Public Document Pack

Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel

Dear Member,

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

DATE: Thursday, 10 May 2018

TIME: 9.30 am

VENUE: Salford Suite, Salford Civic Centre, Chorley Road, Swinton

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

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

Please note that there will be a break for Members at approximately 11.15 a.m. until 11.30 a.m., and at 1.00 p.m. until 1.30 p.m.

AGENDA

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

2 Apologies for absence.

3 Declarations of interest.

4 To approve, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held (Pages 1 - 2) on 5th April 2018.

5 Planning applications and related development control issues. (Pages 3 - 10)

9:30 A.M.

5a 17/71158/FUL 352 Walkden Road, Worsley M28 7ER (Pages 11 - 28)

5b 18/71423/FUL Broadoak Primary School, Fairmount Road, Swinton (Pages 29 - 34) M27 0EP

5c 17/70056/FUL Land Formerly Griffin Hotel, Lower Broughton Road, (Pages 35 - 56) Salford 5d 18/71347/COU 6 and 8 Bindloss Avenue, Eccles M30 0DU (Pages 57 - 66)

5e 18/71548/HH 123 Worsley Road, Worsley M28 2WG (Pages 67 - 72)

11:30 A.M.

5f 16/68858/FUL Oak Court Clifton Business Park, Wynne Avenue, (Pages 73 - 92) Clifton, Swinton M27 8FF

5g 17/70853/FUL Campbell Road Playing Fields, Campbell Road, (Pages 93 - 142) Swinton M27 5GQ

5h 18/71363/FUL Land At Worrall Street, Salford M5 4TH (Pages 143 - 166)

1:30 P.M.

5i 14/65186/FUL Newhaven Business Park, Barton Lane, Eccles, (Pages 167 - 210) Salford M30 0HH

5j 17/70871/FUL Land West Of AJ Bell Stadium And North Of The (Pages 211 - 232) Manchester Ship Canal

6 Planning Applications determined under Delegated Authority. (Pages 233 - 268)

7 Planning Appeals. (Pages 269 - 274)

8 Urgent Business.

9 Exclusion of the Public.

10 Part 2 - Closed to the Public.

11 Urgent Business.

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

5th April 2018

Meeting commenced: 10:00 a.m. “ ended: 10:20 a.m.

PRESENT: Councillor Mashiter - in the Chair Councillors Antrobus, Dawson, Hamilton, Hunt and R. Wilson

Please note that a list of persons in attendance in respect of matters referred to in Minute 91 is included at Appendix A.

88. WELCOME AND APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

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

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Barnes, Burch, Clarke, McIntyre, Morris, Sharpe, Turner and P. Wheeler.

89. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest.

90. MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

RESOLVED: THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 15th March 2018 be agreed as a correct record.

91. APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION – 17/70615/FUL 4-26 LIVERPOOL STREET, SALFORD M5 4LE – CONSTRUCTION OF A BUILDING STANDING TO A HEIGHT OF BETWEEN 6 AND 9 STOREYS AND COMPRISING 127 DWELLINGS TOGETHER WITH LANDSCAPING, CAR PARKING AND ASSOCIATED WORKS

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

RESOLVED: THAT planning permission be granted, subject to (a) the conditions listed in the reports, and (b) authority to approve the details pursuant to condition 7 (Materials) being delegated to the Chair of the Panel in conjunction with the Assistant Director Housing & Planning, and that –

(i) The Strategic Director Place be authorised to enter into a legal agreement, in accordance with Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to secure the following:

. 4no. affordable units (2 bedroom duplex townhouses)

. Financial contribution of £250,000 to be directed in part or in full towards any of the following public realm / transport projects;

- TRO works - Liverpool Street – walking and cyling improvements - Oldfield Road – walking and cycling improvements - The delivery of public realm works to support the Meadows Bridge, located on or adjacent to The Crescent.

. A clawback mechanism to secure an increase in the level of contribution up to the maximum level required by the Planning Obligations SPD, should the viability of the development increase in the future as the scheme is delivered. Clawback monies to be directed in part or in full towards any of the public realm / transport projects identified above.

Authority to approve the final identification of the projects towards which the financial contribution was to be directed, be delegated to the Chair of the Panel in conjunction with the Assistant Director Housing & Planning. 1

Page 1 Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel - 5th April 2018

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

(iii) The authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application to be issued (subject to the conditions and reasons stated in the reports) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement.

92. PLANNING APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY

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

RESOLVED: THAT the content of the report be noted.

93. PLANNING APPEALS

The Strategic Director Place submitted a report which provided details of an enforcement appeal that had recently been received.

RESOLVED: THAT the content of the report be noted.

APPENDIX A - ATTENDANCE LIST

APPLICATION REF. & IN FAVOUR OBJECTING ADDRESS

17/70615/FUL Nathan Matta*

4-26 Liverpool Street Salford M5 4LE

* Indicates those who made representations to the Panel.

2

Page 2 Agenda Item 5

REPORT

Of

Strategic Director Place

To the

Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel

On

10 th May 2018

Planning Applications and Related Development Control Matters

(Not considered to contain exempt information)

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

MAIN REPORT

Page1 3

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

Page2 4 If you do not have personal access to the Internet, free access is available to registered members at each of the sixteen libraries in the city .

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

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

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

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

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

Page3 5 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: 10.05.2018

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

Walkden South

17/71158/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of 8no. semi-detached dwellings

LOCATION: 352 Walkden Road Worsley M28 7ER

APPLICANT: Mr Ryan Little

Page 6

Worsley

18/71423/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am

PROPOSAL: Siting of a single storey modular building to be used as a nursery

LOCATION: Broadoak Primary School Fairmount Road Swinton M27 0EP

APPLICANT: Ms Karen Wild

Broughton

17/70056/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 09:30am

PROPOSAL: Erection of a new apartment building, providing 57 no. 1 and 2 bedroom apartments together with associated access and parking

LOCATION: Land Formerly Griffin Hotel Lower Broughton Road Salford

APPLICANT: Great Chetham Developments Limited

Page 7 Eccles

18/71347/COU RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 09:30am

PROPOSAL: Change of use of two properties from C3 (dwelling) to 12-bed at No. 6 and 13-bed at No. 8 HMO (house in multiple occupation) (Sui Generis), installation of dormer window to No. 8, creation of parking area and dropped kerb

LOCATION: 6 And 8 Bindloss Avenue Eccles M30 0DU

APPLICANT: Mr Ben Hardman

Worsley

18/71548/HH RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE

TIME OF MEETING: 09:30am

PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for increasing the height of existing brickwork boundary wall to average height of 1800mm and facing the wall with new decorative finish. Retaining the existing gates.

LOCATION: 123 Worsley Road Worsley M28 2WG

APPLICANT: Mr Gary Bethel

Pendlebury

16/68858/FUL RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE

TIME OF MEETING: 11.30am

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing building and formation and laying out of car park, together with installation of 2m high railings and gates Re-submission of planning application 16/67858/FUL

LOCATION: Oak Court Clifton Business Park Wynne Avenue Clifton Swinton M27 8FF

APPLICANT: Mr C Beard

Page 8

Swinton South

17/70853/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 11.30am

PROPOSAL: Demolition of 2 no dwellings and erection of 241 dwellings (Use Class C3), laying out of a new Community Park, vehicular access, roads and footways, hard and soft landscaping, walls, fences, drainage and associated works.

LOCATION: Campbell Road Playing Fields Campbell Road Swinton M27 5GQ

APPLICANT: Mr Mike Stone

Ordsall

18/71363/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 11.30am

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing building and erection of a building of part 8 / part 9 storey's comprising 86 residential units together with gym, cycle and car parking and associated works

LOCATION: Land At Worrall Street Salford M5 4TH

APPLICANT: Mr Lyndon Forshaw

Barton

14/65186/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 13:30

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing structures and erection of 244 dwellings with associated works.

LOCATION: Newhaven Business Park Barton Lane Eccles Salford M30 0HH

APPLICANT: Countryside Properties (UK) Ltd

Page 9 Irlam

17/70871/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 13:30

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

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

APPLICANT: United Utilities

Page 10 Agenda Item 5a PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL PART I SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

APPLICATION No: 17/71158/FUL APPLICANT: Mr Ryan Little LOCATION: 352 Walkden Road, Worsley, M28 7ER PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of 8no. semi- detached dwellings WARD: Walkden South

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to a 2350sqm (approx.) site located on the eastern side of Walkden Road. The site is currently occupied by a two story detached dwelling, set in extensive grounds.

Vehicular access to the site is taken from a drop crossing off Walkden Road, with parking being provided on an area of hardstanding located to the side and rear of the property and within a detached garage.

There are a number of trees on site, none of which are protected by a Tree Preservation Order.

The application site is located within a critical drainage area.

Page 11

$n4pmyne4.rtf The application site is located within a predominantly residential area being bounded to the north, east and west by residential properties in a variety of styles, including some that are in the process of being built following grant of applications 13/63859/OUT and 16/67831/REM. There is a substation located to the south, beyond which there is a landscaped area abutting the East Lancashire Road

Description of Proposal

Planning permission is sought to demolished the existing dwelling and re-develop the site in order to provide 4 pairs of semi-detached units, all with 4 bedrooms.

The proposed dwellings which would have a maximum footprint of 14.7m by 5m, would be two stories in height, measuring 5.2m in height at the eaves and 8.3m in height at the ridge with a pitched roof. The dwellings would provide accommodation over 3 floors, one of which would be provided in the roofspace.

The dwellings would front onto Walkden Road being set back at least 5.3m from the back of the footway, with each dwelling being provided with on-site parking, accessed from Walkden Road, and an area of amenity space in the form of a rear garden. . The dwellings would be of a traditional form, with contemporary details including a double height square bay on the frontage. The dwellings would be of a brick construction with a grey tiled roof.

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Date Displayed: 5 February 2018 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Not Applicable

Neighbour Notification

15 neighbouring properties have been notified of this application by letter.

Representations Barbara Keeley MP has objected to the application, making the following comments –

Local residents tell me that they are very concerned about these proposals and that they believe such a development would affect the quality of their lives. I share these concerns.

Residents on Norwood Close have expressed their deep concern that these new houses would directly overlook their properties.

The plans clearly show that all nine properties would have direct access onto Walkden Road from a driveway. Considering that an average household in Walkden has two or more cars it is feasible that this proposed development would mean that eighteen cars would be accessing and exiting Walkden Road at a critical junction of that road with the East Lanes Road.

The proposed development is metres away from where Walkden Road meets the A580 East Lancashire Road and where motorists can cross over the junction to join the Southbound access to the M60, M602 and M62 motorway.

Walkden Road is already one of the most heavily congested roads in the area with stop-start traffic at peak times. Cars waiting to access Walkden Road from these new homes would block the pavements and add greatly to the congestion. Cars exiting Walkden Road to the driveways of the proposed homes will cause queues, as it would mean waiting to cross the traffic that queues at all times of day at the traffic lights. My constituents tell me they fear that this proposal will result in the daily gridlock on Walkden Road and other local roads being made worse. Increased congestion also causes increased pollution.

Currently there are no parking restrictions at this location on Walkden Road and so any visitors to these nine houses could cause further problems by parking on pavements and causing an obstruction on the road very near to the junction with the A580 East Lanes Road.

Page 12

$n4pmyne4.rtf To summarise, I am concerned that this proposal to build nine houses would increase congestion and pollution on local roads. It would also cause loss of privacy to nearby residents who would be overlooked. Overall, I am concerned that this development will have a negative impact on the quality of life my constituents.

Councillor Richard Critchley has objected to the application, making the following comments –

My primary concern is the potential of this development to have a hugely detrimental impact on traffic flow within Walkden.

The driveways for each of the proposed houses will be close to the junction of Walkden Road and the A580, the main road into Walkden and a key route for anyone in Walkden and Little Hulton trying to access the motorway network or A580. Traffic queues from the lights passed the location of the proposed driveways throughout most of the day, seven days a week. Any vehicles wishing to enter the driveways from the north bound carriageway would be blocked and have to wait on Walkden Road until a change in the lighting sequence. This would result in queuing traffic through the junction of the A580 with major implications on traffic flow throughout the area. This would be made even more difficult by the the position of the bus stop, immediately in front of two of the driveways, which would mean traffic waiting a much longer time, whilst the bus is ready and able to pull out.

Due to the busy nature of this road, vehicles existing driveways to turn right would have to pull out into the south bound lane, blocking the road whilst waiting for the north bound lane to clear, again causing significant disruption and delay. Many residents who live on the street tell me that it is so difficult to turn right onto Walkden Road (north bound) that they often travel south and cut through onto Kingsway, which is safer and quicker.

During peak house traffic queues down Broadway onto Kingsway to try and access the A580. Turning right out of this road is exceptionally difficult. If driveways were built opposite and with vehicles entering and leaving, this would be made dangerous and even more challenging.

There are no parking restrictions on the south end of Walkden Road and close to the junction with the A580. This may mean visitors and residents of the new properties parking on the main road into and out of Walkden causing huge delays for all traffic in the town. It is essential that full time parking restrictions are implemented on Walkden Road on both sides of the road from the junction of the A580, passed Kingsway and up to the first existing properties on the road to prevent gridlock.

Finally, the height of the properties is inappropriate. The existing properties to the rear are bungalows and would be dwarfed by the proposed 3 storey houses. This would lead to significant overlooking and intrusion on neighbouring residents.

27 letters of representation have been received in response to the original consultation on the application, from 22 different addresses. One of the letters is written on behalf of occupier of 4 other properties.

The following issues have been raised –  The proposal will result in neighbouring residents experiencing a loss of light  The proposal will result in neighbouring residents experiencing a loss of privacy  The proposed development will overshadow neighbouring properties  The proposal will result in neighbouring residents being exposed to increase noise levels  Neighbouring residents will experience noise and disturbance and disruption during the construction phase  Consideration needs to be given to how contractors vehicles will enter and leave the site safely  The inclusion of numerous vehicular access points into the site from Walkden Road causes concerns in respect of driver, cyclist and pedestrian safety, especially given the close proximity of the bus stop – there is a constant traffic jam from the traffic lights at East Lancashire Road back to Walkden Railway Station, particularly during peak times in the morning and evening.  Vehicles wishing to turn onto Walkden Road from side streets, such as Mesne Lea Road or Kingsway, are already finding it extremely difficult due to queuing traffic and the presence of parked cars, with cars using Kingsway and Broadway as a rat run – this development will exacerbate the existing issues  The proposed development will add to the existing traffic congestion in this area, with the cumulative impact of this development and other recent development in the area being unacceptable both in respect of their highway impact and in respect of the impact they have on residential amenity

Page 13

$n4pmyne4.rtf  The proposed development does not include adequate on site car parking meaning that it is likely that cars will park on street, worsening traffic congestion at the junction – if yellow lines are introduced on both sides of the road to stop this occurring there are concerns that occupiers/visitors will park on Kingsway which already suffers from double parking  There are insufficient reliable buses and trains to encourage local residents to utilise public transport  The increase in traffic will result in an increase in pollution, putting residents health at risk  There have been several developments in the vicinity – the existing infrastructure including the local schools, doctors and mental health providers are already full to capacity; how will the needs of residents be met?  This area has been subject to significant development recently with areas of greenspace being lost and the area becoming more built up  The proposal will result in the loss of mature trees  The proposal will result in the loss of wildlife  The proposal will result in drainage issues  There are alternative sites that could be developed to provide housing  The proposal will devalue property  There are concerns that neighboring residents have not received appropriate notification of the proposed development  The building that will be demolished contains asbestos and there are concerns over the health risks posed by its demolition

Devaluation of property is not a material planning consideration

Neighbouring residents who were originally consulted and all those who had made representation, including Barbara Keeley MP and Cllr Critchley, were notified of an amended description and amended plans on the 6th March 2018.

16 letters of representation have been received in response to the re-consultation, from 13 different addresses, including one that had been written on behalf of 5 other properties as well. With the exception of one person all those who wrote in had done so previously, simply writing to advising that the revised proposal does not address the concerns raised previously, reiterating these for the avoidance of doubt. The letter from the individual who had not previously commented on the application does not raise any new issues.

Relevant Site History

No relevant site history.

Consultations

Highways - Offer the following advice on the application –

Page 14

$n4pmyne4.rtf Site Accessibility Note that there are bus stops located close to the site on Walkden Road that provide limited services of 2 buses per hour in each direction, before advising that there are other bus stops located on the East Lancashire Road, within 3 minutes and 4 minute walk of the site, that provide regular connections between Atherton, Leigh and Manchester City Centre.

State that the site is well connected to the local highway network which provides convenient access from the surrounding residential areas and local amenities.

In the light of this they conclude that the site is considered to be sustainable.

Traffic Impact Assessment Advise that in terms of the traffic impact the proposal is unlikely to result in significant material impact when dispersed to the local highway network.

Site Access Note that as part of the development the applicant intends to create separate driveways for each of the properties, which also includes a hard standing area with approximately 3.5m to 3.8m wide entrance.

Recommend that all solid boundary walls fronting onto Walkden Road should be no higher than 0.6m high, see through guard railing should be utilised for boundary treatment that is higher than 0.6m, before stating that if the developer intends to provide gates these would need to be setback from the frontage in order to enable a large car to pull off the highway while waiting for any gates to open, with all gates opening into the site and not towards the footway.

Advise that Walkden Road is a categorized A road, with the site being located close to the East Lancashire Road / Walkden Road signal junction. In the light of this in order to ensure that the proposal does not result in an increased risk to pedestrians or road users they recommend that a condition is attached that requires any vehicle accessing the property to enter their driveway’s in forward gear, turn around internally and leave in forward gear.

Traffic Regulation Orders State that in order to ensure the safety to pedestrians and road users by mitigating the impact of potential on- street parking resulting from the development the applicant should bring forward a Traffic Regulatory Order scheme in form of double yellow lines as well as to amend the bus stop road marking to include a bus clearway road marking on Walkden Road.

Advise that the following conditions should be attached –

 Full construction details of the new site access points on Walkden Road, should be appropriately designed shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Highway Authority. Such scheme as is agreed shall be constructed in accordance with the approved drawings.  Traffic management scheme to prevent to assist in the safe use of the proposed access points and to prohibit on-street parking.  Construction Management Plan should also include a comprehensive Traffic Management strategy to ensure on and off-site disruption are kept to a minimum and to ensure no increase in risk to pedestrians and road users during the construction period.

Advice has also been recived about how the construction phase should be managed.

Drainage Engineer - No comments received to date

United Utilities Confirm that they have no objection to the proposal subject to the attachment of two conditions – one that requires foul and surface water to be drained on separate systems and a second that requires the submission, approval and subsequent implementation of a surface water drainage scheme, based on the hierarchy of

Page 15

$n4pmyne4.rtf drainage options in the National Planning Practice Guidance with evidence of an assessment of the site conditions.

Suggest that a condition is attached that requires details of a management and maintenance regime for any sustainable drainage that it is included as part of the development.

Offer advice in respect of drainage, the water supply to the unit and the relationship of the development to United Utilities assets- the applicant will be made aware of the advice offered via the attachment of an informative.

Urban Vision Environment (Air And Noise) -

Air Quality Advise that the application site is located within the Greater Manchester Air Quality Management Area (AQMA), and as such introduces new sensitive receptors into an area where air pollution (nitrogen dioxide – NO2) is known to be above EU and UK health based limit values which is an annual mean of 40 μg/m3.

State that the application has been submitted with an air quality impact assessment, which uses detailed atmospheric dispersion modeling, verified against local monitoring to predict the levels of air pollution at the properties, and the potential exposure to future residents. The model (when verified against local monitoring) predicts a maximum annual mean concentration of NO2 37.7 μg/m3.

Advise that data from a diffusion tube monitoring site located approximately 37m to the north showed annual mean concentrations of 32.5 μg/m3 in 2016, before stating that this monitoring site is located closer to the road than the proposed properties, with NO2 being known to disperse quickly with increasing distance from the source, with the most rapid reduction in concentrations over the first few metres.

Conclude that despite the modeling exercise predicting high concentrations of NO2 verifying this against readings taken from a monitoring site located in closer proximity to the road, shows that the modeling readings are likely to be an over estimate of the concentrations at the façade of the proposed dwellings and consequently there are no objections to the proposal on air quality grounds subject to the attachment of a condition that requires each property with off road parking to be provided with an electric vehicle charging point.

Noise Advise that the application site is located adjacent to the busy A575 Walkden Road, at the junction with the A580 East Lancashire Road, stating that it is therefore likely that without mitigation internal noise levels within the proposed dwellings would lead to a negative impact on health and quality of life for future occupants.

State that the noise report submitted in support of the application advocates the installation of acoustically uprated glazing to a achieve a minimum sound reduction index of 32 dB Rw+Ctr. Advise that this would be adequate to protect amenity, stating that it will also be necessary to install acoustically uprated trickle vents to provide background ventilation such that residents do not need to open windows. In the light of this they confirm that they have no objections to the proposal on noise grounds subject to the attachment of conditions to secure appropriate glazing and ventilation.

A condition is also recommended for a Construction Environmental Management Plan. To be submitted

Urban Vision Environment (Land Contam) -

State that the site historically had a building in much the same location as the existing, with a good portion of the site being undeveloped, before advising that there are known areas of filled ground within influencing distance to the site and consequently there is a potential for land contamination to exist. The proposed end use is residential, which are considered a sensitive end use with respect to land contamination risk.

Advise that they have reviewed the ground contamination report submitted with the application and concur with the recommendations that a limited suite of intrusive investigations are required to ensure that the potential risks identified above are either eliminated, or adequately assessed.

State that they therefore have no objections to the proposal subject to conditions.

Page 16

$n4pmyne4.rtf Greater Manchester Ecological Unit - Advise that they have reviewed the bat report submitted in support of the application, which found no evidence of bats, defining the building as being low risk. In the light of this the confirm that the proposal will not have an adverse impact upon bats subject to the attachment of a condition that requires the development to be carried out in accordance with the recommendations in section 6 of the submitted report.

Note that the proposal will result in the loss of trees and shrubs, advising that a condition should be attached that prevents any works to trees and shrubs occurring between 1st March and 31st August in any one year unless detailed bird nest survey by a suitably experienced ecologist has been carried out immediately prior to clearance and written confirmation provided that no active bird nests are present.

Advise that condition should be attached that requires a landscape scheme to be submitted in order to offset the loss of trees and shrubs.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

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 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 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 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

Page 17

$n4pmyne4.rtf 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 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.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy

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 - 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 - 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

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 the relevant criteria within the UDP policies applicable to the proposed development are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.

Principle of development

Part of the site would be classed as greenfield land having regard to the definition of previously developed land in Annex 2 of the NPPF. However, although paragraph 17 of the NPPF states that one of the core planning principles that underpins decision making is to encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed brownfield land (provided that it is not of high environmental value) it does not advocate a sequential approach whereby the development of brownfield land is prioritised over greenfield land.

Page 18

$n4pmyne4.rtf Having regard to this, the location of the site within the urban area, in an accessible and sustainable location, it is considered that the principle of demolishing the existing property and re-developing the site to provide 8 dwellings is acceptable and in accordance with policy.

Size and mix of units

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 reasoned justification 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 proposal involves the re-development of the site to provide 8 houses and consequently the proposal is considered to comply with policy HOU1.

Policy HOU2 of the housing planning guidance states that where houses are proposed the majority should have at least three bedrooms. The proposed dwellings would all have 4 bedrooms and therefore it is considered that the proposal complies with policy HOU2 of the housing planning guidance.

The size and mix of units proposed is therefore deemed to be acceptable and in accordance with the housing planning guidance.

Visual Amenity

The existing property on the site is not listed or locally listed and the site is not located within a conservation area. Having regard to this and given that the property does not have any significant architectural merit that would warrant is retention there are no visual amenity issues with the proposal to demolish the existing building on site.

The proposed dwellings which would have a maximum footprint of 14.7m by 5m, would be two stories in height, measuring 5.2m in height at the eaves and 8.3m in height at the ridge with a pitched roof. The dwellings would provide accommodation over 3 floors, one of which would be provided in the roofspace.

The dwellings on Walkden Road and Kingsway, which would form the immediate context for development, are two stories in height and therefore it is considered that the that the scale and massing of the proposed dwellings is acceptable.

The dwellings would front onto Walkden Road being set back at least 5.3m from the back of the footway, with each dwelling being provided with on-site parking, accessed from Walkden Road, and an area of amenity space in the form of a rear garden.

The dwellings would be sited so they respect the established building line on Walkden Road with the plots being laid out in a way that is comparable to the other semi-detached properties on the road. The proposed siting is therefore also deemed appropriate.

The dwellings would be of a traditional form, with contemporary details including a double height square bay on the frontage. The dwellings would be of a brick construction with a grey tiled roof.

Having regard to the variety of property styles and the mixed palette of materials used in the construction of the properties within the vicinity of the application site and the variety of property styles with terraced, semi- detached and detached properties all be sited within close proximity it is considered that the design and appearance of the proposed dwellings is acceptable.

The frontage to the site would be secured via the erection of a low boundary wall, behind which there would be small area of soft landscaping incorporating 1 tree per pair of semis and a cherry laurel hedge. The existing boundary treatment to the common boundaries with 350 Walkden Road and 8-16 Norwood Close would be retained, with the remainder of the rear boundary, the southern boundary and the rear garden areas being secured via the erection of a 1.8m high boundary fence. A 0.9m high fence would be installed between the properties, up to the boundary with Walkden Road. The garden areas would contain a paved patio area,

Page 19

$n4pmyne4.rtf together with a grassed area, with at least 1 standard tree being planted in the rear garden area of each property.

Having regard to the site constraints and the requirement to provide on-site turning heads for each property it is considered that the proposed landscaping is appropriate.

For these reasons, subject to the attachment of conditions to ensure the use of satisfactory materialsand ensure the submitted landscape scheme is implemented , together with a further condition that requires details of any proposed leveling works to be agreed the proposed development would make an appropriate contribution to the visual amenities of the area. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with policies DES1, DES8 and DES9 of the Salford UDP and the design policies in the National Planning Policy.

Residential Amenity

The application site is located within a predominantly residential area being bounded to the north, east and west by residential properties in a variety of styles, including some that are in the process of being built following grant of applications 13/63859/OUT and 16/67831/REM. There is a substation located to the south, beyond which there is a landscaped area abutting the East Lancashire Road

The properties at the rear of the application site on Norwood Close are bungalows, some of which have rear dormers - these units have small rear gardens ranging between 6m and 8m in length. The proposed dwellings would be located at least 12.2m from the rear boundary of the application site, with the two storey element being located at least 15.2m from the rear boundary. The submitted drawings show that just over 21m would be provided between the habitable room windows at first and second floor level in the proposed dwelling and those in the rear elevation of the properties on Norwood Close.

The properties that are being constructed to the north of the application site following approval of applications 13/63859/OUT and 16/67831/REM are sited at 90degrees to the application site, being located in an offset position from the proposed dwellings. As such there would not be any facing windows, with 12.2m being provided between the single storey element of the proposed dwellings and the common boundary and 15.2m being provided between the first and second floor elements and the common boundary.

There would be at least 18.5m provided between the front elevation of the proposed dwellings and the front boundary of the property at 277 Walkden Road, which is located on the opposite side of Walkden Road, with the proposed dwellings being located in an offset position from the property at 277 Walkden Road.

The property at 350 Walkden Road does not have any habitable room windows in the side elevation facing the application site. The proposed dwellings would be located 3.5m from the common boundary with 352 Walkden Road, with the side elevation of the closest dwelling only containing windows to an en-suite and a bathroom.

The property at 1 Kingsway, which is located on the opposite side of Walkden Road, does not have any habitable room windows in the side elevation facing the application site. There would be at approximately 20.8m from the front elevation of the proposed dwellings and the side boundary with the property at 1 Kingsway which is marked by a high hedge, fence and a series of conifer trees.

The property at 2 Kingsway, which is located on the opposite side of Walkden Road, does not have any habitable room windows in the side elevation facing the application site. There would be at approximately 19.8m from the front elevation of the proposed dwellings and the side boundary with the property at 2 Kingsway.

Having regard to the relationship between the proposed dwellings and the neighbouring residential properties it is not considered that the development would result in neighbouring residents experiencing an unacceptable loss of amenity by virtue of them experiencing a loss of light, privacy and/or any overbearing impact.

In respect of noise and disturbance the Council’s air and noise consultant has confirmed that the proposed development would not result in neighbouring residents being exposed to an unacceptable increase in the levels of noise and disturbance they are exposed to subject to the attachment of a condition requiring the submission, approval and subsequent adherence to a construction method statement.

The Council’s air and noise consultant has not raised any issues in respect of the development exposing neighbouring residents to unacceptable increased levels of air pollution, recommending that each dwelling is

Page 20

$n4pmyne4.rtf provided with a single vehicle electric charging point thereby encouraging the uptake of ultra-low emission vehicles.

With regard to the level of amenity future occupiers of the proposed dwellings would enjoy it is considered that future occupiers would be provided with adequate light and outlook from their habitable room windows. They would also be provided with an area of useable amenity space in the form of a rear garden.

The Council’s Environmental Consultant has advised that given the location of the application site adjacent to the busy A575 Walkden Road and close to the A580 East Lancashire Road it is likely that without the incorporation of noise mitigation measures internal noise levels within the proposed dwellings would lead to a negative impact on health and quality of life for future occupants. In order to ensure the necessary noise mitigation is incorporated they have advised that conditions should be attached to secure the installation of acoustically uprated glazing to all habitable rooms to achieve a minimum sound reduction index of 32 dB Rw+Ctr., together with acoustically uprated trickle vents to provide background ventilation such that residents do not need to open windows.

For these reasons subject to the attachment of the conditions recommended by the Council’s Environmental Consultant the proposal is considered to be in accordance with policies DES7 and EN17 of the City of Salford UDP and the amenity policies in the NPPF.

Parking and highway safety

Vehicle access to the properties would be taken from Walkden Road with each unit being provided with a drop crossing and a driveway capable of accommodating two cars together with a turning head that would allow vehicles to enter and leave the site in a forward gear.

The Council’s highway officer has reviewed the application and advised that the re-development of the site to provide 8 dwellings is unlikely to result in significant material impact when dispersed to the local highway network, with appropriate on site car parking and maneuvering space being provided given the accessible nature of the application site. They have advised that a condition should be attached that requires full construction details of the new access points to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of commencement of development (save for demolition and works below ground)

In order to ensure that vehicles can enter and leave the site in a forward gear and ensure that the proposed development does not result in any increased risk to pedestrians or other road users the highways officer has advised that a condition should be attached to ensure that all vehicles can enter and leave the driveways in a forward gear. The layout of the site has been designed to enable this and a condition has been added. A condition is also added to prevent obstacles above 0.6m to facilitate egress.

In addition the highways officer has advised that in order to ensure the safety to pedestrians and road users by mitigating the impact of potential on-street parking resulting from the development it will be necessary to introduce double yellow lines along the sites frontage with Walkden Road up to the junction with the East Lancs, as well as to introduce a bus clearway. This has been secured by condition.

In order to minimise off site disruption and ensure no increased risk to pedestrians and road users during the construction period the highways officer has recommended that a condition is attached that requires a construction management plan, which includes a comprehensive traffic management strategy, to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development and subsequently adhered to.

For these reasons, subject to the attachment of the conditions recommended by the Council’s highway officer, the proposal is considered to be in accordance with policies A8 and A10 of the City of Salford UDP –it does not raise any issues from a highway safety perspective.

Trees

There are a number of trees on site, none of which are protected by a tree preservation order. The application has therefore been submitted with a tree report that contains a tree survey and an arboricultural impact assessment and a tree protection plan.

Page 21

$n4pmyne4.rtf The submitted report identifies that all trees on site, bar two individual trees (T15 and T16) and two groups of trees (G21 and G22), will be removed to facilitate the proposal. Apart from two trees which are category B; an ash tree T1 and a beech tree T24, both located on the Walkden road frontage; all trees that will be removed are category C trees. The report has been reviewed by the Council’s consultant arborist who has advised that the removal of the two category B trees is deemed acceptable, subject to mitigation planting on a 2 for 1 basis being provided to compensate for their loss. The arborist has also confirmed that the category C trees on site should not be a constraint to development.

In respect of the loss of two category B trees the tree survey report notes that the ash tree has an asymmetrical crown and pruning wounds but despite this it is noted as having a 40+ year life expectancy, with the beech tree having similar features and a predicated life span of 40+ years. The loss of these trees is therefore regrettable but unavoidable given their siting.

In order to compensate for the loss of the two category B trees it is proposed to replant 12 standard trees at the site – 4 on the frontage, central to each pair of dwellings, with a further 8 trees being planted at the rear – 1 per plot. The proposed replanting has been reviewed by the Council’s arborist who has confirmed that it is acceptable, with the use of tree pits serving to assist with the mid-to long term establishment of the trees and reduce the root tracery problems with the hard surfaces.

On balance it is therefore considered that the loss of the two category B trees on site is acceptable – there would be a short term adverse impact upon the treescape of the area but this would be offset in the longer term by the proposed replanting, with the loss of the trees allowing for the creation of a development that best respects the character of the area where it is situated while also allowing for the frontage of the site to be opened up and improved with the scheme proposing to secure the frontage with a low boundary wall.

In order to ensure the successful retention of the remaining trees throughout the development phase the trees will need to be protected with temporary protective fencing. The Councils consultant arborist has confirmed that the submitted Tree Protection Plan provides appropriate details of the layout of the necessary temporary protective fencing along with a diagram of the specification to be used (HERAS style). A condition will be attached to ensure the protective fencing is installed in accordance with the submitted TPP and retained throughout the construction phase.

Ecology

The application has been submitted with a bat survey which has been reviewed by GMEU. They state that there was no evidence of bats found, with the report defining the building as being low risk. In the light of this they have confirmed that the proposal will not have an adverse impact upon bats subject to the attachment of a condition that requires the development to be carried out in accordance with the recommendations in section 6 of the submitted report.

GMEU note that the proposal will result in the loss of trees and shrubs and therefore they have advised that two conditions should be attached – one that prevents any works to trees and shrubs occurring within the bird nesting season which runs between 1st March and 31st August unless a detailed bird nest survey by a suitably experienced ecologist has been carried out immediately prior to clearance and written confirmation provided that no active bird nests are present and another that requires replacement landscaping to be introduced.

In respect of the condition GMEU recommend to ensure that the site is cleared outside the bird nesting 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 and consequently it is not considered necessary to attach this condition - it would duplicate that legislation. However, an informative will be added to remind the applicant of this.

For these reasons subject to the attachment of an appropriately worded informative to advise the developer on their responsibilities in relation to nesting birds together with conditions requiring the development to be undertaken in accordance with the recommendations of the submitted bat report and a landscape scheme that is submitted to the LPA for approval, it is not considered that the proposal would have a significant adverse impact upon ecology and as such the scheme is considered acceptable in this regard.

Page 22

$n4pmyne4.rtf Flood risk and drainage

The application site is within Flood Zone 1 and therefore has a low risk of fluvial flooding. The site is located within the Core Conurbation Critical Drainage Area.

Although no comments have been received from the drainage engineer on this application a proposal was reviewed by the drainage engineers at the pre-app stage where they advised that in accordance with the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment a reduction in surface water run off to 50% of the existing (or to Greenfield runoff, whichever is greater) will be required, stating that a condition requiring the submission approval and subsequent implementation of a scheme for surface water drainage using sustainable drainage methods.

Subject to the attachment of the condition recommended by the drainage engineer together with the condition that United Utilities have requested re draining foul and surface water on separate systems it is not considered that the proposal raises any issues from a flood risk perspective.

Sustainability The proposal offers an opportunity to develop a site which is located within an accessible and sustainable location – the site is located within a 15 minute walk of Walkden Town Centre, which affords occupiers access to a range of goods and services. Furthermore the site is located within a 3 minute and 4 minute walk of a number of bus stops on the East Lancs Road that provide regular connections between Atherton, Leigh and Manchester City Centre with two local buses stopping outside the site, meaning that future occupiers are well served by public transport that provides easy access to sites across the City and beyond.

In addition, the agent for the application has submitted a sustainability statement with the application within which it is confirmed that they propose the adoption of a fabric first energy strategy which addressed the core policy goals of sustainable construction; i.e. reduced CO2 emissions and reduced energy consumption. Sustainability measures to be incorporated into the development include:  The minimization of glazing facing south in order to ensure that the risk of summertime over-heating is minimized, avoiding the need for active cooling/ventilation in summer  The use of materials with U-Values above the requirement of building regulations to provide high levels of insulation  The use of efficient condensing boilers  The use of low energy LED lighting featuring dedicated energy efficient fittings  Providing information on smart metering to occupiers, along with information on the EU Energy Efficiency Labeling Scheme and the Energy Start scheme, with occupiers being advised that smart metering technology should be employed along with fridges / freezers achieving at least an A+ rating, washing machines / dishwashers achieving at least an A rating, and washer dryer / tumble dryers achieving at least a B rating  Using sanitary ware that will favour compliance with the “optional Standards” set out in approved document G for domestic properties  The use of locally sourced materials where possible  The use of materials that achieve an A or A+ rating according to the Green Guide Specification  Requiring the approved contractor to operate according to a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), containing procedures for waste minimisation as well as optimisation of waste recovery and recycling, in accordance with the Waste Hierarchy  The incorporation of external waste storage areas at the rear of the properties that can accommodate general and recyclable waste containers.  The incorporation of trees and landscaping across the site

Other Issues

Neighbouring residents have stated that there are other sites that could be developed to provide housing rather than this one. Although there may be other suitable sites for housing development, the local planning authority’s duty here is to review the application as submitted and determine whether it is acceptable having regard to relevant local and national planning policy.

Page 23

$n4pmyne4.rtf With regard to the issues neighbouring residents have expressed re the asbestos being present in the existing building and what health risks will be posed by its demolition this is not a matter for the Local Planning Authority, with such activities being the responsibility of other departments and agencies to control.

With regard to the issue raised regarding neighbour consultation neighbouring residents were notified in accordance with national requirements as set out in section 15 (5) of the Development Management Procedure Order 2015 - 15 neighbouring properties were notified by letter, with a site notice being posted. Adequate publicity has therefore been undertaken.

Neighbouring residents have expressed concerns over the ability of existing services such as schools and doctors to cope with the additional demand that would be generated by the proposal. The provision of such facilities is controlled outside of the planning process and although contributions are sometimes justified, due to the small scale of this development and the wider benefits offered by the scheme, no contribution is considered necessary to justify approval of the application.

Recommendation

Approve subject to conditions

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

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

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

Proposed site plan - drawing 17018 02 received 17/4/18 Proposed floorplans - drawings 17018 03, 17018 04 and 17018 05 Proposed elevations - drawing 17018 06 Proposed section - drawing 17018 07 Proposed street scene - drawing 17018 08 received 17/4/18 Proposed landscape plan – drawing 17018 10 received 17/4/18

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

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

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

4. The landscaping works shown on approved drawing 17018 10 (submitted 17/4/18) shall be carried out within 18 months of first occupation of the development hereby permitted.

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

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

Page 24

$n4pmyne4.rtf 5. Prior to occupation the applicant shall provide a single electric vehicle charging point for all residential properties with off road parking. The charging point shall be capable of Type 2 "Fast" charging, and wired to a dedicated 30A spur to provide 7KV charging capacity.

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

6. All glazing to habitable rooms (living, dining and bedrooms) shall be designed to achieve a minimum 32 dB Rw+Ctr sound reduction index, and shall be installed as per manufacturer's instructions and retained as such thereafter

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of residents in accordance with policy EN 17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework

7. Prior to the commencement of the development a scheme to demonstrate the use of ventilation measures which removes the need for future residents to open windows for cooling and ventilation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved ventilation measures shall ensure the standards in condition 6 above are not compromised and shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the development and thereafter be retained

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of residents in accordance with policy EN 17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework

8. Prior to the first occupation of the dwellings hereby approved a site completion report confirming that the required uprated glazing and the agreed ventilation measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of residents in accordance with policy EN 17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework

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

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

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

Page 25

$n4pmyne4.rtf 10. Prior to the commencement of development (except for demolition and enabling works) a Phase 2 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

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

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

11. Foul and surface water shall be drained on separate systems.

Reason: To secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of flooding and pollution

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

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

13. Prior to first occupation of the development a scheme for off-site highway improvements to mitigate the potential impact of parking around the site shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable that shall also be agreed prior to first occupation of the development.

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

14. The vehicle parking and associated turning heads shown on the approved plans to serve the development hereby permitted shall be made available for use prior to the development being brought into use) and shall be retained thereafter for their intended purpose. The area to the front of the proposed dwellings, which provides the turning head, shall be maintained clear of obstruction at all times.

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

Page 26

$n4pmyne4.rtf 15. Any solid boundary wall/fence adjacent to Walkden Road should be no higher than 0.6m high, with railings being utilised for any boundary treatment that is higher than 0.6m

Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework

16. No gates shall be installed within 5.5m of the western boundary of the site, which runs along Walkden Road.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

17. No development shall be started until all the retained trees within (or overhanging) the site [shown on TPP, Drawing No: TPP.12764 Rev. 01 dated: 21-12-2017] have been surrounded by substantial fences which shall extend to the extreme circumference of the spread of the branches of the trees (or such positions as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority). Such fences shall be erected in accordance with the specification submitted [shown at APPENDIX 4, within Report No: AIA.12764.01] and shall remain until all development is completed and no work, including any form of drainage or storage of materials, earth or topsoil shall take place within the perimeter of such fencing.

Reason: To safeguard trees on the site and to ensure that adequate provision is made for their protection whilst the development is carried out.

18. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations set out in section 6 of the Gritstone Ecology Preliminary Roost Assessment for 352 Walkden Road.

Reason: To safeguard the habitat of protected species, and enhance the nature conservation value of the site in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

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.

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

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

2. United Utilities have offered the following advice - o The level of cover to the water mains and sewers must not be compromised either during or after construction. o A separate metered supply to each unit will be required at the applicant's expense and all internal pipe work must comply with current water supply (water fittings) regulations 1999. o Should this planning application be approved, the applicant should contact United Utilities on 03456 723 723 regarding connection to the water mains or public sewers. o It is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate the exact relationship between any United Utilities' assets and the proposed development. United Utilities offers a fully supported mapping service and we recommend the applicant contact our Property Searches Team at [email protected] to obtain maps of the site. o Due to the public sewer transfer, not all sewers are currently shown on the statutory sewer records, if a sewer is discovered during construction; please contact a Building Control Body to discuss the matter further. o In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG), the site should be drained on a separate system with foul water draining to the public sewer and surface water draining in the most sustainable way. The NPPG clearly outlines the hierarchy to

Page 27

$n4pmyne4.rtf be investigated by the developer when considering a surface water drainage strategy. We would ask the developer to consider the following drainage options in the following order of priority: 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. o If the applicant intends to offer wastewater assets forward for adoption by United Utilities, the proposed detailed design will be subject to a technical appraisal by an Adoptions Engineer as they need to be sure that the proposal meets the requirements of Sewers for adoption and United Utilities' Asset Standards. The proposed design should give consideration to long term operability and give United Utilities a cost effective proposal for the life of the assets. Therefore, should this application be approved and the applicant wishes to progress a Section 104 agreement, it is strongly recommend that no construction commences until the detailed drainage design, submitted as part of the Section 104 agreement, has been assessed and accepted in writing by United Utilities. Any works carried out prior to the technical assessment being approved is done entirely at the developers own risk and could be subject to change.

3. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) makes it an offence (with certain limited exceptions and in the absence of a licence) to intentionally to kill, injure or take any wild bird, or intentionally to damage, take or destroy its nest whilst it is being built or is in use, or to take or destroy its eggs. Further, the Act affords additional protection to specific species of birds listed in Schedule 1 of the Act. In respect of these species it is unlawful to intentionally or recklessly to disturb such a bird whilst it is nest-building or is at or near a nest with eggs or young; or to disturb their dependent young. You are therefore advised to seek the advice of a suitably qualified ecologist before commencing works on site.

4. When preparing the CEMP required under condition 9 the highways officer has advised as follows - o All construction traffic should be marshalled on and off site by qualified vehicle banksman. o All heavy good vehicles shall be limited to between 8am-5:30pm Monday to Friday and 8am-2pm Saturday only (no working on Sundays or Bank Holidays). o Any traffic management measures required on the highway to be communicated with as much lead in time as possible; o There should be no parking of construction vehicles or operative vehicles on the adopted highway The spaces for and management of the parking of site operatives and visitors vehicle o 'Site entrance ahead' signs shall be displayed on all approaches during working hours; o If it is not proposed to install a wheel wash, efforts should be made to clean mud/debris off vehicles before they leave the site i.e. pressure washing; o If there are vehicle manoeuvres on and off site, that could potentially deposit mud and debris, it will be necessary to deploy a street cleansing vehicle/vehicles during the activity and not just at the end of the morning or afternoon shift; o There should be slippery road sign with 'Mud on Road' sub plates signs available on site with these being deployed at the first signs mud being deposited on the adopted highway

5. The highways officer has offered the following advice - o Existing adopted street lighting and existing services within the footway and carriageway should be either diverted or protected in agreement with relevant authorities. o Any amendments to the carriageway need to be re-instated using similar materials. o The developer should contact John Horrocks to arrange a full dilapidation/Condition Survey of all adopted highways surrounding the site prior to works commencing on site. Tel: 0161 603 4046 o Applications for all forms of highway permits/licenses shall be made in advanced of any works being undertaken on the adopted highway. Please note no boundary fencing shall be erected or positioned on any part of the adopted highway with first seeking the relevant permits/licenses from the Local Highway Authority -John Horrocks- Tel: 0161 603 4046 o Requests for general Information regarding the adopted highway network shall be directed to the Local Highway Authority - John Horrocks- 0161 603 4046 o The works on the adopted highway will be delivered by a s50 agreement and Greater Manchester Roads Activities Permit Scheme (GMRAPS) and to funding to facilitate a vehicle crossover area.

Page 28

$n4pmyne4.rtf Agenda Item 5b

APPLICATION No: 18/71423/FUL APPLICANT: Ms Karen Wild LOCATION: Broadoak Primary School , Fairmount Road, Swinton, M27 0EP PROPOSAL: Siting of a single storey modular building to be used as a nursery WARD: Worsley

Description of Site and Surrounding Area This application relates to Broadoak Primary School which is accessed from Fairmount Road, Worsley. The school is formed of a series of single and two storey buildings with the car park and recreation space to the east, south and west of the buildings. The wider area is predominantly residential in nature. There are two Grade II listed buildings located to the north of the school.

Description of Proposal Planning permission is sought for the installation of a single storey modular building to accommodate a pre- school nursery.

Publicity Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Date Displayed: 19 March 2018 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Not Applicable Reason:

Relevant Site History 97/36249/DEEM3 - Erection of new nursery classroom including tarmac hardplay and grassed softplay area - Approve - 18 June 1997 97/36604/DEEM3 - Construction of a new hard play area to allow existing hard play area to be used as on site overspill staff and visitor car park - Approve - 16 July 1997

Page 29

$wl1zkx21.docx 99/39370/DEEM3 - Infill classroom extension and internal modifications including new external doors and screens - Approve - 22 July 1999 02/43609/FUL - Erection of first floor computer suite above existing library and music room, alterations to the ground floor elevation and installation of roller shutters. - Approve - 21 March 2002 04/48323/DEEM3 - Erection of single storey extension to provide disabled toilet - Approve - 21 June 2004 05/50481/DEEM3 - Siting of a steel storage container - Approve - 17 May 2005 14/64897/FUL - Erection of an infill extension to provide new staircase and lift platform. - Approve - 31 October 2014

Neighbour Notification Neighbours were notified by letter dated 8th March 2018 with additional neighbours identified and notified by letter dated 14th March 2018. A site notice was also displayed close to the site on 19th March 2018.

Representations 6 objections have been received. The issues raised can be summarised as follows:  Increase in traffic on Chatsworth Road and Fairmount Road;  Impact of parking on neighbours and damage to road as a result;  Road side pollution;  Chatsworth Road is used as a rat-run;  Increase in noise levels from the school;  Building is too close to neighbouring dwellings;  Impact on neighbours’ outlook and privacy;  Impact on bats;  Loss of trees/shrubs;  Impact on visual amenity;  A proposal to increase the school car park has not materialised;  Does not know who the applicant is.

In response, the nature of the development is such that it does not require a bat survey to be undertaken. However, an informative will be added for the applicant’s attention.

It is not expected that there will be any trees removed to facilitate the development, however, some trees may be pruned. The trees are not subject to a Tree Preservation Order and the LPA has no objection to the pruning and management of the school’s trees.

The applicant is the Head Teacher of the school.

The remaining points will be addressed in the appraisal below.

Consultations

Highways - No objection.

Senior Drainage Engineer - No objection subject to all drainage works being undertaken in accordance with Building Regulations Approved Document H.

Air Quality, Noise, Contaminated Land - No objection.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan EHC1 - Provision, Improvement of Schools, Colle 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.

Page 30

$wl1zkx21.docx 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 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 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 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 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.

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 the relevant criteria within the UDP policies applicable to the proposed development are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.

Principle of Development

Policy EHC1 supports proposals for the improvement of schools subject to a number of considerations to ensure that the standard of recreation provision remains adequate, adequate disabled access is provided, that there is no adverse impact on the highway network and provision is made, wherever possible, for community use of the buildings and grounds.

The proposed building will be linked to the existing nursery building and will afford the school the opportunity to offer full time nursery places in line with other Salford primary schools. The total number of pupils will not increase. It is considered that the proposal is in accordance with UDP policy EHC1 subject to compliance with other relevant policies.

In relation to the community use of the unit, the school does not offer the use of the buildings to the community in order to reduce the impact of activities on neighbours to standard school hours given that the school is within close proximity to residential neighbours.

Page 31

$wl1zkx21.docx Design

The proposed modular building is to be located to the side and rear of the existing single storey nursery building, close to the western boundary of the site. The building will be largely rectangular with a small projecting link to the existing building. The building will be L-shaped and will measure 9.9m by 6m with the link projecting a further 3m towards the side of the existing nursery building. The main part of the modular building will be 3.1m in height with a flat roof; the link will be set slightly lower at 2.5m. The building will be finished in a Plastisol finish which will be wood effect so as to reduce the visual impact against the main school building. Due to its siting behind the existing building, and modest size, the building will not be visible from the street and is of a sufficient quality to not compromise the appearance of the school as a whole.

Amenity

The modular building will be located in a position that will bring the school buildings closer to neighbours on Bramley Close than existing. At the closest point, the modular building will be 12m away from the boundary shared with the neighbour at 3 Bramley Close and 16m away from the rear boundaries of the properties at 17- 25 Fairmount Road. The elevations of the building facing these neighbours will only feature high level windows, 1.8m above the floor level. In addition to this, the modular building will be screened by the existing trees within the school’s boundary, to the north and west of the modular building, which are to remain in situ. The building will be partially visible from the rear of the neighbouring properties at 48, 50, 52, 74, 76 and 94 Chatsworth Road situated to the south of the school. However, the building will be at least 60m away from the boundary of the closest neighbour. It is proposed to use the nursery school between the hours that the school currently operates to and the development will not introduce any recreation area closer to neighbours than already exists.

These separation distances, existing tree screening and the introduction of high level windows will ensure that there is no detrimental impact on the amenity enjoyed by neighbours in terms of privacy, overlooking, noise, overbearing and outlook currently enjoyed by the neighbours in accordance with policies DES7 and EN17 of the UPD.

Highways

The proposal will not involve any alteration to the car park which will retain 31 spaces plus one disabled space. The car park is accessed from Fairmount Road via a secured gate, set well back from the edge of the footway to allow a vehicle to wait clear of the highway whilst the gate is opening.

The new nursery class room will not accommodate an increase in pupil numbers overall but will allow the opportunity for pupils to remain on site all day in full time nursery places rather than half of the children attending in the morning and half attending in the afternoon. On this basis, it is not considered that there will be a severe impact on the highway in accordance with the NPPF. The offering of full time places will reduce the activities on the highway at midday when parents would be collecting the children from the morning session and dropping off children for the afternoon session.

In addition to this, the school has provided a copy of their latest Travel Plan which has been reviewed by Urban Vision’s Sustainable Transport Planner. The Travel Plan is considered to be up to date and fit for purpose. Although not related to this development, and beyond the scope of this application, it is worth noting that the Sustainable Transport Planner is currently working with the school on schemes to improve the traffic and parking issues in the area.

The modular building will be brought to site and unloaded using a crane and track to direct the building from the Fairmount Road frontage, through the western part of the site and drop the building into place. It is recognised that there will be a small level of disruption to users of the highway during this operation but this is expected to be very short term and will be done outside of term time when no other forms of traffic are likely to be visiting the school.

Heritage

There are two Grade II listed buildings in close proximity to the school site; Sindsley House at the junction of Fairmount Road, Toad Pond Close and Worsley Road and the White Horse Public House. The proposed development is located at such a distance, and screened by the existing school buildings that it will not pose any harm to the setting of these heritage assets.

Page 32

$wl1zkx21.docx Recommendation Approve

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

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

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

Proposed Location Plan, reference BRO-AWP-B1-GF-DR-B-0001 Rev A Proposed Block Plan, reference BRO-AWP-B1-GF-DR-B-0002 Plan Layout and elevations, reference PKR-00-GF-DR-A-01 Rev 03

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

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.

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

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

2. All species of bats found in the UK receive a high level of legal protection under the terms of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. Bats roost in a variety of places and will use cracks, crevices and holes in trees. They are mobile in their habits and can turn up in the most unlikely places at any time of year. Precautions should be taken throughout works, at any time of year, with the possible presence of bats borne in mind. If bats are found at any time during works, then work should cease immediately and advice sought from Natural England or a suitably qualified bat worker.

Page 33

$wl1zkx21.docx This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5c

APPLICATION No: 17/70056/FUL APPLICANT: Great Chetham Developments Limited LOCATION: Land Formerly Griffin Hotel, Lower Broughton Road, Salford PROPOSAL: Erection of a new apartment building, providing 57 no. 1 and 2 bedroom apartments together with associated access and parking WARD: Broughton

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The site was previously accommodated by the Griffin Hotel. The hotel was demolished in 2006 following the granting of planning permission for the redevelopment of the site for apartments. This permission has not been implemented and the site has remained vacant since. The site is currently in an overgrown state and is secured with timber hoardings around its perimeter. The site extends to approximately 0.25 hectares.

Page 35 Description of Proposal

Permission is sought for the erection of a new apartment building with associated access and parking.

Apartments would be arranged in an L shaped block that extends along the frontages of Great Cheetham Street West and Lower Broughton Road. The building would be 5 storeys in height at the corner point and would step down to 4 storeys approximately half way along the Lower Broughton Road and Great Cheetham Street West elevations.

The main pedestrian entrance would be off Lower Broughton Road and would be identified by a recessed area within the facade close to the junction with Great Cheetham street West.

Vehicular access would be provided from Lower Broughton Road below the first floor level of part of the block with parking provided to the rear of the building. A total of 48 car parking spaces would be provided at the site together with 3 disabled spaces and a cycle storage area with capacity for 14 cycles.

Ground floor units are set at approximately 1.7m above pavement level in order to mitigate potential flood risk. In addition units fronting Great Cheetham Street West would have small front gardens at street level and voids would be provided under the ground floor level of the units so that in the event of a flood, flood water would pass over the garden areas and under the building into the car park to the rear of the building. The car park area is proposed to be lowered to allow for flood water to be stored here.

The building would accommodate 57 units (market housing) with the proposed mix as follows: - 10 x one bedroom units - 47 x two bedroom units

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Date Displayed: 5 October 2017 Reason: Article 13

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford EditionDate Published: 31 August 2017 Reason: Article 15 Standard Press Notice

Relevant Site History

11/59934/FUL – Erection of building (maximum 6 storeys) comprising 42 dwellings, 160sqm commercial unit (A1, A2, B1) with associated car parking and landscaping Re-sub of 10/59530/FUL. Permitted

10/58818/FUL – Extension of time limit for implementation of planning permission 04/48414/FUL demolition of existing hotel and erection of part six, part five, part four and part three storey building comprising 63 apartments, car parking at basement level, and communal gardens together with alteration to existing and creation of new vehicular access. Refused

10/59530/FUL – Erection of building (maximum 6 storeys) comprising 42 dwellings, 160sqm commercial unit (A1,A2, B1) with associated car parking and landscaping. Withdrawn

04/48414/FUL – Demolition of existing hotel and erection of part six, part five, part four and part three storey building comprising 63 apartments, car parking at basement level, and communal gardens together with alteration to existing and creation of new vehicular access. Permitted

04/47698/FUL – Demolition of existing hotel and erection of one eight storey block comprising 118 apartments, car parking at basement level, childrens play area and communal gardens together with alteration to existing and creation of new vehicular access. Withdrawn

Neighbour Notification

Neighbours notified: 21/8/2017

Page 36 Amended plan letters sent: 16/1/18

Representations

Three objections have been received (one of which includes 6 signatures.) The following issues are raised: - The planning statement suggests that the site had two previous accesses but this is incorrect; - Loss of light due to proposed 5 storey building at a distance of 20m from the properties on Aegean Gardens; - Parking is less than one space per unit and overflow parking would be on Lower Broughton Road or the housing estate to the rear which will further restrict visibility, increase the risk of collision and impact on the smooth progress of traffic around the development including buses; - Previous applications have only ever been 6 storeys at the corner adjacent to the junction and not along Lower Broughton Road; - The consultation leaflet circulated prior to the application didn’t include a visual image so comments were just on the basis of the re-development of the site and not the detail; - The mass and bulking of the development is not sympathetic to the locality or the site itself; - Impact on TV signal; - Impact of construction works on surrounding properties;

One letter of support has also been received that sets out that they would be delighted to have a new development at the site as the present situation does nothing to enhance the area.

