Public Document Pack

Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel

Dear Member, You are invited to attend the meeting of the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel to be held as follows for the transaction of the business indicated. Sian Roxborough Proper Officer

DATE: Thursday, 17 December 2020

TIME: 9.30 am

VENUE: Remote Meeting via MS Teams Live – please see the link below:

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

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

There is likely to be a break for Panel Members, the time of which will be determined during the meeting.

The items for consideration may not be heard in the order listed below.

AGENDA

THIS MEETING CAN BE VIEWED VIA THE LINK BELOW: This link will work if you are using a Microsoft device. If you are using an Apple or android based device, you will need to download the Microsoft Teams app in order to view the meeting via this link. https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup- join/19%3ameeting_ZjA1M2M4NzMtY2ZiYS00YjNhLWI2MzItNzI3Mm Q2ZmNjMmQ2%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%2268 c00060-d80e-40a5-b83f- 3b8a5bc570b5%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%229d684c1d-4eb2-40d0- a319- 8a0562477992%22%2c%22IsBroadcastMeeting%22%3atrue%7d

1 Apologies for absence and attendance roll call.

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

3 Declarations of interest.

4 To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held (Pages 1 - 4) on 19 November 2020.

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

5a 20/75252/FUL - 159-161 Monton Road, Eccles M30 9GS (Pages 11 - 32)

5b 20/75949/HH - 14 Barrfield Road, Salford M6 7EL (Pages 33 - 40)

5c 20/76043/FUL - 12 New Barton Street, Salford M6 7WW (Pages 41 - 52)

5d 20/75719/FUL - Plot 39, Northbank Industrial Estate, Cadishead Way, (Pages 53 - 72) Irlam M44 5BL

5e 20/75027/FUL - Port Salford Way, Eccles (Pages 73 - 102)

5f 20/75337/FUL - Nursery Farm, Barton Moss Road, Eccles M30 7RR (Pages 103 - 118)

6 Planning applications determined under delegated authority. (Pages 119 - 176)

7 Planning appeals. (Pages 177 - 178)

8 Urgent business.

9 Exclusion of the public.

10 Part 2 - Closed to the Public.

11 Urgent business.

Contact Officer: Tel 0161 793 2602 No: Claire Edwards, Democratic Services E-Mail: [email protected]

Agenda Item 4

Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel

19th November 2020 held via MS Teams Live

Meeting commenced: 9:30 a.m. “ adjourned: 11:13 a.m. “ reconvened: 11:30 a.m. “ ended: 12:45 p.m.

Present: Councillor Mashiter - in the Chair

Councillors Antrobus, Clarke, Dawson, K. Garrido, Morris, Nelson, N. Reynolds, Sharpe and Warmisham

Councillor Dickman during consideration of the following applications: o 5d – 20/74704/HYB Mode Wheel Locks, Plot E, Broadway, Salford o 5e – 20/75252/FUL 159-161 Monton Road, Eccles M30 9GS

Councillor Linden during consideration of the following applications: o 5a – 20/75930/FUL Land adjacent to 9 Duncan Street, Salford M7 2FU o 5b – 20/75195/FUL 7 Old Hall Road, Salford M7 4JJ o 5c – 20/75092/FUL 19 Seedley Road, Salford M6 5WN

Councillor McCusker during consideration of the following applications: o 5d – 20/74704/HYB Mode Wheel Locks o 5e – 20/75252/FUL 159-161 Monton Road

Councillor Walker during consideration of the following applications: o 5b – 20/75195/FUL 7 Old Hall Road o 5c – 20/75092/FUL 19 Seedley Road o 5d – 20/74704/HYB Mode Wheel Locks o 5e – 20/75252/FUL 159-161 Monton Road

A list of registered speakers who made representations to the Panel in respect of the matters recorded under Minute 154 is included at Appendix A.

150. Welcome and Apologies for Absence

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

An apology for absence was submitted on behalf of Councillor Burch.

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

RESOLVED: THAT it be noted that the panel agreed to the inclusion of the items listed.

152. Declarations of Interest

There were no declarations of interest.

153. Minutes of Meeting held on 29th October 2020

RESOLVED: THAT the minutes of the above meeting be agreed as a correct record. 1 Page 1

154. Applications for Planning Permission

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

RESOLVED: THAT it be noted that, following consideration by the Panel, the under-mentioned applications for planning permission were determined, subject to the conditions listed in the above- mentioned report(s), as indicated below –

Application Number/ Site Development Decision Applicant

5a - 20/75930/FUL Land Adjacent To Variation of condition Granted 9 Duncan Street 2 (approved plans) M Rothbart Salford attached to planning M7 2FU application 17/69879/FUL.

*5b - 20/75195/FUL 7 Old Hall Road Demolition of existing Granted Salford house and erection of Halpern M7 4JJ a 3-storey block comprising of 7 no. apartments with amenity and parking spaces.

5c - 20/75092/FUL 19 Seedley Road Demolition of existing Granted, subject to condition 6 Salford building and erection (Construction Method Mr James M6 5WN of a part 2 storey part Statement) being amended to Worthington 3 storey building require the times of construction comprising 8 activities from Monday to Friday supported living to be limited to between residential units with 9.00am-6.00pm. associated staff facilities.

*5d - 20/74704/HYB Mode Wheel Locks Hybrid planning Please refer to Minute 155 Plot E application below. C/o Agent Broadway comprising: Full Salford Planning Application for the creation of a surface car park with 162 car parking spaces together with associated access, footpath, landscaping and ancillary works. Outline Application with all matters reserved for a multi-storey car park with up to 548 car parking spaces and 300 space cycle hub.

2 Page 2 *5e - 20/75252/FUL 159-161 Monton Application for Deferred, by a vote of 6 for, 5 Road variation of conditions against and 2 abstentions, in Mr & Mrs Reeves Eccles 2 (approved plans), 8 order for further information to M30 9GS (noise from plant be collated with regard to the and machinery) and operation of/restrictions that 11 (hours of use of apply to other nearby outdoor the front seating area) bar/restaurant spaces. and removal of conditions 10 (noise mitigation) and 13 (hours of use of the first-floor rear seating area), attached to planning permission 18/71230/FUL (Change of use from mixed use retail (A1) and residential dwelling (C3) to a mix of retail, bar and restaurant A1/A3/A4 including rear extension and internal and external alterations).

155. *5d - 20/74704/HYB – Mode Wheel Locks, Plot E, Broadway, Salford - Hybrid planning application comprising: Full Planning Application for the creation of a surface car park with 162 car parking spaces together with associated access, footpath, landscaping and ancillary works. Outline Application with all matters reserved for a multi-storey car park with up to 548 car parking spaces and 300 space cycle hub

RESOLVED: THAT planning permission be granted, subject to the planning conditions listed in the reports, and that:

(i) Further discussions between officers and the applicant are undertaken to establish a mechanism to ensure that car parking numbers do not exceed those set out in the original outline consent for MediaCityUK, in respect of development on Plot D3 of the wider MediaCity site, as set out in the Highways section of this report, and the final decision on this matter to be delegated to the Assistant Direction of Technical Services in consultation with the Chair of the Panel, and if required, the City Solicitor be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990;

(ii) The applicant be informed that the Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions stated within the reports, on completion of the discussions authorised above and subject to a legal agreement, if required;

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

156. Planning Applications determined under Delegated Authority

The Strategic Director for Place submitted a report containing details of planning applications that he had determined under delegated authority during October and November 2020 and were not, therefore, for consideration by the Panel.

3 Page 3 RESOLVED: THAT the content of the report be noted.

157. Planning Appeals

The Strategic Director Place submitted a report which set out details of appeals that had recently been determined and received.

RESOLVED: THAT the content of the report be noted.

158. Enforcement Activity from 1 July to 30 September 2020

The Strategic Director for Place submitted a report detailing enforcement activity between 1 July and 30 September 2020. The report analysed current enforcement data in relation to complaints received and complaints closed for the quarter and complaints received by ward, complaints outstanding by ward and prioritisation of complaints. The report also included a number of case studies.

RESOLVED: THAT the content of the report be noted with thanks to the officers involved for the work that had been undertaken.

Appendix A Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel – 19th November 2020 Registered Speakers in respect of Applications for Planning Permission (Minute 154)

Application Reference & Objecting Applicant/Agent/ MP/Ward Councillor Address Supporting

5a - 20/75930/FUL Miss Karen Corbett Land Adjacent To 9 Duncan Street Salford M7 2FU

5b - 20/75195/FUL Mrs Sharon Eden 7 Old Hall Road Salford M7 4JJ

5c - 20/75092/FUL Miss Rebecca Bosworth Mr Robert Hodgson 19 Seedley Road Salford M6 5WN

5d - 20/74704/HYB Mr Gareth Finch Mode Wheel Locks Plot E Broadway Salford

5e - 20/75252/FUL 159-161 Monton Road Eccles M30 9GS

4 Page 4 Agenda Item 5

Part 1: Open to the Public

REPORT OF The Strategic Director for Place

TO The Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel

ON 17th December 2020

TITLE: Planning Applications and related Development Control Issues

RECOMMENDATIONS: As indicated in respect of each application.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This report sets out details of the planning applications for determination at this meeting.

Ward Members may make representations to the Panel on the items listed in this report.

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS:

PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

Due to restrictions and Government guidance relating to the Coronavirus, the meeting will be held online and will be streamed live so that anybody with access to the internet can view it.

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972-SECTIONS 100A-100K

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS

The “Background Papers” relating to all reports on planning applications appearing in this report are: -

1. The appropriate ‘case file’ for each planning application on the agenda which is available on the council’s website.

The contents of the file include the following documents:

(a) The submitted planning application (forms, plans and supporting documents and Information) (b) Correspondence with statutory and other consultees; (c) Letters and other documents from interested parties (available on request).

2. Any previous planning applications and subsequent decision notices (if issued referred to in each planning application report on this agenda).

Page 5 1 3. Any tree preservation order referred to in each planning application report on the agenda.

4. Any conservation area plan referred to in each planning application report on the agenda.

5. Papers specifically listed under a heading “Other Background Papers” in any planning report on the agenda.

Although background papers are normally available for inspection at the Civic Centre, Chorley Road, Swinton, due to restrictions and Government guidance relating to the Coronavirus, they are only available online at this time. If you wish to inspect letters submitted by interested parties please email [email protected].

Publications

In considering planning applications or legal action, the City Council has regard to a wide range of published documents, although not ‘Background Papers’ for the purposes of the Local Government Act 1972 – Sections 100A-100K, are nevertheless important to the consideration of these matters.

The Government in particular has published a large amount of guidance and Statutory Instruments in addition to the primary legislation and these are available online.

The following Local Authority publications are available on the Council’s web site –

– SPD – SPD – SPD gy – SPD – SPD – SPD – SPD - SPD - SPD - SPD

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

- UDP Policy E5: Development in Established Employment Areas

Page 6 2

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

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

KEY DECISION: NO

DETAILS: See attached application reports.

KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: See background papers above.

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND IMPLICATIONS: N/A

ASSESSMENT OF RISK: N/A

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

PROCUREMENT IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

HR IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

CLIMATE CHANGE IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED: N/A

CONTACT OFFICERS: TEL NO: Anthony Stephenson 0161 604 7778 Faye Tomlinson 0161 603 8354

WARDS TO WHICH REPORT RELATES: As detailed within each application report.

Page 7 3 Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel

Set out below are details of all of the items which will be considered by the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel at their meeting. Some of these applications may be subject to a s.106 legal agreement (planning obligation). Where this is the case it will be stated next to the recommendation using the code ‘S106’ as detailed in the list of codes below.

Ward Members may make representations to the Panel on all items below including those with an associated s.106 legal agreement.

Index Report (Please refer to Agenda Front Sheet for Page Numbers)

DATE: 17.12.2020

RECOMMENDATION

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

Eccles

20/75252/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING:

PROPOSAL: Application for variation of conditions 2 (approved plans), 8 (noise from plant and machinery) and 11 (hours of use of the front seating area) and removal of conditions 10 (noise mitigation) and 13 (hours of use of the first floor rear seating area), attached to planning permission 18/71230/FUL (Change of use from mixed use retail (A1) and residential dwelling (C3) to a mix of retail, bar and restaurant A1/A3/A4 including rear extension and internal and external alterations).

LOCATION: 159-161 Monton Road Eccles M30 9GS

APPLICANT: MR & MRS REEVES

Page 8 4 Claremont

20/75949/HH RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING:

PROPOSAL: Increasing the width of the existing rear dormer and erection of front dormer.

LOCATION: 14 Barrfield Road Salford M6 7EL

APPLICANT: Mr M Sattar

Claremont

20/76043/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING:

PROPOSAL: Change of use from Class C3 dwelling to Class C4, 4-bed, 4-person HMO, together with erection of a single storey rear extension

LOCATION: 12 New Barton Street Salford M6 7WW

APPLICANT: Mish Liyanage

Cadishead

20/75719/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING:

PROPOSAL: The erection of 3,454 sq.m storage and distribution unit with ancillary office accommodation, together with other associated infrastructure

LOCATION: Plot 39, Northbank Industrial Estate Cadishead Way Irlam M44 5BL

APPLICANT: Mr Jamie Johnston

Page 9 5 Irlam

20/75027/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING:

PROPOSAL: Construction and operation of a temporary recycled aggregate facility comprising waste soil and mineral wash plant, temporary access road and ancillary plant and infrastructure

LOCATION: Port Salford Way Eccles

APPLICANT: c/o WSP Indigo

Irlam

20/75337/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING:

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning permission for the use of the site as a Dog Rescue and Animal Sanctuary, with associated outbuildings, exercise areas and ancillary workers accommodation.

LOCATION: Nursery Farm Barton Moss Road Eccles M30 7RR

APPLICANT: Miss Emma Billington

Page 10 6 Agenda Item 5a

APPLICATION No: 20/75252/FUL APPLICANT: MR & MRS REEVES LOCATION: 159-161 Monton Road, Eccles, M30 9GS, PROPOSAL: Application for variation of conditions 2 (approved plans), 8 (noise from plant and machinery) and 11 (hours of use of the front seating area) and removal of conditions 10 (noise mitigation) and 13 (hours of use of the first floor rear seating area), attached to planning permission 18/71230/FUL (Change of use from mixed use retail (A1) and residential dwelling (C3) to a mix of retail, bar and restaurant A1/A3/A4 including rear extension and internal and external alterations). WARD: Eccles

This application was deferred at the Panel meeting on the 19th November in order that Members could be provided with additional information in respect of the restrictions that apply to other nearby outdoor bar/restaurant spaces.

The map below, and the accompanying table, show which units in the two terraces at 149-175 and 177 to 199 Monton Road and on the opposite side of Monton Road have planning permission for an outdoor seating area and sets out what controls are in place in respect of the hours when the outdoor seating areas can be used. The application site is outlined in red.

Page 11 Map Permitted Property Type of outdoor seating reference hours of use Outdoor seating with permanent furniture

La Turka, 11am to 9pm 168 daily A Monton Road 15/65944/FUL

Outdoor seating with permanent furniture

Closed to the The Park, public by 142 B 11pm Monton

Road 16/67956/FUL

Outdoor seating with permanent furniture

8am – 11pm Playfoots, daily 175 C Monton 18/71298/FUL Road

Outdoor seating with permanent furniture

Noon – 9pm Maltdog, daily 169 D Monton 13/63667/COU Road

Page 12 Map Permitted Property Type of outdoor seating reference hours of use Outdoor seating without permanent furniture

Noon – 10pm Monton daily Tap, 165 E Monton 18/71364/COU Road

The property marked by a red star is Davardis at 171 Monton Road. The use of 171 Monton Road is controlled by planning application 15/67310/FUL which gave consent for the unit to be used as a café/restaurant and takeaway use between the hours of 08:30 and 23:00 Monday to Saturday and 10:00 and 22:00 on Sundays in January 2016. They have been known to place chairs and tables outside of the unit each day and bring them in each night.

Members will note that two units in the same terrace as the application site, The Monton Tap at 165 Monton Road and Maltdog at 169 Monton Road, have more restrictive controls on the use of their front outdoor seating areas than proposed under this application.

As Members are aware the Local Planning Authority makes decisions based on the evidence provided with applications and the technical knowledge of its consultees.

The applications submitted for the outdoor seating at The Monton Tap and Maltdog were limited in respect of the supporting information provided, with neither application containing a noise assessment.

Back in 2013 when Maltdog’s application was considered the LPA did not have any evidence to suggest that use beyond 9pm would be acceptable, with this seating area being one of the first in this part of the centre to seek consent. With regard to the Monton Tap the decision to restrict the use of the outdoor seating area here to 10pm was based the noise assessment submitted under the original application for the application site at 159-161 Monton Road (18/71230/FUL) which showed background noise reducing at or around 10pm.

Should the operators of the other bar/restaurant business wish to come forward to revise the hours when their outdoor seating areas can be used, they have the ability to do this, presenting appropriate evidence to support their applications.

In respect of the proposal, as Members are aware, planning approval 18/71230/FUL granted consent for the creation of an outdoor seating area to the front of 159-161 Monton Road, with condition 11 on planning approval 18/71230/FUL restricting the hours of use of the seating area to between 08:00 and 22:00 each day. The image below shows the approved seating area at the front of the premises which would contain 9 tables, each with 4 seats –

Page 13

Under this application it is proposed to vary condition 11 on planning approval 18/71230/FUL in order to allow the outdoor seating area at the front of the premises to be used between 08:00 and 23:00 hours each day. Despite other revisions to the detail of the scheme it should be noted that the size of the front seating area and the number of tables and chairs it can accommodate remains unchanged from that approved under application 18/71230/FUL -

In order to demonstrate that the front seating area can be used until 23:00 each day without compromising the level of amenity nearby residents enjoy, in particular those on Princes Court which is an over 55s apartment development located approximately 20m to the north east, an updated noise report has been submitted with the application. The noise survey at the front of the premises was undertaken on Wednesday 15/6/2016 and Thursday 16/6/2016.

In respect of noise from the front seating area the noise assessment has assumed there will be one person per table talking with a raised voice at any one time i.e. 9 persons in total, which gives a calculated cumulative noise level is 65 dB LAEQ, at 1m.

The Council’s Environment officer has advised that this is a reasonable assumption, with them advising that using standard noise propagation formula, the noise level will reduce to around 40 dB LAEQ at the façade of Princes Court.

Page 14 The lowest measured background noise levels measured at the front of the site are 53 dB in the daytime (07:00-23:00) and 37 dB LA90 15-minute in the night-time(23.00 to 07.00) and as such, noise levels from patrons using the external seating area are predicted to be 13 dB below the existing background noise levels up to 23:00.

The table below shows the predicted noise impact at the façade of Princes Court;

Description Noise Level Notes One person per table talking Noise level from patrons talking 65 dB LAEQ, at 1m ‘loudly’ (Total 9 people) Distance correction (to Princes -25 dB Noise propagation correction Court – 20m NE) Predicted noise level from seating 40 dB LAEQ area at Princes Court Lowest Daytime Measured 53 dB LA90 15-minute Daytime (07:00 – 23:00) Background Noise Level Difference between seating area - 13 dB noise level and background

A difference of -13 dB is considered to be significantly below the existing background noise level. In light of this noise from patrons using the outdoor seating area is likely to be masked by road-traffic and other ambient noise during the daytime period (i.e. up until 23.00) and consequently it is considered that allowing the outdoor seating area at the front of the premises to be used between 08:00 and 23.00 each day would not compromise the level of amenity neighbouring residents currently enjoy.

It is accepted that there is potential for ‘rowdy groups’ to create noise levels well in excess of the noise levels used in the assessment, however the council’s environment officer has advised that this is controllable through the noise management plan condition.

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

Amendment sheet

Since the agenda was published an additional neighbour letter has been received, from an individual who had previously commented on the application.

The writer is expressing concerns over the inclusion of bi-fold doors and a first-floor rear terrace and the impact these will have on the level of amenity neighbouring residents enjoy.

They state that there is nothing that prevents the bi-fold doors being open at all times when the premises are operational, with this being likely to have an adverse impact upon the levels of amenity those on Belmont Street enjoy, particularly late at night and in the summer months when windows are open.

They also express concerns that anyone dining in the first-floor area would be able to look into the bedrooms of the properties on Belmont Street, with the only screening being provided by a planter which is unlikely to be retained throughout operation.

To overcome these issues they request that the proposal is revised so that the first floor rear terrace and bi-fold doors are removed, with an access door being provided to allow for maintenance.

To clarify the proposal includes the provision of sliding doors to the first-floor rear terrace, not bi-folds as suggested.

As set out in the report it is not considered that the inclusion of large elements of glazing will result in those on Belmont Street experiencing a loss of privacy - there would be 10.8m maintained between the window that would be installed in the existing outrigger and the rear boundary of the site and 12.2m would be maintained between the first floor windows in the extension and the common boundary, with the previously approved scheme having first floor windows within 10.8m of the rear boundary.

Page 15 With regard to the comments regarding control over when the doors in the rear elevation can be opened it suggested that recommended condition 12, which prevents public access to the first floor terrace, is updated to ensure that the doors are kept closed at all times when the premises are open to the public with the updated condition reading as follows –

There shall be no public access to the first-floor terraced area shown on approved plan 004 Rev A at any time. The sliding doors providing access to the first-floor terraced area shall remain closed at all times when the premises is open to the public.

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

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

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to two mid-terraced properties located on Monton Road – numbers 159 and 161.

The property at 159 Monton Road has a retail premises at ground floor level, fronting Monton Road, with a 3 bed flat occupying the rear portion of the ground floor and the first floor of the property.

The property at 161 Monton Road is also in mixed commercial and residential use being occupied by a florist at ground floor level and a 2 bed flat at first floor level.

Page 16 There is a courtyard at the rear of the two properties which is accessed via a passageway running at ground floor level. The courtyard area houses two garages, which are used in connection with the unit at 159 Monton Road, and a decked area used in association with 161 Monton Road.

The site is located within the Monton Village Neighbourhood Centre. It is also located within a Coal Referral Area and a critical drainage area.

As the application properties are located within Monton Village neighbourhood centre they are bounded by a range of uses. There is a hairdressers located at 163 Monton Road and there is a car repair garage located at 157 Monton Road, beyond which there are other commercial units, some of which have residential properties above, with 3 residential units being located at the eastern most end of the terrace at 149-175 Monton Road. There are semi-detached residential properties located at the rear, on Belmont Street, and there is a 3 storey apartment block located on the opposite side on Monton Road.

Description of Proposal

In March 2018 planning permission was given under planning approval 18/71230/FUL for the change of use of the properties at 159-161 Monton Road from mixed use retail (A1) and residential dwelling (C3) to a mixed use unit containing an element of A1 retail, an A3 ice cream parlor and an A3/A4 restaurant and bar, with outdoor seating areas at the front and rear.

Consent was given subject to conditions including condition 2 which set out the approved plans, reading as follows-

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Site location plan - drawing 5000 Rev C Proposed ground floor and basement plan - drawing 2000 Rev N Proposed first floor plan - drawing 2001 Rev N Proposed elevations - drawings 3000 Rev M, 3001 Rev E and 3002 Rev C Proposed sections - drawings 4000 Rev L and 4001 Rev L

This application seeks to vary condition 2 in order to allow for changes to the way in which the property would be extended, laid out and subsequently used, with the revised scheme resulting in the loss of the ice cream parlour element.

The A1 retail element would be retained in the same format as approved previously i.e. being capable of being accessed independently via a separate entrance off Monton Road, with access also being possible from the restaurant/bar. The agent has advised that the existing tenant of 161, the florist, will have first refusal on the retail unit.

The extracts below show the site layout and elevations approved under application 18/71230/FUL and those currently proposed, with the main changes involving the removal of the first floor rear seating area and the associated acoustic fence and a reduction in the built form at the rear in order to allow for the introduction of a larger ground floor seating area with a retractable roof.

Page 17 Approved plans 18/71230/FUL

Page 18 Proposed plans

Page 19 As a consequence of the changes to the scheme, and the preparation of an updated noise assessment report to accompany the S73 application, consent is also sought to –

 Vary condition 8 to ensure that noise from all externally mounted plant and equipment does not exceed the typical background noise level (LA90,T) by more than -1 dB at any time when measured at the boundary of the nearest noise sensitive premises – condition 8 previously required that it should not exceed the typical background noise level (LA90,T) by more than -5dB  Remove condition 10 which required full details of the acoustic mitigation proposed in the noise assessment report by RA Acoustic Engineering to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and subsequently implemented prior to first use – an updated noise report has been provided.  Vary condition 11 to allow the outdoor seating area at the front of the premises to be used between 08:00 and 23:00 hours everyday – condition 11 previously only allowed the front seating area to be used between 08:00 and 22:00  Remove condition 13 which controlled the hours of use of the first floor rear seating area as there is no longer a first floor seating area proposed.

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: N/A

Neighbour Notification

88 neighbouring properties were notified of this application by letter originally.

Representations

5 letters of objection were received in response to the initial consultation on this application, from 4 different addressees. The following issues were raised –

 Monton already has enough bars – another one is not needed  The proposal does not include a viable A1 retail space – it is impossible to envisage how any tenant could operate from the space suggested given its located in the centre of a ground floor bar/restaurant space, with the retail element not having any back of house storage space. Any retail operator would need a “shop window” and direct access from the street to function successfully. It is essential that the scheme includes sizeable and viable A1 content with essential back of house facilities and direct, unimpeded access from the street, with there having been an increased proliferation of non-A1 retail uses in recent years. The proposal would erode the retail character of Monton without it – small business such as the florist that currently operates from the site should be protected.  The proposal will result in neighbouring residents experiencing a loss of privacy and increased noise and disturbance as it contains a balcony on the rear elevation and fume extraction equipment and other plant. All external smoking, eating or drinking areas should be located at the front of the property only - the courtyard seating with retractable roof would be acceptable so long as there are restrictions on when it can be open. It should be closed by 8pm.  There are parking problems in Monton – people don’t use the pay and display car park, preferring to park in the side streets, with some patrons blocking people’s driveways  Taxis often park on the pedestrian crossings and pavements waiting to pick people up from the restaurants and bars – this is an accident waiting to happen  The applicant has no intention of opening the restaurant – he is just changing the plans so he can get planning approved for another 2 years. The flat above the premises is currently being advertised as to let.

Following receipt of amended plans and an updated noise assessment, all those notified of the application originally, and all objectors were sent re-consultation letters on the 05.08.2020.

Page 20 1 letter of objection was received in response, from an individual who had not previously commented, with the writer raising the following issues –

 The works to the 1st floor rear element will result in those on Belmont Street experiencing a loss of privacy  The increased capacity for customer numbers will result in neighbours experiencing noise pollution, with the proposal adding to parking problems and littering of the streets, with customers loitering in the area  Monton village is already overrun with bars, restaurants and large volumes of people.

After receiving comments from the Council’s environmental officer on the revised scheme it became apparent that in addition to varying the plans condition the application was also seeking to vary condition 8 (noise form plant and machinery) and condition 11 (hours of use of the front seating area) and remove conditions 10 (noise mitigation) and 13 (hours of use of the first floor rear seating area). The description of development was therefore revised and a further 10 day re-consultation letter sent on the 30.09.2020.

2 letters of objection were received in response, from individuals who had not previously commented, with the following issues being raised –  There are concerns about the noise from the new use of this property and potential for this to impact on neighbours enjoyment of their properties - particularly as the application relates to the hours of use of the rear seating area and other conditions relating to noise mitigation.  There are already more than enough bars and restaurants in Monton  The proposal will adversely affect the amenity neighbouring residents enjoy both during construction and once the premises is operational.

In total 8 letters of objection have been received in response to the application, from 7 different addresses.

Relevant Site History

Both properties

 18/71230/FUL - Change of use from mixed use retail (A1) and residential dwelling (C3) to a mix of retail, bar and restaurant A1/A3/A4 including rear extension and internal and external alterations. - Approved - 19 March 2018

159 Monton Road

 16/68622/FUL - Change of use from A1 (shop) and C3 (dwellinghouse) to dual use A3 (restaurant and cafe) and A4 (drinking establishment) together with erection of a single storey rear extension to include external staircase and balcony and alterations to front elevation – Refused 11.11.2016, Allowed at Appeal.

 16/69285/FUL - Change of use from A1 (shop) and C3 (dwellinghouse) to dual use A3 (restaurant and cafe) and A4 (drinking establishment) together with erection of a rear extension to include external staircase and alterations to front elevation - Withdrawn

 94/33146/FUL - Erection of two storey rear extension to provide storage space and alteration to shop front - Approved – 15.2.1995

 93/31897/COU - Change of use from shop to dwelling - Refused – 15.12.1993

161 Monton Road

 16/68843/COU - Change of use of first floor from C3 (dwellinghouse) to B1(a) (office) – Approved 15.12.2016

Page 21 Consultations

Design For Security - Advise that they do not have any comments to make on the proposal.

Highways - State that there is on-street parking available, with the site also being accessible by bus with bus stops being located close by on Monton Road. In the light of this they advise that the site is considered to be located within a sustainable area.

Given this and the minor scale of the development they advise that they have no objections to the proposal – it would not have a “severe” impact on local highway network.

Senior Drainage Engineer - Advise that they have no objections to the proposed changes.

The Coal Authority - Provided the following comments on the 18Th May -

As you are aware the Coal Authority is a Statutory Consultee in the planning process when the grant of planning permission is being considered. However, we are not formally required to provide consultation responses when the discharge or variation of planning conditions is under consideration.

Whilst we would normally be willing to offer advice on any consultation from a Local Planning Authority, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, our staff resources are significantly reduced. We are therefore obliged to postpone comment in relation to the discharge or variation of planning conditions until further notice. We trust that in this difficult time LPAs will appropriately consider the information submitted by applicants to assess whether any mining legacy related conditions have been duly complied with.

The Coal Authority comments in respect of the original consent were as follows –

The Coal Authority is satisfied that in this case remedial measures in the form of a reinforced foundation solution, as recommended in the Coal Mining Risk Assessment, are acceptable. The Coal Authority therefore has no objection to the proposed development. Furthermore, detailed considerations of ground conditions and/or foundation design may be required as part of any subsequent building regulations application.

Air Quality, Noise, Contaminated Land - State that the proposed development is not located within the Greater Manchester Air Quality Management Area, with the scale and nature of the development being unlikely to have a significant impact on traffic. In the light of this they advise that they have no objections to the development on Air Quality Grounds.

Confirm that they have no objections to the proposal subject to the attachment of conditions to -  Ensure that the noise rating level (dB LAr,Tr) from all external plant and equipment associated with the development, when operating simultaneously, does not exceed the typical background noise level (LA90,T) by more than -1 dB at any time when measured at the boundary of the nearest noise sensitive premise  Only allow the front seating are to be used between 08:00 and 23:00 on any day  Require the business to operate in accordance with a noise management plan which identifies all noise sources with potential to have a significant impact on neighbouring properties, and outlines what management controls will be used to reduce the potential impact.  Require the bi-folding doors to the front elevation to be closed between 22:00 and 08:00 each day  Ensure there is no public access to the first floor terraced area  Require the glass roof to the rear ground floor dining area to have a minimum noise reduction index of 43 dB Rw (37 dB Rw + CTR)  Require the glass roof to the rear ground floor dining area to be closed between 21:00 and 08:00 each day  Prevent amplified music being played within the external seating areas

Page 22  Prevent any live music being played at the site  Restrict the hours of opening to between 08:00 and 00:00 each day, with an additional period of 1 hour either side of the above times allowed for staff only for the purposes of preparation, cleaning and other ancillary activities associated with the operation of the business  Prevent the use commencing until equipment to control the emission of fumes and smell from the premises has been installed.

Advise that condition 10, that required full details of the acoustic mitigation described in the Noise Assessment Report by RA Acoustic Engineering to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and subsequently installed is no longer necessary and should be removed.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan S1 - Retail and Leisure Development Within Town and Neighbourhood Centres. This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for retail and leisure where it would be of an appropriate scale to the centre; is or can be accessible by a choice of means of transport, walking and cycling; would not give rise to unacceptable levels of traffic congestion or highway safety; make car park facilities, where practicable available to all short stay visitors; be of a high standard of design; would not have an unacceptable impact on environmental quality or residential amenity.

Unitary Development Plan S3 - Loss of Shops This policy states that a change of use from Class A1 retail will only be permitted where it would not have an unacceptable impact on vitality and viability. Consideration will be given to the following in the determination of the extent to which development would have an unacceptable impact: over concentration of non A1 uses in the main shopping streets; pedestrian inactivity; loss of shop frontage; unacceptable impact on environmental quality or residential amenity; develop a wide range of attractions and amenities; contribute to the regeneration of the centre.

Unitary Development Plan S4 - Amusement, Restaurants and Cafes, Drinking Establishments and Hot Food Takeaways. This policy states that proposals for hot food shop uses would not be permitted by the Council where the use would have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of surrounding residential occupiers by reason of noise, disturbance, smells, fumes, litter, vehicular traffic movements, parking or pedestrian traffic and the vitality and viability of a town centre and visual amenity.

Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.

Unitary Development Plan DES8 - Alterations and Extensions This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area.

Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.

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

Page 23 Unitary Development Plan A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled This policy states that development proposals, road improvement schemes and traffic management measures will be required to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, other people with limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians and cyclists

Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.

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

Unitary Development Plan ST14 - Global Environmental This policy states that development will be required to minimise its impact on the global environment. Major development proposals will be required to demonstrate how they will minimise greenhouse gas emissions.

Unitary Development Plan ST1 - Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods This policy states that development will be required to contribute towards the creation and maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy

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

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

The Revised Draft Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (‘GMSF’) was subject to public consultation at the start of 2019. The next version of the plan is expected to be published in for a period of representations in November 2020. In accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework it is considered that very limited weight can be given to the policies in the GMSF.

