Planning Applications to Be Considered by the Pennines Township Planning Sub Committee Date: 21St March 2007

PLANNING APPLICATIONS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE PENNINES TOWNSHIP PLANNING SUB COMMITTEE

DATE: 21 ST MARCH 2007

______

Recommendation Application Id. Code ______06/ D48367 Grant Permission subject to conditions LAND BETWEEN 6 AND 8 TURF HOUSE, SHORE ROAD, LITTLEBOROUGH

06/ D48398 Refuse Permission STRATHMORE, WILDHOUSE LANE, ROCHDALE, OL16 3JW

06/ D48408 Grant Permission subject to conditions SITE OF FORMER DALE & ARKWRIGHT MILL, ALBERT ROYDS STREET, ROCHDALE

06/ D48428 Grant Permission subject to conditions SITE OF MGA WATERSPORTS, 634 HALIFAX, ROAD, ROCHDALE

06/ D48455 Grant Permission subject to conditions FORMER COUNCIL OFFICES, NEWHEY ROAD, Milnrow, ROCHDALE

06/ D48458 Grant Permission subject to conditions FORMER COUNCIL OFFICES, NEWHEY ROAD, Milnrow, ROCHDALE

07/ D48560 Grant Permission subject to conditions SITE OF THE OLD WOOLPACK & ADJOINING LAND, 242 HALIFAX ROAD, ROCHDALE

07/ D48574 Grant Permission subject to conditions LAND ADJACENT TO M62 JUNCTION 21 AND, REAR OF EGREMONT ROAD, MILNROW, ROCHDALE

07/ D48624 Refuse Permission 26, DITTON MEAD CLOSE, ROCHDALE, OL12 9SH

07/ D48724 Grant Permission subject to conditions ST ANNS CHURCH, MILNROW ROAD, ROCHDALE, OL16 5BT

07/ D48725 Grant Permission subject to conditions ST ANNS CHURCH, MILNROW ROAD, ROCHDALE, OL16 5BT

List A Page - 1 -

Application Number Application Type Ward 06/D48367 Full Planning Littleborough Lakeside

ERECTION OF ONE DETACHED DWELLING LAND BETWEEN 6 AND 8 TURF HOUSE, SHORE ROAD, LITTLEBOROUGH

For:- JASON MURPHY Received 24-Nov-2006

RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission subject to conditions

Conditions: 1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application no development shall be commenced until samples or full details of materials to be used externally on the building(s) have been submitted to and approved 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. 3. Prior to the commencement of any development, a finished floor level for the proposed building(s) relative to an agreed off-site datum shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved detail. 4. Prior to commencement of development, an independent site investigation that accords with the guidance provided in BS 10175:2001 shall be carried out to assess the risk to future users of the site from contamination and ground gases. A report containing details of the method of investigation, the degree and nature of contamination found to be present and details of proposed remediation measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall not commence until the remediation measures approved have been completed and a report confirming that the measures set out in the approved report have been implemented has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority. 5. Before the development is commenced, details of the means of construction of the foundations of the proposed development shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. No piledriving operations shall take place without it being demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that all practicable means of ensuring that no nuisance is caused to the occupiers of adjacent properties have been incorporated. 6. No site preparation, delivery of materials or construction works, other than quiet internal building operations such as plastering and electrical installation, shall take place other than between 0730 and 1930 hours, Monday-Friday and between 0800 hours and noon on Saturday, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 7. Before the dwelling is first occupied, a wall or close boarded fence to a design and height approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be erected along the whole length of the south eastern boundary of the site in the position indicated with a brown line on the approved plans, and such wall or fence shall be retained and kept in good repair thereafter.

List A Page - 2 -

8. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modifications), the dwelling hereby approved shall not be extended in any way, except with the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. 9. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modifications), no building, outbuilding or other structure shall be erected within the curtilage of the dwelling hereby approved, except with the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority. 10. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modifications), no windows or other openings shall be inserted into either of the side elevations of the dwelling hereby approved.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity. 3. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity, and to prevent nuisance arising. 4. In order to ensure a safe form of development which poses no unacceptable risk to human health. 5. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 6. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 7. In order to ensure the privacy of the neighbouring property. 8. In order to protect the amenities of surrounding properties which are in close proximity. 9. In order to protect the amenities of surrounding properties which are in close proximity. 10. In order to protect the amenities of surrounding properties which are in close proximity. ______

Reason for Recommendation: This proposal relates to a site which is within the Defined Urban Area and comes within the definition of previously-developed land as outlined in Planning Policy Guidance Note 3: Housing. The proposal is compatible with surrounding uses and is in accordance with the provisions of policies H/3 (Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas) and BE/2 (Design Criteria for New Development) of the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Report

Site: The site in question is a small plot of land which has several small outbuildings including a single-storey former fish and chip shop. It is on Shore Road in a largely residential area, and is on a higher level (approximately 1 metre0 than houses on Sawley Avenue to the rear.

List A Page - 3 -

Proposal: The proposal is to erect one detached dwelling.

Policy Background: Adopted Unitary Development Plan:

Policy H/3 – Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas.

Policy BE/2 – Design Criteria for New Development.

Planning Policy Guidance Note 3: Housing.

Site History: None.

Publicity Responses: Notification letters were sent to nearby properties. Two letters of objection have been received, from the occupants of numbers 12 and 16 Sawley Avenue to the rear of the site. These objections can be summarised as follows:

1) The height of the building would block light from the gardens of Sawley Avenue. 2) The new house would overlook properties on Sawley Avenue, causing privacy problems. 3) The initial plans show the height of the building to be some five feet higher than the existing buildings on either side, and would not be in keeping with the present dwellings.

Two letters have been received, from the occupants of 14 Sawley Avenue and 48 Tintern Avenue, raising concerns about the proposed closure of the alleyway between Shore Road and the rears of properties on Sawley Avenue, which was indicated on the originally submitted plans. Following these concerns and concerns raised by the Head of Highways and Engineering, amended plans have now been received showing that this alleyway will remain open.

A letter has also been received by a family member representing the occupier of number 8 Turf House, the property immediately adjacent to the site. This letter suggests that the new house should be in keeping with the existing properties and take into consideration the present building line and roof line.

With the application, the applicants have submitted letters from Turf House and 12 Sawley Avenue in support of the application, stressing that the site is currently miused by youths. The occupant of Turf House confirms no objection to the new house being so close to the windows in the side of Turf House. It should be pointed out that occupants of 12 Sawley Avenue have also raised concerns in a separate letter, outlined above.

Consultation Responses: Head of Highways and Engineering – initially raised a number of concerns about the lack of off-street parking proposed and the closure of the Public Right of way adjacent to the site. Amended plans have now been received showing that the public right of way will be kept open, and, having visited the site and taken into consideration that the surrounding properties do not have off-street parking provision, the head of Highways and Engineering has now withdrawn his objection relating to this issue.

Views of Officer: I note that the site in question is a ‘brownfield’ site in the Defined Urban Area and within a residential area and thus I consider that the principle of the proposed development is acceptable. Whilst I felt that the originally submitted plans were not acceptable in terms

List A Page - 4 - of the height of the proposed house (which was proposed to be 1 metre taller than the adjacent terraced properties and which would have looked incongruous in the street scene), amended plans have now been received lowering the height of the proposed house to the same height as the adjacent dwellings.

In terms of the windows on the side of Turf House facing the site in question, I note that some of these are obscure glazed and some are secondary, with the only principle window to be affected being an upstairs kitchen window. Whilst I feel that this would not normally be a satisfactory situation, I feel that the fact that the occupant of Turf House has written in in full support of this application has a bearing and in these circumstances I feel that this alone would not now constitute a sustainable reason for refusal.

I note that the Head of Highways and Engineering does not object to the lack of off-street parking provision in the particular circumstances of this site, and I agree that, in accordance with Government guidance, a proposal for a new house close to public transport and the town centre such as this should not normally be required to provide off- street provision.

In terms of other points raised by neighbours, although the site is about 1 metre higher than properties on Sawley Avenue, it would be no higher than existing properties adjacent to it and would also be some seven metres from the boundary with those properties. In these circumstances, whilst they may be some overshadowing of the gardens of those properties, I do not think that those properties can reasonably expect the site in question to be kept open for their benefit or that any property built on it necessarily has to be a bungalow rather than a two storey dwelling of the same height as adjacent dwellings.

Delegation Scheme: The Committee have delegated powers to determine the application either way on reasonable planning grounds.

______

List A Page - 5 -

Application Number Application Type Ward 06/D48398 Full Planning Milnrow and Newhey

ERECTION OF 28 BAY CATTERY UNIT - RESUBMISSION D47733 STRATHMORE, WILDHOUSE LANE, ROCHDALE, OL16 3JW

For:- MR D INGRAM Received 01-Dec-2006

RECOMMENDATION Refuse Permission

Reasons: 1. This proposal relates to a commercial cattery which would be accessed via a new access point off Kiln Lane. The vehicle movement at this new junction is likely to be on a scale which would cause significant disamenity to residents of Kiln Lane by virtue of noise and increased activity. The proposal would be contrary to the provisions of policy BE/2 - Design Criteria for New Development - of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan. 2. This proposal relates to a commercial cattery which would be within an existing residential area and in close proximity to existing dwellings. The development is likely to lead to significant disturbance to residents at night from noise that is likely to eminate from the development. The proposal is contrary to the provisions of policy BE/2 - Design Criteria for New Development - of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan. ______

Report

Site: The site in question is a large detached residential property situated in the Defined Urban Area adjacent to the Green Belt. To the immediate north is another detached property on Wildhouse Lane and to the immediate south is The Gallows pub. Along the eastern boundary of the site is Kiln Lane, with residential properties on the other side of Kiln Lane.

Proposal: The proposal is to erect a 28-bay cattery consisting of a long, low l-shaped building along the boundaries with The Gallows and Kiln Lane. A new access would be formed from Kiln Lane.

Policy Background: Adopted Unitary Development Plan:

Policy BE/2 – Design Criteria for New Development.

Site History: 06/D47733 – Erection of 28 bay cattery unit. Withdrawn.

Publicity Responses: Notification letters were sent to nearby properties and a site notice was posted. Ten letters of objection have been received, from residents of Kiln Lane and Wildhouse Lane

List A Page - 6 - and The Gallows public house. The contents of these letters can be summarised as follows:

1) The proposed development is completely out of tone with the residential nature of the area. The site is only a narrow road width’s away from residential properties on Kiln Lane. 2) As cats are territorial they are always unhappy when taken away from their home territory, however well they are treated. The noise at night from unhappy cats would be totally unacceptable. There will also be increased vehicular movements and the sound of car doors closing. There will also be noise from cleaning operations. 3) The pub is a food outlet and there is concern about odours and the attraction of vermin, the influx of local and stray animals, the level of noise and scent. Customers would be unable to sit outside in the beer garden. 4) Restricted parking is now in force around Wildhouse Lane / Kiln Lane, causing greater parking problems than before. Another business in the area is only going to make matters worse. The three off-street parking spaces indicated are not enough. 5) The proposed access will create traffic problems on what is already an accident black spot. Cars are parked at the kerbside of Kiln Lane daily and would affect visibility from the proposed entrance. 6) Potential health risk from vermin, fleas. Will the hosing down of the cattery filter through onto the public footpath that the children walk on to school? Concern over the deposit of waste matters from the site. 7) Potential affect on property values. 8) The development may become a target for vandalism. 9) Any external lighting could be a cause of disturbance. 10) Commercial signs placed around the property would be inappropriate in a residential area. 11) Wooden stained buildngs are not appropriate within a residential area. 12) The opening times stated on the application do not reflect the nature of the business. 13) There is a danger than the existing access from Kiln Lane would be used which would be dangerous.

Consultation Responses: Chief Environmental Health Officer – no objections.

Environment Agency – no objections.

Head of Highways and Engineering – was initially concerned about visibility at the proposed new entrance from Kiln Lane and the position of the proposed gates, however amended plans submitted on the 13 th February have addressed these concerns by showing better visibility splays and the gates set further back. However, the Head of Highways and Engineering still requires that the school waiting restrictions be extended to a point 12 metres beyond the proposed entrance, this to be funded by the applicants and to be in place prior to the commencement of development on site.

Views of Officer: I note that the proposed building would be quite low in profile (less than 3 metres in height) and situated behind an existing stone wall and hedge. In these circumstances, I feel that the visual appearance of the building would be acceptable.

I note that the Head of Highways and Engineering is now satisfied with the proposed access and all other highways matters.

List A Page - 7 -

I am concerned about the proximity of the proposed development to residential properties. Whilst I note that the Chief Environmental Health Officer has raised no objections, nonetheless I note that policy BE/2 of the Unitary Development Plan requires that new development should “minimise the potential environmental impact of the development, including noise, air and water pollution”. I note that the proposed development would be less than 20 metres away from residential properties, and whilst I appreciate that the cats would be within the enclosed building, I feel that a significant amount of noise pollution from so many animals in close proximity is likely, something likely to be exacerbated by the otherwise relatively quiet residential nature of the area. I feel also that the new access point onto Kiln Lane will lead to increased noise and activity in this currently quiet area, to the detriment of residents.

In terms of other points raised by objectors, I note that the Chief Environmental Health Officer has raised no concerns in respect of smells or vermin. I feel that if the proposed development is well managed these issues should not arise, and if it isn’t well managed these issues can be addressed by Environmental Health legislation. Potential impact upon property values is not a planning consideration, and I see no reason to believe why the development would necessarily be a target for vandals. External lighting could be controlled by a condition on any approval and only minimal advertising can be erected without the need for a seperate advertisement consent. The use of the existing access could also be controlled by condition.

