from noise sources and this includes the employment uses surrounding the application site. The assessment concludes that the site, subject to appropriate mitigation measures, is suitable for residential development. Urban Vision Air and Noise have assessed the submitted information and they confirm the findings of the assessment and have recommended a noise condition in respect of internal noise within the dwellings. Subject to the inclusion of such conditions, it is therefore considered that the applicant has provided the required supplementary evidence to demonstrate that criterion 1 of Policy E5 can be met.
Part 2 of policy E5 requires the applicant to demonstrate compliance with one or more of four criteria. In this instance criteria 2a and 2c are the most relevant relating to future demand for the site and the contribution of the proposed development to the implementation of an approved regeneration strategy respectively.
In respect of criterion 2a, the employment statement submitted describes the poor quality of the accommodation currently provided on site and that over the last 5 years the site has suffered with vacancy rates of between 40 and 50%.
The employment assessment describes that the landlords have endeavoured to promote the estate with various marketing incentives, although what marketing activities have taken place and their relative success (other than in respect of the vacancy rate) is not defined and this would normally be required. Nevertheless it is described that incentives offered have included reducing rents, rent free incentives and extremely flexible lease terms at below current market levels. The statement describes that despite these incentives, the physical characteristics of the estate and poor business location have outweighed these initiatives and voids continue to increase. It is further described that “Marketing Agents have not been willing to accept formal marketing instructions recently as the physical fabric of the estate has deteriorated to a condition where tenant demand is perceived as minimal and rents so low as to produce uneconomic agency letting fees”.
In terms of the potential to improve the offer on this site, a development viability assessment has been submitted and this has been verified by the Councils Estates Team. The assessment relates to an estate of industrial units covering 35% of the site area. It is considered that this is an appropriate form of development for the site in question. The statement describes that refurbishment potential has also been considered, however limited information is provided in this regard and would normally be requested. Nevertheless, in this instance, the site is in a key location adjacent to the Bridgewater Canal and is under utilised. As described further below, the site’s redevelopment and improvement is to be encouraged in support of the wider vision for the Bridgewater Canal Corridor. The refurbishment of the existing buildings alongside the redevelopment of remaining areas would be unlikely to improve the overall viability of the site and it is not therefore considered necessary to provide further detail in this regard.
In relation to criterion 2c, the Bridgewater Masterplan aims to establish a broad vision for the regeneration of the canal corridor and to establish the canal as a key part of the tourism offer of the city. The masterplan also seeks to influence development along the canal corridor, outlining broad principles for development which stakeholders will need to consider in bringing schemes forward.
The Masterplan was approved as a recognised regeneration strategy by the City Council in March 2011. The masterplan specifically identifies the site in question as a “refurbishment or development Page 26 of 130
opportunity”, but describes that “most of the employment sites to the east of the canal, the non tow- path side, appear to be operating efficiently and, given neighbour amenity constraints, the masterplan anticipates that any redevelopment opportunities will be for continued employment use”.
However, although the document identifies the application site, it does not identify a future alternative non-employment use for the site. In light of this, the proposals do not fully comply with all aspects of UDP policy E5 and the Established Employment Areas SPD. However, through criteria 2c of UDP Policy E5 it is recognised that there may be circumstances where the regenerative benefits of development for alternative uses outweigh the protection of employment land.
There have been a number of changes in this area since the publication of the masterplan which are relevant to this planning application, namely the ongoing redevelopment of a former employment site to the west of the canal for housing and the granting of planning permission for residential development on the former Mitchell Shackleton works.
The site of the former Mitchell Shackleton works, was previously considered at appeal for a waste use. During the Inquiry, the Inspector attached considerable weight to the Bridgewater Canal Masterplan, albeit that it did not specifically allocate the site but simply referred to it in relation to its current employment status and authorised use. The Bridgewater Canal was recognized by the Inspector as being an important feature in the area, with the Masterplan being a “material consideration which could have important implications for the character of the area in the longer term.” He recognised that whilst the Masterplan was not a development plan document, it did build upon UDP policy EN23 (Environmental Improvement Corridors) and noted that its significance lay in the potential it identified for the Canal to become Salford West’s main visitor attraction. He acknowledged that together with the residential development of the GUS site, it would result in the locality having a “very different character and atmosphere to that which currently exists” and it was in this context that he assessed the effects of the proposed waste use. The site the subject of this application is similarly important in terms of the realisation of the masterplan vision, perhaps more so given its longer frontage facing directly on to the canal itself.
The masterplan seeks to bring vacant and derelict sites along the canal back into positive use to improve the environment of the canal. The re-development of the application site is seen as being positive and consistent with these aspirations and whilst this could in principle also be achieved through employment development, the submitted viability assessment suggests that it would be uneconomic to bring forward the site for employment uses.
The redevelopment of the site also brings with it the opportunity to complement the redevelopment of the former GUS site which is currently under construction on the opposite side of the canal. The cumulative impact of the redevelopment of this site, together with the former GUS and Mitchell Shackleton works would be to regenerate an area that has been characterized by vacant, derelict and semi-derelict sites for a number of years. This regenerative benefit will however be dependent upon the delivery of a high quality scheme which will complement, enhance and support the regeneration of Salford West as a visitor attraction.
Overall, the site is located in a key location alongside the Bridgewater Canal and has the potential to make a significant contribution to the masterplan vision, being specifically identified as an improvement/redevelopment opportunity. The site is under-utilised with any remaining buildings in a poor state of repair and with relatively high vacancy rates. Without significant investment the site would be expected to see reducing levels of demand and would continue to detract from the vision outlined in the Bridgewater Canal masterplan. The viability assessment submitted which should be assessed, suggest that the redevelopment of the site for employment uses would be uneconomic. It is therefore considered that in this instance the redevelopment of the site for non-employment uses can be justified for the reasons as set out above.
There is an identified need for additional housing in the city, particularly given that the City Council’s most recently published Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) (of August 2013) demonstrates that there is not a 5 year supply of land for housing. Recently calculated housing land supply figures identify a 2.43 year supply (7th July 2014).
Page 27 of 130
As the loss of the employment site has been accepted, the fact that the site is brownfield land located within an urban area and having regard to the shortfall in housing in Salford it is considered that the principle of developing the site for residential purposes is acceptable.
The Bridgewater Canal
The Bridgewater Canal Masterplan has been designed to turn the Bridgewater Canal, over time, into a major visitor destination. This report is in three parts, starting with the vision for the canal before describing the current position and then developing a series of masterplans for each part of the canal. The document highlights a number of general principles including calling for a safe, attractive and overlooked waterside walkway. It is therefore important that all development faces onto the canal to increase surveillance.
This site falls within the Patricroft area and has been identified as a site for refurbishment or development opportunity. In the masterplan the application site is identified as being a development opportunity and anticipates that this would be for continued employment use. The document identifies that the redevelopment of the site would improve the appearance and the vitality of the canalside environment by providing a landscape strip and a quality elevation to the canal.
As this masterplan assumes that the site will be bought forward for employment purposes the document highlights the importance of the new development not turning its back to the canal. This scheme is orientated to face the canal, providing a strong frontage. Given the residential nature of the redevelopment this will provide a well overlooked and more interactive frontage which will increase natural surveillance of the tow path on the opposite of the canal. The area between the built development and canal would be landscaped albeit the detail of this has not been confirmed. It is considered that subject to an appropriate landscape scheme this development would meet the aims and objectives of the Bridgewater Canal Masterplan. Furthermore, a condition requiring this element to be considered later in more detail will also enable the concerns regarding the future maintenance arrangements from the Bridgewater Canal Company to be understood and incorporated.
In terms of site specific measures the document suggests that a new bridge is provided which would improve linkages between Green Lane and the tow path which runs along the western side of the canal. The landing point of this bridge is shown to be on land to the north of this site and as such this development would not conflict with future aspirations of the masterplan. Bridgewater Canal Company consider that the scheme should include the provision of moorings along this stretch of the canal. Whilst additional moorings along the canal are encouraged in the masterplan it is not explicit that these should be provided at this point in the canal.
In addition this document seeks path improvements along Green Lane, the applicants have agreed to provide a new footpath along this section of Green Lane which will not only improve pedestrian access to the site it would also help to deliver an aspiration of the masterplan for this area.
Mix, Type and Density
UDP policy H1 requires that all new housing developments contribute towards the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area in terms of size, type, tenure and affordability.
Policy HOU1 of the housing planning guidance states that within the part of the city where the proposed development is located, the large majority of dwellings within new developments should be in the form of houses rather than apartments. The RJ to the policy considers that normally this will mean at least 80-90% of dwellings on individual sites being in the form of houses rather than apartments.
The site layout plan shows a total of 142 dwellings comprising of 68 houses and 74 apartments. Given only 48% of the proposed dwellings would be houses, this is significantly below the 80-90% that would normally be expected in this part of the city.
The provision of apartments is not considered to be detrimental to the character of the area. Apartments would increase the natural surveillance of the canal towpath therefore reducing the risk of crime, and would also respond effectively to the waterfront location and the significant change in levels along the southern boundary of the site. Page 28 of 130
To the west of the site (former GUS warehouse) a development of 175 houses by Bellway is currently under construction. Additionally the former Mitchell Shackleton site to the north-east has outline planning permission for 140 houses. Given that there are 315 houses either under construction or with outline planning permission, it is considered that the inclusion of apartments will contribute to a more diverse mix of dwelling types in the local area and as such the development is considered to meet policy H1 of the UDP.
Policy HOU2 of the housing planning guidance requires that the majority of new houses should have at least three bedrooms. Of the 68 houses proposed, 43 would have 3 bedrooms or more, in accordance with the guidance.
Policy HOU2 states that where apartments are proposed they should provide a broad mix of dwelling sizes, both in terms of the number of bedrooms and the net residential floorspace. Small dwellings (i.e. studios and 1 bed apartments) should not predominate, and a significant proportion of 3 bedroom apartments should be provided wherever practicable. Paragraph 4.31 of the reasoned justification clarifies that the majority of apartments should have two or three bedrooms, with a floorspace typically 57sqm or above. It is also noted that an alternative approach may be acceptable having regard to criteria A to H of UDP policy H1.
In respect of the proposed apartment provision, there are more one bedroom apartments than two (40x1 bed and 34x2 beds) and the 1 bed apartments have a floor area of 37sqm which is below that recommended in HOU2. Given the two schemes referred to earlier are being developed for housing (noting that the Mitchell Shackleton is outline permission so the mix on that site is indicative at this stage). Together with the fact that between 2003 and 2015 there were a total of 567 apartments built in the ward of Eccles. Of that total 67 (12%) were one bed and 500 (88%) were 2 bed. It is considered that the provision of additional one bedroom apartments will help to diversify the size of new accommodation that is available in Eccles, particularly having regard to the size of new dwellings built over recent times and the size of dwellings being provided on 2 sites in close proximity to the application site. Although the majority of apartments are not greater than 57sqm this is considered acceptable given that the majority not being two bed or more is deemed to be justifiable. Moreover, it is considered that a good range of size (bedrooms / floorspace) is provided across the site that can meet differing needs. The proposal is therefore considered acceptable in this regard.
Design
There are no objections to the demolition of the existing buildings on site which are considered to be in a poor state of repair.
The site would have four access points from Green Lane. The layout provides one road through the site which provides access to the apartments and to shared driveway arrangements. Two further accesses are provided from Green Lane which provides access to two courtyards with dwellings fronting them. All dwellings and apartments would front the highway and shared driveways and those units along the western boundary would overlook the canal too providing good natural surveillance, which is supported. Plots 1, 9, 35, 36 48, 49, 60 and 61 not have a frontage to Green Lane and instead will front the internal roads, which is not ideal. However the applicant has sought to maximise overlooking by introducing windows in the gable elevations to help create a presence to Green Lane. High quality, boundary treatments along the Green Lane frontage will be in the form of brick walls which is supported and this area will be landscaped.
The scale and massing of the dwellings is considered to be appropriate. The dwellings would be either two storey with a mix of hipped and gabled roofs which is not considered to be out of keeping with the built form in the immediate area and would be comparable to the new residential development on the other side of the canal. In respect of the apartments it is considered that the height is appropriate given the blocks are not significantly taller than the dwellings proposed and the increase in height respects the levels difference that occurs along the southern boundary with the railway line.
The dwellings are traditional in appearance constructed from brick with pitched roofs. The dwellings would be simple in appearance with some contemporary features which include windows and canopies over the front door. Dwellings located on corner plots have been designed to include Page 29 of 130
additional windows on gable elevations to add interest. A material schedule and samples have been submitted with the application and propose two types of red brick together with a grey roof tile. The proposed apartments would have a flat roof which is considered to be acceptable from a design perspective. The elevations of the apartments include large projecting elements which help to provide definition to the elevations. Also the elevations will make use of the two proposed brick types used across the wider site which again adds interest to a large elevation. The proposed materials have been submitted with the planning application and it is considered that these materials are good quality and would respect the palette of materials found in the immediate area.
A landscaping scheme has been submitted with the application and provides an indication of hard and soft landscape areas within the site. The scheme is considered to provide residents with a good balance that not only caters for residents parking needs but also provides sufficient access and circulation within the site. It is considered that the landscaping proposal will need to be amended to reflect the concerns of the Bridgewater Canal Company and address specific issues such as planting in close proximity to the canal wall will result in future maintenance issues and could affect the integrity of the canal wall. Therefore a landscaping condition is recommended which will provide a mechanism to secure these outstanding details.
A boundary treatment plan has also been provided which shows that 1.1m railings will be provided to the frontage of Green Lane and part of the boundary to the canal. Fencing to a height of 1.8m is proposed to the rear gardens and where the rear gardens of dwelling border the street boundary walls to a height of 1.8m are proposed. There are concerns with the two types of boundary treatments along Green Lane, whilst it is acknowledged that boundary treatment is required along this frontage to delineate between public and private space and also provide dwellings with private amenity space. Such arrangement could make it difficult to maintain the landscaping along this frontage and in time this could have a negative impact on the visual amenity of the area. It is therefore considered that the element of the scheme requires further consideration and therefore it is recommended that boundary treatments are revisited when considering the landscape scheme for the entire site.
The applicant is proposing crash barriers along the frontage of the canal to a height of 0.64m. There are concerns that this type of boundary treatment will not help to create an attractive environment along the canal frontage. Whilst the importance of having such robust treatment is acknowledged from a safety perspective this should not be at the expense of the visual amenity of the area along the canal frontage. It is considered that such detail can be dealt with through the landscaping condition and an acceptable outcome in this regard can be achieved.
Adequate refuse provision has been incorporated into the scheme with each dwelling having space within the rear garden for bin storage and direct access to the street for collection days. The apartments have communal bin storage areas, there are no details within the application however these details will be secured by condition.
In respect of sustainability the applicant has confirmed that the site will be constructed under the 2010 Building Regulations and will not achieve Code Level 3. A sustainability checklist has been submitted with the application and this outlines sustainability measures which have been considered and incorporated into the scheme and this outlined that the development will:
- Deliver high insulation standards - Utilise energy efficient goods - Provide open space within the development - Minimize the impact of air and noise pollution - Incorporate water saving devices and water meters - Use locally sourced materials - Adopt a site waste management plan - Recycle materials on site - Provide a landscaping scheme with native species to mitigate against the loss of biodiversity
In having regard to the above it is considered that the layout, design, scale, and landscaping of the proposed development is acceptable and fully in accordance with saved UDP Policies DES1, 2, 4, 9 and EN22.
Heritage Page 30 of 130
Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that when considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting “special regard” will be given to the “desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses”.
One of the core planning principles of the NPPF which was published in March 2012, is to “conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance”.
Paragraph 132 of the NPPF states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. It then continues to say that significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting and that as heritage assets are irreplaceable any harm or loss “should require clear and convincing justification”.
The significance of a heritage asset relates to the value of the asset because of its heritage interest which may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. However, significance derives not only from an asset’s physical presence but also from its setting.
In the annex to the NPPF the setting of a heritage asset is described as “the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral”.
The application has been supported by a heritage statement which has been updated during the course of the application. This assesses the impact of the proposed development on the Listed Building, the Queens Arms Pub and concludes that the proposal conserves the character and setting of this heritages asset and will contribute to its long term viability.
The Queen Arms Pub is located adjacent to the western boundary of the site, originally had direct access onto the railway station platform and is 3m higher level than the proposal. There is now an access road to it off Green Lane which runs directly in front of the southern boundary of the application site.
A 3 storey block of apartments is proposed within the development site closest to the Queen’s Arms which would stand a maximum of 9m high. On this part of the site there is currently a former brick built industrial building which stands on the site boundary and is 2 storey in height. Given the changes in level between the site and the Queens Arms, the proposed flats would not exceed the eaves height of the listed pub. The City’s Conservation Officer is that the proposal would retain a similar built form as the existing, as the proposed apartment block would have a similarly long flat frontage with a flat roof and would be of a similar height. The proposed flats would also be set in from the western boundary to the pub and also be set back from the access road to the Queens Arms where the existing former industrial building stands. In light of this the City’s Conservation Officer considers that the proposal apartment block would not dominate the Queens Arms or the street scene and the proposal would increase views of the pub from further along Green Lane when travelling in an east-west direction. The palette of materials proposed is considered to compliment the materials in the immediate area and those found on listed building.
In light of this it is not considered that the proposal would have a significant or detrimental impact upon the setting of the Queens Arms pub and therefore the proposal is considered to accord with UDP policy CH2.
In respect of locally listed heritage assets the Naysmyth’s Steam Hammer and Bridge 119 it is not considered that the proposal would have an unacceptable impact on the setting of these locally listed assets in accordance with CH8.
The heritage statement acknowledges that the site of the former Bridgewater Foundry which is located within the application site, is of archaeological interest. Greater Manchester Archaeological Unit (GMAAS) have been consulted on the planning application and consider the site to have archaeological interest. The application has not been supported by an archaeological desk-based assessment. As such insufficient information has been submitted to allow GMAAS to take an informed Page 31 of 130
view on the planning application and consider it to be the only realistic chance for the physical heritage represented in the site to be considered in the developments design.
GMAAS do note that should the LPA decide to grant planning permission prior to an archaeological desk-based assessment then an condition should be recommended to secure a programme of archaeological works and public engagement and such programme should be undertaken and completed prior to any development related ground works proceed.
In light of the comments from GMAAS the applicants are appointing an accredited archaeological consultant to prepare a desk based assessment. The applicants are of the opinion that the condition recommended by GMAAS is unusually restrictive and consider a simpler worded condition would provide GMAAS that the necessary archaeological work will be conducted from an accredited assessor without being restrictive to the applicant. GMAAS have advised that the condition they have used is in line with a model condition and followed best practice which is considered to be helpful as it full identifies and secures the appropriate level of work that is necessary and is considered to avoid problems for developers when discharging pre commencement conditions over single clause pre commencement conditions. Whilst the final decision of conditions rests with the LPA it is considered in this instance and in the absence a desk based assessment this condition should remain.
Design and Crime
A Crime Impact Statement (CIS) has been submitted in support of the planning application and the applicants have confirmed that they do not wish to obtain any form of Secure by Design Accreditation on this scheme. This details positive aspects of the scheme which include an increase of activity in the area due to residential development, front doors to properties and car parking provision is well overlooked and that rear alleyways are to be gated.
The CIS details a number ways physical security measures can be incorporated into the scheme to improve security. One of these measures is gating the apartment car parking area. The scheme as submitted does not proposed to gate this car parking area..The car parking area will be lit and has the benefit of high levels of natural surveillance from the apartment blocks that overlook the car parking areas. It is also acknowledged that gated car parking area do not always work well in practice therefore it is considered that the arrangement as submitted is acceptable.
The applicants have confirmed that the recommendations in respect of heights and types of boundary treatments have been included within the scheme and that all dwellings will have triggered lighting to the front and rear which will ensure that the car parking spaces with the dwelling are well lit.
The CIS raises issues regarding security systems at the entrances of the buildings, letter boxes, locks on gates and hard surface treatments it is considered that this level of technical detail is beyond that which is within the remit of planning control and as such an informative is to be recommended to draw the applicant attention to this fact should they wish to pursue a formal application for Secure by Design.
Given this it is considered that the development has been designed to discourage crime, anti-social behaviour and the fear of crime, and support personal and property security in accordance with DES10 of the UDP and the Crime and Design SPD.
Amenity
The proposed dwellings fronting the canal would be over 21m to the newly constructed dwellings opposite which is considered to be acceptable in terms of amenity. The only other unit within the immediate area which has an element of residential use is the Queens Arms Public House located at a higher level to the south east of the site. The proposed apartment block would be 14.9m from the rear elevation of the Public House. Given the levels difference that exists at this point the second of the apartment block and the ground floor of the pub would be approximately at the same level. It is considered that given the living accommodate for the pub would be a first floor that the relationship of this to the proposed development would be acceptable and ensure that the development would not have an unacceptable overbearing impact on amenity.
Page 32 of 130
There are certain points within the development where the relationships between dwellings would be tight. However in this case the site layout has been shaped by the road and access arrangements within the site and the design philosophy of having dwellings fronting the street to provide a strong road frontage. The density of development is also an important factor in terms of bringing forward a sustainable form of development. It is not considered that the proposed site layout would result in relationships that would result in future occupants experiencing an unacceptable level of amenity and therefore the proposed layout is considered to be acceptable
In respect of the apartment blocks it is considered that their position within the site is sufficient offset from the proposed dwellings to the north (within the development) to ensure that they will not have an overbearing impact on the amenity of future residents. There is suitable separation distance between the two blocks to ensure there are no privacy issues created. All apartments would have windows in the front and rear elevations that serve all the habitable spaces providing future occupants with an acceptable source of natural light and outlook. The apartment located at ground floor, fronting Green Lane, closest to the southern boundary of the site, would be 2.91m from the retaining wall of the access road to the Queen Arms Pub. The retaining wall would include wrought iron railings and given that these will be visually permeable it is considered that views from habitable rooms in this apartment can be achieved and as such this relationship is acceptable.