The Publication Salford Local Plan: Development Management Policies and Designations (‘Local Plan’) was published on 27 January 2020 and comments were invited until 20 March 2020. This is the version of the document that the city council would like to adopt and has been subject to a significant amount of public consultation in previous stages of its production. However, in accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework the weight that can be given to the Local Plan overall is currently limited. The city council is in the process of considering the comments made to determine the extent to which there are unresolved objections to the policies in the Plan. Those policies with less significant (or no) objections will be capable of carrying more weight than those with significant unresolved objections.

In addition, following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) it is necessary to consider the weight which can be afforded to the policies of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan (paragraph 213 NPPF February 2019).

Page 24

In terms of this application it is considered that the relevant policies of the UDP can be afforded due weight for the purposes of decision making as the relevant criteria within the UDP policies applicable to the proposed development are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.

Appraisal

Introduction

The principle of redeveloping the application site to provide a mixed-use development comprising A1/A3/A4 uses (now a mix of class E and a sui generis bar) has been established through the previous planning permission.

Since the original consent was granted there have been no relevant changes to the development plan. The principle of the proposed development therefore remains acceptable.

Environmental matters such as coal mining risk, flood risk and drainage and land conditions having been considered previously and are unaffected by the proposal.

The key issues in the assessment of this application therefore relate to the impacts of the proposed changes on visual and residential amenity – these are discussed below.

Visual Amenity

In order to facilitate the use of 159 and 161 as a mixed-use development comprising A1/A3/A4 uses it is proposed to –  Demolish the existing garages located at the rear of the properties  Infill the covered passageway running between 159-161 Monton Road  Erect a part two, part single storey rear extension incorporating both pitched and flat roofed elements and a retractable glazed roof over a ground floor courtyard seating area.  Install a flue to serve a fume extraction system  Install a new window in the rear elevation of the existing outrigger at 161 Monton Road  Alter the frontage of the units by removing the existing shop fronts and first floor windows and replacing them with sections of double height and full height glazing all within a timber clad façade. The entrance to the main bar/restaurant area would be defined by a rendered element  Create an outdoor seating area at the front of the premises with this area comprising a hard- surfaced area of 4m by 12.5m, enclosed via a series of planters, with a gap in between to facilitate access into the unit.

The extensions would, apart from the element involving the infilling of the passageway, have limited visibility from public vantage points, with the use of brick construction for the main body of the extensions being welcomed and the addition of a glazed roof adding a contemporary element to the scheme. Having regard to this, and given that the use of a flat roof at the rear and the introduction of a flue having been deemed acceptable under the previous application, it is not considered that the proposed extensions or the flue would form incongruous additions to the buildings that would have an adverse impact upon their character and appearance or that of the wider area. As per the previous consent a condition will be attached that requires the flue to be colour treated in black or an alternative colour to be agreed by the Local Planning Authority beforehand.

In respect of the alterations to the frontage, having regard to the variety in the style and design of the shop fronts along Monton Road there are no objections to the alterations to the frontage on visual amenity grounds, with the key to the success of the scheme being the use of high quality, durable materials, full details of which will be agreed via the attachment of a suitably worded condition.

Similarly in respect of the creation of an outdoor seating area to the front of the units the principle of this was established under the previous application, with many of the established eating and drinking establishments along Monton Road including La Turka, The Park, Vintage Ambience, 6/Cut and The Blind Pig already having external seating areas on the frontage. As such there are no visual amenity concerns with this element of the proposal subject to the attachment of a suitably worded condition

Page 25 requiring full details of the seating area to be provided to the Local Planning Authority for agreement prior to installation.

Given the intention to infill the existing covered passageway there will be no access from the bin storage area in the central courtyard to the street without going through the unit. The agent has confirmed that collection will be undertaken by a private operator, with the arrangement being such that bins will have to be brought through the unit to Monton Road for collection. While this is not ideal it is considered that there is adequate space to the front of the unit for the bins to be stored prior to collection without blocking the highway, with the same solution having been deemed acceptable under the previous application.

For these reasons subject to the attachment of conditions in relation to materials, the design detail of the front seating area and the colour treatment of the flue it is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with policies DES1 and DES8 of the City of Salford UDP and the design policies in the National Planning Policy Framework with the development having the potential to improve the appearance of the site and the visual amenities of the area generally.

Residential Amenity

The proposed extensions and alterations to the frontage, including the infill extension, would not result in the buildings coming any closer to the neighbouring residential properties than they do currently and therefore this element of the proposal would not result in neighbouring residents experiencing a loss of amenity by virtue of them experiencing an unacceptable loss of light, privacy and/or any overbearing impact.

In respect of the extensions and alterations at the rear, it is not considered that these would result in neighbouring residents experiencing a loss of amenity either given that (a) the two storey element would infill the area between the two existing outriggers, not coming any closer to the neighbouring residential properties than the existing outriggers do (b) the single storey element running along the common boundary with the properties on Belmont Street would be 5m in height, the same height as the extensions approved under the previous application, with the glazed roof having minimal impact on amenity due to its glazed nature and the fact that its roof slopes away from the boundary with the units on Belmont Street and (c) there would be 10.8m maintained between the window that would be installed in the existing outrigger and the rear boundary of the site and 12.2m would be maintained between the second floor windows in the extension and the common boundary, with the previously approved scheme having first floor windows within 10.8m of the rear boundary.

The drawings submitted with the application show that fumes and odours would be dealt with via the installation of a fume extraction system that would discharge via a flue installed at the rear of the premises. As per the previously approved application the submission does not include full details of the system proposed, however the Council’s air and noise officer has confirmed that they are satisfied that subject to the attachment of a suitably worded condition the proposal would not result in neighbouring residents being exposed to a loss of amenity by virtue of them being exposed to fumes and odours generated during the cooking process.

In respect of noise and disturbance the application site is located on Monton Road, in an area containing a mix of retail, bars and residential uses, including those on Belmont Street which share a common boundary with the site. An updated noise impact assessment has been submitted in support of the application which considers the noise impact of the proposal using noise monitoring data from 2016, which is deemed acceptable given that noise levels will not have changed significantly in the area.

The noise report has been reviewed by the Councils environmental officer who has advised that subject to conditions being re-attached to ensure that the premises only opens between 8am and midnight and prevent any live music being played at any time, the level of noise from within the building will not affect neighbouring properties when windows and doors are closed.

The Council’s noise officer has re-iterated that when open there will be minimal acoustic attenuation from the bi-folding doors and therefore noise egress could affect amenity and quality of life for neighbouring residential uses, with them therefore advising that a condition should be re-attached that requires the bifold doors to remain closed between 22:00 to 08:00.

Page 26 In respect of the external seating areas the Council’s environmental officer has advised that there is potential for the use of the external seating areas to have a negative impact upon neighbouring residents.

With respect to the front seating area, they advise that the acoustic report submitted with the application includes noise monitoring data which confirms that traffic noise is such that noise from patrons using the front external seating area will only be 3dB above the background noise level to 23:00. The report doesn’t consider the combined impact of breakout noise from within the premises and the front seating area combined. In the light of this they have advised that they would be happy for the front seating area to be used until 23:00, as opposed to 22:00 as approved previously, subject to the business operating in accordance with a noise management plan which identifies all noise sources with potential to have a significant impact on neighbouring properties, and outlines what management controls will be used to reduce the potential impact, for example setting out what measures will be undertaken to deal with rowdy customers in the outdoor seating areas . They advise that this approach is commonplace in a number of commercial uses nearby.

In respect of the ground floor external seating area, this will have a retractable glass roof which provides an acoustic reduction of 37 dB RW +CTR when closed. The seating area is considerably larger than previously approved having space for 11 covers as opposed to 4, with the outdoor seating area extending up to the shared wall between the application site and a residential garden associated with a property on Belmont Street. As such the Council’s environmental officer has advised that whilst the ground floor of the property to the rear may benefit from the barrier effect of the wall, the first-floor bedrooms have direct line of site into the outdoor area and consequently there is potential for noise from the outdoor seating area to have a significant impact on these residents late at night, particularly in summer months when sleeping with partially open windows.

The Council’s environmental officer has confirmed that with the glass roof closed the impact from the patrons using the outdoor seating area will be unlikely to have a significant impact on the properties to the rear even with partially open windows as will be the case in summer. Consequently they advise that extending the size of the rear seating area at ground floor level would not adversely affect the level of amenity neighbouring residents enjoy subject to the attachment of two conditions – one that requires the retractable roof to be closed between 21.00 and 08.00 on any day, and another the requires the roof to have a minimum noise reduction index of 43 dB Rw (37 dB Rw + CTR)

The Council’s environmental officer has advised that condition 14 on planning approval 18/72230/FUL, which prevents any amplified music being played within the external seating areas, should be re- attached.

In respect of noise from plant and machinery there will be 3 air conditioning units located on the flat roofed rear element, together with a flue serving a fume extraction system. The Council’s environmental officer has advised that based on the assumed specification and noise levels from the proposed plant the updated noise assessment demonstrates a low impact at the nearest noise sensitive receptor, with this being -1 dB below the measured background noise level. They therefore advise that they have no objections to condition 8 on planning approval 18/71230/FUL which requires a level of -5 dB compared to the background noise levels being updated so it requires a level of -1dB compared to background level.

The Council’s environmental officer has advised that condition 10 on planning approval 18/72230/FUL, that required full details of the acoustic mitigation described in the Noise Assessment Report by RA Acoustic Engineering to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and subsequently installed is no longer necessary and can be removed. Similarly, they have advised that as the proposal no longer includes a first-floor external seating area condition 13 on planning approval 18/72230/FUL, which restricted the hours of use of the first floor seating area to between midday and 21:00, should be removed and replaced by a condition that prevents public access to the small first floor rear terrace with planting.

In respect of noise and disturbance from the construction phase it is accepted that neighbouring residents could be exposed to some noise, disturbance and general disruption during the construction phase however this is deemed to be short lived and an acceptable consequence of the development, with any contractors being responsible for behaving in a responsible manner and tidying up after

Page 27 themselves. Disruption during construction will not increase over and above that which would occur if planning approval 18/71230/FUL were implemented

For these reasons, subject to the attachment of appropriately worded conditions, it is not considered that the proposed changes will have a significant adverse impact upon the level of amenity neighbouring residents can reasonably expect to enjoy.

The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with policies DES7, S4 and EN17 of the adopted UDP.

Other Issues

Neighbouring residents have questioned whether there is a need for further restaurants and bars in this area. In response to this point it is not the role of the planning system to determine whether there is a need for a proposed development and as such this matter is not a material planning consideration in the determination of this application. In any event the principle of having a mixed-use unit that would provide a retail element together with a bar and restaurant is established by planning approval 18/71230/FUL which remains extant and capable of implementation.

Initially objectors raised concerns that the revised proposals did not include a viable retail space, with the space allocated for retail being sited in the centre of the unit without any “shop window” and direct access from the street. Since the original submission the plans have been revised and the retail unit is being retained in the format approved under 18/71230/FUL whereby it is located to the front of the unit, being capable of being accessed independently via a separate entrance off Monton Road, with access also being possible from the restaurant/bar.

In respect of the concerns raised regarding patrons and taxis parking/waiting on street, blocking driveways, crossing points and pavements it is not considered that the revisions to the scheme will increase or alter the traffic flow to and from the site or the demand for parking associated with the unit over and above that which occurs currently or that which would occur if planning approval 18/71230/FUL were implemented with the highways officer not raising any concerns with the proposal. In respect of how people park it is the responsibility of the individual to parking responsibly in accordance with the highway code.

Objectors have stated that the applicant has no intention of opening the restaurant – he is just changing the plans so he can get planning approved for another 2 years, with flat above the premises is currently being advertised as to let. This application will not extend the time limit for implementation – if successful the scheme will have to be implemented by 19 March 2021.

Recommendation

That planning permission be granted subject to the following planning conditions

1. The development must be begun not later than the 19 March 2021.

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

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

Site location plan - drawing 001 Proposed ground floor and basement plan - drawing 003 Rev B Proposed first floor plan - drawing 004 Rev A Proposed elevations – drawings 005 Rev B and 006 Rev A Proposed sections – drawing 007 Rev A

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

Page 28 3. Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application no above ground construction works shall take place until samples or full details of materials to be used externally on the building(s) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include the type, colour and texture of the materials. Only the materials so approved shall be used, in accordance with any terms of such approval.

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

4. Notwithstanding the submitted details prior to the erection of the outdoor seating area on the Monton Road frontage full details of the proposed seating area shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme and retained as such thereafter.

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

5. The proposed kitchen extract flue shown on the approved plans shall be powder coated black, or an alternative colour to be agreed in writing by the local planning authority, before being erected at the property and shall remain in this form thereafter.

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

6. The unit hereby approved shall contain at least 15sqm of retail floorspace in the location shown on the approved plans.

Reason - In order to maintain a retail presence at the site in the interests of the viability and viability of Monton Neighbourhood Centre in accordance with the policy S3 of the City of Salford UDP and the retail policies of the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. The foundation solution employed shall be as detailed in the Coal Mining Risk Assessment for 159 Monton Road dated August 2016 by Earth Environmental and Geotechnical report number A1630/G/1.

Reason: In the interests of public safety in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework.

8 The noise rating level (dB LAr,Tr) from external plant and equipment associated with the development, when operating simultaneously, shall not exceed the typical background noise level (LA90,T) by more than -1 dB at any time when measured at the boundary of the nearest noise sensitive premises. Noise measurements and assessments shall be carried out according to BS 4142:2014+A1:2019 "Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound". ‘T’ refers to any 1 hour period between 07.00hrs and 23.00hrs and any 15 minute period between 23.00hrs and 07.00hrs

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

9. The uses hereby permitted shall not commence until equipment to control the emission of fumes and smell from the premises has been installed in accordance with a scheme which has been previously submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. All equipment installed as part of the approved scheme shall thereafter be operated and maintained in accordance with that approval and retained for as long as the use continues.

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

Page 29 10 The external seating area to the front of the building, fronting Monton Road, shall only be used between 08:00 hours and 23:00 hours on any day.

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

11. The front façade bi-fold doors to the premises shown on drawing 005 Rev B shall be kept closed between 22:00 hours and 08:00 hours on any day.

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

12 There shall be no public access to the first-floor terraced area shown on approved plan 004 Rev A at any time.

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

13 The glass roof to the rear ground floor dining area shall be kept closed between 21:00 and 08:00 hours on any day.

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

14 The glass roof to the rear seating area shall have a minimum noise reduction index of 43 dB Rw (37 dB Rw + CTR)

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

15 There shall be no amplified music played within the external seating areas on any occasion.

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

16. There shall be no live music at any time.

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

17. The hours of opening for the use hereby approved shall be restricted to 08:00 to 00:00 each day and at no other times. An additional period of 1 hour either side of the above times shall be allowed for staff only for the purposes of preparation, cleaning and other ancillary activities associated with the operation of the business

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

18 Prior to the first use of the mixed-use retail, bar and restaurant use hereby permitted a noise management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The noise management plan shall identify all noise sources with potential to have a significant impact on neighbouring properties and outline management controls to reduce the potential impact. The use shall be operated in accordance with the approved noise management plan at all times.

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

18. Any new drainage in the basement area shall be pumped and not connected directly to sewers.

Page 30 Reason - To secure proper drainage and to manage the risk of flooding and pollution in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

20. No development shall take place until a strategy of surface water drainage for the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved strategy shall be implemented prior to first occupation or use of the development hereby approved unless alternative timescales have been agreed in writing as part of the strategy and retained thereafter.

Reason - In order to ensure a satisfactory method of surface water disposal to reduce the risk of flooding elsewhere in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

Notes to Applicant

1. The applicant is advised that the fume extraction system needs to include an acoustic silencer to be fitted to the kitchen extract flue

2. The secure by design team at Greater Manchester Police have advised as follows - O Any new fittings should be certified to Secured by Design standards. O Tables and chairs should be heavy enough to resist movement by wind. O Tables must be of a design that are suitable for attaching 'property clips' to secure handbags/laptop bags and, if necessary, can be stacked for storage without damaging the clips. Customers should be shown how to use the clips. As an alternative use tables with shelves or net bags under the table top. O Tables and chairs to be visible from within the premises. O They will not normally allow tables, chairs or temporary barriers to remain on the highway after 11.00 pm. O Where natural or street lighting is insufficient, the management of the premises should provide lighting for the area occupied by tables and chairs.

Page 31 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5b

APPLICATION No: 20/75949/HH APPLICANT: Mr M Sattar LOCATION: 14 Barrfield Road, Salford, M6 7EL PROPOSAL: Increasing the width of the existing rear dormer and erection of front dormer WARD: Claremont

Figure 1 – Location of 14 Barrfield Road (red hatched) and the surrounding area

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application relates to a two-storey end-terraced house which stands within a run of 11 such properties. The subject dwelling is located at the corner plot where Carlton Road meets Barrfield Road. It has its front elevation facing towards Barrfield Road. It has an existing single storey side extension attached to a two-storey outrigger which extends to the rear boundary of the site. It has also an existing dormer at the rear plane of the main pitched roof. There is an alleyway to the rear of the dwelling that separates the subject dwelling from the rear neighbour no. 1 Beech Grove.

The terraced dwellings in the same row all have a two storey rear outriggers which form part of the original house. Some of them, for example the adjoining neighbours, no. 6 Carlton Road and no. 8 Carlton Road, have been further extended to the rear like the subject dwelling.

The neighbour to the rear, no. 1 Beech Grove, has a single storey wrapped round extension to the side/rear (granted planning permission in October 2000, ref: 00/41278/HH). The rear garden at this neighbour is bounded by wooden fences.

Front dormers are not found within the terrace where the subject dwelling is located. However, front dormers are a common feature among the terraced dwellings along the opposite site of Barrfield Road.

Page 33

Site photos are shown below:

Figure 2 – the elevation facing towards Carlton Road Figure 3 – the front elevation facing towards Barrfield Road

Figure 4 – the existing single storey extension Figure 5 – the rear elevation of the rear neighbour no. 1 Beech Grove

Description of Proposal

The application originally proposed a first floor side extension on top of the existing single storey side extension, raising the roof of the two-storey outrigger to create habitable loft space with roof windows and increasing the width of the existing rear dormer. This proposal was assessed as being contrary to planning policies and therefore the applicant has amended the scheme. The revised proposal retains the widening of the existing rear dormer as proposed in the original plans and includes a new dormer on the front roof plane of the outrigger. Details and plans are shown below:

Page 34

Figure 6 – the proposed elevations

Figure 7 – the proposed floor plans

Page 35

Figure 8 – the proposed roof plan

Publicity

Site Notice: N/A Reason:

Press Advert: N/A Reason:

Neighbour Notification

There have been 31 neighbouring occupiers notified of the application.

Representations

Letters of representation have been received in response to the application publicity from six properties. In addition, representations have been made by Councillor Pevitt and Councillor Bentham. The representations and comments have been made in response to the original proposal and not the revised proposal. They are summarised as follows:

C – comment received R – officer response C This is a large HMO with multiple tenants already overlooking my residential property significantly. There are also issues with cannabis, smoke and noise that discourage us to enjoy our own garden, even though a fence has been built to provide separation. The proposal would escalate the above problems.

R The applicant has advised that the application property is currently vacant and is being refurbished. It is understood the property was previously occupied as a single family dwellinghouse and the applicant intends to occupy the property as their home. If, in the future, the property was to be occupied as a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO), planning permission would be required. Any potential issues with the occupancy of the property as a single family dwellinghouse, in respect of smoke, noise and rubbish, are not a material consideration in the assessment of this application which proposes alterations to the roof of the property.

C This proposal would bring in more residents and so adds pressure on street parking which is already insufficient in the area.

R The proposed roof alteration and extension would not alter the existing car parking arrangements for the property, i.e. parking on street. Moreover, the additional bedroom at the property, resulting from the roof extension, is not considered to create a significant impact on parking demand over and above that which already exists for the property. The proposed development is therefore not considered to result in an unacceptable impact on the car parking provision.

C The symmetry of the back alley will be deteriorated further. This is important as it is within the view of the residents in particular those who are facing towards the alley.

Page 36

Allowing this application would change an old house with character into a block of flats. It will not compliment the look of the other houses.

R The first floor extension and raising of the roof are not included in the revised proposal. Widening the existing dormer and the addition of the front dormer are not considered to significantly change the character of dwelling. Please refer the appraisal section of this report for more details.

C The proposal will block out most of the sunlight at the rear garden and cause overlooking to the rear of our property.

R The first floor extension and raising of the roof are not included in the revised proposal. The revised proposal is considered not to cause any undue overlooking and/or unacceptable overshadowing to the neighbouring properties. A more detailed assessment is presented in the appraisal section of this report below.

C The dormer extension will be towering over all the other residential properties and having a full bird’s-eye view of the complete rear of our property and the garden.

R The alteration proposed to the existing dormer would increase the width of the window by around 1.1m and would not result in further projections. It would remain set well in from the eaves line. Therefore, this increase in size would not be substantial and hence not considered to cause undue overlooking. In addition, in respect of the proposed new dormer, due to its location within the roofslope, size and position in relation to neighbouring properties, it is considered that this dormer would not result in undue overlooking to neighbouring properties.

C The existing single storey extension as proposed in 94/32525/HH has never been used as a garage as indicated in the approved plans. It has been used as a kitchen. R 94/32525/HH was a permission granted 26 years ago and thus carries no weight in the consideration of the current application. This structure would remain in situ and would not be altered in the proposal.

Relevant Site History

94/32525/HH - Erection of attached brick garage to side of property – Permitted (5 July 1994).

Consultations

Not applicable.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.

Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.

Unitary Development Plan DES8 - Alterations and Extensions This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area.

Page 37

Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy

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

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

The Revised Draft Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (‘GMSF’) was subject to public consultation at the start of 2019. The next version of the plan is expected to be published in for a period of representations in November 2020. In accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework it is considered that very limited weight can be given to the policies in the GMSF.

The Publication Salford Local Plan: Development Management Policies and Designations (‘Local Plan’) was published on 27 January 2020 and comments were invited until 20 March 2020. This is the version of the document that the city council would like to adopt and has been subject to a significant amount of public consultation in previous stages of its production. However, in accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework the weight that can be given to the Local Plan overall is currently limited. The city council is in the process of considering the comments made to determine the extent to which there are unresolved objections to the policies in the Plan. Those policies with less significant (or no) objections will be capable of carrying more weight than those with significant unresolved objections.

In addition, following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) it is necessary to consider the weight which can be afforded to the policies of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan (paragraph 213 NPPF February 2019).

In terms of this application it is considered that the relevant policies of the UDP can be afforded due weight for the purposes of decision making as the relevant criteria within the UDP policies applicable to the proposed development are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.

Appraisal

Impact on the character of the area

The proposed new dormer would be positioned to the front of the subject dwelling facing towards Barrfield Road and hence would be visible from the street scene. Although there are no front dormers found in the dwellings on the same side of Barrfield Road where the subject dwelling is located, it is a common feature among the terraced dwellings on the opposite side (southern side) of the road. The front dormer is designed not to dominate the roof; it would be sited below the ridge line, set back from the eaves and not to build off any external walls, in accordance with Policy HE 10 of the House Extension SPD. It is well positioned and would not appear at odds with the roofscape. Furthermore, it is smaller in size compared to those on the opposite neighbours. It would not affect the elevation facing towards Carlton Road which has matching features with the other dwellings in the same terrace.

The alteration proposed to the existing dormer would increase its width by around 1.1m. It would remain set in from the eaves and sited below the roof ridge. The widening of the existing rear dormer is therefore considered as a minor alteration to the dwelling and would be an appropriate alteration to the roof, in accordance with Policy HE 10 of the House Extension SPD

Page 38

Given the above, the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact upon the character of the application property, the terrace to which it forms a part or the surrounding area in accordance with UDP policies DES 1 and DES 8.

Impact on the amenity of neighbours

The proposed new dormer would be positioned to the front and look onto the opposite neighbours. It is noted that the opposite neighbours have front dormers that would be faced by the proposed dormer. Nonetheless, the dwellings are already in a relatively compacted relationship which is around 15m away from each other. There are currently lower floor windows on both dwellings’ front elevations that face to each other. The proposed front dormer would be set about 300mm in from the existing front windows. In view of this, it is considered that there would be a level of overlooking, however, it would not be over and above that which already exists. It is therefore considered that the proposed front dormer is acceptable in terms of the amenity impact.

Increasing the width of the existing rear dormer would not result in a further projection. The rear dormer would remain set well back from the eaves and maintain the existing separation distance with the rear neighbour no. 1 Beech Grove. It is therefore considered that the increase in size of this dormer would not cause undue overlooking to the neighbouring residents.

In conclusion, the proposal is considered not to result in any detrimental impact upon the general amenity of neighbouring residents in accordance to Policy DES 7 of the Salford UDP.

Impact on the highway network

There is no off-road parking within the application site. Nevertheless, off-road parking is not a typical feature for the dwellings along Carlton Road/Barrfield Road. Moreover, there is on-street parking available in the surrounding area, including Carlton Road and Barrfield Road. An additional bedroom at the property is not considered to create a significant impact on the parking demand that already exists for the property. The proposed development would not have a negative impact on the access or parking arrangements for the subject dwelling and therefore is not considered to result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety or the free flow of traffic.

Recommendation

Approve, subject to the following conditions:

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

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

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

 Drawing: 00 - Proposed Site Plan (Received: 05.11.2020)  Drawing: 01revB - Proposed Floor Plans (Received: 08.12.2020)  Drawing: 03revA – Proposed Elevations (Received: 05.11.2020)

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

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

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

Page 39

This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5c PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL PART I SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

APPLICATION No: 20/76043/FUL APPLICANT: Mish Liyanage LOCATION: 12 New Barton Street, Salford, M6 7WW PROPOSAL: Change of use from Class C3 dwelling to Class C4, 4-bed, 4- person HMO, together with erection of a single storey rear extension WARD: Claremont

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application relates to 12 New Barton Street, a two-storey dwelling in Irlams o’ th’ Height. The property sits towards the eastern end of a terrace of 22 houses, within a network of traditional terraced streets accessed from the wider highway network via Claremont Road to the east and Park Lane to the west. It is an attractive red-brick property with original features being relatively in-tact including a bay-window at ground floor on the front elevation, stone headers and cills and brick detailing such as an archway over the front door.

The property, as with other dwellings in the terrace, benefits from a small paved garden to the front, separated from the footway by a low brick wall. At the rear is a small yard which connects into a secure, adopted alleyway that runs the full length of the terrace to Pomfret Street to the west. The two-storey outrigger to the rear of the property is a common feature across the terrace; this has been previously extended by way of a lightweight single-storey storage structure. The property has no off-road parking, as is the case with almost all surrounding properties.

The surrounding area is predominantly residential in character, although there is a wide range of services and facilities within the medium range including St. Luke’s and St. John’s primary schools and Height Library. The site is located approximately 60m from the Irlams o’ th’ Height Neighbourhood Centre on Bolton Road, with pedestrian access to the precinct available from Claremont Road (near opposite to the junction with New Barton Street), and is circa 180m from the local bus interchange on Bolton Road.

The site is some 75m from the western boundary of the Irlams o’ th’ Height conservation area, however there is no inter-visibility between the two sites.

Page 41

Figure 1 – 12 New Barton Street (centre), front elevation

Description of Proposal

The application seeks planning permission for the change of use of the property from a Class C3 dwellinghouse to a small House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) - Use Class C4 - with four bedrooms, together with a proposed single- storey rear extension.

The proposed internal arrangement comprises one bedroom at ground floor level, at the front of the property, together with a combined kitchen/dining/living area to the rear. The ground floor bedroom would benefit from provision of an en-suite bathroom. Three further bedrooms would be provided at first floor level, together with a shared bathroom.

The application also seeks permission for a single-storey rear extension, which would provide additional floorspace within the kitchen area, and would replace the existing lightweight outhouse. The proposed extension would extend 1.13m to the rear, spanning nearly the full width of the existing outrigger save for a small offset from the shared boundary with 14 New Barton Street. It would be constructed with red facing brickwork and a flat roof with a rubber membrane covering.

A secure cycle store would be provided in the rear yard, with capacity for two bicycles.

Figure 2 – Proposed Ground Floor Layout

Page 42

Figure 3 – Proposed First Floor Layout

Publicity

None.

Relevant Planning History

None.

Neighbour Notification

Seven neighbouring properties have been notified of the application.

Representations

Five separately addressed letters of objection have been received in response to the application publicity, summarised in the table below.

Two letters of objection were received from Councillors Barbara Bentham and Mike Pevitt, which reflect the views of their constituents and which are summarised below.

C – comment received R – officer response C The development would be wholly out of character for the host property and the street in general – the development would damage the family character of the neighbourhood, which has a strong sense of community. The constant changing of tenants can have a detrimental impact on the community as a whole.

The property would be better remaining as a family home, especially at a time when so many properties are unaffordable to many young couples/families and Salfordians in general and given that there are schools in the vicinity. R The principle of the change of use of the property to Class C4, including consideration of the cumulative impacts of HMOs on the community, is considered in the relevant analysis below. All rented housing is subject to a certain degree of transiency; this is not unique to HMOs.

HMOs do provide a valuable contribution towards the delivery of more affordable accommodation within the City, particularly for residents for whom the existing supply of smaller accommodation, such as flats and terraced housing, does not present a viable option. C The property is not large enough to safely accommodate up to 8 adults – this raises questions regarding space standards and fire regulations. R The matters of internal floorspace and amenity standards are considered in detail in the ‘Residential Amenity’ analysis section below. In accordance with the Council’s relevant licensing standards, the property could only be occupied by a maximum of 4 people. The matter of compliance with relevant fire and safety regulations falls under separate legislative regimes. C There is enough student accommodation available in the City and there is little commercial need to crowbar as many renters as possible into a relatively small property.

Page 43

R The application does not propose specific accommodation for students. C The development would add no value to the area and would cause severe disruption (noise, pollution, utilities).

The party walls to neighbouring properties are only 1 brick thickness. The use of the property by 4 people would increase noise to an unbearable level, and the building work would cause significant disturbance, including for neighbouring residents who are currently working from home. R The impact of the development on the occupiers of neighbouring properties is considered in the relevant analysis section below. C Parking on New Barton Street is already an issue, with residents often having to park on surrounding streets – 4 extra adults could mean 4 extra cars looking for a parking space. Although a bike shed is included in the proposals, it is not considered that this would resolve the car parking issue. R This matter is considered in detail in the relevant analysis section below. The LHA does not consider that the additional parking demand from the development would result in a severe impact on the surrounding highway network and it is noted that the site is in a sustainable location with access to public transport. C The front door of No. 12 is around 6 inches from the front door at No. 14 – this presents a health risk in the current COVID-19 pandemic. Students are a high-risk group and households should not be mixing under COVID restrictions. R The location of these doorways is an existing arrangement – no alterations are proposed to the front elevation of the building or to the methods of access/egress. Measures required to reduce the spread of COVID-19, such as maintaining ‘social’ and physical distancing are temporary and cannot be considered to carry weight in the determination of this application. C Water pressure in the area is already low (and Nos. 8-14 New Barton Street share a single connection point to the water main) – adding 4 more people would put too great a burden on the water supply. Sewers in the area are also 120 years old and cannot be expected to cope with an extra 4 people. R The property is currently a two-bedroom house and could feasibly be occupied by 3-4 people; there is no evidence to suggest that the proposed change of use would adversely impact the water supply available to surrounding properties or result in an exceedance of sewer capacity. Water companies are required to maintain a minimum pressure of water; systematic issues regarding water pressure should be referred by residents to United Utilities. C The property currently has a single waste bin that is collected once every three weeks – this is inadequate for four residents, each of which would be preparing their own food. There is a lack of outdoor space for storing additional bins if provided. HMO properties often attract complaints regarding overflowing and contaminated bins, which can lead to vermin. R The submitted site plans demonstrate that adequate space is available within the rear yard to accommodate the requisite number of bins. Issues related to overflowing and contaminated bins are specific to individual properties, rather than to particular residential uses e.g. HMOs. C The development would reduce the value of surrounding houses. R The impact of development on property values is not a material planning consideration. C The Council is itself concerned about the proliferation of small HMOs in Salford, to the extent that it launched a consultation in October on how to deal with the issue. The results of recent inspections show that 93% of three and four person HMOs had issues regarding fire safety and escape routes; over one-third were damp or suffering from mould and one-third had inadequate or no heating. R The consultation referred to relates to the proposed introduction of a new city-wide Additional Licensing scheme for all three and four person HMOs. The proposed Additional Licensing scheme is intended to ensure that such properties are of a good standard, safe for tenants and well managed and that residents are afforded the same protection as people in licensed HMOs.

It is important to note that there is no evidence or reason to consider that the small HMO proposed under this application would fail to be of a good standard or would be managed ineffectively. Licensing is a separate regulatory process and should not be conflated with control under planning legislation.

Consultations (Summaries)

Air Quality, Noise and Contaminated Land – No objection. The site is not within the Greater Manchester Air Quality Management Area. The scale and nature of the development is not likely to have a significant impact on traffic – no objections on air quality grounds.

Page 44

The are no significant noise issues with respect to this development. Recommend a condition to restrict the hours of noise generative construction work, as the area is predominantly residential.

There is minimal operational development associated with the application; the end use is no more sensitive than the existing use. No comments regarding contaminated land.

Flood Risk & Drainage – No objection. All works should be completed in accordance with Building Regulations Part H.

Highways – No objection. The site is located within a residential neighbourhood with local amenities nearby. The application does not include any off-street parking, however there are no parking restrictions to the front of the property and it is envisioned that residents will park on the highway. Although the development may attract additional on-street parking, due to the minor scale of the development and in accordance to NPPF it would not be considered to have a “severe” impact on the local highway network.

There are bus stops located within 200m walk on Bolton Road, from which there are regular services to Bolton, Salford precinct, Swinton, Walkden and Manchester City Centre. The development is considered to be located in a sustainable area.

There is cycle storage proposed to be installed to the rear yard in a lockable shed – the plan states that this includes a vertical racking system, which the local highway authority does not support. Therefore, they recommend that a floor stand is included in the shed and full detail of the racking system should be secured by condition.