It should be noted that amended plan letters were sent on 16th January 2018 and no further letters of representation have been received following this.

Consultations

Design For Security - No comments received to date

Matt Ryan Senior Engineer - No objections subject to conditions. Please refer to Flood Risk and Drainage Section of the report for further discussion.

Environment Agency - No objections subject to conditions. Please refer to Flood Risk and Drainage Section of the report for further discussion.

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

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

Urban Vision Environment (Air And Noise) (UVAAN)- No objections. Recommend conditions in relation to; the submission of a noise assessment including mitigation measures to demonstrate how the required noise standards will be met and a site completion report as well as the submission of a noise and vibration management and monitoring plan. These recommended conditions have been attached. UVAAN also recommend a condition limiting the hours of construction on site however this will be covered as part of the Construction Environmental management Plan (CEMP) condition.

Transport For Greater Manchester (TFGM) - No comments received to date

Urban Vision Environment (Land Contamination) - Recommend contaminated land condition and informative.

United Utilities - Developer Services & Planning - No objections subject to conditions in relation to foul and surface water being drained on separate systems and requiring the submission of a surface water drainage scheme and sustainable drainage management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority (LPA)..

Page 37 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 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 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 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 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 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 A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Parking This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded; and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of safety and security.

Page 38 Unitary Development Plan EN17 - Pollution Control This policy states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning permission will only be granted where the development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory level of amenity.

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

Unitary Development Plan 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

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

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

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

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.

Page 39 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.

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

Appraisal

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

 Principle of development i) Strategic location ii) Previously Developed Land iii) Proposed use – Residential a) Five year land supply position b) Sustainability of the site c) Housing Mix i) Type of dwellings ii) Size of dwellings  Planning Obligations  Design  Amenity  Highways  Ecology  Trees  Flood Risk and Drainage  Contaminated land

Principle of Development i) Strategic Location

UDP Chapter 3 identifies a Spatial Framework for the City and recognises that the opportunities and the need for development, regeneration and environmental protection vary in their scale and nature across the city. The site is located within Central Salford which is identified as the focus for major regeneration and investment activity. The site is not allocated on the UDP Proposals Map. ii) Previously Developed Land

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) defines previously developed land as, land which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land (although it should not be assumed that the whole of the curtilage should be developed) and any associated fixed surface infrastructure.

The application site was previously occupied by the Griffin Hotel which was demolished in 2006. Since then there have been a number of planning approvals for the redevelopment of the site, however these have not been implemented and the site has fallen into a state of disrepair and is currently overgrown. That said the site is still considered to fall within the definition of previously developed land.

Page 40 iii) Proposed use – Residential a) Five-year land supply position

Paragraph 49 of the NPPF states that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the Local Planning Authority cannot demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites. The City Council does have a five year housing supply.

Paragraph 14 of the NPPF is clear that a presumption in favour of sustainable development is a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision taking. Where there is an identified five-year supply of housing the NPPF requires development proposals that accords with the development plan should be approved without delay (paragraph 14), and proposed development that conflicts should be refused unless other material considerations indicate otherwise (paragraph 12). b) Sustainability of the site

The presumption in favour of sustainable development, which is identified by the NPPF, means that it is necessary to consider whether the proposed development represents a sustainable form of development. As part of this overall assessment, consideration of whether the proposed development is accessible to everyday facilities and employment by non-car modes of transport should be given.

The application site is located on a prominent corner plot at the junction of Lower Broughton Road and Great Cheetham Street West. There are bus stops located close to the site on Cromwell Bridge and on Lower Broughton Road within a 2 minute and 5 minute walk of the site providing regular connections between Salford Shopping Centre and Manchester City Centre.

The site is well connected to the local highway network providing convenient access from the surrounding residential areas and local amenities. The majority of the local highway network, particularly Lower Broughton Road, Cromwell Bridge and Great Cheetham Street West is lit and is subject to 30mph speed. In addition Lower Broughton Road / Great Cheetham Street West signal junction is equipped with pedestrian crossing facilities with no waiting restriction on all four approaches of the junction. Some cycle parking provision is also proposed as part of the development. In addition Urban Vision Highways consider that the local highway network has adequate pedestrian facilities to encourage future occupiers to travel by sustainable modes. c) Housing Mix

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

i) Type of dwellings

Policy HOU1 of the housing planning guidance states that within the part of the city where the proposed development is located, new developments should provide a broad mix of dwelling types. Apartments should only be the predominant form of provision on sites in the most accessible locations within Central Salford. An alternative approach may be acceptable having regard to criteria A to H of UDP policy H1.

The proposed development of 57 apartments does not accord with policy HOU1 as only apartments are proposed instead of a broad mix of dwelling types. However it is noted that a small number of units fronting onto Great Cheetham Street West are akin to house type accommodation with front gardens and access from Great Cheetham Street West. In addition it is considered that there are material considerations that would indicate that a scheme of only apartments on this site would be acceptable in principle, subject to separate considerations as to whether the overall scale, massing, height, landscaping, layout, materials and access etc. are appropriate which are considered throughout this report.

Page 41 The site has previously been granted planning permission for 42 units with 67% being apartments (reference 11/59934/FUL) and before that 63 apartments (reference 04/48414/FUL). These permissions have expired meaning therefore there is no extant planning permission for apartments and therefore no formal fallback position. Notwithstanding this, there have not been any material changes to conclude that apartments on the site are no longer acceptable. In particular the most recent permission was determined having regard to policies in the saved UDP and the housing planning guidance and these policies remain extant and are the key considerations in determining whether the mix of dwellings is acceptable.

The proposed scheme would bring back into use brownfield land that is not of high environmental value, in accordance with one of the 12 core planning principles in paragraph 17 of the NPPF. The site in its current form significantly detracts from the amenity and character of the area and the proposed scheme would represent an efficient use of land and provide new homes to meet need.

Having regard to all of the above it is considered that the proposed apartment only scheme is acceptable in this instance.

ii) Size of dwellings

Policy HOU2 of the housing planning guidance requires 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 floor space typically 57 square metres or above. An alternative approach may be acceptable having regard to criteria A to H of UDP policy H1.

The submitted plans show that the proposed apartments would provide the following mix: - 10x1 bed - 47x2 bed

Although small apartments (studios and one bed) would not predominate, the application would be contrary to policy HOU2 given that a significant proportion of 3 bed apartments are not being provided.

Paragraph 6.20 of the Planning Statement provides a brief justification for the lack of any 3 bed apartments with reference made to the proposed 2 bed apartments on the ground floor fronting Great Cheetham Street West being suitable for young families, and acknowledging the availability of family houses with private gardens in the surrounding area. During the application process the applicants were asked to either amend the scheme to include some three bedroom units or to provide further justification with regards to the lack of demand for this size of units.

The applicants have provided an email and letter from a Manchester Estate Agent who confirm they have been active in Salford for a number of years. The supporting documents advise that in their view the inclusion of three bedroom units will have a detrimental effect on the sale ability and also the rent ability of the units. They advise that three bedroom apartments are notoriously more difficult to sell and when it comes to renting they are only popular in a small window of the year meaning the rest of the year they are difficult to rent out. They confirm what is meant by this and state that if a three bed apartment comes to market at the wrong time of year then they can be vacant for 2-3 months at a time whereas if a one or two bed apartment is put on at the same time to rent, these will be rented out in days. In their experience they find that whilst three bedroom apartments are better suited to families they find that families prefer houses. They recommend that three bedroom units are excluded and that the development is one and two bedroom units that are popular in this location.

Regard is had to the supporting evidence provided and in addition it is noted that the site is located within an area where there are a mix of house types and sizes including a significant number of conventional dwellings which are likely to include a proportion of three bedroom units. Having regard to this and the fact that despite previous planning permissions the site has failed to come forward and has been in a poor state of repair for a number of years now it is considered that the proposed mix put forward is acceptable in this instance.

Page 42 Planning Obligations

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

The proposed development includes four units fronting Great Cheetham Street West which would be provided with a garden area and access to the front. Having regard to this and paragraph 4.9 of the Planning Obligations SPD it is considered that these units are more akin to house type accommodation and as such the following obligations are sought: Open space - £17,940.00 Education - £4355.56 Public Realm - £6000.00 Total – £28,295.56

The applicants have confirmed agreement to payment of these monies and this will be secured through a S106 agreement. The council’s planning obligations officer has identified the following projects which these monies would be directed towards:

 Open space – Younger and older children’s play provision at Albert Park, Broughton.

 Public Realm – To provide street scene improvements along Lower Broughton Road and/or Camp Street.

 Education – Primary School Project B: a scheme of works to enhance or extend existing education facilities, or create new education facilities, for a primary school located within Pupil Planning Area 10.

Design

It should be noted that there have been previous approvals on this site for residential developments with the most recent being in 2011 which permitted the erection of family housing and apartments from 4 storeys in height increasing up to six storeys at the corner of the site, adjacent to the junction of Lower Broughton Road and Great Cheetham Street West.

The current proposed development is all apartments arranged in an L shaped block that extends along the frontages of Great Cheetham Street West and Lower Broughton Road. The building would be 5 storeys in height at the corner point and would step down to 4 storeys approximately half way along the Lower Broughton Road and Great Cheetham Street West elevations in order to soften its appearance and ensure it integrates well with the lower height developments that surround the site.

The building would be modern in appearance and the submitted plans and CGI’s indicate the use of a light coloured brick, specific details of which are yet to be confirmed but can be agreed by way of a suitable worded condition.

Due to flood risk issues at the site, internal floor levels are required to be raised up above the level of the adjacent pavement. In the case of the units fronting Great Cheetham Street West the building follows a similar building line to the adjacent properties and this gives sufficient set back from the pavement for the provision of an active frontage with garden areas and direct access from the street to the ground floor units in this location. The lack of depth of the site means that this is not possible to provide a set back with garden areas and front doors on the Lower Broughton Road side, however, raised planters and windows along this elevation together with the inclusion of balconies at higher levels and rain screen cladding add detail and interest to the elevation.

The height of the part of the development closest to existing properties along Great Cheetham Street West has been reduced slightly since the submission of the original plans for two main reasons, one to ensure amenity of neighbours is not impacted to an undesirable degree and two, to ensure that the step up from the adjacent units is not incongruous in the street scene. The step up is considered acceptable and acts as an interim step before

Page 43 the further increase in height to the corner part of the proposed apartment building. It is also noted that this is not too dissimilar to the 2011 approval.

It is considered that the overall scale and massing of the development is acceptable in this location and will act as a focal point of the junction which is currently lacking any formal demarcation in terms of landmark developments or framing of the junction.

The design and appearance of the building is different to any of the surrounding buildings but it is not considered that this makes it unacceptable but would again add interest to the street scene and add life to the site which has stood vacant and derelict for many years.

The main pedestrian entrance would be off Lower Broughton Road and would be identified by a recessed area within the facade close to the junction with Great Cheetham Street West. It is envisaged that signage would be provided on the elevation adjacent to the entrance which will provide further direction in terms of pedestrians accessing the site.

Vehicular access would be provided from Lower Broughton Road below the first floor level of part of the block with parking provided to the rear of the building.

Design and Crime

The application is supported by a Crime Impact Statement. The statement has been produced by Greater Manchester Police (GMP) Design for Security and confirms that subject to minor changes and security additions GMP would be happy to support the development.

The suggested changes/additions, including no patio doors to front elevations; secure gating of vehicular and pedestrian accesses; habitable room windows to ground floor apartments facing the car park, have been incorporated into the proposed scheme. It is noted that only the ground floor units in the northern part of the development would have habitable room windows overlooking the car park, however the other units in the western part of the development have rear accesses via the walkway and as such there would be an element of activity around this area.

They also recommend robust control of access into and around the building; a secure system for the delivery of post and a number of other physical security specifications as set out in section 4 of the report which relates to alarms, windows, doors etc. This level of technical detail is beyond the scope of planning control and as such an informative is recommended to draw the applicant’s attention to the recommendations made by Design for Security.

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 former Griffin Hotel that occupied the site was made up of a number of adjoining parts of differing heights. It was largely centred around the northern end of the site with the southern end used for parking.

It is acknowledged that the Former Griffin hotel was demolished around 2006 leaving the site cleared and undeveloped. Various permissions for the site have been approved with the most recent in 2011 providing built form along the sites frontages, similar to that proposed under this current application and varying in height from 4-6 storeys. Whilst this permission is no longer extant there have been no significant changes on site in terms of the residential properties that surround the site that would warrant a different view being reached in terms of the separation of the current proposed building and its scale and massing.

The proposed apartment block would be set in approximately 1m from the common boundary with 4A Great Cheetham Street West. It would not project significantly beyond its front elevation and would not project beyond its two storey rear outrigger. Number 4A Great Cheetham Street West contains no windows in its side gable and

Page 44 no windows are proposed in the side gable of the apartment building in this location. This relationship is considered acceptable.

To the north of the site on the opposite side of Great Cheetham Street West is the front elevation of a dental practice and the side elevation of a beauty salon with residential accommodation above. The proposed apartment building would retain a distance of approximately 22m from the facing properties and this separation is considered acceptable.

To the west on the opposite side of Lower Broughton Road the site faces a small number of residential and commercial units as well as a mounded grassed area which accommodates a number of large advertisement hoardings. Separation distances from the apartment building range from approximately 16m to approximately 20m with the road in between. In terms of the commercial and residential properties close to the junction with Great Cheetham Street West where the larger separation would exist this is considered acceptable. Further down Lower Broughton Rad where the separation distance is reduced it is noted that the closest residential property will be afforded further light and outlook from beyond the proposed apartment building which ends partway along the front elevation of this residential property and the separation is considered acceptable.

To the east the site is bounded by the residential dwellings on Aegean Gardens. The properties at 5-11 Aegean Gardens share their rear boundary with the application site. The proposed development would be four storeys in height at this part and would retain a distance of approximately 14m from the rear boundary and approximately 23.5m from therear elevation of the closest facing properties. This separation is considered acceptable and is similar to that of previous permissions at the site.

In terms of noise and disturbance from the car parking area, boundary fencing will provide screening from car headlights and will act as a barrier to assist in reducing noise from car engines etc.

Number 15 Aegean Gardens, a bungalow, sits side onto the application site. The part of the proposed apartment building directly adjacent to number 4A Great Cheetham Street West would directly face part of its rear garden and rear elevation. The building in this part would be four storeys in height (approximately 13.5m) and would retain a distance of approximately 9.5m from the common boundary and 20.5m from the rear elevation of number 15 Aegean Gardens. Whilst taller than the rear outrider at number 4A that directly faces the other half of the rear boundary and elevation of 15 Aegean Gardens the apartment block would be set back approximately 4.5m from the two storey outrigger at 4A Great Cheetham Street West.

Regard is also had to the 2011 permission which permitted a building 12m in height at a distance of approximately 6.5m to the common boundary and approximately 18m to the rear elevation of number 15 Aegean Gardens. It is also noted that when the former Griffin hotel was in place one of its buildings ran directly along the side boundary of the rear garden of number 15. Taking all of the above into account it is considered that, on balance, the relationship of the proposed development to the property at 15 Aegean Gardens is acceptable.

No outdoor amenity space would be provided for future occupiers of the proposed apartments with the exception of the small number of ground floor units fronting Great Cheetham Street West. Whilst this is acknowledged, it is noted that the site is within close proximity to public areas of open space which future occupiers may use if they so wish. These include: - Albert Park, which includes a local area of play, informal open space, and all weather playing pitch facilities with flood lights: 200 metres east of the site; - Broughton Cricket and Rugby Club and associated facilities: 340 metres north east of the Site; - Broughton playing fields: 250 metres north of the Site; - Castle Irwell Fields, although temporarily closed for flood defence works: 200 metres to the west of the Site; - River Irwell and the associated walks along the riverside: 30 metres from the Site; and - Grosvenor Green Park 750 metres south east of the Site.

A number of bedroom windows would directly face the access walkway to the rear of the building and whilst the separation distances proposed are considered acceptable the scheme includes privacy screens to parts of the walkway area. This is not intended to be solid so as to ensure sufficient light and outlook for residents of the

Page 45 proposed development but would provide additional privacy for surrounding residents and reduce the feeling of being overlooked. Full details of these screens are to be agreed by way of a suitably worded condition.

Having regard to the above it is considered that the development would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of surrounding residential properties and would provide future users with an adequate level of amenity in accordance with UDP policies DES7.

Air Quality

The development lies partially within the Greater Manchester Combined Air Quality Management Area, and as such there is potential for residents of ground and first floor properties with the façade facing Great Cheatham Street West (A576) to be exposed to levels of Nitrogen Dioxide above UK and EU health based limits. Exposure to air pollution above limit values is known to cause both short and long term health effects. (The extent of the Air Quality Management Area covers the front (Great Cheatham Street Facade) and approximately 15m into Lower Broughton Road.)

An impact assessment has not been submitted with the application; however Urban Vision Air and Noise consider it possible to condition mitigation into the design of the relevant units including measures such as non- openable window units, mechanical ventilation to those rooms and the ventilation taking input air from an alternative facade of the building to Lower Broughton Road. Such mitigation is likely to compliment mitigation required for road traffic noise (see noise section of the report below), and as such a combined condition is recommended.

A condition is also recommended requiring two dedicated parking bays with provision for electric vehicle charging points and this has been agreed with the agent.

Noise

The proposed development fronts onto the busy Great Cheatham Street West, and as such there is potential that without adequate mitigation internal noise levels within habitable rooms would lead to an impact on health, quality of life and residential amenity. The application is supported by a noise impact assessment (July 2017) which uses measurement data to inform the design of a suggested mitigation scheme. The proposed mitigation scheme includes up-rated acoustic glazing and alternative trickle ventilation requirements for certain rooms.

Whilst the proposed scheme will adequately address noise, it will not address the poor air quality in the area as discussed above and as such a condition is recommended requiring the submission of a combined air quality and noise mitigation scheme for ground and first floor rooms facing Great Cheatham Street West.

As the principle of acoustic acceptability has been proven in the report, Urban Vision Air and Noise consider this can be conditioned and therefore do not object to the development subject to condition.

A construction environmental management plan condition is recommended which will ensure disruption during the construction phase is limited where possible.

It is considered, therefore that subject to conditions the proposed development would provide future users with an adequate level of amenity in terms of noise and air quality and would not unduly impact on noise and air quality for occupiers of surrounding residential dwellings in accordance with UDP Policy EN17.

Highways

The proposed vehicular access comprises a 1.5m wide footway on its northern side, a 4.8m wide carriageway, a 0.46m wide ‘buffer’ on its southern side and corner radii of 6 metres at the interface with Lower Broughton Road. The car park entrance is secured by a set of security gates which would be set back from Lower Broughton Road to provide stacking space for 2 small cars.

Pedestrian accesses would be provided to the development from Great Cheetham Street West and Lower Broughton Road. The scheme also includes a cycle storage area to the rear of the building, within the car parking area. A condition is recommended requiring the submission of full details of the cycle store to be

Page 46 submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority and to ensure it is provided prior to first occupation of the units and retained thereafter.

The development would provide a total of 48 car parking spaces which includes 3 disabled parking spaces and this is considered to be acceptable in this location and is in accordance with Salford City Council’s parking standards.

The amended plans now include a single refuse area along the Lower Broughton Road elevation. Urban Vision Highways are satisfied with the location of the bin store and have raised no objections to the collection of waste from the adopted highway however they have advised that they will not permit gates or doors to open onto the adopted highway and a condition is recommended to ensure the doors to the refuse area open inwards.

The Transport Statement confirms that the proposal is likely to generate 15 two-way vehicular trips in the AM peak hour (08:00-09:00) and 15 two-way vehicular trips in the PM peak hour (17:00-18:00). Therefore, in terms of the traffic impact, Urban Vision Highways consider that the proposal is unlikely to result in significant material impact to the local highway network.

An informative is recommended to advise the applicants of the requirement to enter into a S38 and S278 agreement for works to the adopted highway.

In light of the above it is considered that the proposed development and parking provision is acceptable and in accordance with the thrust of UDP policies A2, A8 and A10.

Ecology

The application is supported by a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal by Tyler Grange dated June 2017. The report has been considered by the Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) who have confirmed that ecological issues at the site include nesting birds, invasive species and loss of low value ecological habitat, all of which can be mitigated via condition. Each is discussed in turn below:

- Nesting birds The submitted report notes the presence of potential bird nesting habitat on site. All British birds nests and eggs (with certain limited exceptions) are protected by Section 1 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, as amended. GMEU recommend a condition relating to no clearance, demolition, works to trees etc during bird nesting season, however as this is covered by other legislation an informative has been added rather than a condition.

- Giant Hogweed Giant hogweed was identified on the site. It is an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, as amended to introduce, plant or cause to grow wild any plant listed in Schedule 9 part 2 of the Act. Species such as giant hogweed are included within this schedule. As recommended by GMEU a condition is attached requiring a method statement for its eradication/control for the written approval of the LPA.

Contributing to and Enhancing the Natural Environment Section 109 of the NPPF states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment. The site currently has only low ecological value restricted to widespread and common species associated with natural regeneration of urban sites. Landscaping is proposed along the frontage of the development including specimen trees. GMEU are satisfied that adequate mitigation can be provided subject to the detail. As such a landscaping condition is recommended as well as a condition requiring the submission of an ecological mitigation scheme including elements to mitigate for loss of trees shrubs and bird nesting habitat for the written approval of the LPA.

Initial comments from GMEU raised concerns regarding the potential for negative impacts on the River Irwell. Following this, further information was provided by the applicants which confirmed that previous development on the site connected to the combined sewer on Lower Broughton Road, which is located between the site and the River Irwell and as such, there is no existing surface water connectivity between the site and the river, and no potential for sediment or pollutants to reach the river during the construction phase. Therefore, no ecological impacts to the River Irwell are expected during construction.

Page 47 With regards to post-development drainage the applicants have advised that infiltration is the preferred option however should this not be feasible option then discharge to a watercourse will be the next option. In the event of discharge to the River Irwell, water treatment will be required prior to discharge, which will avoid any potential for ecological impacts to the river post-development.

This information has been considered by GMEU who have confirmed that they are satisfied with the response and recommend a surface water drainage condition be attached to any planning approval.

Trees

The application is supported by a BS 5837 Arboriculture Report. The Council’s Arborist has reviewed the report and confirmed it is of good quality and gives a fair and accurate appraisal of the trees on site.

All recorded trees on the site are proposed for removal in order to facilitate the development. The trees are category C, low amenity value trees which should not be allowed to constrain a development. Tree T2, which is located on the adjacent site will be retained and the root plate of this tree is partially contained within the development site. The report recommends T2 be crown-lifted to a height of 3m on the Western part (above the development site) which is considered pragmatic.

Successful retention of tree T2 throughout the development phase will require the root plate to be protected with temporary protective fencing. A Tree Protection Plan (TPP) has been supplied which gives full details of the specification and layout of the temporary protective fencing required to ensure that T2 is afforded sufficient a Root Protection Area (RPA). An Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) is not required.

Replacement planting should be sought as mitigation for the trees being removed to facilitate the development; the loss of these trees will have a short-term impact upon the local amenity of the area. Given the amount of ‘free space’ across the development the potential for restocking is considered good. A condition is recommended requiring the submission of a replacement planting scheme to be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority including details of timescales and aftercare.

It is considered, therefore that the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable impact on existing trees within or overhanging the site in accordance with UDP policy EN12.

Flood risk and drainage

The application site is located is in flood zone 3 and as such a flood risk assessment (FRA) has been submitted in support of the application.

The submitted plans indicate that the ground floor level of residential units would be 30.77 AOD (this equates to approximately 1.7m above the adjacent pavement level and 300mm above the 1 in 100 year plus climate change) and no objections are raised from the Environment Agency or the Council’s drainage Engineer in this regard.

Initial modeling indicated that the proposed development would, result in increased risk to existing properties along Great Cheetham Street West when compared to the existing situation. Whilst compensatory storage would not be required as the site is not at risk in a 1 in 100 year event flood, risk must be considered for the lifetime of the development. Therefore, as the site is at risk from the impact of climate change, loss of storage should be considered and it is a requirement of Policy FRD5 of the Flood Risk and Development SPG. Compensatory storage is required and the applicants have agreed to provide this.

Following discussions with the Environment Agency and the City Council’s drainage engineer, the applicants have agreed to lower the level of the car parking area to enable flood water to accumulate here in the event of a flood. The water would pass through voids to the rear of the garden areas and under the ground floor level of the units fronting Great Cheetham Street West and would also travel through the area of the vehicular access on Lower Broughton Road into the car park area. Amended plans and a revised FRA have been submitted in this regard.

Page 48 The Environment Agency have advised that the car park is required to be sufficiently lowered to provide the same volume being lost by the building (741M3). It is envisaged that to provide this level of storage the car park would be between 0.6 and 0.11m lower than the pavement level approximately (to approximately 28.556 AOD) however final details of the finished floor level of the car park are to be agreed by condition. A condition is also recommended to ensure full details of flood resilient construction measures and surface water drainage for the site using sustainable drainage methods.

It is considered therefore that subject to conditions the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable increased risk of flooding in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, the Flood Risk and Development Supplementary Planning Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Contaminated Land

The site has a history of use as a hotel. A garage has been on the site at some time in the past, with the potential for underground fuel tanks. As such there is a potential for contamination to exist. The proposed end use is for residential units, which are considered a sensitive end use with respect to land contamination risk.

The desk study report submitted with the application has assessed the potential for a pollution linkage between any identified source, and a receptor. The assessment considers there is sufficient potential risk that a more detailed intrusive ground investigation is required. Urban Vision Environment have reviewed the report and have raised no objections subject to conditions in relation to the submission of a phase 2 site investigation report, remedial measures and a verification report for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority and requiring any soil forming materials for garden areas or soft landscaped areas being brought to site to be tested for contamination and suitability and verification information submitted for the written approval of the LPA.

Recommendation Approve

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

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

A financial contribution to secure £28,295.56 to be allocated to the following:

- Open Space - Younger and older children’s play provision at Albert Park, Broughton. - Education - Primary School Project B: a scheme of works to enhance or extend existing education facilities, or create new education facilities, for a primary school located within Pupil Planning Area 10. - Public Realm - To provide street scene improvements along Lower Broughton Road and/or Camp Street.

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

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

Conditions

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

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

2. Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application no above ground construction works shall take place until samples or full details of materials to be used externally on the building(s) have been

Page 49 submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include the type, colour and texture of the materials. Only the materials so approved shall be used, in accordance with any terms of such approval.

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

3. Prior to the installation of the proposed privacy screens to the rear elevations of the building, full details including samples of materials to be used shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity and to safeguard the amenity of existing, neighbouring and/or future occupants of the development hereby approved in accordance with policies DES1 and DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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

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

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

5. The vehicle parking and access arrangements shown on the approved plans to serve the development hereby permitted shall be made available for use prior to the development being brought into use and shall be retained thereafter for their intended purpose. Prior to first use of the car parking area two dedicated parking bays with provision for electric vehicle charging shall be provided. The charging point shall be capable of Type 2 "Fast" charging and shall be retained for the life of the development.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety and the free flow of traffic, to encourage the uptake of ultra-low emission vehicles and ensure the development is sustainable and to safeguard residential amenity, public health and quality of life in accordance with policies A2, A8 and A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework

Page 50 6. Prior to any earthworks a method statement detailing eradication and/or control and/or avoidance measures for giant hogweed should be supplied to and agreed in writing to the Local Planning Authority (LPA). The agreed method statement shall be adhered to and implemented in full unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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

7. Pedestrian and vehicle access gates and doors to refuse areas shall open inwards and not outwards onto the adopted highway.

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

8. Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted, full details of cycle storage areas including elevations and capacity shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Consideration shall also be had to future capacity and details shown of where additional facilities can be provided in the future if required. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and cycle storage areas provided prior to first occupation of the development and retained as such thereafter.

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

9. Prior to the occupation of the development (or alternative timeframe which has been agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), an updated Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The agreed Travel Plan shall be implemented and reviewed in accordance with the timetable embodied therein.

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

10. Prior to the commencement of development a Landscape and Habitat Creation Scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved Scheme shall identify the opportunities for biodiversity enhancement on site including, but not limited to, elements to mitigate for loss of trees shrubs and bird nesting habitat. The approved scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To secure opportunities for the enhancement of the nature conservation value of the site in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012)

11. Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved a waste management strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The strategy shall include details of storage provision; how bins are moved to and from the collection point, recycling facilities and, bulky waste storage. A verification report to demonstrate that waste management arrangements have been implemented in accordance with the approved strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority within 6 months of first occupation.

Reason: To ensure that the development is adequately serviced in accordance with policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

12. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme of mitigation to address noise and air quality for the ground and first floor habitable rooms with a façade to Great Cheatham Street West, and the first 15m of Lower Broughton Road shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall achieve internal noise levels compliant with BS8233:2014, and shall incorporate non-

Page 51 openable windows, and a mechanical ventilation system which is capable of providing both background and purge ventilation within the rooms. The ventilation system shall take input air from an alternative façade at least 15m from Great Cheatham Street. The acoustic mitigation specified in the accompanying report (July 2017, Echo Acoustics) shall be incorporated into the remaining habitable rooms as identified in the report.

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

13. Prior to occupation of the residential units a Site Completion Report confirming that all necessary noise attenuation measures identified through condition 12 have been implemented shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

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

14. Prior to the commencement of development (except for demolition and enabling works) a Phase 2 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 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.

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

15. Pursuant to condition 14 no occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until a verification report demonstrating completion of all approved remediation works 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 prevent pollution of the water environment and to ensure the safe development of the site in the interests of the amenity of future occupiers in accordance with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

16 If, during the course of development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present, no further works shall be undertaken in the affected area and the contamination shall be reported to the Local Planning Authority as soon as reasonably practicable (but within a maximum of 5 days from the find). Prior to further works being carried out in the identified area, a further assessment shall be made and appropriate action agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

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

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

Page 52 Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and to ensure the safe development of the site in the interests of the amenity of future occupiers in accordance with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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

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

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

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

19. No development shall be started until all the retained trees within (or overhanging) the site (as shown on Tree Protection Plan Drawing, No: 10841/P03), have been surrounded by substantial fences. Such fences shall be erected in accordance with the fence specification shown on TPP, No: 10841/P03 ; in the positions as shown on TPP, No: 10841/P03 and shall remain until all development is completed and no work, including any form of drainage or storage of materials, earth or topsoil shall take place within the perimeter of such fencing.

Reason: To safeguard existing trees and to ensure that adequate provision is made for their protection whilst the development is carried out in accordance with Policy EN12 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

20. The felled trees shall be replaced in accordance with a tree replacement scheme which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be submitted prior to the commencement of development and shall include details of: tree species; tree sizes (including the minimum height and circumference of stem at 1m from the ground level); plan indicating the location of the replacement trees, a timetable for tree planting and details of aftercare.

Any trees planted in accordance with this condition which are removed, uprooted, destroyed, die or become severely damaged or become seriously diseased within 5 years of planting shall be replaced within the next planting season by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted, unless the Local Planning Authority gives its consent in writing to any variation and this condition shall not be considered to have been complied with until the replacement trees have been established to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

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

21. Prior to installation, full details of the proposed vehicular and pedestrian access gates shall be submitted to an approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The access gates shall be installed prior to first occupation of the development in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter.

Page 53 Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.

22. No development shall take place until a scheme for surface water drainage for the site using sustainable drainage methods and which includes details of how water quality will be improved, and how existing surface water discharge rates reduced, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Surface water discharge rate is restricted to 50% of the existing discharge rate or to greenfield runoff, whichever is greater, as per the user guide to the Salford City Council SFRA, subject to a 5l/s minimum. Drainage from the car park requires an oil separator and/or equivalent SUDS. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation or use of the development hereby approved unless alternative timescales have been agreed in writing as part of the strategy.

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

23. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, prior to any works above slab level, details of the finished floor levels of the car park hereby approved shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding from overland flows in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the Flood Risk and Development Supplementary Planning Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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

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

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

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

26. Finished ground floor level to be 30.77m AOD

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.

Page 54 27. Foul and surface water shall be drained on separate systems.

Reason: To secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of flooding and pollution.

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

467-[05]-001-A - Site location plan 467-[05]-004-F - Proposed site plan 467-[05]-012-E - Proposed front elevations 467-[05]-013-D - Proposed rear elevations 467-[05]-011-F - Proposed sections 467-[05]-006-D - Proposed ground floor plan 467-[05]-007-C - Proposed first floor plan 467-[05]-008-C - Proposed second floor plan 467-[05]-009-C - Proposed third floor plan 467-[05]-010-C - Proposed fourth floor plan

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

Notes to Applicant

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

2. Demolition works, together with works to trees, hedgerows and scrub, including site clearance, should not be undertaken in the main bird breeding season (1st March to 31st August), unless nesting birds are found to be absent by a suitably qualified person immediately prior to clearance.

3. The applicants are advised that Giant Hogweed was identified on the site. It is an offence under the terms of the Wildlife and Countryside Act to introduce or allow such plants to grow in the wild and they should be disposed of accordingly.

4. The applicants are advised that and street lighting and existing services within the footway and carriageway which is affected by the development must be relocated and agreed by various utility providers and Highway Authority.

5. The applicants are advised to contact John Horrocks to arrange a full dilapidation/Condition Survey of all adopted highways surrounding the site prior to works commencing on site. Tel: 0161 603 4046.

The applicants are advised that applications for all forms of highway permits/licenses shall be made in advanced of any works being undertaken on the adopted highway Note: NO boundary fencing shall be erected or positioned on any part of the adopted highway with first seeking the relevant permits/licenses from the Local Highway Authority Tel: 0161 603 4046

6. The applicant’s attention is drawn to the comments from design for security set out in the submitted Crime Impact Statement and in particular the recommendations set out in sections 3.3 and 4 of the statement.

7. The applicants are advised that they will be required to enter into an agreement under Section 38/278 of the 1980 Highways Act with the Local Authority to cover works to the adopted highway within and outside the application, including but not limited to a) Full construction details of the new/altered site access points on Lower Broughton Road; b) Redundant access points reinstated as continuous footway, renewal of footway surrounding the development and to provide dropped crossings on pedestrian routes in the vicinity of the site.

Page 55 c) Renew/extend Traffic Regulation Order road marking surrounding the development; d) Installation of a pedestrian dropped crossing across the entrance (tactile block paving - buff coloured); e) Creation of the refuse collection point.

Page 56 Agenda Item 5d

APPLICATION No: 18/71347/COU APPLICANT: Mr Ben Hardman LOCATION: 6 And 8 Bindloss Avenue, Eccles, M30 0DU, PROPOSAL: Change of use of two properties from C3 (dwelling) to 12-bed at No. 6 and 13-bed at No. 8 HMO (house in multiple occupation) (Sui Generis), installation of dormer window to No. 8, creation of parking area and dropped kerbs WARD: Eccles

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application relates to 6 and 8 Bindloss Avenue, which comprises of a pair of unoccupied 3 storey semi- detached dwellings. There are no boundary treatments between the 2 plots apart from a brick wall forming the common boundary to the rear.

No. 6 Bindloss Avenue has a relatively large open area to the south side which, presumably, at one time accommodated a garden. At the current time, both of these plots are overgrown and largely inaccessible. The large area of garden space to the south is subject to an extant planning permission for the erection of three dwellings. The applicant of this permission still intends to implement this development. The site fronts Bindloss Avenue, a residential street, with a vehicular entrance for No. 8 and a pedestrian entrance for No. 6. All boundaries are overgrown with dense banks of mature and self-seeded trees. Several trees close to each of the side boundaries are protected by TPO 13. The site is on sloping ground at its southern end with the ground level falling by approximately 0.5m from north to south.

The surrounding area is predominantly characterised by semi-detached residential dwellings. The site is located to the north of Eccles Town Centre and approximately 250m to the west of Salford Royal Hospital.

Page 57

$5kgjd35w.docx Description of Proposal

Planning permission is sought for the change of use of the dwellings to a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) in each dwelling. At number 6, there will be 12 bedrooms and at number 8, there will be 13 bedrooms.

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Date Displayed: 9 February 2018 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Not Applicable Reason:

Relevant Site History

97/36860/OUT - Outline planning application for twelve flats including means of access - Approve - 17 September 1997

16/68451/FUL - Erection of 3, three-storey dwelling houses - Approve - 14 October 2016 – the proposed dwellings subject to application are located on the land to the south. The existing semi-detached dwellings are included within the blue line on the location plan.

17/69750/FUL - Demolition of existing semi-detached dwellings and erection of 6 no. four bedroom dwellinghouses - Approve - 23 June 2017 – the proposed dwellings subject to this application would be constructed across the entire site, following demolition of the existing dwellings and on the land to the south.

Neighbour Notification

12 neighbours were notified by letter dated 9th February 2018. These neighbours were re-notified by letter dated 13th March 2018 as a result of receiving amended plans and a change of description to include a dormer extension. Neighbours were further re-notified by letter dated 27th March 2018 as a result of receiving another set of amended plans and a further alteration to the description to include a parking area.

As detailed above, a site notice was also displayed on the site fencing.

Representations

48 objections have been received. The issues raised can be summarised as follows:  Insufficient space for parking.  Increased number of vehicles on the highway and parking in the surrounding streets.  Insufficient access for emergency vehicles.  Streets are already congested.  No mention of what kind of tenants would live there – doesn’t want a half-way house/hostel/refuge centre.  The trees need protecting.  Young children play in the street and increased traffic could pose a danger.  Stranger danger from unknown residents.  Questioned whether the rooms would be for sale or for rent.  Disruption during building phase.  Residents expect a large reduction in Council Tax.  Impact on house values.  Out of character with the area.  25 bedrooms are excessive.  Crime and insecurity.  Noise issues due to the number of potential residents

Page 58

$5kgjd35w.docx  Loss of privacy.  Impact on amenity with the number of comings and goings.  Impact on amenity as a result of cumulative effects.  There are bats living in the loft space – doubts the conclusion of the Biodiversity report.  Detrimental impact on drainage/sewer system.  Overcrowding.

One standard letter has been submitted which has been signed by 9 people advising that no amount of alterations could make this development acceptable. Many of these objectors have submitted a separate representations.

Consultations

Arboricultural Consultant - No objection subject to replacement tree planting to improve visual amenity to the front of the site.

Highways – No objection subject to a condition restricting the height of any solid boundary treatment to the site frontage.

Flood Risk and Drainage Engineer - No objection subject to a condition ensuring any basement drainage is pumped and not directly connected to the sewers.

Urban Vision Environment - No objections to the application on noise, air quality or land contamination grounds and no conditions recommended.

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

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

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

Page 59

$5kgjd35w.docx 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 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 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 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 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.

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 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 the relevant criteria within the UDP policies applicable to the proposed development are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.

Principle of Development

Page 60

$5kgjd35w.docx The semi-detached building subject to this application was formerly in residential use, but it is currently vacant. The site is located within 400m of the northern boundary of Eccles Town Centre and within 300m of Hope Neighbourhood Centre, which afford occupiers easy access to a range of goods and services. The site is also located within 400m of Eccles Train Station and within 700m of Eccles Bus Exchange and Eccles Metrolink Station. In addition, the following table identifies a number of services available to this community with the approximate walking distance from the site.

The proposal therefore offers an opportunity to re-develop an existing building which is located within an accessible and sustainable location.

By definition, a House in Multiple Occupation provides tenanted living accommodation that is occupied by persons as their only or main residence, who are not related, and who share one or more basic amenities e.g. bathroom, kitchen, dining etc. It is considered that the principle of introducing a HMO into this predominantly residential area is acceptable - the HMO and the surrounding residential properties share common characteristics by virtue of the fact that they are providing living accommodation.

The council’s interactive map shows that there are 3 other mandatory licensed HMOs in excess of 100m (straight line distance) away from the application properties; these properties are licensed given that they are HMOs of three or more storeys and have five or more occupants. There is no evidence to suggest that the proposal will have an unacceptable impact by reason of the cumulative effects of the concentration of HMO uses.

Whilst existing plans have been submitted with this application, due to the poor condition of the dwellings in their existing state, a comprehensive assessment of the existing layout has not been possible. However, it is reasonable to assume from the layout of the properties that they both previously accommodated at least 6 bedrooms, potentially more. In this regard, it is acknowledged that the proposal will result in the loss of two large dwellings in an area which is characterised by family homes.

The unit is currently vacant and has been for a long period of time. The council’s own records indicate that the dwellings were vacant “for many years” in a report dating back to 1997, further reiterated in 2015 and 2016. Whilst these dwellings could meet the housing needs of those requiring larger properties, given that they have remained vacant for a significant period of time, it is not considered that the loss of the dwellings will have an adverse impact upon the mix of dwellings in the area, with the proposal making a contribution towards meeting the housing needs of those requiring lower cost accommodation (Salford’s anti-poverty strategy recognises that HMOs meet specific housing needs of those requiring lower cost accommodation, that would not necessarily be met by smaller terraced houses or apartments given the difference in rental values).

For these reasons the principle of re-developing the site to provide a 12 bed HMO and a 13 bed HMO is considered to be acceptable providing the development is acceptable in terms of its visual impact, its relationship to neighbouring residents; its impact upon the highway network and in all other regards.

Page 61

$5kgjd35w.docx A number of the objections raise concern in relation to the people who will reside in the HMOs. The LPA has no control over who the future residents may be in the same way there is no control over who resides in a dwellinghouse. However, the property is not to be used as a hostel which falls within Use Class C2 or a Sui Generis use, depending on the situation, and are not classed as HMOs. Whilst not a consideration for this proposal, the applicants manage a number of other HMOs within Salford that are occupied by staff from Salford Royal Hospital. The applicant continues to receive enquiries from staff seeking accommodation of this type and it is likely that this property will be marketed to hospital staff.

Amenity

Each bedroom within the ground and upper floors will have at least one window that will provide an adequate level of light and outlook. The bedrooms within the basement will be served by at least one light well of suitable depth and width to afford an adequate level of light to these rooms. The communal living room, dining space and kitchen will be on the ground floor in both properties, utilising large windows for light, outlook and ventilation. These communal rooms are approximately 36m² in floor space which is considered acceptable, especially in addition to the individual bedrooms which range from 18m² to 29m². There is also a suitable level of space within the rear garden for occupiers to enjoy private amenity space.

According to the Council’s Standards for houses in multiple occupation the following space standards are required to be met –  Single occupancy bedroom (with separate shared facilities) – 6.5sqm  Double occupancy bedroom (with separate shared facilities) – 10sqm  Combined kitchen dining room for 11-15 persons – 24sqm

There is no requirement for a separate living room in a HMO where all bedrooms are over 10sqm.

All bedrooms in the proposed HMO will exceed 10sqm. The combined kitchen/diner will exceed 24sqm, thereby complying with the standard for a HMO with between 11 and 15 people living in it. There is no requirement for a separate living room to be provided but the kitchen/diner space includes living room space. On this basis, it is considered that future occupants of the proposed HMOs will be provided with a satisfactory level of light and outlook.

It is considered that noise would not be significantly different to that associated with a typical large family dwelling. The likely comings and goings would likely be more intense but not to the extent that it would cause harm to neighbouring residential amenity, albeit that would not necessarily be the case should a very large family occupy the property.

It is recognised that there are a number of windows on the side elevation facing No. 10 Bindloss Avenue and the rear gardens of Nos. 9a, 9b, 11a and 11b Preston Avenue. Due to the proximity of the gable of No. 8 Bindloss Avenue to these neighbour’s boundaries, the introduction of bedrooms within the rooms that feature windows on the side elevation, particularly at first and second floor level, could give rise to direct overlooking and a loss of privacy to these neighbours. However, it is also acknowledged that these are existing windows and already serve a residential property. Assessing the layout of the property, the likelihood is that most of these side facing windows served bedrooms when the dwelling was formerly occupied. In addition to this, the dwelling could be brought back into use as a family home, with these rooms being used as habitable spaces, without any control from the LPA. On this basis, the use of the HMO with habitable room windows on the side elevation of No. 8 is considered acceptable.

Similarly, there are windows on the opposite gable elevation to No. 6 Bindloss Avenue. At present, these windows will overlook a vacant plot of land within the applicant’s ownership and are approximately 24m away from the gable elevation of No. 4 Bindloss Avenue, which is an appropriate separation distance to prevent any loss of amenity to these neighbours.

There is an extant planning permission for three dwellings to be erected on the vacant plot of land between No. 4 and No. 6 Bindloss Avenue (reference 16/68451/FUL) and so the impact on this development also needs to be considered. The approved plans identify a row of three dwellings, situated to continue the building line established by Nos 2, 4 6 and 8 Bindloss Avenue. There are no windows proposed in the side elevation of the proposed dwelling facing No. 6 and so it is not considered that there would be any detrimental impact on the future occupiers of the new dwelling if the permission were to be implemented. Like the situation with the

Page 62

$5kgjd35w.docx proximity of the gable of No. 8 to the neighbouring boundaries, there could also be an element of overlooking from the habitable room windows on the gable of No. 6 facing the rear garden spaces of the new dwellings if the permission were to be implemented. The layout of this dwelling, as existing, is also suggestive of the fact that most of these side facing windows will have served bedrooms when the dwelling was formerly occupied and if this dwelling was brought back into use as a family home, with these rooms being used as habitable spaces, the LPA would have no control. On this basis, the use of the HMO with habitable room windows on the side elevation of No. 6 is also considered acceptable.

There is an adequate level of space around the dwellings to accommodate a suitably sized bin store. A condition has been attached requiring details of the siting and proposed bin shelter to be agreed by the LPA prior to occupation of the dwellings.

The proposal is considered to be in accordance with policies DES7 and EN17 of the UDP and the thrust of the NPPF as it would not adversely affect the level of residential amenity neighbouring residents can reasonably expect to enjoy and the development would provide future occupants with a satisfactory standard of living.

Design In order to afford a greater level of amenity for residents within room 8.10 on the second floor, a dormer window is to be installed in place of an existing roof light. The dormer window will be relatively small compared to the roof plane within which it will sit, being set back from the eaves with a small pitched roof. This form will match that of the existing dormer on the opposite roof plane for No. 6. Given the modest nature of the dormer, it is not considered to pose an obtrusive feature against the host building or within the street scene. A condition has been attached to ensure that the materials used are of an appropriate quality to respect the host building.

Highways The proposal will see the introduction of 8 parking spaces located to the front of the dwellings, accessed via two 3m wide dropped crossings along Bindloss Avenue. 8 parking spaces are to be provided and this has been accepted by Urban Vision’s Highways Consultant on the basis that the location is highly accessible and sustainable. Census data suggests that car ownership for occupiers of social rented properties (not provided by the Local Authority) is approximately 33%. A HMO managed by a private landlord does not fit perfectly into either definition of a private rental or social rental category but car ownership levels are expected to also be around 33%. 8 parking spaces for 25 bedrooms represents 32% parking provision which is considered acceptable in this instance.

In addition to this, a condition has been attached to ensure that the secure and sheltered parking for at least 15 cycles shown on the proposed site plan is available for use prior to occupation of the dwellings.

The proposed car parking layout comprises 6 parking spaces between the footway and the building and 2 parking spaces arranged parallel to each side boundary. In terms of manoeuvring space within the site, it is noted that the gap between the back of the parking bay and the boundary fence is only 5.9m with no provision of a turning head as this space has been taken up by bays 1 and 8. Ideally, this gap should be 6m. Given that this is a private parking forecourt, the limited number of parking spaces to be provided on each side, and as its only a shortfall of 10cm, this is considered acceptable in this instance.

With regards to the vehicle access point, two 2.7m wide entrances will be introduced at each side of the site’s front boundary onto Bindloss Avenue. A gap between of 0.9m has been retained between the vehicular entrance and the neighbouring boundary to ensure adequate visibility from the entrance.

With regards to boundary treatments fronting Bindloss Avenue, in order to ensure that there are no obstructions to visibility, a condition has been attached requiring details of the proposed new boundary treatment. Any solid boundary treatment here shall be restricted to be no higher than 0.6m.

Trees A BS 5837 Arboriculture Report has been supplied to support the planning application. This report is over 12 months old and does not discuss the current proposal. Following a review by Urban Vision’s Arboricultural Consultant, it is recognised that the classification of the trees is considered relatively accurate.

The trees growing along the frontage of the site are category C which should not constrain a development. The trees appear to be self-seeded and the remnants of a neglected hedgerow. The present scheme, to establish 8

Page 63

$5kgjd35w.docx parking spaces to the front of the property would require that these trees be removed, which is considered acceptable.

In mitigation, 2 replacement trees will be required. Whilst the Council usually seek to achieve a replacement on a2 for 1 basis, the site is relatively constrained, given the urban context and proposed hardstanding. Two species have been recommended by Urban Vision’s Arboricultural Consultant which will tolerate urban, paved environments (installed using planting pits), these are Quercus robur ‘Fastigiate Koster’ and Pyrus calleryana ‘Chanticleer’. The trees should be staked and tied and a tree-pit(s) should be utilized; the pit will help with mid to long-term establishment and reduce root tracery problems with hard-surfacing. A proposed site plan has been provided identifying the location of the trees which is considered acceptable in terms of visual amenity and affording an adequate level of visibility from the proposed vehicular access points. A condition has been attached requiring details of the tree sizes (including the minimum height and circumference of stem at 1m from the ground level); cross-sectional details of the planting pits; a timetable for tree planting and details of aftercare.

Drainage The site is located within Flood Zone 1 but is within a Critical Drainage Area. The proposed hardstanding to the front will be laid with tarmac which will be constructed to direct surface water to run towards a new Acco drain, laid across the front of the site between the parking bays and the landscaped area for the water to subsequently drain to the soft landscaped area. There are no objections to the proposal on flood risk or drainage grounds subject to the drainage in the basement not being connected directly to the sewers as this may result in a backflow. This can be secured by condition.

Ecology The development does not trigger the need for an ecological survey. An objection has been received to suggest that bats have been observed entering the roof via loose tiles. Bats are protected by the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and so an informative has been added for the applicant’s attention and in the event that bats are found, advice shall be sought from Natural England or a suitably qualified bat worker.

Recommendation Approve

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

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

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

Location Plan at 1:1250 received on 23/03/18 Proposed Front Elevation showing Proposed Dormer received on 13/03/18 Proposed Side Elevation showing Proposed Dormer received on 13/03/18 Proposed Floor Plans, drawing number BA/PL/18/002A Typical Lightwell Section Rev A Proposed Site Layout, Rev B Proposed Parking Layout Rev C

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

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

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

4. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, the development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until full details of the proposed boundary treatments have been submitted to and approved in

Page 64

$5kgjd35w.docx writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any part of the boundary treatment proposed to the front of the site that is not visually permeable shall be no higher than 0.6m in height. The boundary treatments shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme and within 18 months of first occupation of the development hereby permitted.

Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development and to ensure an adequate level of visibility for users of the highway in accordance with Policies DES1, DES9 and A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

5. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans and prior to the construction of the hard standing to the front of Nos. 6 and 8 Bindloss Avenue, a tree replacement scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of: tree species (Quercus robur 'Fastigiate Koster' and Pyrus calleryana 'Chanticleer'); tree sizes (including the minimum height and circumference of stem at 1m from the ground level); cross-sectional details of the planting pits and details of aftercare. The replacement trees shall be planted during the first available planting season following the felling of trees T1, T9, T10, T11 and T12 hereby granted consent.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area.

6. Drainage in the basement shall not be connected directly to sewers and shall be pumped.

To reduce the risk of flooding in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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

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

8. Prior to first occupation of the development, details and the proposed location of a bin store shall be submitted to and approved in witting by the Local Planning Authority. The approved bin store shall be installed prior to first occupation of the development and retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of visual and residential amenity in accordance with Policies DES1 and EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

9. Notwithstanding the details shown on the Proposed Site Layout, Rev B, prior to first occupation of the development, details of the proposed cycle store shelter shall be submitted to and approved in witting by the Local Planning Authority. The approved cycle store shall be installed prior to first occupation of the development and retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Statement of conformity with Article 35 of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015

The Local Planning Authority worked positively and proactively with the applicant to identify various solutions during the application process to ensure that the proposal comprised sustainable development and would improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area and would accord with the development plan. These were incorporated into the scheme and/or have been secured by planning condition. The Local Planning Authority has therefore implemented the requirement in Paragraphs 186-187 of the NPPF.

Notes to Applicant

Page 65

$5kgjd35w.docx 1. STANDING ADVICE - DEVELOPMENT LOW RISK AREA

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

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

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

2. To reduce the risk to pedestrians and road users, any vehicle leaving the driveway should leave the site in a forward gear.

3. The works on the adopted highway will be delivered by an S50 agreement and Greater Manchester Roads Activities Permit Scheme (GMRAPS) and to funding to facilitate a vehicle crossover area. Applications for all forms of highway permits/licenses shall be made in advanced of any works being undertaken on the adopted highway Note: NO boundary fencing shall be erected or positioned on any part of the adopted highway without first seeking the relevant permits/licenses from the Local Highway Authority 0161 793 2500.

4. All species of bats found in the UK receive a high level of legal protection under the terms of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. Bats roost in a variety of places and will use cracks, crevices and holes in trees. They are mobile in their habits and can turn up in the most unlikely places at any time of year. Precautions should be taken throughout works, at any time of year, with the possible presence of bats borne in mind. If bats are found at any time during works, then work should cease immediately and advice sought from Natural England or a suitably qualified bat worker.

Page 66

$5kgjd35w.docx Agenda Item 5e PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL PART I SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

APPLICATION No: 18/71548/HH APPLICANT: Mr Gary Bethel LOCATION: 123 Worsley Road, Worsley, M28 2WG PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for increasing the height of existing brickwork boundary wall to average height of 1800mm and facing the wall with new decorative finish. Retaining the existing gates. WARD: Worsley

Location of 123 Worsley Road (red hatched) within the Worsley area.

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application relates to a detached dwelling on Worsley Road, Worsley. The property has already been subject to a single storey side/rear extension. The surrounding area is residential in nature characterised mainly by detached dwellings. The Worsley Lodge Care Home is located to the south east of the property. Access to this care home is via a lane adjacent to the side/rear of the application property.

Page 67

$gg3xqmoa.docx The application property at junction of Worsley Wall (unfinished) at access to/from Worsley Road and Beechwood Drive Road to Worsley Lodge Care Home

Description of Proposal

The applicant has erect a 1.8m (average) high wall on the front boundary of the existing property. The wall reaches a maximum height of 2.18m at the junction of Worsley Road and the entrance to Worsley Lodge Car Home. The wall is 1.64m at its lowest point close to the entrance to the property on Beechwood Drive. Prior to this, the wall was approximately 0.6m high with laurel hedging on top to a height of 2m. The new wall is currently unfinished with exposed blockwork. The applicant intends to finish the wall in dark grey slate. Part of the wall on Beechwood Drive has already been tiled.

Proposed dark grey slate finish

Page 68

$gg3xqmoa.docx Relevant Site History

07/54757/HH - Erection of single storey rear extension, single storey side extension to link detached garage, infill first floor balcony to create sunroom and enlarged canopy at front – Approved 10.07.2007

Consultations

Highways – No objections

Neighbour notification

Neighbours were notified of the application on 21st March.

Page 69

$gg3xqmoa.docx Representations

Twelve objections have been received from people who visit relatives at the Worsley Lodge Care Home. The key issue raised involve the impact the wall has when exiting the Care Home and how the wall causes visbility problems when trying to turn onto Worsley Road.

One letter of support has also been received which states the following:

1. It’s in keeping with other applications in the area 2. It reduces the height of the existing structure which is a combination of brick and bushes. 3. Aesthetically it is pleasing to the eye and adds value to the general neighbourhood. 4. It provides additional security measures to the occupiers. 5. Living on a busy main road where pollution and noise becomes more of a challenge, this solution addresses these issues.

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 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 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 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.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy Framework National Planning Policy Guidance

Local Planning Policy

Supplementary Planning Document - House Extension This document contains a number of policies and standards to ensure that extensions within the curtilage of dwellings have a limited and acceptable impact on neighbouring residents; future residents of the application dwelling and that development makes a positive contribution to the local environment in terms of design.

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

Appraisal of the Proposed Development

Impact on the character of the area

Page 70

$gg3xqmoa.docx This part of Worsley road is characterised predominantly by relatively low boundary walls with planting rising above or railings set between brick piers which gives a leafy feel and a sense of openness/visual permeability. There are some examples along Worsley road of higher boundary walls but they are in the minority. Although the boundary wall which is proposed as part of this application is currently quite stark due to the light colour and course appearance of the blockwork, the final finish will be of a much higher quality and softer in appearance. The materials proposed are considered acceptable. However, it is a combination of the length and height of the wall along Worsley road which does not respect the overriding character of this part of the road. Although all applications have to be considered on their individual merits, approval of the application in its current form would make it more difficult to resist future development for higher walls in the area and this could have a much greater cumulative impact on the character of Worsley road contrary to policy DES 1 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Impact on the amenity of neighbours . There are no neighbouring properties facing the wall on Worsley Road and therefore the impact of the wall on this stretch are negligible. The gable end of 125 Worsley Road faces the wall along Beechwood Drive. However there are no windows on this elevation and therefore, the wall is unlikely to have an impact on the amenity of neighbours. In any case the neighbour at 125 Worsley Road has written in support of the application.