The proposed layout would ensure all dwellings have private rear gardens and there is an area of landscaping shown between the proposed apartment blocks and the canal which will provide future residents of the apartments with an area of private amenity space. It is considered that the scheme provides future occupants with an acceptable level of outdoor amenity space in accordance with DES7.
Highways and Car Parking
The application has been supported by a Transport Assessment (TA) and a Travel Plan (TP).
Accessibility -
Transport for Greater Manchester (TFGM) have been consulted on the planning application and consider that the is currently not very accessible by public transport as Liverpool Road is outside what is classed to be a reasonable walking distance for access to a bus service and whilst within a reasonable access to a train service. the service that operates from Patricroft Station is limited. TFGM are concerned that people reliant on public transport may not be prepared to walk from the site and is unlikely to significantly reduce the amount of car travel generated by the development. TFGM have suggested that a commuted sum is secured towards the upgrading or improving of the walking/cycling environment around the site.
In response to TFGM comments the applicant has submitted a Travel Plan sets out principle strategy for the development once occupied to encourage future residents to use sustainable transport modes. This has been reviewed by UV’s Sustainable Transport Coordinator has reviewed this and requested further details and offered comments which include issues relating to accessibility and cycle parking. Therefore a detailed travel plan will be secured by condition prior to occupation. Also in respect of accessibility by foot the applicants have revised the scheme to provide a 2m wide footway and a pedestrian refuge crossing point on Green Lane. Given viability issues with the scheme which will be discussed later in the report it is considered that the alterations to the highway and securing a travel plan will help to improve the sites accessibility.
Likely Trip Generation -
The TA submitted with the planning application examines the potential trip generation for the residential use based on the proposed number of dwellings and a comparison against the permitted industrial use based on the floor space currently occupied on site using the industry standard national trip rate database TRICS. Table 1 provides a summary of this as below:
Land Use Am Peak (08:00-09:00) PM Peak (17:00-18:00) Arr Dep Total Arr Dep Total Industrial 36 16 52 10 34 44 (6,493sqm) Page 33 of 130
Residential (142 14 52 66 42 25 67 dwells) Difference -22 +36 +14 +32 -9 +23
Table 1.
Table 1 demonstrates that the proposed residential development could potentially generate 66 two- way trips in the am peak hour and 67 two-way trips in the pm peak hour which equates to roughly one additional vehicle every minute on the highway network. The proposals will therefore be unlikely to result in a severe highway impact as defined within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
When comparing the proposed residential use against the former industrial use, the residential use would be expected to result in a net increase in 14 two-way trips in the am peak and 23 two-way trips in the pm peak. Although this represents an overall increase in vehicle movements compared to the existing permitted industrial use, this is based upon the floor area currently occupied. It is therefore important to note that if the industrial site were fully occupied, the impact would be further reduced.
Additionally, taking into account that the previous industrial use would also have allowed for a significant number of HGV movements, this element will also be removed by the proposed residential development.
The TA includes results for junction modeling work undertaken and it has been shown that the site access junction with Green Lane will continue to operate within capacity in the 2019 scenario with development traffic. Therefore it is considered that the site access junction with Green Lane can adequately accommodate the likely trip generation from the proposed development and it is therefore considered that the proposals are unlikely to have a material impact on the local highway network.
Proposed Access Arrangements-
The scheme proposes four new vehicle access points on Green Lane; two 6m wide access points to serve the internal development and two 4.8m wide courtyard access points. This is considered to be acceptable to cater for two-way traffic flows into and out of the site.
The applicant has agreed to fund a scheme to improve the surrounding pedestrian environment. This will include the provision of a new continuous 2m wide footway outside the application site and installation of a pedestrian refuge crossing point outside the application site on Green Lane.
The applicants have also demonstrated that the existing bus stop outside the application site will be unaffected by the proposed new vehicle access points.
Visibility splays of 2.4m x 43m in both directions, either side of the application site’s junctions with Green Lane can be achieved which are acceptable as they accord with national guidance contained within Manual for Streets.
A Vehicle Swept Path has been supplied which demonstrates that the proposed courtyard areas can be serviced appropriately and safely from Green Lane. The proposed servicing arrangements are therefore acceptable.
Proposed Parking Provision -
The proposed development would provide 189 car parking spaces, which equates to a provision of 1.3 spaces per dwelling in-line with Salford City Councils parking standards.
In respect of cycle parking, the application does not reference any secure cycle parking provision to serve the development. This is required in order to encourage travel via sustainable modes, especially for the apartments therefore such detail will form part of a condition.
Page 34 of 130
Surface Water Drainage
FRD 11 of the Flood Risk and Development Planning Guidance states that new development of 1ha or more in Low Flood Risk Zone 1, should demonstrate that the disposal of surface water from the site will not exacerbate existing flooding. Sustainable Drainage Systems should be used where practicable, particularly in areas prone to surface water flooding.
The application site lies within Flood Zone 1 and a critical drainage area and therefore the application has been supported by a Flood Risk Assessment and a surface water drainage scheme which demonstrates that the proposed scheme will reduce surface water runoff by at least 50% as sought by the SFRA. These have been assessed and deemed acceptable by the City’s drainage engineer. The details of which are set out within the submitted information and form part of the list of approved details as recommended by condition 2.
The National Planning Practice Guidance outlines that the aim should be to discharge surface run off as high up the following hierarchy of drainage options as reasonably practicable: 1. into the ground (infiltration); 2. to a surface water body; 3. to a surface water sewer, highway drain, or another drainage system; 4. to a combined sewer.
The applicant has confirmed that SUDs in terms of ground infiltration cannot be incorporated into the scheme as the site is underlain by clay which rules out infiltration also the Bridgewater Canal is adjacent to the proposed development. There are contamination issues on site and the proposed development requires a clean cover system within landscaped areas and finally the proposed development does not allow any room for any SUDs features. However the applicant has confirmed that the proposed sewers need to be laid at a relatively flat gradient 1:400 which will also act as storage pipes.
The proposal is therefore considered to accord with UDP policy EN19.
Ecology
The application site lies adjacent to the Bridgewater Canal which is classified as a Site of Biological Importance. The canal is also identified in the UDP as being a wildlife corridor. An Ecological Assessment and Bat Survey have been submitted with the planning application.
Surveys of the site were undertaken prior to submitting the application and during the course of the application. These found no evidence of either historic or current that the site is used by badgers for foraging, commuting or occupation. There was no evidence of water voles in the canal and the location was considered unsuitable for the species and there are no issues in respect of great crested newts. GMEU are happy with these conclusions.
In respect of birds it is noted that there are a number of trees and scrub on the edge of the site which have the potential to support nesting birds. The Ecological Assessment and GMEU both recommend that any site clearance takes place outside the nesting bird season. It is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to intentionally damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird whilst in use or being built therefore attachment of a condition to secure this is not deemed necessary as it would duplicate that legislation. An informative has been added to bring this to the applicants attention.
An initial bat survey was undertaken in November and this identified two building within the site as having low to medium potential to support bats. Given this GMEU requested that further surveys are undertaken on the two building within the site at a time when bats are likely to be active. These further surveys have been undertaken and the no bats or signs of bats were found during a daytime survey and no bats were found to emerge from the building on two subsequent dusk emergence surveys. Only minor foraging and commuting of pipistrelle bats was recorded within the vicinity of the buildings during the dusk survey. GMEU has assessed the findings of these survey works and consider that no further survey work is necessary for bats and works can proceed without likely significant effect on bats. GMEU consider that the there is scope within the new development to enhance the biodiversity of the site and this will be recommended to the applicant by way on an informative. Page 35 of 130
Japanese knotweed has been identified on the site at the southern boundary. It is an offence under the terms of the Wildlife and Countryside Act to allow this plant to grow in the wild. Japanese knotweed is also classified under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 as “controlled waste”. Whilst GMEU recommend a condition for its disposal this is considered to duplicate legislation and as such an informative is recommended to draw this to the applicant’s attention.
In light of the above it is considered that the development would not have a detrimental or irreversible impact on ecology therefore the proposal is considered to be acceptable in this regard.
Trees
There are trees within the site, the majority of these are self seeded and on the offside of the Canal. None of the trees on site are afforded protection. To facilitate the development all recorded trees on site are proposed for removal. A tree survey was not submitted with the application as all the trees are shown as to be removed, however the City’s Arborists is of the opinion that they would be Category C and U trees.
The potential to re-stock is very good and the proposed landscaping scheme shows that 113 trees are proposed across the site. It is considered that the amenity value of the replacement trees would be higher than that of the current trees which will be lost as part of the development as such it is considered that the development would accord with UDP policy EN12 and the Trees and Development SPD.
Contaminated Land
The application has been supported by a Phase I and II Geo-Environmental Site Investigation. The submitted report concludes that as access to the site was limited due to the presence of buildings a post demolition site investigation is required, in particular to assess the risk from volatile contamination. The City’s environmental consultants concur with this and therefore recommend a full contaminated land condition. This has also been requested by the EA.
Air Quality
The site experiences poor air quality in part and it is within the City Council’s Air Quality Management Area. An air quality assessment has been submitted in support of the application and this considers existing and future air quality impacts, both with and without the development and it assesses the risks associated with the construction phase of the development.
The report concludes that national air quality standards are not likely to be breeched as a consequence of the operational phase of the development and consequently no mitigation measures are necessary. The air quality impact due to road traffic emissions associated with the development is described as negligible. In respect of the construction phase of the development the report considers that fugitive dust emissions could be significant for certain sensitive receptors, unless mitigation measures are put into place. The report identifies the receptors and in Table 25 it lists the various dust and vehicle emission mitigation measures that should be adopted.
The City’s environmental consultants have considered the report and agree with its findings and conclusions.
The applicants have submitted a CEMP however the detail and scope of this document needs to be agreed as such a CEMP condition is recommended and subject to this the development is considered to accord with UDP policy EN17.
Noise
The development site is bounded by the busy Green Lane to the east, the Manchester to Liverpool railway to the south and various industrial uses to the northwest and to the east. The M602 motorway is to the north. Each of these is a source of noise which is likely to impact on future residents of the site unless noise mitigation measures are put into place. Page 36 of 130
The application has been supported by a noise impact assessment report which assesses the noise impacts of road traffic, rail traffic and industrial noise. Vibration from the railway is also assessed.
The report concludes that the site is suitable for housing. However, various noise mitigation measures (acoustic glazing and alternative ventilators) will need to be installed in certain dwellings to satisfy internal noise level standards. To satisfy external noise standards acoustic grade fencing is recommended. The report states that in order to protect certain garden areas 1.8m boundary walls will be provided. In addition all the dwellings are going to be provided with an Environment PIV Air Source System which will provide an alternative to opening windows to gain ventilation.
The report recognises that the design noise target for external areas of 55dBLAeq cannot be achieved for certain gardens, even with a 1.8m high brick wall in place. The report goes on to refer to BS8233:2014, which states ”In higher noise areas, such as urban areas adjoining the strategic transport network, a compromise between elevated noise levels and other factors may be warranted.” The report concludes that the calculated noise levels are considered reasonable for the area.
The City’s environmental consultants have considered the report and agree with its findings and the point about the external noise level target. Conditions are recommended to secure the mitigation measures as outlined in the noise assessment and verification the measures have been put in place. The proposed development is considered to accord with EN17 of the UDP.
Affordable Housing
Policy HOU3 of the housing planning guidance requires that 20% of dwellings should be affordable on sites above the thresholds set out in UDP Policy H4 (25 or more dwellings). The reasoned justification to Policy HOU3 is clear at paragraph 5.10 that the preference in the policy is for the affordable housing to be provided on-site.
On this basis, the starting position is that 20% (28) of the units on the site should be affordable housing.
The applicant is arguing that should full planning contributions including affordable housing be payable this would render the scheme unviable. If viability is proven to be an issue, then a reduction in affordable housing may then be accepted. Viability is discussed below.
Planning Obligations
The Planning Obligations SPD explains the city council’s overall approach to the use of planning obligations, and sets out detailed advice on the use of obligations to ensure that developments mitigate their impacts by making an appropriate contribution to projects that will ensure the needs generated by the development are met.
The Education Contributions SPD outlines the city council’s approach to raising financial contributions via planning obligations which will be directed to funding works associated with addressing the increased need for primary school places that a development will generate.
These Supplementary Planning Documents require major residential developments of 10 dwellings or more to ordinarily contribute towards addressing increased pressure on existing primary school provision, the provision, improvement and maintenance of open space and recreation facilities; public realm, infrastructure and heritage.
The Council is adopting a New Planning Obligations SPD on the 18th June 2015, the date this application will be presented to panel, which will bring together within a single document all of the city council’s policies relating to planning obligations that are supplementary to development plan policies.
In accordance with these policy documents a financial contribution in excess of 1 million pounds would be sought.
Page 37 of 130
The applicant has undertaken an appraisal of the viability of the development and this shows that if a commuted sum is sought from the scheme, it would render the scheme unviable.
Paragraph 4.5 of the adopted Planning Obligation SPD recognises that there will be some circumstances where it may be appropriate for the value of any planning obligation to be lower, or for there to be no obligation at all. One example of this is where the viability of development would otherwise be compromised and the benefits of development outweigh any negative impacts that would normally be addressed through a larger commuted sum.
The viability appraisal, presented by Countryside Properties, for the scheme has been assessed and verified by the local planning authority. It has been agreed that a sum of £32,000 will be made. Whilst Network Rail’s request for contributions to be directed towards Patricroft Station are acknowledged. It is considered that given this development was identified for redevelopment in the Bridgewater Master Plan and the development is considered to contribute towards the aims and objective of this masterplan it is considered appropriate that these monies are directed towards public realm works between Worsley Road and Patricroft Railway Bridge in line with the Bridgewater Master Plan. In addition, a claw back mechanism would be included in the legal agreement should figures provided for review change providing scope for further monies towards planning obligations the clawback will be directed towards affordable housing.
Other Issues
An objection was received from the Bridgewater Canal Company and one of the issues raised was with respect to the extent of the engineering works and whether these would impact on the canal. The development is set back from the canal at closest point the development would be 7.7m from the canal edge. Whilst it is important that the development does not affect the integrity of the canal it is considered that the set back of built form from the canal edge would be similar to other canal side development within the city and therefore is considered to be more than sufficient to protect the integrity of the canal.
Conclusions
The redevelopment of this site will make an important contribution towards the delivery of dwellings within the city and will result in the delivery of significant social, economic and environmental benefits. The applicant has successful demonstrated that the development would not conflict with policy provisions of UDP policy E5. For the reasons set out in the appraisal section above, it is considered that the proposed development represents a sustainable form of development and that the adverse impacts of the development would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the development and as such it is considered that planning permission should be granted in accordance with the thrust of the NPPF and the saved policies within the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Recommendation
Planning permission be granted subject to the following planning conditions and that:
1) The Strategic Director of Environment and Community Safety be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act to secure the following heads of terms:
- Public Realm - Affordable Housing Contribution
2) That the applicant be informed that the Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions stated below, on completion of such a legal agreement;
3) The authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued (subject to the conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement;
Conditions Page 38 of 130
1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
2. Notwithstanding the layout of the car parking for the apartments, the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan SK352-LP-0 Planning Layout SL352-PL-01 Rev D Proposed Street Scenes (Sheet 1) SK352-SS-01 Rev B Proposed Street Scenes (Sheet 2) SK352-SS-01 Rev A Topographical Survey with Red Line Boundary SK352-TOPO-01 The Walbrook - Floor Plans WALB-01 The Walbrook - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) Brick WALB-6.6-SEMI The Walbrook - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) FCT Brick WALB-6.6-FCT-SEMI The Walbrook - Elevations 6.6 (3 Block) Brick Alt WALB-6.6-3MEWS(A) The Walbrook - Elevations 6.6 (4 Block) Brick Alt WALB-6.6-4MEWS(A) The Weaver - Floor Plans WEAV-01 The Weaver - Elevations 6.6 (Detached) Brick WEAV-6.6-DET The Weaver - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) Brick WEAV-6.6-SEMI The Ellesmere - Floor Plans ELLE-01 The Ellesmere - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) Brick Alt ELLE-6.6-SEMI(A) The Lyn - Floor Plans LYN-01 The Lyn - Elevations 6.6 (Detached) LYN-6.6-DET The Lyn - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) LYN-6.6-SEMI The Grantham / Weaver - Ground Floor Plans GRANT-01 The Grantham / Weaver - First Floor Plans GRANT-02 The Grantham / Weaver - Elevations 6.6 (Semi) GRANT-6.6-SEMI Sales Area Garage Details WWGS-(SIG10)-S04-6.6 450sqft Standard Apartment (Alternative Entrance) S-1-A-450 (SIG) 613sqft Standard Apartment (Alternative Entrance) S-1-A-613 (SIG) Apartments - Plots 119 - 142 - Floor Plans SK351APT-01-1 Apartments - Plots 119 - 142 – Elevations SK351APT-01-2 Rev A Apartments - Plots 69 - 118 - Floor Plans SK351APT02-1 Apartments - Plots 69 - 118 - Floor Plans SK351APT02-2 Apartments - Plots 69 - 118 – Elevations SK351APT02-3 Rev A Wall Types: 1 to 4 NSD 9001 Fences Types: A to D NSD 9102 Hoop Top Railings NSD 9202 500mm Dwarf Wall with 700mm Hoop Top Railing Detail NSD 9002 760mm High NG2 rated crash barrier NSD 9204 Engineering Appraisal 880640 10-01 Rev P1
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
3. The development hereby approved shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the facing materials outlined in Materials Schedule Green Lane Patricroft Materials Schedule SK352MS- Materials Schedule Rev C.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan
4. No development approved by this planning permission shall take place until a remediation strategy that includes the following components to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority:
Page 39 of 130
1. Additional site investigation scheme, (based on ground investigation already undertaken) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.
2. The results of the site investigation and the detailed risk assessment referred to in (1) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken.
3. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (2) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.
Reason: To ensure a safe form of development that poses no unacceptable risk of pollution to controlled waters. in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework.
5. No occupation of any part of the permitted development shall take place until a verification report demonstrating completion of works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plan (a “long-term monitoring and maintenance plan”) for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan. The long-term monitoring and maintenance plan shall be implemented as approved.
Reason: To ensure a safe form of development that poses no unacceptable risk of pollution to controlled waters in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework.
6. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted a remediation strategy to the local planning authority detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with and obtained written approval from the local planning authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved.
Reason: To ensure a safe form of development that poses no unacceptable risk of pollution to controlled waters in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework.
7. Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the local planning authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure a safe form of development that poses no unacceptable risk of pollution to controlled waters in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework.
8. The following noise standards shall be attained with respect to residential accommodation on the site as stipulated in BS8233:2014 - Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings:
(i) internal noise levels of less than 30 dB LAeq,8hour within bedrooms between 23.00 hours and 07.00 hours (ii) internal noise levels of less than 35 dB LAeq,16 hour within living rooms between 07.00 hours and 23:00 hours (iii) internal noise levels of less than 40 dB LAeq,16hour within other living areas (e.g. dining rooms) between 07.00 and 23.00 hours
Page 40 of 130
(iv) typical individual noise events from passing road traffic shall not be in excess of 45 dB LAmax in bedrooms between 23.00 and 07.00 hours The use of ventilation measures which removes the need for future residents to open windows for summer cooling and ventilation shall be identified and submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The ventilation measures identified shall ensure the above standards are not compromised. The noise mitigation measures shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and installed prior to occupation of the development. Prior to occupation of the development a Site Completion Report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The Site Completion Report shall validate that all works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Local Planning Authority. All mitigation measures shall thereafter be retained.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
9. No development above ground level shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority details of the positions, design, materials and type of acoustic fencing or walls to be erected to the various dwelling plots as recommended in the REC Ltd Noise Assessment Report, dated 28th November 2014 . Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
10. No development shall take place, including any works of excavation or demolition, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall provide for: (i) the times of construction activities on site (ii) the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors (iii) loading and unloading of plant and materials (iv) storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development (v) the erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate (vi) wheel washing facilities (vii) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction (viii) a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works (ix) measures to prevent disturbance to any adjacent living accommodation from noise and vibration, including any piling activity (x) measures to prevent the pollution of watercourses
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
11. Prior to first occupation of any of the dwellings hereby approved, a travel plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such a plan shall provide details of the objectives, targets and measures to promote and facilitate public transport use, walking, cycling and practices/facilities to reduce the need to travel and to reduce car use. It shall also provide details of its time frame for delivery, management, monitoring and review mechanisms, travel plan coordination, and the provision of travel information and marketing. The initiatives contained within the approved plan shall be implemented and shall be in place
Page 41 of 130
prior to the first occupation of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To encourage sustainable modes of transport in accordance with Policies A2, A5, A8, A10 and DES2 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 2004-2016.
12. A scheme for the provision of on site and off site highway works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include an implementation programme and the approved scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 2004-2016.
13. Visibility splays of 2.4m x 43m shall be provided in both directions either side of the application site’s junctions with Green Lane and nothing shall be subsequently erected or allowed to grow to a height in excess of 0.6m within them in accordance with Drawing 0841-01. The visibility splays shall be implemented prior to first use of that access point and shall be retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 2004-2016.
14. Notwithstanding the approved plans listed in condition 2, a revised car parking layout for the apartments hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The revised car parking layout shall incorporate adequate provision for disabled drivers in accordance with the standards set out in the Unitary Development Plan. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved layout prior to the apartments being bought into use and such spaces shall be made available at all times the premises are in use and retained thereafter.
Reason: To ensure adequate provision for disabled people in accordance with policies A2 and A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 2004-2016.
15. A scheme for the provision of 15 secure cycle spaces for use by the apartments hereby approved shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The secure cycle provision shall be provided in accordance with the agreed details prior to the occupation of the apartments and retained thereafter.