Delegation Scheme: The Committee have delegated powers to determine the application either way on reasonable planning grounds.

______

Application Number Application Type Ward 06/D48408 Full Planning Central Rochdale, Smallbridge Firgrove

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - 85 DWELLINGS AND ONE RETAIL UNIT SITE OF FORMER DALE & ARKWRIGHT MILL, ALBERT ROYDS STREET, ROCHDALE

For:- BASE REGENERATION LLP Received 06-Dec-2006

RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Committee resolves to grant planning permission subject to: -

1. The conditions set out below

2. An agreement being entered into under Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 or other appropriate legislation to secure the following: i. A commuted sum payment is made as a contribution towards the cost of the provision of public open space within the Rochdale Housing Market Renewal Area, in accordance with the Councils public open space policy.

3. The Development Control Manager being authorised to issue the decision notice on completion of the Section 106 agreement or receipt of an advanced payment as a contribution towards the cost of the provision of public open space.

List A Page - 8 -

Conditions: 1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application no development shall be commenced until samples or full details of materials to be used externally on the building(s) have been submitted to and approved 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. 3. No development shall commence until full details of the treatment of all site boundaries, including fences, walls, retaining walls and any other means of enclosure, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. 4. No development shall commence until details of the design, construction and drainage of the access to the site from Roch Street and the access route through the site have been submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to the dwellings hereby approved being first occupied. 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 and amended in 2005, or any equivalent Order following the revocation and re-enactment thereof, the retail unit hereby approved shall not be used for the retail sale of goods, for the sale of sandwiches or other cold food for consumption off the premises and for the display of goods for sale, Furthermore the retail unit hereby approved shall not open for trade of business before 07.00 hours nor after 22.00 hours Monday to Saturday, and not before 10.00 nor after 20.00 hours on a Sunday. 6. Before any development is commenced, a landscaping scheme shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. Such a scheme shall include details of the type, species, siting, planting distances and the programme of planting of trees and shrubs. The scheme of planting, as approved, shall be carried out during the first planting season after the development is substantially completed and the areas which are landscaped shall be retained as landscaped areas thereafter. Any trees or shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within three years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally requires to be planted. 7. Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2, Parts 1 and 2, of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any equivalent Order following the revocation and re-enactment thereof, the dwellings hereby approved shall not be extended in any way. 8. Prior to commencement of development, an independent site investigation that accords with the guidance provided in BS 10175:2001 shall be carried out to establish if the site is affected by contamination. A report containing details of the method of investigation, the degree and nature of contamination found to be present and details of proposed remediation measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall not commence until the remediation measures have been approved by the Local Planning Authority, and a report confirming that the measures set out in the approved report have been implemented has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. 9. There shall be no vehicular access to the site from Albert Royds Street.

List A Page - 9 -

10. Prior to any development commencing a scheme for the remodelling of the existing signalised junction of Albert Royds Street, Roch Street and Riverside Drive shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to any dwellings hereby approved being first occupied. 11. Prior to any development commencing a scheme for the traffic calming of the streets bounded by Roch Street, Cannon Street, Cook Street, Albert Royds Street (A664) and Halifax Road (A58) shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning authority. The scheme shall incorporate details of on street parking to serve the existing dwellings within this area. None of the dwellings hereby approved shall be occupied until the scheme as approved has been implemented. 12. The on street car parking spaces as shown on the approved plans shall be marked out and made available prior to the first occupation of any of the dwellings hereby approved. 13. Prior to any development commencing a scheme shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority to ensure that the houses are designed so that noise from road traffic is not more than: § 35dB(A) Leq 5mins in the bedrooms with windows shut and other means of ventilation provided between 11pm and 7am; § 40dB(A) Leq (1 hour) in other habitable rooms with windows shut and other means of ventilation provided at all times. § 50dB(A) Leq (1 hour) in a main area of garden. The duly approved scheme shall be implemented in full before any of the dwellings and apartments hereby approved are first occupied.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity. 3. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity. 4. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance and in the interest of road safety. 5. In the interests of road safety. 6. In order to achieve a satisfactory level of landscaping in the interests of the amenity of the area. 7. In the interests of preserving the design qualities of the dwellings hereby approved. 8. 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. 9. In the interests of road safety. 10. In the interests of road safety. 11. In the interests of road safety. 12. In order to ensure that there is adequate provision for vehicles to be parked clear of the highway in the interests of road safety and amenity and to prevent obstruction. 13. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. ______

List A Page - 10 -

Reason for Recommendation. The lies within the Defined Urban Area as defined in the Rochdale Unitary Development Plan. The site is previously developed land and its redevelopment accords with Planning Policy Statement 3 (Housing) which encourages the use of previously developed land within urban areas in preference to the development of greenfield sites. Subject to the recommended conditions the proposed residential development would also comply with the requirements of Policy H/2 (Land Provided for New Housing), H/3 (Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas), Policy EM/4 (Contaminated Land) and Policy BE/2 (Design of New Development) of the Rochdale Unitary Development Plan.

Report:

Site: Vacant site previously occupied by Dale Mill (demolished in 2002) and Arkwright Mill (demolished in 1990) on the southern side of Roch Street and east of Albert Royds Street. The site is around 1.80 hectares in area. The southern part of the site, previously occupied by Arkwright Mill, contains a number of self-seeded trees and bushes.

The site is bounded by housing to the north west, on the opposite side of Roch Street. To the north east, on the opposite side of Albert Royds Street, is open land. The River Roch forms the eastern boundary of site, with open land beyond. To the south of the site are allotments and a factory which is set down at a lower level.

Proposal: The application is for 85 dwellings and 1 retail unit. The proposal provides a mix of housing types which are arranged in a series of terraces. The scheme looks to create housing types which are compatible with the local area, with terraces situated to the perimeter of the site comprising mainly two storey accommodation, with three storey units positioned as ends to each arrangement. Within the centre of the site a block of family homes is proposed while an apartment block lies at a dominant location adjacent to the junction of Albert Royds Street and Roch Street. Lying adjacent to the southern boundary of the site, overlooking the River Roch three rows of terraced dwellings are proposed.

Vehicular access into the site is from Roch Street. This access extends through the site with the surface designed to be shared between pedestrians and vehicles – ‘homezones’ with pedestrian priority. Such designs help reduce the speed of local traffic whilst offering better spaces for pedestrian movement and recreation.

Car parking is integrated into the shared street design. There are a total of 86 on street parking spaces with an additional 9 incurtilage and an area of 39 secured undercroft parking spaces to the north of the site.

The proposal provides two areas of open space, in which one will provide childrens play equipment. Both these areas of open spaces are overlooked by the proposed dwellings. Along the frontage with the River Roch is a ribbon of open space which will allow views over the river and open land beyond.

Policy Background: Adopted UDP Policies:- BE/2 – Design of New Development. EM/3 – Noise and New Development H/2 – Land Provided for New Housing H/3 – Residential Development Outside Allocated Areas. H/5 – Residential Density H/6 – Provision of Recreational Open Space in New Housing Development

List A Page - 11 -

H/7 – Affordable Housing` A/8 – Capacity of the Highway Network A/10 - New Development - Provision of Parking EM/4 – Contaminated Land EM/8 – Development and Flood Risk

National Planning Guidance :- Planning Policy Statement 3 – Housing Planning Policy Statement 23- Planning and Pollution Control

Site History: 2003/D41779 – Outline planning permission for residential development. Approved 23/09/2003.

Publicity Responses: The relevant neighbouring properties were notified and site notices posted. One letter of objection has been received from Anglian Windows who occupy the industrial unit to the south of the site.

In the letter from Anglian Windows it is commented that the site operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Concerns are raised regarding the proximity of the proposed units to the industrial unit. It is requested that these dwellings be adequately acoustically shielded to avoid any future opportunities for complaint against the activities which occur from the site.

Consultation Responses: Head of Highways and Engineering: – has commented that due to the proximity of the retail unit to the junction of Roch Street and Albert Royds Street the servicing arrangements of it could be detrimental to highway safety. To overcome this concern it is recommended that a condition be attached to any approval notice which will prevent this retail unit being used for the sale of goods or the display goods for sale. A further condition is recommended which will require a scheme be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority for traffic calming of the streets bounded by Roch Street, Cannon Street, Cook Street, Albert Royds Street and Halifax Road. This scheme will improve road safety within the area.

Chief Environmental Health Officer: - has raised no objections.

Senior Contamination Officer - comments that due to previous industrial activities which have occurred on the site, some significant contamination is present. Prior to the application being submitted detailed site investigations have been undertaken at the site and ground conditions are generally well understood. A Remediation Strategy and a Method Statement for Remediation have been submitted and reviewed. No objections to the proposal are raised subject to a detailed condition which will require further site investigations to be undertaken. In summary it is considered that the site can be safely developed.

Environment Agency – at the time of writing this report the final views of the Environment Agency had not been received. These will be reported verbally to Members at the Committee Meeting.

Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Unit – no objections raised.

The Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) – comment that this scheme has the makings of an exemplar project that could help champion good design in the Housing Market Renewal Areas and therefore be of national significance.

List A Page - 12 -

Views of Officer: In 2003 , the Rochdale Development Agency, in partnership with Rochdale MBC, Rochdale Housing Initiative and West Pennine Housing Association commissioned a masterplan for the redevelopment of the Dale Mill Site. The objective was to provide an exemplar project for the Rochdale Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder Initiative and to secure the opportunity to improve both the quality of thinking and implementation of new housing in the area. In June 2003, after a national competition, attracting widespread interest, the architects and urban designers Proctor and Matthews, were appointed to explore masterplan options for Dale Mill. Prior to Proctor and Matthews submitting this application, extensive local resident consultation has occurred in which presentations, workshops and exhibitions have taken place within the community.

The proposed development of this site raises a number of issues that need to be considered: 1) The acceptability of the proposed development having regard to Planning Policy Guidance Statement 3 (Housing). 2) The acceptability of the proposed development having regard to UDP Policy H/3 (Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas). 3) Highways, traffic and the proposed means of vehicular access to the site 4) Layout and the Design and appearance of the proposed dwellings. 5) Contaminated land 6) Recreational Open Space 7) Affordable Housing 8) Other matters and concerns raised.

1. The acceptability of the proposed development having regard to Planning Policy Guidance Statement 3 (Housing)

Planning Policy Statements are prepared by the government to provide guidance to local authorities and others on planning policy and the operation of the planning system. Local authorities are required to take their contents into account when determining planning applications.

Planning Policy Statement 3 sets out specific guidance in respect of housing development and requires that Councils make adequate provision of sites to accommodate the demand for new homes. This PPS also states that the Government is committed to maximising the re-use of previously-developed land in order both to promote regeneration and to minimise the amount of greenfield land being taken for development. A number of objectives are identified. These objectives include: a) Continue to make effective use of land by re-using land that has been previously developed. b) Providing wider housing opportunity and choice and a better mix in the size, type and location of housing .

With regard to the first issue, since November 2002 it has been policy of the Council not to allow housing development on any greenfield sites in the Borough. The proposed development would therefore only be acceptable if the housing was to be built on previously developed land. PPS3 defines previously developed land as:-

‘Previously-developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure.’

List A Page - 13 -

The definition excludes land that:

‘Land that was previously-developed but where the remains of the permanent structure or fixed surface structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time (to the extent that it can reasonably be considered as part of the natural surroundings)’.

In this particular case the site previously contained two large mills, know as Dale Mill and Arkwright Mill, which were demolished in 1990 and 2002. Since 2002 the site has been vacant and having been on site bricks and debris from the mills are scattered across it. Therefore evidence of the previous uses of the site are still apparent. In my opinion the proposed residential development satisfies the definition of previously developed land as set out in PPS3 and for the purposes of PPS3, the development of these areas of the site is acceptable in principle. Another objective of PPS3 is to make the most efficient of land by encouraging developments which provide a wider housing opportunity and choice and a better mix in the size, type and location of housing. This area surrounding the site is dominated by terraced dwellings and therefore the choice of dwelling types within the area is limited. The proposed development provides a wide range of dwellings types which include 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments and 2, 3, 4 and 5 bedroom houses. The development would result in a density of 47 dwellings per hectare. In my opinion this would be an appropriate density for this particular site having regard to its location and setting. PPS3 also advises that local planning authorities should create more sustainable communities. One of the ways to achieve this is by building in ways which exploit and deliver accessibility by public transport to jobs, shopping, leisure and local services. This particular site is located within easy walking distance of shops and bus routes along Halifax Road and Albert Royds Street.

2. The acceptability of the proposed development having regard to UDP Policy H/3 (Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas).

Policy H/3 of the UDP states that residential developments on sites not allocated for housing or any other use within the plan will be permitted so long as the following criteria are satisfied:- a) the site is on previously developed land; b) the site is well located in terms of access to jobs, shops and services by modes of transport other than the car; c) the development provides a mix of dwellings in terms of type and size. d) the proposed development is compatible with plans policies dealing with flood risk, unstable land, contaminated land and landfill gas; and e) the proposed development is compatible with surrounding uses, including highways both in terms of its impact upon those uses and the impact of surrounding uses upon the amenity of future residents. .