Planning Policy

GMSF The Revised Draft Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (‘GMSF’) was subject to public consultation at the start of 2019. The next version of the plan is expected to be published in for a period of representations in late 2020. In accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework it is considered that very limited weight can be given to the policies in the GMSF.

Local Plan The Publication Salford Local Plan: Development Management Policies and Designations (‘Local Plan’) was published on 27 January 2020 and comments were invited until 20 March 2020. This is the version of the document that the city council would like to adopt and has been subject to a significant amount of public consultation in previous stages of its production. However, in accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework the weight that can be given to the Local Plan overall is currently limited. The city council is in the process of considering the comments made to determine the extent to which there are unresolved objections to the policies in the Plan. Those policies with less significant (or no) objections will be capable of carrying more weight than those with significant unresolved objections.

City of Salford Unitary Development Plan In addition, following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) it is necessary to consider the weight which can be afforded to the policies of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan (paragraph 213 NPPF February 2019).

In terms of this application it is considered that the relevant policies of the UDP can be afforded due weight for the purposes of decision making as the relevant criteria within the UDP policies applicable to the proposed development are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan ST1 – Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods This policy states that development will be required to contribute towards the creation and maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods.

Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.

Page 45

Unitary Development Plan DES2 - Circulation and Movement This policy states that the design and layout of new development will be required to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site safely, be well related to public transport and local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

Unitary Development Plan DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.

Unitary Development Plan DES8 – Alterations and Extensions This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area.

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

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

Unitary Development Plan A2 – Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled This policy states that development proposals, road improvement schemes and traffic management measures will be required to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, other people with limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians and cyclists.

Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.

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

Other Material Planning Considerations

National

National Planning Policy Framework National Planning Practice Guidance

Local

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

Supplementary Planning Guidance – Housing The purpose of the guidance is to ensure that the residential development coming forward in Salford contributes to establishing and maintaining sustainable communities, tackles the specific housing and related issues that face Salford, and helps to deliver the vision and strategy of the UDP, the Housing Strategy and the Community Plan.

Page 46

Supplementary Planning Guidance - Claremont and Weaste Neighbourhood Plan The Neighbourhood Plan sets out the vision for Claremont Weaste for the next 15-20 years. It sets out what the area looks like now and how it might develop.

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

Appraisal

Principle of Development

The application seeks planning permission for the change of use of the building from a Class C3 dwellinghouse to a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) with four bedrooms (Use Class C4). Class C4 allows for the use of a building by not more than six residents as an HMO.

UDP Policy H1 sets out that all new housing developments are required to contribute towards a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area, provide a high-quality residential environment and provide an adequate level of amenity. The site is located within an area of the City in which there is an Article 4 Direction in place (relating to change of use from C3 to C4); the Direction was introduced in light of the concentration of HMOs in certain areas. The application therefore seeks planning permission for development which would otherwise have been permitted development (under Schedule 2, Part 3, Class L of the General Permitted Development Order). The issue of concentration and prevalence of HMOs forms a material consideration with respect to determination of this application.

As at 23 October 2020, in Claremont Ward there were 57 mandatory licensed HMOs (those with five or more occupants forming two or more households). There is no data available on selectively licensed HMOs (those with less than five occupants) as none of the Council’s selective licensing areas extend into Claremont ward. Council tax records from March 2020 identify 4,623 registered properties within the ward. The total number of registered HMOs, as a proportion of the total number of residential properties in Claremont ward, was therefore 1.2%.

Figure 4 below shows existing mandatory licensed HMOs within the immediate vicinity of the application site. There are no existing HMOs recorded on the mandatory licensing register on New Barton Street; there are five such properties in relatively close proximity to the application site, one on Stapleton Street and four on Claremont Road.

Figure 4

Page 47

It is noted that there may be existing small HMOs on New Barton Street for which the change of use from a Class C3 dwelling was carried out under permitted development rights prior to the Article 4 direction coming into force (and it is noted that local residents have referred to a HMO at 2 New Barton Street) – no data is available to the LPA on the existence of such properties for this reason. There are no historic records of other planning applications for HMOs on New Barton Street, Saxby Street, Stapleton Street or Pomfret Street.

Taking account of the relatively low numbers of registered HMO properties in Claremont Ward, and around Irlams o’ th’ Height in particular, and the dispersal of such properties, it is not considered that the development would result in a situation whereby the proportion of HMOs within the immediate or wider area would be so high as to have a demonstrable adverse effect on the supply of family housing in the area or result in an overconcentration of HMOs. Similarly, it is not considered that the proposal would adversely alter the character of the neighbourhood.

The proposal will result in the loss of a single C3 dwellinghouse, however, it is not considered that this would have an adverse impact on the overall mix of dwellings and accommodation in the area or the supply of market and family housing in the vicinity of the site, taking account of the cumulative effects of other changes of use in the vicinity. The development would make a positive contribution towards meeting the housing needs of those persons requiring lower-cost rental accommodation within the City, which is not necessarily met by the existing supply of smaller terraced housing or apartments.

Regard is to be had to the Claremont and Weaste Neighbourhood Plan; Section 5 of the Plan sets the objective to achieve “a good range of housing to ensure the area can accommodate families and other household types”. Statement 4, which relates to housing priorities, does not contain any measures relevant to consideration of change of use to a small HMO. Accordingly, the proposed development is not considered to conflict with the provisions of the Neighbourhood Plan.

In light of the above considerations, the principle of the change of use to a Class C4 ‘small HMO’ is considered acceptable and the development would accord with the provisions of UDP Policy H1, the Claremont and Weaste Neighbourhood Plan and the relevant considerations of the NPPF.

Residential Amenity

Impact on Neighbouring Dwellings

The building is located within a predominantly residential area, and within a long terrace of properties generally comprised of Class C3 dwellings. The existing make-up of the building is as a two-bedroom dwelling. Class C4 HMOs are limited to a maximum occupation level of six persons, albeit the application proposal is for a four-bedroom layout and it is likely to be occupied by a maximum of four persons (also in accordance with the Council’s HMO Licensing Standards). Therefore, it is not considered that the proposed development would result in a significant intensification in the use of the site or an appreciable change in the nature and frequency of comings and goings such that it would impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers. It is noted that the Council’s Environmental Consultant has raised no objections to the proposals, however there is a recommendation to attach a condition restricting noise generative construction works to a limited range of hours, in light of the site being located within a residential area. Given the operational development requiring planning permission is relatively small in scale, and matters of noise from construction are otherwise dealt with under the Environmental Protection Act and Control of Pollution Act, it is not considered that attaching such a condition would meet the ‘six tests’ set out under paragraph 55 of the NPPF; an informative for the applicant is recommended instead.

The application includes for the construction of a single-storey rear extension which would project 1.13m to the rear, spanning nearly the full width of the existing outrigger save for a small offset from the shared boundary with 14 New Barton Street. The extension would replace an existing light-weight store, which has been constructed with a mono- pitch roof with a ridge-line on the boundary with No. 14. The proposed extension would have a flat roof, and would be constructed to a height of 2.8m. The proposal would comply with Policy HE5 of the Council’s House Extensions SPD, which relates to single-storey rear extension depths. A single window would be installed in the side elevation of the extension, facing out into the rear yard. Regard is to be had to Policy HE2 of the House Extensions SPD; the existing brick wall on the boundary with 10 New Barton Street provides sufficient screening to prevent any impact on the privacy of the occupiers of the neighbouring property, and in any event the additional window replicates an existing inter-relationship, as it sits adjacent to an existing kitchen window which faces into the yard, and is therefore considered acceptable.

Page 48

The proposals also include for the erection of a cycle storage shed in the rear yard; the structure is similar in size to a typical garden shed or other storage structure and it is not considered that it would, by reason of its scale, size and siting, adversely impact on the occupiers of neighbouring dwellings.

It is not considered that the proposal would conflict with the relevant policies of the House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document, the provisions of UDP Policies DES7, DES8 or EN17, nor with the NPPF, with respect to the potential impact on neighbouring occupiers.

Amenity Standards for Future Occupiers

In respect of the standard of amenity to be afforded to future occupiers; the ground and first floor habitable rooms within the HMO would be provided with full windows to ensure adequate provision of daylight and a suitable outlook. The existing small rear yard does not comprise functional amenity space given the size constraint, however, this is typical of the surrounding terraced dwellings and the site is located close to both Oakwood Park (0.25km to the north- west) and Lightoaks Park (0.2km to the south-west). The internal layout, with respect to the floor area of the bedrooms and kitchen/dining/living room, would meet with the Council’s Standards for Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO) if the property is to be occupied by a maximum of four persons, which, although applicable for licensing purposes, comprises a material consideration and is considered a suitable comparative for considering the standard of amenity to be afforded through the planning process.

It is not considered that there are any issues with respect to air quality, noise or contamination which would impact on the amenity or safety standards to be provided to future occupiers. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal would meet with the relevant requirements of UDP Policies H1 and DES7 and the NPPF.

Design and Appearance

The proposed rear extension would sit within the enclosed rear yard and views of the structure from public vantage points are therefore limited, as the retained boundary wall provides a significant visual screen. Regardless, the extension is considered to be an appropriate, subordinate addition to the dwelling, with respect to scale and massing. The proposed flat-roof construction does not match with the roof-form of the host property, but other examples of flat- roof extensions are visible elsewhere to the rear of properties along New Barton Street and Stapleton Street. Given the limited visibility of the structure (only from the secure alleyway and the rear of neighbouring properties), this is considered acceptable. The blank rear wall would be largely screened by the existing boundary wall.

The extension is to be constructed of facing brickwork and fenestration would be white uPVC, both to match the host dwelling – this is considered appropriate. A condition is recommended requiring materials to match the existing property, with the exception of the roof covering which is to be a rubber EDPM membrane. The proposed cycle shed is a metal enclosure, colour-treated green. Again, given the limited visibility and the siting to the rear of the property, this is considered acceptable.

The proposed development would accord with Policies DES1 and DES8 of the UDP and the relevant considerations of the NPPF, with respect to design and appearance.

Access, Highways Impact and Parking

There is no space within the site to accommodate off-street parking for residents; this is the case for the occupiers of the existing C3 dwelling. There are no parking restrictions on either side of New Barton Street, or on the surrounding roads of Stapleton Street and Saxby Street and the interconnecting spurs. It is therefore the case that residents of the proposed development would seek to park on the surrounding roads. HMOs generally attract occupiers with lower than average levels of car ownership in comparison to typical C3 residential uses. The Council does not have a specific standard for car parking provision for HMO uses, with each development to be assessed on a case-by-case basis. The Local Highway Authority (LHA) has reviewed the application and considers that although the development may attract additional on-street parking, given the scale of the development it would not result in a ‘severe’ impact on the local highway network (with reference to the relevant test set out under paragraph 109 of the NPPF), although it is noted that existing levels of on-street parking in the area, as in all areas with a significant proportion of terraced housing, are high.

The site is within a sustainable location, in light of the proximity (60m) to the Irlams o’ th’ Height Neighbourhood Centre, which contains a range of local shops and services. The site is also close (180m) to the local bus interchange on Bolton Road, which provides access to regular services to Bolton, Salford Precinct, Swinton, Walkden and the

Page 49

City Centre (services 8, 36, 37, 38, 74, and 75), placing frequent public transport connections within around a 5 minute walk for future residents.

In addition, the applicant has proposed the provision of a secure cycle store in the rear yard, to provide storage for two bicycles. This would assist in facilitating uptake of active and sustainable methods of travel amongst future occupiers, providing a viable alternative to private car use and ownership - the site is near to the segregated cycle lane which provides a strategic cycle link, along Bolton Road to the south-east, into the City Centre. The LHA considers the type and extent of cycle storage provision to be acceptable, subject to inclusion of a floor-stand, rather than a vertical racking system – this is required by a condition recommended below.

In respect of servicing of the development, it is noted that at present bins for the property are stored to the rear, in the yard area. There would be no change in respect of the method of bin storage; storage in a private rear yard, with access to the secure alleyway to move bins to the street for collection, is acceptable.

In light of the above factors, the proposal is considered to accord with UDP Policies A8 and A10 and the relevant considerations of the NPPF.

Conclusion

The application site is located within a sustainable location, within an existing residential area and near to a wide range of shops, services and facilities. It is not considered that the development would result in an over-concentration of HMOs within the immediate or wider area, such as to have a demonstrable adverse effect on the supply of family housing or have significant adverse implications on the provision of a balance and mix of dwellings. The design and appearance of the proposed extension is acceptable and it is not considered that the proposed operational development nor the change of use itself would detrimentally impact on the amenity of surrounding neighbours. The development would likely lead to an increase in on-street parking in the immediately surrounding streets but it is not considered that the impacts on the highway network would be severe, and it is acknowledged that future residents would benefit from ease of access to sustainable public transport.

The proposal is therefore considered to accord with the provisions of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, the relevant Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance and the NPPF; the recommendation is therefore that planning permission is granted.

Recommendation

That planning permission be granted subject to the following planning conditions:

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

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

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: - Site Location Plan and Proposed Site Plan ref. 12NBSS/200/BR - Proposed Plan Layouts ref. 12NBSS/202/BR - Existing and Proposed Elevations and Section ref. 12NBSS/203/BR

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

3. No part of the development shall be occupied until such time as the secure cycle storage within the rear yard of the property, as detailed on approved plan ref. 12NBSS/202/BR, has been constructed on site and made available for use. Notwithstanding any detail shown on the approved plans, the cycle store shall be fitted with a floor-based racking system, such as Sheffield stands. The cycle storage shall be retained as installed thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of ensuring sufficient provision of cycle storage for residents in order to facilitate and encourage active travel in accordance with Policies A2 and A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. The materials used in the construction of the single-storey rear extension hereby approved must be of a similar appearance to those used in the construction of the exterior of the existing building, with the exception of the roof which shall be a rubber EDPM flat-roof membrane.

Page 50

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

Notes to Applicant

The developer's attention is drawn to the recommendations of the LPA's Environmental Consultant - All noise generative construction works should be restricted to the following hours: 0800-1800 Monday to Friday and 0900-1400 on Saturdays. No noise generative construction works should take place on Sundays and Public Holidays. Quieter activities such as internal decorations, electrical work or plumbing may be carried on outside the above hours.

Page 51 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5d

APPLICATION No: 20/75719/FUL APPLICANT: Richard Austin Alloys Ltd LOCATION: Plot 39, Northbank Industrial Estate, Cadishead Way, Irlam, M44 5BL PROPOSAL: The erection of 3,454 sq.m storage and distribution unit with ancillary office accommodation, together with other associated infrastructure WARD: Cadishead

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application relates to a vacant site which is located at plot 39 Northbank Industrial Park, Brinell Drive, Irlam. The site measures approximately 10,045m2 (1.0 hectares) and is broadly triangular in shape. The site is located just off the roundabout at the junctions with Cadishead Way and Bessemer Road. The site has a vehicular access point from Cadishead Way.

To the south of the site is an open storage facility which has a large amount of plant and equipment on site, whilst to the east across Cadishead Way is large single storey light industrial building that houses Mach 4 Pharma Systems. To the west of the site across Brinell Drive are two large light industrial buildings and an area of public open space.

The site is located within an allocated employment area populated by offices, light industry, general industry and storage and distribution.

The site has a relatively flat topography and comprises mature vegetation with a number of large trees along the external boundaries; none of which are protected by way of Tree Preservation Orders. The site is not located within a Conservation Area, nor are there any listed buildings or other designated or non-designated heritages assets on, or adjacent to it. The Site is located in Flood Zone 1 (low risk of flooding).

Description of Proposal

Background

Page 53

The applicant, Richard Austin Alloys, was founded in 1981. It is one of the UKs largest independent aluminium and stainless steel stockholders. It has warehouses located across the country which house a comprehensive stock range and modern processing facilities.

The requirement for the application has arisen due to the need to expand the company’s existing operations. There is no capacity to expand at their existing premise off Bessemer Road and they are therefore seeking to expand operations on to the application site.

Proposal

Planning permission is sought for the erection of a 3,454m2 storage and distribution unit with ancillary office accommodation, together with other associated infrastructure.

The proposed development will comprise:

 A 3,081 sq.m storage and distribution unit;  A 372 sq.m ancillary office;  30 car parking spaces;  A further 2 accessible car parking spaces and 3 EV charging spaces; and,  10 secure cycle spaces.

Fig.1 – Proposed site locaiton plan

The layout of the proposal has been influenced by the proposed access point and the need to provide sufficient space for HGV movement within the Site. The proposed unit has therefore been orientated and set back from the road to ensure that vehicles ingressing and egressing the site have sufficient room to manoeuvre. An HGV turning circle is identified to the north of the proposed unit.

The building has been designed to offer a functional and high quality structure which will satisfy the occupier’s requirements whilst simultaneously contributing towards the areas strong identity as a location for economic development. The proposed outdoor canopy will extend off the unit’s northern elevation. The canopy will provided covered access to the two loading doors located on the north elevation of the proposed unit.

Page 54

The unit would be approximately 7.5m in height, 81m in length and 40m in width. It would be finished with microrib and trapezoidial cladding. There would be glazing serving the ground and first floor office accommodation.

The site’s means of enclosure is a paladin fence which will be complimented by a landscaping scheme.

Vehicular access to the site will be delivered off Brinell Drive which runs to the north west of the site. The Entrance to the office building would be via an entrance door in the north eastern elevation of the building.

It would potentially employ up to 36 full time employees.

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 3 September 2020 Reason: Article 15 Standard Press Notice

Neighbour Notification

Five (5) neighbouring occupiers have been notified of the application.

Representations

No letters of representation have been received in response to the application publicity.

Relevant Site History

No relevant site history.

Consultations

Design For Security - No comments received to date;

Air Quality, Noise, Contaminated Land – No objections, subject to conditions being attached to ensure the development is carried out in full accordance with the remediation strategy described in the submitted Geo- Environmental Assessment and that a verification report, which validates that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed with the Local Planning Authority.

Senior Drainage Engineer - No comments received to date;

Highways – No objections in principle (please refer to the highway section of the appraisal for further details)

Environment Agency - No comments received to date;

Landscape Design - No comments received to date;

City Airport And Heliport - No comments received to date;

United Utilities Water Ltd - No objections subject to conditions to control surface and foul water drainage from the site.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled This policy states that development proposals, road improvement schemes and traffic management measures will be required to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, other people with limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians and cyclists

Page 55

Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.

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

Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.

Unitary Development Plan DES2 - Circulation and Movement This policy states that the design and layout of new development will be required to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site safely, be well related to public transport and local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.

Unitary Development Plan DES9 - Landscaping This policy states that hard and soft landscaping should be provided where appropriate that is of a high quality and would enhance the design of the development, not detract from the safety and security of the area and would enhance the attractiveness and character of the built environment.

Unitary Development Plan DES10 - Design and Crime This policy states that developments must be designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour, and the fear of crime. Development should i) be clearly delineated ii) allow natural surveillance iii) avoid places of concealment iv) encourage activity within public areas.

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

Unitary Development Plan EN18 - Protection of Water Courses This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on surface or ground water.

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

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

Unitary Development Plan ST1 - Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods

Page 56

This policy states that development will be required to contribute towards the creation and maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods.

Unitary Development Plan ST3 - Employment Supply This policy states that a good range of local employment opportunities will be secured by enabling the diversification of the local economy and by using planning obligations to secure local labour contracts and training opportunities.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy

Supplementary Planning Document - Sustainable Design and Construction This policy document expands on policies in Salford’s Unitary Development Plan to provide additional guidance for planners and developers on the integration of sustainable design and construction measures in new and existing developments.

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

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

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

Supplementary Planning Document - Planning Obligations This policy document expands on the policies in Salford’s Unitary Development Plan to provide additional guidance on the use of planning obligations within the city. It explains the city council’s overall approach to the use of planning obligations, and sets out detailed advice on the use of obligations in ensuring that developments make an appropriate contribution to: the provision of open space; improvements to the city’s public realm, heritage and infrastructure; the training of local residents in construction skills; and the offsetting of greenhouse gas emissions.

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

Planning Guidance - Flood Risk and Development The overarching aim of the planning guidance is to ensure that new development in areas at risk of flooding in the city, is adequately protected from flooding and that the risks of flooding are not increased elsewhere as a result of new development.

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

The Revised Draft Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (‘GMSF’) was subject to public consultation at the start of 2019. The next version of the plan is expected to be published in for a period of representations in November 2020. In accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework it is considered that very limited weight can be given to the policies in the GMSF.

The Publication Salford Local Plan: Development Management Policies and Designations (‘Local Plan’) was published on 27 January 2020 and comments were invited until 20 March 2020. This is the version of the document

Page 57

that the city council would like to adopt and has been subject to a significant amount of public consultation in previous stages of its production. However, in accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework the weight that can be given to the Local Plan overall is currently limited. The city council is in the process of considering the comments made to determine the extent to which there are unresolved objections to the policies in the Plan. Those policies with less significant (or no) objections will be capable of carrying more weight than those with significant unresolved objections.

In addition, following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) it is necessary to consider the weight which can be afforded to the policies of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan (paragraph 213 NPPF February 2019).

In terms of this application it is considered that the relevant policies of the UDP can be afforded due weight for the purposes of decision making as the relevant criteria within the UDP policies applicable to the proposed development are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.

Appraisal

The main issues for consideration in the determination of this application are as follows:-

 Principle  Design & Layout  Design & Crime  Residential Amenity  Transport and Highways  Flood risk and drainage  Environmental  Trees  Ecology  Landscaping  Planning Obligations

Principle

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published in 2012 (and updated in February 2019) is a key part of reforms to make the planning system less complex and more accessible; to protect the environment; and to promote sustainable growth.

At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development with a definition given in paragraph 8. This states that there are three dimensions to the concept of sustainable development: economic, social and environmental.

All in all, the NPPF is clear that “local planning authorities should approach decision taking in a positive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development”.

In addition the NPPF planning core principles states that LPA’s should “proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes, business and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs”

Policy E5 of the UDP has several stipulations on development within employment areas, and sets out that planning permission would be granted for the following types of development where consistent with other relevant policies and proposals of the UDP, these are set out below;

1. the modernisation and refurbishment of existing buildings; 2. the redevelopment of land and buildings for employment purposes; 3. improvements to access, circulation, parking and servicing, particularly where this would foster sustainable transport choices; 4. the environmental improvement of the area including, where appropriate, the landscaping of vacant sites; and 5. improvements to property and personal security, where this is consistent with the need to maintain high standards of design.

Page 58

The applicant, Richard Austin Alloys, was founded in 1981. It is one of the UKs largest independent aluminium and stainless steel stockholders. It has warehouses located across the country which house a comprehensive stock range and modern processing facilities.

The requirement for the application has arisen due to the need to expand the company’s existing operations. There is no capacity to expand at their existing premise off Bessemer Road and they are therefore seeking to expand operations on to the application site.

It is considered that the development would be in accordance with policy E5 given that the development would be consistent with item (2) above.

The site is located in an established employment and urban area with industrial uses (both light and general) within close proximity, with the site benefiting from being in an accessible and sustainable locality. Having regard to the above, it is considered that the principle of developing the site for storage and distribution purposes (with ancillary office accommodation) is considered acceptable.

Design and Layout

Cadishead way is a thoroughfare through Irlam/Cadishead which is characterised by open vistas and landscaped areas. There are existing container facilities located approximately 320m to the north east of the site. It is noted that there is no height restriction for the storage of containers on the site adjacent to the Manchester Ship Canal although it appears to be generally stacked four high. The existing universal containers site has a condition attached which restrict the container stack height to five. The majority of buildings in close proximity to the site are single storey.

The site is surrounded by a large number of well-established trees which provides an element of ornamental screening to the site, particularly where it is close to Brinell Drive and Cadishead Way. Of the 10 tree features on site, 2 individual trees, 2 groups and part of another group will need to be removed to facilitate the proposed development. These are located along the north western boundary of the site fronting onto Brinell Way. There loss will be discussed in further detail within the tree section of this report.

The proposed building is of a simple utilitarian commercial design and would be in keeping with that of the other commercial units within the area.

Figure 2: Proposed elevations The layout of the proposal has been influenced by the proposed access point and the need to provide sufficient space for HGV movement within the site. The proposed unit has therefore been orientated and set back from the road to ensure that vehicles ingressing and egressing the site have sufficient room to manoeuvre. An HGV turn circle is identified to the north of the proposed unit.

The building has been designed to offer a functional and high quality structure which will satisfy the occupiers’ requirements whilst simultaneously contributing towards the areas strong identity as a location for economic

Page 59

development. The proposed outdoor canopy will extend off the unit’s northern elevation and will provide covered access to the two loading doors located on the north elevation of the proposed unit.

The unit would be approximately 7.5m in height, 81m in length and 40.m in width. It would be finished with blue microrib and grey trapezoidial cladding. There also would be glazing elements serving the ground and first floor office accommodation.

The scale and massing of the proposed development would be sympathetic to the immediate area and the materials used would respect the industrial nature of the site and buildings.

The site’s means of enclosure is a paladin fence which will be complimented by a landscaping scheme (discussed below).

Having regard to the above, it is not considered that the proposed physical development raises any issues in terms of impact upon the visual amenities of the area or that it would appear incongruous, particularly given the industrial setting. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with policies DES1 and DES8 of the adopted UDP.

Design and Crime

A Crime Impact Statement (CIS) has been submitted in support of the application which has been prepared by Greater Manchester Police – Design for Security.

The development has been assessed against the principles ‘Crime Prevention through Environmental Design’. The development could be vulnerable to opportunist or premeditated attack and theft.

The proposed building has a simple rectangular footprint which features no recessed areas, or similar, which could conceal an offender from view. The development is positioned on the junction of Cadishead Road and Brinell Drive but it will be subject to surveillance from passing vehicles and pedestrians.

On street parking in the local area is in high demand. The proposed development includes a number of parking spaces for staff and visitors, allowing them to park their vehicles in close proximity of the industrial unit without having to rely on street parking, where cars are typically more likely to be targeted by offenders.

The above are all positive aspects of the development.

The CIS recommends that appropriate security measures are incorporated into the proposed scope of work by way of the following measures:-

 The canopy area should be illuminated to a high standard to determine would be offenders or those anti socially minded from targeting this area.  The boundary treatment and pedestrian gates should be to a height of 2.4m, to prevent them being easily scaled and have robust construction to prevent them being damaged to gain entry. It is recommended that close knit paladin fences used such as a 358 style panel.  Shutters and sectional overhead doors had been regularly targeted by offenders to gain access to industrial properties in the area. To prevent shutters or sectional overhead doors being forced open they should be certified to a burglary resistant standard.  Solid block walls should be provided behind any lightweight cladding to a height of 2.4 metres to prevent attacks to the cladding to gain access to the buildings.  The industrial unit should be covered with monitored alarm systems.  Staff lockers should be provided so that staff can safely store personal items during the working day.  The proposed parking areas should be illuminated in accordance with BS5489, and display an average lux level of 10 with uniformity level of no less than 25% . Any pedestrian routes through the site should also be illuminated in accordance with BS5489.

An informative will be attached to advise the applicant that the security measures which are discussed in section 3 of the statement are implemented.

Subject to the aforementioned informative the proposal is considered to be in accordance with policy DES10 of the adopted UDP and the Design and Crime SPD.

Residential Amenity

Page 60

The proposed development is located within an established employment area and will comprise facilities commensurate with the context of the area and the aspirations of the UDP.

Given the location of the application site within the industrial estate there are no residential dwellings within close proximity of the site. The nearest residential dwellings are located approximately 500m to the south west of the site on Colmere Lane and Roseway Avenue. The dwellings are separated from the industrial site by a number of other large industrial units, a line of dense tree and the Manchester to Liverpool Railway lines.

The proposed warehouse building would be approximately 7.5m in height at its highest points. However, given the separation distance which would be retained as well as the presence of the industrial units, wooded area and railway line it is not considered that the building would result in an unacceptable visual impact or be overbearing to the occupiers of these residential dwellings.

The proposed development/use has the potential to be a source of noise, arising mainly from the movement and the loading/unloading of heavy goods vehicles. However, given the siting of the application site in respect of the nearest residential dwellings it is not considered that the operations from the application site would have any unacceptable impact on amenity in respect of noise.

Transport and Highways

The application site is located within an existing Industrial Park setting, off Cadishead Way. The access to the proposed development site is therefore consistent with the access strategy across this industrial area. All vehicular access to the plot would be by way of Brinell Drive, which provides direct access to the primary and local road network.

The site is most easily accessible by car; whilst there are also bus services (No’s 67 & 100) operating along Liverpool Road and Irlam Train Station is located approximately 1000m from the application site. No public rights of way would be created or changed as part of the development proposals.

The applicants have submitted a Transport Statement in support of the application. The Transport Statement seeks to demonstrate that the travel arrangements to the development are appropriate and limits the effects of the increase in travel movements in accordance with Salford’s development plan policies ST14 and A8.

Access Arrangement

Access to the site is proposed via a new priority junction on the B5471 Brinell Drive. The access carriageway will have a width of 8.6m, with footways either side with a width of 2.2m and tactile paving with drop kerb. The site access will be gated and will benefit from 2.4m high steel gates.

In accordance with Manual for Street (MfS) for a 30mph speed limit, 2.4 x 43m visibility splays are achievable in both directions on B5471 Brinell Drive and would be provided.

Footways are proposed on both sides of the access into the site. Footways and crossings for pedestrians will also be provided throughout the internal car park, which will be demarcated using white lining.

From the proposed car park, clear and direct pedestrian routes will be provided to the main entrance, allowing the safe and convenient movement of pedestrians throughout the site, and with minimal conflict with vehicle movements.

Page 61

Figure 3: Proposed site plan

Delivery and Servicing Arrangements

Swept path analysis has been undertaken which shows that a 16.5m articulated HGV can access and egress from the proposed access junction in a forward gear. The analysis also shows that a 16.5m articulated HGV can manoeuvre safely within the site to access the loading doors without impeding on car parking spaces or pedestrian walking routes.

Figure 4: Swept path analysis

Page 62

Proposed Parking Provision

The development proposals will include a total of 35 on-site car parking space, including 2 disabled spaces and 3 Electric Vehicle Charging Point (EVCP) spaces. The majority of the on-site car parking provision is located to the south of the unit, away from the delivery loading doors and HGV turning circle, which are located to the north of the site.

The disabled parking spaces will be located within close proximity to the ancillary office space in order to provide safe and convenient access for all types of disability and visual impaired users. EVCP spaces will also be located within close proximity to the ancillary office space to encourage the use of electric vehicles.

The development proposals will include 10 secure cycle parking spaces which will also be located adjacent to the ancillary office space.

The location of the disabled/ EVCP parking spaces and cycle parking spaces are shown below:-

Trip Generation and Traffic Impact

In order to assess the traffic impact of development trips on the local network and car parking requirement, a trip generation exercise has been under undertaken within the Transport Statement for the proposed use. The applicant has calculated the trip rates using the TRICS database based on the ‘Employment – Industrial Estate’ land use categories. The proposed development is expected to generate 34 two-way trips during the AM peak hour and 31 two-way trips during the PM peak hour.

In terms of traffic impact on the local highway network, the proposed development is expected to generate approximately 1 trip every 2 minutes on average during the AM and PM peak period. When distributed across the local highway network, the applicant considers that the trip generation will have a negligible traffic impact on the local highway and strategic road networks.

During consideration of the application the Councils Highway Engineer recommended the applicant to base their trip rate on existing branches within ownership of Richard Austin Alloys (the applicant). This is to ensure the validity of the traffic generation that is most related to this development and to establish that the appropriate level of on-site car parking is proposed. At the time of writing this report this additional information has not been received, therefore the findings will be reported in an addendum to accompany this report prior to the planning panel meeting. Notwithstanding this, the Highway Engineer has no in principle objections to the proposed development.

Car Parking Provision

The majority of the on-site car parking provision is located to the south of the unit, away from the delivery loading doors and HGV turning circle, which are located to the north of the site. The disabled parking spaces will be located

Page 63

within close proximity to the ancillary office space in order to provide safe and convenient access for all types of disability and visual impaired users. EVCP spaces will also be located within close proximity to the ancillary office space to encourage the use of electric vehicles.

For storage and distribution uses the Councils UDP at Appendix C states that there should be a maximum of 1 space per 45m2 of floor space. This would equate to a maximum of 68 car parking spaces based on a floor area of 3081m2. The proposed development would incorporate 30 car parking spaces; 2 disabled car parking spaces and 3 Electrical Vehicle charging spaces. The proposals will deliver a 3,081m2 storage and distribution unit with a 372m2 of ancillary office space. This equates to 44% of the maximum of 68 spaces normally required by the UDP. In consideration of Salford’s Revised Draft Local Plan parking standards for a 3,081m2 B8 unit, a total of 41 car parking spaces inclusive of 2 disabled car parking bays and 4 cycle parking spaces would be required.

Based on the above information the proposed car parking provision complies with the maximum standards contained in the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan (2004-2016) and Salford’s Revised Draft Local Plan Annex C: Parking Standards (2019).

It is noted that there is a difference between the maximum car parking standards specified in each document, and although the proposed car parking provision complies with both, it is acknowledged that the proposals comply more closely with the Council emerging standards in the revised draft local plan.

As outlined above, in order to provide further reassurance that the proposed on-site car parking provision is adequate, further information has been requested from the applicant about the trip rates for existing branches within ownership of Richard Austin Alloys (the applicant). At the time of writing this report this additional information has not been received, therefore the findings will be reported in an addendum to accompany this report prior to the planning panel meeting.

Flood Risk and Drainage

The site is located within a critical drainage area and in flood zone 1. As the site area is greater than 1 hectare then a Flood Risk Assessment is required. In this case a sequential test was required. A Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy has been submitted in support of the application

Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) includes a list of appropriate land uses in each flood zone dependent on vulnerability to flooding. With reference to Table 2 of the PPG, (below) the proposed development, based on its commercial use, is classed as ‘Less Vulnerable’. This classification of development is appropriate for areas within Flood Zone 1. As the site is located wholly within Flood Zone 1, the sequential test is deemed to have been passed.

