Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel

Public Document Pack

Dear Member,

You are invited to attend the meeting of the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel to be held as follows for the transaction of the business indicated. Miranda Carruthers-Watt Proper Officer ------DATE: Thursday, 6 April 2017

TIME: 9.30 am

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

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

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

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

AGENDA

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

2 Apologies for absence.

3 Declarations of interest.

4 To approve, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held (Pages 1 - 8) on 16 March 2017.

5 Planning applications and related development control matters. (Pages 9 - 16)

9.30 A.M.

5a 16/68336/FUL Former Salford Police Headquarters, Crescent, Salford (Pages 17 - 38) M5 4NL

5b 16/67858/FUL Oak Court Clifton Business Park, Wynne Avenue, (Pages 39 - 54) Clifton, Swinton M27 8FF

5c 16/69058/FUL Whittlebrook Reservoir, Howclough Drive, Worsley (Pages 55 - 62) M28 3FS

5d 17/69369/FUL Former Pilkington Tiles, Rake Lane, Clifton, Swinton, (Pages 63 - 72) Manchester M27 8LP

11.30 A.M.

5e 16/69247/FUL Stanwell Road Playing Fields, Stanwell Road, Swinton (Pages 73 - 92) M27 5TD

5f 17/69389/FUL Waterfront Quay, Salford M50 3XW (Pages 93 - 102)

5g 17/69493/FUL Furness Quay, Salford M50 3XZ (Pages 103 - 136)

1.30 P.M.

5h 16/69281/HYB Site Of The Former Worsley New Hall, Leigh Road, (Pages 137 - 182) Salford M28 2LJ

6 Planning applications determined under delegated authority. (Pages 183 - 208)

7 Planning appeals. (Pages 209 - 210)

8 Urgent business.

9 Exclusion of the public.

10 Part 2 - closed to the public.

11 Urgent business.

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

16th March, 2017

Meeting commenced: 9.30 a.m. “ “ : 11:35 a.m. “ “ : 11:55 a.m. “ ended: 2:15 p.m.

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

Councillor Barnes during consideration of all applications with the exception of 16/69233/FUL (13 Park Road, Eccles M30 9JQ), 16/68439/FUL (Pendleton House, Broughton Road, Salford), 17/69416/FUL (Land Formerly Our Lady The Lancashire Martyrs School, Wicheaves Crescent, Worsley M28 0HF) and 16/69216/FUL (Erie Basin, Salford Quays)

Councillor Burch during consideration of all applications with the exception of 16/69233/FUL (13 Park Road, Eccles M30 9JQ)

Councillor Hamilton during consideration of all applications with the exception of 16/68439/FUL (Pendleton House, Broughton Road, Salford), 17/69416/FUL (Land Formerly Our Lady The Lancashire Martyrs School, Wicheaves Crescent, Worsley M28 0HF) and 16/69216/FUL (Erie Basin, Salford Quays)

Councillor P. Wheeler during consideration of all applications with the exception of 17/69339/FUL (Land South East Of 513 Booths Hall Road, Worsley), 17/69416/FUL (Land Formerly Our Lady The Lancashire Martyrs School, Wicheaves Crescent, Worsley M28 0HF) and 16/69216/FUL (Erie Basin, Salford Quays),

Councillor Lewis during consideration of applications 16/68439/FUL (Pendleton House, Broughton Road, Salford) and 16/69216/FUL (Erie Basin, Salford Quays)

Please note that a list of persons in attendance (including any Ward Councillors) in respect of matters referred to in Minute 95 is included at Appendix A.

92. WELCOME AND APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

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

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Lea, Lewis, McIntyre, Morris and Mr. Jim Wheelton.

93. DECLARATION OF INTEREST

Councillor Lewis declared an interest in respect of application 17/69416/FUL (Land Formerly Our Lady The Lancashire Martyrs School, Wicheaves Crescent, Worsley M28 0HF and did not take part in the Panel’s deliberation or vote on this application. Councillor Lewis addressed the Panel in her role as Ward Councillor.

94. MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

RESOLVED: THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 2nd February 2017 be agreed as a correct record.

95. APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

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

RESOLVED: (1) THAT page 80 of the Main Report – ‘Description of Proposal’ – be amended to indicate that the proposed development (16/69216/FUL – Land north of Erie Basin, Salford Quays) included 33 no. three bedroom apartments, andPage not 30 1as indicated. Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel - 16th March 2017 2

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

Application Number/ Site Development Decision Applicant

16/69161/FUL 68 Edward Avenue Variation of opening hours attached Granted subject to the addition of Salford to planning permission a condition requiring the Mr M Akhtar M6 8DA 12/61647/FUL submission of a litter management scheme to deal with litter generated from the premises.