As previously stated in this report, the site is considered to be previously developed. The site lies within easy walking distance of Halifax Road which provides a good variety of shops and contains a frequent bus services between Rochdale and Littleborough. In terms of criterion (C), the existing street pattern within the area is historically formed of linear back to back terraces, which open directly onto the street and have small rear gardens. The different house layouts proposed offer a variety of solutions with a corresponding choice of size, from 1 to 5 bedrooms and ultimately 7 bedrooms through interconnections. The scale, height and massing has been considered in relation to the neighbouring dwellings. For instance they are arranged in a series of terrace rows with

List A Page - 14 - several rows adjoining Roch Street which provides an active street frontage. Three terrace rows lie along the southern boundary, taking advantage of the views across the River Roch. The majority of the dwellings are two storeys high with three storey dwellings lying at the ends of rows to help define blocks and entrances. Within the centre of the site are a cluster of three storey dwellings in which the access through the site extends around them. Lying adjacent to the junction of Albert Royds Street and Roch Street is a proposed 4 storey high apartment block. This apartment block sits in a dominant location and is clearly visible as a marker building. I consider the type and size of dwellings proposed are accepted as the types provided will ensure the development is sustainable. In terms of criterion (d), the Environment Agency originally objected to the proposal on the grounds that the proposed decking structure which would adjoin the River Roch could hinder maintenance and inspection to the river. Furthermore clarification is sought regarding the extent of engineering works that are proposed next to the riverbank. A meeting has recently taken place with the applicant and the Environment Agency to address the above mentioned issues. Following the meeting the Environment Agency have confirmed that they no longer object to proposal subject to conditions. At the time of writing this report written confirmation from the Environment Agency to confirm they have withdrawn their objection has not been received. Members will be updated at the meeting. With regard to contamination, this matter will be discussed later in the report. Criteria (d) requires an assessment to be made of the compatibility of the proposed development with the surrounding land uses. As set out later in this report I consider that the proposed development will be compatible with the area. I am satisfied that the roads and services will not have an unacceptable impact upon the amenity of adjoining residents or highway safety. Again this matter is assessed later in this report.

3. Highways, traffic and the proposed means of vehicular access to the site.

The Head of Highways and Engineering has commented that the proposed location of the vehicular access is acceptable in that it achieves adequate visibility splays along Roch Street and that it lies a satisfactory distance away from the junction of Roch Street and Albert Royds Street. Within the development it is considered that the home zone style layout will operate safely so as to give a priority to pedestrians rather than vehicles.

The majority of the proposed car parking spaces for the proposed dwellings are integrated into the planted shared surface streetscape design. These spaces will lie with a series of rows lying in front of dwellings, allowing natural surveillance to occur. This arrangement is somewhat unusual as the Council normally encourages in curtilage private parking. However I consider this solution of providing on street parking is well designed as not to dominate and detract from the appearance of the streetscene. Furthermore I consider the locations of the car parking spaces are consistently spread across the site as not to be inconvenient to residents or visitors to the dwellings.

The proposal also includes 39 undercroft car parking spaces which will lie below the apartment block. These spaces will be accessed from the end of the shared surface which extends through the site. It will not be possible to access these spaces from either Roch Street or Albert Royds Street. These spaces will made available for the residents and visitors of the apartments and this area also provides secured areas for bicycles.

The proposal includes the provision of a shop which will be on the ground floor of the apartment block that faces Roch Street and Albert Royds Street. The Head of Highways and Engineering has raised concerns regarding the servicing of this shop as deliveries to it from Roch Street, could be detrimental of highway safety. To prevent a retail use which would generate a lot of comings and goings through deliveries and customers, I

List A Page - 15 - have recommended a condition which will prevent this unit being used for the display of goods for sale or the retail sale of goods. Such types of uses include convenience stores which have daily deliveries and attract a significant amount of customers. Other retail uses , for example hairdressers, will not generate a significant amount of comings and goings whether it be from customers or deliveries. The Head of Highways and Engineering supports this condition.

With the support of the Head of Highways and Engineers I consider the parking and access arrangements are acceptable.

4. Layout and the design and appearance of the proposed dwellings.

With regard to the appearance of the proposed dwellings, the massing of them is intended to offer the appearance of individual houses whist still gaining the living density advantages of a terrace arrangement. The front elevations of the terraces which adjoin Roch Street or the River Roach have been developed to reflect the typical Rochdale red brick terrace. This helps to ensure, especially along Roch Street, continuity between the proposed and existing dwellings within the area. However once within the site each courtyard and private terrace uses a mix of materials and colours which will allow an expression of individuality. The proposed apartment block which would lie adjacent to Albert Royds Street and Roch Street is due to its massing and design a marker building. This external appearance of the upper three floors of this apartment block is dominated by coloured tiles, with red brick used as the subservient material. To create consistency the same colour palette/materials as used on the courtyards will be used on the elevations of the apartments. It is my view that the design and appearance of this apartment block creates a building of visual interest, providing a positive backdrop to the development when viewed from Albert Royds Street. With the majority of the proposed dwellings being terraces they have a close relationship with one another. Therefore careful consideration is given to ensuring adequate levels and privacy and amenity are achieved for the future residents. All dwellings will contain a private courtyard or a private garden area and the majority of principle windows within each dwelling either overlook the street or the River Roch. Secondary widows will either face across internal courtyards or towards the gable elevation of the adjoining dwelling. I consider that the relationship between the proposed dwellings has been carefully and successfully planned, in that adequate spaces between them is achieved to ensure that the future residents enjoy adequate levels of privacy and amenity. There are several points of pedestrian access around the site, to both the north and southwest corners and towards the centre of Roch Street. There are also clear routes from within the site to ribbon of open space which adjoins the River Roch. I consider that the proposal provides a satisfactory number and user friendly routes in and out of the site to achieve good levels of permeability.

5. Contaminated land

Policy EM/4 (Contaminated Land) of the UDP states that the Council will encourage the effective treatment and restoration to beneficial use of contaminated land. When proposals for development are put forward, the Council will require surveys of ground conditions if there are reasonable grounds to suspect contamination. Government guidance, set out in Planning Policy Statement 23 (Planning and Pollution Control) recognises that remediation of contaminated land will often be dealt with by redevelopment and that the planning system can and should secure appropriate investigation and remediation of land. PPG23 states:

List A Page - 16 -

Where contamination is known or suspected or the proposed use would be particularly vulnerable, LPAs should require the applicant to provide with the application such information as is necessary to determine whether the proposed development can proceed. In doing so, they should adopt a balanced approach. It would be disproportionate and unnecessary to require every applicant to carry out a detailed and expensive site investigation. However, sufficient information should be required to determine the existence or otherwise of contamination, its nature and the risks it may pose and whether these can be satisfactorily reduced to an acceptable level.

One of the key issues to resolve on the site is that due to previous industrial activities some significant contamination is present. Prior to this application being submitted, extensive discussions have taken place with the Council’s Senior Contamination Officer and the applicant’s environmental consultants. Extensive and detailed site investigations have already been undertaken and ground conditions are well understood. One issue at the site is the presence of some asbestos containing materials within the made ground. RMBC has advised the environmental consultants in detail how this aspect of the project will need to be managed. The applicant has submitted a Remediation Strategy and a Method Statement for Remediation Works which have been reviewed. It is concluded that the level of investigation works undertaken is satisfactory and the proposed Remediation Strategy will result in a safe development of the site. Overall, it is recommended the application be approved subject to the recommended condition.

6. Recreational Open Space Policy H/6 (Provision of Recreational Open Space in New Housing Development ) states that new housing developments will be required to make adequate provsion for recreational open space by applying a standard of 2.1 hectares per 1000 population. It is further stated that proposals comprising 100 or more bedrooms should include on site provision.

The proposal provides two area of open space which lie adjacent to the rear elevations of the two rows or terraces which would extend along Roch Street. These two areas of open space are overlooked from several dwellings which will result in good levels of natural surveillance. Furthermore the area of open space which will lie towards the north west facing corner of the site will contain childrens play equipment while the other area of open space will contain seating areas to allow for passive recreation. I consider that the size and locations of these areas of open space to be acceptable in which they will provide an important local facility.

Policy H/6 requires that on such sites outdoor sports provision should be provided. In this particular case it is considered that such a facility should not be provided as it would be beneficial to the community if the contribution was used to fund new outdoor sports provision or improve the existing facilities within East Central Rochdale. The applicant has agreed to enter into a Section 106 legal agreement to contribute funds for providing outdoor sports provision within East Central Rochdale.

7. Affordable Housing In terms of the provision of affordable housing, it is confirmed that 23 housing units will be available through West Pennine Housing Association. This will include 2-5 bed houses and will be a mix of homes available to rent or part own through shared ownership schemes. The provision of a mix of tenures is a key objective of Housing Market Renewal. In this particular case there is no need to secure affordable housing through a Section 106 Agreement as such a provision is a requirement within the projects Development Agreement – to which Rochdale MBC and BASE (the developer) will be signatories.

List A Page - 17 -

8. Other matters and concerns. In response to the objection received from Anglican Windows, their site lies beyond the south facing boundary of the site. Access to this site is via Belfield Lane and Mayfield Street. The Chief Environmental Health Officer considers that the relationship between the proposed dwellings that lie adjacent to the south facing boundary and the site of Anglican Windows is satisfactory in that any activities which may occur from within the Anglican Windows site will not unduly affect the amenities of these future residents.

The Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, who are the government’s advisor on architecture, urban design and public space, have commented that they are impressed by the sophistication of the brief and the collaborative approach to the design, consultation and review process. The strong role taken by the Oldham Rochdale HMR Pathfinder towards design is to be encouraged, together with the close working relationships within the design team. It is considered that the scheme has the makings of an exemplar project that could help champion good design in the Housing Market Renewal Areas and therefore be of national significance.

Summary The application site relates to industrial premises located within the defined urban area. The Governments planning policies on housing development, set out in Planning Policy Guidance Statement 3 (Housing), are to maximise the re-use of previously developed land within urban areas in preference to the development of greenfield sites, in order both to promote regeneration and to minimise the amount of greenfield land being taken for development. The proposed development area constitutes previously developed land as set out in PPS 3. The development will also be a sustainable development being located within easy walking distance of the local shops, other local services and bus routes. Furthermore I consider that the design and layout of the scheme is of a high standard which responds to local need, providing good living environments for the future residents.

Delegation Scheme: Members have delegated powers to determine this application on reasonable planning grounds.

______

List A Page - 18 -

Application Number Application Type Ward 06/D48428 Full Planning Wardle

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - 20 APARTMENTS WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING - RESUBMISSION D47487 SITE OF MGA WATERSPORTS, 634 HALIFAX, ROAD, ROCHDALE

For:- FRASC HOLDINGS LTD Received 13-Dec-2006

RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission subject to conditions

Conditions: 1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. No development hereby approved shall be commenced until such time as the culvert which crosses the site has been diverted in accordance with the details shown on approved drawing number XYZ1 revision 1 dated 09-02-07 and further details to be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The further details shall include details of exact route, size, materials, depth, levels and method of construction. 3. The building hereby approved shall be constructed externally in accordance with the material references shown on approved drawing number m2675-010 revision C, samples of all of the materials indicated to be first submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. 4. Prior to commencement of development, an independent site investigation that accords with the guidance provided in BS 10175:2001 shall be carried out to assess ground conditions for contamination in relation to both human health and local ground and surface waters and ground gases. A report containing details of the method of investigation, the degree and nature of contamination found to be present and details of proposed remediation measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall not commence until the remediation measures approved have been completed and a report confirming that the measures set out in the approved report have been implemented has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority. 5. No development shall commence until full details of boundary treatment for the site have been submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. These shall include details of heights and materials and shall show the amenity space and the planted areas between the building and Old Road to be suitably enclosed in the interests of security. The agreed boundary treatments shall be erected prior to the first occupation of any of the flats hereby approved. 6. Before any development is commenced, a full and detailed landscaping scheme for the whole site, including the amenity space and the area between the new building and Halifax Road, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. This shall include details of both hard and soft landscaping and size, species, numbers and positioning of trees and shrubs. The hard landscaping shall be carried out before any of the flats are first occupied and the agreed planting scheme shall be carried out during the first planting season after the development is substantially completed. The landscaped areas shall be retained as such thereafter, and any trees or shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted.

List A Page - 19 -

7. Before the development is commenced, details of the means of construction of the foundations of the proposed development shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. No piledriving operations shall take place without it being demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that all practicable means of ensuring that no nuisance is caused to the occupiers of adjacent properties have been incorporated. 8. Before the commencement of any development, full details of a scheme for the disposal of foul and surface water from the site shall be submitted for the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The duly approved scheme shall be implemented in full before the use first commences. 9. The car parking area shown on the approved plans shall be constructed and marked out in accordance with the details shown, concurrently with the construction of the building hereby permitted and shall be made available for use before the building is first occupied and retained thereafter. 10. No site preparation, delivery of materials or construction works, other than quiet internal building operations such as plastering and electrical installation, shall take place other than between 0730 and 1930 hours, Monday - Friday and between 0800 hours and noon on Saturday, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 11. None of the flats hereby approved shall be first occupied until such time as the existing signal arrangements at the junction of Old Road and the A58 have been upgraded to allow the intensification of use of Old Road, including additional pedestrian facilities within the signal arrangements, to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. 12. None of the flats hereby approved shall be first occupied until such time as Old Road has been widened and improved to adoptable standard along the frontage of the development, from the junction with the A58 to the vehicular access to the underground car park, in accordance with full details to be first submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. 13. None of the flats hereby approved shall be first occupied until a lay-by for refuse collection on Old Road has been provided in accordance with details to be agreed under condition 12 above and a loading only restriction has been placed along its length. 14. Details of any external light to be installed on the building/ site shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority prior to installation. 15. The window shown cross hatched on the approved plans in the western elevation of the building hereby approved (i.e. the side living room window on the second floor of this elevation) shall be permanently fitted with obscured glazing, the degree of glazing to be first agreed with the Local Planning Authority, unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority. 16. The ramp from the bin store to Old Road shall be secured with a locked gate, the height and design of which shall be first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, prior to the first occupation of any of the flats, and shall remain so secured at all times thereafter.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

List A Page - 20 -

2. To ensure a satisfactory form of development and in the interests of land drainage and flood risk. 3. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity.