Impact on the highway network

The Highways Authority have raised no objections to the wall and do not consider it poses a highway safety concern despite the objections raised.

Recommendation

REFUSE

Reason for refusal:

This part of Worsley road is characterised predominantly by relatively low boundary walls with planting rising above or railings set between brick piers which gives a leafy feel and a sense of openness/visual permeability. There are some examples along Worsley road of higher boundary walls but they are in the minority. Although the boundary wall which is proposed as part of this application is currently quite stark due to the light colour and course appearance of the blockwork, the final finish will be of a much higher quality and softer in appearance. The materials proposed are considered acceptable. However, it is a combination of the length and height of the wall along Worsley road which does not respect the overriding character of this part of the road. Although all applications have to be considered on their individual merits, approval of the application in its current form would make it more difficult to resist future development for higher walls in the area and this could have a much greater cumulative impact on the character of Worsley road contrary to policy DES 1 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Page 71

$gg3xqmoa.docx This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5f PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL PART I SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 19 January 2016

APPLICATION No: 16/68858/FUL APPLICANT: Mr C Beard LOCATION: Oak Court Clifton Business Park, Wynne Avenue, Clifton, Swinton, M27 8FF PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing building and formation and laying out of car park, together with installation of 2m high railings and gates Re-submission of planning application 16/67858/FUL WARD: Pendlebury

Additional Information

This application was considered by committee on the 19th January 2017 and again on the 6th April 2017. In April 2017 the application was deferred to allow the applicant the opportunity to provide further evidence to justify the high level of parking on site.

Since the application was last considered by Panel the applicant has submitted a Parking Accumulation Survey. The survey has been undertaken daily (Monday to Friday) from 18.9.17 to 29.9.17 on an hourly basis between 6am and 6pm. Although the consented car parking arrangement only caters for 80 cars, the survey is based upon 90 available spaces currently occupied by the 2 existing tenants. This table summarises the hours of day when the car park, for 90 spaces, is over 65% full.

Page 73 Date Over 65% full 18/9/17 3 hours 19/9/17 5 hours 20/9/17 5 hours 21/9/17 4 hours 22/9/17 3 hour 25/9/17 5 hours 26/9/17 6 hours 27/9/17 6 hours 28/9/17 5 hours 29/9/17 3 hours

The applicant notes that the car parking survey should be read in the context that the second floor of Oak Court is vacant.

The applicant draws attention to the outline application for the wider business park for residential use which has been minded to approve by Members. Noting that if this site comes forward the area for the car parking extension would be surplus and would have no alternative use if left undeveloped. The applicant is of the opinion that in terms of proper planning of the area, a beneficial use should be made of this surplus land like that proposed in this application.

The applicant has also sought to address previous concerns raised by updating the draft Travel Plan (TP). The TP has been based upon a full employee survey and has committed to updating this every year and this will inform any measures needed to support the aims and objectives of the TP. The document names a dedicated TP co-ordinator, outlines that a new cycle hub, shower and changing facilities will be provided. The TP proposes priority car share bays within the car park. The TP states that travel packs will be provided to all employees and that measures to encourage flexible working will be explored. There is also a commitment to give every staff member a free 1 week bus ticket- to try out and encourage bus use.

The City’s Sustainable Transport Planner has reviewed the Travel Plan and is happy with the content. The travel pack which will be provided to all employees has not been submitted therefore this detail will be conditioned. The condition would also require the submission of a further update to the TP within six months of the car park being bought into use, so that the actual travel patterns of employees can be surveyed and reviewed on an annual basis thereafter.

The plans have also been updated to secure cycle parking on site for 24 cycles in the ‘cycle hub’. This would include Sheffield stands so the bike frame can be secured and the cycle store will be covered. The provision of an on-site cycle hub is supported.

In light of the information submitted above the City’s Highway officer, whilst recognising the development exceeds the maximum standards, considers that if the third floor of the building is bought into the use there will be a shortage of parking spaces and this is likely to encourage employees to seek on-street and pavement parking, which provides an unsafe / poor pedestrian environment. They therefore consider that the application should be recommended for approval subject to the following conditions:

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

Page 74 Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

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

Entrance Layout 6938 P14 Phase Plan 6938 P10 Proposed Layout 6938 P13 Maple Court – Service and Entry Points PPC08/043 Proposed Car Park and Cycle Hub PPC08/060 Proposed Car Park and Cycle Hub PPC08/061

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning and to protect residential amenity in accordance with EN7 and E5 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

3. The approved cycle parking shall be implemented and made available for its intended use prior to the development hereby approved being bought into use and shall be retained thereafter.

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

4. Notwithstanding the details submitted within the Travel Plan, the development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until an updated Travel Plan including a Travel Pack for employees has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

Within six months of the development hereby approved being brought into use, a further, updated Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The agreed Travel Plan shall be implemented and reviewed in accordance with the timetable embodied therein.

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

Informative

1. The proposed development should be designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations contained within section 3.2 of the submitted Crime Impact Statement dated (12/11/15 – URN:2013/0697/CIS/01) and a planning condition should be added to reflect the physical security specification listed within section 3.2.8 of the appendices within the submitted Crime Impact Statement. (Please see www.designforsecurity.org/secured-by-design/ or www.securedbydesign.com for more information).

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Additional Information

This application was considered at committee on 19th January 2017, members deferred the application to allow the applicant the opportunity to provide further evidence to justify the high level of parking proposed on site.

Page 75 In order to justify their position the applicant has submitted a letter of support and this is accompanied by two letters from companies who are based within Oak Court.

The applicant’s supporting statement refers back to the Ministerial Statement 2015 and this wording which should be considered in the context of para 39 of the NPPF -

“Local planning authorities should only impose local parking standards for residential and non- residential development where there is clear and compelling justification that it is necessary to manage their local road network.”

They highlight that the Local Planning Authority (LPA) have not provided ‘clear and compelling’ evidence within the officer report to support the need to limit the number of car parking spaces at the development site and note this onus to provide evidence is on the LPA. The applicant states that the LPAs response as merely a restatement of policy A10 is perverse given the UDP was adopted in 2006 and the publication of the Ministerial Statement in 2015 clearly shows Governments position. They have also quoted case law to support that the ministerial statement should be a material consideration in the consideration of planning applications. The applicant draws upon previous information submitted in support of the application such as the Homes and Community Agency Employment Densities Guide as providing the necessary evidence to prove additional car parking is required at the site.

They also point out that the Ministerial Statement states that “the market is best placed to decide if additional parking spaces should be provided” and in this context they argue that accessibility is not relevant to the determination of this case and that the two letters from the occupiers of the building show the “market” and this should be given significant weight in the determination of this application.

They note that Salford’s emerging Local Plan does not seek to impose maximum standards and disagree with the officer report that it should not hold any weight in the determination of this application as this the policy clearly shows the ‘direction of travel’ towards the view of the Ministerial Statement.

The letter then finally draws upon the sustainable measures for the site which will be secured, namely being to adopt a travel plan, provide enhanced cycle parking and provide additional disabled car parking, all of which are measures which do not currently exist. Added to this they note the wider benefits of enhanced landscaping, lighting and security measures.

The first supporting letter is from EnerSys and is written by the companies HR manager who is of the opinion that the site is not well related in respect of public transport, with the nearest bus stops being located on the A666 and the train station being quite a walk from the offices. They note that there employ 45 members of staff with 17 regional sales representatives and 24 service engineers visiting the site. The letter provides a breakdown of the commuting distances of the staff and this is as follows: 0 - 4 Miles = 14% 5 - 9 Miles = 25% 10 - 14 Miles = 8% 15 Miles + = 53%

Page 76 The writer believes for their business to operate successfully they require 55 car parking spaces to meet their requirements.

The second letter from Hall and Kay Fire Services Limit is written by the companies Operations Director again he is of the opinion that the site is not well related in respect of public transport, with the nearest bus stops being located on the A666, the train station being quite a walk from the offices and that there is no metrolink station. They note they have 37 desks for people on site, demand for car parking is higher when sales meeting are taking place and that car parking is vital to their business as it provides flexibility they require to visit customers across the region. The letter provides a breakdown of the commuting distances of the staff and this is as follows: 0 - 4 Miles = 12% 5 - 9 Miles = 19% 10 - 14 Miles = 19% 15 Miles + = 49%

The writer believes for their business to operate successfully they require 35 car parking spaces to meet their requirements.

Both businesses note that their current car parking requirement is currently provided for on the car parking of the adjacent unused offices which are to be redeveloped. They conclude the letter by confirming their support for the application and ask that the Council support their business.

Firstly it is important to note that the development of the remainder of Clifton Business Park for residential use (16/67827/OUT) has been considered at panel and members were minded to approve the application subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement. Although this application is minded to approve, the approval is for outline planning permission and there is no commitment that this will be ever implemented on site. It is also important to note that the planning appraisal for this development considered the site to be sustainable with good levels of accessibility.

Turning to the Ministerial Statement this clear outlines “this government is keen to ensure that there is adequate parking provision both in new residential developments and around our town centres and high streets”. Arguably this site is not a new residential development nor is it located within the City’s town or neighbourhood centres.

Notwithstanding this para 39 of the NPPF is clear that “If setting local parking standards for residential and non-residential development, local planning authorities should take into account: ● the accessibility of the development; ● the type, mix and use of development; ● the availability of and opportunities for public transport; ● local car ownership levels; and ● an overall need to reduce the use of high-emission vehicles.”

The Ministerial Statement clearly states that that the following text now needs to be read alongside paragraph 39 “Local planning authorities should only impose local parking standards for residential and non-residential development where there is clear and compelling justification that it is necessary to manage their local road network.” To be clear this text is not to replace paragraph 39.

Page 77 The officer report clearly demonstrates that the scheme has been considered in light of the of para 39 of the NPPF and this assessment provides the clear and compelling justification to support the use of maximum parking numbers in this location for this type of development.

It is not considered that the applicant has raised any additional information which would change the LPAs view on this matter. As such the application is recommended for refusal on the grounds of:

1. The application site is considered to be in sustainable location within walking distance from Bolton Road which is well served by public transport with nearby facilities and services. Local link is also available for the site, so out of normal hours workers have links around Greater Manchester. In addition, cycle routes, footpaths and good pavements are provided throughout the surrounding areas and as such do not act as a barrier towards accessing the site on a bike or on foot. The proposal includes demolition of the existing building and formation of the additional car park to the existing Oak Court offices. In total, the new car park would accommodate 130 car parking spaces, 50 more than currently available at Oak Court. The proposed development would exceed the maximum car parking provision identified in Appendix C of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan which would undermine the promotion of sustainable transport choices. Insufficient information has been provided by the applicant to justify an alternative approach to parking provision and as such the proposed development conflicts with the policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the sustainable transport principles of National Planning Policy Framework.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The site to which this development relates comprises two office buildings to the west of the existing business park. The first building on the left when viewed from the vehicular access to the business park is Oak Court and is currently occupied by offices. The second building to the north of Oak Court is a vacant office building known as Birch Court. The units to the east of the application site, outside of the red line boundary, are all vacant and subject to a separate planning application ref. 16/67827/OUT for residential development.

The site is located within a mixed use area. There are residential properties located to the south, a mix of other commercial uses to the west and an area of open space located to the east, which wraps around the site to the north. The M60 motorway and a railway line occupy the land beyond the open land to the north-west and north-east respectively.

The open land to the east of the business park is located within the Greenbelt (UDP policy EN1), with all of the open land surrounding the site being identified as land for new and improved recreation use under UDP policy R6/11 – former Robin Hood sidings and adjacent land. The open land surrounding the site is also identified as a wildlife corridor (UDP policy EN9) and as being within the Irwell Valley (UDP policy EN5).

Description of Proposal

Planning consent is sought for the demolition of the vacant Birch Court and formation and laying out of a car park, together with the installation of 2.0 metre high railings and gates around the site

Page 78 boundary. This is a re-submission of a scheme that was refused planning permission on 18 August 2016, ref. 16/67858/FUL (see relevant planning history section of this report below).

The new car park would serve the retained office building - Oak Court, and would provide an additional 50 car parking spaces. There are currently 80 car spaces available on the site. The new layout of the car park would accommodate in total 130 car parking spaces of which 12 would be designated for disabled drivers. In addition, there would be four cycle stands and four motorcycle parking spaces available. The car park would be surrounded by 2 metre high railings with sliding gates situated at the business park entrance to the south-east of Oak Court.

Publicity

Earliest Decision Date: 12 January 2017 Revised Expiry Date: extension agreed to 20 January 2017

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Date Displayed: 6 April 2016 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 24 March 2016 Reason: Article 13 Standard Press Notice

Relevant Site History of the Clifton Business Park

02/43552/FUL - Erection of 3, three storey office units, two industrial units and re-cladding of existing units – Approved 22 May 2002

03/46988/FUL - Construction of 2.5m high walling and entrance gates incorporating security lodge – Approved 25 November 2003

04/47851/FUL - Erection of 3 new build three storey office units – Approved 13 October 2004

07/55681/FUL - Erection of a three storey building surrounding the existing single storey building to create an additional 3300 sq.m office floorspace – Refused 25 February 2008

16/67858/FUL - Demolition of existing building and formation and laying out of car park, together with installation of 2m high railings and gates. Refused 18 August 2016. The application was refused for the following reason:

The application site is considered to be in sustainable location within walking distance from Bolton Road which is well served by public transport with nearby facilities and services. Local link is also available for the site, so out of normal hours workers have links around Greater Manchester. In addition, cycle routes, footpaths and good pavements are provided throughout the surrounding areas and as such do not act as a barrier towards accessing the site on a bike or on foot. The proposal includes demolition of the existing building and formation of the additional car park to the existing Oak Court offices. In total, the new car park would accommodate 130 car parking spaces, 50 more than currently available at Oak Court. The proposed development would exceed the maximum car parking provision identified in Appendix C of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan which would

Page 79 undermine the promotion of sustainable transport choices. Insufficient information has been provided by the applicant to justify an alternative approach to parking provision and as such the proposed development conflicts with the policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the sustainable transport principles of National Planning Policy Framework.

The remainder of the land to the east of the application site is subject to a separate planning application ref. 16/67827/OUT - Outline planning application with all matters reserved except for Access for the demolition of existing buildings and erection of up to 110 dwellings – Pending consideration

Neighbours

4 neighbouring properties were notified of this application on the 17th October 2016

Representations

None received

Consultations

Highways - Objection due to conflict with UDP Policy A10 (please see Highways section below for more information)

Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management - No objections - recommend conditions

Urban Vision Environment (Air And Noise) - No objections

Design For Security - No objections – recommend informatives

Urban Vision Environment (Land Contamination) - No objections

Great Manchester Ecological Unit - No objections

United Utilities – No objections

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan ST3 - Employment Supply

Page 80 This policy states that a good range of local employment opportunities will be secured by enabling the diversification of the local economy and by using planning obligations to secure local labour contracts and training opportunities.

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

Page 81 Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on the 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 and Motorcycle Parking This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded; and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of safety and security.

Unitary Development Plan EN1 - Development Affecting the Green Belt This policy states that carrying out engineering and other operations and making material changes to the use of land are inappropriate development unless they maintain openness and do not conflict with the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. Planning permission will not be granted that might be visually detrimental by reason of its siting, materials, or design, even where it would not prejudice the purpose of including land in the Green Belt. Planning permission will be granted for the working of minerals, provided that high environmental standards are maintained, the affected sites are well restored, and the development is consistent with other policies and proposals of the Plan.

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.

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.

Page 82 Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy

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

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

Supplementary Planning Document - 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.

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

Appraisal

Principle of Development

Loss of employment land

The application site is an established employment area and consequently paragraph 22 of the NPPF and UDP policy E5 are of relevance.

Paragraph 22 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that “Planning policies should avoid the long term protection of sites allocated for employment use where there is no reasonable prospect of a site being used for that purpose” before advising that “Where there is no reasonable prospect of a site being used for the allocated employment use, applications for alternative uses of land or buildings should be treated on their merits having regard to market signals and the relative need for different land uses to support sustainable local communities”.

UDP Policy E5 seeks to retain sites within employment use and 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 following conditions are met:

Page 83 1. the development would not compromise the operating conditions of other remaining employment uses; and 2. one or more of the following apply: a. the developer can clearly demonstrate that there is no current or likely future demand for the site or building for employment purposes; b. there is a strong environmental 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; or d. the site is allocated for another use in the UDP.

Although this site is not specifically allocated as an employment site in the UDP it is afforded protection as an employment site under UDP policy E5, supplemented by policies in the Established Employment Areas SPD which provides further details on the information necessary to satisfy the requirements of UDP policy E5.

The current submission does not include any information with regards to the requirements of the first part of Policy E5. However, the City Council’s Environmental Consultants have raised no objections to the proposal and confirmed that no specific mitigation measures are required. In addition, the remaining part of the business park is vacant and thus it is considered that the development would not compromise the operating conditions of other remaining employment uses.

With regard to the second part of Policy E5, the site formed part of a submission for pre-application advice for residential development on the wider business park site. This pre-application submission outlined how all the office units, except the one that is currently occupied (Oak Court), have stood vacant since completion, with market evidence and the City Councils Employment Land Review providing evidence that the demand for commercial space in this location is limited.

The planning officer’s site visit confirmed that Birch Court and other office buildings (except Oak Court) on the site are vacant and are all in poor state of repair. In addition, in the pre-application advice submission for the wider business park it was outlined that the City Council has been in liaison with the site owner over a number of years in order to assist them in identifying potential tenants and is therefore aware that the units have been marketed for some time, using a number of property agents, at discounted rents, with advertising boards at the site itself (and for a time on the junction of Chapel Street and trinity Way) and a dedicated website.

Therefore, whilst no information has been provided by the applicant with regards to the requirements of UDP policy E5, in view of what is known about the site and given the City Council’s Business and Funding Team has been working closely with the owner during their marketing of the site, no further information is required in respect of the second part of the policy and the proposal is considered to be acceptable under criteria 2a of policy E5.

Highway impact and parking

At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which the government wants to be seen as a golden thread running through both the plan making and decision making process. The NPPF outlines three dimensions of sustainability; economic, social and

Page 84 environmental. These dimensions give rise to a need for the planning system to perform a number of roles including the environment role.

Paragraph 39 of the NPPF indicates that in setting local parking standards local planning authorities should take account of a number of factors including:

 the accessibility of the development;  the type, mix and use of development;  the availability of and opportunities for public transport;  local car ownership levels; and  an overall need to reduce the use of high-emission vehicles

In addition, following publication of a statement made by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government on 25 March 2015 the above paragraph 39 should be read in conjunction with the following text: - “Local planning authorities should only impose local parking standards for residential and non-residential development where there is clear and compelling justification that it is necessary to manage their local road network.”

Whilst the Ministerial Statement (in March 2015) has made it clear that local planning authorities should look at parking provision for new developments on a case by case basis, taking into account any existing local parking pressures, the City Council's adopted UDP vehicle parking standards are a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, which haves gone through the full development plan adoption process and is considered a reasonable starting point for assessing whether the level of off-street parking resulting from the application would be acceptable. This is consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which stresses the importance of promoting sustainable transport and how local policies can influence this (NPPF para 29):

“Transport policies have an important role to play in facilitating sustainable development but also in contributing to wider sustainability and health objectives. The transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel.”

The City Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan Policy A10 (Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking) states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the City 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.

The proposal includes the demolition of an existing building and formation of an additional car park for the existing Oak Court offices. In total, the new car park would accommodate 130 car parking spaces, 50 more than currently available at Oak Court.

In comparison with the previous planning application submission, that was subsequently refused, the agent has submitted a planning statement arguing the case for the development and clarifying that the Oak Court building has a Net Internal Area (NIA) of 2010 sqm (the NIA is the lettable / usable area of the office but excludes corridors, stairwells, lifts, WCs and other communal areas). The building has two tenants who occupy the ground and first floors .The second floor is occupied by Hampstead Investments - the applicant. According to the information provided and based on guidance contained

Page 85 in the Homes Communities Agency Employment Densities Guide (2nd Edition 2010) the agent states that Oak Court would be capable of generating a figure of between 167 to 201 employees. The proposal seeks to provide 130 car parking spaces and according to the agent there would still be a shortfall of parking spaces when set against potential employees.

This contradicts the standards contained in the City Council's UDP, where the maximum car parking provision for a building with a floor area of 2010sqm within a business park would be 50 car parking spaces (1 car parking space per 40sqm within a business park). In the event that the remainder of the business park is demolished and re-developed, the maximum car parking provision for a stand-alone office would be 57 car parking spaces (1 space per 35sqm for stand-alone offices).

The City Council’s Highway’s consultant has assessed the application and whilst he has confirmed that the cycle and mobility impaired parking is appropriate in terms of location, design and numbers, he raises objections to the overall parking numbers which are outside of the City Council’s policy on maximum car parking numbers contrary to Appendix C of the UDP.

Oak Court provides a regional sales function for the occupiers, which involves employees and visitors attending on a day to day basis and currently benefits from 80 car parking spaces. According to the applicants, the building at full capacity could accommodate up to 200 employees and due to its out of town location and distance to public transport routes the tenants and visitors to their businesses are dependent upon using their cars. The applicants claim that the present car parking provision is insufficient and that many current employees already park on site using the existing car parking spaces which were originally provided for the other office accommodation within the Clifton Business Park which were never occupied.

In the agent’s opinion, if planning permission is granted for residential development on the eastern part of the Clifton Business Park via planning application ref. 16/67827/OUT, the car parking provided for the vacant office units and currently being used by the occupants of Oak Court will no longer be available. Thus, it would be vital that sufficient car parking is provided and failure to provide additional car parking spaces would harm the applicants’ prospects to grow their business and attract potential tenants. In addition, a lack of additional car parking provision could result in employees and visitors parking off-site, which could cause further problems within the surrounding streets.

In the Travel Plan submitted with the application the applicant states that:

”the anecdotal evidence from the occupiers is that more car parking is required”.

It is acknowledged that the Travel Plan submitted with the current application has been slightly amended following comments from the City Council’s sustainability consultant and highway consultant on the previous application. However, the information included within the Travel Plan is still very vague and insufficient to ensure that adequate measures would be undertaken in order to promote the most sustainable forms of transport. Whilst the plan identifies that the applicant will designate a Travel Coordinator it does not provide details on when this would happen and for how long it would last. In addition, no information has been submitted with regards to the proposed ‘consultation and promotion’ and how public transport use would be encouraged among employees. The Travel Plan talks about engaging in national and local campaigns, however, it does not identify them. Furthermore, it states that the Final Travel Plan would be produced to educate the occupiers of Oak

Page 86 Court about walking, cycling, car share scheme and use of public transport, but does not give any details of budget to include incentives in the Travel Packs such as discount bus tickets, cycle equipment etc.

Although more information regarding cycle parking has been submitted stating that 8 lockable lockers would be provided, more cycle parking would be preferable and it is unclear which of three types of cycle storage proposed would be used at the site. In addition, no information has been submitted on when the Final Travel Plan would be implemented and how it would be promoted. Moreover, according to the plan an ‘occupier travel survey’ would be undertaken, however no timescales have been set out and no ‘Action Plan’ has been included which would introduce measures to improve and encourage sustainable travel both on traveling to and from the site. Overall, the submitted Travel Plan does not identify the specific required outcomes, targets and measures, and does not set out any clear future monitoring or specific management arrangements at the application site. The fact that the applicants have submitted a Travel Plan for their development does not mean that the development would be sustainable in transport terms and as it would have minimal, if any, impact in terms of reducing overall private car use. The Travel Plan would therefore fail in terms of its stated objectives.

With regards to the Secretary of State’s statement mentioned above, the preamble to the text referred to issues arising from the use of maximum standards and indicated that the market is best placed to decide if additional parking spaces are to be provided.

The agent and the applicant both claim that due to the development not being accessible in a sustainable manner it is not commercially viable and given the Ministerial Statement further evidence in support of the proposal is not necessary. This position is not supported by the City Council and it is considered that there has been insufficient information submitted to justify deviation from the standards outlined in the UDP.

In addition, in accordance with the NPPF, Local Planning Authorities when determining proposed parking provision should give consideration to the accessibility of the development site, in terms of promoting sustainable transport, notably walking, cycling and bus and rail options. Consideration should also be given to the type, mix and use of development. In addition where the sites are more accessible then a lower parking requirement is justified; where sites are less well served by sustainable means, more parking could be considered, provided that this does not support excessive car use.

The application was reviewed by Urban Vision’s Sustainable Travel Officer who confirmed, with the previous submission, that the site is considered to be in a sustainable location within walking distance from Bolton Road which is well served by public transport with nearby facilities and services. This includes bus stops located within 5 minutes’ walk of the site (0.3 of a mile) served by the number 8, 22, 66, 19, 70, 71 and 73 which allow connections to Bolton, Manchester City Centre, Stockport, Eccles and other points around Greater Manchester. Services range from one bus every 10 minutes to one every hour. Local link is also available for the site, so out of normal office hours workers have links around Greater Manchester. In addition, footpaths and good pavements are provided throughout the site and surrounding areas and as such do not act as a barrier towards accessing the site on foot. The Travel Plan submitted by the agent states that the M60 is a barrier to pedestrians and cyclists, however, roads and off road walking and cycling routes are provided along the River Irwell and under

Page 87 the M60. Thus, despite the application site being situated out of town, Clifton Business Park is considered to be situated within a sustainable location.

The application site already has car parking provision in excess of the maximum standard identified in Appendix C of the UDP. The agent provided planning statements and supporting letters from the applicant and tenants of Oak Court stating that the lack of additional car parking would have a detrimental impact on the future growth of the business. However, still no detailed assessment of the operational demands of the application site including efforts to encourage the use of more sustainable modes has been provided which would justify the proposed increased car parking provision. As such it is concluded that insufficient information has been submitted to justify an alternative view. In the absence of specific demand data it is reasonable to consider the UDP parking standards, with the total 130 space provision considerably exceeding the maximum standards. The level of unfettered provision is considered contrary not only to UDP but also to the sustainable transport objectives of the NPPF.

Furthermore, it is acknowledged that currently additional parking is available within the remainder of Clifton Business Park and if the eastern side of the park is re-developed for housing, Oak Court would lose this supplementary car parking provision within the Clifton Business Park. However, the application for residential development has not been determined as yet and the Local Planning Authority can only assess the current circumstances existing at the site. In this instance, it is considered that Oak Court currently does not suffer from serious problems associated with unauthorised on-street car parking and traffic congestion. In addition, due to the location of the site it is considered unlikely that the possible redevelopment of the remainder of the site would have a detrimental impact on the car parking provision within the site or within the surrounding area. As mentioned above, the site is within a sustainable location where there are already opportunities for the applicants to encourage the tenants of Oak Court’s to use alternative modes which could potentially limit further demand for car parking spaces at the application site. Thus, as the site is accessible by public transport and sufficient parking is currently available for Oak Court, it is not considered that refusal of additional car parking provision would significantly impact on the future prosperity of Oak Court as an office building.

Moreover, car parking provision is an element of traffic planning and management and alongside the fact that road transport is responsible for the vast majority of air pollution. Part of the site is located within the City Council’s Air Quality Management Area and whilst no objections have been raised from Council’s Environmental Consultants, it is considered that there is a clear and compelling justification to reduce the use of high-emission vehicles as outlined in the NPPF. Allowing developers to include as much parking as they wish would increase car usage and, in turn, increase air pollution, with more people encouraged to drive rather than use more sustainable and efficient means of transport contrary to the provisions of the UDP and the NPPF which both seek to promote sustainable transport choices and reduce emissions from transport. This in itself is enough to warrant strict controls on local parking levels.

In view of the above it is considered that the proposed car parking is contrary to UDP policy A10 and paragraph 39 of the NPPF.

Visual Amenity

Page 88 The proposal would result in the demolition of an existing office building and the introduction of an additional 50 car parking spaces to the north of Oak Court. The new car park would be surrounded by 2.0 metre high railings with slide gates to the entrance. The materials and scale of the proposed fencing is considered to be appropriate within this location, with similar gates/fencing already being present at the vehicular access to Clifton Business Park. Consequently, it is considered that the proposal would not have an adverse impact upon the visual amenity of the area in accordance with Policy DES1 of the UDP.

Crime and Design

The proposed fencing would create an enclosure to Oak Court and to the proposed car park and has been designed with railings to allow surveillance through them. The vehicular and pedestrian gates are designed in such a way that they provide open views to the site, ensuring that there is a high level of natural surveillance in the car park. The proposed gates and railings would not have any central horizontal bars which mean that they would be difficult to scale and therefore people would be prevented from climbing over them. Greater Manchester Police reviewed the submission and recommended a number of informatives advising the applicant with regards to the type of vehicular and pedestrian access gates, CCTV system, lighting and parking layout in order to increase safety at the site. It is therefore considered that the proposal is in accordance with policy DES10 of the adopted UDP and the Council's Supplementary Planning Document on Design and Crime.

Residential Amenity

Although partly visible from the rear of residential properties along Ellerby Avenue, it is not considered that the introduction of the additional parking with surrounding fencing would have any significant detrimental effect on the amenities of adjacent residents. The proposal would support the existing office building and would not intensify the use of the site to the point that it would result in disturbance to the residential properties to the south-east of the site.

As such it is considered that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the residential amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents. The proposal is therefore in accordance with Policy DES7 of the adopted UDP.

Flood Risk

Paragraph 100 of the NPPF states that inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding should be avoided by directing development away from areas at highest risk. Paragraph 103 of the NPPF states that when determining planning applications local planning authorities should ensure flood risk is not increased elsewhere.

The application site is located within Flood Zone 1 and is therefore within an area defined as having the lowest risk of a flood event occurring (less than 1 in 1,000 annual probability of flooding from rivers or the sea). Therefore, it is considered that the proposed scheme would not in principle be at significant risk of a flooding event and would not result in any significant additional risk of flooding elsewhere in accordance with the NPPF.

Drainage

Page 89 The site is within a Critical Drainage Area. Salford City Council Engineering Services (Drainage) have raised no objections to the submitted Flood Risk Assessment and recommend that conditions are placed on any permission granted for a surface water drainage strategy and details of pollution management (e.g. an oil separator and/or SUDS scheme) to be provided prior to commencement of works.

Ecology

The NPPF states that applications should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity and nature conservation interests by; avoiding significant harm; or where this is unavoidable, adequately mitigate or at last resort compensate for the harm; encouraging opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments; and permit developments that have the primary objective of conserving and enhancing biodiversity.

With regards to the characteristics of the site, it is noted that the application site is located within a built up area. The site itself incorporates two office buildings of which one would be demolished to provide the proposed additional car parking.

The site is located adjacent to a wildlife corridor associated with the River Irwell and adjacent habitats such as woodland, scrub, grassland and wetlands. The site itself includes a mature woodland boundary along the north western, northern and eastern boundaries of the Clifton Business Park. In addition the southern boundary of the business park includes a semi-mature line of native and non- native trees and shrubs. These features could potentially provide good foraging habitat for bats. Both the application for the currently proposed car park and for the separate residential development ref. 16/67827/OUT have been supported by the same Bat Survey, an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and Protected Species Survey/Assessment which covers the whole Clifton Business Park.

All vacant buildings, including Birch Court (proposed for demolition with the current application), have been assessed for their bat roosting potential and found to have less than low bat roosting potential, despite the high risk location on the edge of the Irwell Valley. The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) have confirmed that they have no reason to doubt these findings as the buildings are of a modern 20th century industrial design, lacking features preferred by bats and adjacent to a housing area where significantly high potential roosting opportunities will be present.

In view of the above, it is considered that in principle the proposed scheme, including the demolition, would not cause any significant harm to the ecological value, and nature conservation interests at the site and within the surrounding area. Therefore, the proposed development is considered to accord with policies within the NPPF.

Recommendation:

Refuse

2. The application site is considered to be in sustainable location within walking distance from Bolton Road which is well served by public transport with nearby facilities and services. Local link is also available for the site, so out of normal hours workers have links around Greater Manchester. In

Page 90 addition, cycle routes, footpaths and good pavements are provided throughout the surrounding areas and as such do not act as a barrier towards accessing the site on a bike or on foot. The proposal includes demolition of the existing building and formation of the additional car park to the existing Oak Court offices. In total, the new car park would accommodate 130 car parking spaces, 50 more than currently available at Oak Court. The proposed development would exceed the maximum car parking provision identified in Appendix C of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan which would undermine the promotion of sustainable transport choices. Insufficient information has been provided by the applicant to justify an alternative approach to parking provision and as such the proposed development conflicts with the policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the sustainable transport principles of National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 91 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5g

APPLICATION No: 17/70853/FUL APPLICANT: Mr Mike Stone LOCATION: Campbell Road Playing Fields, Campbell Road, Swinton, Manchester PROPOSAL: Demolition of 2 no dwellings and erection of 241 dwellings (Use Class C3), laying out of a new Community Park, vehicular access, roads and footways, hard and soft landscaping, walls, fences, drainage and associated works. WARD: Swinton South

Update following deferral of application on 15th March 2018.

Members will recall the above application was deferred at the panel meeting on 15th March 2018 for a site visit to view the existing parking situation and layout of local streets. Further information was also requested in relation to the application of the Greenspace policy insofar as Strategic Natural Greenspace is concerned and relation to the Natural England standard.

A site visit took place on Thursday 19th April which was attended by members of the panel, officers, members of the public and members of the applicant’s team.

This report sets out additional representations that have been received since the previous panel meeting and provides additional information on highways and Strategic Natural Greeenspace.

- Consultee comments

Further comments have been received from United Utilities who recommend an update to condition 16 (Management and Maintenance of Drainage System) to ensure that no surface water shall discharge to the existing public sewerage system either directly or indirectly. Condition 16 has been updated in this regard.

- Neighbour representations

7 further letters of support have been received from 6 additional addresses to those who have previously made representation. The responses are summarised below:  The design shows that access and massing have been thought through to minimise impact on surrounding areas;  Positive that there is some external space for children to use;  The area is in need of affordable homes and other tenures and the land is otherwise wasted; Swinton is the only area that doesn’t have any new homes and this will help with housing;  There is a shortage of 4 bed new builds in the area;  The development is a fantastic opportunity

In addition, following the neighbour notification of the members site visit, 8 representations were received which raised concerns regarding the time and route of the members site visit.

Some images have also been provided by a local resident showing queuing traffic along Folly Lane on the mornings of 17th and 18th April.

Page 93 - Strategic Natural Greenspace

In 2006, the City Council adopted a modified version of some of Natural England’s Access to Natural Greenspace Standard (ANGSt). The Salford interpretation of ANGSt has been through extensive public consultation on several occasions without being challenged. Salford’s local standard for strategic natural greenspace focuses on “significant areas for a rich variety of wildlife to thrive” but does not preclude some formal recreation areas. Elsewhere in the city formal recreation areas such as sports pitches partially contribute to the 20 hectare size for an existing strategic natural greenspace in Irlam and Cadishead. The proposed community park at the Former Swinton Wastewater Treatment Works and adjoining land includes a small proportion of disused allotments and sports pitches, which is considered acceptable and consistent with the Salford local standard.

National Standards (voluntary)

In the 1990’s English Nature (now Natural England) proposed minimum distances people would travel to the natural environment known as the Access to Natural Greenspace Standard (ANGSt)

ANGSt recommends that everyone, wherever they live, should have an accessible natural greenspace:

. of at least 2 hectares in size, no more than 300 metres (5 minutes’ walk) from home; . at least one accessible 20 hectare site within two kilometres of home; . one accessible 100 hectare site within five kilometres of home; and . one accessible 500 hectare site within ten kilometres of home; plus . a minimum of one hectare of statutory Local Nature Reserves per thousand population.

Natural England has defined natural greenspace as "places where human control and activities are not intensive so that a feeling of naturalness is allowed to predominate". Natural England reviewed ANGSt in 2008 and concluded that the standard remained useful, but that further guidance (Nature Nearby: Accessible Natural Greenspace, March 2010) was required to explain how this should be applied.

Natural England acknowledge that when using the definition for natural greenspace above, actually deciding at which point a feeling of naturalness predominates may be difficult to determine, and it can be argued that there is considerable room for interpretation. The guidance recommends some form of proxy for categorising a feeling of naturalness based on a four stage rating:

. Level 1 includes nature conservation areas, local wildlife sites, local nature reserves, woodland, and remnant countryside (within urban and urban fringe areas). . Level 2 includes country parks, formal and informal open space, unimproved farmland, rivers and canals, disused/derelict land, and disused/abandoned allotments. . Level 3 includes active allotments, church yards and cemeteries and formal recreation space. . Level 4 consists of improved farmland.

Nature Nearby (Natural England) considers that levels 1 and 2 are proxy indicators of natural greenspace although importantly there is some flexibility where sites are disused or are managed for nature conservation.

Salford Interpretation

Similar to other voluntary standards, ANGSt has been interpreted in different ways by local authorities based on individual circumstances including variations within local authorities. One of the criticisms of ANGSt has been that it is more difficult to achieve or improve on in urban areas due to limited land availability therefore a degree of flexibility needs to be applied.

Salford has not fully adopted ANGSt and where it has local documents make it clear that locally adopted standards are derived from ANGSt and that modifications have been made as summarised in the table below. The 1 hectare and 20 hectare standards have been adopted Salford policy since 2006, which has been updated in a revised draft SPD (2017). The Draft Local Plan (2016) includes

Page 94 these two standards as well as a new Local Nature Reserve standard. The local standards have formed part of a number of extensive periods of public consultation for the different versions of the SPD and the Draft Local Plan. No objections were received in relation to ANGSt or Salford’s interpretation of it, other than comments to highlight the need to recognise that 100 and 500 hectare sites, for example in Bury and Manchester, will be partially accessible to Salford residents.

ANGSt Standard Salford Adopted Standard Salford Documents 2 hectares within 300 metres 1 hectare within 500 metres . Salford Greenspace Strategy walking distance (300 metres SPD (Adopted 2006) straight line) . Revised Draft Greenspace 20 hectares site within 2 km 20 hectares site within 2 km Strategy SPD (2017) applied flexibly where required . Draft Salford Local Plan (accepting linked sites and a (2016) limited proportion of formal recreation provision) 100 hectares site within 5 km No adopted standard but some Not applicable 500 hectares site within 10 km access to cross boundary sites such as Phillip’s Park, Bury 1 hectare of Local Nature 1 hectare of Local Nature . Revised Draft Greenspace Reserves per 1,000 population Reserves per 1,000 population Strategy SPD (2017) (proposed) . Draft Salford Local Plan (2016)

Strategic Natural Greenspace Definition

Broadly based on ANGSt, the Salford interpretation of a strategic natural greenspace is set out in further detail in policies GS2 of Salford Greenspace Strategy SPD (2006) and the replacement draft SPD (2017), which is defined as:

- Being at least 20 hectares in size; - Providing significant areas for a rich variety of wildlife to thrive; and - Publicly accessible without restrictions on entry.

The proposed community park combined with the adjoining city council land is considered to meet Salford’s strategic natural greenspace standard and would satisfy the requirements of Policy H4/2 of the Draft Local Plan (2016) for the following reasons:

Being at least 20 hectares in size

These sites will be linked by existing and new public footpaths and adjacent open spaces to form an overall site of more than 20 hectares. The site would comprise of the following individual sites:

. Campbell Road Playing Fields (6.70ha, predominantly city council ownership) . Swinton / Monton Walkway (3.53ha, city council) . Remainder of Former Wastewater Treatment Works (approximately 8.50ha, private) . Beechfield Playing Fields (2.56ha, city council) . Former Beechfield Allotments (1.51ha, city council) . Approximate total area of 22.80ha

The disused playing fields and allotments contribute a small proportion of the total area. The city council has taken a consistent approach in identifying appropriate sites. Indeed one of the existing strategic natural greenspaces in Irlam (IRC/001 River Irwell Old Course) actually consists of three individual but linked sites, which have much less connection than the proposed community park in Swinton would have.

Providing significant areas for a rich variety of wildlife to thrive

The proposed community park would deliver significant and varied areas. The standard does not require all or even the majority of the site to provide this rich variety. It is common for strategic natural greenspaces to include other recreation uses, which may include some more intensively managed

Page 95 areas. The collection of three sites at River Irwell Old Course, referred to above, actually includes a much greater proportion of 'formal' open space including sports pitches within Princes Park than would be included in the proposed community park.

Beechfield Playing Fields receives minimum maintenance but are actually recorded as a lapsed site in the latest working refresh of Salford Playing Pitch Strategy (2018) which means that they have not been actively used by a local sports club for more than five years. Financial contributions from the proposed development will provide opportunities to invest in the refurbishment of the former statutory allotments, local recreation routes and allow consideration of the future recreation use of the playing fields, which will be the subject of consultation with the local community.

Publicly accessible without restrictions on entry

The former wastewater treatment works is predominately open in appearance but importantly it is currently a private site with no authorised public access. The site needs to have public access to meet the standard, which can only be achieved with the agreement of the private owner. Whilst a publicly accessible site could theoretically be delivered on the site through other options, other than enabling development, none have been identified to generate the significant investment required. The proposed enabling development would lead to significant investment being provided by the developer to remediate the former wastewater treatment works and create a varied strategic natural greenspace.

The panel report sets out within the ‘Proposed use – amenity areas and Community Park’ section that the proposed community park combined with the adjoining city council land would meet the Strategic Natural Greenspace standard. Further information was provided as part of the previous amendment sheet and again further clarification has been set out above. Officers maintain the view that the proposed community park combined with the adjoining city council land would meet the Strategic Natural Greenspace standard.

- Applicant response to Strategic Natural Greenspace

In addition to the above the applicants have also commented that the proposed development would deliver the following key ecological benefits:  New planting to include berry-bearing and nectar rich species to improve habitats for pollinators and other invertebrates;  Mixed woody species hedgerow planting;  Creation of a number of waterbodies (both wildlife ponds and SUDS) ;  Enhancement to bankside habitat of Folly Brook;  Inclusion of bat and bird boxes;  Removal/control of invasive plant species;  Long-term management of habitats.

They consider that the development proposals will ensure the delivery of both housing and Strategic Natural Greenspace/Community Park which will significantly benefit existing Salford residents and future occupiers of the proposed houses.

- Highways

In response to the highway issues raised the tables set out in the original panel report have been updated to include details of time and date of surveys undertaken and current trip rates in order to allow a comparison to be made.

Junction No Location Date of Survey

Tuesday 14 February 2017

J1 A580/ Worsley Road Signal junction 7:30am to 9:30am & 4pm to 6pm By Traffic for Greater Manchester

Page 96 J2 Folly Lane/Fir Road priority junction Wednesday 27th September 2017 J3 Folly Lane/Morpeth Street priority junction 7:30am to 9:30am & 4pm to 6pm J4 Worsley Road/Folly Lane priority junction By CTS Traffic & Transportation Ltd J5 Folly Lane/Thorn Road priority junction

Tuesday 9th January 2018 ANPR Rat-Running Traffic via Thorn Road 7:30am to 9:30am & 4pm to 6pm Survey By Intelligent Data Collection Ltd

As previously set out, with regards to a potential access to the site from Folly Lane this does not form part of the scheme that is before the Panel for consideration. However it is noted that the area of land between the application site and Folly Lane falls outside of the application site boundary and accommodates part of Folly Brook which are likely to be significant constraints to the provision of a vehicular access from this point. It is also noted that should vehicular access be proposed from this point it would be required to continue through a significant area of the green space currently proposed in order to provide access to the residential dwellings and there are also likely to be highway safety issues with visibility onto Folly Lane as it sits on a bend.

The application as submitted proposes access from Campbell Road. The assessment of the proposed development has been carried out in this regard and the proposed access is considered acceptable as set out in the original panel report.

Page 97 - Applicant response to Highway matters

The highway consultant for Bellway has summarised the overall highway impact of the proposed development as follows:

‘The percentage increase in overall traffic at the existing East Lancashire Road/Worsley Road signal junction is just over 1% during the morning and evening peal hours. Without the development traffic there is already in the region of 5,000 vehicles travelling through this junction in the morning and evening peak hours.’

Other matters

As previously set out the applicants have agreed to the provision of £60,000 towards improvement works around the Worsley Road signalised junction. This is to be secured through the S106 agreement and as such the heads of terms has been amended to reflect this:

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: - Affordable Housing - Open Space - Education - Public Realm - Highway works

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;

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Amendment sheet – 17/70853/FUL, Former Sewage Works, Campbell Road

Additional Representations

Members of the Public

Following the publication of the agenda a number of further representations have been received. Three objections have been received as well as three representations in support of the application.

The objections raise the following: - Traffic to and from Campbell Road and on surrounding roads is already bad and will be made worse by the development (including construction traffic); - Safety of children playing on the street; - Only one proposed access to the site is not acceptable. An increase of possibly 300-500 vehicles through one access point is unrealistic. There should be at least two access points to the site with an additional access point via Folly Lane; - The homes are out of reach financially for the type of people and families that need them; - The land should be opened up for social purposes instead of developed; - Impact on air quality and pollution; - The green space provided would be split up and the new build would be too close.

It is not considered that the objections raise any new issues than those already detailed and considered within the published panel report.

The representations of support set out the following: - Housing is needed in this popular area; - Using a former industrial site is a good idea;

Page 98 - Incorporating open space is good and sympathetic rather than as many houses as possible being squeezed onto the plot; - The development will benefit local schools and the local area; - It will make a patch of land that is currently closed off accessible for public enjoyment;

One support letter does say that they would like to see a children’s play area in the development and this is acknowledged however there is an existing play area adjacent to Campbell Road which is an identified project for improvement works within the S106 agreement.

Councillor Ballkind

In addition to the above a representation has been received from Councillor Ballkind. He is unable to attend the panel meeting but requested that his comments be heard as part of the application. His comments are summarised below: - There are significant objections to the proposed development from the existing estate and beyond; - The plans have not been amended their plans despite my objections and those of residents; - It is appreciated that the site is an ideal Brownfield site for development but the intended access in and out of the new estate is totally wrong; - The report from Bellway homes transport adviser is inaccurate as the survey was conducted during the school summer holidays and therefore does not give a true picture of the existing estate of traffic flow. - At present there are only three exits off the estate including two down narrow roads leading onto Folly Lane, which in itself is already very much a congested and dangerous road at nearly all hours of the day. The other exit is down another very narrow road leading to a side road that runs along the side of the East Lancs Road and exiting just before the traffic lights at the junction of Worsley Road, an accident blackspot; - Increased commercial and emergency vehicles down Campbell Road; - The decision should be deferred pending a site visit and the plans amended providing for a different access.

SOSCA Representation

In addition to the above a further representation has been received from SOSCA raising concerns that a number of points have not been adequately addressed in the panel report. The points raised are set out in turn below:

- Ability of the estate roads to deal with the additional traffic that will be generated by the proposed development. The situation on the estate roads is such that off road parking provision is less than half that on the proposed development, leading to cars parked on either side and only room for a single vehicle to pass.

The panel report sets out in the ‘Internal road layout and parking’ section that sufficient car parking spaces would be proposed to serve the development in accordance with the Council’s parking requirements and that the internal road plan is considered to be to an adoptable standard

The panel report also sets out in the ‘Impacts on highway network’ section that the proposed development is unlikely to result in a significant material impact when dispersed to the local highway network when combined with measures to encourage people to use public transport and other sustainable forms of transport. A number of highways conditions are recommended including requirements for junction improvement works at Folly Lane/Thorn Road and requiring the submission of a Travel Plan. An informative is also recommended setting out the requirement for S278 and S38 agreements to include a Traffic Management scheme to prevent/ assist in the safe use of the proposed access point at the Thorn Road / Folly Lane junction, to prohibit on-street parking and to provide a traffic calming scheme within the development and to amend the speed limit/traffic regulation order on neighbouring roads which includes Campbell Road and Thorn Road.

- No assessment of Folly Lane and Rocky Lane as an alternative access point.

With regards to a potential access to the site from Folly Lane this does not form part of the scheme that is before us for consideration. However it is noted that the area of land between the application

Page 99 site and Folly Lane falls outside of the application site boundary and accommodates part of Folly Brook which are likely to be significant constraints to the provision of a vehicular access from this point. It is also noted that should vehicular access be proposed from this point it would be required to continue through a significant area of the green space currently proposed in order to provide access to the residential dwellings and there are also likely to be highway safety issues with visibility as it sits on a bend.

The application as submitted proposes access from Campbell Road. The assessment of the proposed development has been carried out in this regard and the proposed access is considered acceptable as set out in the panel report.

- Inability of the application to deliver a minimum 20 hectare Strategic Greenspace (as required under the Greenspace SPD). No assessment of the ability of the proposed community park to ensure Salford residents can experience the benefits and tranquility of large open green spaces. The development will take away the existing large open green spaces and shatter the existing tranquility and replace it with a number of small disparate green spaces all of which will be directly overlooked by the housing development.

The panel report sets out within the ‘Proposed use – amenity areas and Community Park’ section that the proposed community park combined with the adjoining city council land would meet the Strategic Natural Greenspace standard.

To expand on this, A Strategic Natural Greenspace, as set out in Salford Greenspace Strategy SPD 2006 and the replacement draft 2017, is defined as: - Being at least 20 hectares in size; - Providing significant areas for a rich variety of wildlife to thrive; and - Publicly accessible without restrictions on entry. This is based on a national voluntary standard proposed by Natural England, which Salford adopted in 2006. It is for local authorities to interpret this standard and to consider appropriate sites.

Each of the criteria above is set out in turn below:

- Being at least 20 hectares in size

The proposed community park combined with the adjoining city council land would meet the Strategic Natural Greenspace standard. The community park would meet the requirements of Draft Local Plan (2016) Policy H4/2 and Policy GS2 of the Draft Greenspace Strategy SPD (2017). These sites will be linked by existing and new public footpaths and adjacent open spaces to form an overall site of more than 20 hectares. The site would comprise of the following individual sites:

. Campbell Road Playing Fields (6.70ha, predominantly city council ownership) . Swinton / Monton Walkway (3.53ha, city council) . Remainder of Former Wastewater Treatment Works (approximately 8.50ha, private) . Beechfield Playing Fields (2.56ha, city council) . Former Beechfield Allotments (1.51ha, city council) . Approximate total area of 22.8ha

The city council has taken a consistent approach in identifying appropriate sites. Indeed one of the existing Strategic Natural Greenspaces in Irlam (IRC/001 River Irwell Old Course) actually consists of three individual but linked sites, which have much less connection than the proposed community park in Swinton would have.

- Providing significant areas for a rich variety of wildlife to thrive

The proposed community park would deliver significant and varied areas. The standard does not require all or even the majority of the site to provide this rich variety. It is common for Strategic Natural Greenspaces to include other recreation uses, which may include some more intensively managed areas. The collection of three sites at River Irwell Old Course, referred to above, actually includes a much greater proportion of 'formal' open space including sports pitches within Princes Park than would be included in the proposed community park.

Page 100 Beechfield Playing Fields receives minimum maintenance but are actually recorded as a lapsed site in the latest working refresh of Salford Playing Pitch Strategy (2018) which means that they have not been actively used by a local sports club for more than five years. Financial contributions from the proposed development will provide opportunities to invest in the refurbishment of the former statutory allotments, local recreation routes and allow consideration of the future recreation use of the playing fields, which will be the subject of consultation with the local community.

- Publicly accessible without restrictions on entry

The former wastewater treatment works is predominately open in appearance but importantly it is currently a private site with no authorised public access. The site needs to be in public access to meet the standard, which can only be achieved with the agreement of the private owner. Whilst a publicly accessible site could theoretically be delivered on the site through other options, none have been identified to generate the significant investment required. The proposed development would lead to significant investment being provided by the developer to remediate the former wastewater treatment works and create a varied Strategic Natural Greenspace.

Highway matters

Following the publication of the agenda further comments have been received from Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) who have suggested the provision of additional, and re-positioning of, SCOOT loops at the Worsley Road signalised junction in order to assist in mitigating the impact of the proposed development.

SCOOT loops are installed at traffic signals, and are used to detect passing vehicles which enable the signal system to alter the traffic signal timing by providing more priority to specific approaches when needed.

This has been discussed with the applicants (Bellway) and their highway consultant and they have agreed to the provision of £60,000 towards improvement works at this junction. In addition the applicants have confirmed that a sum of money (approximately £35,000) will be allocated for the provision of free bus passes for future residents to encourage travel by alternative modes. Full details of this offer will be submitted and agreed through the travel plan (condition 20).

Other points

Condition 6 (Tree replacement) within the published report made reference to drawing number 7957- L-01 Revision G however this plan has since been updated to correct text on the drawing which incorrectly referred to Woodland Mix as Woodland Edge Mix. The revised drawing, 7957-L-01 Revision H, has been provided and the plan reference within condition 6 has been updated in this regard.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

APPLICATION No: 17/70853/FUL APPLICANT: Mr Mike Stone LOCATION: Campbell Road Playing Fields, Campbell Road, Swinton, Manchester PROPOSAL: Demolition of 2 no dwellings and erection of 241 dwellings (Use Class C3), laying out of a new Community Park, vehicular access, roads and footways, hard and soft landscaping, walls, fences, drainage and associated

Page 101 works. WARD: Swinton South

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The site is currently vacant but was formerly accommodated by a sewage waste water treatment works which was closed and demolished in the late 1980’s early 1990’s. Since this time the site has remained vacant. The site is currently in an overgrown state and is largely covered by vegetation with some areas of hard standing. The site is fenced and has no public access although it was noted at the time of the officers site visit that there are some gaps in the boundary fencing and informal footpaths running through the site however these are not public rights of way but are more desire lines that have been created by members of the public unlawfully accessing the site. The site extends to approximately 16.91 hectares. The site is not allocated on the UDP Proposals Map.

There is a Strategic Recreation Route which lies to the south east of the site however this does not bound the site and is not affected by the proposed development. The north the site is bounded by the rear gardens of residential dwellings along Thorn Road. The southern end of the site accommodates a scrub woodland area which the supporting statement refers to as Campbell Road Wood and Folly Brook. Beyond this are the rear garden areas of the residential dwellings on Bradford Road.

To the east and west are two council owned parcels of land. There is also a public right of way that runs from Campbell Road between the site and the council owned land to the east however this does not form part of the application site and is unaffected by the proposed development. Further to the east is Swinton Park Golf Club. Further west on the opposite side of the council owned land and bounding the small piece of the application site that juts out to the south west corner are the residential dwellings along South Avenue, Beechfield Road and cul de sacs off Beechfield Road

The site is accessed via Campbell Road.

Page 102 Description of Proposal

Permission is sought for the demolition of 2 no dwellings and the erection of 241 dwellings (Use Class C3), laying out of a new Community Park, vehicular access, roads and footways, hard and soft landscaping, walls, fences, drainage and associated works.

Demolition of 2 no dwellings

It is proposed to demolish the two residential dwellings at 86 and 88 Campbell Road which are located at the southern end of Campbell Road adjacent to the north eastern corner of the site. They are detached properties, one of which fronts Campbell Road with the other fronting the footpath that leads from Campbell Road. Neither of the properties are listed buildings and the applicant has confirmed that both properties are vacant.

Erection of 241 dwellings

The following mix is proposed; - 10 x 2 bed units - 119 x 3 bed units - 105 x 4 bed units - 7 x 5 bed units

This is broken down into the following mix of affordable (52 dwellings) and market units (189 dwellings):

- Market Housing (189 units) - 6 x 2 bed - 84 x 3 bed - 92 x 4 bed - 7 x 5 bed

- Affordable rent (19 units) - 2 x 2 bed - 13 x 3 bed - 4 x 4 bed

- Social rent (20 units) - 16 x 3 bed - 4 x 4 bed

- Shared Ownership (13 units) - 2 x 2 bed - 6 x 3 bed - 5 x 4 bed

Community Park

The scheme proposes a community park to the southern part of the site. The park would extend to approximately 10 hectares and it is proposed that it would be cross funded by the housing development. It is proposed that the community park will connect the site to the two council owned parcels of land to the east and west of the site and will create a new larger public green space. A financial contribution is also to be provided to assist with the delivery of the wider community park on adjacent council owned land and the refurbishment of the existing play area off Campbell Road adjacent to the North East corner of the application site and this is to be secured by the S106 agreement.

The community park is to be an enhanced area to serve existing residents of the area as well as future residents of the proposed development. It will incorporate an attenuation pond, landscaping including trees, shrubs, hedges and wild meadows, footbridges over Folly Brook, seating, waste bins

Page 103 and footpath linkages to the residential development and other existing areas of public open space that sit outside of the application site.

Vehicular access, roads and footways

Access to the site is proposed via Campbell Road to the north eastern corner of the site. A central spine road would run through the site from west to east with smaller cul de sacs and private drives off this central road.

Associated footways would be provided to both sides of all access roads as well as turning heads at the end of cul de sacs. Footpath links are proposed into and out of the proposed community park as well as the provision for future linkages to the existing footpaths/cycle ways and areas of green space to the east and west of the site to enable access from East Lancashire Road, Folly Lane and Bradford Road.

A total of 613 parking spaces are proposed including 128 garage spaces and 13 parking spaces proposed for the community park. Garage spaces are discounted as it cannot be guaranteed that they will be used for car parking. Therefore the total off road car parking provision for the dwellings equates to 472 or 2 spaces per dwelling.

Hard and soft landscaping, walls, fences, drainage and associated works

Landscaping is proposed across the site. The residential part of the development would include in curtilage landscaping for dwellings as well as three pocket parks for public use. Landscaping across the residential part of the site includes trees and shrubs as well as the provision of boundary treatments that range between low railings and post and rail fencing to taller fencing and walls with pillars to define areas of public and private space and also to ensure privacy of rear gardens is provided for future residents.