Reason: To ensure encourage the use of more sustainable transport modes in accordance with Policy ST14 of the adopted City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
16. No development shall take place until the applicant or their agents or successors in title have secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological works and developed a scheme for public engagement. The works are to be undertaken in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) submitted to and approved in writing by Salford Planning Authority. The WSI shall cover the following: 1. A phased programme and methodology of investigation and recording to include: - a desk-based documentary study - a site walkover survey and a building/ structure assessment - archaeological building recording (at levels of detail identified as appropriate in the assessment) - a scheme of targeted archaeological evaluation, possibly leading to - open area excavation and recording 2. A scheme for public engagement to include making the fieldwork investigations open and providing public interpretation. The scheme should consider what can be done during the fieldwork and what could be designed and left as a public legacy. 3. A programme for post investigation assessment to include: - analysis of the site investigation records and finds - a detailed analysis of the fieldwork records
Page 42 of 130
- production of a final report on the significance of the archaeological and historical interest represented. 4. Deposition of the final report with the Greater Manchester Historic Environment Record and dissemination of the results in a manner commensurate with their significance. This may include production of a volume in the Greater Manchester’s Past Revealed series, and a report in a more academic journal. 5. Provision for archive deposition of the report and records of the site investigation. 6. Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the approved WSI.
Reason: In accordance with NPPF Section 12, Paragraph 141 - To record and advance understanding of heritage assets impacted on by the development and to make information about the archaeological heritage interest publicly accessible.
17. Notwithstanding the details on DFD/GLE/L1 Rev A and DFD/GLE/L2 Rev A, the development hereby approved on site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include full details trees and shrubs to be planted, fences, boundary and surface treatment. The scheme shall also include phasing details for the implementation of the landscaping. The scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced within 12 months of removal or death to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
18. Full details of the location and design of refuse and recycling storage areas for the apartments hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such storage areas shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and shall be made available for use prior to the first occupation of the apartments.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
19. No development shall commence until a risk assessment and method statement (RAMS) for such construction works is submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved details.
Reason – To prevent any piling works and vibration from de-stabilising or impacting the railway or the canal in accordance with Unitary Development Plan Policies A4 and DES6.
Notes to Applicant
1. The proposed development lies within a coal mining area which may contain unrecorded coal mining related hazards. If any coal mining feature is encountered during development, this should be reported immediately to The Coal Authority on 0845 762 6848.
Further information is also available on The Coal Authority website at www.coal.decc.gov.uk
Property specific summary information on past, current and future coal mining activity can be obtained from The Coal Authority’s Property Search Service on 0845 762 6848 or at www.groundstability.com
2. Please see letter from the EA dated 18th December 2014 in respect of contamination and waste on site.
3. In respect of condition 12 an agreement under Section 38/278 of the 1980 Highways Act shall be entered into with the Local Authority. This agreement will cover works to the adopted highway outside the application site to include but not limited to:
Page 43 of 130
I. The provision of a new continuous 2m wide footway fronting the application site on Green Lane;
II. The installation of a new pedestrian refuge crossing point outside the application site on Green Lane;
III. The creation of four new vehicle access points on Green Lane to serve the development;
IV. Provision of Street Lighting fronting the site on Green Lane;
V. Associated resurfacing works.
For more information please see comments from the Council's Highway Team dated 13th May 2015.
4. In order to construct the proposed access roads to a standard capable of adoption, the applicant will need to enter into a Section 38/278 Agreement with Salford City Council. To action, the applicant is advised to contact John Proctor, Engineering and Highways division of Urban Vision on 0161 779 4894.
5. As the proposals involve work in the adopted Public Highway on Green Lane, the applicant will need to liaise with the Engineering and Highways division of Urban Vision on 0161 779 4046 to obtain the necessary permits/licenses prior to undertaking any works in the highway.
6. The applicant will need to liaise with the Traffic and Transportation section of Urban Vision on 0161 779 6165 regarding amending the existing Traffic Regulation Order outside the application site on Green Lane to facilitate the proposed new vehicle access points. Please note that the existing double yellow lines along Green Lane will have to remain in place
7. With regard to condition 14 please refer to the minimum standards as outlined in Annex B of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
8. In line with Section 11 of the NPPF, we would recommend that opportunities for biodiversity enhancement be incorporated into the new development. These should include:
Bat bricks and/or tubes within the new development Bat boxes Bird boxes Native tree and shrub planting
9. Information submitted in respect of condition 17 should include details of an alternative form of boundary treatment to a crash barrier and landscaping along the canal edge. The applicant is advised to contact the Bridgewater Canal Company in advance of submitting information in relation to this condition.
10. In respect of condition 19, the RAMS should consider all works to be undertaken within 10m of the operational railway and ensure that works on site follow safe methods of working and have taken into consideration any potential impact on Network Rail land and the operational railway. If vibro-compaction machinery / piling machinery or piling and ground treatment works are to be undertaken as part of the development, details of the use of such machinery and works should also be included. The developer should contact Network Rail Asset Protection prior to works commencing at [email protected] to discuss the proposal and RAMS requirements in more detail.
11. Further in respect of condition 19, the RAMS should consider all works that will take place within an agreed distance to the canal. The distance to canal and the detail of the RAMS shall be agreed with Bridgewater Canal Company.
Page 44 of 130
APPLICATION No: 14/65411/COU APPLICANT: Mrs Zenab Bibi LOCATION: 43 Cross Lane, Salford, M5 4BN, PROPOSAL: Alterations to the southern elevation and change of use of part of the ground, the first and the second floor for use as 4 one bedroomed and 2 two bedroomed, self-contained flats WARD: Langworthy
This application was deferred at the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel Meeting on the 5th March 2015 in order to allow further negotiation regarding the mix and size of units proposed.
Discussions have now been held with the agent and the scheme has been revised; the number of units proposed has been reduced from 8 to 6 and the mix of units revised so the proposal now involves the creation of 4 one bedroomed and 2 two bedroomed, self-contained flats as opposed to 8 one bedroomed units.
The table below provides a schedule of the proposed flats – Page 45 of 130
The description of development has been revised to read “Alterations to the southern elevation and change of use of part of the ground, the first and the second floor for use as 4 one bedroomed and 2 two bedroomed, self-contained flats”.
Neighbouring residents and those who had made representations on the application were notified of the amended scheme on the 26th March and given 10 days to comment.
Two letters of representation have been received in response to the re-notification. One of the representations is from the Windsor Albion Cooperative in which they state that they have not been given sufficient time to consider the revised scheme and comment before advising that they do intend to submit further representations in due course. The other is from an occupant of Albion Towers, who reiterates concerns expressed previously by neighbouring residents that the building is too small to accommodate the number of units being proposed before stating that the proposal will exacerbate the existing car parking problems and anti-social behaviour issues in the area. In the light of these issues the writer states that the upper floors should be converted to just two flats; one on the first floor and another on the second floor.
The revisions to the proposal have broadened the mix of units proposed with the scheme now providing both one and two bed units, thereby allowing it to meet the identified need for 1 bedroom properties in this area as well as further diversifying the mix of residential units in the locality by providing two bedroomed flats. In addition the revisions have allowed the size of units to be increased with the smallest unit now having a floor area of 40sqm and the largest having a floor area of 66sqm. The increase in the size of the units has served to improve adaptability of the units, thereby improving the level of residential amenity future occupants would be provided with. For these reasons the revised proposal to convert the first and second floors of 43 Cross Lane into 4 one bedroomed and 2 two bedroomed, self-contained flats is considered to be acceptable in principle as it would improve the mix of residential units in the locality, in accordance with policy H1 of the adopted UDP and the Council’s Housing Planning Guidance.
The alterations to the mix and size of the units have not had any impact upon the number and position of windows, neither have they resulted in the introduction of habitable room windows into elevations where they would not have existed under the previous scheme to convert the upper floors into flats. Having regard to these facts and given that the proposal to convert the upper floors of the building into 4 one bedroomed and 2 two bedroomed, self-contained flats would not significantly intensify the use of the site to the extent that it would adversely affect the living conditions of neighbouring residents it is considered that the revised scheme is acceptable in both visual amenity terms and in respect of the impact that it would have on neighbouring residents. The revised proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with UDP policies DES1, DES7, DES8 and EN17 which relate to design and residential amenity.
The Council’s highway officer has confirmed that they do not consider that the revisions to the scheme would affect the previous highway comments issued, with the revisions having the potential to make the development less intensive in terms of parking demand than the previous proposals. Having regard to the accessible nature of the application site and the comments of the Council’s highway officer, it is considered that the proposed access, parking and servicing arrangements for the development are acceptable and as such the proposal is considered to be in accordance with UDP policies A8 and A10.
Page 46 of 130
For the above reasons the scheme is still considered to represent a sustainable form of development which will make a positive contribution towards meeting the significant shortfall in housing across the City, without compromising visual or residential amenity or highway safety. It is therefore considered that subject to the attachment of conditions the revised scheme is acceptable and in accordance with the thrust of the NPPF and the saved policies within the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
The plan condition recommended previously has been updated to reflect the revised scheme. It now reads as follows –
The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans -
Site location plan - drawing 2014.013.002 Proposed ground floor plan - drawing 2014.013.006 Proposed first and second floor plan - drawing 2014.013_PL_001_RevA Existing and proposed elevations - drawing 2014.013.005 Rev B
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
Description of Site and Surrounding Area
This application relates to a three storey building located at the junction of Cross Lane and Culverwell Drive in Salford 5.
The ground floor of the building comprises an operational convenience store, two vacant units and an enclosed yard area, which provides access to a rear staircase from which the first and second floors of the building are accessed, while the first and second floors of the building are currently vacant.
There is no on site car parking provision for the application property. However, there is on street parking along one side of Culverwell Drive.
The application property is located within a predominantly residential area being bounded on all sides by residential properties in a variety of styles including a multi-level tower block and detached, semi- detached and terraced residential properties.
The ground floor of the building is currently in use as an A1 shop with the remaining ground floor vacant. There is an application before the panel today for “ Proposed change of use of vacant units to a hairdressers shop (A1) and a fish and chip shop (A5) together with new shop fronts and internal roller shutters” (14/65501/FUL)
Description of Proposal
Planning permission is sought to convert the first and second floors of the property at 43 Cross Lane into eight, 1 bedroom self-contained flats.
In order to facilitate the proposed conversion a new first floor window has been installed in the southern elevation of the building and a high level window in the same elevation has been enlarged.
There would be no on site car parking provided for future occupants of the proposed flats. However, a secure cycle storage unit with 3 Sheffield Stands would be provided within the enclosed access yard, adjacent to the staircase leading to the first and second floors.
Page 47 of 130
Relevant Site History
06/52274/COU - Change of use of part of ground floor to games room - Application Withdrawn - 13 April 2006
99/39502/FUL - Installation of shutters and grilles - Approve - 3 August 1999
10/59197/FUL - Re-siting of shop entrance door and alteration to elevations - Approve - 17 September 2010
14/65694/ADV - Display of two externally illuminated fascia signs - Approve - 21 January 2015
Publicity
Site Notice: Non HH Article 13 Date Displayed: 9th February 2015 Reason: Wider Publicity
Neighbour Notification
117 neighbouring properties were notified of the application on the 3rd February 2015.
Representations
8 letters of representation have been received in response to this application, from 5 different addresses.
Two petitions have also been received, one with 84 signatures and one with 99 signatures.
The following issues have been raised –
Residents in the vicinity of the application site are already exposed to traffic congestion and excessive on street parking and this application would, by virtue of the fact that there would be no onsite parking provision for future occupants, exacerbate the existing problems neighbouring residents are already experiencing and result in issues for refuse collectors and emergency vehicles accessing properties and pedestrians using the footway should cars double park, partially on the footway. Works originally started on converting the first and second floor of the property to a house in multiple occupation which would be let to students and despite the proposal now being for 8 flats there is nothing to stop the landlord leasing the flats to students, giving rise to concerns that tenants could be unruly and the landlord, who would not be based on site, taking little action against any unruly tenants. The proposed units would be bedsits, not 1 bedroom flats and as such the proposal will increase the existing issue with antisocial behaviour, drug use and youths hanging around the unit. The proposed flats would be managed by a private landlord who has no duty or responsibility to the rest of the community when selecting occupants for the proposed flats. It is likely that an assured tenancy agreement will be used and this will not contain anything that will give the private tenants acceptable boundaries of behaviour and conduct. Consequently if the prospective tenants were unruly or exhibited anti-social behaviour the landlord would not have to act on it leaving the other residents to tackle the problem at their own expense via antisocial behaviour legislation. The owner of the building will not be a responsible landlord as they are absent from site and during the time when building works have been undertaken there have been issues with the work practices of those on site and the leaving of skips and rubbish on the road The building at 43 Cross Lane is in a poor state of repair and as such it is adversely affecting the visual amenities of the area which has been subject to much improvement recently via community led initiatives. There are concerns that the proposal could prohibit further improvements to the area and restrict the use of the shared space adjacent to the application site for community events given that the external works that have been undertaken to date have been carried out to a poor standard and as such it clear that the owner of the building does not care about quality or providing decent living standards. The lack of greenspace at the site is also raised, as is the issue of means of escape Page 48 of 130
In addition Councillor Gina Reynolds and Councillor John Warmisham have expressed concerns with the proposals.
Both Councillor Reynolds and Councillor Warmisham have expressed concerns over the fact that the proposed flats will be let to students given the abundance of student accommodation in the area and the fact that the letting of the units to students would not fit with the Council’s plan for providing student accommodation across the City. They have also expressed concerns that the proposal would, as a result of the failure to provide any on site car parking for future occupants of the proposed flats, add to the existing parking problems residents in this area are already experiencing as a result of students parking in all of the streets off Cross Lane and Churchill Way, including Culverwell Drive.
Consultations
Highways – Confirm that they have no objections to the proposed development due to the highly accessible location of the application site, the fact that the parking demand associated with the proposed flats is likely to be relatively low and given that secure cycle parking is proposed for the flats, thereby helping to mitigate any potential parking issues and encourage trips via sustainable modes.
Advise that a condition should be attached which requires the proposed cycle parking to be provided and made available for use prior to the first occupation of any of the proposed flats.
Urban Vision Environment (Air and Noise) – Note that the site is located within an air quality management area, but advise that this does not represent a constraint to the proposed development. Confirm that they therefore have no objections to the proposal subject to the attachment of a condition to ensure that the floor separating the proposed flats from the ground floor commercial units provides adequate sound insulation.
Planning Policy
Development Plan Policy
Unitary Development Plan H5 - Residential Accommodation in Existing Buildings This policy states that the subdivision of dwellings or conversion of non-residential properties to residential use will only be permitted when the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties or the character of the area by reason of noise and disturbance: loss of privacy; design and appearance; cumulative effects of concentration and parking and service arrangements.
Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.
Unitary Development Plan DES8 - Alterations and Extensions This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area.
Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.
Page 49 of 130
Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.
Unitary Development Plan A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Park This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded; and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of safety and security.
Other Material Planning Considerations
National Planning Policy
National Planning Policy Framework
Local Planning Policy
Planning Guidance - Housing The purpose of the guidance is to ensure that the residential development coming forward in Salford contributes to establishing and maintaining sustainable communities, tackles the specific housing and related issues that face Salford, and helps to deliver the vision and strategy of the UDP, the Housing Strategy and the Community Plan.
It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application
Appraisal
Principle
In terms of the mix of units proposed, the development involves the creation of eight 1 bed flats.
The 2011 Census shows that in Langworthy, the ward where the application property is located, the average number of bedrooms per household is 2.2. This proposal would therefore help to diversify the size of accommodation available in the local area, something which would be beneficial given that the average household size in Langworthy is, according to the 2011 census, 1.9 people; second lowest of all wards within the City.
In addition, the proposed development could potentially address the needs of households in the local area who currently live in social housing and are affected by welfare reforms focused on the under- occupation of dwellings -the “bedroom tax” as the proposal would provide additional 1 bed units for private rent which would, given the low turnover of one bedroom accommodation in the social sector, assist those households who are affected by the bedroom tax who have to meet their needs in the open market.
There is an identified need for 1 bedroom units in this area of the City and consequently despite the development comprising solely 1 bed units, given it is for only 8 dwellings, the mix is considered appropriate.
In terms of the size of the proposed units the flats would have a floor area that ranges between 26sqm and 43sqm. Having regard to the fact that the units are 1-bed and the proposal involves the conversion of two vacant floors within an existing building the size of the proposed apartments is considered acceptable.
For these reasons the proposal to convert the first and second floors of the property into eight 1 bedroom, self contained flats is considered to be acceptable in principle as it would improve the mix of residential units in the locality, in accordance with policy H1 of the adopted UDP and the Council’s Housing Planning Guidance. Page 50 of 130
Visual Amenity
In order to facilitate the proposed conversion of the first and second floors of the property at 43 Cross Lane into 8, 1 bed self-contained flats a new first floor window has been installed in the southern elevation of the building and a high level window in the same elevation has been enlarged.
Having regard to the minor nature of the external alterations and the fact that the new windows that have been installed are of the same design and construction as those already contained within the building it is not considered that the external alterations undertaken have had an adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the building. or that of the area generally.
For these reasons the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the area. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with UDP policies DES1 and DES8.
Residential Amenity
The application property is located within a predominantly residential area being bounded on all sides by residential properties in a variety of styles including a multi-level tower block and detached, semi- detached and terraced residential properties.
The proposed development would not alter the scale and mass of the building at 43 Cross Lane and consequently the proposed development would not result in neighbouring residents experiencing any issues with regard to loss of light or having overbearing impact.
With regard to privacy the proposal would result in habitable room windows being introduced in all elevations of the building. However, with the exception of one new window in the southern elevation and the enlargement of an existing window no new window openings would be introduced. The closest separation distance would be to 27 Trenam Place which would be approximately 17m from the application site. Having regard to the established pattern of development within the surrounding area, where residential units are densely packed, and given that neighbouring residential units would be separated from the application site by roads or areas of public space, it is not considered that the proposal would result in neighbouring residents experiencing a significant loss of privacy.
In terms of noise and disturbance it is not considered that the proposal to utilise the first and second floors of the building would significantly intensify the use of the site to the extent that it would adversely affect the living conditions of neighbouring residents. Having regard to this and the fact that the Council’s environmental consultants have not raised any objections to the proposal, it is not considered that the proposed change of use would result in neighbouring residents experiencing a loss of amenity by virtue of the comings and goings associated with the 8 flats.
Future occupants of the proposed dwellings would be provided with adequate light and outlook from their habitable room windows and an area for bin storage and an area of cycle parking would be provided within the enclosed ground floor yard area. There would be no on site amenity space provided. The application site is however located within walking distance to two public parks, Clarendon Park and Peel Park, and consequently, having regard to the constraints faced when converting an existing building, it is considered that on balance future occupants would be provided with a satisfactory standard of living.
The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with policies DES7 and EN17 of the adopted UDP.
Parking and highway safety
There would be no on site car parking provided for future occupants of the proposed flats. However, a secure cycle storage unit with 3 Sheffield Stands (which can accommodate 6 bicycles) would be provide within the enclosed access yard, adjacent to the staircase leading to the first and second floors.
Page 51 of 130
The application site is however located within a highly accessible location off the A6 Broad Street, close to local amenities and is well served by public transport links being located within walking distance to Salford Crescent Rail Station and being served by a frequent bus services which run along the A6 and Cross Lane. There is also a dedicated cycle lane along Cross Lane which will help to promote journeys by bicycle.
Having regard to these facets of the application site and given that there will only be a negligible increase in vehicle movements from an additional 8 flats, the Council’s highway officer has raised no objections to the proposed development stating that the proposals are unlikely to result in a severe highway impact, as defined within the National Planning Policy Framework, which notes that “Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.”
Having regard to the accessible nature of the application site and the comments of the Council’s highway officer, it is considered that the proposed access, parking and servicing arrangements for the development are acceptable.
Other Issues
Neighbouring residents and Ward Councillors have expressed concerns that the proposed flats would be occupied by students. It is acknowledged that the units could be occupied by students, however the design and layout of the units is such that they could be occupied by any individual – they are not units designed specifically for student living, with such units typically containing a series of bedroom pods around shared living and dining accommodation. As such the proposed development is not considered to represent a proposal for student accommodation and consequently it is not necessary to assess the proposal against UDP policy H7 which relates to the provision of student accommodation or the Council’s plan for providing student accommodation across the City. Furthermore, policy HOU7 of the Housing Planning Guidance which relates to demonstrating a need for student accommodation only applies to major development (10 units or more) for student housing.
Issues have also been raised over the building owner’s ability and desire to maintain the building in an appropriate way. While this is not a matter for consideration under this application, it should be noted that if the external appearance of the building were to decline to the extent that it was having an adverse impact upon the visual amenities of the area the local planning authority has powers under s.215 of the Town and Country Planning Act to take appropriate action to seek improvements.
With regard to the issues raised regarding safe working on site these are not controlled by planning legislation.
Conclusion
For the reasons set out in the appraisal section above, it is considered that the proposed development represents a sustainable form of development which will make a positive contribution towards meeting the significant shortfall in housing across the City. It is therefore considered that subject to the attachment of conditions the proposal development is acceptable and in accordance with the thrust of the NPPF and the saved policies within the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Recommendation
Approve
1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans -
Site location plan - drawing 2014.013.002 Page 52 of 130
Proposed ground floor plan - drawing 2014.013.006 Proposed first and second floor plan - drawing 2014.013_PL_001 Existing and proposed elevations - drawing 2014.013.005 Rev B
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
3. Within 28 days of the date of this decision, an assessment of the party floor of the proposed development with the ground floor shop premises shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The assessment shall determine the construction of the party floor and its compliance with the sound insulation standards as specified in Approved Document E of the Building Regulations 2010. If the party floor does not comply with Approved Document E, written details of a sound insulation scheme and its construction shall be provided to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The development shall not take place unless written approval of the proposed scheme has first been issued by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out the development in strict accordance with the approved scheme prior to first occupation of any of the residential units hereby approved.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
4. Prior to first occupation of any flat hereby approved the secure cycle storage to accommodate 6 cycles shall be made available for use in accordance with Drawing 2014.013.006 (received on the 4th February 2015) and retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Notes to Applicant
1. The proposed development lies within a coal mining area which may contain unrecorded coal mining related hazards. If any coal mining feature is encountered during development, this should be reported immediately to The Coal Authority on 0345 762 6848. It should also be noted that this site may lie in an area where a current licence exists for underground coal mining.