4. In order to ensure a safe form of development that poses no unacceptable risk to human health. 5. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity, and to prevent nuisance arising. 6. In order to achieve a satisfactory level of landscaping in the interests of the amenity of the area. 7. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 8. To secure a satisfactory system of drainage and to prevent pollution of the water environment. 9. In order to ensure that there is adequate provision for vehicles to be parked clear of the highway in the interests of road safety and amenity and to prevent obstruction. 10. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 11. In the interests of the smooth flow of traffic. 12. In the interests of highway safety. 13. In the interests of highway safety. 14. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity, and to prevent nuisance arising. 15. In the interests of the privacy of occupiers of the flat and the adjacent nursing home. 16. In the interests of safety and security. ______

Reason for Recommendation: This proposal relates to a ‘brownfield’ site within the Defined Urban Area in a mainly residential area. The proposed development would be in keeping with surrounding uses and would be in accordance with the provisions of policies H/3 (Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas) and BE/2 (Design Criteria for New Development) of the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Report

Site: The site in question is a former retail site used by MGA Watersports situated on the main Halifax Road near to the junction with Birch Road. To the north, on the other side of Halifax Road, are terraced stone houses and to the south-west boundary of the site is Old Road which leads to dwellings on Wuerdle Farm Way and Belvoir Meadows. To the immediate east is a terrace of houses on Wuerdle Street and a new development of dwellings and a convenience store on the site of the former Mount Green garage.

Proposal: The proposal is to provide 20 apartments in a building alongside Halifax Road which would present a three storey elevation to Halifax Road but which would also have lower ground floor and basement levels; due to the slope in the site, this would mean that the building would effectively be four storey to the rear. The basement level would contain 25 underground car parking spaces, a bike store and bin store. At lower ground floor level, to the rear of the building, would be 152.5 square metres of outdoor landscaped amenity

List A Page - 21 - area for the residents (situated mainly over the top of the underground car park), as well as five additional off-street parking spaces adjacent to the new vehicular entrance. The building would be set back from Halifax Road by four metres with a landscaping strip in between, and access to the underground car park would be gained from Old Road. Old Road would be widened with footpaths placed on either side from Halifax Road to the entrance to the underground car park.

The Halifax Road elevation of the building would be mainly locally sourced natural stonework with aluminium framed windows and timber panels adjacent to the windows. The top floor will be hung with natural slate wall cladding. The side elevations would be a mixture of natural stone and hung slate towards the front and render to the rear, with slate grey laminate panels to some elements. To the rear, the materials to be used would be render around the windows in the central part of the elevation, with slate grey laminate panels to either side and an element of brick to the ground floor. Windows would be aluminium framed with cedar panel inserts.

Policy Background: Adopted Unitary Development Plan:

Policy H/3 – Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas.

Policy BE/2 – Design Criteria for New Development.

Planning Policy Guidance Note 3: Housing.

Site History: 06/D47487 – Mixed use development comprising dental practice, pharmacy and residential development of 20 apartments with associated parking and amenity areas. Withdrawn.

Publicity Responses: Notification letters were sent to nearby properties and site notices posted. Five letters have been received from local residents, including one signed by the residents of 1,3,5,8,10,12 and 14 Wuerdle Farm Way, Wuerdle Farm and 16 and 18 Old Road. The contents of these letters can be summarised as follows:

1) The scale of the development is inappropriate for the area. Such a large structure will dominate the area and put all surrounding properties in its shadow. 2) The appearance and materials used, especially at the back, would not be in keeping with the area. 3) The house and garden of 8 Belvoir Meadows will be overlooked by windows of the proposed development. 4) The development of 20 apartments will be detrimental to the quiet nature of the area. 5) There is no shortage of flats in Rochdale. 6) The proposed development would lead to highway dangers and congestion. The road is not wide enough for two cars to pass, let alone fire engines, ambulances, etc. There is nowhere for large vehicles to turn around. Traffic movements on Old Road are likely to double. 7) Old Road has had bollards placed across it as part of a traffic calming measure and this has lead to it being almost pedestrianised, school children and residents regularly walk in the road and the plans do not allow for footpaths along the full length of the road to the bollards; if cars are allowed to park along it, this will narrow the width again. If the bollards were relocated about 100m nearer to Halifax Road, this would enable all the residents of Old Road and Wuerdle Farm Way to exit directly onto Smithy Bridge Road, leaving the new development at the Halifax Road side of the bollards, thus preventing construction traffic and

List A Page - 22 -

subsequent residents from accessing Wuerdle Farm Way. Temporary parking restrictions on Old Road and Wuerdle Farm Way would prevent the contractors from leaving vehicles parked on the roadside during construction. 8) There is not sufficient off-street parking proposed. 9) The road drains on the A58 are blocked. Water coming down Birch Road crosses the A58 and runs down Old Road making it into a virtual torrent causing flooding to the whole area. 10) The culvert which runs under Halifax Road to take water from Birch Hill down to the River Roch runs partly through the site and down onto Old Road.

A letter of objection has also been received from an agent representing the developers of the adjacent Mount Green garage site. The contents of this letter can be summarised as follows:

1) The adverse impact of the block of flats upon the approved detached house next to it will mean the implementation of the housing element of the Mount Green site will be jeopardised. The block will overshadow the small garden area of the proposed house. The block would not respond to the local context and will be an uncomfortable element.

A letter of objection has also been received from the Littleborough Civic Trust. The contents of this letter can be summarised as follows:

1) The density of 140 units per hectare would be excessive. The circumstances do not appear to exist which would allow such a high density. 2) The design is out of character with the surroundings and we are dismayed at the mixture of exterior finishes proposed. A flat roof would be inappropriate. 3) A reduction of one storey and the use of pitched roofing would give the elevation to the road a similarity of appearance to surrounding properties.

Consultation Responses: United Utilities – no objections.

Environment Agency – initially objected to the proposals as the building would have been above a culverted watercourse, however they have now agreed to a diversion of the culvert which can be required by condition on any planning approval.

Head of Highways and Engineering – “the size and type of development will greatly increase traffic around the junction of Old Road and the A58, which is already traffic sensitive. We would therefore require improvements to be made around this junction, improving road safety before the development takes place. We would require the applicant to upgrade the existing signal arrangements to allow the intensification of use on Old Road, including additional pedestrian facilities within the signal arrangements.”

The Head of Highways and Engineering also points out that one of the proposed balconies overhangs the footway and the proposed refuse collection waiting area, on the footway, would be unacceptable in highway safety terms. One solution would be to submit a design detailing a 2 metre wide footway along this route, not passing under the apartment balconies, along with a lay-by area which has a loading only restriction along its length on the highway. This legal order would need to be made prior to the site being brought into use.

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – no objections.

Greater Manchester Police – suggest certain site securing measures which can be required by condition.

List A Page - 23 -

Views of Officer: I note that this proposal is for residential development on a brownfield site in a mainly residential area, and thus I consider that the principle of what is being proposed is acceptable.

Policy H/3 – Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas – of the Unitary Development Plan requires that development should –

a) be on previously developed land; b) be well located in terms of access to jobs, shops and services by modes of transport other than the car; c) provide a mix of dwellings in terms of type and size; d) be in accordance with the Council’s policies on flood risk, unstable land, contaminated land and landfill gas; e) be compatible with surrounding uses, including highways.

I note that the site is previously developed land. I note that it is located on a main bus route into Rochdale, and that the introduction of flats into the area would result in a greater mix of dwelling types than is currently the case in the area. I see no reason why the proposed development is not compatible with Council policies in respect of flood risk, unstable land, contaminated land and landfill gas. In terms of compatibility with surrounding uses, I note that the proposed development is in accordance with the Council’s standards regarding the required distances between existing and new dwellings, and thus I feel that there would be no undue loss of amenity to existing reasons by virtue of overlooking or loss of privacy.

The Halifax Road elevation of the building would be of similar height to the terraced dwellings on the other of Halifax Road, and would be largely constructed of natural stone, which I consider to be characteristic of the area. Whilst the building would have a modern style with flat roof, I see no particular reason why this would not provide an interesting contrast with surrounding properties, the use of traditional materials ensuring that the building still relates to its surroundings rather than appearing completely alien. The rear of the building would be of render and cladding, however I note that this would not be highly visible in the street scene and thus I feel that there is scope for more modern materials on this elevation.

The proposals provide a large area of open space to the rear, and this can be required to be suitably landscaped by condition. The parking provision of 150% is, I consider, all that can be reasonably required given government guidance for sites in close proximity to public transport, such as this, which suggests that local authorities should allow for significantly lower levels of off-street parking on these sites.

In terms of highways matters, the suggestion that Old Road be closed beyond the entrance to the site is unfortunately not possible in highways terms because it would mean that there would be insufficient turning provision for vehicles using the street, with the proposed access not being suitable in this regard. The applicants have agreed to upgrade Old Road as far as the entrance to the site, with new footways.

With regard to other matters raised in publicity responses, I consider that temporary parking restrictions could be enforced on Old Road for the duration of the construction works. Details of site drainage can be required by condition, and the culvert under the building is now proposed to be diverted in accordance with a scheme which has been agreed with the Environment Agency. The matters raised by the Head of Highways and Engineering in respect of overhanging balconies and the position of a lay-by for refuse vehicles have now been addressed with amended plans.

List A Page - 24 -

Delegation Scheme: The Committee have delegated powers to determine the application either way on reasonable planning grounds.

______

Application Number Application Type Ward 06/D48455 Full Planning Milnrow and Newhey

CHANGE OF USE AND CONVERSION OF FORMER COUNCIL OFFICES TO FORM 4 APARTMENTS AND SITE MANAGERS OFFICE - (RESUBMISSION D47089) FORMER COUNCIL OFFICES, NEWHEY ROAD, Milnrow, ROCHDALE

For:- MILNROW PROPERTIES LTD Received 13-Dec-2006

RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission subject to conditions

Conditions: 1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, the side gable wall of the building facing the adjacent building known as 'St Stephens Lodge' shall be re-built and made good using natural stone recovered from other parts of the existing building. 3. Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application no development shall be commenced until samples or full details of materials to be used externally on the building(s) have been submitted to and approved 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. 4. The parking layout shown within the application site as edged in red on the approved plans, (drawing No.LN001 & LY001 Revision B), shall be formed and laid as shown on those plans and made available for use before any of the new apartments subject to this permission are first brought into use. 5. When the existing steps and ramp at the front of the buildings are removed, the surface of the footway to Newhey Road shall be either re-surfaced or made good to satisfy the Council's normal standards for adoption purposes in accordance with a detailed scheme that shall first be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. 6. The design of the pedestrian access gate on the front elevation of the buildings under the clock tower shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority before it is installed on site. 7. The manager's office and store as shown on the approved plans, (drawing No.LY001 Revision B), shall only be used for purposes incidental to the management of the apartments on this site.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

List A Page - 25 -

2. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance of the building and for the avoidance of doubt. 3. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity.

4. In order to ensure that there is adequate provision for vehicles to be parked clear of the highway in the interests of road safety and amenity and to prevent obstruction. 5. In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in the best interests of highway safety. 6. In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and because no such details were included as part of the application. 7. The site has limited off-street parking facilities and an uncontrolled use of these facilities by a non-related business use would be detrimental to road safety and to the convenience of the residents living on the site. ______

Reason for Recommendation: The proposal would represent an acceptable and beneficial re-use of these semi-derelict buildings in a manner that would retain their attractive architectural features and character. The site has a sustainable location in access and transportation terms being close to the centre of Milnrow, the railway/proposed Metrolink station and passing bus routes. The proposal satisfies all the relevant policies in the UDP and is acceptable in all respects.

Report

Site: The application relates to the remaining part of the former Milnrow Council Offices on Newhey Road. The buildings are an important focal point of the local area and are local landmark, mainly because of the attractive front elevation facing onto Newhey Road and the tall clock tower structure.

The building is predominantly constructed out of natural stone, although parts of the rear walls facing towards Royds Street are built out of red brick. The building has a natural slate roof.

The building lies within the Butterworth Hall, (Municipal Buildings), Conservation Area, which was designated by the Council in June last year.

The building is adjoined to the south along Newhey Road by the Carnegie Library building, which was built in 1907. That building is set back from Newhey Road and is also an attractive building of significant character, although its design and external appearance contrasts strongly with the former Council Offices buildings.

On the other side of Newhey Road are stone-built terraced houses and to the northern side of the buildings is the modern, stone-built, St Stephens Lodge apartment building. A public footpath runs from Newhey Road to Royds Street to the rear between the two buildings.