The Sequential Test is required to assess flood risk and the NPPG recommends that the test be applied at all stages of the planning process to direct new development to areas with the lowest probability of flooding (Flood Zone 1). The site therefore passes the sequential test and thus the exception test will not be required.

Flood risk has been assessed as low to medium against a range of flood sources. The proposals will follow best practice regarding site drainage to ensure that any surface water runoff from the development is managed, ensuring flood risk is not increased elsewhere. Surface water from the proposed development will be attenuated and discharged directly to the 225mm surface water sewer to the west.

Page 64

Subject to appropriately worded condition is respect of surface water run-off, the site is not deemed to be at risk of flooding or of increasing the risk of flooding elsewhere.

The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with policy EN19 of the adopted UDP.

Environmental

Air Quality

The proposed development is not within the Greater Manchester Air Quality Management Area. The scale and nature of the development is not likely to have a significant impact on traffic. As such no objections are raised to the development on Air Quality Grounds.

Noise

Given the location of the application site within an industrial estate there are no residential dwellings within close proximity of the site. The nearest residential dwellings are located approximately 500m to the south west of the site on Colmere Lane and Roseway Avenue. The dwellings are separated from the industrial site by a number of other large industrial units, a line of dense tree and the Manchester to Liverpool Railway lines. The Councils Air and Noise Officer has been consulted and has no objections to the proposal on noise grounds.

Land Contamination

The site was historically the River Mersey, until the river was realigned into the Ship Canal, and the land backfilled. The site was then part of the Partington Steel Works and is classed as a landfill. Such uses have the potential to leave legacy pollutants within soils or underlying groundwater. Where a pathway exists between a pollutant and a receptor (human health or the wider environment) a pollutant linkage may be created.

The proposed end use is for a commercial building, which are considered a sensitive end use with respect to land contamination risk.

The desk study report submitted with the application has assessed the potential for a pollution linkage between any identified source, and a receptor. The assessment is dated 2013, however the council’s Environment Officer is satisfied conditions are unlikely to have changed in the intervening years. The assessment includes the results of a site investigation, with soil sampling data compared to generic assessment criteria (GAC) for a commercial end use.

Soil sampling confirmed there were no determinants above the GAC. Asbestos was detected, however will remain under the building footprint, or under an environmental cover system placed in areas of soft landscaping.

Ground gas monitoring has been completed and detected Carbon Dioxide and Methane, resulting in a site characterisation of CS2 (gas protection is required). There will need to be verification of the gas membrane to ensure it is fitted in accordance with the manufacturer’s requirements.

The conclusions of the report are accepted and as such the Local Planning Authority have no objection to the application subject to conditions being applied to ensure the development is carried out in full accordance with the approved remediation strategy described in Geo-Environmental Assessment.

Trees

There are a large number of trees located around the site which are not protected by way of Tree Preservation Order.

The tree survey identified a total of 2 individual trees and 8 groups of trees, which have the potential to be impacted by the development proposals. Of these tree features, 5 were awarded a moderate B grade, 2 were awarded a low C grade and 3 were awarded a very low U grade. None were awarded a high A grade. Of the trees all but Tree T2 are located outside of the application site boundary on the grass verges. The applicant will have to seek the relevant permission of the landowner/external management company to enable the removal of these trees. An informative has been attached to advise the applicants of this.

Of the 10 tree features on site, 2 individual trees, 2 groups and part of another group will need to be removed to facilitate the proposed development, three of these features have been categorised as U, unsuitable for retention. The trees to be felled and/or pruned are detailed in the table below:-

Page 65

None of the trees to be felled are category A trees, Groups G1, G5 and Tree T2 are classified as U with T6 and G7 classified as C.1. Trees in these classes should not constrain a development.

In order to ensure the successful integration of retained trees into the proposed development, various tree protection measures will be incorporated into the design which are intended to maintain the trees in a safe and healthy manner. A condition will be attached to ensure the protection measures outlined in Section 6.0 of the arboricultural report are implemented during the construction phase of the development.

In order to ensure that adequate tree replacements are sought in line with Council Policy a condition has been attached requiring two for one replacements for Trees T2 and T6.

It is considered that the proposed development would not result in any unacceptable impact on the remaining trees within the site in accordance with policy DES9 and the Trees and Development SPD.

Ecology

Paragraph 175 of the NPPF states [amongst others] that ‘when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should apply the following principle: a) if significant harm to biodiversity resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused;

The application site and adjacent sites are not allocated in the adopted UDP as either being in a Wildlife Corridor, Site of Specific Scientific Interest (SSSI) Site of Biological Importance or for their ecology value. Therefore the Local Planning Authority does not consider that a Biodiversity/Ecology Survey is required in support of the application.

Notwithstanding this, an informative has been attached to inform the applicants of their responsibilities to birds whist removing the trees required in order to facilitate the development.

Landscaping

The site is brownfield with a Historic Characterisation of ‘Industrial’. The site is relatively flat with a bund to the north- east of the site where the top layer of earth was skimmed and relocated to in the last 1-2 years.

The ground conditions are damp with rushes and Cornus establishing throughout the site. There is potentially buried concrete foundations of former industry. An external management company maintains mature ornamental vegetation and trees which line Brinell Drive and Cadishead Way. This vegetation provides screening of local industrial units.

As stated above, a couple of trees and 3 groups would need to be removed in order to accommodate the proposal. These trees and groups provide mature ornamental planting running along the outside of site boundary.

As there is the need to remove trees to provide the additional entrance situated on Brinell Drive this will reduce small sections of the ‘green corridor’ along Brinell Drive. The proposed development would result in a number of HGV’s on site. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed replacement vegetation must be low level and native to help mitigate the lack of replacement trees. The landscaping detailed below has been proposed in order to mitigate the loss of the trees and groups of shrubs.

To protect tree roots of the external ornamental vegetation, a 1.5m wide buffer has been included within the landscaping scheme. This consists of a mixed native hedgerow resilient against current damp ground conditions on

Page 66

site. The 1.5m wide strip is to be seeded with a low maintenance tussock grass seed mix. This will require little maintenance and though will not appear manicured and is beneficial to a wide range of wildlife.

Pockets of unused space will be seeded with a species rich grass seed mix, consisting of a high percentage of wildflowers. Although seeded areas will require frequent mowing in its first year of establishment, subsequent years will require minimal maintenance receiving two hay cuts in typical meadow management.

Extending along the building frontage, visible to the internal office space, would be ornamental shrub planting suited to damp shady conditions with year round interest. To mitigate the number of trees lost to accommodate the new site entrance on Brinell Drive, eleven native hedgerow trees have been included. These include fruiting trees and trees well suited to damp ground conditions.

Subject to the above landscaping scheme being implemented the proposal is considered to be in accordance with policy DES9 of the adopted UDP.

Sustainability

UDP policy ST14 states that development will be required to minimise its impact on the global environment and major development will be required to demonstrate how they will minimise greenhouse gas emissions.

The Sustainable Design and Construction Supplementary Planning Document expands on policies in Salford’s Unitary Development Plan to provide additional guidance for planners and developers on the integration of sustainable design and construction measures in new and existing developments.

In accordance with National and Local policies the Council supports the use of renewable energy and encourages developers to incorporate sustainable measures into new development to reduce its impact on the environment.

The proposed Energy Strategy comprises energy efficiency measures, including the energy efficiency associated with ASHP (electric) technology to deliver compliance with Part L Building Regulations. An air source heat pump (ASHP) works by transferring heat absorbed from the outside air to an indoor space, such as a home or an office via the wet central heating systems to heat radiators and provide domestic hot water. An overall CO2 emissions reduction of 7.5% below current (2013) Building Regulation standards is then achieved.

The Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) is the world's leading environmental assessment method for buildings.

BREEAM sets the standard for best practice in sustainable building design, construction and operation and has become one of the most comprehensive and widely recognised measures of a building's environmental performance. It uses recognised measures of performance, which are set against established benchmarks, to evaluate a building’s specification, design, construction and use. The measures used represent a broad range of categories and criteria including energy and water use, the internal environment (health and well-being), pollution, transport, materials, waste, ecology and management processes.

The development proposes the erection of a large storage and distribution unit with ancillary office accommodation, together with other associated infrastructure. A BREEAM 2018 New Construction (Industrial) Pre-assessment has been undertaken to establish how the units may achieve the required BREEAM rating. The BREEAM Pre- assessment indicates that a score of 64.1% or more is achievable which, including all mandatory requirements, will deliver a ‘Very Good’ rating (for which a minimum score of 55% is required).

Listed below are a number of measures which will be incorporated into the development and demonstrates the sustainability of the proposal.

 Site timber will comply with sustainability requirements and construction work and related transport and waste will be appropriately managed and monitored.

 Building occupant glare control (window blinds) will be provided, and achievement of an appropriate daylight factor in relevant building areas is anticipated from the scheme design. Internal and external lighting, zoning and controls will be in accordance with British Standards. Consideration will be made for the thermal and acoustic comfort of the future occupants.

Page 67

 A CO2 reduction below 2013 Building Regulations is predicted through a combination of energy efficiency measures (U Values, air tightness, thermal bridging, low energy lighting etc), and the installation of ASHP technology. All external light fittings and controls will be specified in accordance with BREEAM criteria to ensure energy efficiency and minimise light pollution. The buildings consumption of energy will be monitored with submetering of different areas and categories of consumption.

 Water meters with pulsed outputs will be provided on the mains water supply, and a leak detection system is also anticipated. Water efficient fixtures and fittings (e.g. aerated taps, duel flush WCs) are proposed.

 Measures will be sought to reduce the burden on the environment from construction products. This will be achieved by recognising and encouraging measures to optimize construction product consumption efficiency and the selection of products with a low environmental impact (including embodied carbon), over the life cycle of the building. All site timber will be legally compliant, and a sustainable procurement plan is anticipated for a reasonable proportion of materials. The specification of low impact insulating materials is also assumed. Building durability is also anticipated through the specification of durability / protection measures in vulnerable / high traffic areas.

 A Site Waste Management Plan will be prepared, and targets will be set to divert waste from landfill. Appropriate provision for operational recyclable wastes will also be provided.

In summary the development proposals and energy strategy detailed in this report deliver compliance with relevant national and local planning policy. Sustainability requirements, opportunities and constraints will continue to be a key focus of the development’s detailed design, construction and operation.

Subject to the above being incorporated in the proposed development the proposal is considered to be in accordance with policy ST14 of the adopted UDP.

Planning Obligations

The proposed development would normally trigger the site specific planning obligation requirements for transport and public realm, however it is noted that the site formed part of a wider site considered under application 04/48658/HYBEIA which gave full permission for the ‘retention of the existing site remediation and enabling works and new site infrastructure including roads, landscaping and services and outline permission for the provision of B1, B2 and B8 accommodation’. As part of this 2004 application the applicants entered into a S106 agreement which included contributions towards public transport, environmental improvements and the monitoring of air quality.

This S106 agreement has been paid in full. Therefore, the impacts of the development of this site have already been considered and mitigation provided by the obligations set out in the S106 agreement attached to application 04/48658/HYBEIA. It is not considered that the proposed development would trigger any further requirements over and above that already provided and as such no obligations are required in this instance.

Other Issues

The application site is located within the outer consultation zone around a number of hazardous installations. As the site is located within a consultation zone it has been run through the HSE PADHI+ system which advises whether or not to grant planning permission for the development on the grounds of health and safety.

The PADHI+ systems works on two factors; where the development is within established zones around the installation (inner, middle or outer zones) and what the development is in terms of sensitivity.

A PADHI+ consultation has been carried out for this current application and the response is ‘do not advise against’ granting planning permission and therefore no issues are raised in this regard.

Recommendation

Approve

Conditions

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

Page 68

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

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

Drawing No.001 Site Location Plan dated 27.03.2020; Drawing No.001 Site Plan dated 11.03.2020; Drawing No.002 Proposed Floor Plans dated 11.03.2020; Drawing No.002 Rev A Proposed Site plan dated 27.03.2020 Drawing No.003 Warehouse Office Floor Plans dated 11.03.2020 Drawing No.004 Elevations dated 11.03.2020; Drawing No.004 Roof Plan dated 22.07.2020;

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

3. The development shall be carried out in full accordance with the remediation strategy described in Geo- Environmental Assessment, November 2013, Ref: SJE/C2162/4074, Brownfield Solutions and Ground Gas Assessment Report, November 2014, Ref: JD/C2162/4915, Brownfield Solutions .

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

4. Pursuant to condition 3 and prior to first use or occupation a verification report, which validates that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed with the Local Planning Authority, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

7. The vehicle parking, servicing and other vehicular access arrangements shown on the approved plans to serve the development hereby permitted shall be made available for use prior to the development being brought into

Page 69

use (or in accordance with a phasing plan which shall first be agreed in writing with the local planning authority) and shall be retained thereafter for their intended purpose.

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

8. The cycle parking shall be implemented in accordance with the details shown on approved plans and shall be made available for its intended use prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved and shall be retained thereafter.

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

9. The 3 electric vehicle charging points shall be implemented in accordance with the details shown on approved drawing 002 Rev A Site Plan dated 27.03.2020 and shall be made available for its intended use prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved and shall be retained thereafter.

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

10. The tree protection measures outlined in Section 6.0 of the Arboricultural Planning Statement prepared by RSK ADAS Ltd, dated April 2020 shall be implemented prior to any works taking place on site and shall remain until all development is completed.

Reason: To safeguard important trees on / adjacent to the site and to ensure that adequate provision is made for their protection whilst the development is carried out in accordance with the Trees and Development Supplementary Planning Document and the National Planning Policy Framework.

11. The felled trees (T2 & T6) shall be replaced in accordance with a tree replacement scheme on a ratio of 2:1 which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be submitted prior to the commencement of development and shall include details of: tree species; tree sizes (including the minimum height and circumference of stem at 1m from the ground level); plan indicating the location of the replacement trees and a timetable for tree planting.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory method of surface water disposal to reduce the risk of flooding elsewhere in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and seeks to provide betterment in terms of water quality and surface water discharge rates and meets requirements set out in the following documents;

 NPPF,  Water Framework Directive and the NW River Basin Management Plan  The national Planning Practice Guidance and the Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage Systems (March 2015)  Manchester, Salford, Trafford Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) (2011) and associated technical guidance  Environment Agency Pollution Prevention Guidelines (now withdrawn)  Flood Risk Assessment/SuDS Requirements for new developments (Salford's SuDS Checklist)

Reason for pre-commencement condition: The solution for surface water disposal must be understood prior to works commencing on site as it could affect how underground works are planned and carried out.

Page 70

Notes to Applicant

1. The applicant is advised that they have a duty to adhere to the regulations of Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, the National Planning Policy Framework 2018 and the current Building Control Regulations with regards to contaminated land. The responsibility to ensure the safe development of land affected by contamination rests primarily with the developer.

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

3. The applicants are advised to incorporate the following design and crime measures into the proposal:-

The canopy area should be illuminated to a high standard to determine will be offenders or those anti socially minded from target in this area.

The boundary treatment and peculiar pedestrian gates should be to a height of 2.4m, to prevent them being easily scaled and have robust construction to prevent them being damaged to gain entry. It is recommended that close knit paladin fences used such as a 358 style panel.

Shutters and sectional overhead doors had been regularly targeted by offenders to gain access to industrial properties in the area. To prevent shutters or sectional overhead doors being forced open they should be certified to a burglary resistant standard.

Solid block walls should be provided behind any lightweight cladding to a height of 2.4 metres to prevent attacks to the cladding to gain access to the buildings.

The industrial unit should be covered with monitored alarm systems.

Staff lockers should be provided so that staff can safely store personal items during the working day.

The proposed parking areas should be illuminated in accordance with BS5489, and display an average lux level of 10 with uniformity level of no less than 25% .Any pedestrian routes through the site should also be illuminated in accordance with BS5489.

Page 71 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5e

APPLICATION No: 20/75027/FUL APPLICANT: Peel Land & Property Environmental Ltd LOCATION: Port Salford Way, Eccles, PROPOSAL: Construction and operation of a temporary recycled aggregate facility comprising waste soil and mineral wash plant, temporary access road and ancillary plant and infrastructure WARD: Irlam

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application relates to an irregularly shaped parcel of scrubland extending approximately 3.9ha to the south of the A57 Liverpool Road within the Strategic Regional Site of Port Salford.

The site is screened to the north, north-east and western aspects by an established landscaped buffer and public footpath (PROW 2) delineating the main carriageway of the A57. Beyond the main carriageway lies City Airport and associated buildings (of which two are Grade II listed) and a pair of semi-detached properties. The south- east boundary is formed by the meandering Salteye Brook whilst the western aspect comprises the distribution facility of Great Bear and beyond, the wholesalers Makro. The AJ Bell Stadium and recently constructed Aldi Supermarket lies further east.

Description of Proposal

Permission is sought for the formation of a temporary recycling facility comprising an inert waste soil and mineral washing plant with associated stockpile area, new access road and ancillary plant and infrastructure.

Page 73

Figure 1: Proposed Site Plan

In order to facilitate the proposal, the development will require:  A washing plant with a throughput of c.240,000 tonnes per annum, apportioned as follows: o Recycling aggregates – c.192,000 tonnes per annum; o Cohesive Engineering fill material – c.48,000 tonnes per annum.  Up to 2,900 sqm feedstock and product stockpile area for storage of materials prior to and following processing (up to a maximum height of 6.5m);  Construction of temporary haul road from Port Salford Way into the site;  Ancillary plant and site infrastructure comprising: o Up to two front-loading shovels; o Wheel wash facility; o Weighbridge; o Substation; o Fencing; o Car parking; and o 2no. Portacabins to provide office and welfare facilities.  Borehole to extract groundwater to feed into wash plant; and  External lighting in plant and working areas.

It is estimated that the site will generate approximately 150 2-way heavy goods vehicle (HGV) movements per day, or 7 HGV movements per hour in each direction.

Page 74

The site would typically operate between 0700 - 1800 Monday to Friday and 0800 - 1400 on Saturdays, with maintenance periods over the weekend or on evenings.

Approximately six staff would be employed on a full-time basis to operate and maintain the facility.

Figure 2: Proposed Washing Facility

Figure 3: Proposed CGI of Washing Facility

Page 75

Figure 5: Typical Office and Welfare Portacabin Plans

Reasoning behind the temporary waste recycling facility

The applicant explains that the excavated waste transported to the temporary recycling facility will be imported from other Peel developments across Greater Manchester, including that arising from the implementation of Port Salford. In this regard, the delivery of the Port Salford development will require a considerable volume of material to be excavated and therefore the intention is to divert some of this inert material to the plant and recover as usable construction materials. This includes; aggregates, sand, minerals and other sub-soil materials.

Method processing materials

Mechanical washing process

Once transported from the source, the imported waste will be deposited into designated waste reception areas whereby plant machinery will filter the material through the washing process, resulting in mineral based products.

As explained by the applicant, the washing process is a wet based procedure whereby rainwater is harvested from on site run-off and groundwater from an abstraction borehole. The plant will then recirculate water in order to encourage recycling and further reduce ongoing water supply requirements.

The waste washing process has three stages:

Stage 1: The first part of the process is to remove oversized fragments from the waste through screening and filtering. Fragments which are 70mm in size or less are transferred for washing and the oversized transferred for further processing;

Stage 2: The small fragments travel up a conveyor and an over band magnet removes ferrous metals. The waste is then washed and agitated through a series of screens and a log wash to separate the clay and silts from sand and aggregates. Conveyors are then used to produce stockpiles of different grades of high-quality recycled sand and aggregates. The clay and silt fraction remain as suspended fine particles within the process water; and

Stage 3: This process water is transferred to a settlement tank and the sludge is separated from the water. The sludge is pumped to a filter press, which compresses the fine silt/clay particles to produce a fine graded cohesive mineral. This material is then stockpiled for use as a construction engineering fill. The process water is then recirculated into the washing process.

Any residual waste from the process (typically including light weight organic mix of woods and plastics) will be sent to appropriately permitted disposal and recovery sites in accordance with the waste hierarchy and recovered as Refuse Derived Fuel. Additionally, ferrous metals will be removed from the waste and these will be transferred for onward recovery.

The development will not produce any hazardous, toxic or noxious substances or pollutants, nor generate pollutants or contaminants that could affect ground or water resources. The applicant will also obtain a bespoke Environmental Permit for the process.

Page 76

Recycled material

The recycled aggregate, and all the produced cohesive engineering fill, will be made available for use on the Port Salford project. It is expected that a proportion of material will also be made available to the local market dependant on on-site requirements.

A weighbridge office and wheelwash facility will be used to measure the throughput of materials, and to ensure that estate roads remain clean without mud deposited on the roads.

Publicity

First round of consultation:

Site Notice: Non HH Site notice departure Date Displayed: 13 May 2020 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 9 April 2020 Reason: Article 15 Affect Public right of Way Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building

Second round of consultation due to slight alteration to the red line boundary:

Site Notice: Non HH Site notice departure Date Displayed: 17 October 2020 Reason: Wider Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Setting of listed building Date Displayed: 17 October 2020 Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building

Site Notice: Non HH Affecting public right of way Date Displayed: 17 October 2020 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 15 October 2020 Reason: Article 15 Affect Public right of Way Reason: Affecting setting of Listed Building

Neighbour Notification

10 neighbouring occupiers have been notified of the application by letter dated 16 November 2020.

Representations

No letters of representation have been received in response to the application publicity.

Relevant Site History

Site Context: Port Salford

Port Salford is locally known as the ‘Barton site’. The Barton site is a Strategic Regional Site and a significant area of opportunity for investment growth and development as prescribed by Policy E1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan (UDP). The port forms part of the Atlantic Gateway project, a development strategy for the North West of England which centers on the corridor between Greater Manchester and Merseyside.

Positioned approximately 10km west of the Manchester Regional Centre, the location is intersected by a number of nationally important transport routes including the Manchester Ship Canal, the Manchester to Liverpool railway line, the motorways of the M62 and M60 and the A57 Liverpool Road.

In 2009 (03/47344/EIAHYB), the City granted a hybrid planning permission for development of the Port Salford site (as a whole), including extensive off-site highway (Western Gateway Infrastructure Scheme ‘WGIS’). The proposal included provision of up to 154,500 sqm of warehousing floorspace, alongside a new port facility

Page 77

including canal berths and quay and rail link and sidings. Since this time, several changes to the permission have been approved by the City and the latest version of the permission was issued in 2015 (ref:14/65747/EIAHYB).

Subsequent to the 2014 permission, reserved matters approval (ref:14/65735/REM) was granted for the erection of one of four commercial units. The unit has been constructed and is operated by the distributor, Great Bear. As part of the approval, part-WGIS was required, comprising a new vehicular crossing over the Manchester Ship Canal, alongside a new and enhanced link for the A57 Liverpool Road.

In December 2017, reserved matters approvals followed for Units 2, 3 and 4 (refs: 17/70437/REM & 17/70438/REM). The delivery of unit 2 is only permissible following provision of the rail link, with the provision of units 3 and 4 only permissible on the provision of full-WGIS which comprises improved road connections at junction 10 and 11 of the M60.

Relevant planning applications

03/46028/OUT - Outline planning application for the erection of 20,000 seat sports stadium with associated integrated facilities including a 208 bedroom hotel, gym, exhibition space (6340 sq m), bars (Class A4), restaurants (Class A3), takeaways (Class A5), museum, offices, media/creche rooms, gym and free standing 21,367 sq metres non-food bulk retail development, new access off Liverpool Road and new road through Eccles Waste Water Treatment site via existing access off Peel Green Road and bus interchange, parking and alterations to J11 M60/A57 Liverpool Road. Approved 02.11.2006

03/47344/EIAHYB - Multi-modal freight interchange comprising rail served distribution warehousing, rail link and sidings, inter-modal and ancillary facilities including a canal quay and berths, vehicle parking, hardstanding, landscaping, re-routing of Salteye Brook, a new signal controlled access to the A57 and related highway works including realignment of the A57 and improvements to the M60 (Port Salford). Canal crossing and associated roads and other highway improvements as part of the Western Gateway Infrastructure Scheme (WGIS). Approved 16.07.2009.

12/61611/EIAHYB - Application to vary or remove a number of conditions attached to planning permission 03/47344/EIAHYB for a multi-modal freight interchange comprising rail served distribution warehousing, rail link and sidings, inter-modal and ancillary facilities including a canal quay and berths, vehicle parking, hardstanding, landscaping, re-routing of Salteye Brook, a new signal controlled access to the A57 and related highway works including realignment of the A57 and improvements to the M60 (Port Salford). Canal crossing and associated roads and other highway improvements as part of the Western Gateway Infrastructure Scheme (WGIS). Approved 05.07.2012

12/61299/NMA - Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 03/47344/EIAHYB for insertion of condition listing approved plans. Approved 17.02.2012

12/62701/EIAHYB - Application to vary condition number 4 (approved plan condition) attached to planning permission 12/61611/ EIAHYB for a multi-modal freight interchange comprising rail served distribution warehousing, rail link and sidings, inter-modal and ancillary facilities including a canal quay and berths, vehicle parking, hardstanding, landscaping, re-routing of Salteye Brook, a new signal controlled access to the A57 and related highway works including realignment of the A57 and improvements to the M60 (Port Salford). Canal crossing and associated roads and other highway improvements as part of the Western Gateway Infrastructure Scheme (WGIS). The amendment relates to a road realignment of part WGIS. Approved 05.09.2013

13/63117/DISCON - Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 16 (drainage), 29, (Salteye Brook mitigation), 32 (crime prevention strategy), 33 (local recruitment), attached to planning permission 12/61611/EIAHYB. Not discharged 31.05.2013

13/63413/EIAHYB - Variation of condition 4 (approved plans) on planning application 12/61611/EIAHYB. Amendment to alignment of railway. Approved 03.04.2014

14/65089/DISCON - Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 3 (supporting statement, condition 4 ( Environmental Management Plan) attached to planning permission 13/63513/FUL. Discharged 01.10.2014

14/64784/EIAHYB - Variation of Condition 4 (approved plans) on planning application 13/63413/EIAHYB. Disposed of 04.08.2015

Page 78

14/65747/EIAHYB - Variation of conditions 9 (completion of Part WGIS) and 10 (rail link in place) on planning permission 13/63413/EIAHYB. Approved 19.03.2015

15/66364/DISCON - Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 23 (ground remediation) attached to planning permission 13/63413/EIAHYB ·& 14/65747/EIAHYB. Partial discharge of condition 22.06.2015

15/66694/DISCON - Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 5 (Construction Programme), 6 (Construction Method Statement), 8 (Transportation Steering Group), 20 (Noise and Vibration Plan), 23 (Site Investigation Report), 24 (Contamination), 25 (Fuels and Chemicals), 26 (Trees), 27 (Landscape Scheme), 32 (Security and Crime Prevention Strategy), 33 (Local Construction Training) and 35 (Invasive Species) attached to planning permission 14/65747/EIAHYB. Discharged 05.01.2016

15/67405/NMA - Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 14/65735/REM for the addition of a gate house, with associated paladin fencing to match the fence on the original scheme, and the addition of a fuel tank, lpg tank, smoking shelters and a vehicle wash facility. Approved 29.01.2016

15/67181/DISCON - Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 4 (Details and Samples of Materials) attached to planning permission 14/65735/REM. Discharged 12.02.2016

16/68107/DISCON - Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 14 (Highways Works), 17 (Road Signing), 18 (Car Parking), 22 (Operational Noise and Vibration), 32 (Crime prevention), 33 (Local Construction Training) attached to planning permission 14/65747/EIAHYB. Discharged 02.10.2017

17/70437/REM – Details of reserved matters for layout, scale, appearance and landscaping for the provision of one warehouse building accommodating 35,497sqm (GIA) of B8 floor-space, pursuant to planning permission 14/65747/EIAHYB, along with associated gatehouse, car/cycle parking; boundary treatments; landscaping and other external works. Approved 21.12.2017

17/70438/REM - Details of reserved matters for layout, scale, appearance and landscaping for the provision of two warehouse buildings accommodating 81,189sqm (GIA) of B8 floor-space, pursuant to planning permission 14/65747/EIAHYB, along with associated gatehouses, car/cycle parking; boundary treatments; landscaping and other external works. Approved 21.12.2017

19/74188/NMA - Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 14/65747/EIAHYB to Conditions 4, 5, 6, 10 ,11, 20, 23, 26, 27, 29, 32, 33 and 35. Approved 30.10.2019

19/74187/NMA - Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 17/70438/REM to amend Condition 1 (approved plans). Approved 30.10.2019

19/74471/NMA - Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 17/70438/REM to amend the wording of Condition 1 (as revised, as per the most recent NMA application) to delete reference to the existing plan Ref: C1380-105 and instead, insert reference to the new plan Ref: C1380-105 Rev B. Approved 09.12.2019

19/74470/NMA - Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 14/65747/EIAHYB Conditions 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 20, 23, 26, 27, 29, 32, 33 and 35 of the hybrid planning permission. Approved 09.12.2019

Consultations

Environment Agency – No objection subject to the attachment of conditions relating to the submission of a landscape and ecological reinstatement plan, further site investigation, remediation and verification plans, control of surface water infiltration details, a drainage scheme, and a detailed construction method statement.

Senior Drainage Engineer - No objection subject to the attachment of conditions relating to the submission of a drainage scheme, and a restriction to the surface water drainage rate to 3.5 litres/second.

Air Quality, Noise, Contaminated Land - No objection. The regime of the Environmental Permit is sufficient to ensure air quality, dust, noise and land contamination are regulated.

Page 79

Highways - No objection subject to the attachment of a condition requesting the submission of a construction environmental management plan.

Rights Of Way - No objection subject to the attachment of an informative relating to the protection of the existing public footpath.

Transport For Greater Manchester (TFGM) - No objection. TfGM refer to the Local Highway Authority to determine whether the details provided are acceptable and / or if a condition would be required to avoid HGV movements during the peak hours.

Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service - No objection subject to the attachment of a condition requesting that a programme of archaeological recording works is undertaken and submitted to the Local Planning Authority prior to development related groundworks taking place.

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit (GMEU) - No objection subject to the attachment of conditions relating to the implementation of the submitted Reasonable Avoidance Method Statement, biodiversity enhancement measures, a method statement to control invasive non-native species, and the avoidance of vegetation clearance between March-August.

Landscape Design - No objection in principle, however further information should be submitted through the submission of a comprehensive landscape proposals plan which seeks, where necessary, the retention and enhancement of the existing landscape buffer strip along the A57.

United Utilities Water Ltd - No objection subject to the development being carried out in accordance with the principles of the submitted Flood Risk Assessment and that prior to occupation a sustainable drainage management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development be submitted to the local planning authority.

Design For Security - No objection.

City Airport And Heliport - No objection.

The Open Spaces Society - No comments received to date.

Peak and Northern Footpaths Society - No comments received to date.

Ramblers Association (Manchester Area) - No comments received to date.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan ST1 - Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods This policy states that development will be required to contribute towards the creation and maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods.

Unitary Development Plan ST3 - Employment Supply This policy states that a good range of local employment opportunities will be secured by enabling the diversification of the local economy and by using planning obligations to secure local labour contracts and training opportunities.

Unitary Development Plan ST15 - Historic Environment This policy states that historic and cultural assets that contribute to the character of the city will be preserved and, wherever possible and appropriate, enhanced.

Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.

Unitary Development Plan DES2 - Circulation and Movement

Page 80

This policy states that the design and layout of new development will be required to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site safely, be well related to public transport and local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.

Unitary Development Plan DES9 - Landscaping This policy states that hard and soft landscaping should be provided where appropriate that is of a high quality and would enhance the design of the development, not detract from the safety and security of the area and would enhance the attractiveness and character of the built environment.

Unitary Development Plan DES10 - Design and Crime This policy states that developments must be designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour, and the fear of crime. Development should i) be clearly delineated ii) allow natural surveillance iii) avoid places of concealment iv) encourage activity within public areas.

Unitary Development Plan DEV6 – Incremental Development This policy states that sites within or immediately adjacent to an area identified for major development, planning permission will not be granted for incremental development that would unacceptably hamper or reduce the development options for that wider area.

Unitary Development Plan E1 - Strategic Regional Site, Barton This policy states that one, or a combination of any two of the following types of development will be permitted on the Barton Strategic Regional Site: A) A mix of light and general industry, warehouse and distribution, and ancillary offices and other uses; B) A multi-modal freight interchange, incorporating rail and water based freight handling facilities, and a rail link to the Manchester-Newton-le Willow- Liverpool railway line C) A sports stadium for Salford City Reds with a maximum capacity of 20,000 spectators, and appropriate enabling development.

Proposals must i) make an appropriate contribution towards road and services infrastructure ii) secure improvements to public transport iii) minimise adverse impact on visual amenity, views and vista in the area; enhance the Liverpool Road corridor; v) maintain nature conservation interest of the site vi) have no unacceptable impact on local environmental quality vii) maintain the flood alleviation capabilities of Salteye Brook; viii) provide for a strategic route alongside the Manchester Ship Canal; ix) make appropriate provision for the training and employment of local residents during construction and operational phases.

Unitary Development Plan A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled This policy states that development proposals, road improvement schemes and traffic management measures will be required to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, other people with limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians and cyclists

Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.

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

Unitary Development Plan EN8 - Nature Conservation of Local Importance

Page 81

This policy states that development that would adversely affect the nature conservation value of a Site of Biological Importance, a Local Nature Reserve, or a priority habitat for Salford as identified in the Greater Manchester Biodiversity Action Plan, will only be permitted where the benefits of the development clearly outweigh the reduction in the nature conservation interest of the site; the detrimental impact has been minimised as far as is practicable; appropriate mitigation measure have been provided. Conditions or planning obligations will be used to ensure the protection, enhancement and management of these sites and habitats.

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

Unitary Development Plan EN18 - Protection of Water Courses This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on surface or ground water.