Further information is also available on The Coal Authority website at: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/the-coal-authority
Property specific summary information on past, current and future coal mining activity can be obtained from: www.groundstability.com
This Informative Note is valid from 1st January 2015 until 31st December 2016
2. If, during any works on site, contamination is suspected or found, or contamination is caused, the LPA shall be notified immediately. Where required, a suitable risk assessment shall be carried out and/or any remedial action shall be carried out in accordance to an agreed process and within agreed timescales in agreement with the LPA.
3. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
Page 53 of 130
APPLICATION No: 14/65501/FUL APPLICANT: Mrs Zenab Bibi LOCATION: 43 Cross Lane, Salford, M5 4BN, PROPOSAL: Proposed change of use of vacant units to a hairdressers shop (A1) and a fish and chip shop (A5) together with new shop fronts and internal roller shutters WARD: Langworthy
Description of Site and Surrounding Area
This application relates to a three storey building located at the junction of Cross Lane and Culverwell Drive in Salford 5.
The ground floor of the building comprises an operational convenience store, two vacant units and an enclosed yard area, which provides access to a rear staircase from which the first and second floors Page 54 of 130
of the building are accessed. While the first and second floors of the building are currently vacant there is a planning application before the Panel on this same agenda for “Alterations to the southern elevation and change of use of part of the ground, the first and the second floor for use as 4 one bedroomed and 2 two bedroomed, self-contained flats” (14/65411/COU).
There is no on site car parking provision for the application property. However, there is on street parking along one side of Culverwell Drive.
The application property is located within a predominantly residential area being bounded on all sides by residential properties in a variety of styles including a multi-level tower block and detached, semi- detached and terraced residential properties.
Description of Proposal
Planning permission is sought to bring the two vacant ground floor units back into use; one as an A1 retail unit and the other as an A5 hot food takeaway.
The proposed A1 retail unit, which would have a floor area 27sqm, would operate between 10am and 6pm seven days a week.
The proposed hot food takeaway, which would have a floor area of 49sqm, would operate between 10am and 8pm seven days a week.
In order to facilitate the proposed change of use it is proposed to install two new shop fronts within the buildings southern elevation. It is also proposed to install internal roller shutters powder coated brown / beige. The shop fronts would have a traditional design with an entrance door and shop front window with signage above.
It is also proposed to install a fume extraction system for the proposed hot food takeaway. Externally this would result in two small vents on the east elevation.
Relevant Site History
02/43573/COU - Change of use of part of public house into shop for the sale of hot food and launderette - Approve - 21 March 2002
06/52274/COU - Change of use of part of ground floor to games room - Application Withdrawn - 13 April 2006
99/39502/FUL - Installation of shutters and grilles - Approve - 3 August 1999
10/59197/FUL - Re-siting of shop entrance door and alteration to elevations - Approve - 17 September 2010
14/65694/ADV - Display of two externally illuminated fascia signs - Approve - 21 January 2015
14/65411/COU - Alterations to the southern elevation and change of use of part of the ground, the first and the second floor for use as 4 one bedroomed and 2 two bedroomed, self-contained flats – Pending consideration
14/65694/ADV - Display of two externally illuminated fascia signs - Approve - 21 January 2015
Publicity
Site Notice: Non HH Article 13 Date Displayed: 24 March 2015 Reason: Wider Publicity
Press Advert: Not Applicable
Neighbour Notification
Page 55 of 130
113 neighbouring properties were notified of this application on the 9th March 2015.
Representations
A petition containing 31 signatures has been submitted in opposition to this application.
Those signing the petition have done so on the basis of the following concerns –
The change of use will create more litter, smells and traffic – there is an existing litter problem and plans for restricted parking on Culverwell Drive and the owner has already submitted an application to change the 1st and 2nd floors of the building to flats which will, in combination with this application increase the environmental issues further. The proposed shops will have their doors on the side of the building adjacent to land which is used as community space, with the Windsor Albion Co-operative stating that they intend to gate off the land and use it for an environmental project and social events in the future.
In addition Councilor Gina Reynolds has expressed concerns with the proposals. She is objecting to the proposal on the grounds that there are major parking problems in the area which are proving difficult to resolve and she considers that the introduction of more shops would exacerbate the existing problems. In addition, Councilor Reyonds has raised concerns that the fish and chip shop could potentially create more litter in the area.
Consultations
Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management - No comments received to date
Highways – Confirm that they have undertaken a TRICS trip rate/car parking accumulation assessment which demonstrates that there will only be a negligible increase in vehicle movements from a 27sqm A1 use and 49sqm A5 use, and as such the proposal will have an imperceptible impact on the local highway network. In light of this and the advice given within Paragraph 32.3 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which states that “Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.” they confirm that they have no objections to the proposal on highway safety grounds.
Urban Vision Environment (Air and Noise) - No objections subject to a condition relating to ventilation and noise.
Design For Security - No comments received to date
Planning Policy
Development Plan Policy
Unitary Development Plan S4 - Amusement, Restaurants, Cafe, Drinking This policy states that proposals for hot food shop uses would not be permitted by the Council where the use would have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of surrounding residential occupiers by reason of noise, disturbance, smells, fumes, litter, vehicular traffic movements, parking or pedestrian traffic and the vitality and viability of a town centre and visual amenity.
Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.
Page 56 of 130
Unitary Development Plan DES8 - Alterations and Extensions This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area.
Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.
Unitary Development Plan EN17 - Pollution Control This policy states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning permission will only be granted where the development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory level of amenity.
Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.
Unitary Development Plan A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Park This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded; and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of safety and security.
Other Material Planning Considerations
National Planning Policy
National Planning Policy Framework
Local Planning Policy
Supplementary Planning Document - Hot Food Takeaway This policy document expands on the policies in Salford’s Unitary Development Plan to provide additional guidance on the development of hot food take-aways. It explains the council’s overall approach to hot food take away development, and sets out detailed advice on appropriate concentrations of hot food take away establishments, measures to protect the amenity of surrounding residential occupiers, appropriate standards for parking, and servicing for delivery and waste collection services.
It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application
Appraisal
Principle
The proposal involves the change of use of two vacant units into an A1 retail unit and an A5 hot food takeaway. There is no planning history to indicate the former uses of the two units.
With regard to the proposed retail unit the application site is not located within a town or neighbourhood centre and the applicant has not provided any information to justify the introduction of an A1 retail unit in an out of centre location. Notwithstanding this, having regard to the small scale of the proposed retail unit which has a floor area of just 27sqm, it is not considered that the proposal would have any adverse impact upon the vitality and viability of the neighbouring Pendleton town
Page 57 of 130
centre as the small tradable area of the unit means that it is likely to serve a local need rather than diverting trade away from the centre.
With regard to the hot food takeaway policy HFTA 2 of the Hot food takeaways SPD states that “Where a hot food take away is proposed within 400 metres of a secondary school, planning permission will only be granted subject to a condition that the premises are not open to the public before 5pm Monday to Friday and there are no over the counter sales before that time. This policy will not apply to hot food takeaways proposed in:
A) A designated local centre, town centre or the Manchester/Salford City Centre; B) Locations that would be unlikely to be accessed by pupils of a nearby school.
The application site is not located within 400m of a secondary school and consequently there are no in principle issues with the introduction of a hot food takeaway that operates between 10am and 8pm seven days a week.
Visual Amenity
In order to facilitate the proposed use it is proposed to install two new shop fronts within the buildings southern elevation. It is also proposed to install internal perforated roller shutters.
The proposed shop fronts would each contain a shop window within a formalised shop surround. The roller shutters would be powder coated beige or brown.
The proposed frontage would be of a traditional design and their introduction along southern elevation, which is currently a blank brick wall, is considered to be acceptable in design terms.
The proposal is considered acceptable in design and crime terms in accordance with policy DES10 of the adopted UDP and shop front guidance. The proposal is considered to be in accordance with policies DES1, DES8 and DES10 of the UDP and the thrust of the Design and Crime Supplementary Planning Document and the Shop front guidance document.
In order to prevent odours from the hot food takeaway harming the amenity of neighbouring occupiers, it is necessary to install a fume extraction system, most of which would be housed internally with two small vents introduced to the exterior of the rear (east) elevation.
Residential Amenity
Policy HFTA4 of the Council’s Hot Food Takeaways SPD states that hot food takeaways must provide appropriate extraction systems to effectively disperse odours. Such systems must be acoustically attenuated and not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers, for example by virtue of vibration or odour.
According to policy HFTA3 of the Council’s Hot Food Takeaways SPD a hot food takeaway located within a predominantly residential area should only operate between 8am and 10pm Monday to Saturday, with no opening on Sundays or Bank Holidays, however the policy allows for alternative approaches on a case by case basis having regard to the individual site circumstances.
The application property is located within a predominantly residential area being bounded on all sides by residential properties in a variety of styles including a multi-level tower block and detached, semi- detached and terraced residential properties.
The proposed A1 retail unit, which would have a floor area 27sqm, would operate between 10am and 6pm seven days a week.
The proposed hot food takeaway, which would have a floor area of 49sqm, would operate between 10am and 8pm seven days a week.
In order to facilitate the introduction of the retail unit and the hot food takeaway it is proposed to remove two sections of brick work on the buildings southern elevation and install a two new shop fronts together with associated roller shutters. Page 58 of 130
Having regard to the minimal nature of the works required to install the shop fronts and associated roller shutters, the separation to the neighbouring properties and the fact that the installation of the proposed shop fronts and associated roller shutters would not alter the scale and massing of the existing building it is not considered that the external alterations involved in the installation of the two shop fronts and associated roller shutters would result in neighbouring residents experiencing a reduction in the level of residential amenity they currently enjoy by reason of loss of light, privacy and/or overbearing impact.
The proposal would also include the installation of a fume extraction system in order to effectively disperse fume and odours associated with the proposed hot food takeaway.
The Council’s environmental consultants have reviewed the submitted scheme and advised that the proposed ventilation system would be acceptable in dealing with odours generated from the takeaway. A condition would be attached to any planning permission to ensure that the ventilation system does not generate an unacceptable level of noise.
With regard to noise and disturbance from the operation of the two units proposed, given the fact that the majority of the ground floor of 43 Cross Lane is already being used for A1 retail purposes which has no restrictions on its hours of operation, it is not considered necessary to impose condition on the A1 shop use for the hours proposed. In conjunction with advice given from the Council’s Environmental Consultants it is more appropriate and necessary to condition the following hours for both proposed uses: 9am – 8pm seven days a week. The business may open in accordance with the hours as submitted but the planning condition will ensure that hours of opening protect the amenity of neighbouring residents.
The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with policies DES7, S4 and EN17 of the adopted UDP and policies HFTA3, HFTA4 and HFTA5 of the Council’s Hot Food Takeaways SPD.
Parking and Highway Safety
There would be no parking provision provided for the exclusive use of patrons/staff of the proposed retail unit or hot food takeaway.
The application site is however located within an accessible location off the A6 Broad Street but will most likely serve local needs in any case.
Given the above and the small scale of the development, the Council’s highway officer has raised no objections stating that the proposals are unlikely to result in a severe highway impact, as defined within the National Planning Policy Framework, which notes that “Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.”
Waste disposal
Policy HFTA6 of the Council’s Hot Food Takeaways SPD relates to the disposal of waste. It states that hot food takeaways will need to be provided with appropriate bin storage areas, ideally within the building or alternatively within an enclosed external storage area.
The submission does not include details of the proposed bin storage however the property at 43 Cross Lane has a yard area which accommodates bin storage. It is considered that this area could be utilised by both the A1 retail unit and the A5 hot food takeaway to store bins and consequently it is considered that appropriate bin storage facilities would be provided for the proposed retail unit and the proposed hot food takeaway.
Litter
Policy HTFA7 of the Council’s Hot Food Takeaways SPD relates to the disposal of litter, advising that where there would otherwise be an insufficient availability of litter bins to serve customers hot food takeaways will be required to provide a) a litter bin outside the premises at all times the business is open and one or more little bins within the surrounding area, as appropriate. Page 59 of 130
In this case there is an existing litter bin located outside the A1 retail unit operating from 43 Cross Lane, close to the junction of Cross Lane and Culverwell Drive and therefore it is considered that adequate facilities will be provided for customers to dispose of waste.
Other Issues
Those signing the petition against the application have done so in part on the basis that the proposed shops will have their doors on the side of the building adjacent to land which is used by the Windsor Albion Cooperative as community space, with the cooperative intending to gate off the land and use it for an environmental project and social events in the future.
The area of land referred to is not directly to the front of the proposed entrances. Immediately to the front of the proposed shop entrances is the pedestrian access to the tower block and so it is not considered that any future plans that the Cooperative have would be unacceptably affected.
Value Added
Amendments to the design of the shop fronts have been sought and received. The proposed shop fronts have now been designed with a more traditional appearance and the proposed roller shutters would be perforated and internally fitted rather than solid external roller shutters as initially proposed.
Recommendation
1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans EAST ELEVATION DRAWING NO. 2014.0131.002- Rev A PROPOSED PLAN _ FRONT ELEVATION DRAWING NO 2014.0.13.005_Rev A.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
3. The roller shutters hereby approved shall be perforated and the shutter housing fitted internally within the building as per the submitted Security Shutter plan. Within 28 days of installation of the shutters the external elements shall be powder coated brown or beige.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
4. The ventilation system for the hot food takeaway shall be installed in accordance with the details submitted via email on the 04/06/2015 and 05/06/2015. The installation of the agreed scheme shall incorporate acoustic treatment to ensure that the rating level of noise from the system during its operation does not exceed the background noise level (LA90,T) at any time when measured at the nearest residential premises. All equipment installed as part of the approved scheme shall thereafter be operated and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
5. The use of the A1 shop and A5 hot food takeaway shall not be open to customers and no customers shall remain on the premises outside of the hours of 9am - 8pm.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Page 60 of 130
Notes to Applicant
1. STANDING ADVICE - DEVELOPMENT LOW RISK AREA
The proposed development lies within a coal mining area which may contain unrecorded coal mining related hazards. If any coal mining feature is encountered during development, this should be reported immediately to The Coal Authority on 0345 762 6848. It should also be noted that this site may lie in an area where a current licence exists for underground coal mining.
Further information is also available on The Coal Authority website at: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/the-coal-authority
Property specific summary information on past, current and future coal mining activity can be obtained from: www.groundstability.com
This Informative Note is valid from 1st January 2015 until 31st December 2016
Page 61 of 130
APPLICATION No: 14/66381/FUL APPLICANT: Children’s Services LOCATION: Brentnall Primary School, Northumberland Street, Salford M7 4RP PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey modular building to provide two classrooms. WARD: KERSAL
Description of Site and Surrounding Area
This application relates to Brentnall Primary School. Pedestrian and vehicular access to the school is via Northumberland Street. Staff parking sits to the eastern flank and there is no visitor parking on site. The main school building is a single storey structure that fronts the road, partly extended in 2006. To the rear/flank of the school building is the former caretaker’s two-storey house – now in use for educational and community purposes. The rear of the site is dominated by hard surfaced bitumen playground, edged with trees.
The area to the immediate south is predominantly residential in nature, whilst uses to the north comprise a mixture of low and high density residential developments, another school, a vacant site and the former Higher Broughton Conservative club and bowling green (currently being converted to a Synagogue (as per approval 11/61178/FUL)). Northumberland Street is a busy route connecting Bury New Road and Leicester Road. There are double yellow parking restrictions along this route, with additional restrictions immediately outside the school. A zebra crossing also lies immediately in front of the school entrance.
There are trees on this and surrounding properties that form part of Tree Preservation Order (no. 4) dating from 1969.
Description of Proposal
Page 62 of 130
Structure Permission is sought for the erection of a single-storey building to provide two classrooms, shared cloakroom and wc’s. The building would be sited approximately 14m north of the existing school – partly behind the former caretaker’s house. At its closest it would be just over 9m from the boundary with the former bowling green. It would be modular in form and measure 3.42m in height and would occupy a footprint of approximately 18m by 8.5m. The exterior of the modular building would be faced in cream colour panels and doors with white upvc windows.
Access Access is proposed from the elevation facing the rear of the school building. Windows would face the school and the hard surface playground. Due to the construction method the building is raised from ground level – necessitating ramped/stair access. The main entrance ramp and steps would face main school building. Two secondary fire escapes are also proposed which would front the playground. No alterations are proposed to the existing vehicular and pedestrian accesses to the site.
Use The proposed building is required to provide alternative accommodation for 60 year 6 children, freeing up space within the main school building to accommodate the an additional intake of 60 pupils starting in September 2015.
Tree Works The ‘moderate quality’ B category group of 3no. trees (2 Lime, 1 Sycamore) will be removed to accommodate the new classroom building. This group stands to the centre of the site and is secondary in visual terms to the peripheral boundary trees. It is proposed to mitigate their loss through the provision of 10 new trees along the grassed bank to the northern and western boundaries.
A tree and a group of trees (both of moderate ‘B’ quality) either side of the access roadway are to be retained, with minor low branches removed as per tree survey schedule, to ensure sufficient ground clearance for construction plant and machinery. An area of existing hard surface alongside the boundary with the former Conservative Club will be retained during development to reduce the risk of construction damage to tree roots.
Publicity Earliest Decision Date: 25.07.2015 Revised Expiry Date: No extension agreed
Site Notice: Non HH Article 13 Date Displayed: 03.07.2015 Reason: Wider Publicity
Relevant Site History 06/53447/FUL Erection of a single storey rear extension and erection of an infill extension at the front of the building – Approved 06.10.2006
Neighbour Notification 16 Neighbouring properties notified: 03.07.2015
Representations At the time of writing, no objections have been received. Consultations
Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management - No objections subject to scheme complying with drainage requirements of Building Regulations Part H. Although site is located within Flood Zone 1, Salford City Council's Asset register does not show any historical flooding incidents which have affected this site. Advise that the site is susceptible to surface water flooding of a depth less than 100mm (10cm) for the 1 in 30 storm event. This should not prevent this scheme progressing.
Highways -
Page 63 of 130
It should be noted that Salford City Council has no adopted car parking standards for a Primary School use. A total of 8 car parking spaces, (including 1 disabled bay) and 10 cycle parking spaces serve the school site. Given the number of additional pupils proposed, it would be beneficial for the School to look at providing additional secure cycle parking to help encourage and promote sustainable travel. This can be explored within the School Travel Plan, as per below condition.
A School Travel Plan should reflect existing travel patterns and focus on limiting car traffic to existing levels and gradually reducing these over time. It is vital that this occurs so as to provide an effective mitigation strategy against increased car use. Therefore, in order to ensure that sustainable travel continues to be promoted in respect of the enlarged school facility, we would request that the implementation of an updated School Travel Plan is ensured by way of planning condition.
In view of the above, no highway objections are raised.
Planning Policy
Development Plan Policy Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.
Unitary Development Plan DES8 - Alterations and Extensions This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area.
Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.
Unitary Development Plan EN17 - Pollution Control This policy states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning permission will only be granted where the development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory level of amenity.
Unitary Development Plan A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled This policy states that development proposals, road improvement schemes and traffic management measures will be required to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, other people with limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians and cyclists
Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.
Unitary Development Plan EHC1 - Provision, Improvement of Schools, College This policy states that planning permission will be granted for the improvement, replacement or provision of new schools and colleges, provided that the development would i) not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring uses; ii) secure adequate, accessible playing field provision iii) be accessible by a rage of means of transport iv) incorporate disabled access v) not give rise to unacceptable levels of traffic generation, impact on highway safety, parking or servicing; vi) make provision, where possible, for community use of buildings and grounds.
Unitary Development Plan EN13 – Protected Trees Page 64 of 130
This policy states that development that would result in the unacceptable loss of, or damage to, protected trees will not be permitted. Where the loss of trees is considered acceptable, adequate replacement provision will be required.
Other Material Planning Considerations
National Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework
Local Planning Policy It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application
Appraisal Following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) it is necessary to consider the weight which can be afforded to the policies of the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan (paragraph 215 NPPF 27th March 2012).
In terms of this application it is considered that the relevant policies of the UDP can be afforded due weight for the purposes of decision making as they are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.
Principle National planning guidance presents a high level of in principle support for the provision of additional education facilities. NPPF paragraph 72 is the Governments most up to date planning policy guidance on the provision of schools and fully reflects the Government’s commitment to the delivery of new schools. NPPF states, “The Government attaches great importance to ensuring that a sufficient choice of school places is available to meet the needs of existing and new communities. Local planning authorities should take a proactive, positive and collaborative approach to meeting this requirement, and to development that will widen choice in education. They should: give great weight to the need to create, expand or alter schools; and work with schools promoters to identify and resolve key planning issues before applications are submitted.”
In August 2011 the Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government issued a Policy Statement – Planning for Schools Development which underlines the Government’s commitment to support the development of state funded schools and their delivery through the planning system. The Government considers that the creation and development of state-funded schools is strongly in the national interest and that planning decision-makers can and should support that objective, in a manner consistent with their statutory obligations. They indicate that a collaborative working approach should help to ensure that the answer to proposals for the development of state-funded schools should be, wherever possible, “yes”.