List A Page - 26 - viewed from Royds Street, the rear of the former Council Offices buildings are still visible in general public view through the communal courtyard parking area that has been formed to serve the new apartments. The clock tower of course is still a prominent feature because of its height.

Proposal: To change the use, convert and alter the buildings to create four apartments and an office/store for use by the landlord/management team of the existing 22 and the proposed additional four apartments. Each flat would have two bedrooms.

The proposal involves the demolition of the rear elevations of the buildings and part of the side, (north-west), wall facing St Stephens Lodge and the construction of new walls in their place. The existing front and side elevation to the building are to be left standing and made good. The clock tower itself is to be left at its current height.

The existing modern steps and disabled persons access ramp at the front of the buildings on the footway to Newhey Road are to be removed and a secure means of pedestrian access from Newhey Road into the rear courtyard is to be formed under the base of the clock tower. On the front elevation larger glazed openings are to be formed within the arched former door openings for the original fire station. These alterations will improve the appearance of the front of the buildings.

The new rear walls to the building are to be constructed using facing brick with stone heads and cills to the window and doorway openings.

The off-street parking facilities for this new use of the building are to be accommodated within the communal courtyard/parking area to the rear. A total of 20 external parking spaces and a further 19 spaces for the parking of cars within integral garages under one of the buildings will be available for the entire combined site, which would contain 26 apartments overall if this application were to be approved.

Policy Background: UDP - the site lies within the defined urban area but is not allocated for any particular form of development. The site lies within the Butterworth Hall (Municipal Buildings) Conservation Area, which was Designated by the Council on 28 June this year. The following policies in the UDP are relevant to this proposal:-

Policy BE/2 - Design criteria for new development Policy BE/20 - New development affecting conservation areas Policy BE/19 - Demolition of buildings in conservation areas Policy BE/20 - New development affecting the setting of conservation areas Policy BE/21 - Changes of use to buildings in conservation areas

Site History: 2001 Outline application for residential development, (reference D38746). Approved.

2001 Outline application for residential and office development, (reference D38747). Approved.

2002 Detailed application for the change of use and conversion of former Council offices into three apartments and landlord’s office and the erection of two, 4-storey buildings, containing 22 apartments, (reference D40169). Approved

List A Page - 27 -

2003 Change of use and conversion of former Council offices into three apartments and the erection of two, four-storey buildings containing 22 apartments- revised proposal, (reference D42278). Approved.

2006 Erection of 22 flats in two four-storey buildings with revised design of dormers and an additional four dormers to roof, (retrospective application), reference D48008. Approved.

Publicity Responses: The neighbouring properties were notified of the application and a site notice was also posted. No representations have been received.

Consultation Responses: Head of Highways & Engineering:- no objections.

Views of Officer: The principle of the conversion and re-use of these buildings for residential use has already been established by the previous planning permissions D40169 and D42278. The current proposal is for a very similar form of development although the previously approved two 1x bed flats and one 2x bed flat and manager’s office would now be changed to four 2x bed flats plus managers’ office/store. The size of the office/store has been reduced however.

The current proposal is for a more viable form of development than that proposed previously and this should secure the future retention of the clock tower.

The design of the alterations has been the subject of careful negotiation between officers and the applicant and his agent and the overall design of the conversion has been much improved. The development will bring these currently semi-derelict buildings back into productive use and thereby significantly improve their condition and appearance. This will not only enhance the conservation area but will also improve the local visual amenities of the area.

There will still be sufficient off-street parking facilities for the overall site, given the sustainable location of the site in relation to the centre of Milnrow, the railway/proposed Metrolink station and the passing bus routes along Newhey Road. In any case, the parking facilities would satisfy the most recent Government guidance on parking provision for ‘infill’ urban housing schemes such as this.

In these circumstances I recommend that this application be approved.

Delegation Scheme: Members have delegated powers to determine this application either way using reasonable planning grounds.

______

List A Page - 28 -

Appl ication Number Application Type Ward 06/D48458 Conservation Area Consent Milnrow and Newhey

DEMOLITION OF REAR ELEVATION AND WEST GABLE WALL TO ELIMINATE DEFECTIVE STRUCTURES IN CONJUNCTION WITH REDEVELOPMENT OF FORMER COUNCIL OFFICES FORMER COUNCIL OFFICES, NEWHEY ROAD, Milnrow, ROCHDALE

For:- MILNROW PROPERTIES LTD Received 13-Dec-2006

RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission subject to conditions

Conditions: 1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, the side gable wall of the building facing the adjacent building known as 'St Stephens Lodge' shall be re-built and made good using natural stone recovered from other parts of the existing building. 3. Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application no development shall be commenced until samples or full details of materials to be used externally on the building(s) have been submitted to and approved 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. 4. When the existing steps and ramp at the front of the buildings are removed, the surface of the footway to Newhey Road shall be either re-surfaced or made good to satisfy the Council's normal standards for adoption purposes in accordance with a detailed scheme that shall first be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. 5. The design of the pedestrian access gate on the front elevation of the buildings under the clock tower shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority before it is installed on site.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance of the building and for the avoidance of doubt. 3. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity. 4. In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in the best interests of highway safety. 5. In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and because no such details were included as part of the application. ______

List A Page - 29 -

Report

The buildings comprise three parts, the former Town Hall, the Clock Tower both of 1885 and the former Fire Station Buildings of 1889. The lower part of the Clock Tower is labelled "Municipal Board of Health" while the tower proper appears to be of a later date, most likely early twentieth century. Although of different dates, the buildings form a harmonious composition in the Gothic style. Due to its height, the Clock Tower can be seen from many places in the area but is particularly important along Newhey Road.

The building is predominantly constructed out of natural stone, although parts of the rear walls facing towards Royds Street are built out of red brick. The building has a natural slate roof.

The building lies within the Butterworth Hall, (Municipal Buildings), Conservation Area, which was designated by the Council in June last year.

Immediately to the rear of the site are two new buildings that have recently been erected by the applicant. These two brick-built buildings accommodate a total of 22 apartments and are four storeys in height, although the uppermost storey is accommodated within the roofspace, with dormers to provide light to the uppermost living accommodation. Although the new apartment buildings are now the dominant features on the site when viewed from Royds Street, the rear of the former Council Offices buildings are still visible in general public view through the communal courtyard parking area that has been formed to serve the new apartments. The clock tower of course is still a prominent feature because of its height.

Proposal: This application seeks conservation area consent for the partial demolition and reconstruction of these buildings in connection with planning application D48455, which appears earlier on this agenda. The application should therefore be considered together with that previous proposal.

This application is necessary because the site lies within the Butterworth Hall, (Municipal Buildings), Conservation Area, which was designated by the Council in June last year.

List A Page - 30 -

The new rear walls to the building are to be constructed using facing brick with stone heads and cills to the window and doorway openings.

Site History: 2001 Outline application for residential development, (reference D38746). Approved.

2001 Outline application for residential and office development, (reference D38747). Approved.

2004 Detailed application for the change of use and conversion of former Council offices into three apartments and landlord’s office and the erection of two, 4-storey buildings, containing 22 apartments, (reference D40169). Approved

2005 Change of use and conversion of former Council offices into three apartments and the erection of two, four-storey buildings containing 22 apartments- revised proposal, (reference D42278). Approved.

2006 Erection of 22 flats in two four-storey buildings with revised design of dormers and an additional four dormers to roof, (retrospective application), reference D48008. Approved.

Publicity Responses: The neighbouring properties were notified of the application, the application was advertised in the local press and a site notice was also posted. No representations have been received.

Consultation Responses: The Council’s Design and Conservation Officer has been involved in the negotiations with the applicant/agent over the design of the alterations and has raised no objections to the resultant revised proposals.

Views of Officer: The improvements to the design of the conversion scheme that have been made by the applicant will mean that the proposal would not harm the character or appearance of this

List A Page - 31 - part of the buildings. Indeed, overall the proposed works would actually enhance the conservation area, particularly when the buildings are viewed from the front along Newhey Road.

In these circumstances I recommend that this application be approved.

Delegation Scheme: Members have delegated powers to determine this application either way using reasonable planning grounds.

______

Application Number Application Type Ward 07/D48560 Full Planning Smallbridge Firgrove

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - 13 APARTMENTS WITH SECURED PARKING SITE OF THE OLD WOOLPACK & ADJOINING LAND, 242 HALIFAX ROAD, ROCHDALE

For:- LLOYDFIELD DEVELOPMENTS LTD Received 12-Jan-2007

RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission subject to conditions

Conditions: 1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. No development shall commence until samples or full details including colour and texture of the render, brick and roof tile to be used externally on the building have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The building shall be constructed only of the approved materials. 3. No development shall commence until full details, including height, design and materials, of the proposed boundary treatments of the site have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The boundary treatment shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of any of the flats. 4. Prior to the commencement of any development, a finished floor level for the proposed building(s) relative to an agreed off-site datum shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved detail. 5. Before any development is commenced, a landscaping scheme shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. Such a scheme shall include details of the type, species, siting, planting distances and the programme of planting trees and shrubs. The scheme of planting, as approved, shall be carried out during the first planting season after the development is substantially completed and the areas which are landscaped shall be retained as landscaped areas thereafter. Any trees or shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within three years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size to the those originally required to be planted.

List A Page - 32 -

6. Before the development is commenced, details of the means of construction of the foundations of the proposed development shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. No piledriving operations shall take place without it being demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that all practicable means of ensuring that no nuisance is caused to the occupiers of adjacent properties have been incorporated. 7. Before any development is commenced, details of the design, construction and drainage of the proposed access to the site shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The access shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to the commencement of the development. 8. Prior to commencement of development, an independent site investigation that accords with the guidance provided in BS 10175:2001 shall be carried out to assess ground conditions for contamination in relation to human health, local ground and surface waters and ground gases. A report containing details of the method of investigation, the degree and nature of contamination found to be present and details of proposed remediation measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall not commence until the remediation measures approved have been completed and a report confirming that the measures set out in the approved report have been implemented has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority. 9. The bin store shown on the approved plans shall be constructed of brick walls and a tiled roof to match the main building and shall be available for use prior to the first occupation of any of the flats and at all times thereafter. 10. None of the flats hereby approved shall be first occupied until such time as a prohibition of driving order on Merryman Hall has been made and the subsequent highway work required to prevent vehicular access along that route has been carried out. 11. The car parking and hardstanding area shown on the approved plans shall be constructed and marked out in accordance with the details shown, concurrently with the construction of the buildings hereby permitted and shall be made available for use before the buildings are first occupied and retained thereafter. 12. No site preparation, delivery of materials or construction works, other than quiet internal building operations such as plastering and electrical installation, shall take place other than between 0730 and 1930 hours Monday - Friday and between 0800 hours and noon on Saturday, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 13. The flats should be constructed such that noise from road traffic is not more than 35dB(A) Leq 5mins in the bedrooms with windows shut and other means of ventilation provided between 11 pm and 7 am; and not more than 40dB(A) Leq (1 hour) in other habitable rooms with windows shut and other means of ventilation provided at all times. 14. Details of any external light to be installed on the building/ site shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority prior to installation. 15. The pedestrian access to the rears of properties on Brickfield Street, as shown on the approved plans, shall be kept clear and accessible to the residents of Brickfield Street at all times during the construction period of the development and at all times thereafter.

List A Page - 33 -

4. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity, and to prevent nuisance arising. 5. In order to achieve a satisfactory level of landscaping in the interests of the amenity of the area. 6. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 7. In order to ensure that the access to the site is constructed to the Local Planning Authority's standards to prevent obstruction of the highway and in the interests of road safety. 8. In order to ensure a safe form of development that poses no unacceptable risk to human health. 9. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity, and to prevent nuisance arising. 10. In the interests of highway safety. 11. In order to ensure that there is adequate provision for vehicles to be parked clear of the highway in the interests of road safety and amenity and to prevent obstruction. 12. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 13. In the interests of the amenities of the future occupiers of the flats. 14. In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity, and to prevent nuisance arising. 15. In order to allow residents of Brickfield Street access to the rears of their properties. ______

Reason for Recommendation: This proposal relates to a ‘brownfield’ site situated within the Defined Urban Area in a mainly residential area. The development would be situated close to public transport, would increase the mix of dwelling types in the area and would be compatible with surrounding uses, and would be in accordance with the provisions of policies H/3 (Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas) and BE/2 (Design Criteria for New Development) of the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Report

Site: The site in question is an area of land of approximately 0.13 hectares in size which includes the site of a former pub, The Woolpack, which has now been demolished, and a small office building. To the immediate north of the site is the main road of Halifax Road, and to the east and south are residential terraced dwellings. To the immediate south- west is a garage, on the other side of the small access road of Merryman Hall, which would be closed off with bollards.

List A Page - 34 -

Proposal: The proposal is to erect a building containing 13 flats, 11 of them 2-bedroomed and two one-bedroomed. The building would be L-shaped occupying the south-west and north- west parts of the site. The central portion of the building would be three-storey, with the two ‘wings’ two storey. Seventeen parking spaces would be provided within a secure and landscaped area. A 1-metre wide footway would be left to the rears of properties on Brickfield Street to allow access to those properties.

Materials used externally on the building would be a mix of red brick and white rendering. 17 off-street parking spaces would be provided.

Policy Background: Adopted Unitary Development Plan:

Policy H/3 – Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas.

Policy BE/2 – Design Criteria for New Development.

Site History: None.