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

Unitary Development Plan R5 - Countryside Access Network This policy states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would result in the permanent obstruction or closure of any part of the Countryside Access Network, unless an alternative route is provided that is equally attractive and convenient. New development that is proposed on a site needed for the provision of a new route or link as part of the Countryside Access Network will be required to incorporate that route/link as part of the development. Correspondence

Unitary Development Plan CH2 - Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building This policy states that development will not be granted that would have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building.

Unitary Development Plan CH5 - Archaeology This policy states that planning permission will not be granted for development which would have an unacceptable impact on features of archaeological importance. Where planning permission is granted that will affect known or suspected remains, planning conditions will be imposed to secure the recording and evaluation of the remains.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework National Planning Policy Guidance National Planning Policy for Waste

Local Planning Policy

Supplementary Planning Document - Sustainable Design and Construction This policy document expands on policies in Salford’s Unitary Development Plan to provide additional guidance for planners and developers on the integration of sustainable design and construction measures in new and existing developments.

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

Page 82

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

Supplementary Planning Guidance – Trees and Development This SPD has been prepared to give information to all those involved in the development process with regard to trees and other landscape features of importance to the character and appearance of the area. The document indicates that development which would have a detrimental impact upon any important landscape features will not be permitted unless sufficient justification is provided and mitigation measures enacted for suitable compensation to ensure any harm is reduced.

Greater Manchester Waste Development Plan

The Greater Manchester Joint Waste Development Plan Document (the ‘Waste Plan’) formally became part of Salford's development plan on 1 April 2012, superseded the previously relevant policies ST16 and D1 of the UDP.

The waste plan was prepared jointly between the ten Greater Manchester authorities, and it identifies how Greater Manchester will deliver the spatial vision for waste development to 2027.

The overall aim of the Waste Plan is to provide a sound spatial planning framework to deliver sustainable waste management in Greater Manchester consistent with national planning policies and the Waste Strategy for England 2007. The purpose is to provide sufficient opportunities for new waste management facilities to come forward within Greater Manchester. In this regard the relevant policies of the Waste Plan include:

Policy 6 - Inert residual waste disposal This policy states that applications for inert residual waste disposal will be permitted where the applicant can demonstrate that: (i) the proposal meets the requirements of the Waste Plan, relevant Core Strategy and other relevant national and local planning policy, including the requirement to move waste up the hierarchy; and (ii) the proposal contributes to the Waste Plan aim and objectives.

Policy 10 - Unallocated Sites This policy states that applications for waste management facilities on unallocated sites will be permitted where the applicant can demonstrate that: (i) the proposal fits within the spatial strategy set out in the Waste Plan and contributes to the Waste Plan aims and objectives; and (ii) the proposal meets the same assessment criteria as allocated sites. This purpose of this policy is to provide a positive and flexible approach to the delivery of waste management facilities.

Other Matters

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

The Revised Draft Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (‘GMSF’) was subject to public consultation at the start of 2019. The next version of the plan is expected to be published in for a period of representations in November 2020. In accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework it is considered that very limited weight can be given to the policies in the GMSF.

The Publication Salford Local Plan: Development Management Policies and Designations (‘Local Plan’) was published on 27 January 2020 and comments were invited until 20 March 2020. This is the version of the document that the city council would like to adopt and has been subject to a significant amount of public consultation in previous stages of its production. However, in accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework the weight that can be given to the Local Plan overall is currently limited. The city council is in the process of considering the comments made to determine the extent to which there are unresolved objections to the policies in the Plan. Those policies with less significant (or no) objections will be capable of carrying more weight than those with significant unresolved objections.

In addition, following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) it is necessary to consider the weight which can be afforded to the policies of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan (paragraph 213 NPPF February 2019).

Page 83

In terms of this application it is considered that the relevant policies of the UDP can be afforded due weight for the purposes of decision making as the relevant criteria within the UDP policies applicable to the proposed development are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.

Environmental Impact Assessment

In accordance with Part 2 Regulation 6 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 (EIA Regulations) the proposal falls under the definition of ‘Schedule 2 Development’ Other Projects 11b; Installations for the disposal of waste (unless included in ‘Schedule 1’) which has a site area exceeding 0.5 of a hectare.

Having had regard the criteria under ‘Schedule 3’ of the EIA Regulations, the Local Planning Authority consider that the proposed development is not EIA development and accordingly does not require the support of an Environmental Statement.

Appraisal

The main considerations in the determination of this application include: - Principle of Development; o Barton Strategic Regional Site; o Waste Management; o Economic; - Siting, Scale and Design; o Landscape and Arboriculture; - Heritage; o Designated Heritage Assets; o Archaeology; - Amenity; o Air Quality . Dust o Noise o Lighting Land Contamination - Transport and Highways; o Impact on Public Right of Way Network - Flood Risk and Drainage; and - Ecology.

Principle of Development

Barton Strategic Regional Site

The application site is located centrally within the Barton Strategic Regional Site as prescribed by Policy E1 of the UDP. In this regard the policy states that one, or a combination of any two, of the following types of development will be permitted on the Barton Strategic Regional Site: A) A mix of light and general industry, warehouse and distribution, and ancillary offices and other uses; B) A multi-modal freight interchange, incorporating rail and water based freight handling facilities, and a rail link to the Manchester-Newton-le Willow- Liverpool railway line C) A sports stadium for Salford City Reds with a maximum capacity of 20,000 spectators, and appropriate enabling development.

The reasoned justification for this requirement is due to the strategic nature of the site in providing the potential for the generation of a significant number of jobs which would help to support the economy of the Western Gateway and the wider conurbation.

The proposal seeks the temporary siting of a recycling facility for non-hazardous waste. This represents a departure from the development plan and therefore requires justification in order to demonstrate that the proposal would not detrimentally impact upon the deliverability of the Strategic Regional Site for its intended purpose.

Page 84

The applicant maintains that the recycling facility would represent an effective use of land (as promoted through paragraph 117 of the NPPF) through the delivery of a sustainable recycling operation which would be decommissioned upon the implementation of Unit 4 relating to permission 17/70438/REM of 14/65848/EIAHYB for the wider Port Salford development. It is also evidenced that the proposal would not compromise the deliverability of the rail link which will be constructed at a sufficient distance from the boundary of the application site.

Figure 6: Comparison plan

As evidenced above, the facility is to be sited on the approved location of Unit 4 and to the north-eastern section of the car park associated with Unit 3. As per 17/70438/REM. Development beyond Unit 2 can only be implemented once WGIS has been delivered in full with the applicant estimating this to be seven years away. As a consequence the applicant proposes an alternative temporary use of the land which would otherwise lay vacant. The applicant also states that the proposed temporary use would improve the sustainability of construction activities connected to the Port Salford development in accordance with Peel L&P’s adopted Five Year Sustainability Plan which includes commitments to adopt United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This would contribute towards the presumption in favour of sustainable development as prescribed by paragraph 11 of the NPPF.

The key benefit and purpose of the proposal is to enhance the available waste management infrastructure by investing in a facility which can recover secondary aggregates from materials that are otherwise disposed of and using them in future development at Port Salford. It will also lead to a reduction in the importing of materials from outside the local authority and contribute towards construction, operational and supply chain opportunities.

As clarified by the applicant, the recycling facility will be decommissioned prior to Unit 4 coming forward, and thus fulfilling the requirements of Policy E1 and the wider Port Salford hybrid consent. The applicant has also agreed to a suitable timeframe restricting the operation of the recycling facility for a period of eight years. This can be conditioned in the grant of planning permission and thus is considered to accord with Policy DEV6 of the UDP which requires that incremental development does not unacceptably hamper or reduce the development options for that wider area.

It is however important to emphasise that the acceptability of this development is only supported on the basis that it is operational for a temporary period of time and would not be supported in the long term.

On this basis the temporary use of the land for the recycling of inert waste to be used locally for the deliverability of Port Salford is considered acceptable in principle.

Waste Management

Page 85

The National Planning Policy for Waste and the core principles of the Greater Manchester Waste Development Plan seek to deliver sustainable waste management by supporting the provision of sites and facilities which meet the needs of the local area.

The application site is not allocated as a waste site or area within the Greater Manchester Joint Waste Development Plan Document (2012) and Greater Manchester has sufficient recycling capacity available to deal with the recyclable element of the Construction Demolition and Excavation (CDEW) waste stream. However, in this instance, the provision of a temporary recycling facility which contributes towards the delivery of Port Salford and responds to the wider aspirations of reusing secondary aggregates would help deliver a sustainable waste management supply through a reduction in the dependency of primary resources. This is supported by paragraph 204(b) of the NPPF which encourages Local Planning Authorities to, as far as practicable, take account of the contribution that substitute or secondary and recycled materials and minerals waste would make to the supply of materials, before considering extraction of primary materials.

The applicant has demonstrated that the excavation of locally sourced waste material which would otherwise be transported to other facilities outside Greater Manchester does not encourage nor promote sustainability. The proposal would therefore make a positive contribution to the provision of a temporary waste management facility without unacceptably undermining the strategic aims of the Greater Manchester Waste Development Plan in directing waste development towards the ‘right places’ (paragraph 13). It will also accord with the provisions of the Policies 6 and 10 of the Plan insofar that the proposed facility is easily accessible, is sensitively positioned away from sensitive receptors, and reflects the existing pattern of economic development in Greater Manchester by way of being close to where additional waste is expected to arise from (Port Salford). As such, the proposal is considered to be compliant with the National Planning Policy for Waste and the relevant policies of the Greater Manchester Waste Development Plan.

Economic

It is advised that the proposed waste management facility would employ 5 people. With the site currently disused, the proposals would bring social and economic benefits in accordance with ST1 and ST3 of the UDP.

Siting, scale and design

The application site is located within a strategic area designated for industrial purposes. The proposal seeks the temporary use of the land as a waste recycling facility which will be viewed together with the ongoing development of Port Salford.

As upheld within the supporting documentation, the scheme layout has been designed to ensure operational efficiency whilst safeguarding important vistas. The site benefits from extensive intervening vegetation and an elevated verge which will largely obscure the development from the adjoining A57 Liverpool Road. This vegetation is due to the retained and enhanced, where required, to ensure a consistent level of landscaping is afforded to the boundary treatment. In this regard, from the main access road via a weighbridge, the site splits into two zones. The north contains the feed stockpile, office and welfare portacabins whilst the south would comprise the washing plant, post-processing stockpiling, associated storage bays and both surface water and impermeable lagoon.

The washing plant, extending to a maximum height of 13.8m with accompanying equipment of 9m in height, is ideally positioned furthest from the carriageway and therefore would not represent a discordant or otherwise harmful feature to the detriment of the existing physical characteristics of the surrounding industrial context. Furthermore, it is important to recognise that the proposed development is only temporary and will be replaced in time by Units 3 and 4 which are of considerable scale and of utilitarian design.

The applicant has agreed to a condition restricting the maximum height of the stockpiling to 6.5 meters. The reasoned justification for this is that this corresponds with the height of the conveyor belt on the wash plant and is therefore considered by the applicant a logical reference point for establishing the maximum height. Additionally, it is acknowledged that due to nature of stockpiling, the height of material is staggered whereby the actual peak(s) of any stockpile(s) would be further away from the site’s boundary, and the A57 Liverpool Road. In any event, it is explained that it is very rare that stockpiles would reach the maximum height as material is fed into the wash plant for processing or taken away post-treatment on a frequent basis in accordance with the site operator’s ‘backfilling’ procedures (where vehicles arrive with demolition material and leave with construction material). The

Page 86

maximum 6.5m height attributed to the stockpiling is recommended to be regulated as part of a condition attached to any grant of permission.

It is however recognized that there will be long distance views from the M60, particularly when crossing the Manchester Ship Canal, however this development would be read in context with the commercialised nature of the area and would not harm the local identity or distinctiveness of the landscape.

The site is to be enclosed by a 2m high palisade security fence with two proposed gated vehicular access routes to the west of the site. Full details of the boundary treatments have not been submitted, therefore it is considered reasonable to request this information through the attachment of an appropriately worded condition.

Subject to the incorporation of the aforementioned condition, the proposed development is considered to comply with the requirements of Policy DES1 of the UDP and paragraph 127 of the NPPF.

Landscape and Arboriculture

The proposal is supported by an Arboricultural Impact Assessment and amended landscaping proposals plan (D8211.001).

The results of the baseline tree survey demonstrate that none of the trees to be removed are of high quality, nor are they worthy of protection through a Tree Protection Order. In this regard it is only proposed to fell two category U Crack Willow trees (G61) located to the north-east, adjacent to the A57 Liverpool Road, and a small proportion of young self-seeded Willow and Hawthorn identified as having a group value of category C. The remainder of the trees will be retained in situ (G19) and protected from the development through the incorporation of palisade fencing as outlined within the Arboricultural Impact Assessment and accompanying Mitigation Plan and tree protection fencing specification sheet. These can be conditioned in the grant of any planning permission.

It is also recognized that the majority of the tree removal is associated with, or has already been applied for, as part of the wider Port Salford development permitted through planning application 17/70438/REM.

In respect to the landscaping works, the Council’s Landscape Officer is generally supportive of the proposals however notes that at the present time, insufficient information has been provided as to what additional planting is proposed to enhance the retained vegetation, alongside detail of the boundary treatments and hard surfacing. There are also questions regarding the enhancement of the adjacent verge through the sowing of wildflowers, the management of the hedgerow and shrub planting, and any biodiversity net gains proposed through the removal of existing scrub across the application site. This has been requested as part of a comprehensive landscape proposals plan.

Notwithstanding the comments made by the Landscape Officer, it is important to note that the development is temporary and therefore any comprehensive landscape proposals would also be temporary, resulting in the removal of the vegetation at a later date to facilitate the development of Units 3 and 4 of the overarching Port Salford scheme.

On this basis it is considered reasonable to attach a condition requesting the submission of a landscaping plan to include the provision of biodiversity net gains and boundary treatments, yet to provide a comprehensive landscaping scheme involving additional tree planting and extensive detail would go beyond what is reasonably necessary for the of development proposed.

The proposal is therefore considered compliant with Policy DES9 of the UDP and the Trees and Development SPD.

Heritage

Designated heritage assets

In referencing sites of historical, cultural or archaeological significance, the proposed development is located between 100-200m south of the Grade II listed office, main hangar and control tower of Barton Aerodrome (City Airport).

Page 87

The NPPF (February 2019) recognises that all heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and should be ‘conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of existing and future generations’ (NPPF para 184).

Paragraph 193 states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation with greater weight given, the more important the asset.

Paragraph 194 then continues to say that any harm to, or loss of the significance of a designated heritage asset should require ‘clear and convincing justification’.

Paragraph 195 states that where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a designated heritage asset, permission should be refused unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or total loss of significance is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss. Paragraph 196 states that where a proposal leads to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate securing its optimum viable use.

It is considered that the proposed development would not harm the significance of the nearby designated heritage assets which lie over 100m to the northern aspect and are separated by extensive landscaping, alongside the A57 dual carriageway, which act as a visual barrier. It is also recognized that the significance of the listed buildings is through their grouped value as the first municipal airport in England from which the scheme presented before members would not detrimentally impact.

The proposal is therefore considered compliant with Policies ST15 and CH2 of the UDP and the relevant paragraphs of the NPPF.

Archaeology

In accordance with paragraph 189 of the NPPF and the provisions of Policy CH5 of the UDP, planning permission should not be granted for development which would have an unacceptable impact on features of archaeological importance. Where planning permission is granted that will affect known or suspected remains, planning conditions will be imposed to secure the recording and evaluation of the remains.

The Greater Manchester Archeological Advisory Service (GMAAS) has been consulted and note that through excavation works undertaken in 2012 within this area, samples of the fill cut features produced prehistoric worked flints, some of which are indicative of Later Mesolithic (7800 – 4000 BC) activity, and a sherds of Romano-British (43BC – 410AD) pottery. Salford Archaeology then undertook more detailed excavations, stripping a more extensive area of the triangular prominence. This work identified further cut features, and excavations of a cremation burial whilst another contained a stone mould and part of a quern. A radiocarbon date was obtained for the cremation burial, and the excavations confirmed the impression of sparse but regionally significant remains spanning the Later Mesolithic to the Romano-British period. This previous archaeological work suggests that the triangular prominence attracted past activity as it was a well-drained area of ground sandwiched between the wetlands of Chat Moss, Salteye Brook and the former channel of the River Irwell.

Given that the proposed development area is located close to the site of previous regionally significant discoveries it was initially recommended by GMAAS that a programme of archaeological recording works should be secured through a pre-commencement planning condition. However, as explained by the applicant, the siting of the portable plant and associated machinery hardstanding, including modular office/welfare buildings, would not require any intrusive site works to be undertaken prior to the implementation of the development. As such, there would be no impact on any potential archaeological remains and the request for archaeological investigations is, in this instance, not considered necessary. Further to re-consultation with GMAAS, this position was subsequently accepted and it was agreed that no further archaeological works were required.

On this basis the proposal would be compliant with policy CH5 of the UDP and paragraph 189 of the NPPF.

Amenity

Page 88

The proposed access road associated with this development is located approximately 50m south of a pair of semi- detached residential properties (along Liverpool Road) with the waste recycling plant approximately 150m to the south-eastern aspect. The nearest other residential properties are located along Avroe Road, approximately 430m to the north-east.

Having regard to commercial premises, City Airport is located 100m to the north, whilst the Barley Arms public house is 450m to the east alongside the new Aldi Supermarket and AJ Bell Stadium (over 530m). The distribution warehouse of Great Bear is located 440m to the west with other light industrial uses along Barton Moss Road lying approximately 500m from the application site.

Air Quality

The application is supported by an Air Quality Assessment which has been reviewed by the Council’s Environmental Consultant.

The application site is not located within the Greater Manchester Air Quality Management Area, however given the proposed number of vehicle movements, particularly HGV movements, a detailed dispersion model has been undertaken as part of the overall assessment of emissions. In this regard discussions were held between Salford City Council and the applicant’s consultant prior to the submission of the application to scope a suitable methodology. This was calculated based upon the operational requirements of the facility which included the backfilling of vehicles, the fact that a number of the vehicles expected to access the site would have already been on the highway network, and that those HGV’s would have likely travelled further to existing facilities within the Greater Manchester area to deliver or obtain aggregate.

A detailed road traffic emissions assessment was thereafter undertaken to consider the impact of development- generated road traffic on local air quality at identified existing receptor locations. Road traffic emissions were modelled using the dispersion model ADMS-Roads and concentrations of nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) were predicted at identified sensitive receptor locations.

The development was not predicted to result in any new exceedances of the relevant air quality objectives and the impact of the development on local air quality was predicted to be ‘negligible’ in accordance with guidance. This is accepted by the Council’s Environmental Consultant who considers that a reasonable prediction of the likely impact on local air quality has been calculated based upon national guidelines (Defra Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance and Institute of Air Quality Management & Environmental Protection UK guidance).

It has been recommended that a condition be attached restricting the maximum number of vehicle movements, however this would be hard to enforce and therefore in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 55 of the NPPF, it is not considered that the imposition of a condition would be appropriate.

Dust

The proposal has the potential for fugitive dust emissions to impact off-site receptors, however, as clarified by the Council’s Environmental consultant, the facility will be subject to regulation under the Environmental Permitting Regulations which requires an Environment Agency Permit containing conditions with respect to dust emissions. The site is also reasonably distanced from nearby sensitive receptors and there is no processing of material on site other than washing of the waste soil (which will reduce the materials capacity to create fugitive dust).

As part of the process of applying for the Environmental Permit, which is currently under review by the EA, a dust management plan has been prepared and is included within the submitted Air Quality Impact Assessment. The Council’s Environmental Consultant is therefore satisfied the dust management plan will be sufficient to control dust, and it is not considered necessary to apply any conditions as the Environmental Permitting Regime will manage the mitigation measures.

Noise

A Noise Impact Assessment has been submitted to consider potential noise impacts of the development in accordance with Policy EN17 of the UDP. As alluded to previously, the application site is reasonably distanced from the nearest residential receptors, however, this is a new operation in the area and there is a potential for noise to have an adverse impact off-site.

Page 89

The assessment has been undertaken in accordance with BS4142:2014 (Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound) which compares the predicted noise from the operational plant against the existing background noise in the area. In general, the greater the difference the more likely the noise is to be perceived as a significant detrimental impact.

The report concludes that for residential properties on Trident Road, Barton Moss road and Ripley Crescent the predicted noise does not exceed the exceeding background noise levels. For the receptor on Liverpool Road the predicted noise level will increase by 1dB. This would not be perceptible to the human ear and is considered insignificant.

The conclusions of the report are accepted by the Council’s Environmental Consultant. In addition, noise will also be a matter which is regulated under the Environmental Permit and includes operational hours, alongside the implementation of a Noise Management Plan. As a consequence it is not considered reasonable, nor necessary, to duplicate legalisation and on this basis no additional conditions are recommended in respect to noise.

Lighting

An External Lighting Scheme has been prepared however not submitted as part of this application. The applicant has suggested that the scheme has assessed the impacts of the lighting specifications required to successfully operate the proposed recycling facility with the scheme evidencing that an acceptable level of external lighting can be provided without adversely impacting on residential amenity or the natural environment.

Whilst the above is acknowledged, it is considered reasonably necessary to attach a condition requesting the submission of a lighting scheme in accordance with the provisions of Policy EN17 of the UDP.

Concluding Remarks

The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed development would not adversely impact upon the amenities of nearby residential or commercial premises, nor is there a requirement to attach additional conditions in order to mitigate any impacts identified within the submitted assessments through the planning process. This is clarified through paragraph 183 of the NPPF which explains that ‘the focus of planning policies and decisions should be on whether proposed development is an acceptable use of land, rather than the control of processes or emissions (where these are subject to separate pollution control regimes). Planning decisions should assume that these regimes will operate effectively.’ As this development will be subject to the Environmental Permit, regulated under the Environmental Permitting Regime, it is considered that the license is sufficient to ensure air quality, dust and noise are appropriately regulated.

Case law, particularly concerning another waste site in Salford, saw a Planning Inspector make clear that Planning and EA matters should not overlap, nor legislation and matters of control be duplicated. It is for this reason that the application is considered compliant with the provisions Policies DES7 and EN17 of the UDP.

Land Contamination

The applicant has submitted a ground investigation report from June 2005 which was undertaken as part of the wider Port Salford development. The proposed end use is not considered sensitive from a ground contamination perspective.

A baseline updated study has been submitted as part of the Environmental Permit application and there will be conditions within the Environmental Permit to safeguard against future contamination from the proposed use.

As above, the Council’s Environmental Consultant is assured that the Environmental Permit will satisfactorily regulate the site with respect to land contamination, however, further to consultation with the Environmental Agency, concerns are raised by the current site investigation report which is 20 years old and, in parts, illegible. The Environment Agency does not accept reporting which is over 7 years old and, in the interests of undertaking a robust assessment, it cannot be assumed that given the considerable time which has elapsed, the reporting currently submitted is representative of present day ground conditions.

The Agency have concerns that there may be a pollution pathway for leachable heavy metal contaminants to/from the former historic landfill beneath the site. The entirety of the proposed development was used as a landfill,

Page 90

known as Victoria Tip, which accepted between 75,000 and 250,000 tonnes per year of inert, industrial and commercial waste, between the 1st of July 1986 and the 31st of December 1994. It is suspected the landfill will have taken dredging from the canal, which would likely have leachable metal contamination. The groundwater within the alluvium is likely to be in continuity with Salteye Brook, which is a significant receptor for pollution.

Salteye Brook is a Water Framework Directive (WFD) waterbody, Waterbody ID GB112069061430. Folly Brook and Salteye Brook are failing their chemical status classification due to the presence of mercury. Salt Eye Brook outfalls to the Irwell / Manchester Ship Canal (Irk to confluence with Upper Mersey) Waterbody ID GB112069061452 which is also failing its chemical status due Mercury. There is a possibility that leachable metal contamination may be contributing to this failure and this linkage requires further assessment particularly at source.

The reporting currently provided states perched groundwater beneath the site appears to have been locally impacted by a range of petroleum hydrocarbons, PAHs, chloroforms and BTEX compounds. The report also references previous contaminative activities including the uses of chlorinated solvents and acids. Some high levels of chlorinated solvents were present on the site, which presents a risk of DNAPL contamination. The Environment Agency explains that it is not clear how this relates to the actual boundaries of the site but this aspect should be explored as part of further investigation(s).

In light of the above, further detailed information will be required before built development is undertaken and also in order to inform the final site drainage scheme taken forward. It is therefore recommended that two conditions be attached to any grant of permission requesting that a remediation strategy to deal with the risks associated contamination shall be submitted, alongside a verification report which demonstrates that the completion of works has been carried out in accordance with the approved remediation.

Subject to the attachment of the conditions detailed above, the proposal is considered compliant with Policy EN17 of the UDP.

Transport and Highways

The application is supported by a Transport Statement which has been reviewed by the Local Highway Authority (LHA), alongside Transport for Greater Manchester (TFGM). In this regard it recognized by the relevant authorities that the site will be of a temporary nature and that the boundary of this site lies within an area of land befitting from planning approval for four industrial warehouses. The presence of this development would prevent delivery of Unit 4 and compromise the layout (car park) of Unit 3. The proposal would therefore be decommissioned to allow Unit 4 to be built out at a later date.

The Transport Statement identifies that the waste recycling facility will generate an estimated number of trips based on the assumed volume of demolition material that it would process each year (240,000 tonnes). Based on the site being operational 275 days a year (Saturday assumed to be 0.5 day) this equates to circa 870 tonnes would be processed per day (para 4.8). Paragraph 4.9 goes further to explaining that the most likely type of vehicle used is an 18-tonne HGV which is assumed that, on average, can carry 16 tonnes each (90% full).

It has been identified that a proportion (20%) of the processed aggregate is assumed to remain on site to be used as part of the Port Salford/ new rail line construction process and as such the trips associated with outbound material is expected to be lower (Table 2 and para 4.10). It is also noted (para 4.11) that the site would be a destination for demolition material and an origin for construction material, giving rise for ‘backloading’ to occur, where vehicles arrive with demolition material and leave with construction material. This dual function is relatively unique to this site and reduces the number of trips that are made where similar plants only provided one of the functions, requiring a trip to each. It is also recognised by the LHA and TFGM that not all vehicles will be ‘backloaded’ and the applicant therefore assumes in the calculations that one third of vehicles will, which it considers to be a robust assumption (i.e. likely that more will leave with a full load having emptied at the site).

Paragraph 4.12 concludes that based upon the above (shown in detail in Appendix C of the TS), the site would generate approximately 150 2-way movements per day, or 7 HGV movements per hour in each direction. The calculation assumes a flat demand profile across the days (275)/ hours (11hours) that the facility is proposed to be open, however, in reality this is unlikely to be the case with certain periods of the day likely to be busier and Saturdays perhaps quieter. It is considered by the LHA that an industry standard trigger point for detailed capacity assessment is 30 two-way trips per hour and the conclusion of the Transport Statement is that this site would

Page 91

generate 14 two-way trips, suggesting there is a good degree of tolerance before the site would approach 30. Notwithstanding this, the LHA have taken into account the following factors in considering the acceptability of the impact of this proposal: - o Calculations are based on maximum annual site throughput so considered to be a ‘worst-case’ (para 5.2); o It is unlikely that the demand would ‘spike’ in the network peaks and could conceivably be lower as contractors seek to avoid unnecessary delays in traffic for efficiency purposes (para 5.3); o The facility will not create ‘new’ trips it will cause trips that would otherwise already be on the highway network to divert to this site. On the basis that this facility is considered to only serve Peel’s local operations, these trips would have been on the local highway network (para 5.4 and 5.5) regardless of this application as the development this facility in intended to serve already benefits from planning permission; o The benefits of reduced vehicle mileage on the wider network, as longer trips to similar facilities further afield are avoided by the introduction of this site (para 5.7); o The benefits of a dual-purpose site (destination for demolition material and origin for construction material) on overall trips made on the wider highway network from local construction sites that would use the facility (para 5.8 and 5.9); and o 20% of the material processed by the plant is expected to remain on site for the construction of Port Salford. This would have otherwise had to be ‘imported’ in from other locations resulting in ‘new’ trips on the local network (para 5.10).

In addition to the above, access to the site is proposed to be taken from the A57 Liverpool Road at the existing signal junction which was implemented to serve the four industrial units that make up the Port Salford permission. It is therefore considered suitable to accommodate the type and volume of trips that would be generated by this proposal.

Having given detailed consideration to the information provided within the Transport Statement it is considered that the proposed Recycling Plant is likely to result in a benefit to the wider highway network by ‘intercepting’ trips that would ordinarily be made to/ from locations that are further from the development sites that this facility is intended to serve.

Notwithstanding the reduction in vehicle miles for many deliveries and the disposal of waste, a number of trips are considered to be negated completely by the fact that material processed by the plant is intended to be used on the site for the build out of Port Salford.

It is therefore concluded that the LHA have no objection to the proposal subject to the request for the proposed access to be constructed in accordance with the submitted plans and that the request for a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) be conditioned.

Impact on Public Right of Way Network

The Transport Statement acknowledges the presence, at paragraph 2.5, of a Public Right of Way (PRoW – Footpath 2) which runs close to the northern boundary of the site. The footpath is in the process of being diverted, with a live Definitive Map Modification Order (DMMO) application pending as a requirement of the realignment to the A57, completed in 2017.

At the request of the LHA, the applicant’s architect Bate and Taylor has produced a plan (Drawing no. MH1227- SK13 – extract below) illustrating the existing PRoW alignment (black dashed line), the proposed PRoW diversion based on the Port Salford approval (pink dashed line and proposed development in grey) and proposed Recycling Plant (black lines within the red line boundary).

Page 92

As evidenced, the proposed diversion of the public footpath would not be deliverable if the Recycling Plant were to be built out. However, the proposed diversion route has not been approved and it is understood that the Council’s PRoW Officer has some issues with the proposed alignment in any case.

Whilst the existing public footpath would pass through the red line boundary, it would nonetheless remain unaffected by the proposed development. As such, it has been confirmed by the Council’s Highway Officer that the route can remain on its current alignment whilst an agreement is reached on its formal diversion, through the DMMO process. It is also important to note that the proposal would not restrict movement or the connectivity along the PROW (dotted black line) with the 2m high palisade security fence tightly enclosing the plant enclosure and accompanying access road.

It is therefore considered that this development should not hinder use of the existing PRoW and an informative is recommended for attachment in accordance with Policies DES2, E1 and A2 of the UDP.

Flood Risk and Drainage

A Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy has been prepared in accordance with the guidance contained in the NPPF, relevant PPG and the Salford Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.

The site lies to the north and west of Salteye Brook. The majority of the site is located in Flood Zone 1 (‘low probability’) however the south east of the site lies in Flood Zone 2

As explained by the applicant, the area occupied by the temporary feed stock and washing plant will be located over an impermeable hardstanding. The surfacing will comprise of concrete hardstanding in and around the plant and a hardcore running surface constructed over an impermeable membrane. The impermeable areas of the site will drain to impermeable lagoons constructed to capture and harvest the run off. In this regard the lagoons will be sized to ensure the impermeable areas ultimately discharge at the greenfield run off rate into Salteye Brook.

Notwithstanding the above, the Environmental Agency has identified that the supporting information currently provided states that only ‘surface water’ runoff from the site will be discharged into Salt Eye Brook. However, runoff from the stockpile of waste soils deposited for treatment, the water arising from the soil washing plant and consequently the recirculated effluent in the storage lagoon (and potentially discharged via the secondary lagoon to the brook) are considered by the Agency to be classified as trade effluent.

As aforementioned, surface water runoff may become contaminated once it mixes with contaminated water sources on the site, including accumulation of effluent within the primary sub-surface storage lagoon.

It is understood, from discussion with the applicant’s consultants, that the storage capacity within the stone sub- base and sub-surface storage lagoon should be adequate to prevent a discharge of the effluent from the associated high level overflow detailed in the current indicative drainage plans (193237/DRAIN/D/001 Rev.B or 193237/DRAIN/D/004), under normal circumstances/conditions. However, at present, no information has been provided regarding water quality information or assessment of the potential pollutants. On this basis, it is recommended that the final drainage scheme be conditioned to enable a greater understanding of the potential pollution risk to the water quality of Salt Brook, particularly from the effluent in the storage lagoon originating from the soil washing process.

The Council’s Drainage Engineer has reviewed the submission and raises no objection to the proposed development with the proposal considered unlikely to create a worsening in terms of flood risk given the incorporation of rainwater harvesting and the creation of an impermeable lagoon to capture and harvest run off. It was recommended that the surface water discharge rate be restricted to 3.5l/s, however as explained through discussion with the applicant and the EA, the drainage rate at outfall will be dictated by the area drained. Should the EA seek for the whole site to be impermeable due to any potential risk of land contamination, the discharge rate could subsequently increase as a consequence. The discharge rate is therefore dictated by any remediation

Page 93

which might be necessary and will be dictated through the attachment of Condition 8 (land contamination). It is therefore considered that to restrict the surface water discharge rate to 3.5l/s would not be appropriate.

On this basis the proposal is considered to accord with the provisions of Policy EN18 of the UDP and the relevant paragraphs relating to flood risk contained within the NPPF.

Ecology

In accordance with paragraphs 170 and 175 of the NPPF, planning decisions should conserve and enhance the environment by minimizing impacts on and providing net gains for biodiversity. In the event significant harm resulting from the development cannot be avoided or adequately mitigated, planning permission should be refused.

The application is supported by an Ecological Assessment which has been reviewed by the GMEU and the Environmental Agency.

There are two non-statutory designated sites within 1 km of the site. Both are Sites of Biological Importance (SBI's). Foxhill Glen SBI is 50m to the north of the site on the other side of the A57, and Davyhulme Sewage Works SBI is 500m to the south west across the Manchester Ship Canal. No impacts are expected upon either of the SBIs due to a lack of connectivity with the site, as Foxhill Glen SBI is on the other side of the A57 and Davyhulme Sewage Works is on the opposite side of the Manchester Ship Canal.