In terms of local policy, saved UDP Policy EHC1 places a general presumption in favour of the provision and improvement of schools providing 6 fundamental criteria are met. The policy indicates that development should:
Not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring uses; Secure an adequate standard of playing field and other recreation provision in an accessible and convenient location; Be accessible to the community it serves by a range of means of transport, particularly foot, cycle, and public transport; Incorporate adequate provision for disabled access; Not give rise to unacceptable levels of traffic congestion, or have an adverse impact on highway safety in terms of traffic generation, parking or servicing; and Make provision, wherever possible, for community use of the buildings and grounds
Salford is facing a significant increase in the demand for primary school places, and this demand is projected to continue to increase in future years. The principle of expanding the existing school is therefore supported by the NPPF, local policy including UDP policies EHC1, ST9 (which supports the provision of comprehensive and accessible community facilities), the Planning Obligations SPD: and Page 65 of 130
various ministerial statements as identified above. The proposals will contribute towards addressing the identified capacity issues and ensuring that the City Council can meet its statutory obligations. The development will make a positive contribution towards the creation and maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods in accordance with UDP policy ST1 and contribute towards the provision of accessible community facilities.
In light of the above, it is considered that the principle of extending the existing school site for educational purposes is acceptable and accords with UDP policies ST1, ST9, EHC1 and the general thrust of the NPPF.
Design The proposed building has a simple flat roof design which is similar to the functional appearance of the existing school building. The exterior would be finished with cream coloured cladding panels and incorporate windows only to the front and rear elevations facing the school buildings and playground. Whilst providing additional accommodation, there is also a need to ensure adequate playground space is retained for the school.
The modular form of the development together with its proposed scale, massing and location within the site would allow for works to be carried out whilst not impacting on the summer operations of the school ensuring that the additional accommodation is provided ready for September, which would not be possible should the development follow the same built form, scale and design of the existing building. The design, scale and massing of the proposals are an acceptable solution in this case.
It is considered, therefore that the proposed development is acceptable and would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the existing building or the wider street scene.
Amenity The alterations would not alter the existing access arrangements at the site. The proposed classrooms would be set within the existing school grounds and would be no closer to surrounding residential properties than the closest part of the former caretaker’s house, itself now used for classes. The building is satisfactorily sited so as to minimise the amount of playground space it occupies – leaving adequate playspace for pupils.
It is acknowledged that the proposed development would increase the school’s intensity of use with increased numbers of pupils and staff. Given that only two classrooms are proposed; that as much open playspace as been retained as possible; and the maintaining of separation distances which exist to surrounding residential dwellings - it is not considered that the development would result in an unacceptable increase in noise or disturbance to neighbouring residents. This is particularly so because associated outdoor activity generally takes place during day time hours, with the school entrance activity limited to short periods during pick up and collection times.
It is considered, therefore that the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity currently enjoyed by the occupiers of surrounding residential dwellings in accordance with policies DES7, ECH1 and EN17 of the adopted UDP
Highways and accessibility The proposed development would increase the intensity of the school with two additional staff and 60 additional pupils. In terms of Salford City Council’s adopted maximum parking standards, no standards exist for primary schools. No changes are proposed to the existing vehicular access points or parking provision. The school benefits from a Traffic regulation orders in the form of ‘Keep Clear’ markings fronting both the vehicular and pedestrian access points on Northumberland Street.
Servicing and staff parking is catered for via the small car park off Northumberland Street opposite Topfields Grove. It is capable of catering for small sized goods vehicles and provides 8 general spaces and 1 disabled staff spaces. There is no separate visitor car parking. The school also benefits from 10 cycle spaces. There is no further space for parking on site and the development does not involve the loss of any existing parking. It is also considered that this school has a particularly high percentage of pupils who walk-to-school. Parking provision is considered acceptable.
Page 66 of 130
The proposal would comply with the aims of UDP Policy A10. Notwithstanding this, it is suggested that the school undertake a review of its Travel Plan to bring it up-to-date.
Trees On this very constrained site, the school must retain a practical amount of outdoor playground space. Alternative locations for the siting of the modular buildings have been considered and all other permutations result in the loss of too much hard/grassed playspace. The current proposal would sit over a small earthed area immediately behind the former caretaker’s house on the edge of the hard- surfaced playground. Whilst this would leave the maximum amount of playspace - this portion of land is partly home to a bench, one semi-mature and two mature trees.
In order to facilitate the development these trees and bench are proposed for removal. Two of these are marked within the group ‘G53’ of TPO no. 4 (1969). The semi-mature tree has grown up alongside one of these and is not marked on the original TPO. There are other mature and semi-mature trees on the school site – most significantly along the street frontage, but also to the immediate west, on the edge of the playground and in the ‘allotment garden area’ adjacent to the school.
The justification for Policy EN13 states that “Where the benefits of development clearly outweigh the loss of protected trees... their removal may be permitted, but only where adequate replacements are provided... normally within the site, and on a basis of at least two for one”. All three trees are not individually TPO’d (taking benefit from a large group) nor do they contribute to the public amenity or general street scene – being positioned behind the existing school building. The classrooms are needed to ensure that the area’s children can be educated in suitable accommodation. Consequently, it is considered that such loss is outweighed by the need to increase school capacity. Because there are other trees on site, and the trees in question make little contribution to the public realm, no replacements are considered necessary.
The many trees elsewhere on the site will be retained. Existing trees closest to the area of development are separated from the site by existing fencing which would provide adequate protection during development. Smaller construction vehicles would access the site via the existing vehicular access and car park area and the tree survey submitted with the application outlines minor branch removal works that are to be carried out to the trees nearest the entrance road to prevent damage. These works are considered acceptable. Although the building would sit above ground, with no major foundations other than drainage, water, LAN network and electrics, a condition is recommended to ensure that in the areas where these works would fall within the ‘root protection areas’ of the trees identified on plan 170/ED/003/03 only hand tools be used for excavation in order to protect the remaining trees.
Therefore, it is considered that the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable impact on existing trees at the site.
Flood Risk Management A condition requiring compliance with this will ensure that the development would accord with UDP policy EN19 and the Flood Risk and Development Planning Guidance.
Construction Noise In respect of the construction phase of the development, the modular nature of the proposed building is unlikely to give rise to the usual noise, dust and disturbance problems involved with a traditional build. Similarly, given the limited time for construction before September - the application of a traditional condition requiring the submission, written approval and carrying out of a construction method statement is not practical. Instead, a specific condition restricting the hours of construction, construction vehicle activity/deliveries, wheelwashing, dust suppression and related matters is suggested.
Conclusion In summary, the dimensions, positioning and external appearance of the proposed modular classroom building would be acceptable with regards to visual amenity both within and when viewed from outside the site. There are no highway safety issues that result from the proposed works. Page 67 of 130
Although the proposal would result in the loss of two TPO’d trees, it would only do so in order to safeguard an acceptable amount of open playspace on the site - whilst providing an urgently needed increase in education capacity within the school site. Consequently, the proposal would satisfy the aims of UDP policies ST1, ST9, DES7, ECH1, EN17 and EN19.
Members are advised that whilst the scheme is recommended for Approval, the notification period will not have expired by the date of the Panel Meeting. Therefore, Members are asked to approve the scheme and delegate authority to the Assistant Director of Planning in conjunction with the Chair to consider any objections that may be received between the Panel meeting and the close of the notification period.
Recommendation: Approve 1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans and documents listed below;
Approved Plans: 170/ED/003/01 Rev 1 – Site Plan dated 14.05.2015 170/ED/003/05 Rev 1 - Preferred Internal Layout dated 14.05.2015 170/ED/003/03 Rev A – Tree Constrains Plan dated 21.05.2015 SSL:16604:200:1:1 – Topographical Survey Dated May 2015
Documents Arboricultural Statement - CW/7705-AS Dated 18.05.2015
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
3. Notwithstanding the submitted plans, all excavation works falling within the root protection areas of T2, and G1 shown on the Tree Constraints Plan 170/ED/003/03 dated 21.05.2015, shall be carried out using hand tools only unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To reduce the risk of harm to established trees within the Tree Preservation Order No. 4 and to accord with policy EN13 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan
4 Prior to the commencement of development, the associated pruning works to the group of trees marked G1 on plan no. 170/ED/003/03 Rev A (dated 21.05.15) shall be carried out in accordance with the schedule of works detailed in paragraph 8.3 of the Aboricultural Statement CW/7705-AS (dated 18.05.15) unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect the retained trees from damage during construction and in recognition of the contribution which the retained tree(s) give(s) and will continue to give to the amenity of the area and to accord with policy EN13 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan
5. Within 5 months of the date of this planning permission, an updated School Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed School Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the timetable set out in that plan unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. A report demonstrating progress in promoting sustainable transport measures and a revised Travel Plan Action Plan shall thereafter be submitted annually on each anniversary of the date of the planning consent to the Local Planning Authority.
Page 68 of 130
Reason: To ensure the promotion of sustainable transport alternatives in accordance with policies A2 and A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
6. Development shall be subject to and only take place in accordance with the following limitations and advisories: i) All construction works associated with the development hereby approved which are audible at the site boundary, or at such other place as may be agreed with the Local Planning Authority, shall be carried out only between the following hours: 08 00 Hours and 18 00 Hours on Mondays to Fridays and 08 00 and 13 00 Hours on Saturdays and; at no time on Sundays and Bank Holidays. ii) Deliveries to and removal of plant, equipment, machinery and waste from the site must only take place within the permitted hours detailed above. iii) Mitigation measures as defined in BS 5528: Parts 1 and 2 : 2009 Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites shall be used to minimise noise disturbance from construction works. v) Control measures for dust and other air-borne pollutants must take into account the need to protect any local resident who may have a particular susceptibility to air-borne pollutants.
Reason: To safeguard the existing users and the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Notes for Applicant:
1. STANDING ADVICE - DEVELOPMENT LOW RISK AREA
The proposed development lies within a coal mining area which may contain unrecorded coal mining related hazards. If any coal mining feature is encountered during development, this should be reported immediately to The Coal Authority on 0345 762 6848. It should also be noted that this site may lie in an area where a current licence exists for underground coal mining.
Further information is also available on The Coal Authority website at: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/the-coal-authority
Property specific summary information on past, current and future coal mining activity can be obtained from: www.groundstability.com
This Informative Note is valid from 1st January 2015 until 31st December 2016
2 Further to the requirements of condition 6 the applicant is advised that Salford City Council encourages all contractors to be ‘Considerate Contractors’ when working in the city by being aware of the needs of neighbours and the environment. Suitable procedures for maintaining good public relations including complaint management, public consultation and liaison are advised as is liaison with the Council’s Pollution Control Team on 0161 909 6500. Consent for Emergency Deviation from the permitted working hours must be obtained in writing from the Local Planning Authority prior to their occurrence
Page 69 of 130
APPLICATION No: 14/66487/FUL APPLICANT: Children’s Services LOCATION: Willow Tree Primary School, 2 Greenland Street, Salford M6 5TJ PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey modular building to provide two classrooms and enclosure of existing play area with erection of 1.5m high weld- mesh fence. WARD: LANGWORTHY
Description of Site and Surrounding Area
This application relates to Willow Tree Primary School. Pedestrian access to the school is via Greenland Street. The main school building is sited centrally on this quasi-triangular 1.8 hectare site in Langworthy. The school itself was built in 2009 on land formerly occupied by terraced housing, demolished in 2008. The surrounding area is predominantly residential in nature, though most of the former terraced housing on streets to the south has been cleared and grassed over. Semi detached dwellings sit to the north. To the east are commercial premises along Langworthy Road, many of which have residential flats at first floor. The school site is bounded by substantial fencing and gates which are black in colour.
Description of Proposal
Structure Permission is sought for the erection of a single-storey building to provide two nursery classrooms, shared cloakroom and wc’s and erection of 1.5m high fence to enclosure part of existing playground field. The building would be sited just north of the existing school and to the south-eastern side of the duckpond on land currently used for growing vegetables in raised planters. It would be modular in form and measure 3.42m in height and would occupy a footprint of approximately 18m by 8.5m. It would provide additional teaching space, ancillary store rooms, toilets and shared cloakroom. The exterior of the modular building would be faced in cream colour panels and doors with white upvc windows.
Page 70 of 130
It is also proposed to enclose a small area of the school’s existing playing field alongside the pond and northern perimeter with a 1.5m high welded mesh fence to provide a segregated playspace for the proposed nursery classrooms. Half of the grassed space is currently covered by an all-weather footpath. The proposed area will be replaced with hard surfaced bitumen. It is proposed to relocate the timber planting structures on site. No alterations are proposed to the existing vehicular and pedestrian accesses to the site.
Access Access is proposed from the front elevation, facing the pond. Due to the construction method the building is raised from ground level – necessitating ramped/stair access. Main entrance comprises ramp and stepped access. Two secondary fire escapes located to rear with staircases and wheelchair refuge areas.
Use The proposed building is required to provide alternative accommodation for the existing 60 nursery aged children, freeing up under-used space within the main school building to accommodate 30 additional intake-year pupils in September 2015. It is proposed to help the Council deal with the publicised rise in numbers of school age children. The space vacated by the relocated nursery children is required to be ready for the coming September intake and to meet this deadline works will need to start immediately ensure the replacement nursery is ready.
Publicity
Earliest Decision Date: 25.07.2015 Revised Expiry Date: No extension agreed
Site Notice: Non HH Article 13 Date Displayed: 03 July 2015 Reason: Wider Publicity
Relevant Site History 08/56945/DEEM3 – New Primary School and associated playing areas, landscaping, car parking and construction of new vehicular and pedestrian accesses, and installation of CCTV – Permitted 25.11.2008 09/57862/DEEM3 – Erection of free standing tensile fabric canopy over hard play area – Permitted 28.08.2009 12/61577/FUL – Construction of a timber gazebo – Permitted 14.05.2012 13/62777/FUL – Construction of a timber gazebo (resubmission) – Permitted 22.03.2013
Neighbour Notification 48 Neighbouring properties notified: 03.07.2015
Representations At the time of writing, no objections have been received.
Consultations
Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management - No objections subject to scheme complying with drainage requirements of Building Regulations Part H.
Highways - Parking: It should be noted that Salford City Council has no adopted car parking standards for a primary school use. A total of 38 car parking spaces, (including 4 disabled bays) serve the school site; servicing and staff parking is catered for via the car park off Sydney Street which provides 30 spaces (including 2 disabled staff spaces). Visitor car parking is provided directly off Greenland Street and provides 8 spaces, (including 2 disabled bays). Additionally, site observations have confirmed that some on street parking is available on Greenland Street and surrounding streets to the south of the school. No cycle parking is referenced within the application but 10 covered cycle spaces exist on site.
Page 71 of 130
Travel Plan: It should be noted that an updated School Travel Plan has not been submitted as part of this planning application. A School Travel Plan should reflect existing travel patterns and focus on limiting car traffic to existing levels and gradually reducing these over time. It is vital that this occurs so as to provide an effective mitigation strategy against increased car use. In order to ensure that sustainable travel continues to be promoted in respect of the enlarged school facility, we would request that the implementation of an updated School Travel Plan is ensured by way of planning condition.
Summary & conditions: It is therefore considered that as the modular building is only proposed for a temporary period and will result in the intake of an additional 30 pupils, this is unlikely to result in a severe highway impact as defined within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). In view of the above, no highway objections are raised in respect of the proposals, subject to attachment of the following condition:
Within 5 months of the date of this planning permission, an updated School Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed School Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the timetable set out in that plan unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. A report demonstrating progress in promoting sustainable transport measures and a revised Travel Plan Action Plan shall thereafter be submitted annually on each anniversary of the date of the planning consent to the Local Planning Authority.”
Greater Manchester Ecological Unit - No objections to the proposal on nature conservation grounds providing that suitable measures are taken to prevent pollution of the pond, both during the construction period and post-construction. Some type of silt trap is recommended. Response: The applicant has confirmed that the new area of hard surfacing will drain surface water into the adjoining playing field – rather than the pond.
Planning Policy
Development Plan Policy
Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.
Unitary Development Plan DES8 - Alterations and Extensions This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area.
Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.
Unitary Development Plan EN17 - Pollution Control This policy states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning permission will only be granted where the development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory level of amenity.
Unitary Development Plan A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled This policy states that development proposals, road improvement schemes and traffic management measures will be required to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, other people with limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians and cyclists Page 72 of 130
Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.
Unitary Development Plan EHC1 - Provision, Improvement of Schools, College This policy states that planning permission will be granted for the improvement, replacement or provision of new schools and colleges, provided that the development would i) not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring uses; ii) secure adequate, accessible playing field provision iii) be accessible by a rage of means of transport iv) incorporate disabled access v) not give rise to unacceptable levels of traffic generation, impact on highway safety, parking or servicing; vi) make provision, where possible, for community use of buildings and grounds.
Other Material Planning Considerations
National Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework
Local Planning Policy It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application
Appraisal Following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) it is necessary to consider the weight which can be afforded to the policies of the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan (paragraph 215 NPPF 27th March 2012).
In terms of this application it is considered that the relevant policies of the UDP can be afforded due weight for the purposes of decision making as they are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.
Principle National planning guidance presents a high level of in principle support for the provision of additional education facilities. NPPF paragraph 72 is the Governments most up to date planning policy guidance on the provision of schools and fully reflects the Government’s commitment to the delivery of new schools. NPPF states, “The Government attaches great importance to ensuring that a sufficient choice of school places is available to meet the needs of existing and new communities. Local planning authorities should take a proactive, positive and collaborative approach to meeting this requirement, and to development that will widen choice in education. They should: give great weight to the need to create, expand or alter schools; and work with schools promoters to identify and resolve key planning issues before applications are submitted.”
In August 2011 the Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government issued a Policy Statement – Planning for Schools Development which underlines the Government’s commitment to support the development of state funded schools and their delivery through the planning system. The Government considers that the creation and development of state-funded schools is strongly in the national interest and that planning decision-makers can and should support that objective, in a manner consistent with their statutory obligations. They indicate that a collaborative working approach should help to ensure that the answer to proposals for the development of state-funded schools should be, wherever possible, “yes”.
In terms of local policy, saved UDP Policy EHC1 places a general presumption in favour of the provision and improvement of schools providing 6 fundamental criteria are met. The policy indicates that development should:
Not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring uses; Secure an adequate standard of playing field and other recreation provision in an accessible and convenient location;
Page 73 of 130
Be accessible to the community it serves by a range of means of transport, particularly foot, cycle, and public transport; Incorporate adequate provision for disabled access; Not give rise to unacceptable levels of traffic congestion, or have an adverse impact on highway safety in terms of traffic generation, parking or servicing; and Make provision, wherever possible, for community use of the buildings and grounds
Salford is facing a significant increase in the demand for primary school places, and this demand is projected to continue to increase in future years. The principle of expanding the existing school is therefore supported by the NPPF, local policy including UDP policies EHC1, ST9 (which supports the provision of comprehensive and accessible community facilities), the Planning Obligations SPD and various ministerial statements as identified above. The proposals will contribute towards addressing the identified capacity issues and ensuring that the City Council can meet its statutory obligations. The development will make a positive contribution towards the creation and maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods in accordance with UDP policy ST1 and contribute towards the provision of accessible community facilities.
In light of the above, it is considered that the principle of extending the existing school site for educational purposes is acceptable and accords with UDP policies ST1, ST9, EHC1 and the general thrust of the NPPF.
Design The existing two-storey school building is of a modern design, comprising blue and yellow rendered elements, with glazed sections and - in reference to the surrounding residential red-brick properties – some sections of red-brick fascia panels. The school is set within its own grounds and does not sit directly alongside any of its boundaries. The area is predominantly residential in nature and surrounding dwellings are separated from the application site by surrounding roads and footpaths.
The proposed single storey building is of modern functional appearance with an almost flat roof. It would be finished with cream coloured cladding panels and incorporate windows only to the front and rear elevations facing the pond and playingfield. The position would follow the building line of the existing school building not project onto the playing field it would sit adjacent to. It would be set away from the surrounding roads and houses. At 153m2, it represents a relatively small increase of 5.4% to the existing 2833m2 of accommodation on site.
Whilst the simple design of the proposal would contrast with the existing school building, the exterior panel treatment would help integrate it with its general appearance. The modular form of the development together with its proposed scale, massing and location within the site would allow for works to be carried out whilst not impacting on the summer operations of the school ensuring that the additional accommodation is provided ready for September. This would not be possible should the development follow the same built form, scale and design of the existing building. The design, scale and massing of the proposals are an acceptable solution in this case.
The enclosure of existing playing field to associate the area with the nursery classrooms with 1.5m high fencing would not materially impact on the appearance of the site, given that the site is bordered by a higher version of the same black finished welded-mesh. The raised planter beds are not fixed to the ground and adequate space exists on and around the site to relocate them.
It is considered, therefore that the proposed development is acceptable and would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the existing building or the wider street scene.
Amenity The proposed nursery building would be set within the existing school grounds and would be no closer to surrounding residential properties than the closest part of the school buildings. The provision of this additional accommodation does not remove any existing playingfield space and the playspace to be enclosed already benefits from 3-5 large trees alongside the boundary with the public footpath along the northern boundary. The houses and gardens on that boundary are already further shielded by a 1.8m high close boarded fence.
Page 74 of 130
It is acknowledged that the proposed development would increase the school’s intensity of use with increased numbers of pupils and staff. Given that only two classrooms are proposed; that the small area of playing field to be enclosed already comprises outdoor playspace; and the maintaining of separation distances which exist to surrounding residential dwellings - it is not considered that the development would result in an unacceptable increase in noise or disturbance to neighbouring residents. This is particularly so because associated outdoor activity generally takes place during day time hours, with the school entrance activity limited to short periods during pick up and collection times.