Publicity Responses: Notification letters were sent to nearby properties and site notices posted. Nine letters of objection and an e-mail from local residents have been received. The contents of these letters can be summarised as follows:

1) We would ask that consideration is given to not installing the proposed bollards across Merryman Hall to prevent access from Halifax Road. The area is narrow cobbled streets and in the winter when there is snow and ice this is often the only usable access for residents of Howarth Cross Street. The current housing is terraced housing and therefore cars are double parked, this does not cause a problem for cars travelling up and down the street but is a problem for the emergency services, particularly fire appliances, which use this entrance to Howarth Cross Street and brickfield Street. 2) The fence surrounding the new development would be put up against the backyard walls of houses on Brickfield Street, literally fencing them in. These houses need access to their backyards for an escape route in the event of fire and as a passageway for wheelie bins, and also for window cleaners and deliveries. There has always been a back lane to Brickfield Street, as is shown on historic maps, and it is understood that there is a right of access. 3) There is likely to be a parking overspill from the site. 4) There would be increased vehicular movement at the difficult junction of Millgate and Halifax Road, causing serious congestion problems.

Consultation Responses: Chief Environmental Health Officer – this is an Air Quality Management Area and the houses should be at least 6 metres back from the road. A noise condition should be attached to any approval.

Head of Highways and Engineering – was initially concerned about the location of the bin store and the position of the gates to the proposed car park; however, both of these matters have been addressed by amended plans received on the 6 th March.

United Utilities – no objections.

List A Page - 35 -

Views of Officer: I note that this proposal is located on previously developed land, would increase the mix of dwellings available in the area and would be located close to public transport. Thus I consider that the principle of residential development on this site to be acceptable, in accordance with the provisions of policy H/3 – Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas – of the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan.

I note that the distances between the new building and existing residential properties are in accordance with the guidelines set out in Supplementary Planning Guidance: Guidelines and Standards for Residential Development, and I consider that the design of the building and materials used are in keeping with the character of the area. In terms of off-street parking provision, I note the guidelines of Planning Policy Guidance Note 3: Housing, which makes it clear that on sites close to public transport, such as this, local authorities should significantly reduce their expectations of off-street parking provision, and thus I feel that the 17 spaces proposed are sufficient.

In terms of other issues raised by local residents, I appreciate the desire of residents of Brickfield Street to maintain access to the rears of their properties, and the applicants have now amended the proposals to include a 1 metre wide pathway for these residents to access the rears of their properties. In terms of whether the residents actually have a right of way across the land is a private legal matter for the parties concerned.

As far as the proposed closure of the junction of Halifax Road and Merryman Hall is concerned, I note the comments of the head of Highways and Engineering who feels that the use of this junction constitutes a danger to highway users. I note that Merryman Hall is already subject to a closure order and anyone using it at present is doing so illegally.

Delegation Scheme: The Committee have delegated powers to determine the application either way on reasonable planning grounds.

______

List A Page - 36 -

Application Number Application Type Ward 07/D48574 Full Planning Kingsway, Milnrow and Newhey

ENGINEERING WORKS TO CREATE REVISED LANDFORM INCORPORATING MOUNDING AND ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPE WORKS LAND ADJACENT TO M62 JUNCTION 21 AND, REAR OF EGREMONT ROAD, MILNROW, ROCHDALE

For:- NORTHWEST DEVELOPMENT AGENCY Received 09-Jan-2007

RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission subject to conditions

Conditions: 1. The development hereby approved by this permission shall take place for a period of time not exceeding 5 months and shall end before 1 October March 2008 and the date of the commencement of those works shall be notified beforehand to the Local Planning Authority. 2. Before any development commences on site, a series of trial bore holes shall be drilled across the site to determine the present hydrological conditions in accordance with a detailed scheme that shall be first agreed with the Local Planning Authority and the results of that exercise shall be passed to the Local Planning Authority. Depending on the results of that investigation, if any adverse impacts upon the drainage of the neighbouring residential properties are likely, then a scheme for the incorporation of suitable drainage layers in the area of landfill shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The landfill operations shall only be undertaken in accordance with those agreed details. 3. Before any excavations or earth-moving takes place on site, a temporary 2.4m high, acoustic close-boarded fence shall be erected in the position indicated with the heavy broken line on the approved plan, drawing no. DV-21-006 Revision P4, in accordance with a detailed scheme that shall first be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The agreed fencing shall remain in that position on the site for the duration of the excavation and earth-moving operations on the site and shall be fully removed from the site within one month of the completion of the earthwork operations on the site. 4. No excavation or earthmoving or similar works shall be carried out other than between 08.00 hours and 18.00 hours, on Monday to Friday inclusive or at any other time without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. 5. No excavation or construction works shall take place on the site until measures for the suppression of dust arising from the works have been carried out in accordance with the mitigation measures set out in the Environmental Statement, accompanying and forming part of planning permission D35130. Such measures shall be maintained for the duration of excavation or construction works. 6. There shall be no development on or adjacent to the motorway earthworks. 7. No drainage from the proposed development shall discharge into the motorway drainage system, nor shall any such drainage adversely affect the motorway drainage system.

List A Page - 37 -

8. All plant, machinery and vehicles employed on the site in construction and engineering operations shall be fitted with effective silencers, and all parts of such plant, machinery and vehicles shall be maintained in good repair and so operated as to minimise noise emissions. 9. The excavation and landfill operations shall be carried out in such a way as to minimise the effects of noise and vibration in accordance with the mitigation measures set out in the Environmental Statement accompanying and forming part of planning permission D35130. 10. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, the stripping and movement of topsoil shall only be carried out under sufficiently dry and friable conditions to avoid soil smearing and compaction and to ensure that all available soil resources are recovered. Appropriate methods of soil stripping shall be separately agreed with the Local Planning Authority for any permanently wet or waterlogged areas of the site. 11. Before any development commences on site, a scheme for the location of the mound(s) for the storage of top soil shall be agreed with the Loca Planning Authority. The top soil mounds shall only be located in accordance with the agreed details of that scheme. 12. No pumps shall be operated on the site without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. 13. No external illumination of the site shall take place without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. 14. No direct vehicular access to the site shall take place from Ashfield Lane. 15. The proposed drainage measures indicated on the approved plan, drawing No.DV- 21-06 P4, shall be implemented in full during the course of the development and shall be retained in place thereafter. 16. The waste material to be deposited on site shall be non-oily, chemically and biologically stable and shall not include any biodegradable or putrescible materials such as timber, paper, plasterboard and road sweepings nor any potentially polluting or hazardous materials. 17. The final 850mm of replaced topsoil or soil making material shall be free of large solid objects likely to obstruct subsequent cultivation. The material shall be thoroughly ripped so that any compacted layers are effectively broken up before the placement of topsoil. The topsoil shall then be cultivated to a tilth to provide a seedbed and sown with an agricultural ley seed mixture to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 18. Following the completion of all the earthmoving operations on the site, the land shall be landscaped in accordance with a detailed scheme that shall first be approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The agreed scheme shall be carried out within the first planting season following the completion of the earthmoving operations on the site.

Reasons: 1. To minimise the impact of the proposed development upon the amenities of local residents. 2. To avoid any adverse impacts upon the existing hydrological conditions of the site and the surrounding land. 3. To mitigate the impact of the development upon the amenities of the neighbouring residents.

List A Page - 38 -

4. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 5. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 6. To protect the stability of the motorway earthworks. 7. To protect the stability of the motorway earthworks. 8. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 9. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 10. To ensure that topsoil resources are conserved for beneficial re-use in the subsequent landscaping of the site. 11. No such information was included as part of the application. 12. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 13. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 14. In the interests of road safety. 15. To avoid surface water run-off from the site reaching the neighbouring properties. 16. In order to prevent water pollution. 17. In order to ensure that the land is restored to an appropriate condition for suitable landscaping. 18. In order to achieve a satisfactory level of landscaping in the interests of the amenity of the area. ______

Reason for Recommendation: The proposed development would form part of the development of the proposed Kingsway Business Park and would represent a sustainable means of disposing of surplus unusable fill material within the overall business park site. The proposal would not have an unacceptable impact upon either local residential amenity because of the limited timescale and the resultant landform would have an acceptable in visual amenity terms.

Report

Site: The application relates to an area of land measuring approximately 2.3 hectares situated to the south-west of Nos.59-85 Egremont Road and to the north-west of Nos.60-68 Ashfield Lane. The land is an undeveloped and generally open area that has been planted with a substantial amount of new trees, in the form of immature ‘whips’.

A small part of this area of land was partially raised by the formation of some minor bunding in the south-eastern corner of the site approximately two years ago and the current immature ‘whip’ tree planting was carried out at that time.

Land to the west and south forms the remaining area of the Kingsway Business Park.

Proposal: This is the third of three applications recently submitted by the applicants to dispose of unusable excavated material such as soft clays and alluvium arising from excavations elsewhere on the Business Park. The other two applications, D48572 & D48573, (which related to land to the south of plot J near the M62 and Chadwick Lane and land at Dig Gate Lane respectively), were approved at the Rochdale Township Planning Sub- Committee on 20 February. All three applications form the applicant’s proposed means of

List A Page - 39 - disposing of the relatively large amount of poor and unusable material arising from the overall earthworks strategy of the Business Park.

The amount of this unusable material is far larger than was originally anticipated. Earthmoving is an expensive and time-consuming operation and the earthworks strategy for the business park endeavours to minimise volumes and haul distances to reduce adverse ecological and environmental effects. Much of this unwanted material will be retained on site for re-use on planted areas associated with structural landscaping, highway and greenway corridors and final landscaping on the development plots themselves. Nonetheless, there will still be a significant volume of excess material.

The proposal is to utilise a borrowpit approach, whereby usable material is taken from the site for use elsewhere on the Kingsway Business Park and the resultant void in the ground is used to accommodate the unusable material. In this instance however, it is proposed to deposit slightly more excess material on the site in the form of a new mound above the existing ground levels. That mound is then intended to be subsequently landscaped.

The bulk of the refilling material is to be brought from the phase 1, plot T area of the business park, with the remainder coming from the excavation for the phase 2 attenuation pond and development plots at the northern end of the site. The route for the haul vehicles will be located generally between the main spine road through the site from Kingsway to the M62 and the Stanney Brook Corridor, following the edges of plots T, F G, passing Fenns Farm before crossing Stanney Brook itself to gain access to the proposed fill area.

The proposal is to excavate to a maximum depth of some 16m below existing ground level and to refill the void with the unwanted material to a new level of a maximum height of 3.5m above the existing ground level. The void of the borrowpit would accommodate approximately 140 000 cubic metres of material and refilling the void by creating the new mound on top of it would accommodate a total of 150 000 cubic metres of material.

The area of excavation would be within 11 metres of the rear garden boundaries of the properties along Egremont Road and within 8.5m of the rear boundary of the dwelling of “Ashfield Tops”, Ashfield Lane, at the closest point. The nearest houses along Egremont Road, (Nos.71 & 73), lie some 21m away from the edge of the proposed area of excavation. The nearest house on Ashfield Lane, (“Ashfield Tops”), lies 11m away from the proposed area of excavation.

The applicants have stated that the estimated duration and sequence of works would be as follows:-

To excavate the ‘borrowpit’ and refill with the unwanted material from plot T to the proposed new ground level, with a mound 3.5m higher than the existing ground level, would take approximately 16 weeks. A combination of the following items of plant would be used at different stages of the works:-

a. two tracked 40-50 tonne excavators b. six 35 tonne articulated dump trucks c. a bulldozer d. one towed vibratory roller

The topsoil would be removed and stockpiled from the ‘borrowpit’ area. 50 000 cubic metres of material would be excavated from the site and taken to be used as fill material elsewhere on the business park, with no return loads to the site. 100 000 cubic metres of material would then be excavated from the site and the vehicles would return with surplus material from the stockpile at plot T. (Two additional excavators

List A Page - 40 -

would be required at the plot T stockpile). 50 -75 000 cubic metres of surplus material from the plot T stockpile would then be taken by dump trucks to the site, with no return load. The stored topsoil would then be re-spread over the top of the filled site.

The basic period of earth-shifting is therefore estimated to take approximately 16 weeks, (four months). If however, the weather is especially wet or the detailed design requires any special treatment, (i.e the introduction of drainage layers, formation of barriers etc), then the timescale would be lengthened because the earthmoving operation would be less efficient.

A new drainage ditch is to be formed along the edge of the new mounded area to intercept any surface water run-off from the new mound and prevent it reaching the boundary with the neighbouring properties. The ditch itself will vary in depth as it follows the existing ground profile but is to have an average depth of 0.5m and a width of 0.5m at its base and having an overall width of 1.5m across its top. The gradient of the ditch would fall in two directions to points where the existing land falls significantly away from the properties, from where any water would seep away down the bank to reach Stanney Brook. The ditch would be 5m away from the rear boundary of “Ashfield Tops” and 8m away from the rear boundaries of the properties along Egremont Road.

It is intended that the operations would be undertaken within the period of Spring- Summer 2007, with a period of concentrated activity to minimise the disruption to the nearest residents. The proposed hours of working on the site were not specified originally on the application form but the applicants have since confirmed that they would propose them be to between 08.00 hours and 18.00 hours Monday to Friday and between 08.00 hours and 12.00 hours on Saturday. An alternative desirable working period would be between 07.00 and 19.00 hours Monday to Thursday and between 07.00 hours and 13.00 hours on Friday, with no working at all at weekends.

All of the ground material is natural and uncontaminated and is being used to re-profile the site and therefore the Waste Management Regulations do not apply.