In this regard an Ecological Assessment of the wider Port Salford site was conducted in 2012, however it has been reported that since the previous survey was undertaken Himilayan Balsam has further encroached throughout areas adjacent to the water bodies and grassland. Additionally, Japanese Knotweed, Japanese Rose and Cotoneaster have been observed. As a consequence, an Invasive Species Method Statement has been prepared to outline the approach for dealing with the invasive species present on site which is recommended for attachment in the any grant of permission. This is accepted and supported by the GMEU.

The survey also measures the impact of development upon roosting bats. The development does not propose the demolition of an existing building, nor were any trees identified which would have the potential for roosting bats and therefore the GMEU is satisfied with the conclusions of the assessment.

In line with other recommendations from the assessment, a bat and bird box scheme has been prepared to offset the potential loss of habitats as a result of the required tree loss. The recommendations of the assessment are also agreed by the GMEU and should be conditioned in the grant of planning approval.

The Environment Agency is broadly accepting of the supporting information, however remains conscious that the proposal will require some works to the riparian environment through soil movement, land re-profiling and a new surface water outfall along the Salt Eye Brook corridor.

The prevalence of invasive species has been identified above and commented on by the Environment Agency who is of the opinion that all riparian areas disturbed as part of the scheme of construction are sensitively re- instated with appropriate native soft landscaping which would not hinder future maintenance of the waterbody. It is considered that without detailed consideration the riparian works could have an unacceptable effect on the ecological network and value of Salt Eye Brook. On this basis the Environment Agency has explained that without a condition requesting the submission of a landscape and ecological reinstatement plan, they would be minded to object to the development as there is no guarantee that the development will not result in significant harm to the riparian environment. As such, it is recommended that a condition be attached to any grant of permission requesting the submission of a landscape and ecological reinstatement plan in accordance with the provisions of paragraphs 170 and 175 of the NPPF.

Conclusions

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) requires the determination of this application to be made in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

The proposed development comprises the formation of a temporary recycling facility which, in accordance with guidance contained within the NPPW, would manage waste in accordance with the ‘Waste Hierarchy’ which promotes recovery, recycling and reuse of waste rather than its disposal. The proposed development would

Page 94

contribute towards sustainability through the excavation of locally sourced material which will be processed and reused as secondary aggregates, sand, minerals and other sub-soil materials in the construction of Port Salford.

The principle of development is considered acceptable on the basis that permission is granted for a temporary period of 8 years until which time that full WGIS has been delivered and the implementation of Unit 4 associated with the wider Port Salford development can be implemented. This is considered to outweigh the departure attributed by this development upon Policy E1 of the UDP.

The proposal would have a positive social, economic and environmental impact upon the local area through the effective use of underutilised land which will encourage and promote the use of secondary and recycled resources which will help to reduce pressure on the supply of primary resources in accordance with the NPPW and NPPF. This in turn will support the drive towards achieving sustainable waste management and existing waste management infrastructure.

Subject to the above mentioned conditions, the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact in respect to soil, noise, water, air or light pollution or to health and quality of life including residential amenity. There would also be no harm in respect to highways or the local distinctiveness of the area.

Taking into account all material considerations and, subject to the proposed mitigation measures identified, it is considered that the proposed secondary aggregates plant provides significant benefits by driving waste up the ‘Waste Hierarchy’ and enabling production of secondary aggregates within the city. The site is considered to be appropriately located in respect to its use for managing waste and represents a sustainable form of development in accordance with the provisions of the UDP and that of national planning guidance.

Recommendation Approve

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun no later than three years beginning with the date of this permission with the development thereafter removed and land restored to its former condition by the 17th December 2028 (8 years from the date of the permission being granted).

Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). The development represents a departure from the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan (Policy E1) and is only considered acceptable on the premise that it remains a temporary facility until such time that the deliverability of the wider Port Salford development can be implemented.

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

Location Plan Drawing MH1227-00 Rev D Proposed Site Plan Drawing MH1227-02 Rev H Proposed C&D Recycling Plant Layout Drawing 5094-L1A-T4 Indicative Abstraction Borehole Design Drawing 193237/AB/001 Rev A

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

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

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

(c) Any trees or shrubs planted or retained in accordance with this condition which are removed, uprooted, destroyed, die or become severely damaged or become seriously diseased within 5 years of planting shall be

Page 95

replaced within the next planting season by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted.

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

4. No development shall be started until all the retained trees within (or overhanging) the site as shown on Arboricultural Impact Assessment (Mitigation), Drawing No:D7869.02.007 within Report Ref: The Environment Partnership, Version 5, October 2020, have been surrounded by substantial temporary protective fencing and temporary ground protection. Such temporary protective measures shall be installed in accordance with the specifications submitted in the Environment Partnership, Version 5, October 2020 report, shown at Appendix C, in the positions as shown at Arboricultural Impact Assessment (Mitigation), Drawing No:D7869.02.007 and shall remain until all development is completed and no work, including any form of drainage or storage of materials, earth or topsoil shall take place within the perimeter of such fencing.

Reason: In order to safeguard retained trees in accordance with the Trees and Development Supplementary Planning Document.

Reason for pre-commencement condition: Protective fencing should be erected around all retained trees prior to commencement of works to ensure any impacts upon the trees are appropriately mitigated

5. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment, The Environment Partnership, Version 5, October 2020.

Reason: In order to safeguard retained trees in accordance with the Trees and Development Supplementary Planning Document.

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

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

Page 96

Reason for pre-commencement condition: Any works on site could harm the amenity of neighbouring occupiers if not properly managed so details of the matters set out above must be submitted and agreed in advance of works starting.

7. Prior to the commencement of development, a remediation strategy to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site in respect of the development hereby permitted, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. This strategy will include the following components: a) A preliminary risk assessment which has identified: - all previous uses - potential contaminants associated with those uses - a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors - potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site b) A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off-site. c) The results of the site investigation and the detailed risk assessment referred to in (b) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken. d) A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (c) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.

The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

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

Reason for pre-commencement condition: It is necessary to understand the risks associated within any contamination on the site prior to the commencement of works.

8. Prior to the development being brought into use, a verification report demonstrating the completion of works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the local planning authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met.

Reason: To ensure that the site does not pose any further risk to human health or the water environment by demonstrating that the requirements of the approved verification plan have been met and that remediation of the site is complete in accordance with Policy EN17 EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

9. No drainage systems for the infiltration of surface water to the ground shall take place until a drainage strategy has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Any proposals for such systems must be supported by an assessment of the risks to controlled waters.

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory method of surface water disposal to reduce the risk of flooding and to prevent the deterioration of the Salt Eye Brook in accordance with policies EN17, EN18 and EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and seeks to provide betterment in terms of water quality and surface water discharge rates and meets requirements set out in the following documents; . NPPF, . Water Framework Directive and the NW River Basin Management Plan . The national Planning Practice Guidance and the Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage Systems (March 2015) . Manchester, Salford, Trafford Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) (2011) and associated technical guidance . Environment Agency Pollution Prevention Guidelines (now withdrawn) . Flood Risk Assessment/SuDS Requirements for new developments (Salford's SuDS Checklist)

Page 97

10. Pursuant to findings of condition 7 (remediation strategy) development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as a scheme to dispose of foul, surface water and trade effluent; to install oil and petrol interceptors; and also to install silt trap and/or interceptors has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory method of surface water disposal to reduce the risk of flooding and land contamination elsewhere in accordance with policies EN17, EN18 and EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

Reason for pre-commencement condition: It is necessary to understand the drainage risks associated with any contamination on the site prior to the commencement of works.

11. 12 months prior to decommissioning of the development hereby approved taking place, a decommissioning plan including details of landscape and ecological reinstatement and long- term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscaped areas, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The decommissioning plan shall be carried out as approved and any subsequent variations shall be agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

The scheme shall include the following elements:  Details of maintenance regimes;  Details of any landscape reinstatement proposals along riparian corridor, including landscaping schedule preferably largely based on native species;  Details of treatment of site boundaries and/or buffers around water bodies;  Details of appropriate treatment and control; based on best practice; of any invasive non-native species within working footprint; and  Details of management responsibilities.

Reason: To ensure the protection of wildlife and supporting habitat and, to secure opportunities for enhancing the site’s nature conservation value in accordance with Policy EN8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and National Planning Policy Framework and to ensure that waste and equipment does not remain on the land for a period longer than the permission allows for.

12. The development hereby permitted shall be implemented in accordance with the Invasive Non-Native Species Management Plan Ref: 7921.006 dated February 2020.

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the natural environment from non-native invasive species in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

13. The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the Bird Box Scheme Ref: 7921.005 dated February 2020.

Reason: In the interests of promoting biodiversity net gain in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

14. Nothing other than inert and non-hazardous construction, demolition and excavation waste as set out in the planning application shall be processed on the site.

Reason: Other waste materials raise environmental and amenity issues that would require the reconsideration of the planning application in accordance with Policies EN17 and DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

15. No external lighting shall be installed to the facility, hereby permitted, except in accordance with details which have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The details shall include the hours of operation and location of luminaires and fittings of any external lighting.

Page 98

The approved external lighting plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and thereafter retained. No other external lighting equipment may then be used within the development other than as approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interest of protection and enhancement of biodiversity / protected species.

16. No materials shall be stored and/or sorted on site except within the designated storage and waste sorting areas in accordance with the Proposed C&D Recycling Plant Layout, drawing 5094-L1A-T4.

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

17. The height of the processed and unprocessed material stockpiles shall not exceed 6.5 meters above finished ground levels.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and to minimise the impacts on local amenity and air quality in accordance with Policies DES1 and EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Notes to Applicant

1. Environmental Protection

The applicant is advised that they have a duty to adhere to the regulations of Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, the National Planning Policy Framework 2018 and the current Building Control Regulations with regards to contaminated land. The responsibility to ensure the safe development of land affected by contamination rests primarily with the developer.

2. Environment Agency

Government guidance contained within the national Planning Practice Guidance (Water supply, wastewater and water quality – considerations for planning applications, paragraph 020) sets out a hierarchy of drainage options that must be considered and discounted in the following order: 1. Connection to the public sewer 2. Package sewage treatment plant (adopted in due course by the sewerage company or owned and operated under a new appointment or variation) 3. Septic Tank

Foul drainage should be connected to the main sewer. Where this is not possible, under the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2016 any discharge of sewage or trade effluent made to either surface water or groundwater will need to be registered as an exempt discharge activity or hold a permit issued by the Environment Agency, addition to planning permission. This applies to any discharge to inland freshwaters, coastal waters or relevant territorial waters.

Please note that the granting of planning permission does not guarantee the granting of an Environmental Permit. Upon receipt of a correctly filled in application form we will carry out an assessment. It can take up to 4 months before we are in a position to decide whether to grant a permit or not.

Domestic effluent discharged from a treatment plant/septic tank at 2 cubic metres or less to ground or 5 cubic metres or less to surface water in any 24 hour period must comply with General Binding Rules provided that no public foul sewer is available to serve the development and that the site is not within an inner Groundwater Source Protection Zone. A soakaway used to serve a non-mains drainage system must be sited no less than 10 metres from the nearest watercourse, not less than 10 metres from any other foul soakaway and not less than 50 metres from the nearest potable water supply. Where the proposed development involves the connection of foul drainage to an existing non-mains drainage system, the applicant should ensure that it is in a good state of repair, regularly de-sludged and of sufficient capacity to deal with any potential increase in flow and loading which may occur as a result of the development.

Page 99

Where the existing non-mains drainage system is covered by a permit to discharge then an application to vary the permit will need to be made to reflect the increase in volume being discharged. It can take up to 13 weeks before we decide whether to vary a permit.

Further advice is available at: Septic tanks and treatment plants: permits and general binding rules

Trade Effluent

Effluent discharged from any premises carrying on a trade or industry and effluent generated by a commercial enterprise where the effluent is different to that which would arise from domestic activities in a normal home is described as trade effluent. If you are not able to discharge effluent it will be classed as waste and you must then comply with your duty of care responsibilities.

If you wish to discharge effluent after appropriately treating it to groundwater or surface water please contact the Environment Agency (Tel: 03708 506 506) as a permit under the Environmental Permit Regulations will be required. If proposing to discharge to main – a trade effluent consent or a trade effluent agreement with your water and sewerage company must be obtained before you discharge trade effluent to a public foul sewer or a private sewer that connects to a public foul sewer.

Further guidance is available at: Pollution prevention for businesses

Abstraction Licence

If you intend to abstract more than 20 cubic metres of water per day from a surface water source e.g. a stream or from underground strata (via borehole or well) for any particular purpose then you will need an abstraction licence from the Environment Agency. There is no guarantee that a licence will be granted as this is dependent on available water resources and existing protected rights.

Dewatering

Dewatering is the removal/abstraction of water (predominantly, but not confined to, groundwater) in order to locally lower water levels near the excavation. This can allow operations to take place, such as mining, quarrying, building, engineering works or other operations, whether underground or on the surface.

The dewatering activities on-site could have an impact upon local wells, water supplies and/or nearby watercourses and environmental interests. This activity was previously exempt from requiring an abstraction licence. Since 1 January 2018, most cases of new planned dewatering operations above 20 cubic metres a day will require a water abstraction licence from us prior to the commencement of dewatering activities at the site.

More information is available on gov.uk: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/water-managementapply- for-a-water- abstraction-or-impoundment-licence#apply-for-a-licence-for-a-previously-exempt-abstraction.

Abstraction Information

Certain private and small water supplies do not require a licence to abstract water, therefore we are not necessarily aware of their existence. The locations of private domestic sources may be held by the local authority on the register required by Regulation 14 Private Water Supplies Regulations 2016.

Waste Material

The Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations 1991 for dealing with waste materials are applicable to any off-site movements of wastes.

The code of practice applies to you if you produce, carry, keep, dispose of, treat, import or have control of waste in England or Wales. The law requires anyone dealing with waste to keep it safe and make sure it’s dealt with responsibly and only given to businesses authorised to take it. The code of practice can be found here: https://www.gov.uk//uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data///waste-duty-care-codepractice-2016.pdf

Page 100

If you need to register as a carrier of waste, please follow the instructions here: https://www.gov.uk/register- as-a-waste-carrier-broker-or-dealer-wales

If you require any local advice or guidance please contact your local Environment Agency office.

Waste Classification

In order to meet the applicant’s objectives for the waste hierarchy and obligations under the duty of care, it is important that waste is properly classified. Some waste (e.g. wood and wood based products) may be either a hazardous or non-hazardous waste dependent upon whether or not they have had preservative treatments.

Proper classification of the waste both ensures compliance and enables the correct onward handling and treatment to be applied. In the case of treated wood, it may require high temperature incineration in a directive compliant facility. More information on this can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/how-to-classify-different- types of-waste

Use of Waste Material On-Site

If materials that are potentially waste are to be used on-site, the applicant will need to ensure they can comply with the exclusion from the Waste Framework Directive (WFD) (article 2(1) (c)) for the use of, ‘uncontaminated soil and other naturally occurring material excavated in the course of construction activities, etc…’ in order for the material not to be considered as waste. Meeting these criteria will mean waste permitting requirements do not apply. Where the applicant cannot meet the criteria, they will be required to obtain the appropriate waste permit or exemption from us. A deposit of waste to land will either be a disposal or a recovery activity.

The legal test for recovery is set out in Article 3(15) of WFD as:  any operation the principal result of which is waste serving a useful purpose by replacing other materials which would otherwise have been used to fulfil a particular function, or waste being prepared to fulfil that function, in the plant or in the wider economy.  We have produced guidance on the recovery test which can be viewed at https://www.gov.uk/guidance/waste- recovery-plans-and-permits#waste-recoveryactivities.

You can find more information on the Waste Framework Directive here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/environmental-permitting-guidance-the-wasteframework- directive

More information on the definition of waste can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/legal definition-of-waste-guidance

More information on the use of waste in exempt activities can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/waste-exemptions-using-waste

Non-waste activities are not regulated by us (i.e. activities carried out under the CL:ARE Code of Practice), however you will need to decide if materials meet End of Waste or Byproducts criteria (as defined by the WFD). The ‘Is it waste’ tool, allows you to make an assessment and can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/isitwastetool- for-advice-on-the-by-products-and-end-of-waste- tests

If you require any local advice or guidance please contact your local Environment Agency office.

The developer must apply the waste hierarchy as a priority order of prevention, re-use, recycling before considering other recovery or disposal options. Government guidance on the waste hierarchy in England can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69403/pb135 30-waste- hierarchy-guidance.pdf

Site Waste Management Plans (SWMP) are no longer a legal requirement, however, in terms of meeting the objectives of the waste hierarchy and your duty of care, they are a useful tool and considered to be best practice.

Page 101

Flood Risk Activity Permit (FRAP)

This development will require a permit under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016 from the Environment Agency for any proposed works or structures, in, under, over or within eight metres of the bank of Salt Eye Brook which, is designated a ‘main river’. Some activities are also now excluded or exempt. A permit is separate to and in addition to any planning permission granted. Further details and guidance are available on the GOV.UK website: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/flood-riskactivities- environmental-permits.

3. Public Right of Way

No change to the Right of Way network should be approved without consultation with the Local Planning Authority/ Public Rights of Way Officer.

The developer should not interfere with the Public Right of Way, in particular footpath no. 2, either whilst development is being implemented or once it has been completed; such interference may well constitute an offence.

In particular, the developer must ensure that: -

 There is no diminution in the width of the right of way available for the use by members of the public.  No building materials are stored on the right of way.  No damage or substantial alteration, either temporary or permanent, is caused to the surface of the right of way.  Vehicle movements are arranged so as not to interfere with the public’s use of the way.  No additional barriers (e.g gates) are placed across the right of way, of either a temporary or permanent nature.  No wildlife fencing or other ecological protection feature associated with wildlife mitigation measures are placed across the right of way or allowed to interfere with the right of way.  The safety of members of the public using the right of way is ensured at all times.

Page 102

Agenda Item 5f

APPLICATION No: 20/75337/FUL APPLICANT: Dogs4Rescue LOCATION: Nursery Farm, Barton Moss Road, Eccles, M30 7RR PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning permission for the use of the site as a Dog Rescue and Animal Sanctuary, with associated outbuildings, exercise areas and ancillary workers accommodation. WARD: Irlam

Site and surroundings

This application relates to a 0.73-hectare site which is located on the eastern side of Barton Moss Road in Irlam.

The site is occupied by the former farm house, a series of outbuildings (a visitor reception, a food storage unit and volunteer briefing room with a covered deck, a groom room/visitor WC, a community hut, several animal shelters, two food storage containers and a tool shed), three caravans providing ancillary accommodation (two static and one touring) and areas of hard and soft landscaping which are subdivided by either 2m high mesh fencing or close boarded and picket fences, which together operate as a dog rescue and animal sanctuary.

Page 103 Vehicular access to the site is from Barton Moss Road with parking for approximately six vehicles being provided on a hard-surfaced area located to the front of the site, adjacent to Barton Moss Road. There is also a hard- surfaced driveway accessed from Barton Moss Road that can accommodate two vehicles, with this area being used by those living on site.

The application site is located within the Green Belt, being bounded to the north and west by open land, with the M62 Motorway running to the south and east. The closest residential property to the site is Brighton Grange Farm which is located approximately 60m to the north.

There is a public footway running to the front of the site, along Barton Moss Road – Definitive Footpath 31.

Proposal

Retrospective planning permission is sought to retain the outbuildings, the three caravans and the hard and soft landscaped areas that have been installed at the site as per the site plan below, and to continue using the site as a Dog Rescue and Animal Sanctuary known as Dogs4Rescue.

Grassed area – dog exercise Formal and feral dog landscaping in area visitor area

Formal landscaping – dog exercise and play

Farm animal area

The facility, which houses a maximum of 40 dogs at any one time, operates a unique approach to dog rescue whereby the dogs are not kennelled but live in an environment that is much closer to a home environment. Under this approach the dogs are separated into sub packs depending on their temperament and play style, with the packs being rotated around the various secure areas on the site to keep them stimulated and their lives enriched. At night the dogs sleep in the main house, with staff in their accommodation, within the community hut, or in the case of the feral dogs, outside or in one of the overnight shelters in their enclosure.

The objective of the centre is to rehabilitate and rehome as many dogs as possible with the submission noting that since it was established in October 2013 Dogs4Rescue has successfully rehomed almost 1,500 dogs. In respect of the rehoming process those seeking to rehome dogs housed at the centre make an appointment to

Page 104

visit, entering the centre via the visitor reception where they have the opportunity to first view those dogs that have been identified as suitable for their needs before meeting them and spending time with them.

The centre also offers a permanent home to dogs that cannot be rehomed for example due to health issues or as they are feral dogs unsuited to a domestic environment.

In addition to the dogs, the site also houses a small number of farm animals, including three sheep, two goats, five pigs, 20 chickens, two turkeys, three ducks one goose and one pheasant, with the operator also having a rabbit, two ferrets, two guinea pigs and five cats all as domestic pets.

The facility is a charitable operation, which is run by the founders of the rescue, Emma Billington and Louise Fields, assisted by three full time members of staff, one workaway placement and a number of volunteers who visit the site during the day to assist with operations.

The submission states that four members of staff live on site in order to ensure the continued monitoring of the sub-packs and provide care to the animals – this comprises, the two founders, a workaway placement and another full-time member of staff. The staff occupy four units of staff accommodation – the main house, the touring caravan and the two static caravans – which are strategically placed across the site thereby ensuring that staff are on hand in all areas to separate and calm the dogs, if required, to ensure any disagreements between the dogs are diffused quickly.

The image below shows the location of the four units of accommodation and the areas each unit has responsibility for supervising –

The submission advises that the number of staff on site on a permanent basis derives from the The Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (England) Regulations 2018 – Guidance notes for conditions for providing day care for dogs (November 2018). This advises that there should be one member of staff for every 10 dogs present in a day care facility. This standard has been used as there are no welfare regulations governing

Page 105

rescue centres, with a day care facility being considered to most closely replicate how the centre operates with the dogs being free to roam and mixing in packs.

In addition to rescuing dogs, the centre engages with many in the local community, offering opportunities for people to volunteer at the site and gain new skills, with the activity of being a volunteer breaking the cycle of loneliness experienced by many older people and improving people’s mental health by providing them with purpose or an outlet to switch off from the stresses of day to day life.

Dogs4Rescue also runs initiatives such as animal assisted therapy for children and team building days on site, with enrichment days whereby visits are made to care homes schools and offices also taking place. The facility also provides individuals who cannot have a dog full time or those who are keen to understand whether they are ready to take on the responsibility of owning a dog with an opportunity to borrow a rescue dog or foster dogs on a short term basis.

The revolutionary approach to dog rescue employed at Dogs4Rescue has resulted in the centre supporting and being visited by other rescue centres, including the outreach team from Battersea Dogs Home, in order that they can learn from the centres approach and experiences. The submission states that the centre has taken on and successfully rehabilitated over 50 dogs from other more traditional kennelled rescue centres that would otherwise have been put to sleep.

Relevant Site History

13/64036/FUL - Erection of a new building to provide daycare for dogs, together with a 2.4m high chain link fence – Refused 7 March 2014 on the basis that “The proposed development would be an inappropriate form of development within the Greater Manchester Green Belt and would cause harm to the character and openness of the Green Belt. Furthermore, it has not been demonstrated that very special circumstances exist that would outweigh the harm caused by way of its inappropriateness and the harm caused to the character and openness of the Green Belt. The proposed development would be contrary to the policies within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), and Policies EN1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan”.

The decision was subsequently appealed and the appeal dismissed - appeal reference APP/U4230/A/14/2224320.

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Affecting public right of way Date Displayed: 17 June 2020 Reason: Article 13 affect public right of way

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 18 June 2020 Reason: Article 15 Affect Public right of Way

Neighbour notification

Two neighbouring properties has been notified of the application by letter

Representations

Two letters of representation have been received in response to the application, both supporting the proposal.

Those who have written in make the following points in support of the centre –  There are never any issues with noise or disturbances with the operators keeping the neighbours fully informed  Visitors are respectful with how they park and don’t impact upon nearby resident’s ability to use the road  The site is well maintained to a good standard – the operators have worked really hard and invested time, effort and money in improving the site  The site is a positive asset for the community as a whole  Those visiting the site get immense pleasure from walking the dogs and supporting the charity  The centre provides a base where animal assisted therapy for children can be undertaken - the rescue dogs provide perfect co-therapists for children (and their families) who have emotional and behavioural difficulties

Page 106

with the dogs all having some incredibly sad and often tragic stories that have led them to be at the rescue, with their background stories often resembling (in some part) those of the children.

Consultations

City Airport and Heliport – Confirm that they have no objections to the application.

The Highways Agency – No comments received to date

Air Quality, Noise, Contaminated Land –

Air quality State that the application site is partially within the Greater Manchester Air Quality Management Area, however the scale and nature of the development is not likely to have a significant impact on traffic and consequently they advise that they have no objections to the proposal on air quality grounds.

Noise Note that the application site is relatively remote however there is a residential property located approximately 60m to the north.

Advise that a noise assessment has been submitted with the application which states that using worst case assumptions i.e. all dogs barking at the closest part of the site to the neighbouring residential unit the noise level generated by the barking dogs would not have a significant impact upon the neighbouring property.

Having regard to this and given that the centre operates a “no barking policy” which effectively ensures successful noise management at the site they advise that they have no objections to the proposal on noise ground subject to the attachment of a condition that requires the centre to be operated in accordance with the “no barking policy” appended to the noise assessment.

Land contamination Advise that they have no objections to the proposal on the grounds of land contamination

Highways – State that while the site will attract visitors it is not expected to become a major trip generator and as such it is unlikely to have any noticeable effect on the local highway network, with the site having a small parking area for visitors. Confirm that they therefore have no objections to the proposal on highway safety grounds.

Senior Drainage Engineer – State that they have no objections to the proposal, advising that all works should be undertaken in accordance with Building Regulations Part H, with all areas where dog waste is to be 'washed down' being connected to the septic tank and not the soakaway.

The Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – No comments received to date

The Open Spaces Society – No comments received to date

Peak and Northern Footpaths Society – State that if planning permission is to be granted the applicant should be made aware that the grant of planning permission does not entitle them to obstruct a public right of way crossing or adjoining the application site.

Ramblers Association (Manchester Area) – Advise that they have no objections to the proposal as long as the adjacent public right of way is not obstructed during construction or at completion of the construction works

Page 107

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

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

Unitary Development Plan EN11 - Mosslands This policy states that development on land that cannot practicably be restored to lowland raised bog habitat will be permitted provided it would not prevent the restoration of other land to that habitat. The overall nature conservation interest of the Mosslands will be maintained.

Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context This policy states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness.

Unitary Development Plan DES8 - Alterations and Extensions This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area.

Unitary Development Plan DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours This policy states that all new development, alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other development.

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

Unitary Development Plan A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled This policy states that development proposals, road improvement schemes and traffic management measures will be required to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, other people with limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians and cyclists.

Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.

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

Unitary Development Plan EN19 - Flood Risk and Surface Water This policy states that any application for development that it is considered likely to be at risk of flooding or increase the risk of flooding elsewhere will need to be accompanied by a formal flood risk assessment. It should identify

Page 108

mitigation or other measures to be incorporated into the development or undertaking on other land, which are designed to reduce that risk of flooding to an acceptable level.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy

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

The Revised Draft Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (‘GMSF’) was subject to public consultation at the start of 2019. The next version of the plan is expected to be published in for a period of representations in November 2020. In accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework it is considered that very limited weight can be given to the policies in the GMSF.

The Publication Salford Local Plan: Development Management Policies and Designations (‘Local Plan’) was published on 27 January 2020 and comments were invited until 20 March 2020. This is the version of the document that the city council would like to adopt and has been subject to a significant amount of public consultation in previous stages of its production. However, in accordance with paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework the weight that can be given to the Local Plan overall is currently limited. The city council is in the process of considering the comments made to determine the extent to which there are unresolved objections to the policies in the Plan. Those policies with less significant (or no) objections will be capable of carrying more weight than those with significant unresolved objections.

In addition, following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) it is necessary to consider the weight which can be afforded to the policies of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan (paragraph 213 NPPF February 2019).

In terms of this application it is considered that the relevant policies of the UDP can be afforded due weight for the purposes of decision making as the relevant criteria within the UDP policies applicable to the proposed development are consistent with the policies contained in the NPPF.

Appraisal

Impact on the Green Belt and Visual Amenity

The site lies entirely within the Green Belt. Saved UDP Policy EN1 and the NPPF provide the policy framework against which planning applications in the Green Belt are determined.

Paragraph 133 of the NPPF confirms that the Government attaches great importance to Green Belts, with the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy being to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open, with the essential characteristics of Green Belts being their openness and their permanence.

The five purposes of the Green Belt are identified in paragraph 134 of the NPPF as: a) to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; b) to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; c) to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; d) to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and e) to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land

Paragraph 145 of the NPPF states that Local Planning Authority’s (LPAs) should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in the Green Belt, save for in a number of exceptional cases, with paragraph 146 identifying the forms of development that are not considered to be inappropriate in the Green Belt, provided they preserve its openness and do not conflict with the purposes of including land within it.

Paragraph 143 states that inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. Paragraph 144 then states that when considering any planning

Page 109

application, Local Planning Authority’s should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt, with ‘Very special circumstances’ not existing unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm resulting from the proposal, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.

It is accepted that the proposal would not compromise the five purposes of including land within the Green Belt, it would not result in urban sprawl or neighbouring towns merging into one another nor would it result in encroachment into the countryside.

However, neither the use of the land as a dog rescue centre and animal sanctuary, nor the erection of various buildings and hard and soft landscaped areas associated with this use, conform with any of the listed exceptions in the NPPF. Consequently, it is considered that the use and built form associated with the rescue centre and animal sanctuary amounts to inappropriate development in the Green Belt, which is, by definition, harmful to the openness of the greenbelt.

As can be seen in the images below, the site is heavily screened to the north, and consequently only glimpsed views are possible from the adjacent property at Brighton Grange Farm and the surrounding area, with views from the south east also being limited by the presence of the M62 motorway.

View from bridge across M62 looking north east towards the View south east towards Site from middle of field between Site (May 2020) Brighton Grange Farm and Nursery Farm (May 2020)

Long range views of the site from Barton Moss Road are also limited due to screening.

Looking north/north west along Barton Moss Road towards the Site Looking south/south east along Barton Moss Road towards the Site

There is however a proliferation of structures on the western boundary of the site, adjacent to Barton Moss Road, with “green fencing” having been installed adjacent to the static caravan located in the north western most corner of the site to screen it and limit views from Barton Moss Road.

Page 110

The applicant is proposing to install trellis and rapidly growing climbing evergreen plants to the remainder of the structures running along Barton Moss Road – the Groom Room, the Converted Storage Container and the Visitor Reception to provide similar screening – and this is welcomed.

However, notwithstanding the screening offered by the existing vegetation and boundary treatments and that which is proposed to the Barton Moss Road boundary, it is considered that the proposal causes substantial harm to the character and openness of the Green Belt. This is due to both the large number of structures distributed across the site, many of which are not in keeping with the Green Belt setting, and the presence of significant areas of hard and soft landscaping including areas of artificial grass and raised play surfaces, all of which detract from the simple rural character of the site. Furthermore, the site has been subdivided into distinct parcels for the various sub packs of dogs using chain link and timber fencing. The image below shows this –

Page 111

The applicant has presented a very special circumstances case to try and outweigh the harmful impact of the development on the Green Belt, with this focusing on (a) the unique nature of the rescue centre and the benefits having the rescue centre in its current location brings for the dogs and (b) the benefits the facility offers the community. These will be considered in turn below.

(a) The unique nature of the facility and the benefits of having the rescue centre in its current location for the dogs –

As set out above, the site offers a unique rescue centre experience where dogs are not kennelled but live in an environment that is much closer to a home environment.

The submission advises that the Nursery Farm site is ideal for providing such an offer as it provides a calm countryside location with adequate space to have multiple ‘free-running’ areas for the ‘sub-packs’ of dogs, as well as spaces where dogs can be trained and experience living in an environment that more closely replicates a home environment. It is explained how the space available at the Nursery Farm site allows the dogs to get sufficient exercise with the packs being rotated around the site to keep the dogs stimulated and enriched thereby ensuring that the dogs are happy and well-socialised. This gives them the best possible chance of being rehomed as the ability to allow the dogs to live in this way ensures that they do not develop the health and behavioural problems that kennelled dogs often suffer.

The benefits of such an approach are evidenced by the fact that in the seven years since the centre has been operational it has rehomed almost 1500 dogs, with Dogs4Rescue having worked with a number of traditional kennels, the most renowned being Battersea Dogs Home, to rehabilitate and rehome over 50 dogs which were not coping in a kennelled environment and would otherwise be put to sleep as they were deemed ‘unadoptable’.

In addition, it is explained how the space available at the Nursery Farm site allows the centre to provide a safe sanctuary where dogs that are badly ‘scarred’, or need special care and attention such as Sherry who is paralysed and double incontinent, can live out the rest of their lives, with the space at the site also having allowed for a number of feral dogs unsuited to a domestic environment to be permanently rehomed.

The submission goes on to explain that the rescue centre would not be suited to a more constrained urban environment, particularly as any loud noises would frighten some of the more timid dogs, with the relatively isolated location lending itself to the rescue use due to the infrequent flows of traffic and people along Barton Moss Road, ensure the dogs are not disturbed. Noise from the motorway does not disturb the dogs as it a constant noise that blends into the background.

(b) The benefits the facility offers the community -

The submission describes how Dogs4Rescue engage with many in the local community through initiatives which include –

 Offering opportunities for people within the community to volunteer at the site and walk the dogs –

The submission sets out that Dogs4Rescue has regular volunteers who attend the site between 9am-5pm every day, with 4-6 volunteers typically helping out either on site or off-site, walking the dogs at any one time.