It is considered, therefore that the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity currently enjoyed by the occupiers of surrounding residential dwellings in accordance with policies DES7, EHC1 and EN17 of the adopted UDP
Highways and accessibility The proposed development would increase the intensity of the school with an additional member of staff and 30 additional pupils. In terms of Salford City Council’s adopted maximum parking standards, no standards exist for primary schools. No changes are proposed to the existing vehicular access points or parking provision. The school benefits from a Traffic regulation orders in the form of ‘Keep Clear’ markings fronting both the vehicular and pedestrian access points on Greenland Street.
There will be no reduction in the amount of on-site parking provision previously considered to satisfy the aims of UDP policy A10 when the school was granted permission. As a result of the long- demolished houses on surrounding streets to the south of the school, there is an abundance of on- street parking capacity near the school. Further, parking spaces have been created to the east of the site (to the rear of the commercial properties on Langworthy Road) which could also be utilised should the former terrace housing sites be redeveloped in the future. Consequently, it is not envisaged that the minor increase in student numbers and additional staff member will have a negative impact on the safety and free flow of the public highway network adjacent to the school. The proposal would comply with the aims of UDP Policy A10. Notwithstanding this, it is suggested that the school undertake a review of its Travel Plan, in accordance with condition 9 of the original consent and because over 5 years have passed since it opened.
Biodiversity The application site features a wetland area and duckpond, incorporated into the scheme to assist with natural drainage of the grassed playing field. No changes to these are proposed and no rare or protected species are known to exist in the associated habitats.
Flood Risk Management The pond to the immediate north of the proposed building assists with the natural drainage of the playing field and has special chambers beneath to regulate the volume of storm run-off into the sewer system. It is proposed that run-off from the roof feed into this pond. Foul sewerage will connect to the main foul sewer. A condition requiring compliance with this will ensure that the development would accord with UDP policy EN19 and the Flood Risk and Development Planning Guidance.
Construction Noise In respect of the construction phase of the development, the modular nature of the proposed building is unlikely to give rise to the usual noise, dust and disturbance problems involved with a traditional build. Similarly, given the limited time for construction before September - the application of a standard condition requiring the submission, written approval and carrying out of a construction method statement is not suggested. Instead, a specific condition restricting the hours of construction, construction vehicle activity/deliveries, wheelwashing, dust suppression and related matters is suggested.
Page 75 of 130
Conclusion
In summary, the dimensions, positioning and external appearance of the proposed modular classroom building are acceptable with regards to visual amenity both within and when viewed from outside the site. There are no highway safety issues that result from the proposed works. The proposal would safeguard an acceptable amount of open playspace on the site and provide increase in education capacity within the existing school site. Consequently, the proposal would satisfy the aims of UDP policies ST1, ST9, DES7, ECH1, EN17 and EN19.
Members are advised that whilst the scheme is recommended for Approval, the notification period will not have expired by the date of the Panel Meeting. Therefore, Members are asked to approve the scheme and delegate authority to the Assistant Director of Planning in conjunction with the Chair to consider any objections that may be received between the Panel meeting and the close of the notification period.
Recommendation:
Approve
1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans and documents listed below;
Approved Plans: 1250 Site Plan Preferred Layout – Revision 1 dated 28.05.2015 S_Premises Drawing – Willow PS School_AB52-05 External Foul Drainage (1) dated 26.05.2015 Photo of 1.5m high, black colour mesh-weld fencing
Documents Willow Tree Modular Building - Design and Access Statement dated May 2015 Biodiversity Report NGR: SJ 380419 398804 / UES01535/01 dated 03.07.2015 Email from Agent Ian Murray sent 08.06.2015 @ 17:16
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
3. The hard surface playground shall be constructed so as to prevent the run-off of surface water directly into the pond on site.
Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
4. Within 5 months of the date of this planning permission, an updated School Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed School Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the timetable set out in that plan unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. A report demonstrating progress in promoting sustainable transport measures and a revised Travel Plan Action Plan shall thereafter be submitted annually on each anniversary of the date of the planning consent to the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the promotion of sustainable transport alternatives in accordance with policies A2 and A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Page 76 of 130
5. Development shall be subject to and only take place in accordance with the following limitations and advisories: i) All construction works associated with the development hereby approved which are audible at the site boundary, or at such other place as may be agreed with the Local Planning Authority, shall be carried out only between the following hours: 08 00 Hours and 18 00 Hours on Mondays to Fridays and 08 00 and 13 00 Hours on Saturdays and; at no time on Sundays and Bank Holidays. ii) Deliveries to and removal of plant, equipment, machinery and waste from the site must only take place within the permitted hours detailed above. iii) Mitigation measures as defined in BS 5528: Parts 1 and 2 : 2009 Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites shall be used to minimise noise disturbance from construction works. v) Control measures for dust and other air-borne pollutants must take into account the need to protect any local resident who may have a particular susceptibility to air-borne pollutants.
Reason: To safeguard the existing users and the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Notes for Applicant:
1. STANDING ADVICE - DEVELOPMENT LOW RISK AREA
The proposed development lies within a coal mining area which may contain unrecorded coal mining related hazards. If any coal mining feature is encountered during development, this should be reported immediately to The Coal Authority on 0345 762 6848. It should also be noted that this site may lie in an area where a current licence exists for underground coal mining.
Further information is also available on The Coal Authority website at: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/the-coal-authority
Property specific summary information on past, current and future coal mining activity can be obtained from: www.groundstability.com This Informative Note is valid from 1st January 2015 until 31st December 2016
2 Further to the requirements of condition 5 the applicant is advised that Salford City Council encourages all contractors to be ‘Considerate Contractors’ when working in the city by being aware of the needs of neighbours and the environment. Suitable procedures for maintaining good public relations including complaint management, public consultation and liaison are advised as is liaison with the Council’s Pollution Control Team on 0161 909 6500. Consent for Emergency Deviation from the permitted working hours must be obtained in writing from the Local Planning Authority prior to their occurrence.
Page 77 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66404/REM APPLICANT: Mr Phil Mayall LOCATION: Land Adjacent To Premier Inn, South Of Stanley Street, Salford, , PROPOSAL: Details of reserved matters for access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for development of Plot A5 for erection of an 11- storey building to provide 90 apartments (use class C3); together with associated ancillary facilities, servicing, access, parking, landscaping and public realm, pursuant to outline planning permission 09/57950/EIAHYB. WARD: Ordsall
Description of Site and Surrounding Area
This application relates to the redevelopment of Salford Central and to the large English Cities Fund outline permission that was granted in 2010.
Plot A5 is located adjacent to the River Irwell and is bounded by the recently constructed Premier Inn hotel to the east and existing surface car parking to the west and north. Access to the site is gained from Stanley Street.
Page 78 of 130
The site covers an area of 0.12 hectare and is generally flat but has an approximate drop of 4m to the riverside.
On the opposite bank of the Irwell are a hotel and vacant industrial buildings, both of which lie in Manchester’s Castlefield Conservation Area. The hotel is a converted warehouse that is a grade II listed building, as is the Irwell Street bridge that spans the River Irwell to the east of the site. Trinity Way and the railway viaduct lie to the north and west beyond surface parking that is in the short to medium term identified as compound areas for the construction of the Ordsall Chord rail link.
The closest residential buildings are in Spinningfields, some 70m from the proposed building.
Description of Proposal
It is proposed to erect an eleven storey building comprising 90 apartments on the upper floors with communal facilities, cycle and car parking, refuse and recycling and ancillary plant on the ground floor.
The mix of accommodation is as follows: One bed - 40 - 44.5% Two bed - 40 - 44.5% Three bed - 10 - 11%
The scheme is a PRS (private rented sector) development and so at ground floor, as well as the usual entrance and concierge space there is an ancillary space that can be used as residents’ gym or lounge. In addition parking space is provided for seven cars, including one disable parking bay, and cycle storage for 20 bicycles.
In terms of design the upper floors cantilever over at each end of the block with full width balconies to the apartments facing the river. The proposed materials for the building are pearl white terracotta and copper toned metal cladding. At ground level dark grey brick is also used to solid areas.
At roof level there are photovoltaic panels.
A short service road runs between the proposed building and the adjacent hotel with the area directly between the two buildings being landscaped. To the west more significant soft landscaped areas are provided along with stepped access to the riverside walkway. Due to the change in levels a ramped access would be impractical. The area around the building is entirely publicly accessible.
The application is accompanied by the following documents that address the requirements of conditions on the outline application 09/57950/EIAHYB
Hard and soft landscape details Design and Access Statement Levels Drainage Statement TV Reception Survey Wind Assessment Archaeological Watching Brief Planning and Heritage Statement Flood Risk Assessment Ground Gas Risk Assessment External Lighting Statement Noise Assessment Sustainability Statement Air Quality Report Transport Note Ecology Appraisal Environmental Statement Review Ecological Management Plan
Page 79 of 130
Publicity
Site Notice: Non HH setting of listed building Date Displayed: 17 June 2015 Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building
Press Advert: Salford Advertiser Date Published: 11 June 2015 Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building
Neighbour Notification
The occupiers of six neighbouring properties have been notified of the application.
Representations
No representations have been received to date.
Relevant Site History
09/57950/EIAHYB - Outline application for a comprehensive phased regeneration of Salford Central, including selective demolition, for a mixed-use development of new, improved, altered and replacement buildings, for offices/commercial use (use classes A2 and B1, maximum 197,010sq.m), retail, food and drink and entertainment (use classes A1, A3, A4 and A5, maximum 24,255sq.m), leisure (class D1), hotels (class C1 maximum 140 and 250 bedrooms) and residential use (maximum 849 dwellings) together with associated car parking, landscaping and infrastructure. Detailed application for highway and associated works to Chapel Street (between Oldfield Rd and Trinity Way) and the laying out of public space at Stanley Street. Approve 21 January 2010.
15/65945/NMA - Application for non-material amendment to planning permission 09/57950/EIAHYB for amendment to the Development Schedule (document 18) to permit as part of the mix uses with zone 4 residential use specifically for plots A5 and A6 (outline permission). Amendment to substitute approved plan 37 for submitted drawing plan 37A revision which is over laid to drawing HED.1062.200 General Arrangement (full permission). Approved 4 March 2015.
Consultations
Design For Security - No comments received to date
Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management –
The original FRA (on application 57950) made the following statement:
“The surface water drainage strategy for the site will adhere to the following three-tiered approach It will first minimise the generation of surface water run-off through the implementation of mitigation measures such as the re-use of surface water and green roofs; It will then consider discharging to the River Irwell or infiltrating surface water into the ground using SuDS techniques; Finally, it might discharge some surface water to sewers (limited to existing surface water discharge for a 25mm peak rainfall event. Any increase in surface water discharge would be attenuated to maintain existing discharge limits to the sewers.”
The applicant has now agreed to a 50% reduction in run-off rates in line with the SFRA.
With regard to foul water there are no objections to the discharge rate agreed with United Utilities.
Highways - No objections.
PSSC Canal And River Trust - No comments to make.
Page 80 of 130
English Heritage - No comments to make.
Environment Agency – The flood risk assessment (FRA) submitted by WSP has identified the flood risks to the proposed development based on up to date river levels. The Agency has no objections to the development in relation to the fluvial risks associated with the proposals providing that the mitigation measures outlined in section 9 of the FRA are implemented.
With regard to the surface drainage proposals, it would appear that no reduction in run-off rate is being proposed. This would not meet the aims of the Council’s Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) User Guide. Whether you will require the applicant to meet the 50% reduction (required in a critical drainage area) is a matter for the Council to determine. Should permission be granted the Agency requests that a condition be attached regarding safe routes, implementation of flood resilient construction measures in the ground floor structure and floor levels.
Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service - No comments received to date
Transport For Greater Manchester (TFGM) - No comments received to date
City of Manchester - No comments received to date
Network Rail - The proposal is approximately 82m from the railway boundary. Network Rail offers advice with regard to piling, construction matters and noise mitigation.
Urban Vision Environment (Air and Noise) - No comments received to date
Urban Vision Environment (Land Contamination) – Require a condition regarding land contamination.
Planning Policy
Development Plan Policy
Unitary Development Plan DES10 - Design and Crime This policy states that developments must be designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour, and the fear of crime. Development should i) be clearly delineated ii) allow natural surveillance iii) avoid places of concealment iv) encourage activity within public areas.
Unitary Development Plan DES2 - Circulation and Movement This policy states that the design and layout of new development will be required to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site safely, be well related to public transport and local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.
Unitary Development Plan A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Park This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded; and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of safety and security.
Unitary Development Plan A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled This policy states that development proposals, road improvement schemes and traffic management measures will be required to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, other people with limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians and cyclists
Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.
Unitary Development Plan CH2 - Development Affecting Setting of Listed Building Page 81 of 130
This policy states that development will not be granted that would have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building.
Unitary Development Plan CH3 - Works Within Conservation Areas This policy states that work in conservation areas will only be permitted where it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation area. Consideration will be given to the extent that the proposal i) retains or improves features that contribute to the character or appearance of the conservation area ii) are of a high standard of design iii) retains mature trees iv) secures environmental improvements and enhancements v) protects views into an out of the conservation area.
Unitary Development Plan CH8 - Local List of Buildings of Architectural Interest This policy states that the impact of development on any building, structure or feature that is identified on the council’s local list of buildings, structures and features of architectural, archaeological or historic interest will be a material planning consideration.
Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.
Unitary Development Plan DES10 - Design and Crime This policy states that developments must be designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour, and the fear of crime. Development should i) be clearly delineated ii) allow natural surveillance iii) avoid places of concealment iv) encourage activity within public areas.
Unitary Development Plan DES2 - Circulation and Movement This policy states that the design and layout of new development will be required to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site safely, be well related to public transport and local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.
Unitary Development Plan DES3 - Design of Public Space This policy states that development should include the provision of public space; designed to have a clear role and purpose which responds to local needs; reflects and enhances the character and identify of the area; is an integral part of and provide appropriate setting and an appropriate scale for the surrounding development; be attractive and safe; connect to establish pedestrian routes and public spaces and minimise and make provision for maintenance requirements.
Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.
Unitary Development Plan H4 - Affordable Housing This policy states that in areas that there is a demonstrable lack of affordable to meet local needs developers will be required by negotiation with the city council to provide an element of affordable housing of appropriate types.
Unitary Development Plan H8 - Open Space Provision with New Housing This policy states that planning permission will only be granted where there is adequate and appropriate provision for formal and informal open space, and its maintenance over a twenty-year period. Standards to be reached will be based upon policy R2 and guidance contai8ned within Supplementary Planning Documents.
Unitary Development Plan MX1 - Development in Mixed-use Areas This policy states that a wide range of uses and activities (housing, offices, tourism, leisure, culture, education, community facilities, retail, infrastructure, knowledge-based employment) are permitted within the identified mixed use areas (Chapel Street East. Chapel Street West, Salford Quays, Ordsall Lane Riverside Corridor). Page 82 of 130
Unitary Development Plan ST1 - Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods This policy states that development will be required to contribute towards the creation and maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods.
Unitary Development Plan ST15 - Historic Environmental This policy states that historic and cultural assets that contribute to the character of the city will be preserved and wherever possible and appropriate, enhanced.
Unitary Development Plan EN12 - Important Landscape Features This policy states that development that would have a detrimental impact on, or result in the loss of, any important landscape feature will not be permitted unless the applicant can clearly demonstrate that the importance of the development plainly outweighs the nature conservation and amenity value of the landscape feature and the design and layout of the development cannot reasonably make provision for the retention of the landscape feature. If the removal of an important existing landscape feature is permitted as part of a development, a replacement of at least equivalent size and quality, or other appropriate compensation, will be required either within the site, or elsewhere within the area.
Unitary Development Plan EN13 - Protected Trees This policy states that development which would result in an unacceptable loss of, or damage to protected trees will not be permitted. Where the loss of trees is considered acceptable adequate replacement provision will be provided.
Unitary Development Plan EN17 - Pollution Control This policy states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning permission will only be granted where the development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory level of amenity.
Unitary Development Plan EN22 - Resource Conservation This policy states that development proposals for more than 5,000 square metres of floorspace will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the impact on the conservation of non-renewable resources and on the local and global environments, has been minimised as far as practicable; and full consideration has been given to the use of realistic renewable energy options, and such measures have been incorporated into the development where practicable.
Other Material Planning Considerations
National Planning Policy
National Planning Policy Framework
Local Planning Policy
Supplementary Planning Document - Sustainable Design and Construction This policy document expands on policies in Salford’s Unitary Development Plan to provide additional guidance for planners and developers on the integration of sustainable design and construction measures in new and existing developments.
Supplementary Planning Document - Design This document reflects the need to design in a way that allows the city to support its population socially and economically, working with and inviting those affected into an inclusive decision making process. Equally, development must contribute to the creation of an environmentally sustainable city supporting the natural environment minimising the effects of, and being more adaptable to, the potential impact of climate change.
Supplementary Planning Document - Design and Crime This policy document contains a number policies used to assess and determine planning applications and is intended as a guide in designing out crime.
Page 83 of 130
Supplementary Planning Document - Trees and Development The policy document has been prepared to give information to all those involved in the development process about the standard that the Local Planning Authority requires for new development proposals with specific reference to the retention and protection of trees.
Planning Guidance - Shaping Central Salford’s Spaces The handbook builds on the principles set out in the Salford City Council urban design guide, Shaping Salford and defines the standards for those working with the built environment. This handbook should be used to set a benchmark for public realm improvements across the city. By adopting these standards this guide contributes to creating public spaces that are appealing and become well loved and used spaces at the heart of the community.
Planning Guidance - Salford Central Salford Central Planning Guidance explains how UDP policies apply to the Salford Central area and sets out guidance to ensure that new development, public realm and infrastructure in Salford central is not only fully planned, connected and of an exceptional design quality but also that it is integrated with the surrounding area and that linkages between other regeneration initiatives in the Regional Centre are successfully achieved
Planning Guidance - Housing The purpose of the guidance is to ensure that the residential development coming forward in Salford contributes to establishing and maintaining sustainable communities, tackles the specific housing and related issues that face Salford, and helps to deliver the vision and strategy of the UDP, the Housing Strategy and the Community Plan.
Planning Guidance - Salford Central Development Framework This Development Framework promotes a comprehensive approach to regenerating Salford Central to ensure that the vision is delivered and that Salford is indeed transformed from the ‘World’s first industrial city to city beautiful’.
It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application
Appraisal
This is a reserved matters application and the principle of the development of this plot was approved under planning permission 09/57950/EIAHYB. This permission was amended by application 15/65945/NMA to allow this plot and the adjacent plot 6 to be developed for residential use. It is considered therefore that the main issues relate to whether the scale and massing is acceptable, whether the housing mix is acceptable, whether the appearance of the building is of sufficiently high quality, whether the effect on the setting of neighbouring listed buildings and on the conservation area is acceptable, whether sufficient car parking is provided, whether the impact on the local highway network is acceptable and whether the impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents is acceptable.
The original outline application was EIA development. This reserved matters development now falls below the threshold in Schedule 2 of the EIA regulations and is not in a ‘sensitive location’. At the time of submission though it was above the threshold and so an update of the original environmental statement has been provided for this plot.
Scale and Massing
The original outline permission approved commercial buildings on this site of up to 10 storeys and up to a maximum height of 49 meters above ground level. The non-material amendment retained the 49m maximum but allowed up to 15 residential storeys (this being the equivalent of 10 commercial floors). The proposed development is for an eleven storey building that is a maximum of 35m above ground level.
The impact of the proposed development on heritage assets is dealt with below but it is considered that the scale and massing of the proposed development is appropriate in principle in this riverside setting. Page 84 of 130
Appearance
The proposed building features terracotta as its main cladding material which is a high quality product. The materials mark an appropriate difference from the hotel building adjacent, which is faced primarily in sandstone and grey brick, and the simple palette is considered a benefit to the scheme. The design is contemporary and the double height arrangement of the windows enhances the appearance of the building.
With regard to the ground floor treatment the entrance to the parking area faces Stanley Street. This access is also used for waste collection. The parking areas for cars and cycles are secure but visible to passers by. Plant rooms are located between the proposed building and the hotel. To the riverside the glazed frontage returns on both main elevations to provide more activity to the ground floor. The reception area is accessed on the western elevation of the building adjacent to the main landscaped areas and the stairs to the riverside walkway.
Appearance is addressed in additional detail below with regard to the impact on heritage assets but in principle it is considered that the appearance of the building is of the necessary high quality.
Impact on Heritage Assets
Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states, “In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.”
In terms of conservation areas, there is a similar statutory duty under the terms of Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires Local Planning Authorities to pay, “special attention in the exercise of planning functions to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area.”
The effect of these sections is that decision-makers considering harm to heritage assets cannot simply treat the desirability of preserving the setting of a listed building as a mere material consideration to which they can simply attach the weight they see fit in their judgement. The statutory duty provided by section 66(1) of the Act goes beyond that and treats the preservation of the setting of a listed building as presumptively desirable. The effect of the statutory requirement is to impose a duty on decision-makers to give “considerable importance and weight” or “high priority” to the desirability of preserving listed buildings and their settings.
Paragraph 131 of the NPPF states that in determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of: The desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation; The positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality; and The desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness.
Paragraph 132 states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the assets conservation. It goes on to point out that significance can be harmed or lost through development within its setting and that substantial harm to a grade II listed building should be exceptional. Paragraph 133 states that where this occurs permission should be refused, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh the harm or where a number of criteria apply that includes where the harm is outweighed by the benefit of bringing the site back into use.
Paragraph 135 points out that the effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application.
Page 85 of 130
In the annex to the NPPF the setting of a heritage asset is described as “the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral.”
“The Setting of Heritage Assets” published by English Heritage in June 2012 establishes a five step methodology for assessing the process by which development proposals affecting the setting of a proposal can be assessed. This identifies that the numbers and proximity of heritage assets in urban areas mean that setting is intimately linked to considerations of townscape and urban design. Those steps of relevance here are: Step 1 - Identifying the heritage assets and settings affected Step 2 - Establishing the degree to which the settings make a contribution to the significance of the heritage asset Step 3 - Determining the affect of the development on the proposed heritage asset Step 4 - Maximising enhancement and minimising harm.