The application is accompanied by information relating to the assessment of the ecological issues affecting the site and also a construction noise assessment.

The entire business park was subjected to a rigorous ecological assessment before the original outline planning permission was granted. Because more than two years have elapsed since those original surveys, an updated assessment has been carried out by Brook Ecological Ltd for this application, comprising a walkover survey and an updated desk study. This is to check if the ecological baseline has changed in the intervening years and to particularly check for evidence of any protected species that may have established on the site. The conclusions of this assessment are that the application site is still of low ecological value supporting very common species poor habitats. There was no evidence of any protected species and there are no new records of protected species close enough to the proposed working area to be affected by the development.

The noise assessment is based on an existing noise survey of the site, which was carried out on Monday 26 February, between midday and 15.00 hours, at a number of monitoring points close to the boundary of the site. The existing noise levels recorded were very consistent, varying between 50.6 dB(A) and 52.2dB(A), which was dominated by noise from the M62.

The applicant’s assessment states that it is difficult to accurately quantify the degree of additional noise that would arise from the proposed works. This is mainly because the distance between the various items of operating plant and the houses/gardens will vary throughout the works, as would the actual ground levels at which the plant is operating. If the works were to be undertaken using best practicable means, (following the advice of

List A Page - 41 -

BS5228- Code of Practice for Noise Control on Construction and Open Sites), and full screening of the site from the houses were to be incorporated, the estimated anticipated noise levels from the proposed works would be likely to vary between the best case scenario of 59dB(A) and the worst case scenario of 72.5dB(A). The suggested full screening would comprise a temporary acoustic fence between the extent of the area of excavation and the houses/gardens.

The applicants have stated that if this application were to be refused, then they would need to dispose of the 150 000 cubic metres of unwanted material on another site away from the Kingsway Business Park. Using 20 tonne road-going haul wagons, approximately 15000 return wagon trips, (i.e. 30000 vehicle movements), would be required to transport the material to another site. The duration of that earth-moving operation would vary on a number of factors including the distance to the other landfill site(s), the availability of wagons and the permitted tipping volumes at that other landfill site(s).

Policy Background: UDP - the site lies within the area allocated as being developed as the Kingsway Business Park, were policy EC/7, applies. The most other relevant UDP policies include:-

Policy NE/3 - Biodiversity and development Policy NE/4 - Protected species Policy NE/6 - Landscape protection and enhancement Policy NE/8 - Development affecting trees and woodlands Policy EM - Noise & new development

Site History: 1999 - Outline application for proposed business park, for B2 general and B1 light industrial use and office uses, B8 distribution and storage uses, C3 hotels, ancillary A1, A2, A3 & D2 retail and leisure uses and C1 residential uses, including details of the uses and siting and means of access to development on plots C, D, E, G, H, I & T. (D35130). Approved.

1999 - Construction of spine road to serve business park including highway connection to the north side of junction 21 of the motorway, (M62). (D35132). Approved.

1999 - Construction of estate roads and water attenuation areas, (D36760). Approved.

Publicity Responses: A total of 75 neighbouring and nearby residential properties along Ashfield Lane, Egremont Road, Beechfield Road and Moor Bank Lane were notified of the application and two site notices were also posted. Letters of objection, (including a petition signed by 37 residents), have been received from 19 neighbouring/nearby residents. The grounds of objection are summarised as follows:-

1. The proposed height of the new mound on the site would be too tall. It would block the amount of natural light reaching the neighbouring dwellings along Egremont Road, which are already set at a lower level that the existing ground levels and which only have relatively short back gardens. At present the sunsets in the summer are very attractive and these would be spoilt by the proposal. 2. The current attractive long distance views enjoyed from the neighbouring properties, particularly from the properties along Ashfield Lane, would be significantly obscured.

List A Page - 42 -

3. The proposed higher ground level of the site would represent a greater security risk to the neighbouring properties because potential burglars would be able to look down into the dwellings and ‘case’ the properties from a relatively safe and unobvious position. 4. The application lacks detail on a number of important points such as the proposed hours of working, the likely amount of dust, noise and numbers of vehicle movements to and from the site. It is inevitable however, that the proposed works would cause a significant amount of noise and dust and constitute an unsightly source of nuisance for the neighbouring residents. This would take place constantly throughout the working day, including Saturday mornings and would be intolerable for the local residents. The local residents have already had to endure significant noise and disturbance for the past 18 months and it is unreasonable to expect them to have to put up with this for a further 12 months. 5. Will the material to be tipped on the site truly be uncontaminated? 6. The proposal may adversely affect the stability of the neighbouring dwellings and gardens. There has been substantial vibrations caused by works taking place on the site and some of the residents consider that their houses have been damaged by this, (cracks have occurred in the walls), although the applicant’s contractors have denied any liability for this. This proposal may worsen this problem. 7. The proposal may worsen the existing drainage problems at the rear of Nos.59- 105 Egremont Road. The land is already relatively wet and water already drains into some of the residents’ gardens, which are set at a lower level. 8. If the new tipped material is not compacted properly it may become unstable in the future and cause landslides and further drainage problems. 9. The tipping would result in all of the existing trees and bushes being removed and would harm the wildlife of the area. 10. Why can the unusable material not be disposed of elsewhere within the business park site? The desire to keep the material within the site is of course, driven by the question of cost, rather than anything else. Why should the neighbouring residents be put to such significant inconvenience just to save the developers money? 11. Why was the question of the disposal of unwanted ground material not properly considered when the original outline planning permission was determined? 12. It is understood that the Environment Agency have raised no objections to this application. In other cases however, any material arsing from operations taking place on a site that is no longer required has been defined by the Environment Agency as ‘waste’ and as such is subject to the relevant waste disposal legislation.

Consultation Responses: Head of Highways & Engineering:- no objections subject to the contractors’ traffic not gaining direct access to the site from Ashfield Lane.

Chief Environmental Health Officer:- if permitted, this proposal would result in disturbance from noise and possibly also dust to the neighbouring residents for the approximate temporary period of four to five months.

The noise survey carried out on behalf of the applicants predicts that without screening, a possible ‘worst case scenario’ of a noise level of 82 dB(A) leq. This would occur when heavy plant/machinery would be working close to the houses. This would be similar to that experienced inside a moving bus or when standing 15ft away from a moving heavy lorry. This level of noise would not be experienced all the time, as when the work would be carried out further away the noise levels would diminish. The proposed temporary acoustic fence would reduce the noise level by approximately 10dB(A), to 72dB(A) leq. That noise level would be similar to that experienced on a busy residential road.

List A Page - 43 -

It is recommended that if the application is to be approved, then the hours of working should be restricted to between 08.00 hours and 18.00 hours Monday to Friday, with no working at all at weekends. Conditions should also be imposed to require the details of the temporary acoustic fence to be agreed with the Council and to require the works to be undertaken in accordance with the Environmental Statement, accompanying and forming part of the outline planning permission D35130.

Environment Agency:- views awaited.

Highways Agency:- no objections subject to the imposition of conditions to ensure that the development would not put the adjacent motorway embankment at risk and to prevent any drainage from the site adversely affecting the motorway drainage.

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit, (GMEU):- part of the application site was previously used to create one of the mud snail translocation ‘seasonal ponds’ on the business park site. Mud snails are a protected species under the Wildlife & Countryside Act, (as amended). Unfortunately this ecological mitigation feature was not successful on this site, (and an alternative replacement area has subsequently been agreed between the developers and the Greater Manchester Ecological Unit), nevertheless some mud snails may still be present. If planning permission is to be granted for this development then a condition should be imposed to require a survey to be undertaken before any topsoil is stripped off the site. If any mud snails are found then they would need to be transferred to another suitable part of the business park site.

Part of the site lies near to the Stanney Brook Site of Biological Importance, (SBI) and a minimum 5 metre buffer zone should be formed between the area of excavation and the SBI, which should be temporarily fenced with suitable high visibility fencing.

If the application is to be approved then further conditions should also be imposed to require that vegetation is not removed from the site during the bird breeding season, March to August inclusive) and that the site is subsequently landscaped with a suitable mix of trees and re-seeded with a neutral grassland/wildflower mix.

Views of Officer: This is clearly a controversial proposal with the local residents who live next to or near to the application site. It should be noted however, that one of the main grounds of objection raised by several of the neighbours, namely the fear that the new mound would partly obscure the present long distance views enjoyed from their homes, is not a planning matter.

The planning system exists to serve and protect the public interest and not to protect or safeguard any such private views of the general landscape for individual property owners such as in these circumstances. It should be noted however, that the applicants have reduced the height of the mound from the originally proposed 9m to 3.5m above existing ground level. This would mean that there would be far less impact on the neighbour’s views than that proposed originally.

In my view, there are four main issues that need to be assessed in the case of this proposal;

1. The impact of the revised landform upon the amount of light and the existing open aspect enjoyed from the neighbouring properties; 2. The impact of the proposal upon the ecological value of the site; 3. Whether the proposal would worsen the existing drainage situation at the site to the detriment of the neighbouring gardens or affect the stability of those properties

List A Page - 44 -

4. The impact of the proposed works upon the general living conditions of the neighbouring residents.

1. The impact of the revised landform upon the amount of light and the aspect enjoyed from the neighbouring properties.

As already mentioned, the height of the proposed mound has been reduced by the applicants in response to the neighbours’ concerns. At this lower height, the term ‘mound’ is now something of a misnomer, as from most of the neighbouring properties, (especially those along Egremont Road), the difference in ground level over the long distance involved would be barely noticeable. It should be noted that the objections summarised above all were all made in relation to the original proposal for the 9m high mound.

Now that the height of the new ‘mound’ would be so much lower, in my view the impact upon the amount of natural light or the open aspect enjoyed by the neighbouring properties would be imperceptible.

2. The impact of the proposal upon the ecological importance of the site.

The site itself is of low ecological value and this conclusion has been accepted by the GMEU. The site was previously used to create a habitat for mud snails but this was not successful. The GMEU have raised concern about the possible presence of some mud snails remaining on the site but the survey undertaken on behalf of the applicants by Brooks Ecological Ltd did not find any evidence of this.

The proposed temporary acoustic fence around part of the site boundary would also serve to protect the Stanney Brook Corridor to meet the advice of the GMEU.

The request by the GMEU for no vegetation to be removed during the bird-breeding season should not be made subject to a condition however. Apart from a very few poorly developed trees and bushes in the south-western area of the site, the only other meaningful planting, (apart from grasses etc), comprises the many immature, slender ‘whips’, which are very unlikely to be used for nesting by birds. To restrict the period when the site can be cleared of vegetation in these circumstances would therefore be unjustified and unreasonable in my view because it would preclude the implementation of the proposal until the end of August this year.

The vast majority of the existing young ‘whips’ would of course need to be removed as part of the proposed development but a subsequent suitable replacement landscaping scheme could be secured by a condition following the completion of the works.

3. Whether the proposal would worsen the existing drainage situation at the site to the detriment of the neighbouring gardens or affect the stability of those properties?

Many of the neighbouring residents have stated that site is relatively wet and poorly drained. The residents along Egremont Road have pointed out that most of their rear gardens are slightly lower than the application site and are also poorly drained. They fear that if the proposal is allowed to proceed, then their gardens would be made even wetter.

The proposal involves excavating the ‘borrowpit’ to a level 16m below that of the existing ground level neighbouring and the edge of that borrowpit would be some 11m from the boundary of the gardens along Egremont Road. The height of the proposed new ‘mound’ would be 3.5m higher than the rear gardens along Egremont Road and at that highest point it would be near the centre of the site more than 80m away from those gardens. The gradient of the slope of the mound would therefore be very gentle and the amount of

List A Page - 45 - any additional surface water run off from the site towards the neighbours’ properties should be modest.

The proposal involves the creation of a drainage ditch around the edge of the site to intercept any surface water drainage from the revised landform before it could reach the neighbours’ boundaries. There is no evidence to disbelieve that such a measure would not prevent additional surface water run-off from the site reaching the neighbour’s properties.

Given that the excavations will be carried out at a much lower level than the neighbour’s gardens, the applicants believe that the proposed works would not have any greater impact upon the drainage of the neighbour’s gardens. Until more detailed investigations into the present ground conditions are carried out by the applicants however, it is not possible to offer any absolute guarantees about this point. The applicants have stated that when the new slip road to the M62 was formed near to Ashfield Lane, (which involved substantial ground excavation), only well-drained sands and gravels were uncovered and there was no excess water found. It may therefore be the presence of a layer of poorly draining clay or peat close to ground level on the application site that is causing the land to drain so poorly at present.

To avoid any doubt about this point, my recommendation includes a condition, (No.2), to ensure that the hydrology of the site is more properly investigated before any works begin on site and (if necessary), to require the proposed design and method of working to be adjusted to avoid any worsening of the drainage situation.

The ground level of the site is slightly lower than the garden of “Ashfield Tops” and so that property is unlikely to suffer from any surface water run-off difficulties.

There is no evidence to suggest that the proposed excavation works would have any adverse effect on the stability of those properties.

4. The impact of the proposed works upon the peace and quiet and general living conditions of the neighbouring residents.

Inevitably excavating land and earthmoving is an inherently noisy activity and the proposal would cause additional noise to local residents. There is also the likelihood of windblown dust from the site affecting the residents’ homes and gardens in dry and windy weather.