As set out above the landscaping within the proposed community park would include an attenuation pond, trees, shrub, hedges and wild meadows, footbridges over Folly Brook, seating, waste bins and footpaths within the park area and linkages to the residential development and other existing areas of public open space that sit outside of the application site.

In terms of drainage, surface water from the development would be directed to the proposed attenuation basin with a flow control prior to discharge to Folly Brook. The proposed attenuation basin is within the north western corner of the proposed community park, to the south of the proposed residential development. It is proposed that all vehicle hard-standings would be provided with trapped gullies prior to discharge to the surface water network and in addition the attenuation basin will provide further treatment, particularly for suspended solids.

A substation is also proposed close to the site entrance off Campbell Road. The substation would be of brick construction and would be set back from the road and accessed off a small road within the new estate. It would be 4.14m in width by 3.9m in depth and would incorporate a pyramid roof that would slope upwards from all elevations.

Site History/Background

The site has been the subject of extensive discussions involving the site owners and their consultants, local community groups and the City Council in the form of pre application advice.

Salford Unitary Development Plan (UDP)

The site was originally allocated for mixed use, comprising public open space, residential uses and a new link road in the first deposit draft unitary development plan (February 2003) and the revised deposit draft UDP (November 2003). The majority of objections to the UDP related to this site, which contributed towards the decision of the council to withdraw the allocation prior to the public inquiry. The UDP was adopted in June 2006 leaving the former SWWW unallocated.

Page 104 It should be noted that the adopted UDP pre dates the National Planning Policy Framework which seeks to increase the supply of deliverable housing.

Salford Greenspace Strategy Supplementary Planning Document

Following the adoption of the UDP, the Greenspace Strategy was adopted in July 2006. This document identifies the potential of the site and adjoining local authority land to meet shortfalls of open space provision in terms of strategic natural greenspace and other local recreation standards. The open space chapter of the Council’s Infrastructure Delivery Plan (2012) also identifies the combined sites as a potential strategic natural greenspace.

Salford Local Plan

The Draft Local Plan allocates the former Swinton Wastewater Treatment Works and surrounding open land for open space and housing under policy H4/2. The application site (as shown on the red line location plan) forms part of the allocation. Paragraph 215 of the NPPF sets out the weight to be given to relevant policies in emerging plans when taking decisions on planning applications. Having regard to this, it is considered that very limited weight should be given to the draft allocation of the site for open space and housing due to the plan being at an early state of plan preparation and that that there are significant unresolved objections.

Community Consultation

The statement of community consultation submitted with the application sets out that discussions around the development of the site have been on-going for a number of years and that meetings have taken place in 2016 and 2017 with community groups including Swinton Open Spaces Community Association (SOSCA), Ellesmere Park Residents Association (EPRA), and the Monton Village Community Association as well as with the Salford Allotment Federation and the Member of Parliament for Salford and Eccles.

The applicants have also undertaken pre application discussion with the Local Planning Authority prior to the submission of the application.

The consultation undertaken included notification to a number of Councillors of the intention to bring forward a planning application for the site. Letters were also sent to community stakeholders such as schools, colleges, residents groups and organisations such as the Ramblers Association, Woodland Trust etc (full details are included within the submitted statement of community involvement).

On 31st August 2017, 4923 letters were distributed to commercial and residential properties within a 1km radius of the site which provided an overview of the proposed development as well as details of the consultation website that was created and contact details for the development team including a dedicated email address and community information line. A press release was also issued to the Manchester Evening News which appeared in the press on 6th September 2017 and on the publications website and Facebook page on 5th September 2017.

A public exhibition took place on 7th September at Swinton Park Golf Club that was attended by over 200 people. Exhibition boards were displayed and representatives from Bellway Homes were in attendance as were their transport consultant and staff from Lexington Communications to answer questions and collect feedback.

The statement of community consultation submitted in support of the application sets out that over the course of the public consultation 193 responses were received and these were by way of feedback forms at the public exhibition, by email, by post and online via the project website. Feedback received related largely to issues around highways and infrastructure; provision of local services (e.g. schools) and ecology. In addition to this a number of positive comments were received stating that family housing is required in Salford with a number of people expressing an interest in buying a home at the site.

The applicants have confirmed that they have taken on board the responses received from the public consultation and as a result the apartments once included within the scheme have been removed with

Page 105 a focus on family housing and the numbers of dwellings on site have been reduced from 250 to 241 which is now proposed under this planning application.

Publicity/ Neighbour Notification

252 Neighbour notification letters were sent on 6th November 2017.

Three site notices were displayed in the vicinity of the site on 13th November 2017.

A notice was published in the press on 16th November 2017

Following receipt of amended plans and additional highways information amended plan letters were sent out on 8th February to all those initially consulted as well as all those who had made representations on the application.

Representations - Objections

A total of 339 objections have been received to date from 217 different addresses. The issues raised are summarised below.

Highways Access to the site – the site should be served by more than one access, a second access could be provided at Folly Lane/Rocky Lane. Access should be via a controlled access via Folly Lane/Rocky Lane. There is insufficient infrastructure to cope with the volume of traffic that will be created by the development. The estate is already used for rat running – with the pressure of additional cars this could cause chaos. Loss of on road parking and impacts of cars being able to leave their driveways or people being able to park outside their homes. Why does the access need to be from Campbell Road – there are other options but for economic reasons the developer prefers this access point. Disruption from development, including noise, dirt and congestion etc from construction and construction traffic. One access point will restrict emergency vehicles accessing the site. Traffic is already poor, the volume of traffic would be unacceptable and add to existing poor air quality. Inadequate car parking for the dwellings will mean more overspill parking on surrounding streets. Increased congestion on surrounding estate roads and in the wider area including Eccles, Monton, M602 junction etc. The preliminary traffic assessment carried out by Bellway was during school holidays which gives an underestimation of the negative impact on traffic any development would have on the road and surrounding streets. The development will increase the risk for pedestrians using the island crossing on Folly Lane. Parking issues would be exacerbated by the community park. People will park on the pavement and this will increase congestions on Thorn Road and Campbell Road and restrict the road further. Insufficient parking is provided for visitors to the community park. The access via Thorn Road and Campbell Road is inadequate for the size and scale of development from build to habitation of the development. The existing road surfaces are already in a poor state of repair and the development will make them worse. Lack of vision with regards to the utilisation of Folly Lane as a means of exiting. Campbell Road and Thorn Road can only just cope with the existing traffic – providing there is no HGV delivery to Cooper Clark. Commercial properties on Morpeth Street requires closer scrutiny by planners as Bellway have ignored them. Parked cars on either side of the road means that access will be confined to a single track access road.

Page 106 Increased demand on public transport which is already inadequate. The Travel Plan is idealistic not realistic yet planners insist on parking provision for 2 vehicles. The number of houses should be reduced in order to ameliorate any potential traffic issues. A maximum of 200 houses should be built but to a higher specification. The number of predicted cars that will be introduced by way of the development is inaccurate and there will be far more cars than what has been suggested. The transport assessment carried out by Bellway says that there will not be two cars per household even though the application includes car parking spaces for two cars for each new house. SCC have asked through the In Salford magazine for people not avoid parking on pavements and therefore Thorn Rd and surrounding side roads are not fully accessible for vehicles. Traffic uses the slip road to cut out queues and cut across three lanes of traffic to turn right from the East Lancs. Parked cars impact on visibility for vehicles exiting the estate. If the football pitches shown are used this would increase traffic with nowhere for them to park. The bus lane has already caused an increase in traffic through the estate. There are no planned road improvements to cope with the extra traffic. Traffic surveys were only done once – how can ‘facts’ be accepted from something you can’t generate an average from. Increased pedestrian activity along surrounding roads. The access road to serve the development is wider than existing roads and presumably this is to meet current highway standards – if this is the case then the existing roads cannot be deemed acceptable for increased traffic as they are already narrower than required for a new build. Increased demand for car parks at shopping areas; Monton, Swinton and Eccles. Buses are already regularly full and an increase of people would affect this. Routes to public transport are not well defined therefore more people may choose to use cars. It is unlikely that residents of the new estate would choose to use public transport due to long waits, therefore this is not a sustainable development. A direct walking/cycling route should be implemented to schools in the area.

Public Safety Safety of children living on surrounding roads. This used to be a quiet road but is becoming increasingly unsafe due to the speed that drivers cut through it. Roads are already difficult to cross and the proposed development will only make this worse. Disturbing the land could potentially release harmful elements to currently unaffected areas. Construction vehicles will be a danger to people in the area. Concerns of the potential for increased traffic collisions. The new community park would be a place for people to congregate and engage in antisocial/illegal behavior. The park has been destroyed by vandals and the same thing will happen again. Increased crime. Children will no longer be able to play on the streets. Cars parking on pavements will affect disables and less abled residents. Disruption during construction. The development will release pollutants within the site, such as hydrocarbons, heavy metals and asbestos. The land is heavily contaminated from the former use so the people who buy properties there will not be able to use their gardens. Impact of past use of site and material spread on site on human health (human sewage was spread on the land every week for years) – could cause serious illness to young children and adults. No surfaced path with lighting is proposed towards Monton and as such there is not a safe route during hours of darkness for pedestrians.

Residential Amenity/Air and Noise Pollution Increased pollution and impact on air quality.

Page 107 Loss of green space and trees may affect the air quality of the area. Construction vehicles will affect the air quality. Issues regarding the noise of construction. Increased waste and less bin collections. Light pollution caused by the development. Increased litter. The development would not improve the quality of life for existing residents. Concerns over how doctors/dentists/ schools will cope with the increase in population. School is already oversubscribed – children will not be able to get places in their village school The development will result in stress and reoccurring illness to existing residents. Overlooking and loss of privacy. There will be no green space for local people within walking distance.

Flood Risk and Drainage The rear gardens of properties of South Avenue often flood – the new development is proposed to the rear of this adjacent to the flooded gardens If existing green space is built on, this will create issues with drainage as rainwater will not be able to drain away as easily - lakes from on the site as it is. Further concreting over this wetland area will cause flooding under existing houses on Thorn Road. Impact on sewage and drainage. No provision has been made for the reduction of flooding.

Ecology Impact on wildlife, bats, birds, field mice, water voles, small mammals and deer. Why not erect 4/5 wind turbines and make money for the local community and still have a wild life zone. Loss of birds. Blue infrastructure lost from the green space. Would break up the natural wildlife corridor. Loss of mature trees and bushes within the green space.

Obligations/Open Space/Affordable housing Loss of existing green space and children’s play areas. Impact on capacity of schools. Schools are already full and there is no proposal to build a new school in the area. Not enough open space would be provided to serve the entire wider area. Why are they only building 241 houses. The site could accommodate more than this – is this because of the commitment to having to provide a school for a larger number of houses. What is to stop another house builder coming in the future to build a further 250 units and so on until the whole site is built on. There should be a legal restraint to ban any development of the green space at the bottom of the site. The extra open space would not be adjacent but situated to the south of the proposed development therefore not offering a full single 20 hectare open site. The green space is two separate 10 hectares but should be one 20 hectare site. Loss of only area for children and adults to walk and play away from traffic. The development will add unnecessary pressure to all local services including GP’s. local hospitals, schools and walk in centres. The community park is an offensive attempt to have the houses pushed through. The council cannot presently maintain the park at the entrance to the fields with anti-social behaviour taking place. It’s likely that the community park would fall into disrepair and would be a place for people to congregate away from access roads reinforcing anti-social and illegal behaviour. 20% of the houses will have to be '' affordable'' but this will comprise of small town houses and or flats. Which more than likely will be bought by investors and rented out as very few first time buyers

Page 108 want to buy flats. This site is the only green lung we have and its development should be rejected. Loss of open space which will be overlooked The development needs to maximise green infrastructure on the site as well as connections to the wider network and supporting movement of plants and animals. Loss of potential green space. The nearest largest green space surrounding the site are golf courses that are private with no facility to use the land. The land that is proposed as green space is land that has no value to the developer and would cost too much to make good for building – this does not make it central to the design and merely a nod to ensure it meets council approval. Building right up to the green space would ruin perception of this space which is enjoyed by walkers away from traffic and noise. As much green space as possible should be kept together and not split into fragments. The Council should formally designate the land to the left of the site which is not already protected under the Allotment Act, the land to the right of the site and the area of the community park as Local Green Space. This should form part of the Local Plan to be adopted in 2018. Who will maintain the park and where will the money come from. The area already has a community park so the new park would add nothing new and only takes away high quality open space. Residents should be consulted before any S106 monies are spent. The site should include the area of council owned land to the west should be included with the western area being used for housing to allow the open nature of the resulting green space on the eastern side. Improvements suggested by Bellway regarding the land around the site cannot be made as its outside of their ownership. Most of the new homes will be priced significantly higher than the national average and will not be accessible for first time buyers. The 20% that are affordable are likely to comprise of small town houses and/or flats which are likely to be bought by investors and rented out. More affordable housing is required. Without restrictive covenants in place the way is paved for more homes and no community spaces for people to use in the area.

Other The development is not needed. The number of houses should be reduced. Structural impact on existing buildings caused by demolition, plant machinery/building material being delivered to site etc. The houses will be priced significantly above the national average and will not be accessible for first time buyers. The development should be screened from the community park by trees with particular emphasis on the pathway from Bradford Road up to Campbell Road. Cumulative impact of this and the planning application that is being prepared for 500 houses on Duncan Mathieson Playing Fields off Lancaster Road. Concerns over the land locked section of land to the rear of Thorn Road and associated maintenance issues- over grown trees may over shadow resident’s gardens. Cumulative impact of lots of other smaller scale developments that have taken place over the years each on impacting on traffic. These houses are not needed. Bellways proposal for ‘affordable housing’ means they are not interested in providing a reasonable number Swinton Open Space society community association campaigned successfully a few years ago against building on the site as it was a designated wildlife sanctuary, conservation area and nothing has changed since then

Page 109 Decrease in house prices for existing properties. Loss of view. Some of the houses will probably be offered for buy to let and sold to investment groups. Request that appropriate measures are built into the design of the new Community Park to prevent any potential illegal use of motorcycles ‘off the road’ e.g. the employment of physical barriers where appropriate. Request reassurances re the public footpath which runs from Bradford Road to Campbell Road – request that the A-frames installed on the footpath by SCC some years ago remain in position as these have proved essential in combating what was a very serious anti-social behaviour problem in the form of motorbikes. The development needs to be screened by trees from the community park. Time to review and respond to amended plan letters is too short.

The concerns raised as set out above are considered throughout the relevant sections of this report with the exception of those which are not material planning considerations.

Representations – Support/Neutral

18 letters of support and 4 neutral representations have also been received from 20 different addresses. The comments raised are summarised below.

Provided the green spaces are incorporated as planned the development enhance and improve the current derelict space the development is supported. New houses are in high demand but low supply. There is a shortage of affordable 3/4 bed houses in the area so more larger houses need to be built not just homes for first time buyers. Families would benefit from this a lot. It is evident from the number of extended 3 bed properties in the area that there is a need for larger family homes in the area. The development will allow local people to stay in the area when looking for larger homes. Living on the proposed development would reduce our commute time. The development is likely to result in increased value for surrounding houses. The development makes good use of a brownfield site. This is an ideal area to raise a family. The land is currently subject to anti social behaviour, use of quad bikes, drugs and drink by gangs of children so the development would alleviate this. The proposed houses fit perfectly to my requirements. The plans offer an ideal living area for families that the majority of new estates do not offer with a community park.

Consultations

Design For Security – Raise no objections. Please refer to the Design and Crime section of the report for further discussion.

Drainage Engineer - No objections subject to conditions. Please refer to the Flood Risk and Drainage section of the report for further discussion.

Highways - No objections subject to conditions. Please see Highways section of report for further discussion

Environment Agency - No objections subject to conditions. Please refer to the Ecology and Contaminated Land sections of the report for further discussion.

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

Page 110 Urban Vision Environment (Air And Noise) - No objections subject to conditions. Please refer to the Noise and Air Quality sections of the report for further discussion.

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

United Utilities – No objections subject to conditions. Please refer to the Flood Risk and Drainage section of the report for further discussion.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

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

Unitary Development Plan ST5 - Transport Networks This policy states that transport networks will be maintained and improved through a combination of measures including the extension of the network of pedestrian and cycling routes; the expansion and improvement of the public transport system and the enhancement of support facilities; the maintenance and improvement of the highway network; the provision of new road infrastructure where this will support the city's economic regeneration; requiring development proposals, highway improvement schemes and traffic management measures to make adequate provision for the needs of the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists, and, wherever appropriate, maximise the use of public transport; and the protection and enhancement of rail and water-based infrastructure to support the movement of freight and passengers.

Unitary Development Plan ST10 - Recreation Provision This policy states that a comprehensive range of accessible recreation opportunities will be provided through 1) the protection, improvement and reorganisation of existing recreation sites; 2) the development of a regional park; 3) developing a network of Key Recreation Areas; 4) provision of new recreation facilities on sites allocated in the UDP; 5) the development of a series of Local Nature Reserves; 6) improvement of access between urban areas and the Countryside; 7) use of planning obligations to provide new and enhanced recreation facilities.

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

Unitary Development Plan ST13 - Natural Environments Assets This policy states that development that would result in an unacceptable impact on any of the city's natural environmental assets will not be permitted.

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 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 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 111 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 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 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 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

Page 112 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 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 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 EN22 - Resource Conservation This policy states that development proposals for more than 5,000 square metres of floorspace will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the impact on the conservation of non-renewable resources and on the local and global environments, has been minimised as far as practicable; and full consideration has been given to the use of realistic renewable energy options, and such measures have been incorporated into the development where practicable.

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

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

Local Planning Policy

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

Page 113 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 - 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 - 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 - 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 - 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 - 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 - 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.

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

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 the relevant criteria within the UDP policies applicable to the proposed development are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.

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

 Principle of development

Page 114 i) Strategic location ii) Proposed use – Residential a) Five year land supply position b) Development of Greenfield Land c) Mix, type and density  Affordable Housing  Planning Obligations  Design and Layout i) Layout of the development ii) Scale and Massing iii) Appearance of the house types  Design and Crime  Amenity  Air Quality  Noise  Impact on the highway network and transport infrastructure i) Sustainable location ii) Proposed access arrangements iii) Impacts on highway network iv) Internal road layout and parking v) Off-site highway works  Ecology  Trees  Landscaping  Contaminated land  Flood Risk and Drainage  Sustainability

Principle of Development

i) Strategic Location

UDP Chapter 3 identifies a Spatial Framework for the City and recognises that the opportunities and the need for development, regeneration and environmental protection vary in their scale and nature across the city. The site is located within Salford West where the emphasis is to continue to develop a series of attractive and thriving neighbourhoods that offer the best of all worlds, easy access to the transport network and opportunities of the regional centre in a suburban location on the edge of the countryside.

The site is not allocated by, or subject to, a protective designation in the UDP. However, as noted above the Green space Strategy SPD identifies the potential of the site and adjoining Council owned land to meet shortfalls of open space provision in terms of strategic natural green space and other recreation standards.

ii) Proposed use – Residential

a) Five-year land supply position

The city council published in November 2016 an updated five year housing land supply position covering the period 1 April 2016 to 31 March 2021. As explained at paragraph 6.3 of the report, there is an 8.7 years supply of deliverable sites for housing over the period 1 April 2016 to 31 March 2021. Given this, and in accordance with paragraph 49 of the National Planning Policy Framework, relevant policies for the supply of housing in Salford’s development plan can be considered up-to-date.

The city council published it most recent Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) in November 2017, with this covering the period 2017-35. The HELAA incorporates the requirement to produce a SHLAA. The application site and surrounding open land is identified in the 2017 HELAA for 244 houses (reference S/SSO/020) and is considered to be suitable, available and

Page 115 achievable for new housing for the purposes of the assessment. It is assumed that 100 houses will be completed on the site by 2022, with the remainder to follow.

Notwithstanding that the site is identified in the HELAA, paragraph 1.2 of the HELAA main report is clear that although the assessment “….makes a judgment about the developability of particular sites for development, it is based on a number of assumptions and does not in any way prejudge any planning applications that may be received on individual sites. The identification of potential from sites within this assessment does not imply that the city council would necessarily grant planning permission for their development”. As further noted at paragraph 1.4 the assessment does not constitute council policy. Given this, the application should be treated on its own merits having regard to the development plan and other material considerations.

Paragraph 14 of the NPPF is clear that a presumption in favour of sustainable development is a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision taking. Where there is an identified five- year supply of housing the NPPF requires development proposals that accords with the development plan should be approved without delay (paragraph 14), and proposed development that conflicts should be refused unless other material considerations indicate otherwise (paragraph 12).

b) Development of Greenfield Land

The site is currently vacant and is largely covered by vegetation with some areas of hard standing following the clearance of the built form associated with the former waste water treatment works. As such part of the site falls within the definition of previously developed land. However it is recognised that a large part of the site is not previously developed.

Even though the city council has identified a five-year supply of deliverable sites for housing, this does not mean that planning permission for the development of greenfield sites for new housing can be refused simply on that basis. Although paragraph 17 of the NPPF states that one of the core planning principles that underpins decision making is to encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value, it does not advocate a sequential approach whereby the development of brownfield land is prioritised over greenfield land. Given the sustainable location of this site, there are no in principle objections to the sites development for housing subject to compliance with local and national policy as a whole.

c) Mix, type and density

Paragraph 50 of the NPPF sets out local planning authorities should deliver a wide choice of high quality homes and create sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities.

Type of dwellings

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 should be in the form of houses rather than apartments. Alternative approaches on individual sites may be permitted where it can be clearly demonstrated by the applicant that there are specific circumstances that justify this, particularly having regard to criteria A-H of UDP policy H1.

The scheme proposes 241 houses and as such accords with the requirements of Policy HOU1 of the Housing Planning Guidance.

Size of dwellings

Policy HOU2 of the housing planning guidance states that where houses are proposed the majority should have at least three bedrooms.

The development proposes 10 x 2 bed (4%), 119 x 3 bed (49%), 105 x 4 bed (44%) and 7 x 5 bed units (3%) and is therefore in accordance with the requirements of policy HOU2 given that 96% of the proposed dwellings are 3 bed or larger.

Page 116 The density across the area of the site to be developed (excluding the area of the community park) is approximately 36 units per hectare which is in accordance with the requirements of UDP policy H1 and is considered acceptable in this location.

iii) Proposed use – Amenity areas and Community Park

The submitted plans indicate the provision of three ‘pocket parks’ at key points adjacent to the main spine road within the development. The areas would be secured but accessible and would also include footpaths through and seating to encourage their use. The layout of the pocket parks together with the proposed seating arrangements, landscaping and access points would complement the amenity space provided and would provide suitable recreation provision within the development.

The proposed new community park would provide clear benefits to supplement the proposed pocket parks within the residential estate and would also supplement areas of existing public open space around the application site. Appropriate routes have been identified across the site and within the proposed community park to ensure it is accessible and integrates with existing footpaths/cycle ways and amenity areas that sit outside of the community park.

Indicative links have also been provided on the submitted plans to the council owned area to the west of the site as well as to the area of land between the application site and Folly Lane to enable future pedestrian links to be developed between the application site and South Avenue and Folly Lane.

No issues are raised to the development of this part of the site as a community park and it is considered that it would be a welcome addition to the area and provide recreation and amenity space for both existing and future residents in the area.

The proposed community park combined with the adjoining city council land would meet the Strategic Natural Greenspace standard.

A full detailed specification of the community park in terms of landscaping will be secured by recommended condition 23 and the future management and maintenance of the community park is to be secured through the S106 agreement which requires a scheme to be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. It is also a requirement of the S106 that the community park remains publically accessible in perpetuity.

Affordable Housing

UDP Policy H4 requires that in areas where there is a demonstrable lack of affordable housing to meet local needs, developers will be required, by negotiation with the city council, to provide an element of affordable housing, of appropriate types on all residential sites over 1 hectare, irrespective of the number of dwellings, or in housing developments of 25 or more dwellings.

Policy OB1 of the planning obligations SPD identifies that the site is within a mid/high value area; given this there is a requirement that 20% of the proposed houses should be affordable with a tenure split of 75% social/affordable rented and 25% intermediate tenure.

Given that the scheme proposes 241 houses, there is a requirement for 48 affordable dwellings, comprising of 36 social/affordable rent dwellings and 12 of an intermediate tenure. The developers have engaged with the Housing Strategy and Enabling team and a Registered Provider (Great Places) and through negotiation 52 affordable properties, comprising of 20 social rent, 19 affordable rent (LHA capped) and 13 shared ownership dwellings have been secured to meet local housing need and strategic housing priorities and their locations are shown on the submitted site layout plan. The affordable housing will be allocated as per the agreed allocations policies and processes and the council has 100% nominations on the rented homes on first let and 50% on relet.

Planning obligations

The Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) explains the city council’s overall approach to the use of planning obligations, and sets out detailed advice on the use of obligations to

Page 117 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 site is located within a Mid/High value area and the SPD advises that a development of this nature in this part of the City should contribute towards open space, public realm and education. The applicants are agreeable to full planning obligations which total £2,609,168.99 and this is to be secured by a S106 agreement. The Council’s Planning Obligations officer has identified the following projects which these monies would be directed towards:

Openspace 1. Investment to increase capacity at Beechfield allotments 2. Provision of children’s play equipment and recreational improvements at Campbell Road Playing Area and surrounding openspace 3. Swinton-Monton Greenway: Improvements to loopline from Monton Road to Campbell Road and improved linkages to Swinton Centre 4. Works to provide access improvements to new Nature Park 5. Beechfield Playing Fields

Public Realm 1. Swinton-Monton Greenway: Improvements to loopline from Monton Road to Campbell Road and improved linkages to Swinton Centre 2. Works to provide access improvements to new Nature Park

Education 1. Education Project A within Pupil Planning Area 5 - A scheme of works to enhance or extend existing education facilities, or create new education facilities, for a primary school located within Pupil Planning Area 5.

Design and Layout

i) Demolition of the existing buildings

The existing buildings which are to be demolished are sited to the north eastern corner of the site. They are detached properties and one fronts Campbell Road with the other fronting the footpath that leads from Campbell Road. A small access road off Campbell road provides vehicular access to the second property. The properties are of standard design and are not of any particular architectural merit nor are they afforded any protection. The applicants have confirmed that these properties are currently vacant.

It is considered that the demolition of the existing buildings and associated works is acceptable and will allow for the future redevelopment of the application site. It is not considered that the demolition of these buildings would result in an unacceptable impact on the character and appearance of the street scene or the wider area.

ii) Layout of the development

The site would be accessed from Campbell Road. The access road would turn off from Campbell Road and across the area of the two dwellings at 86 and 88 Campbell Road which are proposed to be demolished.

A central spine road will run through the site from east to west with smaller cul de sacs and private drives off this central road. Associated footways would be provided to both sides of all access road as well as turning heads at the end of cul de sacs.

The majority of dwellings would front the proposed new roads with corner properties being dual fronted to avoid large expanses of blank brickwork at these prominent locations within the site and introduce natural surveillance of the site. Dwellings along the eastern and western boundaries of the site largely front or would be side onto the areas of green space therefore resulting in a positive relationship with natural surveillance of the intended public areas. A small number of dwellings would back onto the sites eastern boundary adjacent to the public right of way and whilst ideally the

Page 118 dwellings would front this public footpath, if the dwellings were to be turned round it would significantly impact on the gateway to the site and would result in large boundary treatments at the sites entrance off Campbell Road leading to an uninviting and over dominant feature within the street scene. On the opposite side of the footpath is open space and the remainder of the dwellings along this site boundary either front or are side on. As such it is considered that the orientation of the properties is acceptable.

Link points would be provided within the site and up to its boundaries to enable future connections with the land to the east and west of the site. The community park to the southern end of the site is such that it would integrate with, and provide linkages to the council owned parcels of land to the east and west. The wider concept layout plan submitted in support of the application also demonstrates how linkages could be provided from within the site, across adjoining areas of land and leading to South Avenue, Folly Lane, Bradford Road and East Lancashire Road to allow connectivity with the wider area and enable alternative accessibility to the site for future occupiers as well as members of the public wishing to visit the community park.

In addition to the community park the scheme includes a small number of green spaces within the housing development. The first is at the site entrance from Campbell road with a further three being provided on key corners of the main spine road through the site. Dwellings would front the proposed pocket parks to assist with natural surveillance of these areas although it should also be noted that these areas are sited at prominent points adjacent to the main spine road and as such they are highly visible within the street scene.

The corner dwellings would introduce 1.8m high boundary walls and pillars to their rear garden areas which would be directly adjacent to the back of footpath, however these areas would be for a short span only with the front, more prominent corners being open plan or having 1m high loop top railings and being landscaped. In addition it is noted that there are already examples of varying types of taller boundary treatments to rear gardens on corner properties in the wider established residential area. In curtilage landscaping is proposed across the site and is discussed in more detail later on in this report.

Dwellings that front the internal access roads are slightly staggered but do follow a similar building line with the small staggering allowing for some additional interest within the street scene and to the overall character of the development. Some separation is proposed between side gables of dwellings with a large number of units having driveways to the side giving the impression of space around dwellings across the site.

ii) Scale and Massing

The scheme proposes 241 dwellings the large majority of which would be 2 storey with a small number (32 units across the site) of 2.5 and 3 storey dwellings which would be pepper potted across the site. It is considered that the inclusion of 2.5 and 3 storey units are acceptable and would add to the character of the development and provide further interest to the street scene.

As set out above the density of the proposed development equates to approximately 36 dwellings per hectare which is considered acceptable. Dwellings would each be provided with small front gardens and private garden areas to the rear. Plot sizes are considered to be consistent with those of existing properties within the surrounding area.

The proposed development would provide a mix of detached and semidetached dwellings with a small number of terraced properties. It is considered that the scale and massing of the proposed dwellings are in keeping with existing dwellings in the surrounding area. It is considered that the height, scale and massing of the proposed development would be appropriate and would not appear incongruous within the street scene.

iii) Appearance of the house types

The surrounding area accommodates a mix of house types, including detached, semidetached and terraced properties of varying designs and finishes. Materials used within the area are predominantly red/brown brick although there are some examples of render and alternative brick types. The original

Page 119 submitted plans indicated that a number of dwellings would incorporate elements of render however following discussions with the applicant’s amended plans have been received that remove all render from the scheme. Dwellings would be constructed of red brick with grey and red roof tiles and where relevant dormers would be tile hung.

A condition is recommended requiring full details and samples of proposed materials to be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority prior to any above ground construction works.

Dwellings would be of a traditional design and whilst all would be of similar styles a number of different variants are proposed. Individual dwellings would incorporate details such as header and cill detailing, front canopies, bay windows, projecting front elements and roof pikes etc which adds to the design and appearance of the dwellings.

Design and Crime

The application is supported by a Crime Impact Statement. The statement has been produced by an independent crime prevention design consultant and sets out that the development will be consistent with the principles of the NPPF and has adopted the principles of Secured by design.

The Crime Impact Statement has been reviewed by Design for Security who have raised no objections to the proposed development. They have confirmed that the crime impact statement has been produced by a suitably qualified person and have recommended that the development is built to Secured by Design standards and accredited prior to first occupation. They also advise that alarms, windows, doors etc should be to certified standards however this level of technical detail is beyond the scope of planning control and as such an informative is recommended to draw the applicant’s attention to the recommendations made by Design for Security.

Dwellings would front the street or areas of public open space. Corner properties would be dual fronted to include windows on gable elevations to ensure natural surveillance is provided throughout the site. The dwellings at plots 104 and 83 and plots 78 and 49 do not propose any fenestration within their side gables and sit side on to an internal access road and a main footpath link to the community park area. This has been raised with the applicants and following discussions they have agreed to amend the gable detailing for these plots to include fenestration so as to ensure that natural surveillance is provided to the public areas and encourage the safe use of the pedestrian links. A condition is recommended requiring the details of the amended gables for these plots to be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

Car parking would be largely in curtilage and planting/boundary treatments are proposed to boundaries of each plot to clearly define public and private areas. Where car parking sits outside of the main residential curtilage natural surveillance is provided with the presence of adjacent dwellings and in the case of the parking areas serving plots 150-160 the solid section of fencing would be 1.8m with 0.3m high trellis above to allow for increased visibility from surrounding properties whilst also retaining privacy to garden areas.

Boundary treatments across the site comprise: - 2m high pillars with low level wall and timber infill panels (total height of low wall and timber infill would be 1.8m) to rear gardens that are prominent within the street scene i.e. where they are sited adjacent to footpaths; - 0.9m high post and rail fencing and 1.8m high close boarded timber fencing with associated pedestrian access to rear garden areas and between properties; - 1m high hoop top railings with pedestrian and vehicular access gates around the pocket parks within the residential part of the development, along the southern and western boundaries of the site adjacent to the areas of public open space and partly along the eastern boundary of the site adjacent to the public footpath where side/rear gardens and access points are proposed; - 1.8m high close boarded timber fencing with 0.3m high trellis to parking areas serving plots 150 to 160

Elevations of all proposed boundary treatments have been submitted and reviewed and are considered acceptable in the locations shown on the submitted boundary treatments plan.

Page 120 Front gardens would be open plan but landscaped which will ensure private and public spaces are clearly defined whilst not appearing overbearing in the street scene and allowing natural surveillance. Full details of landscaping have been submitted alongside this application and are discussed in detail in the relevant section of this report.

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

Air Quality and noise are discussed under the relevant sections of the report below and are considered acceptable subject to conditions.

i) Impact on existing residents

There are no existing residential properties that directly bound the proposed residential development to the south, east and west. To the north are the rear gardens and the rear elevations of the residential dwellings along Thorn Road. The Council would normally require the following separation distances to be retained in order to protect the residential amenity of surrounding properties as well as ensuring adequate amenity is provided for future occupiers of the development: - minimum of 21m between first floor facing habitable room windows - minimum of 9m between ground floor habitable room windows and single storey blank gable walls - a minimum of 13m between ground floor habitable room windows and two storey blank gable walls- - a minimum of 9m between the first floor habitable room window and a two storey blank gable

All properties along the northern boundary of the site would be two storeys in height and would exceed the required separation distances as set out above. Plot 223 would be the only property side on to the northern boundary of the site. It would occupy an irregular shaped plot with an additional piece of garden area provided between its side gable and the northern boundary. The property at plot 223 would introduce two first floor windows in its side elevation. These windows would serve a bathroom and en suite and would retain a distance of approximately 6m from the site boundary. It is therefore considered that an obscure glazing condition relating to these windows is not required and that the presence of these windows would not result in an unacceptable loss of privacy to occupiers of adjacent properties.

It is acknowledged that there is likely to be an element of disruption during the construction phase and a construction environmental management plan condition is recommended in order to mitigate the impacts of construction activities at the site.

The community park proposed to the southern end of the site would back onto the rear gardens of the properties along Bradford Road. Given the nature of the existing use of the site together with the proposed configuration of the community park, i.e. footpaths through rather than a play area or sports area it is not considered that the proposed community park would result in an unacceptable impact on the amenity of residents of adjacent properties.

The existing area of the former waste water treatment works is a privately owned site and as such should not be accessible by members of the public however breaks in the fence mean that the site is currently informally used. However should the fencing be fixed and the site secured (which the owners could do at any point without the need for planning permission) residents would have no right of access across the site.

The community park is proposed to provide a purpose built area which would be open and accessible to the public. Some parking spaces for visitors to the community park would be provided to the north of the park on the edge of the residential development and linkages would be provided from adjacent green spaces and footpaths. In addition the existing green areas and play space off Campbell Road are identified as projects for planning contributions to be directed towards. It is considered, therefore that the proposed development would improve the quality of existing green space within the area as well as providing a more accessible and purpose built community park within the site that would be available for use by existing and future residents.

Page 121 It is not considered that the proposed development would result in an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers of surrounding residential dwellings in accordance with UDP policies EN17 and DES7.

ii) Amenity of future occupiers

Within the site itself separation distances largely meet or exceed the distances set out above. There are a small number of instances where these distances are reduced with the pinch points across the site being around 15/16m for facing properties and around 11.5m for elevations facing two storey gables. It should be noted that these relate to a small number of units within the site (and not to existing properties which surround the site) where by future residents would be buying into this relationship and that similar separation distances have been accepted on other similar developments elsewhere across the city. In addition it is acknowledged that these distances have been dictated by the layout of the site which seeks to create a strong streetscape whilst also retaining a significant area of space to the southern part of the site for the provision of the community park.

Given the above it is considered that the separation distances across the site are acceptable and that the proposed development would provide all future occupiers with an acceptable level of light and outlook to habitable rooms within each of the house types.

All dwellings would benefit from a private rear garden which would provide future occupants with an adequate sized area of outdoor amenity space which is supported and residents would also have access to the public green space proposed within the community park to the south of the site and the existing areas of green space to the east and west of the site.

In light of the above it is considered that the proposal would provide future users with an adequate level of amenity in accordance with UDP policy DES7.

Air Quality

The application site is not located within an Air Quality Management Area however it is acknowledged that the development would likely result in an increase in road traffic (issues around highways are discussed in detail further on in this report) and there is also potential for fugitive dust emissions during the construction phase.

The application is supported by a Travel Plan, and again this is covered in more detail in the highways section of the report below. The travel plan has also been reviewed by Urban Vision Air and Noise who are in agreement with comments raised by Urban Vision Highways that whilst acceptable in principle the Travel Plan needs to be developed further and a condition is recommended in this regard.

The application is also supported by an Air Quality Impact Assessment which has been reviewed by Urban Vision Air and Noise who accept the methodology and conclusions of the report however they are mindful that the modeling output predicts a small increase in pollution concentrations at all receptors.

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

Urban Vision Air and Noise have recommended a condition requiring all properties with off road parking to be provided with a single electric charging point. This has been discussed with the applicants who have advised that they do not consider it feasible for these to be installed. In light of this and given the absence of any policy requirement it would be difficult to substantiate a reason for refusal on these grounds. Urban Vision Air and Noise also recommend a condition requiring the submission of details of gas fired boilers to ensure that all boilers meet a minimum standard. This is

Page 122 beyond the scope of planning control and is covered by other legislation and the installation of gas boilers will need to be carried out by a registered installer.

Noise

The application is supported by a noise impact assessment which has been reviewed by Urban Vision Air and Noise. The report determines that suitable noise levels within dwellings can be achieved using standard double glazed units for bedroom and living room spaces together with standard passive vents.. A noise standards condition is recommended.

Existing residential properties could suffer noise and dust during construction works and as such a construction environmental management plan condition is recommended. Subject to conditions it is considered that the proposed development would provide its users with an adequate level of amenity in accordance with UDP Policy EN17 and would not unduly impact on the amenity of surrounding residential properties by reason of noise.

Impact on the highway network and transport infrastructure

i) Sustainable location

The application site is located within an established residential area. It is well related to local amenities and has good transport links with Folly Lane (an established bus route) and is close to the A580 East Lancashire Road.

The majority of the local roads are well lit with footway on either side of the carriageway and are subject to a 30mph speed limit with traffic calming in the form of speed humps, apart from Campbell Road and Thorn Road. There are two Public Rights of Way (PROW) located to the east of the site (Swinton & Pendlebury Definitive Footpaths 48 and 50), which run north/south from Eccles Road to Cavendish Road and in a northeast/southwest direction from the A580 East Lancashire Road to the public footpath that runs south from Campbell Road.

There are bus stops located close to the site on Folly Lane and on Worsley Road providing regular services in each direction. In addition, there are bus stops located on East Lancashire Road providing regular connections between Swinton, Leigh, Atherton and Manchester City Centre.

As such the site is considered to be in a sustainable location and it is not considered that its development for residential purposes would be inappropriate.

It is considered that the layout of the site is such to encourage walking and cycling with the provision of 2m wide footpaths across the site which would link to the existing footpaths on Campbell Road as well as links to the areas of land to the east and west of the site and to the community park at the southern end of the site. Natural surveillance would be provided from existing dwellings that back onto parts of the site as well as from proposed dwellings fronting the street and dual fronted properties on corner plots. Whilst cycle storage provision has not been specifically identified on the submitted plans each dwelling would be provided with a sufficient sized rear garden to accommodate some form of secure cycle parking.

The scheme has been designed to encourage travel by alternative modes for appropriate journeys and is within a sustainable location, close to a range of facilities and destinations accessible by a range of means including by car, walking, cycling and by public transport in accordance with national and local transport policies.

ii) Proposed access arrangements

Vehicular access to the site would be provided from Campbell Road to the north eastern corner of the site. The proposed new access would include a 6.75m wide carriageway with 2m wide footways on both sides, which has been accepted in principle by Urban Vision Highways and by the Greater Manchester Fire & Rescue Service. (Adoption of the highways falls outside of the planning process).

Page 123 The Greater Manchester Fire & Rescue Service recommends the footways on both sides of the access road entering the site should be strengthened and this is to be incorporated into the design of the access from Campbell Road to the proposed emergency access link and would allow emergency vehicles to use the footways along this section of the road in the event of an emergency. In addition, the proposal includes a 3.7m wide emergency access link to the south of the main entrance providing a secondary point of access into the main part of the site. South of the emergency access point, the main estate road would continue as a 5.5m wide carriageway with 2m wide footways along both sides.

Access to the community park would be provided from within the site and link points are proposed to enable future accesses to be provided for pedestrians and cyclists from the East Lancashire Road, Folly Lane and Bradford Road.

The Community Park and Public Realm within the proposal will provide a pedestrian route linking to existing footpaths. The S106 agreement will ensure that the community park remains publically accessible in perpetuity.

As part of the proposed development the applicants also intend to provide the following:  Planning obligations towards open space and public realm works including improvement works to existing footpaths in the vicinity of the site;  To provide a 20mph speed limit on the neighbouring roads (subject to the submission and approval of a TRO);  Offsite works to improve the visibility splay of the Folly Lane/ Thorn Road junction to a standard that accords with Manual for Streets requirement for a 30mph road;  Welcome Pack / Travel Packs to be provided to future residents with incentives such as free bus tickets and provision of secure cycle parking, aimed at encouraging the future residents living within the development site to travel by sustainable modes of transport. (Full details are to be agreed and secured by the Travel Plan – recommended condition 21)

iii) Internal road layout and parking

A total of 472 private parking spaces, 128 garages and 13 visitors parking spaces are proposed across the site which equates to a ratio of approximately 2 private spaces per dwelling which complies with Salford City Council’s parking requirements.

The proposed estate roads would be 5.5m wide with 2m wide footways on both side of the carriageway, terminating into turning heads. Both turning head areas are designed to accommodate 9.86m long refuse vehicles or similar size vehicles to manoeuvre within the development.

It is proposed to create a 20mph speed limit within the site to encourage low vehicle speeds and traffic calming in the form of junction speed tables and flat top speed humps are proposed.

The internal road plan is considered to be to an adoptable standard in terms of layout and is subject to detail design and agreed by the Local Highway Authority. Shared private drives, private parking areas and shared surfaces are not eligible for adoption. The development’s drainage systems beneath any adoptable road must be adopted by the Sewerage Undertaker (United Utilities) prior to any new highway being adopted by Salford City Council and an informative is recommended to advise the applicants of this.

iv) Impacts on highway network

The submitted Transport Assessment reviews the recorded Personal Injury Collision (PIC) data for the most recent five-year period from 1st September 2012 to 31st August 2017, obtained from (TfGM). It confirms the PIC data does not indicate any inherent road safety issues or recurring accident patents within the study area.

In addition, based on the PIC data at the Folly Lane/ Thorn Road Junction along with the proposed highway works as set out above, Urban Vision Highways consider that the improvements will enhance the safety for those people using the junction.

Page 124 - Traffic Impact Assessment

The Trip generation use has been calculated using trip rates from the TRICs database. The proposed residential trip rates has been extracted from the submitted Transport Assessment and are shown in Table 1 and Table 2 below.

Table 1 – Trip Generation

Page 125 Privately Owned Housing Trips (32 units) Time Period Arrival Departure 2-Way Weekday AM Peak Hr 30 101 131 Weekday PM Peak Hr 98 64 163

It can be seen from Table 1 that the overall development is expected to generate 131 and 163 two- way trips in the AM and PM peaks, respectively.

Table 2 – Route Assignment of Trips Generated by the Development Weekday AM Peak HR Weekday PM Peak HR Route Original/Destinations 2-Way Movement 2-Way Movement 1 vehicle per A580 East Lancashire 1 vehicle per 2 1 Bury, Manchester and Salford 25 Approx. 2.5 31 Road (east) minutes minutes A580 East Lancashire Blackburn, Darwen, Bolton, Chorley, 1 vehicle per 1 vehicle per 2 20 24 Road (west) Preston, Salford, St Helens and Wigan 3 minutes 2.5 minutes Approx. 1.1 Approx. 1.3 Cheshire East, Halton, Liverpool, 3 Folly Lane (south) 64 vehicle per 80 vehicle per Salford, Trafford and Warrington minute minute Worsley Road 1 vehicle per 1 vehicle per 4 Birmingham, Crawley and Eastbourne 3 3 (southwest) 20 minutes 20 minutes Worsley Road Bradford, Oldham, Rochdale and 1 vehicle per 1 vehicle per 4 5 12 15 (northeast) Tameside 5 minutes minutes

It can be seen from Table 2 how traffic from the proposed development is envisaged to disperse into the local highway network with the highest on Folly Lane of 1.1 and 1.3 two-way trips per minute in the AM and PM peaks, respectively.

Transport for Greater Manchester and Urban Vision Highways are satisfied with the traffic impact assessment which demonstrates that the local priority junctions will continue to operate within capacity with the addition of the development traffic.

The traffic impact assessment show the existing Worsley Road / A580 East Lancashire Road signal junction, is over capacity during the 2017 weekday scenario and for all scenarios (Base and Base with Assessment flows) for the 2019 and 2024 future years. Although there is likely to be an increase in queues and delays at the junction, it would still be within limits that are not severe providing adequate measures are put in place to further encourage the use of public transport and other sustainable forms of transport.

Therefore, in terms of the traffic impact, Transport for Greater Manchester and Urban Vision Highways consider that the proposed development is unlikely to result in a significant material impact when dispersed to the local highway network when combined with measures to encourage people to use public transport and other sustainable forms of transport. A Travel plan has been submitted in support of the application and a condition is recommended requiring the submission of a more in depth travel plan including budget details, travel surveys, welcome packs etc

- Queuing at Folly Lane / Thorn Road Junction

The Transport Assessment confirms that site visits and surveys have been undertaken and recorded at 5-minute intervals at the Folly Lane / Thorn Road Junction. The survey indicates a maximum queue of only 2 vehicles which occurred between 8:25am and 8:30am.

- Rat-Running Traffic on Thorn Road

In order to address resident concerns in relation to rat-running traffic between the A580 East Lancashire Road and Folly Lane, the developer commissioned an Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) surveys on Tuesday 9 January 2018.

Page 126 The TA / ANPR survey confirms the rat-running traffic predominately occurs on Thorn Road. During the morning between 7:30am and 9:30am, a total of 23 vehicles travelled from Folly Lane, via Thorn Road to the A580 East Lancashire Road. This equates to an averages of 13 vehicles per hour or 1 vehicle approximately every 4.6 minutes.

From the A580 East Lancashire Road during the morning between 7:30am and 9:30am, 75 vehicles travelled to Folly Lane via Thorn Road. This equates to an averages of 38 vehicles per hour or 1 vehicle approximately every 1.6 minutes.

While during the evening between 4pm and 6pm, a total of 18 vehicles travelled from Folly Lane via Thorn Road to the A580 East Lancashire Road. This equates to an averages to 9 vehicles per hour or 1 vehicle approximately every 6.6 minutes.

From the A580 East Lancashire Road during the evening between 4pm and 6pm, 52 vehicles travelled to Folly Lane via Thorn Road. This equates to an average of 26 vehicles per hour or 1 vehicle approximately every 2.3 minutes.

In summary, a small number of vehicles do use the residential roads between Folly Lane and East Lancashire Road as a rat-run however this is not considered as severe. Based on the above ANPR survey, Urban Vision Road Safety is satisfied with the ANPR survey and considered that the proposed development would not encourage additional rat-running traffic from Folly Lane to the East Lancashire Road or vice versa.

v) Off-Site Highway Works

The submitted Transport Assessment includes drawing 42220/5501/020 which sets out the proposed junction improvement works to the Folly Lane/Thorn Road junction which seeks to improve the visibility splay from Thorn Road to a standard that is in accordance with the Manual for Streets requirements for a 30mph road. This includes:  Improved visibility splays in both directions - achieves visibility splay of 2.4m x 43m;  Creation of a 200mm build out of the mouth of junction on the eastern side of Folly Lane;  Narrowing down the main carriageway slightly to 3.2m in both directions;  Amending the central hatched area on Folly Lane to create an informal pocket for cars waiting to turn right into Thorn Road;  To provide pedestrian crossing provision in form of dropped kerb tactile paving either side of the junction; and  To amend the existing Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) road markings and to de-clutter the footway by relocating TRO signage to the back of footway.

A condition is recommended to ensure that the junction improvement works at the Folly Lane/Thorn Road access point are constructed in accordance with the submitted details prior to first occupation of the residential dwellings. Informatives are also recommended to advise the applicants of the need to enter into a S278 and S38 agreement in relation to other associated internal and external highway works;

With regards to the site entrance from Campbell Road, vehicular access points to properties 73, 75 & 84 will be affected by the proposal. Urban Vision highways recommend the developer should engage with the home owners to ensure their vehicular access points will not be compromised by the proposal or during the construction period and measures will be put in place through the S278 and S38 highways agreements to ensure this.

The proposed offsite highway works will be secured by the S278 and S38 highways agreements that sit outside the planning application process. An informative is recommended to advise the applicants of the requirement to enter into a S38 and S278 agreement for works to the adopted highway and also to advise of the need for historic roads within the site to be formally stopped up.

In view of the above, no highway objections are raised in respect of the proposed development.

In response to the neighbour representation made in relation to the consideration for an alternative access point highways have confirmed that they would not accept a new junction of the A580 East

Page 127 Lancashire Road as this is part of the key route network. The A580 East Lancashire Road is a Bus Priority Corridor, there are bus lanes on the east and west bound carriageway which are utilised by services which include the guided bus services. The bus lanes are an important component of the measures to encourage public transport use and reduce single occupancy car journeys, an additional junction on the A580 East Lancashire Road is likely to unnecessary add additional delays to bus journey times.

As an inter-city road which is connected to both primary roads and a motorway within Salford it would not be appropriate to introduce an additional junction to serve a development of less than 250 dwellings, which may result in additional delays to the A580 East Lancashire Road. A new junction would need to be appropriately spaced and on land under the control off the applicant. It is understood that the applicant does not control any land adjacent to the East Lancashire Road to enable a new junction to be formed.

Therefore, both Urban Vision Highways and Transport for Greater Manchester would not accept a new junction off the A580 East Lancashire Road as it will have an adverse impact, particularly on public transport.

Ecology

The application is supported by an ecological assessment which has been reviewed by the Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) who confirm that the ecology surveys undertaken to inform the application have been undertaken by suitably qualified ecologists and are to appropriate standards and scope. GMEU are also aware of previous ecological surveys of the site and taking all of these surveys into account they are satisfied that no additional surveys need to be carried out prior to the determination of the application.

The site is not designated for its nature conservation value and is not known to support any specially protected species, except for foraging bats. GMEU are aware of previous reports of great crested newts and water voles having been reported on the site or close by, but accept that neither of these species is present any longer. The site is of local value because it supports semi-natural green space close to a large urban population, providing something of a refuge for local wildlife.

Locally important habitats on the site include blocks of broadleaved woodland and scattered trees and scrub. Birds recorded on the site include song thrush, mistle thrush, bullfinch, grasshopper warbler, house sparrow, dunnock, and reed bunting, all species of conservation concern.

Under the terms of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 it is an offence to harm nesting birds, their eggs and young and an informative is recommended to advise the applicants that there should be no vegetation clearance required to facilitate the scheme during the optimum period for bird nesting (March to July inclusive).

Mitigation for the loss of habitats and the impact on species that will be caused by the proposals include the development of open land to the south into a new Community Park. Proposals for the park include new tree planting, new hedgerow planting, new wetlands, proposals for enhancing grassland diversity and proposals for improving access to the site. GMEU welcome these proposals and consider that taking into account the creation of the Park and new landscaping to be incorporated into the area of new built development sufficient mitigation would be provided for ecological harm resulting from the built element of the development.

In line with Section 11 of the NPPF, opportunities for biodiversity enhancement should be incorporated into the new development, such as; bat bricks and/or tubes; bat boxes; bird boxes; native tree and shrub planting and a condition is recommended to ensure this.

GMEU recommend the submission of a comprehensive long term (in perpetuity) Management Plan for the Community Park. As set out previously the future management and maintenance of the community park will be secured by the S106 agreement which will require full details to be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority and for the park to be managed in accordance with the approved details or any subsequent amended scheme.

Page 128 Woodland at the boundaries of the built development to be retained should be protected from potential encroachment during the course of works by the erection of suitably robust fencing. As also required by the Council’s arborist a tree protection plan condition is recommended to ensure existing trees are protected throughout the construction phase of the development.

GMEU also recommend that if groundwork for an approved scheme have not commenced within one year of the date of the last ecological survey of the site (conducted in June 2017) then new surveys of the site for the possible presence of Badgers should be undertaken and if Badgers are found by new survey then a Method Statement must be prepared giving details of the measures to be taken to avoid any possible harm to badgers during the course of works. A condition is recommended in this regard.

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

Trees

The existing trees within the area of the proposed dwellings are proposed to be removed. Perimeter trees are to be retained with the exception of a small number as are those within the southern part of the site. A BS 5837 Arboriculture Report has been submitted in support of the application. The report confirms that G1, part of G3, T22 and T23 are proposed for removal to facilitate the development; the surveyor has not been able to successfully categorise these trees (floating between cat B and C) however the Council’s Arborist has confirmed that category C would be a fair appraisal. Category C trees should not be allowed to constrain a development. The report also recommends a crown reduction to trees T3, T6, T12, T14 and T25 to facilitate access to the development and these proposed works are considered acceptable.

Provision of new hard standing and the construction of foundations for buildings will encroach within the Root Protection Area (RPA) of T2; T3; T6; T7; T8; T9; T12-T14; T18; T19; T20 and T25. Encountering roots is highly likely and it is impossible to predict in what size and quantity they will be found. This sort of work is better suited to a watching brief with the project Arboriculturist present on site to advise how best to deal with roots and a condition is recommended requiring the submission of an Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) to be agreed by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development.

Successful retention of trees throughout the development phase will require the retained trees to be protected with temporary protective fencing. A combined Tree Constraints Plan (TCP) and draft Tree Protection Plan (TPP) have been issued. A condition is recommended requiring the submission and written approval of a final Tree Protection Plan.

A tree replacement scheme has been included as part of the submitted landscape specification and landscape plans which includes details of tree planting both within the residential part of the site and also within the community park area. It is proposed to plant 156 trees within the residential part of the site and 2335 trees within the community park area (including maple, birch and oak species). This has been reviewed by the Council’s arborist who considers it to be acceptable. A condition is recommended to ensure that the felled trees are replaced in accordance with the submitted landscape specification and associated plans only in so far as they relate to tree planting.

Landscaping

In terms of landscaping, a landscape plan has been submitted in support of the application which indicates the hard and soft landscaping provision across the site.

The supporting statement sets out that the community park seeks to retain and enhance any existing landscape features where feasible, and augment these with new planting, footpaths, play facilities and street furniture. The park would provide multi-functional green space that seeks to enhance biodiversity, and provide opportunities for amenity and recreation, incorporating the following features: • A legible network of footpaths, connecting to new housing, existing playing fields, and the existing footpath network beyond the site. A variety of habitats, including ponds & wetland, grassland, native woodland, and wildflowers meadows.

Page 129 • Parking provision on the southern edge of the proposed housing area.

As set out above a financial contribution is to be secured through the S106 agreement for open space and public realm works which are to include improvement works to the adjacent Council owned land and the existing play facilities at Campbell Road.

The submitted landscape plans have been reviewed by the council’s Landscape Architects who require further information to be provided including detailed design and construction drawings. This information has not been provided to date and as such whilst the landscape plans submitted are acceptable in so far as they relate to replacement tree provision and tree planting across the development, a landscape condition is recommended to ensure full details are submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

In terms of hard landscaping a plan has been submitted which indicates that all hard surface areas within the residential development would be black bitmac with the exception of private footpaths around dwellings which would be grey concrete flags. It is considered that shared access areas and driveways should be constructed of a different material to add some variance and character to the development as well as clearly defining areas of private, semi private and public areas. As such the submitted hard landscaping plan is not included in the approved plans and the recommended landscape condition includes a requirement for hard landscaping details to be provided for written approval of the Local Planning Authority as well as soft landscaping.

The Environment Agency have raised no objections to the propose development but have advised that a scheme should be agreed to ensure that the landscape within the site and particularly within the new community park is managed in such a way as to protect and where feasible enhance the ecological value of the site including the Folly Brook stream corridor and key green infrastructure asset. The management and maintenance of the community park area is to be secured by the S106 agreement which will require full details to be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. It will also ensure that the management and maintenance will be carried out in accordance with the approval details and requiring any subsequent variations to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Contaminated Land

The application is supported by a Phase I and Phase II report which have been reviewed by Urban Vision Environment.

The application is for residential use which is a sensitive end use with respect to land contamination. Historic uses of the site include former waste water treatment works (WWTW), former ponds (made ground), sludge lagoons, precipitation tanks and filter beds from approximately 1893 to 1993. Above ground structures associated with the WWTW have been removed. A former landfill has been identified in the South-east of the site which has potential to generate methane gas.