The application includes accounts from 10 people who have volunteered at the site, setting out how the experience has benefited their mental and physical health by (i) helping them to feel productive and fulfilled (ii) giving them a sense of purpose and motivation (iii) providing them with a way of getting regular exercise out in the fresh air (iv) getting them out the house and giving them something to look forward to as they spend time with likeminded people, being part of the Dogs4Rescue community (v) providing an escape from busy, stressful jobs (vi) allowing people to learn new skills and guide career choices and (vii) helping with anxiety and stress and giving people pleasure and happiness.

 Providing Animal Assisted Therapy with a registered and chartered clinical psychologist

The submission sets out how therapy sessions with children and their families take place at the site every week between 10am and 4pm on Wednesdays and Sundays, with up to six sessions being held each day.

Page 112

The submission sets out how conducting therapy sessions at the centre with rescue dogs in attendance provides the psychologist with a unique point of access as the children often identify with the dogs as their background stories often resemble, at least in part, those of the children which leads the young person to feel more at ease allowing them to open up and talk thorough their issues with their animal companion by their side.

The submission includes six case studies which highlight how attending sessions have benefited children. This includes the case of a six year old boy who was taken out of mainstream school for behavioural issues and placed in special provision who was then given rescue therapy for six months on a weekly basis with this allowing the child to return to mainstream school. In addition, to the case of a 16-year-old boy who relocated to the UK from Europe and was very anxious about meeting and communicating with new people due to his accent with the sessions giving him an arena to calmly practice different scenarios using the therapy dog as a sounding board, with the sessions giving him the confidence to attend college and make new friends.

 Allowing older people to act as Enrichment Angels who visit the centre daily, via an appointment system, to spend time with the dogs.

The submission includes statements from two of the Enrichment Angels which highlight the positive role visits play in their lives, with the Enrichment Angels explaining how their visits have, amongst other things, given them focus and a reason to get out of the house and take some exercise, a way to relax and de-stress and a way to get over bereavements and deal with illness in the family and the stress of being a carer.

 Visiting schools with the dogs to educate children and destigmatize rescue dogs by demonstrating that rescue dogs don’t all have issues and are capable of being re-homed

The submission explains that Dogs4Rescue have undertaken five school visits, to three separate schools, between September 2019 and October 2020, including a visit to a special needs school to take part in an assembly. Normally more visits would be undertaken but visits to schools have been limited due to the current restrictions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

 Visiting care homes as a way to reach out to the most lonely and vulnerable in a mission to help dogs rescue people

The submission explains that so far Dogs4Rescue have visited three care homes between September 2019 and March 2020, with this project being a new venture that takes a lot of time to organise. It advises that once the current restrictions are over Dogs4Rescue are hoping to re-launch this programme, with more visits taking place as the dogs spread happiness and joy, with their presence particularly helping those who have had to part with pets on entering the home.

A case study example is provided which highlights how a dog placed in a care home helped a resident who had always had dogs at home. It explains how the pair bonded immediately, with the dog sleeping with the individual at night, providing great comfort.

A statement from the Dignity Lead for Manchester Council is also included where they state that “I work with care homes across Manchester and I identified that some residents had to part with their pets on entering the home which caused them, understandably, a lot of heartache. I started looking at ways that might help with this and started working with Dogs 4 Rescue in 2019. They came and spoke to both Activity Coordinator Networks in Manchester and brought a couple of their dogs with them. This proved to be very successful and there was a lot of interest. They are able to let care homes foster dogs, have visits, adopt them after a vigorous matching process and in the future they are hoping to allow residents to visit their premises to view all the varied animals in situ on a regular basis which I think is a very exciting project that care homes will certainly take up”.

 Hosting ‘Office Days’ where rescue dogs visit offices and allowing businesses to foster dogs

The submission explains that there have been 10 ‘Office Days’ between September 2019 and October 2020, including one that was filmed for Channel 4. It explains that Dogs4Rescue have been asked to do many more but have had to turn them down as there were not enough volunteers to assist at the time, with Covid Restrictions also limiting the number of office days that could take place.

Page 113

The supporting information explains how Dogs4Rescue have partnered with Team Knowhow, a local business in Irlam, who regularly foster dogs, typically having two rescue dogs living at their 24-hour depot at any one time. In a letter from the General Manager it is confirmed that the company have fostered 19 dogs over the past year, with the dogs making a huge difference to the office as “the dogs bring smiles and laughter – they get us all out for a walk increasing exercise and boosting morale. The team is closer and the responsibility of looking after a dog gives everyone a common goal. We have had more than one dog in at once and we’ve been able to give those who need a break from the rescue some much needed tlc time. It’s rewarding in many ways and our whole team feel the benefits.”.

 Hosting team building days where teams from various businesses volunteer to help out at the rescue centre undertaking tasks such as cleaning, painting, weeding and dog walking take place fortnightly on a Friday.

The submission advises that there were 20 team build days held in 2019, with Dogs4Rescue having been asked to do many more. It notes that volunteers always find the experience rewarding, getting a unique experience in a completely unique setting.

 Allowing individuals to “borrow our rescue” and foster dogs

The application states that the “borrow our rescue” provides benefits to those who cannot have a dog full-time or on a long term basis with a case study of someone who regularly “borrows a recue” noting that “For us humans the benefits are huge too. We get to have some healthy exercise in the fresh air, we enjoy the company of the dogs and we get to spoil them and show them some love and treat them – this is extremely rewarding – it is a great stress buster and diversion from the pressures of life. You feel a sense of achievement that you have helped out in a small way and help the dogs get used to humans whilst giving them an opportunity to have some quality human time and spend some time sniffing new scents and enjoying the fresh air. We have felt really enriched since we have been volunteering as helping out really does make you feel better and that you have contributed to an animal’s happiness even if it’s in a very small way. We love helping out at Dogs4Rescue and truly feel that we have benefited immensely from the experience.”

The supporting information advises that the Dogs4Rescue’s foster programme allows people wishing to ‘trial’ how a dog would fit within their home; or for those who are able to care for a dog on a full time basis, but not necessarily for the long-term, to foster a rescue dog. A case study example explains how one individual had fostered over 40 dogs, with the experience leaving them with happy memories and a sense that they have played a part in preparing the dogs for their new homes and helping them find their happy endings.

Having regard to the above it is considered that a detailed case for ‘very special circumstances’ has been put forward by the applicant, with the benefits that Dogs4Rescue offers to both the dogs it rescues and the wider community representing very special circumstances that justify granting planning permission for inappropriate development within the greenbelt.

However, in order to ensure the continued operation of the centre, as detailed in this application, it is considered that a personal permission is appropriate, with a condition setting out that the dog rescue and animal sanctuary on the site shall only be operated by Emma Billington operating as Dogs4Rescue, being recommended.

A condition restricting occupation of the three caravans on the site to those volunteering at or employed by Dogs4 Rescue should also be attached as the introduction of ancillary living accommodation at the site is only deemed to be appropriate because, as set out in the proposal section above, it is necessary to allow Dogs4Rescue to operate in the way that they do.

Given that the application is only supported on the basis of the very special circumstance case put forward by Dogs4Rescure it is also considered necessary to include a condition that requires the use of the site as a dog rescue and animal sanctuary to cease and all structures on site, save for the farmhouse, to be removed within three months should Dogs4Rescue leave the site. The occupation of the facility by an alternative operator would not necessarily be deemed appropriate in this Green Belt location as it may not offer the same benefits to the dogs and the wider community as Dogs4Rescue does.

In addition, a further condition that requires a green screen to be installed to the remainder of the structures running along Barton Moss Road – the Groom Room; the Converted Storage Container; and the Visitor Reception, within the next planting season, will be attached to reduce the visual impact of these structures.

Page 114

Members should note that the facility proposed under this application differs significantly from that refused in 2013 and subsequently dismissed at appeal. The appeal scheme involved the introduction of a new building and chain link fencing in order to allow the use of the site to provide day care for dogs. It was a commercial operation, which was deemed to represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt and there were no very special circumstances that outweighed the harm by reason of inappropriateness. This current proposal is for a charitable operation which offers significant benefits to both the dogs it rescues and the wider community, with these benefits being considered to outweigh any harm that exist by reason of inappropriateness.

Impact on the Mosslands

The application site is located within the Mosslands, but outside the Heartland. According to policy EN11 it will be assumed that a site has the potential to be restored to lowland raised bog habitat unless the applicant can clearly demonstrate otherwise. No evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the land could not practicably be restored to lowland raised bog habitat and consequently part B(b) of the policy EN11 is of relevance.

According to Part B(b)(i) of Policy EN11 development that would affect land which has the potential to be restored to lowland raised bog habitat will be permitted where the development would not prevent restoration in the future.

In this case, a proportion of the development on the site is on previously developed land, with the majority of the buildings being non-permanent structures without foundations. The landscaped areas and boundary fencing are also capable of being easily removed to facilitate restoration. Having regard to this, and being mindful of the benefits the proposal brings for both the animals rescued and the wider community, it is considered that the proposal complies with policy EN11 – the development would not prevent the restoration of the land to raised bog habitat in the future, with the proposal not therefore affecting the landscape or nature conservation value of the Mosslands.

Residential Amenity

The application site is located within the Green Belt, being bounded to the north and west by open land, with the M62 Motorway running to the south and east. The closest residential property to the site is Brighton Grange Farm which is located approximately 60m to the north.

Having regard to the offset from the closest residential properties, it is not considered that the introduction of the structures, hard and soft landscaped areas or the boundary treatments has resulted in neighbouring residents experiencing a loss of amenity by virtue of them experiencing an unacceptable loss of light, privacy and/or any overbearing impact.

In respect of the use of the site as a dog rescue and animal sanctuary, the application has been submitted with a noise assessment which states that using worst case assumptions i.e. all dogs barking at the closest part of the site to the neighbouring residents, the noise level generated by the barking dogs would not have a significant impact upon the neighbouring property. There is a ‘no barking policy’ appended to the noise assessment, which advises that, due to the dogs not being kennelled, the dogs backgrounds, and the way that the centre operates to ensure that dogs don’t become bored, stressed or fearful, there is limited noise generated from barking. It states that where barking does occur there are staff present on site at all times to challenge any barking thereby ensuring that it is stopped straight away and not allowed to continue, with the dogs soon learning what behaviour is acceptable.

Having regard to the conclusions of the report and given that the centre operates a “no barking policy” which effectively ensures successful noise management at the site, the Council’s environment team have advised that they have no objections to the proposal on noise grounds subject to the attachment of a condition that requires the centre to be operated in accordance with the “no barking policy” appended to the noise assessment.

Environmental Health officers have advised that in the seven years that the centre has been operational they have not received any noise complaints.

For these reasons, subject to the attachment of the condition recommended by the Environment team, a condition to limit the number of dogs on site at any one time to 40 and a condition that requires a full time staff presence, the proposal is considered to be in accordance with policies DES7 and EN17 of the UDP and the thrust of the

Page 115

NPPF as it has not/would not adversely affect the level of residential amenity neighbouring residents can reasonably expect to enjoy.

Parking and highway safety

Vehicular access to the site is from Barton Moss Road with parking for approximately six vehicles being provided on a hard-surfaced area located to the front of the site, adjacent to Barton Moss Road. There is also a hard- surfaced driveway accessed from Barton Moss Road that can accommodate two vehicles, with this area being used by those living on site.

The submission has been reviewed by the Council’s highway officer who has advised that they have no objections to the proposal on highway safety grounds as while the site will attract visitors it is not expected to become a major trip generator. As such the development is unlikely to have any noticeable effect on the local highway network, with the site having a small parking area for visitors.

Having regard to the comments of the highway officer, it is not considered that the proposal has had/would have an unacceptable adverse impact upon highway safety subject to the attachment of a condition that requires the two parking areas to be retained at all times when the site is being used as a Dog Rescue and Animal Sanctuary. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with policies A8 and A10 of the adopted UDP.

In respect of the public right of way, the built form on site has not blocked the passage of pedestrians along the public footway running to the front of the site along Barton Moss Road. Therefore, it is considered that the proposal has/would not affect the use of the public right of way. The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with policy A2 of the adopted UDP.

Recommendation

In accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009: circular 02/2009, if planning panel resolve to grant planning permission, the Local Planning Authority is required to refer the application to the Secretary of State. The applications must be referred to the Secretary of State because the development is considered to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt that would have a significant impact on the openness of the Green Belt.

Recommendation - Refer to the Secretary of State with a resolution that full planning permission be granted for the use of the site as a Dog Rescue and Animal Sanctuary, with associated outbuildings, exercise areas and ancillary workers accommodation, subject to the conditions set out below.

Conditions

1. The development hereby approved is detailed in the following approved plans: Site location plan – drawing 749/100 Issue B Site plan – drawing 749/110 Issue E Boundary treatments plan – drawing 749/120 Issue C Structure 1 – Static caravan – drawing 749/201 Structure 2 – Visitor reception – drawing 749/202 Structure 3 – Food store and volunteer briefing room – drawing 749/203 Structure 4 – Groom room and visitor WC – drawing 749/204 Structure 5 – Community hut – drawing 749/205 Structure 6 – Farmhouse – drawing 749/206 Structure 7 – Touring caravan – drawing 749/207 Structure 8 – Static caravan – drawing 749/208 Structure 9 – Shelter for the dogs – drawing 749/209 Structure 10 – Shelter for the dogs – drawing 749/210 Structure 15 – Food storage container – drawing 749/215 Structure 16 - Food storage container – drawing 749/216 Structure 17 – Tool shed – drawing 749/216

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

Page 116

2. The dog rescue and animal sanctuary hereby permitted shall only be operated by Emma Billington operating as Dogs4Rescue as detailed in the operational management strategy contained within appendix C of the Planning Policy Compliance Statement by Euan Kellie Property Solutions dated May 2020.

Reason: The application site is located in the Green Belt with the proposal representing inappropriate development which is only deemed acceptable on the basis that it is operated in accordance with the details submitted in this application.

3. The two static caravans and one touring caravan hereby approved on the site shall only be occupied by those volunteering at, or employed by, Dogs4 Rescue.

Reason: The application site is located in the Green Belt with the proposal representing inappropriate development which is only deemed acceptable on the basis that it is operated in accordance with the details submitted in this application.

4. If Dogs4Rescure leave the site the use of the site as a dog rescue and animal sanctuary shall cease and all structures on site, save for the farmhouse, shall be removed within three months of Dogs4Rescue leaving the site and the land returned to its former condition as open land.

Reason: The application site is located in the Green Belt with the proposal representing inappropriate development which is only deemed acceptable on the basis that it is operated in accordance with the details submitted in this application.

5. Within two months of the date of decision full details of the green screen and planting shown on approved drawing 749/120 Issue C and detailed in section 7.49 of the Planning Policy Compliance Statement by Euan Kellie Property Solutions dated May 2020 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full within the first replanting season following approval and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: To improve the appearance of the site and reduce the developments impact upon the openness of the Green Belt in accordance with saved UDP policies DES1 and EN1 and the design and greenbelt policies in the NPPF

6. There shall be no more than 40 dogs accommodated on site at any one time.

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

7. The dog rescue and animal sanctuary hereby permitted shall be operated in accordance with the submitted “no barking policy” appended to the Hann Tucker Associates Noise Impact Assessment, dated May 2020, Report Reference 27899.

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

8. At no time shall dogs be kept at the site unless under the supervision of at least four members of staff

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

9. The two parking areas shown on approved drawing 749/110 Issue E shall be retained and made available for use in association with the dog rescue and animal sanctuary hereby permitted at all times.

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

Page 117

Notes to Applicant

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

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

This Standing Advice is valid from 1st January 2019 until 31st December 2020

Page 118

Agenda Item 6

Part 1: Open to the Public

REPORT OF The Strategic Director for Place

TO The Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel ON 17th December 2020

TITLE: Planning Applications determined under Delegated Authority

RECOMMENDATIONS: That the report be noted.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To set out details of applications determined by the Strategic Director for Place in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation.

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS: (Available for public inspection) Details of the applications are available on the Council’s Public Access Website http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/default.aspx If you would like to access this information in an alternative format, please contact the planning office on 0161-779 6195 or e-mail [email protected]

KEY DECISION: NO

DETAILS: Please refer to the attached schedule.

KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: Performance Management

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND IMPLICATIONS: N/A

ASSESSMENT OF RISK: N/A

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

PROCUREMENT IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

HR IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

CLIMATE CHANGE IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED: N/A

CONTACT OFFICER: Liz Taylor TEL NO: 0161 779 4803

WARDS TO WHICH REPORT RELATES: As specified in the attached schedule. ______

Page 119

Recommendation

PER = Approve AUTH = Consent REF = Refuse NO OBJECTION = Allow the scheme as no objections have been received. An example would be used in response to consultations from neighbouring authorities or in relation to prior approvals when no objections have been received DISCON = Discharge of condition – an example would be that the submitted information is approved PDIS = Part discharge of conditions requested – an example of this would be that negotiations are still on-going with regard to some of the requested conditions or the condition is a multi- staged condition and part is acceptable NDIS = Not Discharging condition requested – an example would be the submitted information is not acceptable and the decision is to refuse

Application Type

FUL = Full application ADV = Advert Application OUT = Outline Application HH = Householder Application REM = Reserved Matters COU = Change of use LBC = Listed Building Consent CON = Conservation Area Consent DISCON = Formal Discharge of Condition NMA = Non-Material Amendment MMA = Minor material Amendment DEMCON = Demolition Consultation TPO = Tree Application TEL56 = Telecommunication Notification ART16 = Art16 Notification PDE = General Permitted Development Extension

Page 120 DELEGATED DECISIONS BY DCM

APPLICATION No: 20/76107/LPACON DATE VALID: 29.09.2020

APPLICANT:Angela Leckie

LOCATION: Manchester Cathedral , Victoria Street, Manchester, M3 1SX

PROPOSAL: Consultation received from Manchester Council (Ref 128045/VO/2020) for City Council Development - Public realm works to create a new public amenity space (Phases 1A, 1B and 1C) comprising the creation of a memorial feature to the Manchester Arena Attack, new entrance square in front of Manchester Cathedral, areas of new paving, amenity planting, raised lawns, tree planting, street furniture and lighting.

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76331/LPACON DATE VALID: 03.11.2020

APPLICANT:Jennie Townsend

LOCATION: Singleton Court Bury Old Road Prestwich M25 8FX

PROPOSAL: Consultation from Bury Council (BMBC ref. 65846) for: Conversion of roof space to create 5no 2bed 3person self-contained units with front and rear dormers and new enclosed external stairwells. Associated refuse and bike storage.

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 November 2020 ______

Page 121 APPLICATION No: 20/76334/LPACON DATE VALID: 04.11.2020

APPLICANT:Jeff Davies

LOCATION: Power Station 132 Manchester Road Carrington M31 4AY

PROPOSAL: Consultation from Trafford Council (reference number 102133/FUL/20) for Installation of a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) including battery units, transformer units, inverter cabinets and banking compound, with a generation capacity of 49.9MW and storage capacity of up to 250MWh with associated access, parking and fencing.

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76335/LPACON DATE VALID: 04.11.2020

APPLICANT:Jeff Davies

LOCATION: Power Station 132 Manchester Road Carrington M31 4AY

PROPOSAL: Consultation from Trafford Council (reference number 102134/FUL/20) for Installation of a gas engine-based peaking facility of up to 49.9MW gross electrical capacity, including gas engines, stacks, cooling systems, fire water tank and pump house, gas kiosk and banking compound with associated access, parking and fencing.

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 November 2020 ______

Page 122 APPLICATION No: 20/76380/LPACON DATE VALID: 10.11.2020

APPLICANT:Cormac McGowan

LOCATION: Article 18 Land Adjoining The Manchester Ship Canal North Of Lock Lane And Thirlmere Road Partington

PROPOSAL: Article 18 Re- consultation received from Trafford Council (Application number 100110/RES/20) - Amended plans and red edge boundary for the approval of reserved matters for layout, scale, appearance and landscaping pursuant to 86160/OUT/15 for the erection of 299 dwellings (including 39 affordable homes), public open space including play facilities, and associated works including flood water storage tanks and the erection of sub-stations. The application is accompanied by an EIA compliance statement

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75792/FUL DATE VALID: 21.08.2020 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr Damien Cain

LOCATION: 1 Hamilton Avenue Eccles M30 0FF

PROPOSAL: Partial demolition of the existing single storey outrigger and erection of a new replacement flat roof over, erection of a single storey side extension, alterations to the elevations and conversion of the existing dwelling into two flats.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76031/HH DATE VALID: 29.09.2020 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr Steve Wadsworth

LOCATION: 36 Cannon Street Eccles M30 0FT

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 November 2020 ______

Page 123 APPLICATION No: 20/76036/HH DATE VALID: 07.10.2020 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr Brian Robb

LOCATION: 2 Bradburn Avenue Eccles M30 0NH

PROPOSAL: Erection of a first floor side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 2 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76057/FUL DATE VALID: 07.10.2020 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Deji and Ceri Adeyeye

LOCATION: 192 Liverpool Road Eccles M30 0PF

PROPOSAL: Conversion of the existing ground floor shop and residential accommodation above into 8-bedroom HMO (House in multiple occupancy) (Sui Generis) and alterations to elevations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/74882/LBC DATE VALID: 16.04.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Scott Sugden And Ellenbrook LOCATION: RHS Bridgewater Worsley M28 1HP

PROPOSAL: Listed Building consent for the Internal works and formation of external access ramp and steps.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

Page 124 APPLICATION No: 20/75187/FUL DATE VALID: 29.04.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Scott Sugden And Ellenbrook LOCATION: RHS Bridgewater Worsley M28 1HP

PROPOSAL: Construction of external access ramp and steps.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75636/HH DATE VALID: 23.07.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Craig Stephenson And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 15 Langtree Close Worsley M28 7XT

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey side and rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75784/PDE DATE VALID: 15.10.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Mark Yarwood And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 17 Springburn Close Worsley M28 1XN

PROPOSAL: Demolition of an existing rear conservatory and erection of a rear conservatory

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 November 2020 ______

Page 125 APPLICATION No: 20/75882/HH DATE VALID: 08.09.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Tracey Davenport And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 21 Meadowfield Drive Worsley M28 1NG

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey side and rear extension and external alteration

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75908/HH DATE VALID: 04.09.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Sree Thampy And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 6 Gatemere Close Worsley M28 7UY

PROPOSAL: Erection of a 1st floor side extension over existing garage, single storey front porch extension including a front extension to existing garage featuring a new bay window and conversion of 1 x garage into a living space.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75971/HH DATE VALID: 22.09.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr And Mrs J Sedgley And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 4 Habergham Close Worsley M28 7XJ

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of a part two, part single storey rear extension with first floor Juliet balcony

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

Page 126 APPLICATION No: 20/75999/DISCON DATE VALID: 17.09.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Neil Sharp And Ellenbrook LOCATION: Land North Of Simpson Grove And East Of Border Brook Lane Worsley M28 1LY

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 2 (Materials) attached to planning permission 19/73119/REM

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76018/CLUDP DATE VALID: 19.09.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Zoe Diompy And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 3 Doefield Avenue Worsley M28 7GT

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76121/ADV DATE VALID: 07.10.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Royal Horticultural Society And Ellenbrook LOCATION: RHS Bridgewater Occupation Road (off Leigh Road) Worsley M28 1HP

PROPOSAL: Installation of 4 no. non-illuminated advertisement displays at the entrance of the RHS Bridgewater site. Re-Submission of 20/75060/ADV

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

Page 127 APPLICATION No: 20/76153/PDE DATE VALID: 19.10.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Lee Ritches And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 56 Leigh Road Worsley M28 1LR

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76217/DISCON DATE VALID: 20.10.2020 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT:Mr Neil Sharp And Ellenbrook LOCATION: Land North Of Simpson Grove And East Of Border Brook Lane Worsley M28 1LY

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 5 (Construction Method Statement) attached to planning permission 19/73119/REM

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/74880/DISCON DATE VALID: 25.02.2020 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr Christian Bury

LOCATION: Land Formerly Griffin Hotel Lower Broughton Road Salford

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 4 - (Construction Method Statement), 9 - (Travel Plan), 11 - (Waste Management Strategy), 13 - (Noise), 10 - (Landscape and Habitat Creation Scheme), 18 - (Hard and Soft landscaping), 20 - (Tree Replacement Scheme), 22 - (Surface Water Drainage), 23 - (flood risk mitigation), 25 - (Emergency Planning Statement), 28 - (Flood Interpretation Scheme) attached to planning permission 17/70056/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 November 2020 ______

Page 128 APPLICATION No: 20/75821/DISCON DATE VALID: 03.09.2020 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr Fred Baama

LOCATION: Land Formerly Griffin Hotel Lower Broughton Road Salford

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 2 (Materials), 8 (cycle storage), 9 (travel plan), 15 (verification report), 17 (contamination and suitability), 18 (landscaping), 21 (proposed vehicular and pedestrian access gates), 22 (surface water drainage), 26 (Foul and surface water) and 28 (flood interpretation scheme) attached to planning permission 17/70056/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 12 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76097/HH DATE VALID: 09.10.2020 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT: Mr Shloime Abenson

LOCATION: 23 King Street Higher Broughton Salford M7 4PU

PROPOSAL: Conversion of existing garage into habitable living area, part two storey part single storey rear extension and loft conversion with dormer window to front elevation and flat roof rear dormer.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76103/HH DATE VALID: 03.10.2020 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr Aron Wieser

LOCATION: 5 Broughton Green Square Salford M7 2GH

PROPOSAL: Single storey rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

Page 129 APPLICATION No: 20/76167/TPO DATE VALID: 14.10.2020 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT:Mr James Beswick

LOCATION: Greek Orthodox Church Bury New Road Salford M7 4EY

PROPOSAL: Fell one ash tree (T1)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75884/HH DATE VALID: 04.09.2020 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Mr Anthony Johnson

LOCATION: 1 Banklands Close Cadishead Irlam M44 5DQ

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing rear conservatory and erection of a part two part single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76073/NMA DATE VALID: 30.09.2020 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Mrs Miranda Bell

LOCATION: Land Off Omega Drive Northbank Industrial Estate Irlam M44 5GR

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment following the grant of planning permission 18/72017/FUL for installation of doors and changes in car parking

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

Page 130 APPLICATION No: 20/76096/DISCON DATE VALID: 02.10.2020 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:Mr Karl Daniels

LOCATION: Land Adjacent 10 Tramway Road Irlam M44 5BE

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 11 (Phase 2 Site Investigation),12 (Validation of remedial works),13 (Drainage) and 14 (Foul and surface water) attached to planning permission 19/74365/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76161/HH DATE VALID: 13.10.2020 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:TRACY & NIGEL PICKERING

LOCATION: 8 Leader Williams Road Irlam M44 6AU

PROPOSAL: Erection of a part two, part single storey side extension (Resubmission of 20/75409/HH)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75994/PDE DATE VALID: 05.10.2020 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Mr Richard Teasdale

LOCATION: 25 Weylands Grove Salford M6 7WX

PROPOSAL: Single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 November 2020 ______

Page 131 APPLICATION No: 20/76010/HH DATE VALID: 22.09.2020 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Eileen Urey

LOCATION: 21 Ranelagh Road Swinton M27 4HG

PROPOSAL: Removal of existing conservatory. Proposed single storey rear/ side extension with roof windows.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76021/HH DATE VALID: 04.10.2020 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Mrs Pravina Patidar

LOCATION: 15 Burnside Avenue Salford M6 8NS

PROPOSAL: Erection of a first floor side extension together with alterations to elevations.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76222/TPO DATE VALID: 21.10.2020 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Keates

LOCATION: Cygnet Lodge Radcliffe Park Road Salford M6 7WQ

PROPOSAL: 20% crown thin and crown clean (to remove storm damaged/badly pruned branch stubs in mid crown) one beech (T1).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

Page 132 APPLICATION No: 20/74892/FUL DATE VALID: 28.02.2020 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Constructing Growth and

LOCATION: Land Off Lansdowne Road Eccles M30 9PD

PROPOSAL: Redevelopment of the Site to provide 36 no. apartments, in a part four and part five storey building, together with associated parking and site infrastructure

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75794/HH DATE VALID: 17.08.2020 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Thej Koppa Narayana

LOCATION: 49 Ellesmere Road Eccles M30 9JH

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of a single storey rear extension and 2no. x two storey front extensions with a single storey front porch including balcony area above porch. Additional roof light windows to front and rear elevation, conversion of garage into a habitable room and external alterations including insertion of 2 x windows in original side elevation of house

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75859/TPO DATE VALID: 20.10.2020 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mrs Goss

LOCATION: Ellesmere Lodge 28 Ellesmere Road Eccles

PROPOSAL: Remove three lowest limbs and limb at mid height that overhangs the garden of 2 Allington Drive (as indicated on submitted photograph) one sycamore tree (T1)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

Page 133 APPLICATION No: 20/76014/HH DATE VALID: 19.09.2020 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs M Sargent

LOCATION: 22 Winchester Road Eccles M30 9BS

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of a single storey rear and a two storey side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76047/DISCON DATE VALID: 25.09.2020 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:ForViva ForHousing

LOCATION: Plot Of Land East Of Vicars Street Vicars Street Eccles M30 0DG

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 5 (Landscaping), 6 (Cycle Parking), 9 (Site Completion Report) and 16 (Tree Replacement Scheme) attached to planning permission 18/72588/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 12 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76076/DISCON DATE VALID: 01.10.2020 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Goodwin

LOCATION: Crown Bingo Hall Church Street Eccles M30 0LZ

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 5 (contaminated land remediation strategy), 10 (retained and new elements) and 11 (Construction Method Statement) attached to planning permission 16/68464/FUL. Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 4 (retained and new elements) attached to planning permission 16/68465/LBC.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 November 2020 ______

Page 134 APPLICATION No: 20/76085/TPO DATE VALID: 19.10.2020 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr David Feeney

LOCATION: 12 Rutland Road Eccles M30 9FA

PROPOSAL: Remove two branches (indicated in photograph 3) one lime tree (T1).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76102/HH DATE VALID: 09.10.2020 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Miss Holly Smith

LOCATION: 23A Half Edge Lane Eccles M30 9AY

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of a single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76116/CLUDP DATE VALID: 06.10.2020 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:COUPER

LOCATION: 9 Godolphin Close Eccles M30 9EW

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

Page 135 APPLICATION No: 20/76180/TPO DATE VALID: 15.10.2020 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT:Mr James Beswick

LOCATION: 14 Westminster Road Eccles M30 9EB

PROPOSAL: 15% crown thin one sycamore tree (T1) 20% crown thin two lime trees (T2 and T3).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75532/OUT DATE VALID: 28.07.2020 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Mottram

LOCATION: Chat Moss Herbs Barton Moss Road Eccles M30 7RL

PROPOSAL: Variation of condition 3 (occupancy) attached to planning permission 94/33087/OUT

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75934/HH DATE VALID: 08.09.2020 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:Mr Robert Sumner

LOCATION: 80 The Crescent Irlam M44 6EG

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing detached outbuilding and erection of a detached single storey outbuilding to rear end of garden

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 November 2020 ______

Page 136 APPLICATION No: 20/75988/HH DATE VALID: 22.09.2020 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT:NATALIE MATHER

LOCATION: 3 Hartley Grove Irlam M44 6HL

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing single storey side and rear extension and erection of a single storey side and rear wrap round extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75876/NMA DATE VALID: 28.08.2020 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Matthew Baldwin Riverside

LOCATION: 1 Encombe Place Salford M3 6FJ

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment following the grant of planning permission 17/71160/FUL ground floor apartment entrance doors / fire escape doors, reduction in height of the parapet wall, galvanised powder coated balustrade and removal of soldier course brickwork.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75898/LBC DATE VALID: 02.09.2020 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Gary Leckenby Riverside

LOCATION: Old Court House, Flat 23 Encombe Place Salford M3 6FJ

PROPOSAL: Listed Building Consent for the replacement of two first floor hardwood sash windows.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 November 2020 ______

Page 137 APPLICATION No: 20/75936/FUL DATE VALID: 10.09.2020 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Alatoru MacPepple Riverside

LOCATION: 3 Ventnor Street Salford M6 6BH

PROPOSAL: Change of use from C3 dwelling to C4, 4 bed, 4 person HMO, together with construction of rear dormer

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75981/FUL DATE VALID: 15.09.2020 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Thomas Holt Riverside

LOCATION: Delaney Heights Cannon Street Salford M3 6FD

PROPOSAL: Concrete slab for a sprinkler tank with 2No fire pumps and UPS battery back-up with GRP housing around the tank

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75993/P3JPA DATE VALID: 01.10.2020 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Benjamin Eckstein Riverside

LOCATION: 1 Peel Mount Salford M6 6AF

PROPOSAL: Prior Approval for the proposed change of use from offices (Class B1(a)) to one dwellinghouse (Class C3)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 November 2020 ______

Page 138 APPLICATION No: 20/76015/LBC DATE VALID: 19.09.2020 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Salford City Council Riverside

LOCATION: Salford Gallery And Museum Crescent Salford M5 4WU

PROPOSAL: Listed Building Consent to form opening on flat roof for roof access hatch

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76098/DISCON DATE VALID: 02.10.2020 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Sean Kempley Riverside

LOCATION: Former Manchester Racecourse Turnstiles Building Cromwell Road Salford M6 6DB

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 10 (ecological (bat) surveys) attached to planning permission 20/75015/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76144/DISCON DATE VALID: 10.10.2020 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:James Parry Riverside

LOCATION: Irwell House 40-42 Frederick Road Salford M6 6NY

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 9 (Travel Plan) and 12 (Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction) attached to planning permission 17/69401/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 December 2020 ______

Page 139 APPLICATION No: 20/76162/DISCON DATE VALID: 13.10.2020 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Matthew Fisher Riverside

LOCATION: The Crescent Salford M5 4PF

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 10 (noise mitigation measures) attached to planning permission 15/67356/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76249/NMA DATE VALID: 24.10.2020 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT:Mr Ben Thomas Riverside