The existing noise climate at the site is characterised by noise from the motorway and is relatively constant in loudness and character. The likely noise arising from the proposed works would generally be significantly louder than, and of a different character to, the existing situation. Even if the contractors use ‘best practice’ and suitable acoustic fencing were to be erected between the site and the houses, there are limits to how much the noise could be reduced. It is important to note however, that the noise from the proposed works would vary at different times according to which item of plant was operating and on which part of the site it is operating and also from where the neighbouring resident was listening.

None of the houses around the site have particularly long gardens and some of the bungalows along Egremont Road lie within only 21m from the proposed area of working. The dwelling of “Ashfield Tops” is even closer to the site, being only 11m away from the edge of the proposed ‘borrowpit”. Windows to its living room, a bedroom and its kitchen window face onto the proposed area of working and the fence to this boundary of the garden is only 1m high.

List A Page - 46 -

The period of nuisance and disturbance would be for a temporary period of a maximum period of five months, whilst the applicants have stated that they hope to be able to complete the work within four months, depending on ground conditions and the weather conditions etc. In considering the application, Members should also be aware of the circumstances that have led to the submission of this application.

The applicants need to dispose of a substantial quantity of unusable material from the overall business park site and this application is one of three proposals of their waste material strategy. As stated earlier in the report all other practical options for this strategy have already been explored and are being utilised. It will not be possible to spread the material out more thinly over the wider business park, as some residents have suggested, for a variety of technical and practical reasons.

Some residents have argued that this proposal is just a way to cut costs for the developers. By disposing of the material on this site, rather than taking it off the business park site, there would be a lower cost for the developer and this would assist in the viability of the whole project. Apart from the cost savings however, there would be other benefits arising from this proposal, which need to be considered by Members. If this application were to be refused, then there would be the need to transport the waste material to another landfill site away from the Kingsway Business Park, which might be relatively distant. The transfer of such a volume of material away from the site, using as many as 30 000 haul lorry movements, would have an adverse impact upon the general amenity and traffic congestion/road safety in the wider area along those haul routes to the other landfill site(s). There are also other wider ecological and sustainability arguments about the wisdom of transferring large volumes of earth from site to site in on the national road system.

It is therefore necessary to balance the environmental, traffic and cost-saving advantages of the proposal, (by transferring the unusable material for a relatively short distance within one part of the business park site to another), against the harmful effect that would be experienced temporarily by the neighbouring residents.

The applicants are prepared to erect temporary acoustic fencing around the area of excavation, (alongside the proposed drainage ditch), to mitigate against the noise impacts. It should be noted that the proposed fence would stand within 15m of the nearest dwellings on Egremont Road, (Nos.71 & 73 Egremont Road) and within 5m of the Ashfield Tops”.

I recommend that if the application is approved, then this proposed fence should be required to be 2.4m high. At that height and in this position, the fencing would alter the outlook from the neighbouring properties. The impact upon the outlook from ”Ashfield Tops” would be especially severe because that dwelling has various habitable room windows that would be within only 5m of the fence. The fencing would only stand on the site for 4-5 months however, and it would reduce the degree of noise that would be experienced by the neighbouring residents during that time.

As for the proposed hours of working, I agree with the Chief Environmental Health Officer that they should be limited to between 08.00 hours and 18.00 hours Monday to Friday, with no weekend working, notwithstanding the applicants’ proposals.

Conclusions

In my view, the proposed height of the revised new landform would in the long term have no noticeable effect on the aspect enjoyed from the neighbouring residents. The shape and level of the resultant landform would still have an acceptable appearance, there would be no unacceptable ecological impact and there should be no adverse effect on the local drainage. The only remaining issue to be decided is whether the wider

List A Page - 47 - environmental and traffic benefits of the proposal would outweigh the inevitable harmful impact upon the neighbours’ residential amenities for the maximum five month duration of the project.

The proposal would inevitably have a very noticeable and, at times, quite harmful impact upon the living conditions of the neighbours who live around the site along Ashfield Lane and Egremont Road. That situation would only be for a temporary period of some four to possibly five months however.

In my view, the case is very finely balanced but I recommend that the application be approved subject to the conditions set out at the beginning of this report.

Delegation Scheme: Members have delegated powers to determine this application either way using reasonable planning grounds.

______

Application Number Application Type Ward 07/D48624 Householder Smallbridge Firgrove

FRONT AND REAR DORMERS AND SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION 26, DITTON MEAD CLOSE, ROCHDALE, OL12 9SH

For:- MR SHAH Received 23-Jan-2007

RECOMMENDATION Refuse Permission

Reasons: 1. The application relates to a mid-terraced dwelling fronting Ditton Mead Close. The proposed construction of a single storey extension projecting 4.5m out from the rear wall of the property would have an unduly detrimental impact on the amenities and the outlook currently enjoyed from the neighbouring properties at No.24 and 28 Ditton Mead Close as the proposal will create a large and obtrusive development that will directly impact on their amenities. The proposed development would be contrary to policies BE/2 - Design criteria for new development and H/11 - Residential Extensions of the Council's Replacement Unitary Development Plan and Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development, which states that design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions, should not be accepted. ______

Report

Site: The site is a mid-terraced property fronting on to Ditton Mead Close, within a wholly residential area. The rear garden of the property rises up to the north of the dwelling, adjoining a public footpath that provides access to the housing estate.

List A Page - 48 -

Proposal: The proposal is erect a 4.5 metre long extension to the rear of the dwelling directly along the boundary with 24 Ditton Mead Close, forming a single storey pitched roof extension 3.5 metres wide. The other side wall of the proposed extension would stand 1.75m away from the boundary with No.28 Ditton Mead Close.

Policy Background: The following Unitary Development Plan policies are applicable: - BE/2 – Design Criteria for New Development H/11 – Residential Extensions

The Council’s UDP supplementary planning guidance document: “Guidelines & Standards for Residential Development” is also relevant.

Site History: N/A

Publicity Responses: All relevant neighbouring properties have been informed and objections have been received from the occupants of 24 and 28 Ditton Mead Close who wish to object on the grounds that the proposal will be detrimental to their amenity, creating a large brick built extension that will overshadow their properties.

Consultation Responses: Head of Highways and Engineering: no objections. Head of Environmental Health: no objections.

Views of Officer: The Council’s UDP supplementary planning guidance document: “Guidelines & Standards for Residential Development”, indicates that the Council would normally allow a single-storey rear extension to be 3m in length when on the boundary with a neighbouring property. Thus the proposal is 1.5m in excess of Council standards in relation to 24 Ditton Mead Close.

In relation to no. 28 Ditton Mead Close, the extension is set away from the boundary, and an allowance can be made for the extension to be longer. In this instance, however, the proposal projects 0.2m further than permitted even with this allowance taken into account.

The applicant’s proposal to build a 4.5m long extension would represent a breach of the Council’s normal minimum standards. In my view, if approved, the additional size of this extension would severely adversely affect the neighbours’ amenities on both sides. This would be particularly so with 24 Ditton Mead Close, creating a large brick wall along the boundary with this property having a negative impact on their amenities and the amenities of anyone who occupies these properties in the future.

In December 2006, Committee granted planning permission for an extension at the rear of 22 Ditton Close (D48109). The length of that extension is 5.1 metres on the boundary with no. 20 and this, itself, was an increase in size to a proposal which was granted by Committee for an extension of 4.5 metres. In both cases the officer recommendation was refusal as the neither of the proposals for extensions complied with adopted Council policy. Notwithstanding those decisions to permit development, I still consider that this application should be refused. In my view, the approval of this extension, which exceeds the Council’s normal standards in relation to both sides, would be detrimental to the amenities of both neighbours. Approving the extension would further the precedent that the Council will grant permission for larger extensions than adopted Policies allow within this area. Such a decision would make any regulation of the size of extensions within the

List A Page - 49 - area increasingly difficult to control and lead to a significantly detrimental impacts on neighbours within the estate as was discussed prior to approval for application D48109.

Delegation Scheme: The Committee have delegated powers to determine the application either way on reasonable planning grounds. ______

Application Number Application Type Ward 07/D48724 Full Planning Smallbridge Firgrove

ERECTION OF REPLACEMENT CHURCH HALL ST ANNS CHURCH, MILNROW ROAD, ROCHDALE, OL16 5BT

For:- ST ANN'S CHURCH BELFIELD Received 07-Feb-2007

RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission subject to conditions

Conditions: 1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Notwithstanding any details indicated in the application, no development shall commence until samples of all materials (including colour) to be used externally on the new building have been submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The building shall be constructed externally only of the approved materials. 3. Before the development is commenced and during the course of construction, measures shall be taken to protect existing trees on or overhanging the site. Details of the means of protection shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority before the development is commenced. 4. Before the development is commenced, details of the means of construction of the foundations of the proposed development shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. No piledriving operations shall take place without it being demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that all practicable means of ensuring that no nuisance is caused to the occupiers of adjacent properties have been incorporated. 5. No site preparation, delivery of materials or construction works, other than quiet internal building operations such as plastering and electrical installation, shall take place other than between 0730 and 1930 hours, Monday - Friday and between 0800 hours and noon on Saturday, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. In order to ensure the new building enhances the setting of the listed building and the area.

List A Page - 50 -

3. In order to protect the existing trees on the site in the interests of the amenity of the area. 4. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. 5. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising. ______

Reason for Recommendation: This proposal relates to a site upon which is currently located a poor quality building which does not relate well to the adjacent listed church, and the proposed new building would make a positive contribution to the area in design terms and which will compliment the church, as well as providing improved community facilities, and the proposal is in accordance with the provisions of policies CF/1 – General Criteria for the Development of Local Community and Health Facilities, BE/2 – Design Criteria for New Development and BE/17 – New Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building – of the Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Report

Site: The site in question is the site of an existing church hall which is immediately adjacent to the listed church of St Anns Church, the site being to the rear of the church on the residential street of Brocklebank Road. Houses on Albert Royds Street are on a lower level of approximately 1.5 metres to the immediate west of the site.

Proposal: The proposal is to demolish the existing pitched-roof church hall and replace it with a new building on the same footprint, however the new building would be of modern flat-roofed design which would be greater in height than the eaves line of the existing building but lower than the ridge of the existing building. The building would be of simple form and constructed externally of slate grey flat panels.

The building would provide a new hall, meeting rooms and toilets.

Policy Background: Adopted Unitary Development Plan:

Policy CF/2 – General Criteria for the Development of Local Community and Health Facilities.

BE/2 – Design Criteria for New Development.

BE/17 – New Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building.

Site History: None.

Publicity Responses: Notification letters were sent to nearby properties and a site notice was posted. At the time of writing of this report, one letter of objection has been received, from the occupant of 10 Brocklebank Road, opposite the site. The contents of this letter can be summairsed as follows:

1) Privacy invasion. 2) View will be blocked off.

List A Page - 51 -

3) Builders and construction causing noise on site. 4) Heavy machinery could affect foundations of other properties. 5) Traffic congestion / parking obstruction.

Consultation Responses: Head of Highways and Engineering – no objections.

Views of Officer: I note that this proposal is to replace an existing building on the same footprint, and whilst I note the new building would be squarer than the existing, there will be a reduction in the overall height to compensate for this and thus as a result I feel that the impact upon surrounding properties would be no greater than the existing situation.

I note that the Conservation Officer is satisfied with the proposals and considers the simple form of the proposed design to be a good contrast with the listed building and would represent a significant improvement on the existing situation.

With respect to other matters raised by the objector, I do not see how the new building would cause any more privacy invasion, loss of view or traffic congestion than the existing building. It is inevitable that there will be noise during construction, however this can be controlled to reasonable times by the imposition of a suitable condition. The developers will be required to demonstrate that foundation operations will not cause damage to neighbouring properties.

Delegation Scheme: The Committee have delegated powers to determine the application either way on reasonable planning grounds.

______

Application Number Application Type Ward 07/D48725 Listed Building Consent Smallbridge Firgrove

LISTED BUILDING CONSENT FOR THE DEMOLITION OF EXISTING CHURCH HALL ADJACENT TO LISTED BUILDING ST ANNS CHURCH, MILNROW ROAD, ROCHDALE, OL16 5BT

For:- ST ANN'S CHURCH BELFIELD Received 07-Feb-2007

RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission subject to conditions

Conditions: 1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. No demolition work shall take place other than between 0730 and 1930 hours, Monday - Friday and between 0800 hours and noon on Saturday, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 2. In order to safeguard the amenities of the area and to prevent nuisance arising.

List A Page - 52 -

Report

The building would provide a new hall, meeting rooms and toilets.

This application is for listed building consent to demolish the building.

Policy Background: Adopted Unitary Development Plan:

BE/17 – New Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building.

Site History: None.

6) Privacy invasion. 7) View will be blocked off. 8) Builders and construction causing noise on site. 9) Heavy machinery could affect foundations of other properties. 10) Traffic congestion / parking obstruction.

Consultation Responses: Head of Highways and Engineering – no objections.

Views of Officer: I note that this proposal is to demolish the existing church hall in preparation for the new building for which planning permission is sought with planning application D48724, also being considered by Committee tonight.

List A Page - 53 -

I note that the Conservation Officer is satisfied with the proposals and considers the simple form of the proposed new design to be a good contrast with the listed building and would represent a significant improvement on the existing situation.

With respect to other matters raised by the objector, I do not see how the demolition of the building would cause privacy invasion, loss of view or traffic congestion. It is inevitable that there will be noise during demolition, however this can be controlled to reasonable times by the imposition of a suitable condition.

Delegation Scheme: The Committee have delegated powers to determine the application either way on reasonable planning grounds.

______