The report adequately identifies sources of contamination across the site through desk based research (historic maps and records) together with intrusive investigations. A Tier I Human Health Risk Assessment identified elevated levels of a number of contaminants with an exposure pathway.

Elevated methane levels have been detected in one area of the site, and the report recommends additional works are required prior to development commencing including further real-time ground gas monitoring and quantitative risk assessment to the south-east of the site and a remediation & enabling works strategy. It is considered all the further analysis and works can be conditioned as part of the determination of the application.

The Remediation and Enabling works strategy concludes that the site will be suitable for the proposed residential end uses subject to the completion of the identified works including;  Materials management and reuse strategy ensuring materials impacted by heavy metals, PAH and trace asbestos are placed in areas of low sensitivity;  Construction of 600mm clean cover system in all areas of private gardens and 300mm clean cover in other areas of soft landscaping and public open space, subject to independent plot specific validation;

Page 130  Identification and removal of material in the south-east sector where elevated methane concentrations have been found, including post remediation monitoring to ensure residual methane concentrations are <20%BV;  Finalisation of the ground gas classification in the south-east sector dependent on the monitoring above;

The remediation strategy is considered acceptable, and sufficient to ensure both the housing and proposed green space will, following remediation, be suitable for intended end use.

As such no objection is raised on the grounds of land contamination subject to conditions in relation to the development being carried out in accordance with the remediation strategy or such varied remediation strategy as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority; submission of gas protection measures to be installed in relevant plots; submission of a verification report that validates that all remedial works have been undertaken on site in accordance with those agreed with the LPA; that works should cease onsite if during the course of development contamination not previously identified is found to be present; and testing of soil or soil forming materials to be brought to site for use in gardens or soft landscaping

The recommended conditions have been attached.

The Environment Agency have also reviewed the submitted reports and have also advised that they have previously reviewed a number of reports for the site as provided to them under a chargeable agreement. They raise no objections in relation to contaminated land but have recommended a condition to ensure that if contamination not previously identified is found at the site then works shall cease until a remediation strategy has been submitted to the local planning authority on how the contamination will be dealt with. This condition is also recommended by Urban Vision Environment as set out above and is attached.

Flood Risk and Drainage

The application site is located predominantly in flood zone 1 and is greater than 1 hectare in size. As such a Flood Risk Assessment has been submitted in support of the application. Folly Brook passes through the site with an associated narrow strip of Flood Zone 3 within the brook’s gully, and there is an area in the south east corner of the site that is in Flood Zone 2 however it is noted that no development is proposed in this area so it remains appropriate to consider the development to be in Flood Zone 1.

The development is classed as more vulnerable owing to its residential use however this is deemed to be appropriate in this flood zone.

There is a risk of surface water flooding in the site, in a strip near the centre of the eastern side of the site. This is likely to fall outside of the development area and will be managed by the proposed development. The Areas Susceptible To Ground Water flooding map indicates that the risk class for this 1km map square is greater than 75% for superficial deposits groundwater flooding.

The submitted flood risk assessment states that “The BGS (British Geological Society) data included in Appendix J shows the main development site to be in an area with potential for groundwater flooding to property below ground level; the remainder being in an area with potential for groundwater flooding to occur at the surface. The GeoSmart Information Groundwater Flood Map indicates the site to be at negligible risk. A Phase 1 and 2 Geo-Environmental Site Assessment has been undertaken by E3P and reference to their report 10-838-r1, January 2017, should be made for the full details. The Executive Summary confirms: Perched groundwater was encountered between 1.5m and 8.2m bgl confined by the underlying stiff clay soils that underlie much of the site. Site levels will ensure finished floor levels are set above existing ground levels. The site is therefore not considered to be at risk of flooding from groundwater.”

Experience within Salford indicates that where ground levels are changed in an area where there is any potential for groundwater problems, this can give rise to changes in the ground water regime resulting in groundwater flooding of adjacent properties. A condition is recommended to ensure that

Page 131 details of finished floor levels of the dwellings are submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

A Surface Water Drainage Strategy – SUD’s Inclusion Form has been provided in support of the application. The form sets out that surface water from the development will be directed to an on-site attenuation basin with a flow control prior to discharge to Folly Brook at Greenfield Qbar rates. The proposed attenuation basin is within the proposed community park and its size and location are shown on the submitted plans.

The completed form confirms that all vehicle hard-standings will be provided with trapped gullies prior to discharge to the surface water network and in addition the attenuation basin will provide further treatment, particularly for suspended solids. Detailed design and construction of the attenuation basin have not yet been provided. It is acknowledged that there is a requirement for some form of treatment of the surface water prior to the discharge into the pond which could be dealt with by a change to the layout of the pond to include a forebay area to allow for silt and solids to settle out and allow biological treatment process to take place.

The Council’s drainage engineer has therefore recommended a condition relating to SuDS and surface water drainage and this will ensure the submission of the detailed design and construction of the attenuation basin for the written approval of the LPA prior to its installation and also ensure that the development of the site is considered as a whole. United utilities have also reviewed the submission documents and have raised no objections to the proposed development subject to conditions in relation to foul and surface water being drained on separate systems and the submission of a surface water drainage scheme for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

The recommended conditions are attached. A condition is also attached requiring the submission of a sustainable drainage management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

It is proposed that the Community Park and attenuation basin will be maintained by a management company to be established by the developer. Future management can also be incorporated into the management and maintenance scheme to be submitted in relation to the community park and this forms part of the S106 agreement which requires a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Sustainability

The supporting Planning Statement includes a chapter in relation to Salford City Council’s sustainability checklist and the guidance contained within the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD. In addition a separate Energy Statement has been submitted. This is in addition to the proposed SUDs as set out in the Flood Risk and Drainage section above.

The submitted documents set out the ‘Fabric First’ approach used by Bellway which includes high levels of insulation and efficient building services to reduce the carbon footprint of every home. The strategy locks efficiency savings into the fabric of the building and requires zero maintenance or repair from home owners. The savings cannot be undone and will persist for the lifetime of the development.

Paragraph 6.3 of the Design and Construction SPD sets out that it should be practicable in the vast majority of cases for new dwellings to achieve energy demand reductions that are at least 25% more efficient that the Target Emission Rate as defined by the 2006 Building Regulation Standards.

The submitted documents confirm that the development will cut forecasted CO2 emissions by 5.89% over current Part L and that the proposals better Part L 2006 by 33.65%. The Energy Statement confirms that the following measures will be incorporated into the detailed design of the development:

 The construction specification of every home will include high levels of insulation in the ground floor, external walls and roof spaces.  The detailed house type designs incorporate the thermal bridging guidance produced by Constructive Details and the Government, thereby reducing a significant source of heat loss.

Page 132  An efficient gas condensing boiler will be installed in each property. The heating designs of each house type will include dual zone controls with delayed start thermostats.  Energy efficient lamps will be installed in every light fitting.  Each property will be naturally ventilated using efficient decentralised extract fans to ensure the internal living environment will be healthy and comfortable.  Each entrance will be illuminated with an energy efficient external light or provision will be made for a purchaser to install such a fixture.  The white goods installed in each property or offered to purchasers will be energy efficient with an A+/A rating.

In terms of renewable energy none are proposed as part of the development however it is noted that measures such as photovoltaic panels could be installed on a number of properties by future occupiers should they wish.

The planning statement concludes that the development will meet building regulations requirements through the application of the ‘fabric first’ approach and the implementation of energy efficiency measures described above and as such they do not consider that renewable or decentralised energy is required. It goes on to say that outdoor areas, both public and private will be provided as well as retained and new tree cover across the site that will provide opportunities for shade and shelter from extreme weather events.

A condition is recommended to ensure that the sustainability measures outlined above are incorporated into the development. The Fabric First approach and inclusion of the above measure will ensure that the development meets the reductions required by the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD and as such is considered acceptable.

With regards to waste the planning statement sets out that to encourage best-practice waste management from the new dwellings, each home will be provided with suitable external space for the storage of both non-recyclable waste and recyclable waste, as well as dedicated storage spaces for general waste recyclables and food waste to encourage residents to select the most appropriate waste routes. It goes on to say that full consideration has been given to the council’s waste management infrastructure and services to ensure that the occupiers have the necessary infrastructure to participate in any kerbside recycling services. The application is also supported by a swept path to demonstrate that a refuse vehicle can enter the site in forward gear, turn within the turning heads proposed as part of the internal road layout and exit in forward gear.

The planning statement also sets out that the development will seek to minimise waste during the construction phase of the development. This can be considered as part of the Construction Environment Management Plan which is required by condition 20 however the statement sets out the following measure that will assist in minimising construction waste:  Supervision of deliveries and secure storage of materials to minimise on-site damage;  Where possible, the use of a scheme for recycling and reusing materials on site;  Minimisation of the excavation and landscaping requirements of the proposed development;  Monitoring of resource use, reviewing energy and water use and putting in place measures to minimise resource use;  Monitoring of construction material with waste stored in a dedicated storage areas including an area provided for waste susceptible to water damage;  Storage and labelling of waste in dedicated skips to ensure collection and storage of common waste streams to facilitate re- use and recycling.

In relation to clean water flushing and the use of grey water recycling equipment the applicants have provided a statement which confirms that there is currently no policy requirement at local or national level to install grey water recycling equipment or rainwater harvesting equipment to feed toilets non- potable water and that the installation of such equipment is only required in response to Drainage concerns (rainwater harvesting) or internal water consumption (rainwater harvesting & grey water recycling).

The statement goes on to say that grey water recycling and rainwater harvesting can contribute to a lower internal water consumption and part G of the Building Regulations requires an internal water consumption of no more than 120 litres per person per day. The Housing Standards Review allows

Page 133 Local Planning Authority’s to set a lower standard of 105 litres per person per day, subject to need and viability in areas of water stress. This level of consumption is in line with Code for Sustainable Homes Levels 3 and 4 (now since suspended).

Bellway Homes proposes the installation of dual flush toilets, flow restriction devices and appropriately sized baths and they confirm that such measures comply with Part G of the Building Regulations and have the ability to comply with the standards of Level 3 and 4 of the now suspended Code for Sustainable Homes and as such there is no requirement to install harvesting equipment or grey water recycling.

The statement sets out that the measures proposed by Bellway Homes achieve a level of sustainability in line with Government policy and by extension local policy. It states that both technologies use energy to pump water from source to end use, energy which would otherwise not be necessary and both require regular maintenance, servicing and filter changes. Furthermore, the equipment specifications are not compatible with a large residential scheme: 1. Harvesting tanks must be sited 5m from any building or any other buried structure (etc neighbouring tank) 2. Greywater recycling requires a large 210 litre tank installed in the loft space and separate plumbing configuration which is not compatible to modern house types.

Conclusion

The principle of developing the site for residential and park uses is acceptable. The application site is located within a sustainable location and is accessible by a range of means of transport. The proposed development would bring forward an appropriate mix of dwellings including large family dwellings and affordable dwellings. Impacts of the proposed development on other matters including design, residential amenity, the highway network, ecology, contamination, flood risk and drainage have all been assessed and found to be acceptable subject to conditions and obligations where necessary. It is considered, therefore, that the proposed development would not compromise the aims and objectives of the relevant policies contained within the adopted Unitary Development Plan and there are no material planning considerations that would justify a refusal of permission. It is accordingly recommended that the application be approved subject to the completion of the S106 agreement and the conditions outlined below.

Recommendation Approve

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

1) The Strategic Director of Environment and Community Safety be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act to secure the following heads of terms: - Affordable Housing - Open Space - Education - Public Realm

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

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

Conditions

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

Page 134 Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2. Save for the details of plots 49, 78, 83 and 104 which shall be agreed under condition 24, the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

- SL01 Rev A - Site Location plan - ST01 Rev A – 2.5/3 Storey - BT01 Rev E – Boundary Treatments Plan - BH/MAN/SD/WRG017 – 1m High Hoop Top Railings - BH/MAN/SD/FD001 Revision A – 1.8 Close Boarded Fence - BH/MAN/SD/FD018 – 1.8m Closed Boarded Fence with 0.3m Trellis - BH/MAN/SD/FD003 – 900mm 2no. Post & 2no. Rail Fence (100mm Post) - BH/WL/SD/FD049 Revision B – 1800mm High Piers with Low Level Wall & Timber Infill Panels - PL01 Rev Y – Proposed Layout - PC01 Rev Y – Proposed Coloured layout - EM01 Rev D – Elevation Materials Plan - PP01 Rev A – Phasing Plan - Substation drawing – revision B dated 03.10.16 showing pyramid roof option only

Campbell Road, Housetype Range February 2017 which includes the following plans: - Thomas 1806 sq.ft - Hawthorne 1645 sq.ft - Priestly 1558 sq.ft - Fleming 1466 sq.ft - Lilac 1394 sq.ft - Larch 1293 sq.ft - Fulwood/Falkland 1263 sq.ft / 1169 sq.ft - Oakwood 1151 sq.ft - Weston 1025 sq.ft - Regent 1016 sq.ft - Stirling 1009 sq.ft - Japonica Alt 978 sq.ft - Browning 978 sq.ft - Browning Alt 992 sq.ft / Regent 1016 sq.ft - Greenwich 870 sq.ft / Hampton 855 sq.ft - Cherry Alt 794 sq.ft - Cherry 794 sq.ft - Cherry Alt 794 sq.ft / Rochester 775 sq.ft - Studley 619 sq.ft - Single detached garage - Double detached garage - Twin detached garage

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

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

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

4. No development shall be started until all the retained trees as shown on [Tree Constraints Plan (TCP), Drawing No: P.620.16.03 Rev C, dated: 05-10-2017] within (or overhanging) the site,

Page 135 have been surrounded by substantial fences which shall extend to the extreme circumference of the spread of the branches of the trees (or such positions as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority). Such fences shall be erected in accordance with a specification to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall remain until all development is completed and no work, including any form of drainage or storage of materials, earth or topsoil shall take place within the perimeter of such fencing.

Reason: To safeguard existing trees and to ensure that adequate provision is made for their protection whilst the development is carried out in accordance with Policy EN12 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

5. No development shall be started unless and until an Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) has been submitted and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved AMS.

Reason: To safeguard existing trees and to ensure that adequate provision is made for their protection whilst the development is carried out in accordance with Policy EN12 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

6. The felled trees shall be replaced in accordance with the details contained with the submitted Landscape Specification (Document No: LDS425(D)-LS) and the following drawing numbers only in so far as they relate to tree planting: - 7957-L-01 Revision G - LDS425-01D - Planting plan 1 of 4 - LDS425-02D - Planting plan 2 of 4 - LDS425-03D - Planting plan 3 of 4 - LDS425-04D - Planting plan 4 of 4

The replacement trees for each phase of the development shall be planted in the first available planting season following the first occupation of each phase and in the case of the community park within 12 months of the laying out of the park.

Any trees planted in accordance with this condition which are removed, uprooted, destroyed, die or become severely damaged or become seriously diseased within 5 years of planting shall be replaced within the next planting season by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted, unless the Local Planning Authority gives its consent in writing to any variation and this condition shall not be considered to have been complied with until the replacement trees have been established to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

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

7. The development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the duly approved remediation strategy (Remediation and Enabling Works Strategy, (October 2017) or such varied remediation strategy as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

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

8. Within 4 weeks following the completion of the identified remediation and verification gas monitoring in the south-east sector the applicant shall submit, and agree with the Local Planning Authority the gas protection measures to be installed in relevant plots. The gas protection measures shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

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

Page 136 9. Pursuant to conditions 7 and 8 no occupation of any part of the development hereby permitted shall take place until a verification report demonstrating completion of all approved remediation works and gas protection measures to specific plots 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 prevent pollution of the water environment and to ensure the safe development of the site in the interests of the amenity of future occupiers in accordance with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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

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

11. If, during the course of development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present, no further works shall be undertaken in the affected area and the contamination shall be reported to the Local Planning Authority as soon as reasonably practicable (but within a maximum of 5 days from the find). Prior to further works being carried out in the identified area, a further assessment shall be made and appropriate action agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

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

12. The following noise standards shall be attained with respect to the proposed residential accommodation as stipulated in BS8233:2014 - Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings: (i) internal noise levels of less than 30 dB LAeq,8 hour within bedrooms between 23.00 hours and 07.00 hours (ii) internal noise levels of less than 35 dB LAeq,16hour within living areas between 07.00 and 23.00 hours (iii) external noise levels of less than 55 dB LAeq,16hour in the private gardens 07.00 and 23.00 hours (iv) typical individual noise events from road vehicle should 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 general ventilation as identified in the submitted Environmental Noise Study, (October 2017), Ref R1329-REP01A-PC, Red Acoustics shall be implemented in full and retained as such thereafter.

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

13. Prior to the commencement of development a Landscape and Habitat Creation/Enhancement Scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved Scheme shall identify the opportunities for biodiversity enhancement on site including, but not limited to;

Page 137 - Bat bricks/boxes - Bird boxes - Native tree and shrub planting - Consideration of species rich grassland within the park area. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To secure opportunities for the enhancement of the nature conservation value of the site in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

14. If ground works for the development hereby permitted have not commenced within one year of the date of the last ecological survey of the site (conducted in June 2017) then new surveys of the site for the possible presence of Badgers shall be undertaken and if Badgers are found by new survey then a Method Statement must be prepared giving details of the measures to be taken to avoid any possible harm to badgers during the course of works. The method statement must be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of any ground works on site and the development must be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To safeguard protected species in accordance with the Nature Conservation and Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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

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

16. Prior to occupation of the development a sustainable drainage management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development shall be submitted to the local planning authority and agreed in writing. The sustainable drainage management and maintenance plan shall include as a minimum:

a. Arrangements for adoption by an appropriate public body or statutory undertaker, or, management and maintenance by a resident's management company; and b. Arrangements for inspection and ongoing maintenance of all elements of the sustainable drainage system to secure the operation of the surface water drainage scheme throughout its lifetime.

The development shall subsequently be completed, maintained and managed in accordance with the approved plan.

Reason: To ensure that management arrangements are in place for the sustainable drainage system in order to manage the risk of flooding and pollution during the lifetime of the development in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 138 17. Foul and surface water shall be drained on separate systems.

Reason: To secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of flooding and pollution.in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

18. Prior to any works above slab level, details of the finished floor levels of the dwellings hereby approved shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and to reduce the risk of flooding from overland flows in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the Flood Risk and Development Supplementary Planning Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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

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

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

20. Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted a Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall focus on sustainable transport options (including walking, cycling, public transport incentives, car share options, electric and ultra-low vehicle incentives).

Following 50% occupation of the residential dwellings (or alternative timeframe which has been agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), an updated Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The agreed Travel Plan shall be implemented and reviewed in accordance with the timetable embodied therein.

Page 139 Reason: To ensure that the travel arrangements to the development are appropriate and to limit the effects of the increase in travel movements in accordance with policies ST14 and A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

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

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

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

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

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

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

23. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans no above ground construction works shall commence on plots 49, 78, 83 and 104 until revised elevation plans which show fenestration in the gable ends has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These plots shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity and to ensure the natural surveillance of public areas in accordance with Policies DES1 and DES10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.

24. No gates on driveways shall open onto the existing/proposed adopted highway.

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

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

Page 140 Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.

26. Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted the junction improvement works to the Folly Lane/Thorn Road junction as shown on drawing number 42220/5501/020 (Folly Lane/Thorn Road Proposed Junction Improvements) within the submitted Transport Assessment shall be implemented in full and retained as such thereafter.

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

Notes to Applicant

1. STANDING ADVICE - DEVELOPMENT LOW RISK AREA

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

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

This Standing Advice is valid from 1st January 2017 until 31st December 2018 2. The applicants are advised that the development should be built to Secured by Design standards and accredited prior to first occupation.

3. The applicant's attention is drawn to the comments made by United Utilities in their response letter of 8th December 2017.

4. The applicant's attention is drawn to the comments made by the Environment Agency in relation to waste on site, waste to be taken off site and flood risk in their response letter of 21st December 2017.

5. The applicants are advised than any works to Folly Brook will require consent from the Environment Agency.

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

7. With respect to gas protection measures (condition 8) the applicant's attention is drawn to BRE 414, Protection Measures for Housing on Gas-Contaminated Sites. In addition the verification requirements of BS8845:2015 Code of Practice for the design of protective measures for methane and carbon dioxide ground gases for new buildings. Verification of gas protection systems needs to be undertaken during the construction process, possibly on a plot by plot basis, to ensure there is no difficulty with the final discharge of the conditions.

8. Demolition works, together with works to trees, hedgerows and scrub, including site clearance, should not be undertaken in the main bird breeding season (1st March to 31st August), unless nesting birds are found to be absent by a suitably qualified person immediately prior to clearance.

9. The applicants are advised that in relation to condition 19 finished floor levels should be a minimum of 150mm above adjacent highway level.

Page 141 10. Highway works, remedial measures and supporting Traffic Regulation Orders to be introduced in vicinity of the development shall include the following:  Full construction details of The new site access points on Campbell Road, internal road layout and access points to properties 73, 75 & 84 Campbell Road; and the modification of Thorn Road / Folly Lane junction and any other off-site highway works.  The adoptable highway drainage system must either connect into a proposed adoptable surface water system, or an existing United Utilities adopted surface water sewer or a watercourse where a Consent to Discharge from the Environmental Agency is required.  Regarding to adopted carriageway and footways, any amendments to the carriageway need to be re-instated using similar materials.  Must protect adopted street lighting and existing services within the footway and carriageway.  Areas to be submitted for adoption will require an agreement;  All proposed adoptable highways to be drained to an adopted S.W. sewer;  The developer should undertake Road Safety Audits at the relevant stages to provide an opportunity to monitor Thorn Road / Folly Lane junction, Campbell Road and Thorn Road to ensure no increase in risk to pedestrians and road users or to enhance the safety of the site entrance, junction and neighbouring roads should it need to.  As part of the Road Safety Audit at the relevant stages should ensure opportunity to monitor the site entrance and the internal operation of the development and to ensure risk are kept to a minimum for pedestrians and road users or to enhance the safety of the internal roads should it need to.

The applicants are advised that they will be required to enter into an agreement under Section 38/278 of the 1980 Highways Act with the Local Authority to cover works to the adopted highway within and outside the application, including but not limited to:  For the creation of new vehicular site entrance with pedestrian footways that is approved by the Highway Authority.  For the creation of the internal carriageways, footways, highway drainage, street lighting to SCC’s current adoptable standards.  Vehicle crossover area with continuous footway with designed dropped section designed to appropriate standards shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Highway Authority  Adopted carriageway and footways, any amendments to the carriageway need to be re- instated and using similar materials.  Street lighting, signage, drainage and other utility services within the footway and carriageway that is affected by the development must be relocated and agreed by various utility providers and Highway Authority.  Dilapidation Survey should be undertaken after the completion of the development to ensure the adopted footway and carriageway is not damaged by construction vehicles;  To provide a Traffic Management scheme to prevent/ assist in the safe use of the proposed access point at the Thorn Road / Folly Lane junction, to prohibit on-street parking and to provide a traffic calming scheme within the development and to amend the speed limit/traffic regulation order on neighbouring roads which includes Campbell Road and Thorn Road.

11. The applicants are advised that in relation to condition 21 the Travel Plan should include information about the budget set aside for the travel plan implementation and monitoring, full details of the TPC and information regarding travel surveys. Welcome Pack / Travel Packs should be presented during the marketing phase and provided on the first day of occupation. Travel surveys should be done at 50% occupation and new targets set. The Travel plan should be reviewed every year for a period of 5 years. The TPC should work with Salford City Councils Sustainable Transport Planner to successfully execute the targets.

Page 142 Agenda Item 5h

APPLICATION No: 18/71363/FUL APPLICANT: Forshaw Land & Property Group LOCATION: Land At Worrall Street, Salford, M5 4TH PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing building and erection of a building of part 8 / part 9 storey's comprising 86 residential units together with gym, cycle and car parking and associated works WARD: Ordsall

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This planning application relates to a 1.2ha site on the south side of Worrall Street, off Ordsall Lane. The site is bounded by the Manchester Ship Canal to the south and at either side of the site to the east and west there are low rise industrial/warehouse buildings. The Manchester Ship Canal and its tow path, referred to as the riverside walkway in this report, sits approximately 2m lower than the application site. Access to the riverside walkway is gained from steps from Worrall Street between Serck Marston and Lamba Court.

The site forms part of a wider industrial area on the south-east side of Ordsall Lane known as Ordsall Riverside, an area of 30.6 hectares comprising a linear strip of land alongside the River Irwell. Development in this area is directed by the Ordsall Riverside Planning Guidance (2008).

Background

This application is a resubmission of a recent application on Worrall Street, reference 17/70046/FUL, which sought permission for the demolition of existing buildings and erection of three buildings ranging from 7 to 9 storeys in height comprising 232 residential units together with public realm, landscaping, car parking and associated works. In November 2017, the application was presented to the Planning and Transportation Panel,

Page 143 where members resolved to grant planning permission for the development subject to the signing of a section 106 Agreement.

The application 17/70046/FUL, known hereafter as the 2017 scheme, proposed three blocks of the development known as Block 1A, 1B and 2. Block 1A was located adjacent to the Fortis development on Worrall Street, Block 1B was sited opposite this block and Block 2 shown adjacent to the River Irwell. It is Block 2 adjacent to the river which is the subject of this application.

The applicant is currently working with the Local Planning Authority (LPA) to draft the S106 for the 2017 scheme, however, due to issues of site assembly which appear unlikely to be resolved in the immediate future, the applicant is currently unable to complete the S106 agreement. As a result the applicant is keen to progress with the site at Block 2 where there are no such issues and hence why this planning application has been submitted

The development for Block 2, the subject of this application, is exactly the same as that proposed in the 2017 scheme.

Description of Proposal

Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing building on site and for the erection of an 8 storey/ 9 storey building accommodating 86 residential units.

The building would have a footprint of 50.6m by 20.5m, and fill the majority of the site. The building would have large projecting bays along the elevations to Worrall Street and the river. The top two floors of the development would be set back 0.5m from the main frontage.

The development would provide for 31 x 1 bedroom apartments, 47 x 2 bedroom apartments, 7 x 2 bedroom duplex units and 1 x 3 bedroom apartments.

Access for all the units in this block would be provided by the main entrance into the building from Worrall Street. Vehicle access into the building is provided from Worrall Street and this block will provide for 8 car parking spaces, one of which is laid out for disable use and 96 cycle spaces. At ninth floor a large communal amenity space will be provided and a gym is proposed fronting onto Worrall Street.

The application has been supported by the following documents, which were submitted in respect of the 2017 application ref (17/70046/FUL): Design and Access Statement S106 Proforma Planning Statement Crime Impact Statement Daylight/Sunlight Assessment Phase 1 Geo Environmental Site Assessment Air Quality Assessment Ecology Report Flood Risk Assessment Noise Impact Assessment Travel Assessment Sustainability Checklist and Statement Summary of economic benefits of the scheme

A covering letter was also submitted confirming the updated position.

Publicity

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

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford EditionDate Published: 1 March 2018 Reason: Article 15 Standard Press Notice

Page 144 Neighbour Notification

229 properties were notified of this planning application on 26th February 2018. The notification included properties on Dyer Street, Worrall Street, Ordsall Lane, Woden Street, Everard Street.

Representations

None

Relevant Site History

95/33812/TPDC - Change of use from waste disposal station to warehouse and distribution unit with associated offices – Approved 11th November 1995. 17/70046/FUL - Demolition of existing buildings and erection of three buildings ranging from 7 to 9 storeys in height comprising 232 residential units together with public realm, landscaping, car parking and associated works – Minded to approve the application at the Planning and Transportation Panel in November 2017 subject to completion of a S106 agreement.

Consultations

PSSC Canal And River Trust - Do not wish to comment on this application as a Statutory Consultee.

Environment Agency – Refer to the Council’s Flooding Planning Guidance. No objections to the application providing that the application is undertaken in strict accordance with the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA). Recommend conditions in respect of contaminated land.

Rights Of Way - No comments received to date

Urban Vision Environment - No objection subject to conditions, more information can be found in the pollution section of this report.

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit - The new application includes the same ecological information and landscape proposals. The ecological information is still valid. Therefore their previous recommendation made in respect of 17/70046/FUL still applies.

Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service - Having reviewed the information provided with the application and their records GMAAS does not consider that there is any requirement for archaeological mitigation in regard to this application.

Manchester Ship Canal Company - No comments received to date

Design For Security – Have raised issues in respect of aspects of the development these are discussed in more detail within the report.

Highways – No objections to the proposed development, more detail can be found in the officer report.

United Utilities - Do not object to the proposal; subject to conditions relating to foul water and surface water. Comments have been provided on site drainage, the management and maintenance of SUDs, water supply and United Utilities assets.

Trafford M B C - No comments received to date

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.

Page 145 Unitary Development Plan ST12 - Development Density This policy states that development within regional centres, town centre and close to key public transport routes and interchanges will be required to achieve a high density appropriate to the location and context.

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

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

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

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

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

Unitary Development Plan DES5 - Tall Buildings This policy states that tall buildings will be permitted where: the scale of the development is appropriate; the location is highly accessible; the building would positively relate to adjacent public realm; is of high quality design; makes a positive contribution to the skyline; would not detract from important views; would not cause unacceptable overshadowing or overlooking, detrimental to the amenity of neighbouring occupiers; be no unacceptable impact on the setting of a listed building or value of a conservation area; be no unacceptable impact on microclimate; be no unacceptable impact on telecommunications; and there would be no unacceptable impact on aviation safety.

Unitary Development Plan DES6 - Waterside Development This policy states that all new development adjacent to the Manchester Ship Canal will be required to facilitate pedestrian access to, along and, where appropriate, across the waterway. Schemes should incorporate a waterside walkway with pedestrian links between the walkway and other key pedestrian routes and incorporate

Page 146 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 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 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 A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Parking in New Development 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 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 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

Page 147 no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory level of amenity.

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

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

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

Unitary Development Plan 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

Local Planning Policy -

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

Supplementary Planning Document - 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 - 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 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 - Nature Conservation and Biodiversity

Page 148 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 - 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 mitigate the impacts of the development

Planning Guidance - Ordsall, Riverside This guidance sets down the council’s broad vision for the regeneration of the area and sets out the principles to create a cohesive and distinctive character and sense of place to enable an appropriate mix of uses and high quality design in new development and public realm across the area.

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

Planning Guidance - 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.

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

Appraisal

Principle of Development

The application site is situated within the Saved UDP (Unitary Development Plan) MX1 policy area in which a variety of land uses are deemed appropriate. The Ordsall Riverside corridor (including the application site) also forms part of an established employment area as defined by Saved UDP Policy E5 and specifically paragraph 8.40 of the Reasoned Justification (RJ) to that policy.

Saved UDP Policy E5 is supplemented by the Established Employment Areas Supplementary Planning Document. Policy EMP7 deals specifically with employment areas falling within the area identified by UDP Policy MX1. Under this policy the applicant is required to demonstrate compliance with criterion ‘1’ of Saved UDP Policy E5, that “the development would not compromise the operating conditions of other remaining employment uses.”

In terms of the development’s potential impact on remaining employment uses (criteria 1), the vision for the area is one of residential led development and a residential scheme is currently under construction immediately to the north east of the site and two applications for residential development are being considered on land between Worrall Street and Ordsall Lane. The scheme retains access to the neighbouring employment uses along Worrall Street, the applicant has agreed to provide a financial contribution for the Local Highway Authority to review and provide for Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO) in the area to mitigate any impacts from on-street car parking associated with the development. Any proposed TROs along Worrall Street will be undertaken in consultation with the existing businesses. In respect of noise, Urban Vision Air and Noise have assessed the information which considers the proposed use with the existing employment uses. They agree with the findings of the noise assessment subject to a condition to control the internal noise within the dwellings. It is therefore considered that the applicant has provided the required supplementary evidence to demonstrate that criterion 1 of Policy E5 can be met.

Page 149 Policy OR1 of the Ordsall Riverside planning guidance also deals with employment uses. At paragraph 6.46, it confirms that the guidance comprises ‘an approved regeneration strategy’ for the purposes of criteria 2c of Saved UDP Policy E5 and that the purpose of Policy OR1 is to “establish the circumstances in which reuse or redevelopment of employment sites will be considered to contribute to the implementation of the strategy”. For a residential scheme to be acceptable, policy OR1 requires that all reasonable attempts have been taken to relocate existing businesses and that the development complies with other policies in the guidance. In respect of the former the applicant has confirmed that the business which currently occupies the premises will consolidate their business into another building on Worrall Street, as this is only partially occupied at the moment.

Proposed Housing Mix -

The proposed scheme would comprise 86 apartments. The proposed mix of dwellings is as follows:

Dwelling Floorspace Number of units Total Percentage (sqm) 1 bed apartment 39 to 47 sqm 31 31 36% 2 bed apartment 56 to 69 sqm 47 54 63% 2 bed duplex 70 to 74 sqm 7 3 bed apartment 88 sqm 1 1 1% Total 86 86

Policy HOU1 of the Housing Planning Guidance acknowledges that the Ordsall Lane Riverside Corridor offers the opportunity to provide a broader mix of housing types than in other parts of the Regional Centre, including houses as well as apartments, to complement and supply the development of a sustainable mix of housing in the wider Ordsall neighbourhood.

Policy OR2 of the Ordsall Riverside Guidance describes that “in order to ensure that the Ordsall Lane Corridor offers a broader mix of dwelling types than in other parts of the Regional Centre, a significant proportion of family orientated dwellings should be provided”.

It would appear that none of the units could meet the definition of ‘family-orientated’ as set out in the Ordsall Riverside guidance (Policy OR2, paragraph 6.59). The difficulties in providing family accommodation within high density schemes are recognised, and that whilst the proportion of three bed apartments is lower than consented on other sites within the corridor, the mix is identical to that proposed in 2017 application. In the 2017 application the mix across the site was comparable to other consented schemes. It is also recognised that the applicant is willing to make a financial contribution towards improving existing bus services in the area which will improve accessibility which supports the principle of higher density developments within the corridor.

Policy HOU2 of the Housing Planning Guidance describes that “where apartments are proposed, they should provide a broad mix of dwelling sizes, both in terms of the number of bedrooms and the net residential floorspace of apartments. Small dwellings (i.e. studios and one bedroom apartments) should not predominate, and a significant proportion of three bedroom apartments should be provided wherever practicable”. The reasoned justification to Policy HOU2 of the Housing Planning Guidance adds that “the majority of apartments in new development should normally have two or three bedrooms, with a floorspace and layout that makes them adaptable to changing needs (typically 57sqm or above).

The mix, in terms of bedrooms, is consistent with Policy HOU2 of the Housing Planning guidance. All but six of the units with two bedrooms or more have a floorspace of over 57sqm in accordance with HOU2. Therefore the mix is considered to accord with the UDP policy H1 and the Housing Planning Guidance.

Design and Visual Impact

Site Layout –

The illustrative masterplan within the Ordsall Riverside Planning Guidance promotes one large block of development bounded by Dyer Street, Worrall Street, Ordsall Lane and the riverfront. This block of development would include a section of Worrall Street to the west of Dyer Street, see extract below:

Page 150 Extract from Illustrative Masterplan (Map A) Ordsall Riverside Planning Guidance (2008). Application site outlined indicatively in red.

Given land ownership in this area and that the development of this site and the adjoining parcels of land are being bought forward separately, it would be very difficult to realise the masterplan in its totality. As Worrall Street is to be retained, the proposed development has been sited to provide frontage to both the river and Worrall Street, this is considered to be a reasonable approach.

The illustrative masterplan and public realm strategy as shown in Map 8 of the planning guidance shows Dyer Street extending to the river front by a public square adjacent to the riverside walkway. The location of this proposed public square sits outside the application site and not within the ownership of the applicant. The option of pulling block 2 from the eastern boundary of the site to create a route down to the river was considered by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) when the 2017 application was being considered. However it was acknowledged that if this route was provided it would be doglegged and not create the views as desired by the planning guidance from Ordsall Lane to the river. It is also acknowledged, at this time, that there is an existing stepped access down from Worrall Street to the river next to Lamba Court, therefore if a route was also provided within the application boundary; it would create two routes within 55m of each other. In light of these factors it was considered that the extension of Dyer Street to the river should be considered comprehensively as part of a future scheme to redevelop the adjacent site. It is not considered that permitting this development would restrict this route being created nor would it duly compromise the adjacent site from being bought forward for development in the future and therefore the siting of the development as proposed is considered to be acceptable.

In respect of the riverside walkway, the planning guidance policy OR3 requires that developments fronting the riverside walkway should, where practicable, allow for the widening of the walkway to a minimum width of 8m. The provision of the walkway is a key element of the Irwell City Park Planning Guidance, policy ICP17 of this guidance states that a combined footway and cycleway will be created along the entire riverside route of the Irwell City Park to provide the City Park with full public access all year round and at all times.

The scheme will widen the riverside walkway from approximately 2m to 4m. Whilst this is not the desired 8m consideration has to be given to the practicalities of developing plots between the river and Worrall Street which

Page 151 are already narrow and may become undevelopable if a further 4m of the site has to be given across for the walkway. Also it is acknowledged that the riverside walkway narrows at the western end of Lamba Court to less than 2m and given Lamba Court is a relatively new residential development it is highly unlikely that this footpath will be widened in the near future. In light of this it is considered that the doubling the width of the existing footpath is sufficient and this will be of benefit to all users of the walkway and would help to realise the aims and objectives of both the Ordsall Riverside and Irwell City Park Planning Guidance.

The RJ to policy OR4 of the planning guidance (para 6.98) states that given the fragmented nature of land ownership in the area, planning permission will not be given for incremental development that would unacceptably hamper or reduce the development options for the wider corridor, in accordance with policy DEV 6 of the UDP. Proposals for development of smaller sites in isolation must demonstrate that their implementation would not prejudice or unduly constrain options for redevelopment of adjacent sites. Compliance with the illustrative Masterplan would lend weight to such a case. Schemes that deviate from the illustrative Masterplan would have to provide alternative evidence that the proposals are compatible with potential future neighbouring development.

This proposed development contains no habitable room windows within the gable elevations along these boundary’s and therefore safeguarding the development potential of Serck Martson and 10 Worrall Street in accordance with the Planning Guidance.

Vehicle and pedestrian access into the development will be taken from Worrall Street. The provision of duplex apartments with private space at ground floor level to Worrall Street is supported in terms of promoting overlooking and presenting active frontages. To the river duplex apartments will be situated across the ground and first floor, due to level differences when viewed from the riverside walkway these duplex units would be at second and third floor as the riverside walkway is at a lower level. There is no living accommodation at lower ground level (level of the riverside walkway) due to flood constraints. The duplex units span around half the buildings frontage to the river, the remaining half is made up of plant, bin and cycle storage. The applicants have confirmed that due to the size of the site and the fact it has two frontages, the number of units with frontage to the river is limited by the need to provide ancillary accommodation in the form of; refuse storage, cycle storage, entrance foyer, car parking and plant rooms etc on the ground floor. Whilst this arrangement is not ideal the layout does provide a high degree of natural surveillance from the duplexes at ground floor together with all the apartments on the upper floors which is an improvement to the relationship the existing warehouse has to the riverside walkway and will improve the pedestrian environment for users of the walkway.

Overall in terms of the layout of the scheme whilst it does not strictly accord with the illustrative masterplan set out in the Ordsall Riverside planning guidance it does work with the constraints of the site and in doing so achieves the overall aims of the guidance as such the layout of the scheme is considered to be acceptable.

Height and Scale –

There are a variety of building heights in the area surrounding the application site. To the west the area is characterised by two-storey warehouse/office buildings fronting Worrall Street and Ordsall Lane. To the east is the Bridgewater Point development which ranges in height from six to eight storeys and beyond this is the Lamba Court apartments which are four to six storeys in height.

The Ordsall Riverside Planning Guidance sets out some general principles for the height and scale of development for the area of the application site. The guidance advises that development within the Regent Road quarter, where this development is sited, should be 6+1 storeys (“+1” relates to an additional storey at roof level set back from the main frontage). It identifies the potential for exceptions to maximum height to allow slightly higher buildings at key corners.

The proposed development would be 8 storeys stepping up to 9 storeys. The top two floors of this block would be set back from the front elevation, with the exception of a central section marking the entrance of the building, along Worrall Street, where the height is taken up to roof level. The block would exceed the height set out within the guidance and it is not considered that the block would mark a ‘key corner’. However it is felt that the heights proposed would be acceptable as they would be of a comparable height and scale to other new development in Ordsall Riverside. The varied building height will create an interesting roofline and it is felt that the height will not be imposing for pedestrians either along Worrall Street or the river.

Detailed Design and Appearance –

Page 152 The proposed scheme is contemporary in appearance; the mass of the building has been broken up by the introduction of large projecting bays that run from the second floor up the building on Worrall Street and from first floor up the building on the river frontage. These bays give the building a rhythm and help to create a varied roof line. These bays would project forward in the street scene but as they are above head height it is not considered that this would be overbearing in the street scene or along the riverside walkway.

The elevations would comprise of brick facades with recessed motor joints, the setback top floors would be metal clad and ceramic tiles would be used for the rear wall of the balcony’s and around the apartment building entrance, the external doors to the duplex units would be clad in metal. The doors and windows would also be aluminum.

The existing neighbouring buildings are predominantly brick and therefore it is considered that the palette of brick proposed for the elevations would be appropriate. The brick colour is indicatively shown as being a brown buff; the applicants have undertaken a brick study looking at materials locally and found there to be a mix of different materials in the area. They have then explored a number of different brick colours and consider the brown/buff will provide a contemporary appearance which responds positively to adjacent developments. This position is accepted. Along areas where the building does not create an active frontage, for example where the car parking is proposed along Worrall Street, the brick work will be laid to be perforated to allow light and views into and from these areas. Along the river walkway there would be solid brick detailing/corbelling. It is considered that these proposed treatments have been carefully considered and are an appropriate design solution given the buildings internal layout.

The cladding to the top floors would distinguish the top of the buildings and reduce the massing of the buildings. In order to reflect the site’s history, which dyed velvets, the applicant is looking to use a palette of greens, reds and purples to the rear of the recessed balconies. There are no objections to this approach; it is considered that the use of colour within the balconies will subtly add interest to the elevation without being too elaborate. The balconies will be enclosed by metal railings and their colour has been indicated to match the colour panels. It is not clear whether this will work successfully but options can be explored when agreeing the proposed materials across the site. A materials condition is recommended to agree all external finishes which will ensure that the development will be of the highest quality.

Overall it is considered that the development in itself would have its own identity and would have a positive impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area in accordance with the design policies referenced above.

Landscape and Public Realm

As discussed above the scheme includes a new section of public realm in the form of a widened riverside walkway. A landscaping plan has been submitted with the application which provides an indication of how these areas will be treated.

In respect of the riverside walkway the landscaping proposals show that this will be hard surfaced and is shown to include provision of benches. Through discussion with the applicant, in the 2017 scheme, it was been agreed that this area will remain free from obstruction to ensure that pedestrians and cyclists can freely pass.

A detailed and comprehensive landscape scheme for the site will be secured by condition and subject to this the scheme is considered to accord with UDP policy DES9.

Amenity

The nearest occupied residential properties are within the apartment block, Steele House, that forms part of the Lamba Court development. This development sits 76m to the west of the application site fronting the river. It is considered that the application site is sufficiently offset from Lamba Court as to not have an unacceptable overbearing impact on the amenity these residents currently enjoy.

The neighbouring site to the north west, known as Bridgewater Point is currently under construction, the proposed development sits 31m from the Bridgewater Point and this is considered sufficient to ensure the development does not have an unacceptable overbearing impact on the amenity of future residents.

Page 153 As the development mirrors that proposed under the 2017 scheme, which has a minded to approve resolution from planning panel, it is considered that there are no issues between this block of development and those blocks proposed on the opposite side of Worrall Street under the 2017 scheme.

To the east and west of the application site, land is still within commercial/industrial use, therefore there are no directly amenity impacts resulting from the development. The scheme is designed, to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority, so that it does not fetter future development of these sites and this has been discussed earlier in this report.

In terms of the amenity of future occupiers, all habitable room windows within the development would have sufficient outlook. The daylight/sunlight information submitted with the application shows that across the site particularly at lower levels the units will be below BRE standards in respect of sunlight and daylight. The standards improve the higher up in the building. As discussed earlier in the report the proposed building has been positioned to have frontage to Worrall Street and has been designed to include large projecting bays to add interest to elevations. It is these elements which impact upon the light received to rooms within the development. It is acknowledge that this is a new development and residents would be buying into this arrangement therefore on balance it is considered that the regeneration benefits of the scheme far outweigh the amenity impact and as such the scheme is considered to be appropriate in this regard.

In light of the above it is considered that the proposal would accord with UDP policy DES7.

Crime and Design

A Crime Impact Statement (CIS) has been submitted in support of this application, which accompanied the 2017 scheme. The CIS is supportive of a scheme that removes low quality buildings and replaces these with a development which has a mix of unit types that will repopulate the area by attracting a diverse group of residents. The statement draws upon the fact that the scheme has been designed to face the street and maximise natural surveillance. Entrances into the building will be from main frontages and the duplex units will benefit from defensible space at ground floor level. Also they are supportive of the secure cycle parking which is being provided.

The DFS team have raised a number of points, in respect of this development, the main one being the access to the gym from the street. They are concerned that if the doors are left open, for example in the summer months this could lead to illegitimate access into the building and also compromise the security of the equipment and residents and their personal items. This issue was raised in the 2017 application and at this time the applicant has stated that the doors into the gym are required for fire reasons and cannot be removed. The 2017 officer report also noted that it would be unenforceable to add a condition that requires these doors to remain shut unless in the event of an emergency. As with the 2017 scheme the doors are not directly off the street and are slightly offset as stepped access into the gym is provided from the street. It is considered that on balance this arrangement is acceptable and this will be an issue for the building management team to monitor going forward.

The DFS team and the CIS report makes a number of recommendations on the specification of fixtures and fittings within the development, lighting of the building entrances and use of high speed shutters to the car park. It is considered that these recommendations sit outside the remit of planning. However, to ensure the applicant has due regard to these recommendations the applicant’s attention will be drawn to these points by an informative.

It is considered that the information submitted demonstrates that the scheme has been designed to ensure that it does not increase opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour in accordance with UDP Policy DES10. In addition, the redevelopment of the site presents an opportunity to improve security in the area through the introduction of increased activity and active frontages onto streets.

Highways

The planning application has been supported by a Transport Assessment (TA) which includes a draft Travel Plan (TP) which were submitted under the 2017 application.

The scheme provides for 8 car parking spaces; 1 of which is allocated for disabled use. This equates to 9% provision for the entire development. Given the restrictive car parking provision this will serve to reduce future

Page 154 car generated traffic from the development as such the proposal will be unlikely to result in a severe highway impact as defined within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

The TA confirms that there is likely to be more demand for car parking than the available car parking provision provided at the development. Therefore in order to mitigate this impact the scheme needs to include measures to discourage on-street parking and to promote sustainable travel by providing more choice of transport modes at the outset to ensure future occupiers are aware of such facilities to not rely on a private vehicles.

The Housing Planning Guidance, para 4.8, recognises that the Ordsall Lane Riverside Corridor has generally lower public transport accessibility than other areas of the Regional Centre. The current bus services provide a limited frequency service. There are currently two bus services running on Ordsall Lane, the 70/73 is an hourly service while the 294 runs only two services per day. A further hourly bus service runs along part of Oldfield Road turning down Robert Hall Street. Additional services are available in other areas of Ordsall and on Regent Road, which involves walking over 800m. It is considered that this public transport service would be unlikely to encourage significant modal shift which is required to justify the low levels of car parking proposed. The City’s highways officers consider it is important to provide additional services to influence people’s travel patterns in order to increase the sustainability of the development and to reduce the impact to the local highway network. In this regard the applicant has agreed to make a financial contribution to improve public transport routes in the Ordsall Riverside Corridor.

The applicants have also submitted a draft travel plan in order to promote the use of public transport. This has been reviewed and it is considered that the Travel Plan Framework provides a starting point from which a Full Residential Travel Plan can be prepared. The Travel Plan (TP) will however need to provide further detail to ensure that the document provides a firm commitment to encouraging the use of sustainable transport including.  The applicant needs to provide incentives for future occupier to encourage the use of sustainable transport modes i.e. to provide bus and tram travel tickets, car clubs and EV charging points;  Site specific Travel Pack should be produced and provided before occupation, to encourage use of sustainable transport modes;  Contact details of the Travel Plan Coordinator needs to be provided and in place prior to occupation;  With regards to cycle facilities further details are required and the cycle facilities should be periodically reviewed and additional capacity should be added as required.

Given the above, an updated TP should be submitted to the LPA prior to the development being first occupied, so that an improved package of measures/incentives can be agreed. The revised document would be secured by condition and the identified timescale is designed to ensure that the appropriate measures are in place at the point at which residents move into the development, so that they are encouraged to change their travel pattern behaviours from the outset. The condition would also require the submission of a further update to the TP within six months of first occupation, so that the actual travel patterns of residents can be surveyed and reviewed on an annual basis thereafter.

In terms of cycle provision this scheme would provide for 96 cycle spaces. This cycle provision accords with the cycle strategy across the wider site which was approved in the 2017 scheme.

The applicant has also agreed to provide a financial obligation towards the lease of a car club vehicle.

In terms of measures to discourage on-street car parking it is acknowledged that on-street parking provides a poor pedestrian environment therefore there is a requirement to identify specific potential problematic areas and provide waiting restrictions/traffic management scheme to prevent further parking. The applicant has agreed to provide a financial sum, which will be directed to a review of the existing TROs in the area and the implementation of amended or new TROs where required in line with the legal procedure.

The vehicle access point into the new development is provided into the car parking area off Worrall Street. Visibility splays at this access point accord with national guidance contained within Manual for Streets. An on- street servicing area is provided for the development on Worrall Street. A vehicle swept path demonstrates that the proposed development can be serviced appropriately and safely from Worrall Street. The proposed servicing arrangements are therefore acceptable.

The Highway Authority have requested that any amendment to the carriageway needs to be re-instated using similar materials, any redundant access points need to be reinstated as continuous footway and provision of

Page 155 tactile paving either side of the car park access and service access will be required. Also any lighting column affected by this development will have to be relocated and upgraded. Highways officers have noted that the applicant will need to continue to liaise with the Highway Authority in respect of S50/S177/S278 Agreements; this is highlighted to the applicant through informative.

In light of the above it is considered that the proposed development and parking provision is acceptable and in accordance with the thrust of UDP policies A2, A8 and A10.

Flood Risk, Surface Water and Drainage

The application site lies within Flood Zone 2 and 3 and is also within a critical drainage area and therefore the application has been supported by a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and addendum report which was submitted through the application process for the 2017 application. The development has been designed with the residential accommodation at ground floor level having raised floor levels to afford protection to residents in the event of a flood. Safe access and egress from the building is available via Worrall Street in the 1 in 100 year flood event. The FRA has been reviewed by both the EA and the City’s drainage engineer.

In terms of flood risk the EA and the City’s drainage engineer have raised no objection to the scheme subject to conditions to secure mitigation in line with the FRA including safe access and egress, finished floor levels, flood resilient construction and provision of a flood plan as secured through the 2017 permission.

In terms of surface water the City’s drainage engineer has recommended a condition securing a surface water drainage scheme which would secure either 50% of the existing (or to greenfield runoff, whichever is greater) which uses sustainable drainage methods.

In light of the above it is considered that the proposed development would accord with UDP Policy EN19 and the Flood Risk and Development Planning Guidance.

Ecology

The site is located adjacent to the River Irwell which is identified in the UDP as a Wildlife Corridor and the development also would involve substantial demolition therefore the application has been supported by an Ecology Report. The report is identical to that submitted under the 2017 application.

The survey recorded the following habitats on site; scrub, areas of hard standing; and buildings, and noted that no invasive plant species were recorded within the survey area. The report demonstrates that the site is of low ecological value and GMEU agreed with this point in the 2017 application and have confirmed in their current comments on the scheme that these points are still applicable.

Bats -

As part of the ecology report the buildings on site were assessed as having negligible bat roosting potential. GMEU disagrees with this due to the proximity of the site to the River lrwell but does accept that the buildings are low risk and therefore no further surveys or information are required. An informative will be placed on the planning decision reminding the applicant of their legal responsibilities in respect of this protected species.

Impact on the River lrwell –

GMEU noted in their comments for the 2017 scheme that no information has been supplied on the potential impact to the River lrwell in terms of the Water Framework Directive or on how the development will enhance the river corridor in-line with the Salford development plan aspiration for the river corridor.

The main risks of the development are during the demolition and site clearance process, when dust, debris and pollutants could potentially have negative impacts on the River lrwell and post development through increased runoff and discharge to the River both in terms of volume and pollutants. GMEU are happy that the risks can be controlled through the construction method statement condition.

GMEU note that loss of the scrub along the boundary between the existing site and the riverside walkway could have a negative impact on ecology. They note that whilst planting is proposed elsewhere around the development potentially mitigating for this loss the most appropriate location for planting would be along the

Page 156 lrwell boundary as this would enhance the functionality of the River lrwell as a green infrastructure asset, both recreationally and for wildlife. Whilst this position is noted, the LPA are of the view that the riverside walkway should be free from obstruction to allow pedestrians and cyclists to pass freely. The applicant has been asked to consider a green wall at basement level along this frontage however they set out in the 2017 that due to a combination of excessive installation costs and an on-going maintenance regime a green wall is not a viable option. Given the scheme is the same as the scheme which has been minded to approve therefore it would be unreasonable for the application to fail on these grounds.

In terms of drainage post development, GMEU have requested that a drainage scheme be designed to have no negative impact on the River Irwell. A drainage scheme is to be secured by condition and an informative is recommended to highlight this requirement to the applicant.

It is considered that securing a construction method statement and drainage scheme will ensure that this development does not have an unacceptable impact upon the water quality of the River Irwell in line with the Water Framework Directive.

Pollution

Air Quality -

The development is not within the Greater Manchester Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) however the scale of the development is likely to lead to a negative impact on air quality in the city region by virtue of additional traffic emissions generated as a result of the development.

Further, the cumulative impact of a number of developments (regardless of scale) requires assessment to ensure that overall development does not cause a deterioration of air quality in the area. The application is supported by an air quality impact assessment which considers the construction and operational phase of the development.

With respect to the construction phase of the development, the conclusions of the report are accepted and the recommended mitigation should be incorporated into a Construction Method Statement (CMS).

With regard to the operational phase of the development, the air quality assessment does not take account of cumulative development, of which there are a number of large scale developments in the vicinity. The quantum of development however has not changed from that recommended approval in 2017 and therefore there are no objections to the scheme in this regard.

Noise -

A noise impact assessment has been submitted to support the application. The assessment relates to the previous 2017 application which incorporated three sites and as such only the parts of the report pertinent to this site have been reviewed. The noise monitoring to inform the assessment was undertaken in April 2017 and as such is considered to be representative of today’s conditions. Commentary is provided within the report on the likely noise impact of nearby commercial uses.

The report confirms that, with mitigation, the internal noise standards for habitable rooms as defined by BS8233:2014 (Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction from Buildings) will be met. However there is predicted to be an exceedance of the WHO criteria for external amenity spaces on all façades, with the maximum exceedance predicted to be over 15 dB LAEQ,16hr above the lower WHO criteria for moderate annoyance.

It is noted that the external amenity spaces referred to are private outdoor balconies rather than private gardens, and it is accepted that residents living in accommodation in an area such as this will, in all likelihood, accept a higher noise climate on balconies.

The City’s Environmental Consultant has reviewed all information submitted and is satisfied with the findings and the conclusions drawn. Conditions have been recommended in respect of noise and ventilation to safeguard amenity of future occupiers.

Page 157 Land Contamination -

The planning application has been supported by a phase I preliminary risk assessment. The report comprises a review of historical mapping, geological and environmental data, as well as a site walkover in order to produce an initial conceptual site model for the proposed development. The report identifies a potential risk with regards to human health, controlled waters and hazardous ground gas and recommends an intrusive investigation in order to assess the potential pollutant linkages further. The City’s Environmental Consultants have considered the information and agree with the recommendations of the report. Contaminated land conditions are recommended in this regard.

Sustainability

The City Council’s Sustainable Design and Construction SPD seeks to ensure that sustainable design and construction measures are integrated into new developments. Compliance with this SPD is demonstrated through submission of a sustainability checklist which the applicant has submitted in support of the application. The applicant has also provided details of how the design and construction of the scheme would minimise energy consumption and maximise sustainability. The statement confirms that the scheme has been designed and will be constructed to exceed the minimum standard of the 2013 Building Regulations.

The approach adopts a ‘fabric first’ design that does not rely on high performance with careful consideration of the orientation, window opening and glazing specifications.

In addition to this the following are to be incorporated into the scheme to minimize the energy consumption and CO2 emissions:

 The scheme will provide an on-site DNO utility sub-station and a main LV switch room. This will include power factor correction equipment to ensure an efficient delivery of power to each consumer.  Energy efficient LED lighting, with daylight sensing technology.  Enhanced space heating controls, controlled centrally within each apartment and react quickly to offset heat loses.  Increased hot water generating efficiencies which means each apartment will have a hot water cylinder and can take advantage of off peak electricity or electricity on site, if installed. Water storage and booster rooms are located within the building. Heat recovery ventilation which will provide a supply of fresh clean air to lounges and bedrooms and recover heat from extract systems serving kitchens and bathrooms  Natural ventilation in the form of opening windows with mechanical ventilation in order to minimise external noise  Gravity fed soil and waste water drainage system.  Water consumption will be limited to 125l per person per day in accordance with part G of Building Regulations.