It is necessary therefore to detail the heritage significance of surrounding buildings.
The closest heritage assets to the site are the Grade II listed hotel on the opposite bank of the River Irwell and the Grade II listed bridge that spans the river. As both are grade II Historic England have no comments to make on the application. The hotel is some 48m from the proposed building. The listed bridge is approximately 38m from the proposed building and between the two is the recently constructed Premier Inn. There is a locally listed building, Riverside House, to the east but the Premier Inn lies directly between the proposed site and this heritage asset.
The listed bridge has significance on a number of levels. It is a good example of late 19th century bridge construction and engineering incorporating both stone and metal work, which remains as original and which incorporates the Arms of both Salford and Manchester. The bridge therefore has high material, design and social significance within its structure retaining 19th century design and decoration that allows an interpretation of its significance and role in bringing the communities of Salford and Manchester together through better communication.
The listed former warehouses are now in use as a hotel and have therefore been altered. They are good examples of early to mid 19 century warehouses. They are of medium significance.
The Castlefield Conservation Area extends over a large area and centres on the Roman remains of Mancunium. Of more relevance to this site, the River Irwell was made navigable in the 1720s and the first quay constructed in 1734. At the turn of the 19 century the Castlefield area was the hub of the canal network in Manchester. The world’s first railway station was opened in 1830. The wider Conservation Area is of the highest significance on both physical and social levels.
The locally listed Riverside House is of low significance as it is not listed and in addition is completely screened from the application site by the recently constructed Premier Inn.
While the development has no impact on the fabric of any heritage asset it will have some effect on the setting of the two listed structures and on the Conservation area. The application site being adjacent to the River Irwell will previously have been characterised by significant built development. It is considered that the proposed development has at worst a neutral effect on the setting of these three heritage assets. It is considered that the reinstatement of buildings appropriate to their time of construction could be considered to enhance the setting of both listed structures and the Conservation Area.
In summary it is considered that the proposal removes a vacant site, reinstates historic townscape forms and provides built development that respects the historic environment. The scheme has no detrimental effects on any listed building or on the setting of any heritage asset. The scheme accords with the requirements of the NPPF and the heritage policies of the UDP.
Page 86 of 130
Highways and Car Parking
There are no highway objections to the proposed development. Given the location of the site so close to the regional centre and to major public transport infrastructure it is considered that the few parking spaces provided is entirely appropriate. Bicycle parking is provided in accordance with Council standards.
There is currently no provision for the existing riverside walkway to continue under the Irwell Street bridge. The proposed DDA route will be provided by the applicant on future plots to the west of the site. Stepped access is provided under this scheme.
Amenity of Neighbours
The nearest residential neighbours are some 70m from the proposed building with the premier Inn building being closer. It is not considered therefore that there would be any detrimental effect on any existing residential occupiers as a result of this proposal.
With regard to the amenity of future residents of the proposed building it is only those closest to the existing Premier Inn that might be affected as a result of the proximity of the building. In detail it would be the second bedroom in a two bed apartment that would be 8m from the gable of the existing hotel. These would be the only habitable room windows that would have any form of restricted outlook. Secondary living room windows also face this gable. It is not considered that this would result in any unacceptable effect on amenity for future residents.
Size and Mix of Dwellings
The mix of dwellings includes the same number of one and two bed apartments but also includes over 10% of three bedroom apartments which exceeds the usual numbers developers are willing to provide and so the mix exceeds the requirements of Housing Planning Guidance, which requires that at least 50% of apartments have two or more bedrooms.
With regard to the size of dwellings the one bed units are over 40sq.m in size and all of the two bed units are over 60sq.m. As Housing Planning Guidance requires that at least 50% of units are over 57sq.m in floor area it can be seen that this development exceeds these standards.
Sustainability
The building has been designed to minimise energy use in construction and future operation to build in energy savings and costs. Of particular note is that photovoltaic panels are to be installed on the roof to provide on-site renewable energy production.
In addition passive measures included within the design of the proposed development include: Enhanced insulation to the building envelope Windows with high thermal insulation Reduced air permeability Maximisation of the use of daylight
Other measures incorporated into the scheme include: Provision of low energy LED lighting Heat recovery on ventilation systems
The following renewable technologies were considered but discounted for the reasons set out: Air source heat pumps – it was considered that there was insufficient space. Wind Power – there is insufficient wind speed in the area and the noise generation would have a negative effect on residents Solar water heating – this was considered to have negative impacts on space internally within apartments and externally on the roof, affecting the amount of photovoltaic panels that could be incorporated as well as at ground level, and to have capital costs that are too high.
Page 87 of 130
Biomass heating – this was considered unviable due to space requirements and high capital expenditure Combined heat and power – this was considered unviable due to space requirements and high capital costs Ground source heat pumps – this was considered unviable due to space requirements and high capital costs.
The development will achieve level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. The main reason why level 4 is not achieved is that there is insufficient room for more photovoltaic panels on the roof.
Flooding and drainage
There is no habitable accommodation at ground floor. The Flood Risk Assessment concludes that the development can be safely accommodated on the site with specific mitigation with regard to finished floor levels and an evacuation plan for extreme events.
With regard to drainage the three tier hierarchy is as follows: 1. Sustainable urban drainage systems (SuDS) 2. Discharge of surface water off site direct to watercourse 3. Discharge to adopted sewer
In this instance the use of SuDS in the form of soakaways is not considered feasible due to the underlying strata. The ground investigation report indicates that the site and surrounding area is underlain by made ground deposits up to 3.4m in depth and as such there is a residual contamination risk with this strata. In addition the underlying principal aquifer is regarded to be of high sensitivity and accordingly is not considered suitable infiltration media. Alternative forms of SuDS such as swales and detention ponds are not suited to the site due to the relatively small amount of public open space and position within a densely populated city centre location.
The Manchester Ship Canal Company has riparian rights over the River Irwell in this location and as such discharge direct to the river Irwell was not considered a viable option post development.
As the existing site does discharge to the existing combined sewer network this was considered the most practical solution for the proposed development.
Agreement has now been reached with regard to surface water run-off.
Ecology
The detailed landscape design ensures that species selected enhance opportunities for habitat creation in an area that is currently dominated by hardstanding and that offers very little of ecological value. It is considered that the proposed development will lead to an overall betterment in habitat and ecology.
Recommendation
Approve
1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the DPP drawing schedule dated 8 July 2015
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
2. Samples and details of the materials for the external elevations of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the development fits in with the existing buildings in the vicinity in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. Page 88 of 130
3. Prior to the commencement of the development, a Preliminary Risk Assessment report, including a conceptual model and a site walk over, to assess the potential risk of land contamination, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Should a potential risk be identified then: 1.A Site Investigation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of land contamination on site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors focusing primarily on risks to human health and the wider environment; and 2.The details of any proposed Remedial Works shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such Remedial Works shall be incorporated into the development during the course of construction and completed prior to occupation of the development; and 3.A Verification Report shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The Verification Report shall validate that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of public safety in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework.
4. The development hereby permitted shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) by WSP ref 11191037 and the following mitigation measures detailed within the FRA: 1. Identification and provision of safe route(s) into and out of the site to an appropriate safe haven; 2. Implementation of flood resilient construction measures in the ground floor structure; 3. Finished floor levels no lower than 27.15 above Ordnance Datum.
The mitigation measures shall be fully implemented prior to occupation and maintained subsequently in accordance with the timing/phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme.
Reason: To ensure safe access and egress to and from the site and to reduce the impact of flooding on the development in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Page 89 of 130
ITEM NO. 6
REPORT OF THE Strategic Director for Environment and Community Safety
TO THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL ON 16th July 2015
TITLE: PLANNING APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY
RECOMMENDATION: That the report be noted
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To set out details of applications determined by the Strategic Director for Environment and Community Safety in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS: (Available for public inspection) Details of the applications are available on the Council’s Public Access Website http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/default.aspx If you would like to access this information in an alternative format, please contact the planning office on 0161-779 6195 or e-mail [email protected]
KEY DECISION: NO
DETAILS: See attached schedule
KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: Performance Management
EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND IMPLICATIONS:N/A
ASSESSMENT OF RISK:N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDING: N/A
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A
OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED:N/A
CONTACT OFFICER: Viv Prytharch 0161 779 4852
Page 90 of 130
WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S): As specified in the attached schedule
Recommendation
PER = Approve AUTH = Consent REF = Refuse NO OBJECTION = Allow the scheme as no objections have been received. An example would be used in response to consultations from neighbouring authorities or in relation to prior approvals when no objections have been received DISCON = Discharge of condition – an example would be that the submitted information is approved PDIS = Part discharge of conditions requested – an example of this would be that negotiations are still on-going with regard to some of the requested conditions or the condition is a multi staged condition and part is acceptable NDIS = Not Discharging condition requested – an example would be the submitted information is not acceptable and the decision is to refuse
Application Type
FUL = Full application ADV = Advert Application OUT = Outline Application HH = Householder Application
REM = Reserved Matters COU = Change of use LBC = Listed Building Consent CON = Conservation Area Consent DISCON = Formal Discharge of Condition NMA = Non-Material Amendment MMA = Minor material Amendment DEMCON = Demolition Consultation TPO = Tree Application TEL56 = Telecommunication Notification ART16 = Art16 Notification PDE = General Permitted Development Extension
Page 91 of 130
DELEGATED DECISIONS BY DCM
APPLICATION No: 15/66051/FUL DATE VALID: 06.03.2015 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr David Hartley
LOCATION: Land Adjacent To 34 Harrison Street Eccles Salford M30 7DD
PROPOSAL: Erection of a new dwelling and construction of new roof to existing dwelling
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66125/DISCON DATE VALID: 23.03.2015 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr Brendan Kiely - Berkshire Homes
LOCATION: Land Adjacent To And Behind 11 New Hall Avenue Eccles Salford M30 7LF
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (materials), 6 (acoustic report), 8 (control method statement - Himalayan balsam), 10 and 11 (tree protection and method statement), 12 (site and landscape plan) and 13 (crime prevention statement) attached to planning permission 13/64131/FUL
DECISION: Part Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66211/DISCON DATE VALID: 07.04.2015 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mulbury Homes And City West Housing Trust
LOCATION: Land On Green Street Eccles
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 2 (materials) and 15 (highway works) attached to planning permission 14/64873/FUL
DECISION: Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 June 2015 ______
Page 92 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66212/DISCON DATE VALID: 07.04.2015 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mulbury Homes And City West Housing Trust
LOCATION: Land On Clifford Street Eccles
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 2 (materials) and 16 ( off site highway works) attached to planning permission 14/64872/FUL
DECISION: Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66372/HH DATE VALID: 07.05.2015 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr Kevin Walsh
LOCATION: 43 Boardman Street Eccles Salford M30 0FP
PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey detached rear garage.
DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66464/DISCON DATE VALID: 27.05.2015 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mulbury Homes And City West Housing Trust
LOCATION: Land On Green Street Eccles M30 7HY
PROPOSAL: Request for compliance of conditions 4 (Noise Attenuation Issues) and 10 (Flood Warning) attached to planning permission 14/64873/FUL.
DECISION: Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 June 2015 ______
Page 93 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66465/DISCON DATE VALID: 27.05.2015 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mulbury Homes And City West Housing Trust
LOCATION: Land On Clifford Street Eccles M30 7HR
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 4 (Noise Attenuation Issues) and 10 (Flood Warning and Emergency Planning Scheme) attached to planning permission 14/64872/FUL.
DECISION: Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66479/DISCON DATE VALID: 28.05.2015 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:City West Housing Trust
LOCATION: Land Between 53-55 Nelson Street Eccles M30 0GZ
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 4 (materials), 8 (site investigation), 9 (drainage layout) attached to planning permission 14/65579/FUL
DECISION: Part Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66484/DISCON DATE VALID: 04.06.2015 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr H Kiely
LOCATION: Land Adjacent To And Behind 11 New Hall Avenue Eccles Manchester
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 4 (Preliminary Risk Assessment) 14 (Surface Water) And 16 (Flood Resilience) attached to planning permission 13/64131/FUL
DECISION: Not discharging DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 July 2015 ______
Page 94 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66016/DISCON DATE VALID: 27.02.2015 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:City West Housing Trust And Ellenbrook LOCATION: Garages Between 39 And 41 Haydock Drive Worsley M28 1HA
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (land contamination), 6 (drainage scheme), 7 (samples of materials), 8 (scheme for turning head), and 9 (vehicle crossings) attached to planning permission 14/65424/FUL.
DECISION: Part Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66346/HH DATE VALID: 30.04.2015 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr M Pilling And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 14 Eastmoor Worsley Salford M28 1YU
PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey residential outbuilding in rear garden
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66373/CLUDP DATE VALID: 07.05.2015 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Frank Boydell And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 32 Falconwood Chase Worsley Salford M28 1FG
PROPOSAL: Convert Integral Garage to a Dining/Kitchen
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
Page 95 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66386/HH DATE VALID: 12.05.2015 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr D Galek And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 12 Wyre Drive Worsley Salford M28 1HH
PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension and front entrance canopy and enlargements and alterations to side and rear roofs.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66436/DISCON DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Stephen Gorst And Ellenbrook LOCATION: Ellenbrook Primary School Longwall Avenue Worsley Salford M28 7PS
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 1 (time limit), 2 (samples), 8 (replacement planting scheme) and 9 (construction method statement), attached to planning permission 14/65713/FUL
DECISION: Not discharging DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66502/PDE DATE VALID: 31.05.2015 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Neil Hutchinson And Paul Ockerby And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 101 Leigh Road Worsley M28 1LG
PROPOSAL: Single storey rear extension.
DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
Page 96 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/65850/DISCON DATE VALID: 06.01.2015 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr Kamer Akram
LOCATION: Land At The Corner Of Willerby Road And Bury New Road Salford
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (materials), 4 (flood), 5 (land contam), attached to planning permission 13/63670/FUL
DECISION: Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66179/FUL DATE VALID: 27.03.2015 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mrs P Buckley
LOCATION: 323 Lower Broughton Road Salford M7 2LH
PROPOSAL: Change of use from a ground floor empty shop to a one bedroom apartment together with alterations to elevations
DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66351/HH DATE VALID: 05.05.2015 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr A Heartsman
LOCATION: 60 Northumberland Street Salford M7 4DG
PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey side extension and a single storey rear extension with succah roof, together with the construction of roof dormers to the front and rear elevations.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66363/P3JPA DATE VALID: 06.05.2015 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr J Fekete C/O
LOCATION: 417 - 419 Bury New Road Salford M7 4ED
PROPOSAL: Notification of a change of use from B1 a (business) to C3 (dwelling houses) on the first and second floor only to accommodate 8 no. apartments
DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 June 2015 ______
Page 97 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66390/LBC DATE VALID: 11.05.2015 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mrs A Etheridge
LOCATION: 390 Lower Broughton Road Salford M7 2HH
PROPOSAL: Installation of central heating boiler and associated flue on the eastern elevation
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66207/FUL DATE VALID: 07.04.2015 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Omnicell Inc
LOCATION: Omega Phase 2 Omega Drive Cadishead M44 5BD
PROPOSAL: Change of use of unit for the manufacture, storage and distribution of medical packaging products with ancillary office
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66348/FUL DATE VALID: 11.05.2015 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Irlam And Cadishead College
LOCATION: Irlam And Cadishead College 2A Station Road Irlam M44 5ZR
PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing cycle store and erection of replacement cycle store and 5no, 4m high lamps.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66433/PDE DATE VALID: 26.05.2015 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Philip O'Connor
LOCATION: 7 Allotment Road Cadishead M44 5JH
PROPOSAL: Single storey extension to the rear.
DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
Page 98 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66475/NMA DATE VALID: 27.05.2015 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Mrs Catriona Swanson
LOCATION: Irlam Railway Station Station Road Irlam
PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 14/65139/FUL for the position of the proposed fence to be moved due to the alteration to location of proposed ramp
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66574/DISCON DATE VALID: 08.06.2015 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Tracy Baker Redrow Homes NW
LOCATION: Clariant Works Hayes Road Cadishead M44 5BX
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of all conditions attached to planning application 10/58651/FUL And 12/61337/FUL
DECISION: Part Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66213/HH DATE VALID: 15.05.2015 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Mike Wiszniewski
LOCATION: 8 Parkstone Drive Swinton Salford M27 5NB
PROPOSAL: Erection of a part single part two storey rear extension
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
Page 99 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66181/FUL DATE VALID: 28.03.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Andy Crosby
LOCATION: 2 To 20 The Gardens And Land Between 2 To 20 And 1 To 23 The Gardens Eccles M30 9DU
PROPOSAL: Alterations to the elevations of the block at 2 to 20 The Gardens, change of use of the 3 ground floor shop units at 12, 14 and 20 The Gardens to 3 one bed apartments and creation of a 20 space car park with associated landscaping with amendment to conditions 2 and 4 (approved plans) and removal of condition 7 (tree protection fencing), 8 (arboricultural method statement) attached to planning permission 14/65559/FUL
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66196/HH DATE VALID: 08.04.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Nwakaji Eppie
LOCATION: 8 Sandwich Road Eccles Salford M30 9HD
PROPOSAL: Demolition of the existing single garage and erection of a single storey rear/side extension
DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 22 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66252/HH DATE VALID: 14.04.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Richard Hoddes
LOCATION: 37 Hawthorn Avenue Eccles Salford M30 9NE
PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing rear single storey element and erection of new single storey rear extension.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 June 2015 ______
Page 100 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66266/DISCON DATE VALID: 16.04.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Peter Barlow
LOCATION: 19 Clarendon Crescent Eccles Salford M30 9AU
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (materials), 4 (contaminated land) and 5 (landscape scheme) attached to planning permission 12/61856/FUL
DECISION: Part Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66336/FUL DATE VALID: 01.05.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Paul Carroll
LOCATION: 31 Half Edge Lane Eccles Salford M30 9AY
PROPOSAL: Conversion of existing dwelling (C3) to guest house (C1) together installation of rear dormer and velux rooflight's at attic level.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66360/HH DATE VALID: 04.05.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr PAUL DOWNING
LOCATION: 22 Victoria Crescent Eccles Salford M30 9AW
PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing side extension and erection of a two storey side incorporating garage and single storey rear extension.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
Page 101 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66366/TREECA DATE VALID: 07.05.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Paul Hodgson
LOCATION: Queenscroft Victoria Road Eccles
PROPOSAL: Remove one main stem overhanging Ellesmere House carpark (in accordance with the photograph) back to the boundary wall one goat willow tree (T1)
DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66470/DISCON DATE VALID: 28.05.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:McCarthy & Stone Retirement Lifestyles Ltd
LOCATION: Monton House Hotel 116 - 118 Monton Road Eccles M30 9HG
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (landscape), 8 (noise), 9 (site investigation), 10 (drainage) attached to planning permission 12/626258/FUL
DECISION: Part Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66454/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell
LOCATION: Railway Bridge At Gildabrook Road Salford
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at Gildabrook Road
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
Page 102 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66455/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell
LOCATION: Eccles Railway Station Church Street Eccles M30 0DN
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at Eccles Station
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66456/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell
LOCATION: Railway Bridge At Albert Street Eccles
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at Albert Road
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66457/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell
LOCATION: Railway Bridge At Monton Road Eccles
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at Monton Road
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
Page 103 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66519/DISCON DATE VALID: 06.06.2015 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Asif Aya
LOCATION: 10 Rutland Road Eccles Salford M30 9FA
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 6 (Arb Report) attached to planning permission 15/65915/HH
DECISION: Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66144/DISCON DATE VALID: 17.03.2015 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Mr Kieran Tames - Peel Land And Property Ltd
LOCATION: City Airport Manchester Control Tower Barton Airport Eccles M30 7SA
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 5 (land contamination), 6 (invasive species), 7 (protection of SBI) and 10 (arboricultural method statement) attached to planning permission 14/64656/FUL
DECISION: Part Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66183/HH DATE VALID: 13.04.2015 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Mr David Higgins
LOCATION: 99 Broadway Irlam Salford M44 6DQ
PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey side extension
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
Page 104 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66256/DISCON DATE VALID: 10.04.2015 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Mr Kieran Tames
LOCATION: City Airport Manchester Control Tower Barton Airport Eccles M30 7SA
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 3 (surface water) 4 (flood risk) attached to planning permission 14/64656/FUL
DECISION: Not discharging DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66320/ADV DATE VALID: 12.05.2015 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:You Gym (UK) Ltd
LOCATION: Your Gym Salford City Stadium 1 Stadium Way Eccles Manchester M30 7EY
PROPOSAL: Display of one internally illuminated fascia sign
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66356/HH DATE VALID: 30.04.2015 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Mr J Fletcher
LOCATION: 65 Sunningdale Drive Irlam Manchester M44 6NJ
PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing garage and erection of a side extension to existing bungalow re-submission of 14/65269/HH
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
Page 105 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66364/DISCON DATE VALID: 05.05.2015 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Peel Investments (North) Ltd
LOCATION: Land Between Mid-point Of Manchester Ship Canal And Liverpool Road Eccles
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 23 (ground remediation) attached to planning permission 13/63413/EIAHYB _ 14/65747/EIAHYB
DECISION: Part Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 22 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/65975/FUL DATE VALID: 20.03.2015 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Michael Hampson - Insite Properties (Manchester) Ltd Riverside
LOCATION: Site Of Former Duchy Public House And Adjoining Land Brindleheath Road Weaste Salford
PROPOSAL: Erection of 18 dwellings with associated highways and landscaping works
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66243/LBC DATE VALID: 20.04.2015 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Darren Kibble Riverside
LOCATION: Peel Building University Of Salford Crescent Salford
PROPOSAL: Listed Building Consent for alterations to facilitate repairs to the building to include internal refurbishment works, redecorating walls, ceilings and joinery items, replacement doors, forming a ticket office from the entrance lobby by knocking through an internal wall to provide a serving hatch, installation of secondary glazing to assist with acoustic issues, new doors to the entrance lobby and replacement of damaged stain glass window panes.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 June 2015 ______
Page 106 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66334/DEMCON DATE VALID: 03.06.2015 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr J Lonsdale Riverside
LOCATION: Horlock Court And Constantine Court University Road Salford M5 4QZ
PROPOSAL: Prior notification for the demolition of Horlock Court And Constantine Court
DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66471/NMA DATE VALID: 29.05.2015 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:The Guinness Partnership Riverside
LOCATION: Matthias Court Silk Street Salford M3 6JD
PROPOSAL: Application for non-material amendment to planning permission 14/65856/FUL for the rear entrance lobby to be raised in height from single storey to three storey to match front entrance lobby
DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66222/HH DATE VALID: 15.04.2015 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Mark Halpern
LOCATION: 20 New Hall Avenue Salford M7 4HR
PROPOSAL: Extend and remodel the existing main roof to provide additional use of space to the existing second floor bedrooms
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 June 2015 ______
Page 107 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66325/HH DATE VALID: 05.05.2015 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Richard Elton
LOCATION: 6 Tuscany View Salford M7 3TX
PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey side extension
DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66345/HH DATE VALID: 14.05.2015 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr N Cohen
LOCATION: 37 Broom Lane Salford M7 4FF
PROPOSAL: Loft conversion including two front pitched roof dormers and a rear flat roof dormer.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66371/HH DATE VALID: 06.05.2015 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Steven Dorsey
LOCATION: 24 Moor Lane Salford M7 3WX
PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey side extension.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66478/PDE DATE VALID: 26.05.2015 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mrs Shprinzei Rachel Schwimmer
LOCATION: 12 Japan Street Salford M7 4HP
PROPOSAL: Proposed rear extension.
DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
Page 108 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66257/FUL DATE VALID: 21.04.2015 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Mr Stephen Morris
LOCATION: Salford Foyer 1 Lower Seedley Road Salford M6 5WX
PROPOSAL: Installation of a new external containerised plant room
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66389/FUL DATE VALID: 12.05.2015 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Mrs Louise Hanmer
LOCATION: Alleygates To The Rear Of 231 - 239 Langworthy Road Salford M6 5PQ
PROPOSAL: Erection of 2.2 metre high galvanised steel alley gates, with 2 metre high galvanised steel railings.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66450/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell
LOCATION: Railway Bridge Langworthy Road Salford
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at Langworthy Road
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
Page 109 of 130
APPLICATION No: 14/65046/FUL DATE VALID: 21.07.2014 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Mr Andrew Beswick
LOCATION: Northern Accident Repair Co Lester Road Little Hulton M38 0PT
PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for the creation of a 30 space car park, laying of hardcore capping layer, widening of an unadopted road and retention of 2.4m high palisade fencing.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66214/FUL DATE VALID: 16.04.2015 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Kenny Waste Management Limited
LOCATION: Waste Disposal Site Lester Road Little Hulton M38 0PT
PROPOSAL: Change of use from waste management/disposal site to parking of vehicles and storage of plant equipment.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 14/64762/DISCON DATE VALID: 06.05.2014 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Shaun McCarthy
LOCATION: Land To The Rear Of Ordsall Sports Centre Off Elmira Way M5 3DA
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of conditions 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 15 attached to planning permission 13/63658/FUL
DECISION: Part Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
Page 110 of 130
APPLICATION No: 14/65619/FUL DATE VALID: 13.11.2014 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Embankment Development Limited
LOCATION: Land At Junction Of Chapel Street And Greengate Salford
PROPOSAL: Erection of replacement retaining wall at podium level along Greengate
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66037/DISCON DATE VALID: 27.02.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Guy Marsden - Liveman Properties Limited
LOCATION: Dock Office Trafford Road Salford M50 3XB
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 3 - Heritage Assets retained/reused attached to planning permission 14/65101/LBC.
DECISION: Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66275/FUL DATE VALID: 24.04.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr A Tal
LOCATION: Broadway Inn 32 Broadway Salford M50 2UW
PROPOSAL: Change of use from public house (A4) with living accommodation above to C1 Serviced ApartHotel together with a roof to enclosed rear yard to incorporate this within the building, erection of a dormer extension and alterations to elevations.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
Page 111 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66285/ADV DATE VALID: 17.04.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Ian Bradshaw
LOCATION: 16 Chapel Street Salford M3 7NH
PROPOSAL: Display of three hoarding signs, two non-illuminated, and one internally-illuminated signs around construction site
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66339/P3JPA DATE VALID: 29.04.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Factory Estates C/O IDP
LOCATION: Custom House Furness Quay Salford M50 3XX
PROPOSAL: Notification of a change of use from B1 (a) (offices) to C3 (dwellinghouses) living accommodation for 60 apartments
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66349/ADV DATE VALID: 15.05.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Ms Helen Clissett
LOCATION: Unit 4, Aldine House Riverside New Bailey St M3 5FS
PROPOSAL: Display of two internally illuminated fascia signs and one externally illuminated hanging sign
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
Page 112 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66397/NMA DATE VALID: 12.05.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:X1 Developments
LOCATION: Land On The South West Side Of Michigan Avenue Salford
PROPOSAL: Application for non-material amendment to planning permission 10/58887/FUL to vary the triggers within conditions 2,3,5,6,8,9,11,15 and 16 to provide the applicant with additional time to discharge the conditions.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66417/NMA DATE VALID: 27.05.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Jeremy Birkett Jones - Hunter Real Estate Investment Mana
LOCATION: 6 Exchange Quay Salford M5 3EQ
PROPOSAL: Application for non-material amendment to planning permission 14/64635/FUL for the design development of landscape and simplification of building 6 solar control
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66420/ADV DATE VALID: 19.05.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Stephen Dewhurst
LOCATION: South Langworthy Road Salford M50 2QN
PROPOSAL: Erection of a double sided internally illuminated advert signage to bus shelter
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
Page 113 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66421/ADV DATE VALID: 19.05.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Stephen Dewhurst
LOCATION: Dallas Court South Langworthy Road Salford M50 2UW
PROPOSAL: Erection of a double sided internally illuminated advert signage to bus shelter
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66446/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell
LOCATION: Rail Bridge Oldfield Road Salford
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at Oldfield Road
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66447/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell
LOCATION: Rail Bridge West Egerton Street Salford
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at West Egerton Street
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
Page 114 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66448/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell
LOCATION: Railway Bridge Windsor Street Salford
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at Windsor Street
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66449/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell
LOCATION: Railway Bridge At Cross Lane Salford M5 4QH
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at Cross Lane
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66049/DISCON DATE VALID: 07.04.2015 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mr Daniel Mundy
LOCATION: 32 Buckingham Road Swinton Salford M27 8QF
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 2 (materials) 5 (land contamination) attached to planning permission 13/64002/FUL
DECISION: Part Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
Page 115 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66162/HH DATE VALID: 09.05.2015 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mr Mark Stapley
LOCATION: 79 Bolbury Crescent Swinton Salford M27 8AJ
PROPOSAL: Proposed single storey side extension and extension to single garage to form double garage
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66276/FUL DATE VALID: 16.04.2015 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mr MICHAEL REID
LOCATION: Laurence Lowry Court Lowry Drive Swinton Salford M27 6DL
PROPOSAL: Change of use of former 3 bed warden accommodation to 2, 1 bed self contained flats within a sheltered housing scheme with alterations to elevations
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66277/DISCON DATE VALID: 16.04.2015 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:
LOCATION: Unit 10 Junction Business Park Rake Lane Clifton Swinton Manchester M27 8LU
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of Condition 3 - Land Contamination Verification, attached to planning permission 14/64819/FUL
DECISION: Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 June 2015 ______
Page 116 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66328/FUL DATE VALID: 29.04.2015 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Ms M Folkes North
LOCATION: 44 Wesley Street Swinton M27 6AD
PROPOSAL: Planning application for the erection of 1.85m high gates
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66324/HH DATE VALID: 29.04.2015 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Richard Chorlton North
LOCATION: 2 Perth Street Swinton M27 0JG
PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing single storey side extension and erection of a single storey side extension.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66507/NMA DATE VALID: 01.06.2015 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr S Booth - Total Auto Services North
LOCATION: 338 East Lancashire Road Swinton M27 0LJ
PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment to planning permissions 13/63798/FUL and 14/65010/NMA for amendments to plans L(00)01, 0321401-01, 0321401-02 and 0321401-03 for new plans 3163-01 REV B, 3163-02 REV A and 3163-04 REV D.
DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
Page 117 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66408/DISCON DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Stephen Gorst South
LOCATION: Grosvenor Road Primary School Parkgate Drive Swinton Salford M27 5LN
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 2 (samples) and 8 (construction method statement attached to planning permission 14/65717/FUL
DECISION: Not discharging DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66441/DISCON DATE VALID: 21.05.2015 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Simon Ismail South
LOCATION: Worsley Road Community Church Worsley Road Swinton Salford M27 5SF
PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (Samples and Materials) and 12 (Building Survey) attached to planning permission 15/65930/FUL.
DECISION: Part Discharge of Condition DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66461/PDE DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Caroline Kershaw South
LOCATION: 45 Lawnswood Drive Swinton M27 5NH
PROPOSAL: Erection of a rear conservatory
DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 June 2015 ______
Page 118 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66342/HH DATE VALID: 30.04.2015 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Mr Peter Heavey And Seedley LOCATION: 21 Lancaster Road Salford M6 8AQ
PROPOSAL: Roof pitch increase to higher the ridge height (re submission of planning application 14/65623/HH).
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 22 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66387/FUL DATE VALID: 12.05.2015 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Mrs Louise Hanmer And Seedley LOCATION: Alleygates To The Rear Of 35- 37 Kennedy Road And 36-38 Barff Road Salford M5 5ET
PROPOSAL: Erection of 2.2 metre high galvanised steel alley gates, with 2 metre high galvanised steel railings.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66438/TPO DATE VALID: 21.05.2015 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Mr Paul Hodgson And Seedley LOCATION: 83 St Georges Crescent Salford M6 8JN
PROPOSAL: Crown reduce to leave a height of 15m and a width spread of 8m and 10% crown thin one ash tree (T1)
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66451/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell And Seedley LOCATION: Railway Bridge Derby Road Salford
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at Derby Road
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
Page 119 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66452/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell And Seedley LOCATION: Railway Bridge At Weaste Road Salford
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at Weaste Road
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66453/PRI DATE VALID: 22.05.2015 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Michael Gradwell And Seedley LOCATION: Railway Bride At Stott Lane Salford
PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the proposed parapet works to bridge at Cross Lane
DECISION: Permitted development DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66253/HH DATE VALID: 14.04.2015 WARD: Winton APPLICANT:Paul Newton
LOCATION: 9 Northfleet Road Eccles Salford M30 7PG
PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension and small front porch
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 June 2015 ______
Page 120 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66294/FUL DATE VALID: 21.04.2015 WARD: Winton APPLICANT:Mr David Walker
LOCATION: Kings Court 14 South King Street Eccles Salford M30 8PH
PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the installation of roller shutter to South king Street elevation
DECISION: Approve - unconditional DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66385/HH DATE VALID: 11.05.2015 WARD: Winton APPLICANT:Mr A J GARNETT
LOCATION: 1 Lothian Avenue Eccles Salford M30 8GR
PROPOSAL: Demotion of existing rear conservatory and erection of a single storey rear extension and single storey front infill extension.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66218/COU DATE VALID: 15.04.2015 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Aram Shebani North
LOCATION: 76 - 78 Coniston Avenue Little Hulton M38 9WZ
PROPOSAL: Change of use from one residential unit back into two residential dwellings.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 June 2015 ______
Page 121 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66323/HH DATE VALID: 14.05.2015 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Matthew Apps
LOCATION: 2 Sefton Drive Worsley Salford M28 2NQ
PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing single storey rear extension and erection of new single storey rear extension, construction of a decked area and new car parking area. Resubmission of planning application 14/65328/HH.
DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66354/HH DATE VALID: 11.05.2015 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Craig Armitt
LOCATION: 31 Douglas Road Worsley M28 2SR
PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing garage and erection of a two storey side and single storey rear extension.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66337/HH DATE VALID: 05.05.2015 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Julien Irving
LOCATION: 377 Worsley Road Swinton Salford M27 0EJ
PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing detached garage and construction of new detached garage.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 June 2015 ______
Page 122 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66340/HH DATE VALID: 30.04.2015 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr S Brand
LOCATION: 8C Beatrice Road Worsley Salford M28 2TN
PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of a single storey rear extension
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66367/HH DATE VALID: 12.05.2015 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Zach Thorp
LOCATION: 8 Chapel Road Swinton Salford M27 0HF
PROPOSAL: Erection of a part single, part two storey side extension incorporating garage and a part first floor, part two storey rear extension.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66374/HH DATE VALID: 07.05.2015 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr R Sollazzi
LOCATION: 11 The Warke Worsley M28 2WX
PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey side extension to include alterations to the existing attached front garage and a part two/part single storey rear extension.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66403/TPO DATE VALID: 07.05.2015 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Miriam Rayner
LOCATION: 154 The Green Worsley M28 2PA
PROPOSAL: 10% crown thin one cedar tree (T1).
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 June 2015 ______
Page 123 of 130
APPLICATION No: 15/66384/HH DATE VALID: 12.05.2015 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Tony Evans
LOCATION: 1 The Moorings Worsley Salford M28 2QE
PROPOSAL: Erection of a first floor side extension and a single storey rear extension.
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66472/NMA DATE VALID: 29.05.2015 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Gary Davison
LOCATION: 36 Fairmount Road Swinton M27 0EP
PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 14/65117/HH for raising the level (floor and roof) of the proposed garden room extension at the front of the house by 425mm
DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 June 2015 ______
APPLICATION No: 15/66463/NMA DATE VALID: 21.05.2015 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Jermaine Barrett South
LOCATION: Burgess Farm Hilton Lane Worsley M28 3TL
PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 14/64634/REM for the change of house types to plots 12,15,16,37,39,45,49,55,69,73,77,80,85,106,112,115,120,121,126,128,131,133,140 ,and 141
DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 July 2015 ______
Page 124 of 130
ITEM NO. 7
REPORT OF The Strategic Director for Environment and Community safety
TO THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL ON 16th July 2015
TITLE: PLANNING APPEALS
RECOMMENDATION: That the report be noted
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To set out details of appeals received and determined
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS: (Available for public inspection) Details of the applications are available on the Council’s Public Access Website http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/default.aspx If you would like to access this information in an alternative format, please contact the planning office on 0161-779 6195 or e-mail [email protected]
KEY DECISION: NO
DETAILS: See attached schedule
KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: Performance Management
EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND IMPLICATIONS:N/A
ASSESSMENT OF RISK:N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDING: N/A
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A
OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED:N/A
CONTACT OFFICER: Viv Prytharch 0161-779-4852
WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S): As indicated in the attached schedule.
Page 125 of 130
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
REPORT ON PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS DECIDED
APPLICATION No: 14/65345/ADV
APPELLANT: Mr John Downs
APPEAL SITE: Cosmo Bingo Club 241 Liverpool Road Eccles M30 0QN
PROPOSAL: 48 sheet poster advertising Cosmo bingo and the National Bingo game on the Lewis St elevation of the club
WARD: Barton
OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Refuse
APPEAL DECISION: Appeal dismissed
DECIDED ON: 11 June 2015
On 28th November 2014 advertisement consent was refused under the Council’s scheme of delegation for the erection of a 48 sheet poster board advertising Cosmo bingo and the National Bingo game on the Lewis Street elevation of the club at 241 Liverpool Road, Eccles. The reason for the refusal states:
- Due to its size, siting and placement on a prominent and significant locally listed building; and the cumulative impact of other adverts in the immediate vicinity, the proposed advertisement would have an unacceptable detrimental impact upon visual amenity and the character of the area contrary to Policy DEV2 and Policy CH8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, and Paragraph 67 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
The applicants appealed the decision.
The Inspector considered that the main issue was the effect on the character and appearance of the area.
The Inspector considered that the original building, which is locally listed, has been extended to some extent at the front and at the side facing Lewis Street, however, the extension replicates the scale and form of the original building and some of the historic features. Overall the building (and extensions) makes a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area on account of its distinctive design and appearance.
The 48 sheet poster advertisement would be fixed onto the flank wall of the extended appeal building in a prominent position close to the junction with the A57, Liverpool Road. It would be clearly visible from the westerly approach along Liverpool Road notwithstanding the intervening totem pole sign. The Inspector considered the size and scale to appear especially dominating and out of place on the building even if it was placed in a more commercial location. It would cut across and obscure some of the significant architectural features and it would significantly detract from the building’s flank façade close to the corner, and by doing so harm the character and appearance of the area.
The Inspector acknowledged that there were large poster signs in place on the site before the extension was built. However, in conclusion, the Inspector acknowledged the appellants suggested need for signage although in the context of existing smaller signage the need for further advertisement does not outweigh the significant harm to the character and appearance of the area that would arise from the advert.
The inspector therefore dismissed the appeal
Page 126 of 130
APPLICATION No: 14/65112/HH
APPELLANT: Mr Z Thumin
APPEAL SITE: 97 Singleton Road Salford M7 4LX
PROPOSAL: Construction of a dropped kerb and the formation of driveway to the front on the existing dwelling.
WARD: Kersal
OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Refuse
APPEAL DECISION: Appeal Allowed
DECIDED ON: 29 June 2015
On the 11th December 2014 planning permission was refused under the Council’s scheme of delegation for the construction of a dropped kerb and the formation of driveway to the front of 97 Singleton Road, Salford. The reason for refusal states:
- The proposal would result in the loss of a tree which is the subject of a tree preservation order and would result in an unacceptable detrimental impact upon the character and amenity of the area contrary to policy EN13 of the adopted City of Salford Unitary Development Plan
The applicants appealed the decision.
The Inspector considered that the main issue for consideration was the effect of the proposed development on the character and the appearance of the surrounding area, having particular regard to the removal of the protected tree. It has been acknowledged that the Council has raised no objection in principle to the formation of the new driveway and access, however, in implementing the development a mature Sycamore tree would have to be felled in the front garden which is protected by Tree Preservation Order (TPO) 475 2011.
The Sycamore tree is 14.5m tall and stands in the front garden of No 97. It is located behind a stone retaining wall and hedge on land which is around 1.5m above pavement level. The depth of excavations required to construct the parking area would prevent the retention of the tree which is highly prominent in the street scene due to its size and height, position and as there are no other trees in the neighbouring front gardens.
The Inspector considered that the Sycamore is viewed within the context of the many trees along both sides of the road frontage and in front gardens which are included in a TPO. All of the trees contribute to the most attractive and distinctive verdant character of the surrounding area. The loss of the Sycamore tree would erode the positive contribution that it makes to the quality of the environment.
The Inspector continues to consider that Sycamores are generally more appropriately located away from buildings because of their vigour and eventual size. The appeal tree is mature and located within a relatively small front garden. Based on the evidence it is considered likely that its continued growth and crown spread over the next 40 years or so would cause greater overshadowing of the front of the house. There are also minor cracks and displacement visible in the front retaining wall. These factors attracted significant weight in decision.
The Inspector acknowledged the appellant’s desire to park at the front of his home, particularly as he has a large family including young children. The Inspector considered this as a personal circumstance and provided some weighting, justifying this by saying the family home would enjoy long term benefits from the proposed front driveway.
Page 127 of 130
The Inspector concluded that the development does not have an unacceptable impact on highway safety and whilst the removal of the TPO protected sycamore would be contrary to the objectives of saved policy EN13 and policy DES1, it would, when considered together with the justifications for the driveway and the potential for replacement planting to compensate the national and local policies would be satisfied.
The Inspector therefore allowed the appeal with the inclusion of a condition requiring a replacement tree.
Page 128 of 130
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
REPORT OF NEW PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS RECEIVED
APPLICATION No: 15/65895/HH
APPLICATION DECISION LEVEL: Delegated to Officer
OFFICER Refuse RECOMMEND’N:
APPEAL SITE: 11 Castleway Salford M6 7AL
PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey side extension and first floor rear extension
WARD: Langworthy
APPELLANT: Mrs Barbara Chadwick
DATE RECEIVED: 22 June 2015
The applicant has appealed the decision. The reason for refusal states:
The proposed two storey side extension by virtue of its scale and massing would create an unacceptable overbearing and over shadowing effect on neighbouring residents (Nos. 9 and 13) detrimental to the amenity of the occupiers of the dwellinghouses, contrary to Policy HE7 of the House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document, Policy DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.
APPLICATION No: 13/64081/OUTEIA
APPLICATION DECISION LEVEL: Panel Decision
OFFICER Approve RECOMMEND’N:
APPEAL SITE: Land To North Of Middlewood Street And East Of Oldfield Road, Salford (Middlewood Locks)
PROPOSAL: Extension of time application for the implementation of planning permission 06/52762/OUT for the Outline application (access only) for mixed use development comprising 142,697 sq.m residential use (Class C1 and C3); 67,773 sq.m commercial use (Class B1); and 27,191 sq.m leisure/retail use (Class A1,A2,A3,A4 and D2) together with associated uses, car parking, landscaping and infrastructure
WARD: Ordsall
APPELLANT: Scarborough Developments (Salford) Ltd
DATE RECEIVED: 2 July 2015
Page 129 of 130
Members will recall that this item was reported to the planning panel previously although a formal start date had not been received from the planning Inspectorate. Members resolved to support the appeal for the reasons set out in the report presented to panel on the 18th June 2015.
For awareness the Inspectorate has provided a formal start to the appeal. The applicant has appealed against condition 1 imposed which states:
Application for approval of reserved matters shall be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters, or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.
Page 130 of 130