LOCATION: Car Park Frederick Road Campus, M6 6PU

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment following a grant the planning permission 20/74930/FUL for amendment to the below ground drainage in relation to condition 11 and drawing UOSEH-CUR-00-00-DR-C-9250.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75911/HH DATE VALID: 21.09.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Silverstein

LOCATION: 17 Wensley Road Salford M7 3GJ

PROPOSAL: Proposed ground floor wrapped round rear/side extension with roof windows, two storey rear extension and first floor side extension, loft conversion with rear dormer

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 November 2020 ______

Page 140 APPLICATION No: 20/75943/HH DATE VALID: 16.09.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Y Saunders

LOCATION: 81 Singleton Road Salford M7 4LX

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension with roof window

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76001/PRI DATE VALID: 24.09.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Mordechai Teff

LOCATION: 6 Park Avenue Salford M7 4SF

PROPOSAL: Prior Approval for the erection of a single storey extension above existing first floor (max. height 5.386)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76002/PRI DATE VALID: 24.09.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Rose

LOCATION: 6 Kersal Crag Salford M7 4SL

PROPOSAL: Prior Approval for the erection of a single storey extension above the existing second floor (max. height 4.700m)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 November 2020 ______

Page 141 APPLICATION No: 20/76004/PRI DATE VALID: 24.09.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Kohn Nosson

LOCATION: 5 Ivy Gardens Salford M7 4NY

PROPOSAL: Prior Approval for the erection of single storey extension above the existing second floor (max. height 4.053m)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75972/COU DATE VALID: 18.09.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Mish Liyanage

LOCATION: 219 Littleton Road Salford M7 3TJ

PROPOSAL: Change of use from C3 (dwelling) to a small HMO C4 (4 residents)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75982/TPO DATE VALID: 01.10.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Rob Potter

LOCATION: 28 Vine Street Salford M7 3PG

PROPOSAL: Reduce over-extended lateral projecting to north by approx 1.5m and crown reduce to leave a height of 5.5m and a width spread of 2m one cherry (T0484).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

Page 142 APPLICATION No: 20/75985/FUL DATE VALID: 16.09.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Friedman

LOCATION: 4 New Hall Road Salford M7 4EL

PROPOSAL: Retention of single storey rear extension together with external alterations to facade

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75997/HH DATE VALID: 28.09.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Rushparl Singh

LOCATION: 79 Singleton Road Salford M7 4LX

PROPOSAL: Single storey rear extension and loft conversion with additional roof windows

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76055/HH DATE VALID: 08.10.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Wolf

LOCATION: 16A Cavendish Road Salford M7 4WW

PROPOSAL: Single storey rear extension to form Sukkah Room with flat roof and opening glazed roof light, with external concrete ramp.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 December 2020 ______

Page 143 APPLICATION No: 20/76062/PDE DATE VALID: 07.10.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Lionel Emanuel

LOCATION: 137 George Street South Salford M7 4QP

PROPOSAL: Single storey rear extension

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76064/TPO DATE VALID: 19.10.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Paul Bowden

LOCATION: Blackfields Bury New Road Salford

PROPOSAL: Prune back to the new boundary fence (in accordance with attached photograph) one Sycamore (T1) and one ash (T2).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76101/FUL DATE VALID: 20.10.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Salford City Football Club

LOCATION: The Peninsula Stadium Moor Lane Salford M7 3PZ

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the erection of a security control room and media suite

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

Page 144 APPLICATION No: 20/76137/CLUD DATE VALID: 09.10.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Yonathan Kahn

LOCATION: 110 Nevile Road Salford M7 3PL

PROPOSAL: Certificate of Lawful Development for existing fence above 1m high

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76252/FUL DATE VALID: 24.10.2020 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT:Mr Martin Smith

LOCATION: 298 Littleton Road Salford M7 3QG

PROPOSAL: Erection of new hipped roof

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76049/CLUDP DATE VALID: 25.09.2020 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Mr Tom O'Clee

LOCATION: 1 Halton Bank Salford M6 7AB

PROPOSAL: Certificate of lawful development for the proposed installation of 32 Ground Source Heat Pumps on a shared borefield at Halton Bank, Salford.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

Page 145 APPLICATION No: 20/76066/COU DATE VALID: 29.09.2020 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Salford Estates (no.2) Ltd

LOCATION: 122 Albany Way Salford M6 5HR

PROPOSAL: Change of use from Restaurant/Cafe to Fish & Chip Restaurant and Hot Food Takeaway (Sui Generis) with no external alterations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76138/COU DATE VALID: 09.10.2020 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Mr Jack Stocker

LOCATION: 20 Pembroke Street Salford M6 5GS

PROPOSAL: Conversion of dwelling (C3) to 5 bed, HMO (C4)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76148/P3NPA DATE VALID: 09.10.2020 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Mr Alan Edge

LOCATION: 1 Mulberry Court Mulberry Road Salford

PROPOSAL: Application for prior approval for change of use of ground floor from shop (E) to residential (C3) with alterations to elevations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 December 2020 ______

Page 146 APPLICATION No: 20/76149/P3NPA DATE VALID: 09.10.2020 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Mr Alan Edge

LOCATION: 1 Sycamore Court Paddington Close Salford M6 5FR

PROPOSAL: Application for prior approval for change of use of ground floor from shop (E) to residential (C3) with alterations to elevations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76150/P3NPA DATE VALID: 09.10.2020 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT:Mr Alan Edge

LOCATION: 1 Magnolia Court Citrus Way Salford M6 5AN

PROPOSAL: Application for prior approval for change of use of ground floor from shop (A1) to residential (C3) with alterations to elevations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75676/HH DATE VALID: 14.08.2020 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Loynes

LOCATION: 7 Calder Drive Worsley M28 0TH

PROPOSAL: Single storey conservatory to the rear

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

Page 147 APPLICATION No: 20/75765/FUL DATE VALID: 23.09.2020 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Mr Suleman Muhammad

LOCATION: 286 Manchester Road West Little Hulton Worsley M38 9UX

PROPOSAL: Proposed change of use of ground floor from newsagent (Class E) to hot food take away (Sui Generis), together with alterations to elevation and installation of extraction flue to side elevation

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75823/DISCON DATE VALID: 20.08.2020 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Mr Elliot Read

LOCATION: Land At Old Lane Little Hulton

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of partial compliance of condition 4 (Travel Plan) attached to planning permission 17/71019/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined

DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75950/FUL DATE VALID: 09.09.2020 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Mr Indravarden Patel

LOCATION: 15 Manchester Road West Little Hulton Worsley M38 9EG

PROPOSAL: Creation of a first floor covered escape walkway over existing stores and installation of external escape staircase to rear garden/car park area

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

Page 148 APPLICATION No: 20/75978/DISCON DATE VALID: 13.10.2020 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Mr L Makin

LOCATION: Land At Old Lane Little Hulton

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 4 (Travel Plan), 7 (contamination and suitability) and 8 (verification report) attached to planning permission 17/71019/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76072/FUL DATE VALID: 30.09.2020 WARD: Little Hulton APPLICANT:Mr Matthew Buckley

LOCATION: Worsley Wastewater Treatment Works Mort Lane Worsley

PROPOSAL: Construction of 3 No. Motor Control Centre Kiosks

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 19/73954/NMA DATE VALID: 01.08.2019 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Sweeney

LOCATION: Land On The South West Side Of Michigan Avenue Salford M50 2GY

PROPOSAL: Application for non-material amendment to planning permission 15/66481/FUL for inclusion of 7 no external car park spaces within the site boundary.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 November 2020 ______

Page 149 APPLICATION No: 19/74275/NMA DATE VALID: 11.10.2019 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:C/O

LOCATION: Gresham Mill South Hall Street Salford M5 4TP

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 15/67048/FUL for alteration/removal of condition 10.

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/74940/ADV DATE VALID: 16.09.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Miss Sophie Parkinson

LOCATION: Radclyffe Park Trafford Road Salford M5 3FE

PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for 4 no. wall mounted signs and 8 no. pole mounted signs

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 12 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75572/COU DATE VALID: 06.08.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:C/ o Agent

LOCATION: The Garage, Unit 4 Ground Floor Broadway Salford M50 2TG

PROPOSAL: Change of use of marketing suite (Use Class A2) to restaurant and hot-food takeaway (Use Classes A3/A5)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 November 2020 ______

Page 150 APPLICATION No: 20/75712/NMA DATE VALID: 01.08.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:C/o Agent

LOCATION: Plots C1, D1 And E1 Blue Mediacityuk Salford M50 2EQ

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment following a grant of planning permission 15/67509/REM for amendment to car parking spaces.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75846/DISCON DATE VALID: 25.08.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Abdel Koussa

LOCATION: 257 Ordsall Lane Salford M5 3WH

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of partial compliance of condition 5 (verification report) attached to planning permission 16/69223/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75880/ADV DATE VALID: 28.09.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:SK Group (t/a DPSK)

LOCATION: 402 Ordsall Lane Salford M5 3BU

PROPOSAL: Display of 2 fascia signs and 1 projecting sign all internally illuminated

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 November 2020 ______

Page 151 APPLICATION No: 20/75890/DISCON DATE VALID: 10.09.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:MR Richard Hyder

LOCATION: Land Bounded By Gore Street, Trinity Way And Chapel Street Salford

PROPOSAL: Request for discharge of conditions 3 ( Car and Cycle parking), 10 ( Archaeological works), 11 (Hard and soft landscaping). 12-13-14 (Acoustics) attached to planning permission 15/66415/ FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75986/FUL DATE VALID: 06.10.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Rana Anwar Hassan

LOCATION: 30A Unit A 30-34 Duncan Street Salford M5 3SQ

PROPOSAL: Change of use of ground floor unit from B8 (storage and distribution) to Hot food takeaway (sui Generis), installation of new shop front and vertical extract duct to rear elevation.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 12 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75987/ADV DATE VALID: 16.09.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Miss Shaw

LOCATION: Lightbox, Unit 2 Blue Media City Salford M50 2AD

PROPOSAL: Installation of Window Manifestations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

Page 152 APPLICATION No: 20/76052/PRI DATE VALID: 05.10.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Miss Demi Greaves

LOCATION: 103 - 105 Eccles New Road Salford M5 4RX

PROPOSAL: Application to determine if prior approval is required for a proposed change of use from shop (use class A1) (Class E(a)) to cafe (use class A3) (Class E(b)).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 12 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76048/DISCON DATE VALID: 25.09.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Martin Wallis

LOCATION: BUPA Car Park King William Enterprise Park King William Street Salford

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 18 (Site Completion Report) attached to planning permission 19/74106/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 12 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76074/ADV DATE VALID: 30.09.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Ben Porte

LOCATION: Land Adjacent Red Rose Retail Park Regent Road Salford M5 3GR

PROPOSAL: Display of an internally illuminated 48-sheet digital display with a vertical meadow (green wall) Re-submission 20/75088/ADV

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 25 November 2020 ______

Page 153 APPLICATION No: 20/76078/ADV DATE VALID: 01.10.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Harriet Shaw

LOCATION: Land Between Chapel Street Gore Street Salford M3 5FP

PROPOSAL: Display of four internally illuminated projecting signs and two externally illuminated free-standing signs

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76086/ADV DATE VALID: 01.10.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Hall

LOCATION: Grainger Office Building Waterman Walk Salford M50 3AF

PROPOSAL: Display of one folded aluminium panel with internally illuminated logo and letters with acrylic and perspex face. One vinyl window graphic displaying company name and display of window manifestations to the front elevation

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76108/ADV DATE VALID: 06.10.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Ben Porte

LOCATION: Land At Summerseat Close Salford M5 3JQ

PROPOSAL: Display of 2no internally illuminated 48-sheet (6MX3M) D-Poster advertisements fronting Trafford Road.

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

Page 154 APPLICATION No: 20/76145/DISCON DATE VALID: 10.10.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Abdel Koussa

LOCATION: 257 Ordsall Lane Salford M5 3WH

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of partial compliance of condition 9 (Materials) attached to planning permission 16/69223/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76146/DISCON DATE VALID: 10.10.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Daniel Murphy

LOCATION: Land Surrounding Stanley Street Bound By Trinity Way, Irwell Street And River Irwell M3 5DA

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 10 (Bollards) attached to planning permission 19/73721/REM

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 2 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76157/DISCON DATE VALID: 13.10.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Phil Marsden

LOCATION: Land Bounded By Cleminson St To North, New Bailey St To East, River Irwell To South-east, Trinity Way And North Star Drive To South And Adelphi St To West; Known As Salford Central, Extending To 17.7 Hectares. M3 5JT

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 36 (Archaeological Management Strategy) attached to planning permission 09/57950/EIAHYB

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

Page 155 APPLICATION No: 20/76164/DISCON DATE VALID: 26.10.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Richard Hyder

LOCATION: Embankment West Off Salford Approach And New Kings Head Yard Chapel Street Salford

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 14 - Hard and soft landscaping, 15 - Landscape Management plan, 16 - External lighting, 17 - Parking and service site management ,23 - Vehicle parking and service access arrangements, 26 - Wind mitigation measures attached to planning permission 17/70626/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76242/DEMCON DATE VALID: 02.11.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Steph Cageao

LOCATION: Custom House And Furness House Furness Quay Salford M50 3XZ

PROPOSAL: Prior Approval for the demolition of frames of Custom and Furness House

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76243/NMA DATE VALID: 23.10.2020 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:Mr Matthew Eastham

LOCATION: Zone L Of Salford Central Masterplan Land Off Adelphi Street Salford

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission 19/73075/REM for the revised plans, proposed street elevations 2,3 elevations and sections to blocks 1 to 4 and 3/4 bedrooms, proposed street elevations 1/2

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

Page 156

APPLICATION No: 20/75961/HH DATE VALID: 21.09.2020 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mr Jacek Nielacny

LOCATION: 4 Dalton Drive Swinton M27 8UB

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory. Proposed Single storey rear extension, two storey side extension, loft conversion with rear dormer, increased size of front porch. Rendering to existing and proposed external walls.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76053/P3KPA DATE VALID: 05.10.2020 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mrs Sonia Whittle

LOCATION: 16 Hilton Square Pendlebury Swinton M27 4DB

PROPOSAL: Application to determine if prior approval is required for a proposed change of use from office (use class E) to non-residential education (use class F1)

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76094/ADV DATE VALID: 02.10.2020 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Poster Property Ltd

LOCATION: 721 Bolton Road Swinton M27 8FL

PROPOSAL: Upgrade of existing 48 sheet advert to support digital poster

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

Page 157 APPLICATION No: 20/76140/FUL DATE VALID: 10.10.2020 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Miss Rebecca Gorman

LOCATION: The Henry Boddington 219 Bolton Road Swinton M27 8TG

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the erection of 1no. 4 metre high column with Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) Camera

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76141/ADV DATE VALID: 10.10.2020 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Miss Rebecca Gorman

LOCATION: The Henry Boddington 219 Bolton Road Swinton M27 8TG

PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for the display of 14 non illuminated signs in relation to the car park area at The Henry Boddington.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76202/NMA DATE VALID: 19.10.2020 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:Mr Paul Anderson

LOCATION: 1 Westbourne Avenue Swinton M27 6NN

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment following grant of planning permission 18/71252/HH for alterations to front elevation

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 November 2020 ______

Page 158 APPLICATION No: 20/74744/FUL DATE VALID: 06.04.2020 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:INM Properties Ltd North

LOCATION: 465 Chorley Road Swinton M27 9RH

PROPOSAL: Erection of a first and second floor extension, infill roof extension and conversion of first and second floor to form 6 flats

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75933/LBC DATE VALID: 14.09.2020 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr David Farrington North

LOCATION: Wardley Hall Wardley Hall Road Worsley M28 2ND

PROPOSAL: Listed Building Consent for the installation of new external lighting to the northern aspect of the site, with column lighting to the entrance drive, parking area, and up-lighting to the north facade of the Hall itself. The proposal also includes the repair to the existing wrought-iron entrance gates and masonry piers, as well as installation of new electrified automation security system to the existing gated access.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75969/CLUDP DATE VALID: 23.09.2020 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Adam Markiewicz North

LOCATION: 29 Hinchley Way Swinton M27 6HB

PROPOSAL: Application for certificate of lawful development for erection of a detached garage.

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 18 November 2020 ______

Page 159 APPLICATION No: 20/75089/HH DATE VALID: 27.03.2020 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Robert Korcz South

LOCATION: 3 West Drive Swinton M27 4ED

PROPOSAL: .Part two storey, part single storey rear extension with new overhanging canopy and changing of main roof from hip to gable with external alterations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75924/HH DATE VALID: 25.09.2020 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Mr Greg Todd South

LOCATION: 24 Linksway Swinton M27 5NY

PROPOSAL: Proposed two storey extension to the existing dwelling to create a granny annex

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76034/TEL56 DATE VALID: 23.09.2020 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Telefonica UK Limited South

LOCATION: Overdale Swinton M27 5LL

PROPOSAL: Prior approval for the installation of a 20m slim-line column supporting 6 no. antennas, 2no. transmission dishes, 2 no. equipment cabinets and ancillary development thereto including a GPS module and 3 no. Remote Radio Units (RRUs).

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 November 2020 ______

Page 160 APPLICATION No: 19/73701/FUL DATE VALID: 13.06.2019 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust And Seedley LOCATION: Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust Stott Lane Salford M6 8HD

PROPOSAL: Construction of a new acute receiving centre (ARC) with helipad (use class C2) and associated site works, including parking, hard and soft landscaping and minor works including demolition to adjacent buildings at Salford Royal Hospital

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75893/FUL DATE VALID: 10.09.2020 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Soloman Obisan And Seedley LOCATION: The Treasure House 523 Eccles New Road Salford M50 1DN

PROPOSAL: Creation of first floor together with alterations to elevations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 12 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75967/FUL DATE VALID: 12.09.2020 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Motor Fuel Group Ltd And Seedley LOCATION: 526 Eccles New Road Salford M5 5BJ

PROPOSAL: Installation of 8 vehicle charging points, associated electrical infrastructure (including 2.4m high timber fencing), 10 car parking spaces and 2 no. New Jet wash bays.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

Page 161 APPLICATION No: 20/76017/ADV DATE VALID: 19.09.2020 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:N/A And Seedley LOCATION: West One Retail Park, Unit 13 West One Way Salford M50 1ZD

PROPOSAL: Display of one flex-face sign, one suspended projecting sign both internally illuminated and one non-illuminated panel sign, together with various window graphics

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76151/P3NPA DATE VALID: 09.10.2020 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Mr Alan Edge And Seedley LOCATION: 3 Derby Road Salford M5 5NZ

PROPOSAL: Application for prior approval for change of use of first floor from shop (A1) to residential (C3) with alterations to elevations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 3 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76147/FUL DATE VALID: 11.10.2020 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT:Ralu Lonescu And Seedley LOCATION: 4 Tootal Road Salford M5 5FX

PROPOSAL: Change of use from C4, 6 bed HMO, to Sui Generis, 9 bed, 9 person HMO, with single storey front extension, pitched tiled roof replacing flat lean to rear roof, and basement conversion and extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 4 December 2020 ______

Page 162 APPLICATION No: 20/75710/P3JPA DATE VALID: 22.09.2020 WARD: Winton APPLICANT:Mr Mark Barrett

LOCATION: 620-624 Liverpool Road Eccles M30 7NA

PROPOSAL: Application to determine if prior approval is required for the change of use of part ground and first floor of 622 Liverpool Road and the first floor of 620 and 624 Liverpool Road from Offices (Class B1(a)) to 6 no. studio apartments (C3)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 12 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 15/67099/COU DATE VALID: 13.10.2015 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Mike Murphy North

LOCATION: T J Murphy Limited And Ubu Environmental Moss Lane Worsley Salford M28 3LY

PROPOSAL: Change of use of existing vehicle recovery yard to storage of vehicles and car parking provision, erection of a 2.4m high acoustic timber fence and installation of 2no 6m high lighting columns.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75426/HH DATE VALID: 13.06.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Jim Sutherden North

LOCATION: 434 Manchester Road Worsley M28 3WJ

PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

Page 163 APPLICATION No: 20/75734/HH DATE VALID: 10.08.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Danny Smith North

LOCATION: 9 Grayson Road Little Hulton Worsley M38 9PN

PROPOSAL: Part single storey side extension (garage) and part two storey side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75737/HH DATE VALID: 12.08.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Ferguson Doyle North

LOCATION: 1 Emlyn Street Worsley M28 3JZ

PROPOSAL: Proposed single storey rear extension and insert bi-folding door to rear outrigger.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75825/HH DATE VALID: 27.08.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:brown North

LOCATION: 60 Eastham Way Little Hulton Worsley M38 9LX

PROPOSAL: Proposed two storey side/ rear extension with inserting a first floor window and front door in the front elevation.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

Page 164 APPLICATION No: 20/75835/FUL DATE VALID: 22.08.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr John Bailey North

LOCATION: 158 Bolton Road Worsley M28 3BW

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension to enlarge existing kitchen, yard and storage into one large storage area.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75844/DISCON DATE VALID: 25.08.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:c/o Agent North

LOCATION: Former Eaton Works Land East Of Worsley Road North Walkden M28 3QN

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of partial compliance of conditions 17 (site completion - noise measures) ,20 (verification report) attached to planning permission 18/71344/FUL. Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 25 (acoustic fencing design) and 27 (access to M61) attached to planning permission 18/71344/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

Page 165 APPLICATION No: 20/75927/TPO DATE VALID: 16.10.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mrs Gaynor Brittain North

LOCATION: 1, 2, 3, 4 And 6 Old Vicarage Gardens Worsley M28 3JR

PROPOSAL: Fell one hawthorn (T15). Crown reduce to leave a height of 14m and a width spread of 4m and 30% crown thin four sycamore (T31, T30, T27, T25) and one lime (T29). Crown reduce to leave a height of 14m and a width spread of 3.5m and 30% crown thin one sycamore (T28). Crown reduce to leave a height of 13m and a width spread of 3.5m and 30% crown thin one lime (T26) one sycamore (T12). Crown reduce to leave a height of 15m and a width spread of 4.5m and 30% crown thin one ash (T11). Crown reduce to leave a height of 14m and a width spread of 5m and 30% crown thin one sycamore (T9). Pollard to leave a height of 6m one ash (T23). Crown reduce to leave a height of 17m and a width spread of 10m and 30% crown thin one ash tree (T35). Crown reduce to leave a height of 7m and a width spread of 4m and 30% crown thin one lime (T34). Crown reduce to leave a height of 10.5m and a width spread of 4m and 30% crown thin one ash (T33). Crown reduce to leave a height of 12m and a width spread of 4.5m and 30% crown thin one ash (T32). Crown reduce to leave a height of 4.5m and a width spread of 1.5m and 30% crown thin one hawthorn (T10). Crown reduce to leave a height of 12m and a width spread of 3.5m one sycamore (T17). Crown reduce to leave a height of 14m and a width spread of 4m one sycamore (T16). Crown reduce to leave a height of 11m and a width spread of 4m one lime (T14).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76132/CLUDP DATE VALID: 08.10.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Steve Summers North

LOCATION: 12 Church Road Worsley M28 3LW

PROPOSAL: Application for a lawful development certificate for a proposed Single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

Page 166 APPLICATION No: 20/76192/PDE DATE VALID: 16.10.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Victoria Heywood North

LOCATION: 6 Egerton Grove Worsley M28 3LH

PROPOSAL: Proposed single storey rear extension

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 26 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 19/74367/HH DATE VALID: 11.11.2019 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Chris Wood

LOCATION: 14 Hazelhurst Fold Worsley M28 2JU

PROPOSAL: Erection of three storey side extension with single storey rear extension and basement extension. In addition to raising the roof ridge to create a second floor level, second floor front extension and two storey front extension.

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/74809/FUL DATE VALID: 20.02.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Ms Sally Hargreaves

LOCATION: Land At Hazelhall Close Off Hazelhurst Road Salford Worsley

PROPOSAL: Variation of condition 2 (materials) 4,5 and 12 (tree removal and boundary/landscape treatment) attached to planning permission 19/73141/FUL

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 12 November 2020 ______

Page 167 APPLICATION No: 20/74936/HH DATE VALID: 02.03.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Paul Mallon

LOCATION: 20 Worsley Road Worsley M28 2GQ

PROPOSAL: Retrospective boundary treatment of fencing and gates to 20 Worsley Road

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75529/DISCON DATE VALID: 03.07.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:JP Singleton

LOCATION: 301 Walkden Road Worsley M28 2RZ

PROPOSAL: Application for approval of details reserved by condition 9 (intrusive site investigation) attached to planning permission 19/73709/FUL.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75584/HH DATE VALID: 20.07.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Brimelow

LOCATION: 3 The Paddock Worsley M28 2QR

PROPOSAL: New free standing Single Storey Garage

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 2 December 2020 ______

Page 168 APPLICATION No: 20/75683/HH DATE VALID: 05.08.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Matthew Evans

LOCATION: 188 Chatsworth Road Worsley M28 2GF

PROPOSAL: Proposed New Porch to front elevation, single storey rear extension, increasing the roof ridge of the main dwelling for enlargement of second floor and external alterations.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75711/HH DATE VALID: 04.09.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mrs Harriet Lucero

LOCATION: 14A Wardley Hall Lane Worsley Manchester M28 2RL

PROPOSAL: Proposed basement level rear extension including extending current rear balcony and alteration to the front door and extending front canopy.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75716/TPO DATE VALID: 29.09.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Jack Holden

LOCATION: 9 Chatsworth Road Swinton M28 2NU

PROPOSAL: 15% crown thin, remove epicormic growth to a height of 10m and crown reduce in accordance with the attached photograph one lime (T3). 15% crown thin, remove epicormic growth to a height of 10m and crown reduce in accordance with the attached photographs lime trees (T2 and T4) and one sycamore (T3).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

Page 169 APPLICATION No: 20/75783/DISCON DATE VALID: 19.10.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Matthew Evans

LOCATION: 188 Chatsworth Road Worsley M28 2GF

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (Materials), 4 (Surface water drainage) and 5 (Foul and surface water) attached to planning permission 19/73392/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75836/HH DATE VALID: 31.08.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:L Candland

LOCATION: 27 Chapel Road Swinton M27 0HF

PROPOSAL: First floor extension to rear over existing ground floor and new side door access

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 16 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75892/HH DATE VALID: 29.08.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Shan Khambata

LOCATION: 9 Oaklands Road Swinton M27 0ED

PROPOSAL: Single storey side extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

Page 170 APPLICATION No: 20/75894/HH DATE VALID: 31.08.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs O'Sullivan

LOCATION: 8 Old Hall Lane Worsley M28 2FG

PROPOSAL: Erection of detached garage

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75904/HH DATE VALID: 04.09.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mrs Louise Adkin

LOCATION: 96 Hazelhurst Road Worsley M28 2SP

PROPOSAL: Proposed single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75919/HH DATE VALID: 04.09.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr and Mrs Franklin

LOCATION: 37 Crossfield Drive Worsley M28 2QQ

PROPOSAL: Two storey gable extensions to the front and rear, first floor extension and alterations to existing roof structure including raising ridge height. Extending front porch and remodelling of elevations.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

Page 171 APPLICATION No: 20/75948/HH DATE VALID: 19.09.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Rob Ryan

LOCATION: 440 Walkden Road Worsley M28 2NE

PROPOSAL: Proposed single storey rear extension with roof windows and two storey side extension, hip to gable loft conversion with rear dormer and proposed render to rear.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 1 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75955/HH DATE VALID: 17.09.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr & Mrs Parkes

LOCATION: 19 Longley Drive Worsley M28 2TP

PROPOSAL: Construction of new detached brick garage with new 2.1m high internal fencing between garage and principal dwelling.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75974/HH DATE VALID: 21.09.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Laura Buck

LOCATION: 323 Walkden Road Worsley M28 2RY

PROPOSAL: Two storey side/rear extension with Juliette balcony and part single storey rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 November 2020 ______

Page 172 APPLICATION No: 20/75983/TPO DATE VALID: 30.09.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Paul Greally

LOCATION: 23 Ringlow Park Road Swinton M27 0HA

PROPOSAL: Prune to provide a 5m clearance between the tree and the boundary fence (reducing lateral branches by 2m) one sycamore tree (T1).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76011/CLUDP DATE VALID: 18.09.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Jared Maillinson

LOCATION: 18 Ryecroft Lane Worsley M28 2PN

PROPOSAL: Application for a lawful development certificate for proposed permitted side extension, rear dormer, roof over garage and new windows within principal dwelling; roof, rear and side elevations.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76020/TPO DATE VALID: 29.09.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Miss Jennifer Adams

LOCATION: 16 Ryecroft Lane Worsley M28 2PN

PROPOSAL: Crown reduce to leave a height above ground of 7m and a spread of 5m and crown thin by 20% one Silver Birch (T1).

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

Page 173 APPLICATION No: 20/76042/HH DATE VALID: 02.10.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Jared Maillinson

LOCATION: 18 Ryecroft Lane Worsley M28 2PN

PROPOSAL: Conversion of existing garage into habitable room with new front bay window.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 2 December 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76060/TREECA DATE VALID: 13.10.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr Steve Birch

LOCATION: 131 The Green Worsley M28 2PA

PROPOSAL: Crown reduce to leave a height of 15m and a width spread of 6m and 20% crown thin one acer (T1). Crown reduce to leave a height of 5m and a width spread of 3m one apple (T2).

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 11 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/76218/NMA DATE VALID: 20.10.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Flanagan

LOCATION: 100 Greenleach Lane Worsley M28 2TU

PROPOSAL: Application for a non-material amendment following grant of planning permission 20/74700/HH to increase of parapet wall to accommodate steelwork arrangement

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

Page 174 APPLICATION No: 20/76247/PDE DATE VALID: 22.10.2020 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT:Mr S Featherstone

LOCATION: 26 Ashford Avenue Swinton M27 0FY

PROPOSAL: An application to determine if prior approval is required for a proposed single storey rear extension

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75757/OUT DATE VALID: 08.08.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:WJM Investments Ltd South

LOCATION: 93 Walkden Road Worsley M28 7BQ

PROPOSAL: Variation of Condition 3 (Approved plans) and removal of Conditions 7 (Traffic Management Scheme), 16 (Tree Protection Fencing), 17 (Tree Protection Plan), 18 (AMS) and 19 (Cellular Confinement System) attached to Planning Permission 18/71747/OUT.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 19 November 2020 ______

APPLICATION No: 20/75990/HH DATE VALID: 29.09.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr Neil Thompson South

LOCATION: 14 Woodside Avenue Worsley M28 3HR

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing garage to the side/rear of property and erection of a two storey side extension with integral garage and part two part single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 November 2020 ______

Page 175 APPLICATION No: 20/76084/HH DATE VALID: 01.10.2020 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Mr David Thompson South

LOCATION: 18 Broadway Worsley M28 7EY

PROPOSAL: Existing detached dwelling house proposing single storey side extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 30 November 2020 ______

Page 176 Agenda Item 7

Part 1: Open to the Public

REPORT OF The Strategic Director for Place

TO The Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel ON 17th December 2020

TITLE: Planning Appeals

RECOMMENDATIONS: That the report be noted.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To set out details of appeals received.

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS: (Available for public inspection) Details of the applications are available on the Council’s Public Access Website http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/default.aspx If you would like to access this information in an alternative format, please contact the planning office on 0161-779 6195 or e-mail [email protected]

KEY DECISION: NO

DETAILS: Please refer to the attached schedule.

KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: Performance Management

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND IMPLICATIONS: N/A

ASSESSMENT OF RISK: N/A

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

PROCUREMENT IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

HR IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

CLIMATE CHANGE IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A

OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED: N/A

CONTACT OFFICER: Liz Taylor TEL NO: 0161 779 4803

WARDS TO WHICH REPORT RELATES: As specified in the attached schedule.

Page 177 1 PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

REPORT OF NEW PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS RECEIVED

APPLICATION No: 20/75704/TEL56

APPLICATION DECISION LEVEL: Delegated to Officer

OFFICER Refuse RECOMMEND’N:

APPEAL SITE: Clarendon Streetworks Liverpool Street Salford M5 4GW

PROPOSAL: Prior approval for telecommunications - proposed 20m high Phase 8 monopole together with wrapround cabinet at base and associated ancillary works

WARD: Langworthy

APPELLANT: MBNL

DATE RECEIVED: 11 November 2020

An Appeal against refusal of planning application. The reasons for refusal were as follows; No evidence of the rationale for site selection, including evidence that opportunities have been considered for mast/site sharing and locating equipment on existing buildings and structures, has been submitted in order to ensure that the proposed installation complies with requirements to keep the number of masts and installations to a minimum. The proposal is therefore contrary to the requirements of policy TEL1 of the Salford City Council Supplementary Planning Document Telecommunications (October 2013), policy DEV1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework. The proposed monopole, by virtue of its height, massing and appearance, would be out of scale with its surroundings, be an incongruous feature in the street scene, and together with the associated equipment cabinets would have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the area, compromising the aims and objectives of the Pendleton Regeneration Programme and Masterplan with respect to the proposed Liverpool Street 'Main Access Boulevard'. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies DES1 and DEV1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, policy TEL2 of the Salford City Council Supplementary Planning Document Telecommunications (October 2013), policy 3 of the Salford City Council Planning Guidance Pendleton (March 2009) and the National Planning Policy Framework. The proposed development would be located in a position whereby it would have a detrimental impact on the outlook from the forthcoming residential dwellings fronting onto Liverpool Street which will form part of 'Phase 3' of the Pendleton Regeneration Area Programme and Masterplan contrary to policies DES1, DES7 and DEV1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, policy TEL2 of the Salford City Council Supplementary Planning Document Telecommunications (October 2013) and the National Planning Policy Framework. The proposal would not improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area nor does it comply with the development plan and therefore does not comprise sustainable development. There were no amendments to the scheme, or conditions which could reasonably have been imposed, which could have made the development acceptable and it was therefore not possible to approve the application. The Local Planning Authority has therefore implemented the requirement in Paragraph 38 of the NPPF.

Page 178 2