The applicant has also reviewed renewable and low carbon technologies including district heating connection (not available locally), air source heat pumps, solar hot water, small scale CHP generation and photovoltaic. Photovoltaics will be considered as part of the wider scheme (2017 application). Given the roof top amenity space on this block there is limited scope to accommodate them within this development.

It is considered that the development would meet the City Council's aspirations in terms of sustainability and the requirements of the SPD and is therefore considered to be acceptable in this regard.

Planning Obligations

The application proposes the redevelopment of the site to provide 86 residential apartments, 7 duplex units would be provided but given they do not have their own direct access from the street they would not fall within the definition of townhouses as outlined in the Planning Obligations SPD.

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

Page 158 As noted within the Highways section of this report, it is considered that measures are required to promote the use of the existing bus service which will improve accessibility and create a place where residents are not reliant on car-related travel. As such the applicant has agreed a financial contribution of £146,200 towards promoting existing bus services. A contribution of £23,125 will also be secured to cover the lease costs for a car club vehicle and also to review and provide for any TROs to mitigate the impacts of on street car parking as a result of this development.

In the 2017 application, the applicant proposed to undertake public realm works in lieu of any financial payment. These public realm works include the extension to Dyer Street and widening of the riverside walkway. The riverside walkway widening will be secured under this scheme. The extension of Dyer Street will be secured when the wider site is bought forward for development. The landscaping condition will secure the timetable for implementation of the riverside walkway. It is recommended that a clause be included in the Section 106 agreement to safeguard the permissive rights of way along the widened river walkway.

Conclusion

This application seeks to redevelop a former employment site to create a residential-led development. This is in accordance with UDP Policy MX 1 and the Ordsall Riverside Planning Guidance for the area. The applicant has sought to demonstrate how the scheme delivers the aspiration of the Ordsall Riverside Planning Guidance, in terms of providing active frontages without fettering the development opportunities of remaining sites within the immediate area. The development would not give rise to unacceptable impacts on residential amenity, for existing or future residents, with respect to loss of light, privacy or visual amenity, or to noise and air pollution. There will be ecological impacts however it is considered that these can be appropriately mitigated by the proposed landscaping scheme and the imposition of conditions. The applicant has identified acceptable strategies for preventing opportunities dealing with land contamination and the drainage of the site. The development has incorporated a number of sustainability and energy saving measures into its design and layout. The Highways Authority considers that the scheme is unlikely to result in a severe highway impact subject to mitigation in the form of planning obligations. In this regards a financial contribution of £169,325 would be secured, which would be used to promote existing bus services, review of TROs and the provision of a car club vehicle. Overall it is considered that the proposal would make a positive contribution to the regeneration of the Ordsall Riverside area and represents a sustainable form of development that complies with the relevant policies within the City of Salford’s UDP and the NPPF.

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:

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

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

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

Conditions –

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

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

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

Page 159 Ground floor plan 2016-187-C220 First floor plan 2016-187-C221 Second-sixth floor plan 2016-187-C222 Seventh floor plan 2016-187-C223 Eighth floor plan 2016-187-C224 Elevations Block C 2016-187-C225

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

3. Prior to the commencement of development (except for demolition and enabling works) a Phase 2 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

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.

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

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

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

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

6. If, during the course of development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present, no further works shall be undertaken in the affected area and the contamination shall be reported to the Local Planning Authority as soon as reasonably practicable (but within a maximum of 5 days from the find). Prior to further works being carried out in the identified area, a further assessment shall be made and appropriate action agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

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

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

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

Page 160 8. 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 should demonstrate that it has been prepared in liaison with other development sites within 500m of the site boundary. The approved statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall include:

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

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

9. No development shall take place until a scheme for surface water drainage for the site using sustainable drainage methods and which includes details of how water quality will be improved, and how existing surface water discharge rates reduced to either 50% of the existing (or to greenfield runoff, whichever is greater), has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation or use of the development hereby approved unless alternative timescales have been agreed in writing as part of the strategy.

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

10. No development shall take place until a scheme detailing flood resilience measures to be incorporated into the development up to the flood level predicted for the 1:1,000 year flood event as set out in the Manchester Ship Canal 2010 Study has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full and retained thereafter.

Page 161 Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding from overland flows in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and policy FRD 7 of the Flood Risk and Development Supplementary Planning Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework.

11. Foul and surface water shall be drained on separate systems.

Reason: To secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of flooding and pollution in accordance with policy EN17 and EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

12. The finished floor levels hereby approved shall be set no lower than 25.64m above Ordnance Datum (AOD) as set out in section 5.1 of the FRA addendum by HaskoningDHV dated 23rd October 2017

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding from overland flows in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the Flood Risk and Development Supplementary Planning Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework..

13. Prior to the occupation of the development a detailed scheme identifying and providing safe route(s) into and out of the site to an appropriate safe haven and detailed flood plan should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved system shall be brought into use prior to the occupation of any unit and shall be retained and revised at all times thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure safe access and egress from and to the site in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the Flood Risk and Development Supplementary Planning Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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

Within six months of the development hereby approved being brought into first occupation, a further, updated Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The agreed Travel Plan shall be implemented and reviewed in accordance with the timetable embodied therein.

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

15. The following noise standards shall be attained with respect to the proposed residential accommodation as stipulated in BS8233:2014 - Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings: (i) internal noise levels of less than 30 dB LAeq,8hour within bedrooms between 23.00 hours and 07.00 hours (ii) internal noise levels of less than 35 dB LAeq,16 hour within living rooms between 07.00 hours and 23:00 hours (iii) internal noise levels of less than 40 dB LAeq,16hour within dining rooms between 07.00 and 23.00 hours (iv) typical individual noise events from road traffic shall not be in excess of 45 dB LAmax in bedrooms between 23.00 and 07.00 hours

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

16. Prior to the commencement of construction, excluding demolitions and works below ground, a scheme to demonstrate the use of ventilation measures which removes the need for future residents to open windows for summer cooling and rapid ventilation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved ventilation measures shall ensure the standards in condition 15

Page 162 above are not compromised and shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the development and thereafter be retained.

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

17. Prior to the commencement of construction, excluding demolitions and works below ground, full details of noise mitigation measures for the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented on site prior to the occupation of the development and retained thereafter.

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

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

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

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

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

19. Notwithstanding the details submitted with the planning application, and prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, the applicant shall submit to and have approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, details of the sustainability initiatives incorporated into the development. These initiatives shall reflect those highlighted in the sustainability checklist submitted in support of the application and shall include, but not be limited to:  Insulation exceeding the requirements of Building Regulations;  Energy efficient appliances; and  Water minimisation measures such as low flow toilets and showers.

Reason: To ensure an energy efficient development in accordance with the provisions of Retained Policy EN21 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the Council’s Sustainable Design and Construction Supplementary Planning Document.

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

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

Page 163 21. Notwithstanding the details submitted to date, the development hereby approved shall not be brought into first occupation until detailed plans showing the location and arrangement of on-street car parking and loading arrangements along Worrall Street has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and be retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of pedestrian safety and the safe operation of the highway network, having regard to Policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Notes to Applicant

1. STANDING ADVICE - DEVELOPMENT LOW RISK AREA

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

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

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

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

3. With respect to gas protection measures the applicant’s attention is drawn to BRE 414, Protection Measures for Housing on Gas-Contaminated Sites. In addition the requirements of BS8845:2015 Code of Practise for the design of protective measures for methane and carbon dioxide ground gases for new buildings should be followed for installation and the verification requirements of CIRIA C735 Good Practice on the Testing and Verification of Protection Systems for Buildings against Hazardous Ground Gasses will need to be submitted. 4. Verification of gas protection systems needs to be undertaken during the construction process, or the applicant may not be able to discharge the condition. This can lead to issues with property searches and / or mortgage at a later time. 5. In respect of condition 6, please see recommendations of the Worrall Street Development - Air Quality Assessment ref I&BPB6277R001.F0.1 dated 28th April 2017 and comments from the Local Highway Authority dated 26th June 2017.

6. All species of bats found in the UK receive a high level of legal protection under the terms of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. They are mobile in their habits and can turn up in the most unlikely places at any time of year. Precautions should be taken throughout works, at any time of year, with the possible presence of bats borne in mind. If bats are found at any time during works, then work should cease immediately and advice sought from Natural England or a suitably qualified bat worker.

7. In respect of condition 9, the submission should demonstrate that the disposal of surface and foul water will have no negative impacts on the River Irwell in accordance with the Water Framework Directive

8. - The developer shall contact the Local Highway Authority to arrange a full dilapidation/Condition Survey of all adopted highways surrounding the site prior to works commencing on site; - The applicant has to enter into a S50/S278 Agreement to facilitate associated highway works; - The applicant has to enter into a S177 agreement for any building over hang over the adopted highway/footway and over any part of the Riverside Walk footpath; - Applications for all forms of highway permits/licenses shall be made in advanced of any works being undertaken on the adopted highway Note: NO boundary fencing shall be erected or positioned on any

Page 164 part of the adopted highway with first seeking the relevant permits/licenses from the Local Highway Authority; and - To discuss the above or for requests for general Information regarding the adopted highway network shall be directed to the Local Highway Authority- 0161 603 4046

9. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the letter from United Utilities dated 13th March 2018.

10. In respect of condition 14 the revised Travel Plan shall include:  The applicant needs to provide incentives for future occupier to encourage the use of sustainable transport modes ie to provide bus and tram travel tickets, car clubs and EV charging points;  Site specific Travel Pack should be produced and provided before occupation, to encourage use of sustainable transport modes;  Contact details of the Travel Plan Coordinator needs to be provided and in place prior to occupation;  With regards to cycle facilities further details are required and the cycle facilities should be periodically reviewed and additional capacity should be added as required.

11. The Environment Agency officer the following advice:

Model Procedures and good practice

We recommend that developers should:

Follow the risk management framework provided in CLR11, Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, when dealing with land affected by contamination. Refer to the Environment Agency Guiding principles for land contamination for the type of information that we required in order to assess risks to controlled waters from the site. The Local Authority can advise on risk to other receptors, such as human health. Consider using the National Quality Mark Scheme for Land Contamination Management which involves the use of competent persons to ensure that land contamination risks are appropriately managed.

Refer to the contaminated land pages on GOV.UK for more information.

The redevelopment of the site may give rise to waste management issues and we would advise the Applicant as follows:

Reuse of material on site:

The CLAIRE Definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice (version 2) provides operators with a framework for determining whether or not excavated material arising from site during remediation and/or land development works are waste or have ceased to be waste. Under the Code of Practice:

 excavated materials that are recovered via a treatment operation can be re-used on-site providing they are treated to a standard such that they fit for purpose and unlikely to cause pollution  treated materials can be transferred between sites as part of a hub and cluster project  some naturally occurring clean material can be transferred directly between sites.

Developers should ensure that all contaminated materials are adequately characterised both chemically and physically, and that the permitting status of any proposed on site operations are clear. If in doubt, we should be contacted for advice at an early stage to avoid any delays.

We recommend that developers should refer to:

 the Position statement on the Definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice and;  the Environmental regulations page on GOV.UK.

Waste to be taken off site:

Contaminated soil that is, or must be disposed of, is waste. Therefore, its handling, transport, treatment and disposal is subject to waste management legislation, which includes:

Page 165  Duty of Care Regulations 1991  Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005  Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2017  The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011

Developers should ensure that all contaminated materials are adequately characterised both chemically and physically in line with relevant guidance and that the permitting status of any proposed treatment or disposal activity is clear.

Prior to commencing construction works on the site, ensure the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has identified potential risks and appropriate control measures to ensure that all staff are aware of the pollution prevention requirements, particularly when working near the watercourse. This is to ensure no pollution to the watercourse is caused by the works. Please refer to our pollution prevention guidance pages at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/pollution-prevention-for-businesses

11. The landscaping strategy for the riverside walkway shall ensure the route is kept free from obstruction to ensure that pedestrians and cyclists can freely pass.

Page 166 Agenda Item 5i

APPLICATION No: 14/65186/FUL APPLICANT: Countryside Properties (UK) Ltd LOCATION: Newhaven Business Park , Barton Lane, Eccles, Salford, M30 0HH PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing structures and erection of 244 dwellings with associated works. WARD: Barton

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to Newhaven Business Centre which is located off Barton Lane in Eccles. The site extends to 6.3ha and is bounded by dwellings along the north, east and west boundaries. Along the northern boundary where the site is accessed from Barton Lane the site is level. The site sits approximately 0.5m lower than dwellings along Boardman Street. The northern section of the site, adjacent to Harecastle Avenue, has comparable ground level to neighbouring properties. Along this western boundary the site stays level but the ground level along Harecastle and Blisworth Avenue falls away. At the southern part of the application site the land is approximately 3m higher than the properties on Caledonian Drive. Adjoining the southern boundary there is a scrap metal processing business, operated by EMR, and beyond this is the Manchester Ship Canal. The EMR site sits at a lower level which is approximately 3m lower than the application site.

The site is relatively flat and previously accommodated a number of single storey/two storey buildings which were in commercial/industrial use however most of these have now been demolished and the site is vacant. The western part of the site is used for the storage of heavy goods vehicles.

Page 167 Description of Proposal

Planning permission is sought for the erection of 244 dwellings and associated works which would include the demolition of all the remaining buildings within the site. As noted above many of the buildings have been demolished however the gate house into the site remains and there is a building within the part of the site used for the storage of heavy goods vehicles.

The scheme originally submitted in August 2014 was for 212 dwellings on site. However during the course of the application and to address the concerns with regard to noise the layout of the scheme was updated to include the provision of apartments and increase the number of units to 258.

A revised scheme and supporting information for the development of 258 units was submitted on 12th May 2015. Following further dialogue with the Local Planning Authority the layout of the scheme has been amended to that which is currently being considered for 244 units on the site.

The latest scheme for consideration proposes 244 dwellings across the site in the following mix:

House Type Number of units Three bed dwelling 148 Four bed dwelling 48 One bed apartment 24 Two bed apartment 24

There would be a split of market housing and private rental dwellings, none of the units on site would be of affordable tenure.

There would be a mix of detached, semi-detached and terraced properties within the development that would be either 2 or 2½ storey. The dwellings would be constructed from brick with tiled, pitched roofs and would have a traditional appearance. There would also be two apartment blocks, within the scheme, which would be 3 storeys. Like the dwellings the apartments would be constructed from brick but would have a flat roof and a more contemporary appearance.

All the dwellings would have rear gardens and across the site 440 car parking spaces would be provided either within curtilage or on shared parking areas which equates to 2 spaces per dwelling and 1 space per apartment.

Vehicle access into the site would be taken from Barton Lane. Within the site there would be a series of circular roads with various cul-de-sacs and shared driveways off them. The dwellings would be positioned to front Barton Lane, the internal roads and shared spaces within the development.

The proposal would include the 5,762sqm of open space provision along the southern boundary of the site. Landscape details have been submitted with the application and show that this space will be grassed with raised mounds, there would be a footpath through the space and the area will include trees and shrubs. No seating areas are proposed.

The proposed development would also include the provision of a 5m high wooden acoustic barrier along the southern boundary of the site.

The application has been accompanied by a range of supporting documents as follows: -

Document Submitted with Updated for the Updated for the original application revised scheme for revised scheme for for 224 units 258 units 244 units Air Quality Assessment X X X Crime Impact Statement X X Design and Access X X Statement Employment Land Report X Flood Risk Assessment X X

Page 168 Noise Impact Assessment X X X Phase 1 Habitat Survey and X X Arboricultural Assessment Phase 1 & 2 Geo X X Environmental Site Assessment Planning Statement X X Site Waste Management X X Plan Transport Assessment X X X Viability Appraisal X X X

Relevant Site History

08/56427/FUL - Retention of a Biomass incinerator and associated plant. Application approved 23.01.2009

07/54847/FUL - Installation of roller shutters to front door and windows. Application approved 10.12.2007

05/50853/TEL56 - Prior Notification for the installation of a 15m telecommunications lattice tower, three antennas, one 300mm and two 600mm dish antenna, radio equipment housing and ancillary development. Application approved 19.07.2005

05/50259/COU - Continued of use of land for overnight bus parking and retention of three floodlights, a fuel bowser and a metal storage container. Application refused 24.05.2005 for the following reasons:-

1. Insufficient details have been submitted to enable the full implications of the proposed development to be assessed. 2. The development is having an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of the neighbouring residential occupiers by reason of noise and general disturbance contrary to Policy DEV1 and EN20 of the Adopted City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and Policy DES7 and EN14 of the Revised Replacement City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

99/39999/FUL - Continued use of premises as a commercial and trailer rental depot and siting of portable office building. Application approved 04.02.2000

99/38911/FUL - Erection of single storey side extension to existing units. Application approved 24.03.1999

97/37515/TPDC - Erection of factory extensions with office extensions at first floor and creation of 48 additional parking spaces. Application approved 26.02.1998

96/35638/TPDC - Outline application for the siting of 33 dwellings. Application refused 07.11.1996 for the following reasons:-

1. The proposed access from Barton Lane via Warburton Street cannot be achieved without serious detriment to highway safety and accordingly the proposed housing site does not have a satisfactory means of access. 2. The proposed development of the site for residential purposes is incompatible with the existing neighbouring industrial development which by reason of its close proximity and character would not be conducive to the creation of an acceptable living environment for the future residents of the proposed scheme.

The applicant did not appeal this decision.

96/35199/TPDC - Use of land for storage of equipment and container - Application refused 13.06.1996 for the following reasons:-

1. The proposed development would result in considerable loss of amenity by virtue of increased noise, traffic and appearance of the site for neighbouring residents.

Page 169 96/35004/TPDC – Erection of factory extension with office extension above at first floor level. Application approved 25.04.1996

95/34753/TPDC - Change of use to commercial vehicle and trailer truck rental depot and siting of portable office building. Application approved 8.2.1996

Publicity

When the application was first submitted it was advertised in both the press and by site notice, detail of which are set out below:

Site Notice: Non HH Article 13 Date Displayed: 20 August 2014 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Salford Advertiser Date Published: 21 August 2014 Reason: Article 15 Standard Press Notice

Neighbour Notification

137 neighbours were notified of the planning application on the 12th August 2014 when the application was originally submitted.

Amended plans were submitted and the number of units on the site was increased to 258. Following this the neighbours were then notified on the 12th May 2015 that the description of the scheme had been amended and new plans and additional information had been received.

On the 8th December 2016 neighbours were notified that additional information had been received in respect of noise and were offered the opportunity to comment.

The scheme was then updated again, to that which is being considered in this report for 244 units. Neighbours were notified on the 23rd November 2017 that the description of the scheme had been amended and new plans and additional information had been received.

Representations

Cllr Lancaster has objected to the application on the basis of future proposals for the access road to the lorry parking which currently takes place on part of the site being relocated from its current position on to Barton Road.

In respect of concerns regarding the trailer park and access, the applicant has confirmed that the contractual position is that trailer park will be acquired with the former business park on receipt of a satisfactory planning consent to ensure they get vacant possession of the entire site before works commence.

Eight letters have been received objecting to the proposal on the following grounds:

C = Comment R = Response

C Concerns that the boundary wall to the rear of dwellings along Harecastle Avenue will be removed. The objector want this to remain in situ to protect privacy R The applicant has confirmed that this boundary wall will be retained and the new fence line will run on the inside of this. The only element the applicant may look to remove would be the sections of palisade fencing that sit on top of the wall. C The development will devalue property. R This is not a material planning issue and therefore cannot be afforded any weight in the determination of this planning application. C Further housing will place additional demand on school places within the City R Planning obligations will be sought from the development to mitigate its impact and if considered necessary monies can be directed towards school places. C Proposal will increase traffic and increase congestion along Barton Lane during construction and post

Page 170 development R The traffic impacts of the development when complete have been assessed in the officer report. It is appreciated that during a construction period neighbouring residents may experience issues as identified above. However construction activity is temporary in nature and considered to be an acceptable consequence of development. Conditions will also be imposed to address amenity related issues during the construction phase of development. C On street car parking along Barton Lane makes parts of the road impassable at peak time; measures should be put in place to prevent this. R This appears to be an existing problem; it is not considered that the traffic generate from this development will unacceptably increase parking along Barton Lane. All dwellings within the development will be provided with sufficient off street car parking provision. C Question the robustness of the noise assessment and monitoring R Noise matters including noise modelling has been scrutinised during this planning application. More detail on this can be found in the noise section of the officer’s report. C The increase in cars from the development will impact on air quality R The air quality impacts of the development have been considered and this is discussed in the air quality section of the report. C The proposal for housing will mean free living for people on benefits R This is not a material planning matter and therefore cannot be afforded any weight in the determination of this planning application. C The loss of employment land will be a loss of revenue for the council through business rates R The loss of employment land has been considered in the officer’s report. Loss of revenue is not a material planning issue. C The development will detrimentally impact upon amenity of neighbouring residents R The impact of the development on the neighbouring residents has been fully considered in the amenity section of this report. C There are a lot of empty houses and flats in the area so why are they building more? R Although there is a five year supply of deliverable dwellings this does not mean that planning applications can be refused because of that. To maintain a five year supply the council has to continue to grant planning permission for sustainable development. In the Eccles neighbourhood area (which comprises on the wards of Barton, Winton and Eccles) as of January 2018 2.74% of dwellings were vacant. This compares to a vacancy rate of 3.16% across the city as a whole. As a comparison, in January 2017 the vacancy rate in the Eccles neighbourhood was 3.32% and across the city was 2.91%. Therefore it can be seen that vacancies have fallen in Eccles over the last 12 months. In a functioning housing market it is normal for there to be empty homes in order to facilitate property transactions. It is normal for a vacancy rate of 3% at any given point in time. Given the vacancy rate is below 3% in Eccles it is not considered that there is an over concentration of vacant properties in the Eccles neighbourhood. C Documents were not available on line and consultation periods were not long enough and insufficient information has been submitted to establish what is happening on the site. R There is no evidence to show that documents were not available on line. Consultation periods for responses have been in line with National and Local regulations. C Development will be significantly higher than properties along Blisworth and Harecastle by reason of land levels difference impacting upon amenity R There is a land level difference along the western boundary this has been considered when assessing the impact of the development on neighbouring residents. See the amenity section of the report. C The development will lead to a loss of light to neighbouring properties and gardens R Loss of light and overbearingness has been considered by the Local Planning Authority see the amenity section of the appraisal for more information. C Drainage concerns water already leaks through the boundary treatment on Blisworth and Harecastle and that the new development will have significant impact on drainage of existing residents. R A drainage scheme for the site will be designed to mitigate impacts of development, water that is collected on site will be dealt on site and discharged in accordance with agreements with UU. C Concerns about proposed boundary treatment along the west boundary and land stability concerns as development is in close proximity to this wall. R As noted above, the western boundary of the site is to be retained. Ground stability is not a planning consideration here and will be a matter for the applicant to consider during the construction.

Page 171 C Would like assurance that the ecology recommendations are put in place to protect wildlife around the site. R An ecology assessment has been undertaken by the applicant and updated during the course of the application. GMEU have reviewed this and their recommendations will be secured through conditions and Informatives, where appropriate. C Note the importance that contamination matters are dealt with correctly R Issues on contamination have been considered and appropriate remediation works will be secured by condition. C The objector wants to understand what security measures will be in place during the construction period R This matter will be considered under the Construction Method Statement. This statement requires community engagement so if residents are experiencing issues they can raise this with the developer.

One resident has been in contact asking when the application will be approved.

A further resident is concerned that the vacant site is becoming a nuisance and is being used as a racing site for bikers which is creating noise to the detriment of the area.

An objection has been received from European Metal Recycling (EMR) which operates from the site adjacent to the southern boundary of the application site. EMR have made several representations over the course of the planning application objecting to the fact that inappropriate mitigation measures have been put forward to ensure that EMR operating conditions are not compromised by the residential development. More detail is outlined in the report below.

Consultations

For the avoidance of doubt these are the latest consultees comments in respect of the amended scheme submitted in November 2017 for 244 units.

Design For Security (DFS) – Support the application subject to the development being designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations contained within the submitted Crime Impact Statement. In further comments on the amended plans the DFS team support the application noting the requirement to construct the development to Secured by Design standards, the latest being SBD New Homes 2016.

Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management – No objection subject to a condition securing a surface water drainage scheme. Highways – No objections subject to conditions in respect of the submission of access details, highway works and Traffic Regulation Orders, the provision of parking spaces, the provision of visibility splays and the provision of a Construction Management Plan.

Environment Agency – No objections subject to condition relating to contaminated land.

In respect of noise, the EA have concerns regarding both the adequacy of the mitigation to the residential units within the proposed development in bringing noise levels from neighbouring activities down to acceptable limits, and the approach taken by the applicant in justifying any remaining noise from such sources that would otherwise be considered as having a significant impact or significant adverse impact on the residential units within the proposed development. As such, the risk of changes in, or deterioration of that mitigation over time, and the likelihood of complaints in any case remains an issue that could lead to a protracted and costly dispute. In the event that the impact assessment is accepted and the residential development goes ahead the EA would appreciate some recognition that ongoing mitigation of remaining noise levels lies with the residents of the new housing estate and not with the operator. In addition the EA would appreciate some sharing of the plans around the adoption of the barrier.

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit – No objections were raised to the initial submission subject to conditions relating to nesting birds, invasive species and submission of a landscape management plan. An informative has been recommended in respect of bats. Updated comments on the revised application also raise no objection to the scheme but include additional conditions surface water in light of the Water Framework Directive.

Page 172 Manchester Ship Canal Company – Request that consideration is given to the visual and acoustic mitigation measures proposed for the residential properties to prevent any complaints from residents that would have the potential to undermine the established port-use of the EMR site. They request that mitigation is future-proofed to prevent any complaints. They have advised that port activity along the Canal and the use of the EMR site is likely to increase over time, thus increasing the potential for noise activity at the site.

A further letter was received which objects to the planning application on the grounds that no suitable mitigation measures are appropriate and the proposed use is incompatible with the operations on the EMR site. They believe that the application will have detrimental impacts on the workings of an operational port facility and would undermine the current and continued use at this site.

They note that EMR have been operating from this site since 1984, this wharf has been in operation since 1894 and that vessels can transit the canal 7 days a week without restrictions. MSCC refute claims that ship loading is a rare occurrence and provide the following through puts for the EMR site:

2010 106,666 tonnes (28 vessels) 2011 103,441 tonnes (28 vessels) 2012 41,304 tonnes (10 vessels) 2013 46,616 tonnes (11 vessels) 2014 35,721 tonnes (9 vessels) 2015 40,592 tonnes (11 vessels) – to August

Noting that EMR react to commodity price and product demand therefore the frequency of vessels is haphazard.

They conclude by confirming that EMR is a canal side business which MSCC want to promote and support and highlight that this business helps to reduce lorry miles from the roads.

In relation to the latest plans Peel Port reaffirm their objection to the scheme that the mitigation measures are not enough to mitigate the long standing noise produced at the EMR wharf.

They state in the letter that the EMR wharf is regionally important for the movement of scrap metal. They consider that the introduction of a non-compatible use would eventually lead to the closure of the facility, due to the strong likelihood of complaints, and a difficulty in being able to promote other uses on the site. Which will affect the viability of the Manchester Ship Canal in the long term.

They state that the site removes 882,400 lorry miles (including empty backhaul) from the congested roads in the region and highlights that objectors to the scheme have commented on highway impacts.

In respect of noise Peel Ports do not consider appropriate noise monitoring/modelling has been undertaken in respect of vessels along the canal that can use the canal unrestricted and note that these activities have been subject to noise complaints from existing residents who live further away from the canal than this site. Reaffirming that the canal can be used in the day as well as at night.

Peel Ports note that surface water discharge into the canal has to be agreed.

Finally they point out that Peel Ports objected to the inclusion of the EMR site for residential use within the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework.

Urban Vision Environment (Air and Noise) – Have no objection to the proposal on the grounds of air quality subject to conditions. Consider that the noise impact from traffic along Barton Lane can be appropriately mitigated against to protect amenity of future residents. After initially objecting to the scheme on the grounds of noise and disturbance due to its proximity to the scrap metal yard EMR to the south, this objection has been removed as the noise mitigation measures proposed are considered to be acceptable to safeguard residential amenity. More detail and suggested conditions are set out in the appraisal section of this report.

Urban Vision Environment (Land Contamination) - No objections subject to contaminated land conditions.

Health and Safety Executive – Do not advise, on safety grounds, against the granting of planning permission in this case.

Page 173 Minerals and Waste Planning Unit – Have significant concerns about the proposed development as it would bring residential dwellings within close proximity of an existing waste management facility (EMR). They note that EMR processed 130,000 tonnes of waste metal in 2016 and they see this facility as being regionally significant and should be safeguarded in line with policy 12 of the Waste Plan. The unit go onto highlight that there is a strong likelihood that should the proposed development be approved the EMR facility will be subject to complaints from the occupiers of the new dwellings due to emanating noise from the site; as metal recycling facilities are loud operations due to the nature of lifting, moving and dropping large sheets/chunks of metal and the machinery usually involved. They considered it likely that this would lead to the closure of the facility and note it would be difficult for the operator to find an alternative suitable site of this size with the same road and water based access facilities.

Planning Policy

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004 requires the determination of this application to be made in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. For the purposes of Section 38(6), the Development Plan for Salford City Council comprises the following documents:-

 The saved Unitary Development Plan (UDP) policies;  The Greater Manchester Joint Waste Development Plan Document (Waste DPD); and  The Greater Manchester Joint Minerals Development Plan Document (Minerals DPD)

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 ST3 - Employment Supply This policy states that a good range of local employment opportunities will be secured by enabling the diversification of the local economy and by using planning obligations to secure local labour contracts and training opportunities.

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

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

Unitary Development Plan 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 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

Page 174 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 contained 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 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 EN12 - Important Landscape Features

Page 175 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.

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

Unitary Development Plan R1 - Protection of Recreation Land Facilities This policy states the development of existing Recreation Land and facilities will not be permitted unless: i. the development is for recreation purposes that would contribute to the continued recreation use of the site; ii. adequate replacement provision, of equivalent or better accessibility, community benefit and management is made in a suitable location; iii. it has been clearly demonstrated that the site is surplus to recreational requirements; iv. the development is ancillary to the principal use of the site.

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 DEV4 - Development Close to Harzardous Uses This policy states that development within the vicinity of notifiable installations will not be permitted where they would result in an unacceptable increase in the risk or consequences of a major accident.

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 (NPPF) Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE) National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)

Local Planning Policy

Page 176 Supplementary Planning Document - Greenspace Strategy This policy document expands on the policies of the Unitary Development Plan relating to the issues of open space and recreation, and seeks to ensure that all stakeholders have a clear understanding of how those policies should be implemented and their desired outcome. This should help to ensure that the greenspace needs of Salford are successfully met; delivering safe, high quality open spaces that are well-located, well- designed, well-managed, and meet the aspirations of local communities.

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

Supplementary Planning Document - 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.

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 mitigate the impacts of the development.

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 - 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.

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.

Evidence base and regeneration strategies

Employment Land Review for Salford Strategic Housing Market Assessment (2012) Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (2013)

Page 177 Salford West Regeneration Framework and Action Plan (2008)

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

Appraisal

1. Principle of development i) Strategic location

UDP Chapter 3 identifies a Spatial Framework for the City and recognises that the opportunities and the need for development, regeneration and environmental protection vary in their scale and nature across the city. The site is located within Salford West where the emphasis is to continue to develop a series of attractive and thriving neighbourhoods that offer the best of all worlds, easy access to the transport network and opportunities of the regional centre in a suburban location on the edge of the countryside.

The site is not allocated for any purpose within the UDP, albeit that it constitutes an Established Employment Area as defined by UDP policy E5. The northern boundary of the site, which provides access to the site is designated as an Existing Strategic Recreation Route (UDP Policy R5); whilst the southern boundary of the site meets the Manchester Ship Canal and is the subject of two allocations; a Proposed Strategic Recreation Route (UDP Policy R5) and a Wildlife Corridor Key Area of Search (UDP Policy EN9). These matters are considered within subsequent sections of this report. ii) Brownfield land

NPPF paragraph 17 identifies twelve core land use planning principles, of which bullet point 8) states that planning should “encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value.” The site comprises the Newhaven Business Park and associated buildings and the adjoining trailer park and site clearly comprises land which can be defined as previously developed land. Matters of ecology are considered within subsequent sections of this report, however the reuse of this brownfield site would address one of the core land use planning principles of the NPPF and would be in accordance with NPPF paragraph 111. iii) Existing use – Employment

The whole of the site is considered an employment site and therefore in order to consider the principle of the redevelopment of the site for residential provision it is necessary to consider the scheme within the context of policy E5 ‘Development within Established Employment Areas’. Supplementary planning guidance on the application of this policy is provided by the Established Employment Areas SPD (July 2010) which identifies the key issues that need to be addressed when making decisions about the release of employment land for non- employment uses. The principle policy in the determination of this application is saved UDP policy E5. The policy states:-

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: -

1. The development would not compromise the operating conditions of other remaining employment uses; and 2. One or more of the following apply: a. The developer can clearly demonstrate that there is no current or likely future demand for the site or building for employment purposes; b. There is a strong environmental 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; or d. The site is allocated for another use in the UDP

Criterion 1 of UDP policy E5 (The development would not compromise the operating conditions of other remaining employment uses) has been supported by policy EMP2 of the Established Employment Areas SPD which states that evidence needs to accompany a formal planning application to demonstrate this point and this should include:

Page 178 1. Details of any adjacent employment uses and the activities that are currently taking pace there or are likely to take place in the future 2. An analysis of any potential conflicts between those remaining uses/activities and the proposed non- employment use, including assessment of issues such as dust, noise, vibration etc. The policy notes that the analysis should include an explanation as to how any identified conflicts could be mitigated.

In accordance with policy E5 and EMP2 the applicant has submitted various noise and air quality reports during the course of the planning application to demonstrate that the proposed residential use is compatible with the scrap metal yard adjacent to the site.

In terms of air quality the City’s Environmental Consultants are of the view that the proposed scheme does not present air quality issues that would be a constraint to development. They also point out that the EMR operation is subjected to an Environmental Permit, regulated by the Environment Agency. The permit contains conditions relating to dust control measures and practices.

In respect of noise all assessments submitted by the applicant together with those submitted by the operator of the scrap metal yard EMR have been assessed in detail by the City’s Environmental Consultant and this matter is considered in greater detail within the subsequent noise section of this report.

Paragraph 123 of the NPPF aims to avoid noise from giving rise to a significant adverse impact on health and quality of life as a result of new development and to mitigate and minimize adverse impacts on health and quality of life. It also recognises that development will often create some noise and existing businesses wanting to develop in continuance of their business should not have unreasonable restrictions put on them because of changes in nearby land uses since they were established.

BS4141:2014 ‘Methods for Rating and Assessing Industrial and Commercial Sound’ describes methods for rating and/or assessing sound of an industrial and/or commercial nature. It can also be used to determine the likely noise impact for future residents in line with the NPPF and NPPG. The methods described, use outdoor sound levels to assess the likely effects of sound on people who might be inside or outside a residential premise. The standard is a recognised method for assessing noise complaints, for assessing sound from new industrial sources and for assessing sound at proposed new dwellings.

The applicant accepts that, without mitigation, significant adverse impact is likely to be suffered by the occupiers of the proposed residential units due to industrial noise from EMR. Through negotiation with the Local Planning Authority, the scheme has been amended to include a significant package of noise mitigation measures, more detail of these are set out in the noise section of this report.

Subject to these mitigation measures being secured on site, the City’s Environmental Consultant is satisfied that the impact on amenity of future residents, both internally within the dwellings and externally within their associated amenity space, will be low and is therefore acceptable. The likelihood of adverse impact on amenity has been reduced as far as practically possible. This is not to say that residents will not hear noise from the EMR; it is likely that noise from EMR will be heard across the site. But being mindful of these noise mitigation measures, the fact that these mitigation measures work for the worst case scenario (with lower background noise levels and for the nosiest activity of ship loading), and given the infrequency of ship loading, particularly for the larger grades of metal, the impact on amenity is considered low and acceptable.

The applicant’s Planning Statement and Employment Land Report, submitted in 2014 with the original planning permission, sought to demonstrate compliance with criterion a, b and c of policy E5 part 2.

In respect of Criterion 2b ‘there is a strong environmental case for rationalising land uses or creating open space’.

Policy EMP4 of the Established employment areas SPD describes that for the purposes of UDP Policy E5, rationalising land-uses is defined as the reordering of uses in, or the redevelopment of, an area to address specifically identified issues or objectives. It continues that a strong environmental case will need to demonstrate that the current use of the site in question has a significant negative impact on the surrounding area by virtue of unacceptable and abnormal levels of one or more of a number of factors, including noise, that cannot be acceptably mitigated.

Page 179 In this instance the impact being referred to is not from the site in question but from another employment use to the south which will remain. Whilst an opportunity to address issues generated by a neighbouring site could potentially be relevant to this criterion, there are likely to be very limited circumstances where this is would be the case. A judgement would need to be made having regard to issues such as the economic importance of the site to be redeveloped (largely considered under criterion 2a of Saved UDP Policy E5); the nature, scale and permanence of the unacceptable/abnormal noise levels to be addressed; the alternative options available to address them, and the scale and wider implications of the improvement that would be experienced.

Newhaven is a large employment site and there remain questions around the economic future of the site in relation to criterion 2a of Saved UDP Policy E5, it is not clear that existing residents are currently subject to unacceptable/ abnormal noise levels, and the proposed acoustic wall will not eradicate noise from the area (the scheme itself bringing a further number of dwellings into an area affected by noise with some being specifically modified to address the issue). It is not therefore considered that the scheme would be justified under criterion 2b.

In terms of the issues associated with potential redevelopment of the site for employment purposes, types of activity and potential limitations, these are more appropriately considered under criterion 2a and the scope of the demand assessment.

In respect of Criterion 2c ‘the development would contribute to the implementation of an approved regeneration strategy or plan for the area’.

Policy EMP5 of the Established Employment Areas SPD supplements the above, describing that, for a regeneration strategy or plan for the area to be relevant in these terms the strategy/plan must have been given formal approval by the city council; and specifically incorporate proposals to release land or buildings within an established employment area for the provision of non-employment development.

The applicant refers to Driver 1 of the Salford West Framework “a successful local economy and business location of choice” and the reference to “existing industrial sites with the potential reconsideration of function at Highfield Road (Little Hulton) and parts of Patricroft (Barton)”.

The key issues associated with Driver 1 of the Salford West Framework and include, amongst other things: a) Delivering an appropriate range and quality of employment and industrial/employment sites across Salford West to meet future needs of key growth sectors in line with the findings of the Employment Land Review. b) Address the mis-match of old employment sites and demand for new sites that are well located and of appropriate quality, making sure we maximise the employment potential of existing employment land / premises, in line with the findings of the Employment Land Review.

The action plan associated with Driver 1, under the heading “BL3 Upgrading existing business locations” identifies the following action: b. Examine the potential for alternative uses at existing sites: Explore the potential through qualitative analysis of historic industrial areas alongside an assessment of the potential benefits of promoting alternative uses for poorly located and outdated industrial estates where demand is evidently low, possibly:  Highfield Industrial site in Little Hulton: Suffers from poor environmental quality and outdated accommodation, resulting in low demand and occupancy  Parts of the Patricroft Industrial site: The age and quality of accommodation detract from local amenity and environmental quality and relatively poor primary road access detracts from demand.

The action above refers to examining the potential of sites rather than necessarily encouraging the redevelopment of existing employment areas, the key issues identify the need to “maximise the employment potential of existing employment land / premises”. Whilst the two employment areas listed do not appear to be shown on a diagram within the published version, they are identified in the Draft Salford West framework and do not relate to Newhaven Business Park. Notwithstanding this, Newhaven Business Park was reviewed alongside a number of other employment areas in Salford’s Employment Land Review published in 2009. In that review it was concluded that “The business park provides a flexible range of functional commercial accommodation that is well suited to the needs of a variety of businesses”, its ongoing role is again being considered as part of this application.

Page 180 Whilst a residential scheme could contribute to certain objectives within the Salford West Framework so too could an employment development on this site. Provided that a demand for the site from an employment perspective remains, its retention in this use is consistent with the points above and would ensure that “we maximise the employment potential of existing employment land / premises”. The guidance in the Salford West Framework does not therefore lead to a conclusion that the redevelopment of Newhaven Business Park for residential development should be supported. The proposal is not therefore consistent with Saved UDP Policy E5 Criterion 2c.

The issue remains to what extent the site presents an employment development opportunity as considered under criterion 2a of Saved UDP Policy E5, ‘the developer can clearly demonstrate that there is no current or likely future demand for the site or building for employment purposes’.

Prior to the submission of the application, the City Council’s Regeneration Team worked with the owner of the estate to try and assist in reviving the site as an employment location. Unfortunately despite this support the estate continued to decline, with a number of voids remaining despite the low rents on offer. The Employment Land Report outlines that despite a comprehensive proactive marketing strategy vacancy levels remained consistently high.

The report justifies the high vacancy levels by highlighting that the site has a number of limitations in terms of its accommodation, access and proximity to residential uses. These matters are acknowledged by the City Council but it is also recognised that these issues are common to a number of employment areas. It is noted that Salford’s Employment Land Review states that “the estate is well managed and provides traditional employment accommodation (B2/B8) on flexible terms – small to medium sized units are commonly available. Immediate road access is via Eccles town centre and therefore can be congested, however the M602 is within 2km. The business park provides a flexible range of commercial accommodation well suited to the needs of a variety of businesses” (Annex A – Site Proformas – Ref15 – Newhaven Business Park).

It is considered that in isolation the limitations identified above would not be considered sufficient to justify the redevelopment of an employment site for non-employment uses under the terms of UDP policy E5. However, when considering these issues together with the low levels of occupation seen over a considerable period, despite active marketing and low advertised rents; a lack of current demand has been apparent and over an extended period. Since this view was taken by the LPA in 2014 the owner of the site has demolished all the buildings within the site, due to the high vacancies and maintenance liabilities. The site is currently vacant with the exception of the haulage yard. The remainder of the site was occupied for 3 months by Salford van hire while their new depot was being constructed; the only other interest was from a film company who was looking to use the site for up to a week at a time. In light of this it is considered that the applicant has demonstrated that there is no likely current demand for the whole site as an employment use.

In relation to future demand and the potential redevelopment of the site for employment uses, the applicant has submitted a viability appraisal for a scheme comprising small to medium sized units at a plot ratio of 35%. Both these assumptions are considered appropriate given the site’s access and neighbouring residential uses. Whilst modern accommodation should have a positive impact on interest from potential occupiers, given the high vacancy levels sustained over an extended period at very low rental values, it is more questionable whether this would generate a sustainable level of occupation. In light of this it is considered that the applicants have demonstrated that there is no likely future demand for employment uses on the application site.

Given the above, it is considered that the redevelopment of the estate for residential uses is consistent with UDP Policy E5 criteria 1 and 2a. iv) Proposed use – Residential a) 5 year land supply position

The report entitled ‘Salford’s five-year housing land supply position. 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2020’ (published August 2015) identifies that there is a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years’ worth of housing against Salford’s housing requirements. Given this, and in accordance with paragraph 49 of the NPPF, relevant policies for the supply of housing in Salford’s development plan can be considered up-to-date. b) Mix, type and density

Page 181 The UDP Proposals Map indicates that the site is located within an area classified as ‘West Salford’. Housing Planning Guidance Policy HOU1 states that, “within West Salford, Broughton Park, Claremont and the northern part of Weaste and Seedley, the large majority of dwellings within new developments should be in the form of houses rather than apartments, in order to protect the existing character of the areas and reflect the generally lower levels of accessibility compared to other parts of the city.”

Housing Planning Guidance Policy HOU2 states that the majority of new dwellings should have at least 3 bedrooms. Alternative approaches on individual sites may be permitted where it can be clearly demonstrated by the applicant that there are specific circumstances that justify this, particularly having regard to criteria A – H of UDP Policy H1.

Policy H1 aims to deliver no less than 30 dwellings per hectare throughout the city. The development has a density of 38 dwellings per hectare. It is considered that the density of development within this part of the city is appropriate to its context and would constitute an effective use of land as required by the NPPF (para 111).

The plans submitted in support of the proposed scheme indicate that the development would accommodate 244 dwellings comprising: -

Type Number of beds Number of properties Percentage of properties (%) Apartment 1 24 10% Apartment 2 24 10% House 3 148 60.5% House 4 48 19.5%

Across the site 20% of the mix of units would be in the form of apartments. The two bedroom apartments would have a floor area of 57sqm and the one bedroom apartments will have a floor area of 42sqm. Houses would predominate and account for 80% of the total number of units. In accordance with HOU1 and HOU2 the majority of the units would be in form of houses with at least three bedrooms therefore would be appropriate in this part of the City. It is considered that the mix identified above provides a range of dwellings in types and size which helps towards creating a sustainable community. v) Proposed use adjacent to a Waste Facility

EMR is an established, valuable and sustainable waste facility which deals with a large proportion of Greater Manchester’s waste metal. Due to the businesses location on the Ship Canal with an operational wharf the facility it provides meets objective 3 and 8 of the Greater Manchester Joint Waste Development Plan Document which state that:

Objective 3: To assist in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and assist in adaption/mitigation of climate change, including resource efficiency and minimising the need for energy in accordance with targets at national, regional and local level.

Objective 8: To reduce waste movements and, where waste needs to be moved, to promote the sustainable movement of waste across the sub-region.

In particular the Waste Plan at para 1.32 highlights the importance of sustainable modes of transport i.e. use of the canal. And the NPPF at para 143 highlights that Local Planning Authorities should seek to safeguard existing, planned or potential wharfage.

The Minerals and Waste Unit highlight policy 12 of the Waste Plan (Safeguarding Existing Waste Management Capacity), whilst this policy does not directly apply to this case, as this is not a former permitted waste facility, the spirit of the policy which seeks to ensure the existing waste management capacity in Greater Manchester is maintained is important.

The development of housing within close proximity of the wharf would potentially introduce an adverse impact on the amenity of future residents (due to the noise of handling metal in the open) and as such the wharf could become a ‘bad neighbour’. There is clearly a concern that EMR could be subject to complaints leading to regulatory action by the Environment Agency and a subsequent financial burden on the business to comply, or relocate.

Page 182 Since the original application in August 2014 there have been a number of iterations in the scheme design, each accompanied by additional noise impact assessments. It has generally been accepted by the City’s Environmental Consultants that internal living areas can be acoustically insulated to provide satisfactory noise levels with windows closed. The principal area of concern related to external private amenity spaces.

The latest iteration includes changes to the scheme layout including a reorientation of the properties closest to EMR such that the properties themselves provide acoustic screening to their garden areas. In combination with the proposed acoustic fencing (5m) and other identified mitigation, the City’s Environmental Consultants have reached the view that the current scheme represents a solution where the proposed residential development can be accommodated without causing unacceptable level of noise and disturbance to the future occupiers of the proposed dwellings.

This is discussed in further detail below.

2. Impact on the highway network and transport infrastructure

The applicant has submitted a Transport Assessment (TA) in support of the planning application which has been updated during the course of the application. i) Sustainable location

The presumption in favour of sustainable development, which is identified by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), means that it is necessary to consider whether the proposed development represents a sustainable form of development. As part of this overall assessment, consideration of whether the proposed development is accessible to everyday facilities and employment by non-car modes of transport should be given. The applicant has completed this exercise as part of the Transport Assessment and concludes that the site is highly accessible on foot; is well located to generate trips on foot and provides potential for a high degree of linked walk trips between the development and the surrounding area; accessible by cycle, with a local cycle route located within 600 metres of the site and a National Route within a kilometre; is located close to bus stops on Barton Lane and Trafford Road, offering services to Manchester city centre and The Trafford Centre; and Eccles train station and Metrolink station are both located within a short distance of the site offering journeys to destinations including Ashton-under-Lyne, Oldham, Bury, Manchester and Liverpool. The site is therefore considered to be located in a highly accessible location which is accessible by non-car modes and which will cater for the needs of the development’s residents and will assist in promoting a choice of travel modes other than the private car. ii) Proposed access arrangements

The site is currently accessed from Barton Lane, the proposed access to the site will continue to be located in the same location however the width of the junction will be reduced to provide a 6.75 metre wide junction with footways on either side. Urban Vision’s Highways Engineer has confirmed that the proposed access arrangements and visibility splays are acceptable and accord to Manual for Streets Guidance. iii) Impacts on highway network

The TA addendum identifies the trip generation of the existing business park based upon the TRICS database. This demonstrates that the Business Park could potentially generate in the region of 167 two-way trips in the AM peak, around 125 two way trips in the PM peak hour.

Based upon the quantum of development proposed the applicant, using the TRICS database indicates that the development could potentially generate in the region of 148 two-way trips in the AM peak, around 165 two-way trips in the PM peak hour. A comparison of these impacts indicates that, in terms of expected traffic generation, (when compared to the existing business park use of the site at full capacity), the proposed development would result in a net decrease of 19 two way vehicular trips in the AM peak hour. There would be an increase in PM traffic movements of 40 two way vehicular trips. The Addendum concludes that the traffic impact of the proposed development is negligible during the traditional peak periods and the number of traffic movements would actually decrease substantially over the period between 0700 and 1900 hours when compared to the existing use of the site.

Page 183 A site access assessment has been undertaken as part of the TA. This assessment demonstrates that the proposed junction arrangement on Barton Lane will adequately accommodate the background and proposed development traffic.

Urban Visions Highways Engineer has reviewed the submitted information and agrees that the proposed residential use would generate significantly less traffic than the existing business park use (running at capacity) and reduce the HGV movements and therefore raises no objections to the proposed development on traffic generation grounds. The proposed development therefore accords with UDP policy A8 and paragraph 32 of the NPPF. iv) Internal road layout and parking

The proposed layout has been considered by Urban Visions Highway Adoption Manager and is considered that the proposed layout is acceptable in principle in terms of its design and layout. These matters will however be considered in detail via the S38 process.

The proposed plan will provide off street parking for two vehicles per dwelling. UDP policy A10 indicates that development with more than 1.5 off- street parking spaces per dwelling or unit of accommodation, averaged over the city area, is unlikely to be regarded as sustainable. However, the proposed dwellings comprise a mix of larger sized units and therefore it is anticipated that owners of these properties may own more than one vehicle per household and the quantum of off road parking provision will help to reduce the number of vehicles which are parked on the street. It is therefore considered that the proposed parking provision in this instance is acceptable and in accordance with the thrust of UDP policy A10.

3. Design and layout

NPPF paragraph 17 identifies a set of 12 core land use principles that should underpin the decision-taking process. Securing high quality design is identified as one of these 12 guiding principles and this is embellished upon within NPPF Chapter 7 (Requiring good design).

The Design Supplementary Planning Document: Shaping Salford sets out a vision for good design. It identifies core design principles that are specific to Salford and that apply across the whole of the city. The Design SPD provides a general overview of the character of Eccles and identifies the design principles that are most important to this neighbourhood. The Design SPD provides a general overview of the character of Patricroft, Peel Green and Barton and identifies the design principles that are most important to this neighbourhood. The Design SPD identifies the following design principles which are of particular relevance to this site: -

 An appropriate development in terms of scale, detailing and provision of access, will be sought adjacent to the Manchester Ship Canal;  Development will allow pedestrian routes to follow the canal with development providing an active frontage to the waterside.  The development of vacant plots in this area should be redeveloped to establish a coherent frontage; and  The development should be designed to mitigate the impact of industrial areas on nearby homes using an appropriate scale, materials, landscaping and screening. i) Scale and Massing

The surrounding area is predominantly residential, with areas of employment uses located to the east of the site. The properties in the surrounding area comprise a mix of predominantly 2 storey Victorian / Edwardian, post war and contemporary properties.

The scale and massing of the dwellings is considered to be appropriate. The dwellings would be either two storey or two and half storey with a mix of hipped and gabled roofs which would be in keeping with the built form in the immediate area. The apartments within the site would increase in height to three storey however given their location within the development boundary their scale and massing would be acceptable. ii) Layout of the development

Page 184 The existing street pattern in the immediate area is varied as terraced properties to the north and east of the site are laid out in structured blocks, whilst the contemporary dwellings to the west are far less formalised.

The proposed layout of this site would be informal in nature, similar to the dwellings to the west. The proposed dwellings fronting Barton Lane would respect the building line created and continuing the strong frontage along Barton Lane which is supported.

The site would have one access point from Barton Lane. The layout provides a series of circular roads within the site with a number of cul-de-sac / shared driveway arrangements. The majority of dwellings would front the highway which is supported. The proposed dwellings along the southern boundary of the site would be positioned to front the road/shared space that runs along the southern boundary. At this point the positioning of the dwellings has been shaped by the need to address noise issues from the neighbouring employment use. This arrangement is considered to work successfully, providing overlooking of the street and to car parking spaces but also ensuring that the dwellings are offset from the proposed boundary treatment which will be significant in height. iii) Appearance of the house types

There are a variety of different house types in the immediate area. The terraced properties have uniform fenestration, stone heads and cills and bay windows with gable roofs. The more contemporary dwellings to the west have a mix of hipped and gable roofs with detailing such as projecting porches and brick string courses.

The proposed dwellings are traditional in appearance constructed from brick with pitched roofs. The dwellings would have feature brick detailing around windows, detailed string courses, brick plinth detailing and pitched roof canopies. Dwellings located on corner plots have been designed to be duel fronted and include a projecting bay window or additional windows on gable elevations. The dwellings would have white uPVC windows and eaves.

The proposed apartments would too be constructed from brick but have a flat roof which is considered to be acceptable from a design perspective. Each block has a stepped front elevation which helps to add visual interest to the elevations and break down the massing of the blocks. Each block would be constructed from two red bricks and would include detailing such as feature brick around windows, detailed string courses, brick plinth detailing which links back to the dwellings. The elevations of the apartment blocks do appear more contemporary as they have glazed Juliette balconies and dark grey window frames.

A material schedule has been submitted with the application but this is not accompanied by any material samples. Samples will be required by condition to ensure that the materials are acceptable and would respect the context of the immediate area in accordance with the Design Policies referenced above.

4. Amenity (Users and Neighbours UDP Policy DES7) i) Impact on existing residents

The proposed dwellings fronting Barton Lane would be at their closest point 19m to the dwellings opposite. This separation distance is considered to be typical of the urban context with facing terraced dwellings that back onto the pavement. The proposed dwellings fronting Barton Lane would sited behind the existing building line and as such, in this circumstance, this relationship is considered acceptable.

In respect of the dwellings along Barton Lane and Crowngreen Road, that have rear elevations that directly face the application site, the proposed dwellings would maintain suitable separation distances to existing dwellings to ensure that their introduction would not have an unacceptable overbearing impact on amenity or on the privacy existing residents currently enjoy.

There are no habitable room windows in the gable elevation of 14 Crowngreen Road or 133 Barton Lane. There are windows in the gable of 153 Barton Lane, taking worst case scenario that these are habitable room windows, the gable of plot 242 would be 12.4m from no.153 and the garage would be 8.4m. These distances are considered to be acceptable to ensure that the introduction of a dwelling in this location would not have an overbearing impact on the amenity of residents at no.153.

Page 185 In respect of 135a Barton Lane, a bungalow, situated along the northern boundary of the site, there are large outbuildings which restrict direct overlooking from plots 208 and 209 within the development. Plots 215 and 216 within the development are located 10.2m from the common boundary at ground floor and 12.2m at first floor, this separation distance is considered to be sufficient to ensure that occupants of this property are not overlooked to a degree which will impact on the privacy they enjoy.

Properties along Boardman Street back onto the eastern boundary of the site. The rear elevation of the new dwellings are over 21.2m from these existing properties which is considered to be acceptable to ensure that there is no an unacceptable overbearing impact on amenity or on the privacy existing residents currently enjoy. Plot 36 is positioned so it is at an angle to the rear elevation of 82 Boardman Street, and at its closest point the single storey element of plot 36 is 10m from the outrigger no.82. Given this distance, the position of plot 36 and no.82 and that no.82 sits on higher ground than the application site, this relationship is considered to be acceptable and the amenity of residents at no.82 would not be unduly compromised.

Harecastle Avenue and, Blisworth Avenue are to the west of the application site. Along this western boundary of the application site there is a significant levels change. Close to the northern corner of the site land levels between the application and neighbouring land to the west is almost the same, whereas when you move south the land levels begin to change with the south west corner of the application site of about 2m to 3m higher than land to the west and south. Along this boundary plot 201 sits 11.8m from the window in the rear elevation of a single storey extension and 15.1m from the first floor level at 24 Harecastle Avenue. It is noted that the floor level of the proposed dwelling would be approximately 0.2m lower than that’s of no.24. The window in the rear extension at no.24 serves a kitchen, which is a non-habitable room, therefore in light of this and given the separation between the two properties this relationship is considered to be acceptable. The scheme has been amended during the course of this applicant to pull the gable elevation of plot 201 away from the boundary so it now sits 5.2m from the boundary it is considered that this will ensure that the proposal would not have a significant overbearing impact on the garden areas of either 24 or 26 Harecastle Avenue.

Along the remainder of this common boundary the dwelling would retain at least 21m between existing and proposed dwellings, when measured from first floor, which is considered to be acceptable and would protect existing and future occupant’s level of amenity.

It is considered that the front habitable elevation of plot 182 is sufficiently set in from the boundary of the site to ensure that it does not significantly overlook 27 Caledonian Drive or its garden. The fence shown along this boundary is 1.8m in height. Whilst this fence with the change in land levels could appear imposing on the garden area of 27 Caledonian Drive, regard has to be given that a 2m high fence could be erected along this boundary under permitted development it is considered that on balance this is acceptable. ii) Amenity of future occupiers

The development would provide all future occupiers with an acceptable level of light and outlook. There are certain points within the development where the Council’s standard separation distances would not be maintained. This is namely between the facing habitable room windows and window to gable elevations. It is considered however in this circumstance these distances have been dictated by the layout that seeks to maintain suitable distance to existing neighbours and to create a strong and positive street frontage. It is also acknowledged the potential occupier will be ‘buying into’ this relationship and therefore shorter separation distances are considered to be appropriate in this case.

As will be discussed below one of the proposed mitigation measures in respect of noise will be that the dwellings facing the EMR site have fixed windows for all habitable rooms which have windows on the front or gable elevation. Whilst this is not ideal in amenity terms the applicant has sought to amended the internal layout of the dwellings to limit the number of windows that will be effected, they will also install a purge ventilation system to these properties and it is acknowledged that the dwellings will have openable windows on the rear of the property. In light of the above it is considered that the future occupiers will experience an acceptable internal living environment and therefore it would be unreasonable to refuse the application on these grounds. iii) Amenity space

In respect of the existing open space on site the Council’s greenspace audit identifies 0.51 of private amenity space within the application site, split by the access road, at the Barton Lane entrance. The Local Planning

Page 186 Authority are unaware of any public access or recreation function for this part of the site, and consider that it appears to be more of an attractive landscaping to mark the entrance and is therefore not considered to be protected by UDP Policy R1. Whilst the loss of this greenspace is regrettable it is considered that the replacement open space, which is slightly larger in size, would be accessible to the future occupiers of the scheme and to the wider community which is a benefit and as such there is no objection to the scheme in this regard.

All dwellings would benefit from a private rear garden. One block of apartments (units 41-64) would benefit from an area of private amenity space within its curtilage the other block (units 87-110) would not. Whilst this is not ideal there is an area of public open space within the site opposite the apartments which could be utilised by future occupants. The site is also situated 150m south of Eccles Recreational Ground which has, bowling greens, a children's play area, football pitches, multi-use games area, outdoor gym equipment, pentanque (French boules) and tennis courts. It is therefore considered that future occupiers of the site will benefit from outdoor spaces and as such will have an acceptable level of amenity.

In light of the above it is considered that the proposal would accord with UDP policy DES7.

5. Design and Crime

UDP policy DES10 states that development will not be permitted unless it is designed to discourage crime, anti- social behaviour and the fear of crime. This approach is fully in accordance with NPPF paragraphs 58 and 69 which indicate that planning decisions should aim to ensure that developments “create safe and accessible environments where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion.” Further policy guidance is outlined in the council’s Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) on Design and Crime.

A Crime Impact Statement (CIS) has been submitted in support of the planning application. This details positive aspects of the scheme which include that all the houses face the street and front door can be clearly seen, back gardens in the main back onto each other to reduce exposure to public or communal areas, no gable ends abut the street, dwellings incorporate windows in gable elevations, car parking spaces and the area of open space are overlooked.

The CIS details a number ways physical security measures can be incorporated into the scheme to improve security. This requests that layout incorporates front boundary treatments for the dwellings and that the boundaries of the site with adjacent employment uses and adjoining public areas is considered and sufficiently robust. It is considered that the proposed boundary treatment to the perimeter of the site, being a 1.8m high close board fence, is robust and secure. In respect of boundaries to the front of the dwellings, it is not considered a wall or railings along frontages would be acceptable in design terms given that this would be broke up with the provision of car parking. Low level planting is proposed to the front of dwellings to demark the boundary between public and private space it would not provide any hard security protection but this is not considered to be any different to other residential schemes across the City and as such is considered to be acceptable.

It is acknowledged that the CIS has not been revisited when the layout of the scheme have been amended. However it is considered that the scheme has not altered so significantly and many of the principles of the original submission are carried forward to the latest layout. The DFS team were consulted on the amended scheme and in their comments they acknowledge are happy to support the application.

Overall 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.

6. Pollution i) Air Quality

NPPF identifies 12 core planning principles one of which indicates that planning should “contribute to....reducing pollution.” To prevent unacceptable risks from air pollution, planning decisions should ensure that new development is appropriate for its location. The NPPF states that the effects of pollution on health and the sensitivity of the area and the development should be taken into account.

Page 187 The application is supported by an Air Quality Assessment Addendum report. The Addendum report updates previous air quality assessments undertaken by REC Ltd to support the original application in August 2014.

The Addendum report has been undertaken in response to the re-design of the housing site (from 255 dwellings to 244 dwellings); updated technical guidance and associated air quality assessment tools; and to address officer concerns that dust from the EMR metal recycling to the south of the development site may present nuisance and loss of amenity risks to the future residents.

The Addendum report states that part of the development site lies within the City Council’s Air Quality Management Area (AQMA).This statement is incorrect as only parts of Barton Lane to the north are within the AQMA. There is however potential for future residents of the site and existing residents on Barton Lane to be exposed to unacceptable levels of pollution, mainly due to future road traffic emissions. The Addendum report considers existing air quality in respect of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulates (PM10); future air quality (with and without the scheme for the years 2020 and 2030; dust from the construction phase of the development; and dust and particulates that may be arising from the EMR site.

The City’s Environmental Consultants have considered the Addendum report and previous REC reports, and are satisfied with the assessment approach taken and the methodology adopted.

Construction phase - providing various mitigation measures are deployed, as identified in a REC report of 24th July 2014 (Table 25), the residual effect from all dust generating activities is predicted to be ‘negligible’.

This aspect of the development can be controlled through the use of a Construction Environmental Management Plan on any planning permission granted as a condition in this respect is recommended.

Operational phase – the overall significance of the air quality impacts from road traffic emissions for both 2020 and 2030 are deemed to be ‘negligible’ and that the site is considered suitable for the proposed development without the implementation of mitigation measures to protect future users from elevated NO2 or PM10 concentrations.

The prediction modelling shows that ‘with’ the scheme there will be increased levels of NO2 and PM10. However, the increases are likely to be negligible.The City’s Environmental Consultants are satisfied that the increases are likely to be insignificant in terms of impact and that accepted air quality standards for both pollutants will not be breached.

Dust from EMR – there is a low likelihood of particulate matter related health issues or dust complaints at the development site from operations at the EMR site. Further, the report found that there was a low risk of the PM10 air quality standard being exceeded; the likelihood for dust annoyance is low; and that the extent of the various dust metals deposited and analysed was not considered to be significantly elevated relative to estimated background levels of those metals for the region.

Overall, the report concludes that the EMR site does not cause a significant adverse impact on PM10 or deposited dust levels at the proposed development site.

The report goes on to recognise that through consultation in respect of the noise issues experienced at the site, a number of mitigation measures have been integrated into the development design which will further serve to reduce the potential impact of any dust arising from the EMR site. The mitigation measures relevant to air quality include dwellings being set back from the quay; a 5m high solid, fence running the length of the site’s boundary with the EMR site; and fixed windows to habitable rooms with alternative room ventilation.

It is also important to point out that the EMR operation is subjected to an Environmental Permit, regulated by the Environment Agency. The permit contains conditions relating to dust control measures and practices.

The City’s Environmental Consultants are of the view that the proposed scheme does not present air quality issues that would be a constraint to development. Therefore from an air quality perspective the proposals are considered to be in accordance with UDP policy EN17 and the NPPF. ii) Noise

Page 188 The NPPF para 123 is clear that planning decisions should aim to:  avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development;  mitigate and reduce to a minimum other adverse impacts on health and quality of life arising from noise from new development, including through the use of conditions;  recognise that development will often create some noise and existing businesses wanting to develop in continuance of their business should not have unreasonable restrictions put on them because of changes in nearby land uses since they were established; and  identify and protect areas of tranquillity which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value for this reason.

National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG - Noise) builds on the NPPF Policies, and contains guidance on the assessment of the impacts of noise on Planning based on the average response to noise. Unlike previous guidance which contained categories of noise exposure based on measurable decibel levels, the NPPG-Noise contains subjective guidance with no specific levels. The table below is reproduced from the NPPG-Noise.

Increasing effect Perception Examples of outcomes Action level No specific No Observed Not noticeable No Effect measures Effect required Noticeable Noise can be heard, but does not cause any change in behaviour or attitude. No specific No Observed and not Can slightly affect the acoustic character of the area but not such that there measures Adverse Effect intrusive is a perceived change in the quality of life. required Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level Noise can be heard and causes small changes in behaviour and/or attitude, eg turning up volume of television; speaking more loudly; where there is no Mitigate and Noticeable alternative ventilation, having to close windows for some of the time because Observed reduce to a and intrusive of the noise. Potential for some reported sleep disturbance. Affects the Adverse Effect minimum acoustic character of the area such that there is a perceived change in the quality of life. Significant Observed

Adverse Effect Level The noise causes a material change in behaviour and/or attitude, eg avoiding certain activities during periods of intrusion; where there is no Significant Noticeable alternative ventilation, having to keep windows closed most of the time Observed Avoid and disruptive because of the noise. Potential for sleep disturbance resulting in difficulty in Adverse Effect getting to sleep, premature awakening and difficulty in getting back to sleep. Quality of life diminished due to change in acoustic character of the area. Extensive and regular changes in behaviour and/or an inability to mitigate Noticeable effect of noise leading to psychological stress or physiological effects, eg Unacceptable and very Prevent regular sleep deprivation/awakening; loss of appetite, significant, medically Adverse Effect disruptive definable harm, eg auditory and non-auditory

Whilst the response to noise is subjective, it is necessary to use measurement and calculation to inform mitigation design. With respect to industrial and commercial noise two British Standards are appropriate;

BS4142:2014 (Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound).

The BS4142 methodology (in simple terms) is a means of comparing a Rating Level to the background noise. The Rating Level is calculated by measuring the specific noise, and then applying a penalty depending on intrusiveness, tonality, intermittency or other acoustic character. The difference between the rating level and the background level is used to judge the likely response to noise on the following basis; a) Typically, the greater this difference, the greater the magnitude of the impact.

Page 189 b) A difference of around +10 dB or more is likely to be an indication of a significant adverse impact, depending on the context. c) A difference of around +5 dB is likely to be an indication of an adverse impact, depending on the context. d) The lower the rating level is relative to the measured background sound level; the less likely it is that the specific sound source will have an adverse impact or a significant adverse impact. Where the rating level does not exceed the background sound level, this is an indication of the specific sound source having a low impact, depending on the context.

BS8233:2014 Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings.

BS8233 is not the appropriate standard for assessing industrial noise (see BS4142 above), however BS8233 does provide the noise levels that should be achieved within living environments and external amenity areas to avoid noise from giving rise to significant impacts on heath and quality of live. The levels specified in the standard are based on widely researched World Health Organisation standards. a) Background

The planning application when submitted in 2014 was supported by a noise report which assessed noise sources from not only from the EMR site but also other commercial noise sources to the south and road traffic noise from vehicles using Barton Lane to the north. The report concludes that with appropriate noise mitigation measures being put into place e.g. acoustic fences and upgraded double glazed windows an appropriate level of amenity can be made for future residents. The City’s Environmental Consultants raised significant concerns about the proximity of the proposed housing scheme to EMR and objected to the application on these grounds.

In response to the initial objection the applicant sought to amend the site layout to provide for dwellings and apartments which faced the site boundary with EMR. This revised layout has been supported by eight further noise reports in support of the application. The reports are dated 17th April 2015; 12th May 2015, 19th June 2015, 2nd September 2015, 8th October 2015 and 19th October 2016, 21st June 2017 and 14th September 2017.

The reports of the 17th April 2015 and 12th May 2015 were amended to include a noise barrier along the southern boundary of the site as a means of noise mitigation.

The report of 19th June 2015 follows on from further joint noise measurements which were taken whilst ship loading operations (considered to be one of the noisiest operations undertaken by EMR) were taking place at EMR on 12th June 2015. This report made a number of recommendations including the 5m high barrier along the full extent of its southern boundary with a number of low height acoustic fences within the development; upgraded standard double glazing in order to control road traffic noise levels in bedrooms facing Barton Lane; and where habitable rooms face EMR a scheme of acoustic glazing and alternative ventilation will be required in order to allow a through flow of fresh air into the room without the need to open windows.

The reports dated 17th April, 12th May and 19th June 2015 date did not include a BS 4142 assessment. The report dated 2nd September 2015 included a BS4142 assessment and was supported by a further site layout which proposed an acoustic barrier (2m bund and 3m fence) which would run the entire length of the site boundary.

The noise report was revised again on the 8th October 2015 and this report contained details of a noise impact assessment produced by the EA in August 2010 in response to complaints. The conclusions of the 2010 EA investigation required EMR to reduce their noise levels on site. The report claims that the noise levels from EMR have increased since this time and therefore EMR are breaching their EA permit. It then concludes that should EMR be operating in accordance with their permit that the mitigation proposed as part of this scheme would be able to appropriately safeguard residential amenity.

On the 19th October 2016 a new noise report was submitted which had been undertaken by a newly appointed noise consultant PDA. PDA undertook some long term noise monitoring on the site to establish typical background noise levels and to enable a more in depth BS4142 assessment than previously submitted.

On the 20th of November 2017, following discussion with the LPA, the following documents were submitted with the application. These form the latest position in respect of noise for the applicant;

Page 190 - Further background noise surveys in accordance with BS4142:2014; - An updated Noise Impact Assessment(dated 14th September 2017) including detailed noise propagation models to assess the potential impact of EMRs operations on new noise sensitive properties, recommending appropriate noise mitigation measures. - Comments in respect of adopting a low background noise level; - Report to assess the impact of partially opened windows for the nearest proposed dwellings and additional noise mitigation measures; and - An assessment of the acoustic fence alone to inform potential phasing of the development.

The information above includes the following package of noise mitigation measures:

 The site layout including the 32m standoff from the southern boundary with EMR, and the orientation of the houses closest to EMR.  A 5m high acoustic fence running along the full length of the southern boundary of the site. This fence will have a mass of 25kg/sqm. The applicant has confirmed that this will have a life expectancy of 25 years and its on-going maintenance will be dealt with by a management company;  2.5m high screen walls will be provided around eastern and western boundaries of outdoor amenity spaces closest to EMR, and between some of the plots  Fixed windows will be secured on all habitable room windows in the front and gable elevation of properties directly facing the boundary with EMR.;  Identified plots will have upgraded mechanical ventilation to allow for rapid ventilation and cooling; and  Identified plots will have upgraded glazing to the following specification (glass, air gap, glass mm) . Ground floor units 6/12/6 . First Floor 12/12/8.4 . Second Floor / roof rooms 12.8/16/6

In respect of the phasing of the development the applicant is of the opinion that providing the noise barrier is erected prior to occupation there would be no specific requirement to prevent occupation of any unit within the site. b) EMR operations

European Metal Recycling (EMR) is located between the southern boundary of the application site and the Manchester Ship Canal. EMRs core business is the recycling of scrap metal. In this site metal of various grades is brought to site via lorries, stockpiled on site and then the materials are taken from site via ships. EMR use the quay to load 4000 to 4500 tonne cargoes of scrap metal from the site taking it primarily to steel works in Spain, France and Portugal. There are various grades of metal from metal turnings up to plate and girder.

EMR have also confirmed that they work to the following hours, currently restricted by EA Permit.

Receipt of metal for recycling 07.30am until 17.30pm Monday to Friday & 7.30 am until 13.30pm Saturday Processing of waste

Loading of Ships 07.00 am until 21.00 Monday to Friday 08.00 am until 19.00 Saturdays 09.00 am until 17.00 Sunday and bank holidays.

The permit contains a clause which states: “In the event of emergency that may require the site to deviate from these times, agreement must be sought from the EA” c) Noise Abatement Notice and Complaints

Historically noise complaints have been received by the City Council from a resident of Boardman Street 110m north of the EMR site. This resulted in a Noise Abatement Notice being served on EMR in April 2008 and resulted in EMR to erecting an acoustic barrier and re-locating their noisier metal handling operations to more distant parts of the wharf.

The EMR site currently has an Environmental Permit as a Scrap Metal Dealer. The permit is controlled by the Environment Agency and it lists two conditions to control and to manage noise. The City’s Environmental

Page 191 Consultants have been in communication with the Agency and have been advised that in 2010 EMR were found to be breaching their permit on two occasions for ‘unacceptable noise levels’. This was investigated by the EA and EMR had three points of action: 1) EMR Ltd to provide the Environment Agency with information relating to the construction of the current fence, including what assessment of the site was made prior to its construction. 2) EMR Ltd to appoint an acoustics expert to advise on adequate noise abatement from the site, as the current acoustics fence is serving no purpose. 3) EMR Ltd to produce a ‘noise management plan’ for the site as an update to section 9.2 of the working plan.

The EA have confirmed that this was resolved to the satisfaction of the complainant. The EA have also confirmed that at the time they recognised the difficulty the operator was having in controlling noise from activity on site. The operator implemented a series of steps which assisted in reducing noise levels, however there is a limit to how successful these steps were.

Since this two further reports of noise were reported in February 2011.

The EA have confirmed that at this moment in time they are not taking any action in respect of EMR at this site breaching their permit conditions. d) Objections on Noise Grounds to the Scheme

A number of noise related objections have been received in respect of the above application from European Metal Recycling Ltd (EMR); MAS Environmental and Peel Ports. The Environment Agency (Environmental Permitting Team) have raised concerns. These are summarised below:

European Metal Recycling Ltd (EMR)

In their latest correspondence, EMR raise a number of concerns:

The development results in significant land use conflicts and should be expected to lead to the demise of the EMR and Port commercial operations.

The screening proposed in the application is inadequate and there is a real threat to the use of the quay for ship loading.

There is a real threat that future occupiers of the houses and flats will complain about a major source of intrusive noise.

The proposed houses and flats are much closer to the source of the noise than the houses that were the subject of complaints (and the commencement of enforcement action by the local authority) in the past.

It is questioned whether the fence will block out much of the noise. The elevation drawings show windows in the flats in particular, will directly overlook the ship loading.

In view of their concerns EMR request that the latest revised noise report is rejected and insist that PDA Acoustics carry out a BS4142:2014 assessment that they appear repeatedly unwilling to carry out.

MAS Environmental

The MAS report of 28th December 2017 (EMR/Ecc/171229) provides a review of the PDA Acoustics report dated 10th October 2017 on which, it would appear, objection to the application is made. Earlier objections were made to the initial planning application and the noise assessment reports by REC Acoustic Consultants.

The author of the current objection report makes much reference to his opinions of how an environmental assessment should and should not be carried out, does not make any technical assessment and only comments on the PDA report referred to above. Technical assessments have however been provided in earlier MAS reports, but the circumstances of the application have since changed.

Page 192 PDA Acoustics in their 9th January 2018 report provides a detailed response to the objection.

In summary, the main points of concern by MAS are:

PDA Acoustics have misapplied the available noise related guidance i.e. BS8233:2014 and World Health Organization criteria, in that the guidance is not appropriate for the “attention grabbing” characteristics of noise from EMR. Consequently, BS4142:2014 should be used as the assessment tool.

PDA’s assessment using BS4142:2014 predicts unacceptable noise levels inside and outside dwellings, and these will exceed the ‘significant adverse impact’ criteria by a substantial margin to an extent of potential ‘severe impact’ Despite this, PDA claim that the sound environment will not lead to complaints and therefore, the PDA analysis is misdirected and the impact is understated.

PDA’s noise impact analysis and mitigation proposals in this case are inadequate and they adopt a fundamentally flawed approach to their assessment. The exception is BS4142:2014, but this has limitations and may lead to the underestimation of impact.

Metal recycling outdoors is of a nature and character that leads to adverse impact at low sound energy and audibility levels. Its impact cannot be determined through the use of decibel based guidance.

Being a port related external activity it utilises large cranes, ship loading and the moving of materials with a distinct metal on metal intrusive character. The character includes multiple changing tones, impulsive content, periods of intense and prolonged activity. The height and position of noise emissions is variable and the character and level of each movement of materials also can vary significantly. As a result, these short periods of dominant noise with special characteristics will lead to a wide range of changes to residential behaviour that materially affect use of residential property.

The author of the report concludes,

“I am clear in my expert opinion that the mitigation is grossly inadequate and complaints will arise leading to significant restriction of the commercial operations should the housing be provided as designed”

Peel Ports

In their letters of 5th December and 22nd December 2017, Peel Ports has raised concern about a lack of any formal noise survey being undertaken in connection with ships moving along the canal, docking and idling. There is a history of complaint it is alleged, elsewhere on the canal. The 5th December letter calls for an extension of time in the determination of the application.

Environment Agency

The Agency in their letter 12th December 2017 has no objection in principle to the proposed development.

However, concerns are expressed in terms of the adequacy of the mitigation in bringing noise levels down to acceptable limits and the approach the assessor (PDA) in justifying any remaining noise that would otherwise be concluded as having a significant impact or significant adverse impact. A report dated 21st November 2017 supports the 12th December 2017 response. The report goes into the specifics of the assessment methodology adopted by PDA.

The Agency is also concerned about the risk of changes in or deterioration in the adopted mitigation over time, and the likelihood of complaints in any case remaining.

The Agency concludes that in the event that the impact assessment is accepted and the residential development goes ahead the Agency would appreciate some recognition that the ongoing mitigation of remaining noise levels lies with the residents of the new housing estate and not with the operator, EMR. e) Countryside’s Final Position

Page 193 The applicant is of the opinion that the updated reports and assessments submitted with the application have reviewed in detail the relationship between the proposed residential development and the operations at EMR. They are if the opinion that through the addition of mitigation including acoustic fencing, re-orientation of the units, enhanced glazing, use of fixed windows and use of alternative ventilation that new dwellings can be built on site without having a negative impact on either new residents or EMR’s operation. f) LPAs Position

The City’s Environmental Consultants are satisfied that with the implementation of the identified noise mitigation measures i.e. the acoustic barriers, acoustic double glazing, alternative ventilation systems that internal and external noise levels are likely to meet those required by the City Council, based on BS8233:2014 in respect of road traffic noise impacting the site. Further acoustic assessments submitted using the appropriate BS4142:2014 assessment methodology have confirmed that noise levels internally and externally can meet appropriate standards, with mitigation.

The mitigation proposed is substantial and includes the following;

 The site layout including the 32m standoff from the southern boundary with EMR, and the orientation of the houses closest to EMR.  A 5m high acoustic fence running along the full length of the southern boundary of the site. This fence will have a mass of 25kg/sqm. The applicant has confirmed that this will have a life expectancy of 25 years and its on-going maintenance will be dealt with by a management company;  2.5m high screen walls will be provided around eastern and western boundaries of outdoor amenity spaces closest to EMR, and between some of the plots  Fixed windows will be secured on all habitable rooms windows in the front and gable elevation of properties directly facing the boundary with EMR.;  Identified plots will have upgraded mechanical ventilation to allow for rapid ventilation and cooling; and  Identified plots will have upgraded glazing to the following specification (glass, air gap, glass mm) . Ground floor units 6/12/6 . First Floor 12/12/8.4 . Second Floor / roof rooms 12.8/16/6

It is important to understand that the nature and character of the noise (as pointed out by MAS above) is such that it cannot be described as “anonymous”, or “steady” such as, for example, road traffic noise. It is a fact that future residents will hear noise from EMR to varying degrees when in their garden areas, or other areas around their homes.

BS4142:2014 is a standard which attempts to provide a basis for the consistent assessment of industrial and commercial sound, such as is produced from EMR. The method for this assessment, in simple terms can be described as follows;

 Measure the “background” noise level (the level of noise without the specific noise operating)  Measure the “specific sound level” (the noise from EMR operations)*  A correction (or penalty) is then applied to Specific Noise Level to account for specific acoustic features (such as impulsiveness, tonality, intermittency and other specific characteristics). This is known as the Rating Level  The Rating Level is then subtracted from the Background Level to determine the significance of the sound.

The standard states that the significance of a noise is generally as follows; a) Typically, the greater this difference, the greater the magnitude of the impact. b) A difference of around +10 dB or more is likely to be an indication of a significant adverse impact, depending on the context. c) A difference of around +5 dB is likely to be an indication of an adverse impact, depending on the context.

Page 194 d) The lower the rating level is relative to the measured background sound level, the less likely it is that the specific sound source will have an adverse impact or a significant adverse impact. Where the rating level does not exceed the background sound level, this is an indication of the specific sound source having a low impact, depending on the context.

The assessment of industrial noise using BS4142:2014 is considered a robust and appropriate methodology. It is the view of the City’s Environmental Consultant that PDA have undertaken a thorough assessment, using conservative (but appropriate) background noise levels to compare with the specific noise, including ship loading operations.

In the latest PDA report, with mitigation, the BS4142 assessment showed that during the noisiest activity (ship loading) and with mitigation; - All internal noise levels will meet BS8233 standards - Garden areas will meet BS8233 standards - The BS4142 assessment indicates a low impact in outdoor areas.

With respect to ship loading, Information from EMR (email dated 8th September 2015) would indicate that ship loading takes place at a greater rate than once every month. Indications are that the decline in ship loading activities over recent years due to the economic down turn has now halted and may even be rising again. In 2010 twenty eight ships were loaded and in 2011 it was twenty nine. It should be noted that ship loading is only permitted to a maximum of 11.5 hours per day, and there are between 1 and 2 ship loading events per month lasting up to 5 days. Not all ship loading involves the noisiest activity (loading with plate and girder) and a number of ships are loaded with lighter metal. The nature of EMR business provides a level of uncertainty as noise experienced at this current time could increase due to intensification, changes in hours of operation or process changes etc.

Any changes to the hours of operation would require an application to vary the current permit, which the Environment Agency would consider. The Agency would consider the noise implications of any extended hours and this would have to include consideration of neighbouring amenity.

In respect of the comments from the applicant in respect of EMR operating outside their permit. The EA have confirmed that they are not currently investigating this matter as there have not been formal complaints from local residents. The Permit (EAWML 50335, dated 12th February 2007) authorises EMR to operate a metal recycling facility at Irwell Park Wharf. The permit lists a number of conditions to control the environmental impacts from various on-site operations. Section 5.2 of the Permit deals with the monitoring and control of noise, as follows:

Measures shall be implemented and maintained throughout the operational life of the site to control and monitor noise emissions from the site, in accordance with the standards specified in condition 1.3 and section WP/9.2.

All emissions to air from the specified waste management operations on the site shall be free from noise at levels which are likely to cause harm to human health or serious detriment to the amenity of the locality outside the site boundary, as perceived by an authorised officer of the Agency.

On detection or notification of noise pollution, that is or is likely to be transported beyond the site boundary at such levels that it is likely to cause harm to human health or serious detriment to the amenity of the locality, immediate action shall be taken to stop the waste handling operations giving rise to the noise.

The incident and the remedial action shall be recorded in the site diary.

The EA has various powers of enforcement in respect of non-compliance of the Permit conditions and in order to bring about improvements and compliance with conditions. Ultimately, the EA could revoke a Permit for non- compliance and stop a particular activity from taking place. The Permit holder has various defences to any enforcement action, including the best available technique (BAT) defence i.e. that all practicable measures are being deployed in the control of noise, taking financial costs into consideration. BAT are the measures that can be used to prevent or to minimise emissions of noise.

The EA controls will remain on EMR so long as the site holds an Environmental Permit. The means by which the EA would assess whether noise from EMR was in breach of the conditions would be by means of

Page 195 undertaking a BS4142:2014 assessment. The same assessment as undertaken by PDA in support of the application.

It is noted that, whilst previous complaints have been received from a resident on Boardman Street, these properties will have some of the benefit of the acoustic mitigation proposed in the current scheme e.g. the new acoustic fence and some of the new buildings providing noise protection

With respect to the NPPG-Noise (see table above) it is considered that, with the mitigation in place, the noise climate across the site would fall between No Observed Effect Level (NOEL) when EMR was not operating (and at times when EMR is operating), and Observed Adverse Effect Level (OAEL). The appropriate action (in accordance with Planning Practice Guidance- Noise) is to “Mitigate and Reduce to a Minimum”. The present scheme is therefore compliant with the Guidance.

Measurements taken in accordance with the methodology in BS4142:2014 have been used to design a mitigation scheme that ensures that noise levels meet the standards contained within BS8233:2014. Mitigation includes; a 5m noise barrier, 32m buffer zone, houses orientated to provide acoustic screening boundary treatments to gardens, acoustic glazing and alternative ventilation)

It is the view of the City Council’s Environmental Consultant that the substantial mitigation proposed, whilst not making the noise inaudible, minimises the impact of noise on residents (as described in NPPG-Noise) and the risk of future complaints about EMR.

As such, noise has been shown not to be a constraint and on balance the scheme is acceptable in noise terms with conditions. g) Consideration of the Objections

On the basis of the plans originally submitted in 2014, the Local Planning Authority was concerned about two incompatible land uses being in juxtaposition and the likelihood of noise complaints being made by future residents. In turn, this could put pressure on EMR through possible enforcement actions by the Environment Agency.

However, the applicant has revised the housing scheme on a number of occasions, to the point where the current scheme, with significant mitigation as outlined above, would appear to satisfy required design standards in respect of noise, both within the dwellings and in private external amenity areas.

While there can be no guarantee that future complaints will not arise and that noise will not be heard in outdoor areas and within some dwellings on occasions, the City’s Environmental Consultants are satisfied that the applicant’s noise assessment is robust enough (to BS412:2014 and to other standards) and that the proposed noise mitigation measures are adequate enough to provide a satisfactory level of amenity for future residents.

As PDA state in their response letter of 9th January 2018, much of the weight of the MAS report’s arguments appear to be those personal to the author and presented in non-peer reviewed conference papers. It is the view of the City’s Environmental Consultants that the process of noise assessment undertaken by PDA appears to have been done to appropriate current planning guidance and published noise related standards.

The calculation methodology adopted by PDA is by reference to well accepted standards of noise propagation, and noise propagation calculations have been carried out in accordance with ISO961313 part 2, which is widely accepted as the most accurate standard method of calculating noise propagation outdoors. Similarly, PDA’s calculations of noise break-in through residential facades would appear to have been carried out in full detailed octave band calculation using the composite sound insulation of the facades and correcting for reverberation within typical habitable rooms.

The overall thrust of the MAS report is critical of the methodology used by PDA. However, it would appear that PDA has used the same sound power levels for recycling activities measured by MAS at the EMR site; the same sound propagation models as those advocated by MAS elsewhere; derived internal noise levels by applying correction factors to recommended internal noise levels (as specified in BS8223:2014) to account for the acoustic character and feature of the noise from EMR; and assessment of the residual impact of the proposals is in accordance with BS4142:2014 (including the necessary consideration of context).

Page 196 Noise assessment of ships on the canal has not been asked for by the City’s Environmental Consultants or has been provided by the applicant. However, it is likely that ship noise and associated activities is insignificant in comparison to the levels of noise emitted from EMR operations. Given the significant noise mitigation proposed to the site and the building envelops, including fixed windows to bedrooms and living rooms of the nearest dwellings, any noise impact due to the movement of vessels is likely to be low. Therefore the Local Planning Authority is satisfied that sufficient noise related information has been provided on which to make a decision without any further noise survey of canal traffic.

The headline concerns raised by the Environment Agency include, the appropriate use of standards; differing noise levels reported in two PDA reports; choice of background sound levels used in the PDA assessment; consideration of low frequency noise measured during ship loading activities; reference to open windows having to be kept closed; the use of BS4142:2014 and taking context into account; and concerns about the reported high levels of noise in the PDA assessment reports. The City’s Environmental Consultants have considered the Agency’s technical comments in respect of noise and PDA’s response and is of the view that the Agency’s concerns have already been addressed, either in the latest application submissions or in PDA’s supporting noise assessments and reports.

The Agency has an enforcement responsibility in terms of EMR’s Environmental Permit for handling scrap metal (permit reference: EAWML/50335, issued 28th January 2004). One of the Permit’s conditions relates to the control of noise emissions beyond the site boundary likely to cause harm to health or serious detriment to the amenity of the locality. h) Conclusion

The City’s Environmental Consultant is satisfied that the appropriate noise standard, BS4142:2014 has been used in this case, and that it has been properly applied. He is also satisfied that other accepted criteria (e.g. BS8233:2014 and World Health Organization Guideline standards) have been used (in association with BS4142:2014) to inform the necessary mitigation measures in this case. BS 4142:2104 does takes into account the character of noise, as in this case, by applying a penalty to the rating level. PDA’s noise assessment, even with such adjustments applied, would appear to show that predicted noise levels will achieve expected noise design criteria within residences and in private external amenity areas.

The City’s Environmental Consultant can relate to the objections that have been made on noise grounds, and in many cases the questions and concerns raised are ones which they have previously shared and discussed with the applicant and PDA Acoustics. Adjustments have subsequently been made to their submissions and being mindful of the proposed package of mitigation and having regard to the objections submitted the City’s Environmental Consultant is of the view that they can support the scheme subject to the imposition of conditions. iii) Contaminated Land

NPPF paragraph 121 states that planning decisions should ensure that the proposed site is suitable for its new use taking account of ground conditions, including pollution arising from previous uses and any proposals for mitigation including land remediation or impacts on the natural environment arising from that remediation.

Previous significant concerns were raised with The Phase 1 and 2 Geo-Environmental Report submitted with the application in 2014, however a Remediation and Enabling Works Strategy has been submitted in support of the application which includes an updated Risk Assessment to address these concerns.

It is noted in the report that access to the Western Sector of the site was not possible, and further investigation required in this area will be addressed during the remediation process with subsequent verification testing.

The latest report has undertaken further investigations around the historic above ground tank features. It is not clear whether additional ground gas investigations have been undertaken (as no records of monitoring are included in the report), however the report does mention monitoring results from areas of the site not previously investigated.

In light of the comments above a full suite of contaminated land conditions and gas monitoring conditions are recommended. Subject to the imposition of these conditions the scheme is considered to accord with EN17 of the UDP.

Page 197

7. Ecology

The applicant has submitted an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey in support of the planning application. This document has been reviewed by Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU). The ecological value of the site was assessed in 2014 where the site was not considered to have significant constraints. The site was considered to consist of low value habitats, with ecological interest restricted to the trees on the site and associated bird nesting potential. Since this original report was submitted, all industrial buildings on site have been demolished, therefore an updated ecological report has been submitted and this indicates that there have been no significant material changes in the ecological circumstances.

The survey incorporated an assessment of all trees and buildings for bat roosting potential. The assessment indicated that all buildings and nearly all the trees had negligible bat roosting potential. Two trees have low potential for bat roosting. GMEU have recommended that since the existing buildings on site have been cleared that an informative be placed on the condition highlighting to the applicant that under the Habitat Regulation it is an offence to disturb, harm of kill bats.

All trees and shrubs on site will be removed as part of its redevelopment. GMEU has recommended conditions which prevent the removal of trees and shrubs during the bird nesting season. As 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 the attachment of a condition is not necessary as it would duplicate that legislation. Therefore an informative highlighting this to the applicant is recommended.

Japanese knotweed has been identified within the south western part of the site and the reassessment has indicated that this may have expanded over the last three years. GMEU have recommended a condition for the submission of a method statement which will detail avoidance, control and eradication measures for Japanese knotweed.

Since the application was assess by GMEU in 2014 there has been an increased emphasis on enhancement of the ecological potential of watercourses as a result of the Water Framework Directive. The site if buffered from the canal by approximately 40m of land therefore GMEU note the risks during construction of negative impacts are low. However upon review of the drainage plan submitted in support of the application GMEU note that there appears to be an existing surface water outfall from the site in to the Manchester Ship Canal. They therefore recommend that measures be put in place during construction to prevent pollutants and sediment reaching the canal via this hydrological pathway and recommend a condition to safeguard this. They also note that the drainage strategy looks to drain surface water when the development is built through this route and therefore a further condition is recommended requiring the applicant to demonstrate that there will be no negative impacts on the ecological potential of the Manchester Ship Canal due to disposing of surface water this way.

GMEU note that all the trees within the site will be felled but consider that the revise landscaping strategy which includes a significant native tree planting along the southern boundary as well as additional planting across the proposed housing development will provide adequate ecological mitigation for what it being lost. They recommended that the landscaping along the southern boundary be conditioned to secure 5 years post development maintenance and monitoring scheme. In this regard a management/maintenance strategy is being sought for this area and the landscaping scheme will ensure that any removed, uprooted, destroyed, die or become severely damaged trees are replaced.

In light of the above and subject to conditions 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.

8. Trees and Landscaping

The Trees and Development Supplementary Planning Document (2006) presents a suite of policies concerning the retention and replacement of trees. The applicant has undertaken an Arboricultural assessment as part of the planning application submission which presents a schedule of trees surveyed on site (classified according to BS 5837:2012) and a Tree Constraints Plan. An addendum to the tree report submitted with the proposal for 244 units confirms that there are no major changes to the site from that reported under the original submission in 2014.

Page 198

Within the proposed application site boundary and including adjacent land, there were a total of 99 trees/groups that were assessed as potential being affected by the development proposals.

Within the application boundary itself 62 individual trees were surveyed, 16 groups and 1 hedge, all of which will be felled as part of the redevelopment. The majority if the trees surveyed and to be felled are Category C and U trees and these should not be allowed to constrain a development. There are no category A trees either within or adjoining the site that could be effected by the proposed development.

There are 11 individual trees and 6 groups which are considered to be category B, this equates to 34 trees in total. There are also 13 category B trees that sit outside the application boundary and these will not be felled as they not within the ownership of the applicant.

The category B trees within the site are located towards the entrance of the site close to Barton Lane. In order to make the necessary alterations to the site access and also so that there are dwellings that front Barton Lane giving the development a presence within the street scene it will not be possible to retain any of the trees. The loss of trees will have a visual impact when viewed from Barton Lane however replacement tree planning in this location is proposed as is a site wide landscaping scheme.

The applicant has submitted a series of detailed landscape plans in support of the application. These plans were reviewed by Urban Vision’s Landscape Consultant who considered that the proposed plans are of a high quality. The plans show extensive replacement tree planting across the site. It is considered that the landscaping would have positive impact on the visual amenity of the area and biodiversity . The landscaping plans require small revisions to account for the changes to the turning heads therefore final landscape details and implementation of the landscape scheme will be secured by condition.

9. Flood risk and drainage

The applicant has submitted a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) as part of the submission in accordance with the requirements of NPPF and the NPPG. The FRA indicates that the site is located entirely within Flood Zone 1 and as such is assessed as having less than 1 in 1,000 annual probability of river or sea flooding. The Sequential Test does not apply to residential development within Flood Zone 1 and as such the location of the proposed development is considered appropriate in terms of flood risk.

The site forms part of the North West Critical Drainage Area and as such this has implications for surface water drainage considerations of new developments. The SFRA requires a 50% reduction in flows for development on Brownfield sites within a Critical Drainage Area. A surface water condition is therefore recommended and this will reduce flows as per the SFRA.

10. Sustainable Design and Construction

The applicant has completed the City Council Sustainable checklist and also has submitted a summary outlining how the scheme performs against key criteria set out in policy SDC1 of the Councils Sustainable Design and Construction SPD.

1. Minimise Energy Consumption – The applicant adopts a fabric first approach toward energy consumption and the scheme has been designed so a number of the units benefit from passive solar gain. 2. Maximise the Provision of On-Site Renewable Energy Supply and/or Connections to a Decentralised Low – Carbon Energy Supply – The fabric first approach is above Building Regulations requirement outline in the SPD and as such there is no requirement for further renewable technologies. Notwithstanding that there are also viability reasons for not exploring renewable technologies. 3. Incorporate public and private open spaces that offer shade and shelter from increasing temperatures and/or protection from wind, rain and increasing likelihood of extreme weather events– The scheme provides for 5,762sqm of public open space this area will be landscaped and this landscaping will offer shelter and shade. 4. Minimise the impacts of ambient air and noise pollution – These impacts have been given due consideration through the planning process. 5. Minimise water consumption – measures will be put in place to reduce water consumption ie low flush toilets and aerated taps.

Page 199 6. Minimise the speed and quantity of surface water run-off – The LPA is seeking to secure a 50% reduction in surface water run off and this will be secured by condition. 7. Minimise the impact of flood events – The site is within Flood Zone 1 8. Maximise the use of responsibly sourced and/or recycled building materials – The applicant has not confirmed where materials will be sourced. 9. Minimise construction waste - The applicant has submitted a Site Waste Management Plan in support of the planning application in respect of points 8 and 9. 10.Incorporate adequate waste recycling facilities – All dwellings will be provided with appropriate waste bins including recycling bins in accordance with Council wide standards. 11.Maximise the provision of wildlife habitats – The existing site has low ecological value. It is acknowledged by GMEU that the provision of private gardens and public open space will improve the sites ecological value. 12.Incorporate appropriate facilities for cyclists and pedestrians – The site has good level of permeability and will provide for footpaths within the development. All dwellings and apartments will have provision for cycle storage.

The applicants approach to sustainability is considered to be acceptable and meets the requirements of policy EN22 of the UDP and the Councils Sustainable Design and Construction SPD.

11. Planning Obligations

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

The SPD advises that a development of this nature in this part of the City should contribute towards open space and education. Transport and public realm contributions are site specific and in this instance it is considered that the proposed development is of a size that would impact on the surrounding public realm and therefore a contribution towards public realm is also sought.

The applicant has however submitted a viability appraisal to demonstrate that the scheme would not be financially deliverable if the contribution sought was too high.

The Planning Obligations 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 submitted viability appraisal has been extensively reviewed with most matters having been agreed. Build costs are the subject of ongoing discussion and an update on the viability position will be provided prior to the panel meeting through the amendment sheet.

Conclusion

This application seeks to redevelop a former employment site to create a residential development. The evidence submitted with the application demonstrates that the site is surplus to employment needs and that the introduction of dwellings will not compromise the operating conditions of neighbouring employment uses, namely EMR which operates on adjoining land. The form of development would meet the aspirations of the housing planning guidance and bring an underutilised site back into use which would have a positive impact on the amenity of the area. The development would provide future occupiers with an acceptable level of residential amenity and would not compromise the amenity of existing residents; with respect to loss of light, privacy or visual amenity, or to noise and air pollution. There will be no adverse ecological impacts. The applicant has identified acceptable strategies for dealing with land contamination and the drainage of the site. The development has incorporated a number of sustainability and energy saving measures into its design and layout. The Highways Authority considers that the scheme is unlikely to result in a severe highway impact. A financial contribution is still being negotiated and once agreed will be used to fund projects to mitigate the impacts of the development. For the reasons set out in the appraisal section above, it is considered that the proposed development represents a sustainable form of development and as such it is considered that planning

Page 200 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 an appropriate financial contribution towards education, open space, public realm improvements and/or affordable housing.

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

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

Conditions

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

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

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

Planning layout (SK365-PL-01 Rev FF) Site Sections 1 (SK365-CS-01 Rev A) Site Sections 2 (SK365-CS-02 Rev A) Site Sections A-A (SK365-CS-02) The Ashbourne (AHSB-01) The Ashop (ASHO-01) The Baybridge (BAYB-01) The Dunham (DUNH-01) The Ellesmere (ELLE-01) The Grantham (GRANT-01) The Longford (LONG-01) The Lymington (LYMI-01) The New Calder (NCAL-01) The New Stamford (NSTAM14 -6.0 Rev A & NSTAM14-01 Rev A) The New Weaver (NWEAV 14-01, NWEAV-6.0-DET, NWEAV-6.0-SEMI) The Trent (TREN-01) The Walton (WALT-01) The Stamford MOD (STAM-01 Rev C & STAM-6.0 Rev D) The Stamford UP MOD (STAM-UP-01 & STAM-UP-6.0) The Dunham MOD (Dun-6.0 Rev C & DUN-01 Rev B) Apartments (SK365-APT-PL-01 Rev B) Single detached garage (NSD 9800) Double Detached Garage (NSD 9801) Twin Detached Garage (NSD 9802) Sales detached garage (NSD 9803) Boundary plan (SK365-BP-01 Rev B) Wall types (NSD 9001 Rev C) Fence types (NSD 9102) Post and rail fence (NSD 9105) Metal underpass gate (NSD 9106) Hooped top railings (NSD 9202) External works layout (40-12-01 to 6 Rev P4)

Page 201 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning and to protect residential amenity in accordance with EN7 and E5 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

3. Prior to occupation of any building, the applicant shall submit and agree with the Local Planning Authority a phased occupation plan taking into account the acoustic character of the site. The plan shall demonstrate that in all occupied properties noise levels within internal habitable rooms and external amenity spaces meet or exceed the standards contained in BS8233:2014 Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings (as shown below).

LOCATION 07:00 – 23:00 23:00 – 07:00 Living Room 35 dB LAEQ, 16 Hour -- Dining Room / Area 40 LAEQ, 16 Hour -- Bedroom 35 LAEQ, 16 Hour 30 LAEQ, 8 Hour External private amenity pace 55 LAEQ, 16 Hour

The development shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the approved phasing plan scheme.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers and to safeguard the operations of employment used in accordance with policies E5 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. Prior to occupation acoustic glazing shall be installed to habitable rooms with a façade facing Barton Lane in units 1, 2, 242 and 243 shown on site layout drawing SK365-PL-01, Revision FF. The acoustic glazing shall achieve, as a minimum, a sound reduction index (R) of 31 dB Rw. The acoustic glazing shall be retained thereafter.

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

5. Prior to occupation acoustic glazing shall be installed into plots 36-40, 44 – 48, 52 – 56, 60 – 64, 65 – 87, 91 – 95, 99 – 103, 107 – 110, 174 – 181 and 244 on site layout drawing SK365-PL-01, Revision FF in accordance with drawings SK365-APT-PL-01 rev B, The Dunham (Mod) 6.0 Elevations (Brick) DUN-6.0 rev C, The Dunham Mod Floor Plans DUN-01 rev B, The Stamford UP Mod 6.0 Elevations (Brick) STAM- UP-6.0, The Stamford UP Mod Floor Plans STAM-UP-01, The Stamford Mod 6.0 Elevations (Brick) STAM-6.0 rev B, The Stamford Mod Floor Plans STAM-01 rev C. The acoustic glazing shall achieve, as a minimum, a sound reduction index (R) as detailed in table X below and shall not contain opening lights in accordance with the drawings above.

Minimum Sound Reduction Index R (dB) at Octave Band Location Centre Frequency (Hz) Rw+Ctr Rw 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 Ground 20 18 28 38 34 38 27 31 floor Plots First Floor 31 32 39 46 53 57 39 44 Plots Second Floor and Roof 26 29 38 45 45 56 36 41 Rooms Plots

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers and to safeguard the operations of employment used in accordance with policies E5 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

6. Prior to the occupation of plots 36-40, 45 – 48, 53 – 56, 61 – 64, 65 – 86, 91 – 94, 99 – 102, 107 – 110, 174 – 181 and 244 shown on site layout drawing SK365-PL-01, Revision FF the positive pressure

Page 202 ventilation system as specified in drawings ENV/06288 Rev OR (Front Flat Type A-MHVR, Flat Type E- MHVR, Stamford and Dunham) to run at continuous trickle speed with capability to provide purge ventilation shall be installed.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers and to safeguard the operations of employment used in accordance with policies E5 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. Prior to occupation of units 36-40, 45 – 48, 53 – 56, 61 – 64, 65 – 86, 91 – 94, 99 – 102, 107 – 110, 174 – 181 and 244, shown on site layout drawing SK365-PL-01, Revision FF, a Validation Test of the sound attenuation works shall be completed and the results submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Such validation test shall:

a) Be completed in accordance with an approved method statement which shall first be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. b) Demonstrate that the specified noise levels have been achieved. c) In the event that the specified noise levels have not been achieved, then notwithstanding the sound attenuation works thus far approved, a further scheme of sound attenuation works capable of achieving the specified noise levels and recommended by an acoustic consultant shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. d) Such further scheme of works shall be installed as approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any unit set out above is occupied and shall thereafter be retained unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers and to safeguard the operations of employment used in accordance with policies E5 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

8. The fixed acoustic glazing and mechanical ventilation to units for plots 36-40, 44 – 48, 52 – 56, 60 – 64, 65 – 87, 91 – 95, 99 – 103, 107 – 110, 174 – 181 and 244 on site layout drawing SK365-PL-01, Revision FF shown in drawings SK365-APT-PL-01 rev B, The Dunham (Mod) 6.0 Elevations (Brick) DUN-6.0 rev C, The Dunham Mod Floor Plans DUN-01 rev B, The Stamford UP Mod 6.0 Elevations (Brick) STAM-UP- 6.0, The Stamford UP Mod Floor Plans STAM-UP-01, The Stamford Mod 6.0 Elevations (Brick) STAM- 6.0 rev B, The Stamford Mod Floor Plans STAM-01 rev C shall only be replaced by glazing meeting the same acoustic performance criteria specified in conditions 5 and 6 above.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers and to safeguard the operations of employment used in accordance with policies E5 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

9. The Acoustic Barrier, as shown on shown on site layout drawing SK365-PL-01, Revision FF along the southern boundary of the site, shall be erected in accordance with Drawing No J7/01047 and the detail contained within Jakoustic Commercial and Highway JSW 29 Issue 01 prior to occupation of any unit on site. The barrier shall have a minimum density of 25kg/m2, be 5000mm in height relative to the ground level and constructed of a material with no holes or openings.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers and to safeguard the operations of employment used in accordance with policies E5 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

10. The acoustic barrier as per condition 9 shall be retained in situ thereafter and managed and maintained in strict accordance with a scheme which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to occupation of the development.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers and to safeguard the operations of employment used in accordance with policies E5 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 203 11. The 2.5m high brick walls as shown on SK365-BP-01, Revision B shall be erected prior to occupation of any unit on site, unless otherwise agreed through the phasing plan (condition 3) and be retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers and to safeguard the operations of employment used in accordance with policies E5 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

12. Prior to the occupation of units 239 – 242 and 1 – 7 the 1800mm Acoustic fence shall be installed as shown on site layout drawing SK365-PL-01, Revision FF. The fence shall have a minimum density of 18kg/m2 and be constructed of a material with no holes or openings. Once erected the fence shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers and to safeguard the operations of employment used in accordance with policies E5 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

13. The walls and roof of the dwelling hereby approved shall be constructed in accordance with the specification outlined at 8.1.1 and 8.1.3 of the Proposed Residential Development – New Haven Business Park, Eccles, Addendum Noise Assessment (Low Background).

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future occupiers and to safeguard the operations of employment used in accordance with policies E5 and EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

14. Prior to the commencement of development, save for site clearance and remediation, full construction details of the proposed improved site access onto Barton Lane, including the removal of the traffic island, the provision of tactile paving, associated resurfacing works and new road markings with junction protection in form double yellow lines shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The access shall be constructed in strict accordance with the agreed details.

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

15. Visibility splays of 2.4m x 43m shall be provided in both directions either side of the application site’s junction with Barton Lane and from the driveways on Barton Lane and no means of enclosure shall be shall be subsequently erected or landscaping allowed to grow to a height in excess of 0.6m. The visibility splays shall be implemented prior to first occupation of any dwelling hereby approved and shall be retained thereafter.

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

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

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

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

(i) the times of construction activities on site which, unless agreed otherwise as part of the approved Statement, shall be limited to between 8am-6pm Monday to Friday and 9am-2pm Saturday only (no

Page 204 working on Sundays or Bank Holidays). Quieter activities which are carried out inside buildings such as electrical works, plumbing and plastering may take place outside of agreed working times so long as they do not result in significant disturbance to neighbouring occupiers; (ii) the spaces for and management of the parking of site operatives and visitors vehicles; (iii) the storage and management of plant and materials (including loading and unloading activities); (iv) the erection and maintenance of security hoardings including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate; (v) measures to prevent the deposition of dirt on the public highway; (vi) a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition/construction works; (vii) measures to minimise disturbance to any neighbouring occupiers from noise and vibration, including from any piling activity; viii) measures to prevent the pollution of watercourses; and (ix) measures for managing and controlling dust emissions during construction (x) a community engagement strategy which explains how local neighbours will be kept updated on the construction process, key milestones, and how they can report to the site manager or other appropriate representative of the developer, instances of unneighbourly behaviour from construction operatives. The statement shall also detail the steps that will be taken when unneighbourly behaviour has been reported. A log of all reported instances shall be kept on record and made available for inspection by the local a planning authority upon request.

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

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

19. The landscaping works shown on the approved plans shall be carried out in accordance with any timing / phasing arrangements agreed or within 18 months of first occupation of the development hereby permitted, whichever is the later. Any trees or shrubs planted or retained in accordance with this condition which are removed, uprooted, destroyed, die or become severely damaged or become seriously diseased within 5 years of planting shall be replaced within the next planting season by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted, unless the Local Planning Authority gives its consent in writing to any variation.

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

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

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

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

Page 205 Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped having regard to its location and the nature of the proposed development and in accordance with Policies DES1 and DES9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

21. Before development commences a method statement detailing avoidance, control and eradication measures for Japanese knotweed together with a timetable for implementation shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The agreed method statement shall be implemented in full.

Reason - It is an offence under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 to introduce, plant or cause to grow wild any plant listed in Schedule 9 part 2 of the Act.

22. No development, site clearance, earth moving shall take place or material or machinery brought on site until a method statement to protect the Manchester Ship Canal from accidental spillages, via any existing on-site drainage has been supplied to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority. All measures will be implemented and maintained for the durations of the construction period in accordance with the approved details.

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

23. No development, with the exception of site clearance and remediation, shall take place until it can be demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the ecological potential of the Manchester Ship Canal resulting from the disposal of surface water post-development submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details, as approved, shall be implemented in full in accordance with a timetable which has first been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and to limit ecological impacts of the development in accordance with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, the Nature Conservation and Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document and the National Planning Policy Framework.

24. No development shall take place until a scheme for surface water drainage for the site using sustainable drainage methods and which includes details of how water quality will be improved, and how existing surface water discharge rates reduced to 50% of the existing runoff has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation or use of the development hereby approved unless alternative timescales have been agreed in writing as part of the strategy.

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

26. Prior to the occupation of the development (or alternative timeframe which has been agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), an updated Travel Plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The agreed Travel Plan shall be implemented and reviewed in accordance with the timetable embodied therein.

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

Page 206 27. Notwithstanding any information submitted with the application an updated site investigation survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. This should include an assessment of the potential risks to:

* human health, * property (existing or proposed) including buildings, pets, and service lines and pipes, * adjoining land, * groundwaters and surface waters, * ecological systems,

Where unacceptable risks are identified, an appraisal of remedial options and proposal of the preferred option(s) to form a remediation strategy for the site.

The development shall thereafter be carried out in full accordance with the duly approved remediation strategy.

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

28. Pursuant to condition 27 and prior to first use or occupation; a verification plan shall be submitted and agreed by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall provide details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.

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

29. Pursuant to condition 28 and prior to first use or occupation of each phase / unit a verification report, which validates that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed with the Local Planning Authority, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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

30. No development shall commence until proposals for gas protection measures, to be incorporated into the proposed building to prevent the ingress of landfill gas or ground gas, have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved gas protection measures shall be incorporated into the development.

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

31. Pursuant to condition 30; and prior to first use or occupation a verification report, which validates that all gas protection measures to be incorporated within the development were completed in accordance with those agreed with the Local Planning Authority, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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

32. Any soil or soil forming materials to be brought to site for use in garden areas or soft landscaping shall be tested for contamination and suitability for use prior to importation to site. Prior to occupation, evidence

Page 207 and verification information (for example, laboratory certificates) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the LPA.

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

33. If, during the course of development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present, no further works shall be undertaken in the affected area and the contamination shall be reported to the Local Planning Authority as soon as reasonably practicable (but within a maximum of 5 days from the find). Prior to further works being carried out in the identified area, a further assessment shall be made and appropriate remediation implemented in accordance with a scheme also agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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

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

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

35. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved plans showing the existing and proposed ground levels across the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The proposed plans shall include a level adjacent to the site which will remain unchanged. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted details.

Reason -To enable any proposed changes of level to be assessed in accordance with the provisions of policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Informatives

1. STANDING ADVICE - DEVELOPMENT LOW RISK AREA

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

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

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

2. In order to construct the proposed site access road to a standard capable of adoption, the applicant will need to enter into a Section 38 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.

3. As the proposals involve work in the adopted Public Highway on Barton 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.

4. Whilst the trees T42 and T45 to be felled have been assessed as low risk for bats, the applicant is reminded that under the Habitat Regulation it is an offence to disturb, harm or kill bats. If a bat is found

Page 208 felling work should cease immediately and a suitably licensed bat worker employed to assess how best to safeguard the bat(s). Natural England should also be informed.

5. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) makes it an offence (with certain limited exceptions and in the absence of a licence) to intentionally to kill, injure or take any wild bird, or intentionally to damage, take or destroy its nest whilst it is being built or is in use, or to take or destroy its eggs. Further, the Act affords additional protection to specific species of birds listed in Schedule 1 of the Act. In respect of these species it is unlawful to intentionally or recklessly to disturb such a bird whilst it is nest-building or is at or near a nest with eggs or young; or to disturb their dependent young. You are therefore advised to seek the advice of a suitably qualified ecologist before commencing works on site.

6. No vegetation clearance required by the scheme should take place in the optimum period for bird nesting (July to August inclusive) unless nesting birds have been shown to be absent by a suitably qualified person.

7. The following advice is provided by the Environment Agency:

Model Procedures and good practice

We recommend that developers should:

 Follow the risk management framework provided in CLR11, Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, when dealing with land affected by contamination  Refer to the Environment Agency Guiding principles for land contamination for the type of information that we required in order to assess risks to controlled waters from the site. The Local Authority can advise on risk to other receptors, such as human health.  Consider using the National Quality Mark Scheme for Land Contamination Management which involves the use of competent persons to ensure that land contamination risks are appropriately managed.  Refer to the contaminated land pages on GOV.UK for more information.

The redevelopment of the site may give rise to waste management issues and we would advise the Applicant as follows:

Reuse of material on site

The CLAIRE Definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice (version 2) provides operators with a framework for determining whether or not excavated material arising from site during remediation and/or land development works are waste or have ceased to be waste. Under the Code of Practice:

 Excavated materials that are recovered via a treatment operation can be re-used on-site providing they are treated to a standard such that they fit for purpose and unlikely to cause pollution  Treated materials can be transferred between sites as part of a hub and cluster project  Some naturally occurring clean material can be transferred directly between sites.

Developers should ensure that all contaminated materials are adequately characterised both chemically and physically, and that the permitting status of any proposed on site operations are clear. If in doubt, we should be contacted for advice at an early stage to avoid any delays.

We recommend that developers should refer to:

 The Position statement on the Definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice and;  The Environmental regulations page on GOV.UK.

Waste to be taken off site

Contaminated soil that is, or must be disposed of, is waste. Therefore, its handling, transport, treatment and disposal is subject to waste management legislation, which includes:

Page 209  Duty of Care Regulations 1991  Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005  Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2017  The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011

Developers should ensure that all contaminated materials are adequately characterised both chemically and physically in line with relevant guidance and that the permitting status of any proposed treatment or disposal activity is clear. If in doubt, we should be contacted for advice at an early stage to avoid any delays.

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

9. Consultation with the Manchester Ship Canal Company should be undertaken in connection with United Utilities to ensure that the discharge of Surface Water from the site is acceptable to both parties.

10. The acoustic performance of glazing systems and acoustic fences is highly dependent on being correctly installed to a high standard of workmanship, without holes and using high density filling materials instead of expanding foam. All joints, seals and materials should be checked prior to installation for defects, and such units rejected and replaced.

Page 210 Agenda Item 5j PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL PART I SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

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

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

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

Page 211

$4dbtljtf.rtf parallel to the M60. The Eccles Wastewater Treatment Works (EWwTW) is located on the eastern side of these two highways.

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

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

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

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

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

This application again seeks consent for the development of an outfall structure, retaining wall and maintenance hatch, of matching siting scale and design to that which was approved under application 14/64512/FUL. The proposals also include the construction of a temporary access road, linking Stadium Way with the site of the temporary construction compound - which would be adjacent to the outfall structure. This aspect of the scheme differs from previous iterations, whereby the temporary access road had a junction out onto the A57 Liverpool Road.

The proposed outfall structure would be set into the northern bank of the MSC, just to the east of the Salteye Brook. It would be set largely underwater with its wing walls flush with the existing profile of

Page 212

$4dbtljtf.rtf the bank. The submitted plans indicate that the structure measures approximately W10.2m x L17.7m and would be of concrete construction.

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

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

PUBLICITY

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

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

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

RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

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

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

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

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

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

Land To The West And East Of Junction 11 Of The M60, Eccles

Page 213

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONSULTATIONS

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

Page 214

$4dbtljtf.rtf Greater Manchester Ecological Unit (GMEU) – No objections. Conditions relating to the following matters have been recommended:  Submission of a precautionary pre-commencement survey of Salteye Brook for the presence of Water Voles.  Provision of replacement tree planting.  No vegetation clearance or tree felling required by the scheme to be undertaken during optimum bird nesting season.  Submission of a Method Statement for controlling the potential spread of invasive plant species.

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

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

Ramblers Association – No comments received to date.

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

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

Urban Vision Environment (Contaminated Land) – No objections

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

REPRESENTATIONS

Three separate streams of correspondence have been submitted to the LPA in response to this application, all raising objections to the proposed outfall structure and wider UU improvement works.

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

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

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

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

Page 215

$4dbtljtf.rtf Key: O = objection; R = applicant response and officer comment BDB = Bircham Dyson Bell; IP = Indigo Planning; WM = Walker Morris

O The proposal is EIA development on the basis that: raised  Since the previous proposal was screened the regulations governing EIA have by BDB; changed. The new regulations impose new and more extensive requirements as to IP; WM the information to be provided by applicants in order to enable screening decisions to be undertaken and impose new and more onerous requirements in respect of the content of screening decisions. They also identify new and different characteristics in the screening selection criteria set out in Schedule 3.  The Screening Opinion (SO) issued for the proposals in 2014 was flawed in that it failed to take into account the wider works proposed by UU, of which the outfall is necessarily but one part. It also failed to take into account the cumulative effects with other development and reached conclusions about impacts on the use of natural resources in the absence of any evidence justifying those conclusions. The SO failed to consider the environmental impacts associated with the operation of the development and failed to identify the fact that it is proposed in an area in which environmental quality standards laid down in EU legislation have already been exceeded. There is no consideration of whether or not the development is a change to, or extension to, an existing Schedule 2 development (Wastewater Treatment Plant).  UU consider that the development will have significant beneficial effects for the water quality in the Salteye Brook. If this is the case then EIA will plainly be required.

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

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

Page 216

$4dbtljtf.rtf contrary to UDP Policy E1. Already significant work has been undertaken, at cost and risk, in progressing with the detailed design and requisite approvals needed to deliver the rail link and this has helped underpin the funding secured to date.

R 1) The details of the BoA are a civil matter for discussion between UU & CoSCoS, which can take part during the forthcoming CPO inquiry. Notwithstanding this it is noted that UU have offered to grant a Build-over Agreement (BoA) that would allow a retail development to be constructed over the line of their proposed tunnel either pre- or post-construction of the tunnel. On this basis the wider UU proposals would not sterilise the land or prejudice the delivery of the retail development. 2) The potential impacts on the day-to-day operations of the Stadium site would be limited to the construction phase of the development (c.2-3yrs). The applicant has committed to ensuring that the impacts on the stadium (and its events) are minimised, and in line with normal working practices. Notwithstanding that elements of the wider scheme benefit from permitted development rights, the applicant has agreed that these working practices, along with appropriate measures to manage vehicle movements, should be detailed and agreed in a Construction Management Plan. The applicant has confirmed that a BoA could be granted that would enable the expansion of the stadium over the line of their proposed tunnel. Once operational, vehicular access to the site would be required on a very infrequent basis c. every 10yrs), and would be planned, as there are no moving parts to the development. 3) There is no conflict with Port Salford in terms of the permanent works proposed within this application (outfall structure and retaining wall). Whilst there is an overlap between the temporary construction compound for the applicant’s development and the proposed PS rail link, matters arising from the construction phase of development should not prevent the granting of planning permission. The interface between the proposed temporary working area and the PS scheme is a civil matter for discussion between the relevant parties. The wording within UDP Policy E1 does not preclude the proposed development and the applicant has adequately demonstrated that their scheme would not unduly prejudice the delivery of the developments that are envisaged and advocated within the Policy.

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

R  The applicant has stated that the design criteria quoted by BDB relates to the design of foul and surface water sewers serving development sites. It is therefore not applicable as the proposed outfall tunnel will carry flows treated at Eccles WwTW and screened storm flows, rather than the raw (untreated) sewage assumed by BDB. The typical ‘self-cleansing’ velocity for foul sewage is not directly relevant here, but the tunnel would achieve such a velocity around seven times a year.  For c.97% of the time the outfall tunnel will only be conveying flows that have been through the treatment process at Eccles WwTW. Sampling of the treated (final) effluent discharging from the WwTW has revealed that it is compliant with the EA’s discharge consent, which stipulates a limit of 45mg/l on the quantity of suspended

Page 217

$4dbtljtf.rtf solids.  Spill flows to the tunnel from the WwTW storm tanks will have passed through the existing 6mm aperture inlet screens and grit removal processes prior to being routed through the storm tanks. The heavier particles then settle out in these tanks and are subsequently removed for treatment elsewhere. A similar process occurs for storm flows from SAL0018 and the Eccles WwtW Inlet.  The applicant has stated that there is no valid justification to support the statement that the outfall tunnel could accumulate 5,000 – 6,500 tonnes of sludge prior to it becoming self-cleansing. They go on to calculate that a typical year’s spill would yield a potential annual solids volume of about 210 tonnes. In practice though, the yield of potential settlement in the outfall tunnel (as opposed to solids being transported through to the discharge) is not expected to typically exceed 100 tonnes per annum.  In further correspondence, the applicant has stated that there is no evidence to substantiate claims that 100 tonnes of solid particles will equate to 5,000 tonnes of sludge. The suspended solids in question do not settle and form “sludge” as contended, but form a deposit on the bottom of the pipe which will not accumulate in the way that BDB assert.  Any volumes of suspended solids are not additional volumes generated as a result of the scheme, but are solids that currently discharge to Salteye Brook.

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

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

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

O Inadequate / insufficient information has been submitted with the application to enable the LPA to reach an informed and balanced planning judgement. BDB 1) Ecology – The Planning statement refers to an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and a Water Vole Survey that were undertaken in 2012. The age of the surveys means they are no longer robust and their scope did not extend to include the MSC.

Page 218

$4dbtljtf.rtf 2) The tree survey that underpins the Arboricultural Report was also undertaken in 2012. As such there is no up to date assessment of the value of these trees within the Application. 3) The Validation Checklist requires all development affecting waste handling activities (e.g. sewage treatment works or poultry farms) to be accompanied by an Air Quality Assessment (AQA). The proposed development meets this criterion. When the proposed development is considered as a whole, including by reference to its intended function, it is plain that it should be treated as a modification to the Eccles WwTW. 4) The Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) provided by UU fails to adequately asses the flood risks for the development. It considers only the additional run-off from the development and not the outfall itself. The design of UU’s new outfall enables the discharge of much larger quantities of water than are currently discharged via the Salteye Brook, as the Brook is a much smaller watercourse. The increased volume of water may lead to an increased risk of flooding to the MSC.

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

Page 219

$4dbtljtf.rtf O The development would pose risks to the MSC from ground-movements. The construction of the new outfall and shaft is situated in close proximity to Barton Locks BDB and there is significant risk that it will have an impact on the physical integrity of the existing wall, which forms part of the bank of the MSC and the essential lock infrastructure. The information provided by UU does not demonstrate that the stability of the excavations can and will be managed by allowing for risks such as unexpected ground conditions etc.

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

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

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

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

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

Page 220

$4dbtljtf.rtf PLANNING POLICY

Development Plan Policy

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

Unitary Development Plan DES6 - Waterside Development This policy states that all new development adjacent to the Manchester Ship Canal will be required to facilitate pedestrian access to, along and, where appropriate, across the waterway. Schemes should incorporate a waterside walkway with pedestrian links between the walkway and other key pedestrian routes and incorporate ground floor uses and public space that generate pedestrian activity. Where it is inappropriate to provide a waterside walkway, an alternative route shall be provided. Development should protect, improve or provide wildlife habitats; conserve and complement any historic features; maintain and enhance waterside safety; and not affect the maintenance or integrity of the waterway or flood defences. All built development will face onto the water, and incorporate entrances onto the waterfront; be of the highest standard of design; be of a scale sufficient to frame the edge of the waterside; and enhance views from, of, across and along the waterway, and provide visual links to the waterside from surrounding areas.

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

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

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

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

Page 221

$4dbtljtf.rtf Unitary Development Plan EN17 - Pollution Control This policy states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning permission will only be granted where the development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory level of amenity.

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

Unitary Development Plan E1 - Strategic Regional Site, Barton This policy states that one, or a combination of any two of the following types of development will be permitted on the Barton Strategic Regional Site: A) A mix of light and general industry, warehouse and distribution, and ancillary offices and other uses; B) A multi-modal freight interchange, incorporating rail and water based freight handling facilities, and a rail link to the Manchester-Newton-le Willow- Liverpool railway line C) A sports stadium for Salford City Reds with a maximum capacity of 20,000 spectators, and appropriate enabling development. Proposals must i) make an appropriate contribution towards road and services infrastructure ii) secure improvements to public transport iii) minimise adverse impact on visual amenity, views and vista in the area; enhance the Liverpool Road corridor; v) maintain nature conservation interest of the site vi) have no unacceptable impact on local environmental quality vii) maintain the flood alleviation capabilities of Salteye Brook; viii) provide for a strategic route alongside the Manchester Ship Canal; ix) make appropriate provision for the training and employment of local residents during construction and operational phases.

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

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

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

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

Page 222

$4dbtljtf.rtf Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

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

Local Planning Policy

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

REQUIREMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

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

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

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

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

APPRAISAL

Context

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

Page 223

$4dbtljtf.rtf

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

Principle of Development

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

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

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

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

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

The ‘Representations’ section of this report sets out concerns issued on behalf of Port Salford Land Limited (PSL) and the City of Salford Community Stadium (CoSCoS), which indicate that the proposed development would prejudice the delivery of future development that has either been consented or that is advocated by Policy E1. However, notwithstanding that the underground tunnel can be built under permitted development, the applicant has confirmed that a Build-over Agreement would be issued for land upon which a large non-food retail store has been granted (ref: 15/66923/REM); this would enable the building to be constructed either before or after the Shaft 04 tunnel has been installed; thus preventing the applicant’s development from sterilising the site of the

Page 224

$4dbtljtf.rtf retail store or any proposed expansion of the Stadium. CoSCoS and PSL have also expressed concern with how the construction phase of the development would impact upon operations at the stadium, particularly events, and the delivery of the rail link at Port Salford. It is considered that the adoption of best practice construction measures can be secured through the imposition of a Construction Environment Management Plan, whilst a number of the remaining concerns raised relate to civil matters that are not of material consideration in the determination of this application. It is therefore considered that the development would not conflict with the provisions and aspirations set out within Policy E1 of the City of Salford UDP.

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

Ecology

The applicant has stated that the overall driver for the scheme is to address water quality and aesthetic issues associated with Salteye Brook by removing all discharges from Salteye Brook for storm events with a return period of 1 in 5 years or less and in turn achieving compliance with the requirements of the EC Freshwater Fish Directive. They go on to explain that, on this basis, the development will maintain the overall nature conservation interest of the site and improve the wildlife corridor along Salteye Brook. The purpose of these works has been acknowledged by the Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU).

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

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

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

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

Page 225

$4dbtljtf.rtf GMEU have stated that the invasive plants Himalayan balsam and Japanese knotweed are frequent in this area. As such they have recommended a condition requiring the submission and subsequent implementation of a Method Statement for controlling the potential spread of these plants during the course of any approved works. This requirement can be incorporated into the Council’s standard Construction Environment Management Plan condition.

Trees

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

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

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

Access and Highways

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

Part of the temporary access track would cross an informal parking area adjacent to the A J Bell Stadium’s training pitches. The applicant has stated that, in this area, the line of the temporary access route has been selected to avoid a landscape mound associated with the stadium development, which would necessitate the loss of approximately six (unmarked) car parking spaces and two lighting columns. Whilst the loss of this informal parking area is regrettable, it is recognised that it is temporary and that six spaces represents only a very small percentage of the overall level of car

Page 226

$4dbtljtf.rtf parking provision associated with the wider Stadium site. As such there are no concerns with this aspect of the development.

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

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

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

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

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

Flood Risk

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

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

Representations received from objectors have indicated that the new outfall enables the discharge of much larger quantities of water than are currently discharged via the Salteye Brook, as the Brook is a much smaller watercourse. The increased volume of water may lead to an increased risk of flooding

Page 227

$4dbtljtf.rtf to the MSC. In response, the applicant has confirmed that the risk of flooding from the development is not materially increased by the proposals. The overall drained volume of storm flows received by the Eccles catchment area and subsequently discharged into the MSC would remain the same. Whilst there may be some acceleration in the rate at which these storm flows are discharged into the canal during extreme events, the peak of these flows would pass down the canal before the Irlam Pond reaches its peak volume as a result of the flows from the upstream Irwell catchment. This is possible as the MSSCL operate the sluice gates within the MSC to manage flood-risk. The water level within the MSC is regulated by MSCCL so as to ensure that the canal is passable by vessels that use it. This operation is automated and managed using a series of computer-operated gates. It is understood that discharge into the MSC shall remain within any discharge consent granted by the Environment Agency. The development has been reviewed by both the Environment Agency and the City Council’s consultant Drainage Engineer, with no objections raised.

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

Visual Amenity

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

Residential Amenity

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

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

Impact on the Manchester Ship Canal

Water Quality The applicant has confirmed that the main driver for the development is to reduce the frequency of unsatisfactory intermittent discharges (UID) from Eccles Wastewater Treatment Works (EWwTW) and the local combined sewer overflow system into Salteye Brook, with a view to improving its water quality and meeting the EC Freshwater Fish Directive (EC FFD). This is principally achieved by discharging straight into the MSC, via the new tunnel and outfall shaft, rather than via the Salteye Brook. Therefore, under normal conditions, there would be no material change to the water quality in the MSC as a result of the development. The applicant has indicated that the reduction in annual stormwater spill volumes and additional screening of stormwater flows for solids, which will result from

Page 228

$4dbtljtf.rtf the wider development works, means that there will be no detriment in the water quality of the MSC. There will however be an improvement in its aesthetic quality as larger objects, that previously might have entered the MSC and its banks, will no longer enter the canal and be visible.

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

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

Other Matters

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

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

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

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

Page 229

$4dbtljtf.rtf CONCLUSION

This application again seeks consent for the development of an outfall structure, retaining wall and maintenance hatch, of matching siting scale and design to that which was approved under application 14/64512/FUL. The proposals also include the construction of a temporary access road, linking Stadium Way with the site of the temporary construction compound - which would be adjacent to the outfall structure. The proposed development does however form part of a wider scheme of works by United Utilities that would improve the water quality and ecological status of the Salteye Brook and improve its aesthetic quality also, along with that of the Manchester Ship Canal. The applicant has provided adequate justification for the purpose, location and alignment of the proposals, which would not conflict with the development aspirations set out in UDP Policy E1 for the Barton Strategic Regional Site. Any trees lost to the development would be replaced as part of an appropriate landscaping scheme. The operational outfall would not give rise to any detrimental impacts on visual amenity or residential amenity, particularly with respect to noise and odour. It would generate a negligible number of vehicle movements and subsequently the resulting impacts on air quality would also be negligible. The construction phase of the development has the potential to generate a degree of noise and dust disturbance, from vehicle movements and the construction works themselves. However these effects would be temporary in nature and could be reasonably mitigated through the adoption of best practice measures set out in a Construction Environment Management Plan. Furthermore the applicant has agreed to restrict the number of HGV movements to no more than 100 per day outside the highway network peak hours.

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

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

Conditions

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

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

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

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

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

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

Page 230

$4dbtljtf.rtf (ii) the spaces for and management of the parking of site operatives and visitors vehicles; (iii) the storage and management of plant and materials (including loading and unloading activities); (iv) the erection and maintenance of security hoardings including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate; (v) measures to prevent the deposition of dirt on the public highway; (vi) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during demolition/construction; (vii) a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition/construction works; (viii) measures to minimise disturbance to any neighbouring occupiers from noise and vibration, including from any piling activity; (ix) measures to prevent the pollution of the River Irwell/Manchester Ship Canal from accidental spillages, dust and debris; (x) a community engagement strategy which explains how local neighbours will be kept updated on the construction process, key milestones, and how they can report to the site manager or other appropriate representative of the developer, instances of unneighbourly behaviour from construction operatives. The statement shall also detail the steps that will be taken when unneighbourly behaviour has been reported. A log of all reported instances shall be kept on record and made available for inspection by the local a planning authority upon request. (xi) details of mitigation measures to avoid the possible pollution of the Manchester Ship Canal during the construction period (Reference should be made to Pollution Prevention Guidelines for development close to water courses published by the Environment Agency.) (xii) details of vehicle movements onto and off the local highway network. (xiii) an Invasive Plant Species Management Plan, which shall identify measures to be undertaken to eradicate invasive plant species from the site.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Page 231

$4dbtljtf.rtf Reason: In the interests of the wildlife corridor and the visual amenity of the area, having regard to Policies DES1 and EN9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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

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

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

Notes for Applicant:

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

Page 232

$4dbtljtf.rtf Agenda Item 6

PART 1 – Open to the Public

REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR PLACE

TO THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL ON 10 th May 2018

TITLE: PLANNING APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY

RECOMMENDATION: That the report be noted

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To set out details of applications determined by the Strategic Director Place 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: Liz Taylor – 0161 779 4803

WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S): As specified in the attached schedule

Page 233

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 234 DELEGATED DECISIONS BY DCM

APPLICATION No: 18/71565/ART16 DATE VALID: 20.03.2018

APPLICANT:Steven McCoombe

LOCATION: Article 16 Euro House Overbridge Road Salford M7 1SL

PROPOSAL: Article 16 consultation from Manchester Council (application Reference 119398/JO/2018) for the variation of conditions 2 (specified plan), 3 (servicing area), 7 (bin store), 12 (cycle storage) and removal of condition 6 (TRO) attached to planning permission referenced 115297/FO/2017,

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 16/69020/FUL DATE VALID: 21.11.2016 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr Paul Dilworth

LOCATION: Land Formerly Patricroft Working Mens Club Legh Street Eccles M30 0UT

PROPOSAL: Change of use of vacant land for storage of containers together with erection of 3m timber boarded fencing and associated landscaping fronting Legh Street and 1.8m close boarded fencing and associated planting fronting Bridgewater Canal.

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

Page 235 APPLICATION No: 16/69254/OUT DATE VALID: 15.02.2017 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mangrove Estates Ltd

LOCATION: Former Barton Sports Club Barton Lane Eccles M30 0FR

PROPOSAL: Outline planning application with all matters reserved, except for Access, Layout and Scale, for the demolition of existing buildings and the erection of a three-storey apartment block containing 24 no. 1 bedroom and 24 no. 2 bedroom units, with associated external works and car parking.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 9 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71027/HH DATE VALID: 21.12.2017 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mrs Julie Cherian

LOCATION: 784 Liverpool Road Eccles M30 7LL

PROPOSAL: Provision for a dropped kerb to allow vehicular access from a driveway onto a classified road.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71104/FUL DATE VALID: 16.01.2018 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mrs Safiya Patel

LOCATION: 178-180 Liverpool Road Eccles M30 0PF

PROPOSAL: Conversion of first and second floor from a single flat into 3 self contained residential flats (C3), together with insertion of new windows at first floor level to the both rear and side elevations. Timber gates proposed to rear alleyway.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

Page 236 APPLICATION No: 17/71141/FUL DATE VALID: 02.01.2018 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Forviva Michael Reid

LOCATION: 171 Liverpool Road Eccles M30 0WD

PROPOSAL: Construction of two concrete bases for refuse bins

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71358/HH DATE VALID: 06.02.2018 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Wayne Rafferty

LOCATION: 6 Sealand Drive Eccles M30 7GW

PROPOSAL: Erection of a part single storey, part two storey side and single storey rear extension. Re-submission of 17/69781/HH

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/70906/DISCON DATE VALID: 08.11.2017 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Mike Stone And Ellenbrook LOCATION: Land Off Highclove Lane Boothstown Salford M28 1ZQ

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 6 (CEMP) and 11 (Construction Environmental Plan) attached to planning permission 15/67036/OUT.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 April 2018 ______

Page 237 APPLICATION No: 17/70916/DISCON DATE VALID: 08.11.2017 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Mike Stone And Ellenbrook LOCATION: Land Off Highclove Lane Boothstown Salford M28 1ZQ

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 2 (CMS) attached to planning permission 17/70025/REM.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71238/HH DATE VALID: 17.01.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mrs Elaine Atherton And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 67 Wyre Drive Worsley M28 1HH

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71255/HH DATE VALID: 31.01.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Ms Claire barber And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 80 Leigh Road Worsley M28 1LR

PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey side and single storey rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 April 2018 ______

Page 238 APPLICATION No: 18/71264/FUL DATE VALID: 05.02.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr MIKE PLATT And Ellenbrook LOCATION: St Andrews Church Of England Primary School Vicars Hall Lane Worsley M28 1HS

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey infill extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71365/CLUDP DATE VALID: 08.02.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Paul Taylor And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 60 Greylag Crescent Worsley M28 7AB

PROPOSAL: Certificate of lawfulness for proposed construction of a rear dormer and alterations from a hipped to gable roof

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71394/HH DATE VALID: 13.02.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Jonathan Atkinson And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 15 Goodshaw Road Worsley M28 7GJ

PROPOSAL: Erection of part first floor/part two storey side extension and first floor and single storey rear extensions.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 April 2018 ______

Page 239 APPLICATION No: 18/71418/HH DATE VALID: 21.02.2018 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Bindesh Patel And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 15 Ellerbeck Crescent Worsley M28 7XN

PROPOSAL: Construction of dormer to the rear, new velux windows to the front and conversion of hipped to gable roof.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/69537/OUT DATE VALID: 31.03.2017 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr Robin Slinger

LOCATION: 311 - 315 Bury New Road Salford M7 2YN

PROPOSAL: Outline planning application with all matters reserved accept for Access, Layout and Scale for the demolition of existing buildings and erection of a mixed use development of 2 no. ground floor units, A1 (Shops), A2 (Financial Professional Services), A3 (Restaurants Cafes) or B1 (Business) 30 no. apartments with a mix of one and two bedrooms together with car parking at lower ground floor level

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71192/FUL DATE VALID: 18.01.2018 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Talmud Torah Chinuch Norim School

LOCATION: Talmud Torah Chinuch Norim School 11 Wellington Street East Salford M7 2AU

PROPOSAL: Variation of conditions 2,3,4,5,12,13 and 14 attached to planning permission 11/59880/FUL and removal of condition 7

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 April 2018 ______

Page 240 APPLICATION No: 18/71352/COU DATE VALID: 13.02.2018 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr P White

LOCATION: 13 - 17 Grecian Street Salford M7 1JF

PROPOSAL: Continued use as an MOT Station (B2)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71384/ADV DATE VALID: 19.02.2018 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr Mike Thorpe

LOCATION: Mocha Parade Land At The Junction Of Sussex Street And Lower Broughton Road Broughton

PROPOSAL: Display of one community digital led advertising screen

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71395/HH DATE VALID: 21.02.2018 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr Akiva Pines

LOCATION: 362 Great Clowes Street Salford M7 2ET

PROPOSAL: Erection of front porch with external staircase.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 April 2018 ______

Page 241 APPLICATION No: 18/71396/HH DATE VALID: 13.02.2018 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr WEISZ

LOCATION: 83 Devonshire Street Salford M7 4BE

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey side extension and demolition of existing succah

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71439/FUL DATE VALID: 23.02.2018 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr Saqib Munir

LOCATION: St Johns Court Wellington Street West Salford M7 2EH

PROPOSAL: Retrospective conversion of manager's accommodation to two self contained flats.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71271/CLUDP DATE VALID: 13.03.2018 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Peter Richard Ward

LOCATION: 18 Shirley Avenue Swinton M27 4HX

PROPOSAL: Certificate of lawfulness for proposed single storey extension to the rear of the property. Surface water drainage to be incorporated into existing.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

Page 242 APPLICATION No: 18/71324/FUL DATE VALID: 09.02.2018 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Ms Rizwana Ul -haq

LOCATION: 58 Russell Road Salford M6 8NR

PROPOSAL: Change of use of ground floor shop from (A1-shop) to (C3 residential), erection of a part two part single storey side extension and single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71328/FUL DATE VALID: 01.02.2018 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Mr Mohammad Tahir

LOCATION: 235 Bolton Road Salford M6 7HP

PROPOSAL: Proposed rear dormer and alterations to front elevation

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 29 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/70803/HH DATE VALID: 09.11.2017 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mrs Vickie Bonnerr

LOCATION: 61 Snowdon Road Eccles M30 9AS

PROPOSAL: Demolition of a single storey conservatory and the erection of a single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 April 2018 ______

Page 243 APPLICATION No: 18/71304/COU DATE VALID: 22.02.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Amir Asghar

LOCATION: 13A Cromwell Road Eccles M30 0QT

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the conversion of garage into a dwelling Re-submission of 17/70774/COU

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71323/P3NPA DATE VALID: 09.02.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Partha Roy

LOCATION: 118 Liverpool Road Eccles M30 0WZ

PROPOSAL: Notification for Prior Approval for a Proposed Change of Use from A1 (Shop) to C3 (residential)

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71351/DISCON DATE VALID: 05.02.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Adam Newcombe

LOCATION: 28-30 Church Street Eccles M30 0DF

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 4 (air extraction) attached to planning permission 16/67950/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 April 2018 ______

Page 244 APPLICATION No: 18/71364/COU DATE VALID: 07.02.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Lee Markey

LOCATION: 165 Monton Road Eccles M30 9GS

PROPOSAL: Planning application for the variation of condition 7 (external outdoor seating hours) attached to planning permission 15/66558/COU

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71511/TPO DATE VALID: 13.02.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Bob Green

LOCATION: 9A Westminster Road Eccles M30 9HF

PROPOSAL: Crown thin by 20%; crown lift to provide a 3m clearance above existing ground levels one lime tree (T1) and one beech tree (T2).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71410/FUL DATE VALID: 19.02.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr Richard Potter

LOCATION: Ashleigh Care Home 2 Belgrave Crescent Eccles M30 9AE

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing rear conservatory, erection of a single storey rear extension and change of Use from C2 (residential care home) to C3a (dwelling houses) to include two self-contained one bed flats and one dwelling

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 April 2018 ______

Page 245 APPLICATION No: 18/71523/DISCON DATE VALID: 13.03.2018 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Andrea Savvidou

LOCATION: 49-51 Regent Street Eccles M30 0BP

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 3 (materials) attached to planning permission 17/69995/FUL.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71150/HH DATE VALID: 03.01.2018 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Mr Liam Gordon

LOCATION: 82 Broadway Irlam M44 6DQ

PROPOSAL: Erection part single part two storey wrap around extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71447/HH DATE VALID: 23.02.2018 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Mr Burgess

LOCATION: 6 Oleo Terrace Irlam M44 6TP

PROPOSAL: Demolition of conservatory and erection of a single storey side and rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 April 2018 ______

Page 246 APPLICATION No: 16/68777/FUL DATE VALID: 11.04.2017 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Allan Maidment Riverside

LOCATION: 22 Crescent Salford M5 4PF

PROPOSAL: Change of use from A2 (finance and professional services) to C4 (house in multiple occupation) together with internal alterat ions and alterations to the rear elevation.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/69671/DISCON DATE VALID: 17.03.2017 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Daniel Barton Riverside

LOCATION: Land Located South Of The River Irwell And West Of Littleton Road Centred On Whit Lane Charlestown M6 6HP

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of conditions 5 (Open Space), 6 (Landscaping), 21 (Noise Mitigation), 23 (Lighting), 26 (SUDS Phase 3) and 30 (Travel Plan) and part discharge of condition 17 (Validation of Gardens), attached to 15/67254/EIAHYB.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/69799/LBC DATE VALID: 07.04.2017 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Allan Maidme nt Riverside

LOCATION: 22 Crescent Salford M5 4PF

PROPOSAL: Listed Building Consent for the change of use from A2 (finance and professional services) to C4 (house in multiple occupation) together with internal and external alterations.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 April 2018 ______

Page 247 APPLICATION No: 17/70969/FUL DATE VALID: 17.11.2017 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Steve Hassall Riverside

LOCATION: Salford Gallery And Museum Crescent Salford M5 4WU

PROPOSAL: Replacement of the existing CCTV system, to include additional cameras throughout the building and cameras on the external elevations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/70970/LBC DATE VALID: 17.11.2017 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Steve Hassall Riverside

LOCATION: Salford Gallery And Museum Crescent Salford M5 4WU

PROPOSAL: Listed Building Consent for the replacement of the existing CCTV system, to include additional cameras throughout the building

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71124/DISCON DATE VALID: 02.01.2018 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Webber Riverside

LOCATION: Agecroft Commerce Park Agecroft Road Swinton M27 8UJ

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 3 (landscaping) attached to planning permission attached to planning permission 16/68953/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

Page 248 APPLICATION No: 18/71367/DISCON DATE VALID: 07.02.2018 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Goldman Riverside

LOCATION: 28- 28A And 30 Broad Street Salford M6 5BY

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 6 (CEMP) attached to planning permission 17/70096/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71438/NMA DATE VALID: 15.03.2018 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Andrew Ferguson Riverside

LOCATION: 5 Hulme Street Salford M5 4PX

PROPOSAL: APPLICATION FOR A NON-MATERIAL AMENDMENT TO PLANNING PERMISSION 16/68405/REM TO REVISE THE MATERIAL OF THE BALCONIES

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 29 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71299/COU DATE VALID: 02.02.2018 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mrs KLYNE

LOCATION: 1 The Drive Salford M7 3ND

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the change of use from C1 (guest house) to Sui Generis (HMO) house in multiple occupancy to accommodate pupils of the Yeshivas Lubavitch School

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

Page 249 APPLICATION No: 18/71331/HH DATE VALID: 20.02.2018 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr J Grunfeld

LOCATION: 54 Broom Lane Salford M7 4RS

PROPOSAL: Front porch extension, single storey rear extension, front and rear dormers and alterations to elevations.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71334/HH DATE VALID: 08.02.2018 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Joseph Roberts

LOCATION: 22 Brantwood Road Salford M7 4FL

PROPOSAL: Erection of a part single/part two storey side and rear extension, front porch and demolition of existing garage

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71403/HH DATE VALID: 14.02.2018 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Silberger

LOCATION: 10 Eastleigh Avenue Salford M7 4FY

PROPOSAL: Construction of dormer extensions to roof space at front and rear of dwelling

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

Page 250 APPLICATION No: 18/71433/FUL DATE VALID: 23.02.2018 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr S Munir

LOCATION: 1 Midfield Court Northumberland Street Salford M7 4DQ

PROPOSAL: Retrospective conversion of manager's accommodation to two self contained flats.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71467/TPO DATE VALID: 08.03.2018 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Dale Leon

LOCATION: 25 Moorside Road Salford M7 3PJ

PROPOSAL: 15% crown thin, crown lift to provide a 5m clearance from the surrounding ground level and reduce to provide a 3.5m clearance from the property one beech tree (T1).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71144/FUL DATE VALID: 01.02.2018 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Mr M Raheel

LOCATION: 19 Seedley Road Salford M6 5WN

PROPOSAL: Proposed change of use of A1 (Shop) with flat above to C3 (dwelling) with alterations to elevations, elevated patio area and 1.8m close boarded fence.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 April 2018 ______

Page 251 APPLICATION No: 17/71019/FUL DATE VALID: 01.12.2017 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Great Places Housing Association

LOCATION: Land At Old Lane Little Hulton

PROPOSAL: Proposed erection of 83 dwellings, means of access and associated works.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71259/HH DATE VALID: 02.02.2018 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Mr John Clay

LOCATION: 20 Trent Drive Worsley M28 0TS

PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for the retention of a boundary wall.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/69848/FUL DATE VALID: 12.05.2017 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Bernard Nwaiwu

LOCATION: St Ignatius Church And Rectory King Edward Street Salford M5 3RG

PROPOSAL: Change of use of existing church and rectory buildings to multi- purpose community hall with training facilities , demolition of existing extension, and erection of new extension to form new reception

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 April 2018 ______

Page 252 APPLICATION No: 17/70597/DISCON DATE VALID: 11.09.2017 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:

LOCATION: The Regent Site The Quays Salford

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 8 (land contamination) and 10 (the Quays road crossing) attached to planning permission 15/66274/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/70796/DISCON DATE VALID: 16.10.2017 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Phil Marsden

LOCATION: Land Bounded By Cleminson St To North, New Bailey St To East, River Irwell To South-east, Trinity Way And North Star Drive To South And Adelphi St To West; Known As Salford Central, Extending To 17.7 Hectares. M3 5JT

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 22 (Zone B highway changes), 23 (Zone B access to Ralli Quays), 25 (materials), 26 (Zone B Security), 44 (ecological management plan), 47 (Japanese Knotweed/Giant Hogweed), 49 (bats), 50 (nesting bird survey), 53 (bird breeding season), 56 (provision of safe route), 68 (environmental management plan), 69 (considerate contractors), 70 (site waste management), 71 (dust) and 76 (black redstarts) attached to 09/57950/EIAHYB (relating to Plot B5 and B6 - Two New Bailey Square).

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

Page 253 APPLICATION No: 18/71205/ADV DATE VALID: 16.01.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Ian Lightbody

LOCATION: HMRC Trinity Bridge House Chapel Street Salford M3 5AQ

PROPOSAL: Display of a double sided internally illuminated advert signage to bus shelter.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71355/ADV DATE VALID: 08.02.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Morton

LOCATION: North Tower Victoria Bridge Street Salford M3 5AS

PROPOSAL: Advertisement consent for replacement illuminated and non- illuminated fascia signs (5 No.) and one totem sign

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71357/DISCON DATE VALID: 21.03.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Rob Duxbury

LOCATION: Land Bounded By Gore Street, Trinity Way And Chapel Street Salford

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 7 (materials) attached to planning permission 15/66415/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 April 2018 ______

Page 254 APPLICATION No: 18/71425/FUL DATE VALID: 20.02.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT: Roofoods Ltd LOCATION: Unit 10 Foundry Business Park 325 Ordsall Lane Salford M5 3LW

PROPOSAL: Installation of external plant to include 11no. extract ducts, 3no. air intake louvres, 2no. air condenser units and 3no. flues for gas fired boliers and 2no. vents for gas cupboard, and installation of an external bike rack

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71459/DISCON DATE VALID: 27.02.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Ben Livingstone

LOCATION: Unit 2 The Albion Brunel Avenue Salford M5 4BE

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of condition 3 (travel plan) attached to planning permission 17/69847/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71489/NMA DATE VALID: 13.03.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Ben Fearns

LOCATION: Albert Vaults 169-171 Chapel Street Salford M3 6AD

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 15/66691/FUL for change to the East, West & North elevations by replacing the proposed powder coated dark grey spandrel panels between windows with blue, change to the proposed South elevation facing the railway viaduct consisting of removing the recess between the blue and red brickwork so all brickwork to this elevation will be flush and all standard windows to the upper floors will have their head reduced in height above floor level by 75mm.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 29 March 2018 ______

Page 255 APPLICATION No: 18/71496/DISCON DATE VALID: 07.03.2018 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:McGoff

LOCATION: Land On Woden Street Salford

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of partial compliance of condition 3 a (Elevations), b (Windows), c (Balconies and balustrades, including screening to roof terraces), and d (Entrances and doors) attached to planning permission 14/65586/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/70717/FUL DATE VALID: 27.10.2017 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mr Raymond McCadden

LOCATION: Lower Lodge Agecroft Road Swinton M27 8SN

PROPOSAL: Change of use from pet superstore and dog boarding kennels to builders merchants, erection of a new warehouse building, a new timber storage shed and external alterations to retained buildings. Retention of the former garage and conversion to a cafeteria /diner. Including demolition of various buildings to facilitate development (Part retrospective)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 29 March 2018 ______

Page 256 APPLICATION No: 17/71125/DISCON DATE VALID: 02.01.2018 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mr Webber

LOCATION: Agecroft Commerce Park Agecroft Road Swinton M27 8UJ

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 3 (landscaping) attached to 17/69672/FUL.

Condition 3 - Landscaping

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71303/ADV DATE VALID: 26.01.2018 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mr D Bradbury

LOCATION: Wheatsheaf Industrial Estate Labtec Street Swinton Salford M27 8SE

PROPOSAL: Erection of a 'V' shaped non illuminated advertising sign (resubmission of 17/70952/ADV)

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71444/HH DATE VALID: 26.02.2018 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mr W Emmerson

LOCATION: 4 Malvern Drive Swinton M27 8XT

PROPOSAL: Proposed two storey side extension and single storey rear extension and demolition of detached garage

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 April 2018 ______

Page 257 APPLICATION No: 18/71458/HH DATE VALID: 28.02.2018 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mr Jefferson

LOCATION: 1 Walnut Close Swinton M27 6NH

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey rear conservatory

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71359/HH DATE VALID: 06.02.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Andrew Stephens North

LOCATION: 9 Dryden Avenue Swinton M27 0JY

PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for a covered, open fronted timber structure at the rear of the garden and raised decking

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71417/ADV DATE VALID: 19.02.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT: - North

LOCATION: 119 Moorside Road Swinton M27 0LB

PROPOSAL: Display of various signs including one illuminated.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 April 2018 ______

Page 258 APPLICATION No: 18/71471/PDE DATE VALID: 28.02.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mrs G Evans C/O Mr C Wilkinson North

LOCATION: 9 Norbury Grove Pendlebury Swinton Manchester M27 6DR

PROPOSAL: Erection of a rear extension

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71250/FUL DATE VALID: 26.01.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Alan Brownson South

LOCATION: 72 Overdale Swinton M27 5WZ

PROPOSAL: Proposed two storey dwelling at land to the side of 72 Overdale, Swinton

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71350/HH DATE VALID: 06.02.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr David Marr South

LOCATION: 128 Overdale Swinton M27 5NZ

PROPOSAL: Erection of a part single/part two storey side extension with the introduction of an A/C Unit and a single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

Page 259 APPLICATION No: 18/71406/HH DATE VALID: 12.02.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Scott Hannah South

LOCATION: 19 Folly Lane Swinton M27 0DF

PROPOSAL: Erection of two storey side and single storey rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 April 2018 ______

APPLICA TION No: 18/71398/HH DATE VALID: 13.02.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mrs Gemma Hulme South

LOCATION: 2 Collingwood Drive Swinton M27 5LF

PROPOSAL: Erection of two storey side/rear extension and single storey rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71485/DISCON DATE VALID: 22.03.2018 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mrs Carolyn Williams South

LOCATION: 110 Station Road Swinton M27 6AL

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (materials), 4 (bin storage) and 7 (noise mitigation) attached to planning permission 17/70207/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 April 2018 ______

Page 260 APPLICATION No: 18/71453/TPO DATE VALID: 10.03.2018 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Miss Emily Gray And Seedley LOCATION: 19 Harvard Grove Salford M6 8GT

PROPOSAL: Crown reduce to leave a height of 7m and a width spread of 6.6m. Crown lift to provide a 4.6m clearance (removing 4-5 lowest limbs) from the surrounding ground level one sycamore tree (T1).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71339/DISCON DATE VALID: 31.01.2018 WARD: Winton APPLICANT:

LOCATION: Land Bounded By South King Street/Cook Street And Millers Street Eccles

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation all conditions on planning permission 94/33294/FUL have been complied with.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 29 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71401/HH DATE VALID: 14.02.2018 WARD: Winton APPLICANT:Mrs C Curran

LOCATION: 12 Hastings Road Eccles M30 8JR

PROPOSAL: Demolition of conservatory and single storey extension (resubmission of 17/71041/HH)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 April 2018 ______

Page 261 APPLICATION No: 18/71443/PDE DATE VALID: 21.02.2018 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Andy German North

LOCATION: 8 Gratten Court Worsley M28 3BZ

PROPOSAL: Erection of a garden room.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/69864/DISCON DATE VALID: 13.10.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Lee Plaister

LOCATION: The Lodge Old Warke Dam Woodstock Drive Worsley M28 2WP

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 4 (bats), 5 (landscape plan), 6 (arboricultural method statement) and 7 (flood risk) attached to planning permission 15/66542/HH.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 17/71171/FUL DATE VALID: 05.01.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Bernard Taylor

LOCATION: 6 Hazelhurst Fold Worsley M28 2JU

PROPOSAL: Part retrospective application to convert the garage to the rear of the property into a self-contained dwelling with associated alterations

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

Page 262 APPLICATION No: 18/71283/FUL DATE VALID: 24.01.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Richard Coffey

LOCATION: Land Formerly 278 Leigh Road Worsley M28 1LH

PROPOSAL: Application for variation of condition 2 (approved plans) attached to planning permission 16/67818/FUL

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 29 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71366/HH DATE VALID: 12.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Ege Ferguson

LOCATION: Honey Pot Cottage 46 Roe Green Worsley M28 2RF

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing single detached garage and erection of a double detached replacement garage

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71381/CLUDP DATE VALID: 09.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Ms K Donohue

LOCATION: 45 Granby Road Swinton M27 0EY

PROPOSAL: Certificate of lawfulness for proposed roof conversion to rear and structural alterations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

Page 263 APPLICATION No: 18/71382/HH DATE VALID: 13.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr J Bieliunas

LOCATION: 37 Ryecroft Lane Worsley M28 2PN

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of single storey rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71383/TPO DATE VALID: 19.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr John Smith

LOCATION: Chomlea 1A Longley Drive Worsley M28 2TP

PROPOSAL: Crown lift to provide a 3m clearance from the ground level and crown reduce to leave a 3m spread (north and east) and a 2.5m spread (south and west) and a height of 15m one beech tree (T1).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71387/HH DATE VALID: 19.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr M. Bowes

LOCATION: Bridgewater Cottage 1 Farm Lane Worsley M28 2PU

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey rear extension, new door to side elevation, decking to the side and masonry pier to front elevation (re-submission of 17/70441/HH).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

Page 264 APPLICATION No: 18/71388/TPO DATE VALID: 22.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr John Smith

LOCATION: Chomlea 1A Longley Drive Worsley M28 2TP

PROPOSAL: Prune the roots (in accordance with the submitted photographs/information) to allow the boundary wall to be rebuilt one beech tree (T1).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71397/HH DATE VALID: 13.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr John Emerson

LOCATION: 32 Meadow Gate Worsley M28 2RB

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing garage and erection a new detached garage

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71400/HH DATE VALID: 14.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr M Miller

LOCATION: 24 Meadow Gate Worsley M28 2RB

PROPOSAL: Demolition of conservatory and erection of first floor side extension, part single/part two storey rear extension and new bay window to front elevation

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

Page 265 APPLICATION No: 18/71426/HH DATE VALID: 23.02.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Graham and Lucy Marshall

LOCATION: 5 Drywood Avenue Worsley M28 2QA

PROPOSAL: Proposed first floor side extension over existing garage and two storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71516/TREECA DATE VALID: 10.03.2018 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Mark Brown

LOCATION: 152 The Green Worsley M28 2PA

PROPOSAL: Fell one rowan tree (T1).

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 16/69151/REM DATE VALID: 06.12.2016 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Robin Malinowski South

LOCATION: Burgess Farm Hilton Lane Worsley M28 3TL

PROPOSAL: Variation of condition 1 (approved plans) on planning permission 15/66358/REM for the substitution of house types on plots 52-61, 115-120, 126-128, resulting in a reduction from 179 units to 177 units and provision of financial contribution to affordable housing in lieu of provision on site.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 28 March 2018 ______

Page 266 APPLICATION No: 17/70461/FUL DATE VALID: 12.09.2017 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr John Houghton South

LOCATION: 2 Hurstfield Road Worsley M28 7UJ

PROPOSAL: Erection of two dwellings

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71248/DISCON DATE VALID: 23.01.2018 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:c/o South

LOCATION: Salford City College Walkden Sixth Form Centre Walkden Road Worsley M28 7QD

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 8 (habitat creation scheme) and 17 (affordable housing) attached to planning permission 16/69232/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 April 2018 ______

APPLICATION No: 18/71392/HH DATE VALID: 14.02.2018 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mrs Louise Jones South

LOCATION: 151 Newearth Road Worsley M28 7UL

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension and construction of a front porch

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 April 2018 ______

Page 267 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 7

PART 1 – Open to the Public

REPORT OF The Strategic Director Place

TO THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL ON 10 th May 2018

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: Liz Taylor 0161 779 4803

WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S): As indicated in the attached schedule.

Page 269 PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

REPORT ON PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS DECIDED

APPLICATION No: 15/67415/COU

APPELLANT: Mr Tariq Aziz

APPEAL SITE: Weaste Hotel, Edward Avenue, Salford

PROPOSAL: Change of use from Drinking Establishment (A4) to 24 Bedroom Hotel (C1) (retrospective)

WARD: Weaste and Seedley

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to conditions

APPEAL DECISION: Appeal Allowed

DECIDED ON: Appeal hearing 20 th February 2018. Date of decision 9 th April 2018

An application for the above development was validated on 28 th January 2016 and was refused at Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel, on 6 th October 2017, against officer recommendation. The reasons for refusal were as follows:

1. The application is for a main town centre use located in an out-of-town location. No sequential assessment has been carried out to demonstrate that there are no other sequentially preferable sites contrary to paragraph 24 of the NPPF and paragraph 010 of the National Planning Practice Guidance.

2. The application has been submitted retrospectively for a change of use from drinking establishment (A4) to Hotel (C1). However, it is questionable whether the use is better described as a hostel given that, despite being open for bookings from the general public, the majority of occupants have been homeless referrals from local authorities. Given the concentration of 24 bedrooms for this use and the evidence presented by the Greater Manchester Police Authority in relation to the concentration of police activity at the application site from a range of disturbances together with the high number of objections from local residents it is considered that the proposal is eroding the quality and character of the area which is undermining the amenity of residents. The application is therefore contrary to Policies ST1 and H6 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan and the NPPF.

Following the refusal of the planning application an enforcement notice was issued on 9 th December 2016 requiring the cessation of the use of the premises as a hotel.

The applicant appealed the refusal of planning permission and the enforcement notice. The appeals were linked and a hearing took place in February 2018 which was attended by Council representatives as well as Councillors and members of the public.

Prior to the Hearing the Appellants agents contacted the Council to discuss the areas where the Council considered work should be undertaken to address the issue of the sequential assessment. An analysis of the areas identified by the Council was carried out by the Appellants. The Council accepted that there are no sequentially preferable sites and accordingly did not maintain the first reason for refusal.

The inspector considered that the main issue in this case was whether the use of the hotel by private paying guests would harm the quality of life for nearby residential occupiers.

It was evident from the representations received by the Council when the planning application was

Page 270 being considered that the use of the Weaste Hotel by Local Housing Occupiers had caused considerable problems for local residents. This was also reinforced by evidence presented by Greater Manchester Police (GMP)

Shortly after the refusal of the planning application all Local Authority referrals to the premises ceased and the hotel continued to operate as a more conventional hotel with private paying guests only. In addition CCTV was installed to ensure coverage of activity at the hotel.

When assessing the evidence from the Police the inspector was informed that since 2016 the recording of crimes/incidents had changed significantly and this has resulted in the crime figures appearing to be greater than they were prior to 2016. The Police were represented at the Hearing and provided details of crimes/incidents where they had attended the Weaste Hotel.

The inspector considered the figures for the period following the cessation of the use of the Weaste Hotel by Local Housing Occupiers provided an insight as to how the hotel use now operates and its impact on local residents. The Police provided those figures for a period of about 63 weeks. During that period they came to the Hotel on about 15 separate occasions and included incidents such as damage to the hotel; disputes between guests; hotel guest assaulted policeman; guest making inappropriate comments to passers by.

The police were not able to confirm how many incidents they would be likely to attend over a similar period at other hotels but did confirm that in general terms hotel uses do generate a high number of crimes/incidents.

The inspector acknowledged that police attendance at the hotel may have some limited impact on residents but considered that the majority of incidents involved crimes/incidents against the hotel and very few incidents involved private paying guests causing problems for local residents.

He acknowledged the fear of crime as a concern of the Council and local residents and was referred by the Council and the appellants to case law in this regard.

The inspector concluded that: • The use of the Weaste Hotel by private paying guests has resulted in a reduced level of anti- social behaviour/criminality than occurred when it was used by Local Housing Occupiers. • Anti-social behaviour is not intimately connected with the use of the Weaste Hotel as a hotel by private paying guests.

He did not accept: • That a hotel use is a use which ordinarily would give rise to a fear of crime for persons living near a hotel, or • That a hotel use is likely of its very nature to produce other difficulties for neighbours.

The inspector considered from the evidence of the Police that Hotel uses do generate crimes/incidents but in general terms the crimes/incidents occur within the building or its curtilage and do not generally impact on surrounding users.

The inspector considered that the levels of crimes/incidents that have occurred at the Weaste Hotel since it has been used only by private paying guests are any greater than would occur at any other hotel and that the continued use of the Weaste Hotel by private paying guests is unlikely to harm the residential amenity enjoyed by nearby residents.

The inspector acknowledged claimed incidents that have occurred since the Weaste Hotel has only been open to private paying guests and whilst he does not condone the conduct of some of the hotel residents he considered that most of these incidents reflect the failure to manage the behaviour of some guests staying at the Weaste Hotel. He went on to say that the planning system cannot provide a mechanism for controlling the management of the guests who stay at the Weaste Hotel and that there are many uses which are carried on in residential areas where the use has the potential to create unacceptable impacts on residential amenity if not properly managed.

He concluded that a hotel use of the Weaste Hotel by private paying guests would not materially harm

Page 271 the quality of life of residents living in the area. Accordingly, the hotel use would be in accordance with the UDP when read as a whole as the hotel use would maintain the sustainable urban neighbourhood within which it is located.

Other matters considered by the inspector

Local listing and ACV

The inspector acknowledged that the Weaste Hotel is locally listed and considered that its use as a hotel does not harm its heritage value. The Council and local residents explained that the Weaste Hotel had been included as an asset of community value and that this status would be lost if planning permission for a hotel use was granted. However, both the Council and Appellants confirmed that its status as an asset of community value was not a material consideration in the determination of these appeals.

Roller Shutter

The inspector noted the community concerns regarding the external painting of the Weaste Hotel and installation of a “roller shutter door” in its main elevation and that the appeal proposals do not seek permission for the roller shutter door despite this being shown on the submitted plans. The roller shutter was therefore not considered as part of the appeal and the inspector advised that the Council can deal with the unauthorised roller shutter door if they consider it is expedient so to do. (This has been passed to the Enforcement Team to review).

Neighbour representations

The inspector gave consideration to all the matters raised by local residents including: a) The submissions of Mr Heywood. b) The Trip Advisor reviews of the Weaste Hotel by guests who have stayed there. c) The visual presentation made by Mr Heywood at the Hearing. d) The proximity of the Weaste Hotel to the local school.

He noted that many of the concerns related to non-planning matters. He also noted that some residents believe that if planning permission were to be granted for the hotel use then the use of the Weaste Hotel would revert to a use by Local Housing Occupiers which caused them significant problems. However he noted that a condition restricting the use of the Weaste Hotel to private paying guests only could be enforced and the Appellants agreed that they no longer wished to allow its use by Local Housing Occupiers.

For the reasons set out the inspector concluded that the enforcement appeal should succeed on ground (a) and planning permission will be granted. He also concluded that the appeal against the refusal of planning permission should succeed and allowed the appeal subject to conditions as summarised below: 1. Approved plans 2. Parking scheme to be submitted for the written approval for the LPA. Agreed scheme to be laid out and retained 3. Noise levels 4. None of the bedrooms within the Weaste Hotel shall be occupied at any time by persons who have been referred to the Weaste Hotel for accommodation by a local authority or other licenced public body or their agents. For the avoidance of doubt the bedrooms within the Weaste Hotel shall only be occupied by private paying guests.

Page 272 PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

REPORT OF NEW PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS RECEIVED

APPLICATION No: 17/70605/ADV

APPLICATION DECISION LEVEL: Delegated to Officer

OFFICER Refuse RECOMMEND’N:

APPEAL SITE: Pavement Outside Aldine House 30 New Bailey Street Salford

PROPOSAL: Display of a single sided LED illuminated sequential display affixed to the frame of the payphone kiosk.

WARD: Ordsall

APPELLANT: Mr Nathan Still

DATE RECEIVED: 17 April 2018

The applicant has appealed the decision. The reason for refusal states;

The appearance and siting of the advertisement would appear as an obtrusive feature within the street scene and would create a cluttered appearance which would be harmful to the visual amenity of the area contrary to Policy DEV2 of the Unitary Development Plan and Paragraph 67 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 273

APPLICATION No: 17/70800/FUL

APPLICATION DECISION LEVEL: Delegated to Officer

OFFICER Refuse RECOMMEND’N:

APPEAL SITE: 2A Prospect Road Cadishead Irlam M44 5AW

PROPOSAL: Erection of detached dormer bungalow

WARD: Cadishead

APPELLANT: Mr David Burgess

DATE RECEIVED: 9 April 2018

The applicant has appealed the decision. The reason for refusal states;

The Local Planning Authority offered solutions to the applicant in order to make the development acceptable. The applicant was however unwilling to amend the plans. Without these amendments the development would not improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area and therefore does not comprise sustainable development. The Local Planning Authority has therefore implemented the requirement in Paragraphs 186-187 of the NPPF.

The proposed development by reason of its form and contemporary design, would not respond to its physical context or respect the character of the local area, and would represent an incongruous form in its relationship to the established 20th Century terraced and semi-detached dwellings surrounding the site. The proposal is contrary to the Shaping Salford Design Supplementary Planning Document, which states that building frontages will be of a consistent design quality and will be sensitive to the street in which they are located, in addition to Policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

The south eastern gable elevation of the proposed property would be located directly adjacent to the common boundary with 86 Liverpool Road, close to the outdoor amenity space serving that property, and less than 13.0m to the ground floor habitable room window situated to the rear. This would provide an unacceptable overbearing and overshadowing impact, and loss of light to, occupiers of that property to the detriment of their amenity. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, the House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 274

Appeals Received.rtf