16/69223/FUL 13 Park Road Erection of a detached dwelling Refused against the officer Eccles within the garden area of existing recommendation, by a vote of 5 Miss Jessica Hurley M30 9JQ property for, 4 against, on the grounds that the proposed new dwelling would be detrimental to the character of the area due to its detailed design, scale and massing in relation to the adjacent terrace of properties to the north, contrary to Policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

*16/69247/FUL Stanwell Road Erection of a new 2 Form Entry, Deferred due to insufficient Playing Fields 420-pupil primary school and 30- information having been provided Mr Craig Moynihan Stanwell Road pupil nursery, with covered linking in relation to traffic management Swinton walkway to an existing sports hall and the car parking strategy for M27 5TD (to be internally re-configured); the development, to enable the access, car parking, associated Panel to fully evaluate the outdoor sports and play facilities, proposal. hard and soft landscaping and associated infrastructure The Panel acknowledged the pressures that existed in relation to the increasing demand for school places in the city. There was concern expressed that pre planning application consultation with ward members and local residents should normally take place on school developments, and would help the application process.

16/69276/FUL Former Ford Mill Variation of condition 15 (amended Please refer to Minute 96 below Site plans) and 16 (travel plan) attached Mr Percy Lawson Ford Lane to planning permission Johnston Salford 06/53710/FUL M6 6PE

17/69346/FUL 182 Weaste Lane Change of use from C3 (dwelling Refused, against the officer Salford house) to 7 bed HMO (house in recommendation, by a unanimous Mr Aram Shebani M5 5JL multiple occupation) (Sui Generis) vote, on the grounds that the and formation of light well to front of proposed development would property result in an overconcentration of Page 2 HMOs in the area and would Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel - 16th March 2017 3

Application Number/ Site Development Decision Applicant

provide a poor level of amenity for future residents due to the lack of communal amenity space such as a large kitchen/dining/living room, contrary to policies H1 and H5 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

16/68439/FUL Pendleton House Change of use of the former Granted Broughton Road Coroner’s Court, including 2nd, 3rd Mr J Gwynne at Salford and 4th floor extensions, demolition Endeavour of rear buildings and erection of a 6 storey extension to provide 71 no. apartments in total

*16/69216/FUL Erie Basin Proposed residential development Please refer to Minute 97 below Salford Quays comprising 270 no. apartments with Mr Stuart McCrone associated car parking, landscaping and public realm improvements, including a new public dockside walkway

*16/69279/FUL Former Hope High The erection of 64 dwellings, the Please refer to Minute 98 below School laying out of roads and footways; Mr Mike Stone Eccles Old Road hard and soft landscaping, walls Salford and fences and drainage; and other M6 8GG associated works

17/69339/FUL Land South East Of Erection of two detached dwellings Refused, against the officer 513 Booths Hall with associated car parking and recommendation, by a unanimous Mr Myerscough Road landscaping Re-Submission of vote, on the grounds that the site Worsley 15/66712/FUL forms part of the wider Manchester Bridgewater Park recreational allocation and provides an important landscape feature that characterises the entrance to the wider housing area. Insufficient information had been provided to clearly demonstrate that the site is surplus to recreational requirements and the proposal is therefore considered contrary to policy R1 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan.

*17/69416/FUL Land Formerly Our Erection of 73 residential dwellings, Please refer to Minute 99 below Lady The together with associated works c/o Agent Lancashire Martyrs School Wicheaves Crescent Worsley M28 0HF Page 3 Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel - 16th March 2017 4

96. 16/69276/FUL – FORMER FORD MILL SITE, FORD LANE, SALFORD M6 6PE – VARIATION OF CONDITION 15 (AMENDED PLANS) AND 16 (TRAVEL PLAN) ATTACHED TO PLANNING PERMISSION 06/53710/FUL

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

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

- Open space contribution

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

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

97. *16/69216/FUL – ERIE BASIN, SALFORD QUAYS – PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING 270 NO. APARTMENTS WITH ASSOCIATED CAR PARKING, LANDSCAPING AND PUBLIC REALM IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING A NEW PUBLIC DOCKSIDE WALKWAY

RESOLVED: THAT planning permission be granted, subject to (a) the planning conditions listed in the reports, and (b) authority to discharge conditions 8 (Materials), 10 (Landscaping), 11 (Ground Floor Plan) and 13 (Cycle Storage) being delegated to the Chair of the Panel in conjunction with the Assistant Director for Planning & Housing, and that:

(a) A financial contribution of £316,000 towards:

. Works to provide enhanced green infrastructure within the area bound by the Quays Loop Road, Broadway and Trafford Road, including Howard Street. These works may include street trees, sustainable drainage systems and works to ameliorate storm waters and associated urban diffuse pollution;

. Works to enhance pedestrian connectivity from the development to, and along, King William Street and/or Broadway.

(b) Where development does not commence within three months of the grant of any consent, a clawback mechanism to secure an increase in the level of contribution up to the maximum level required by the Planning Obligations SPD should the viability of the development increase in the future as the scheme is delivered. Clawback monies to be directed towards either of the two projects identified above, or to affordable housing.

(c) That full public access be maintained to the dockside walkway at all times, and its ongoing maintenance be secured in perpetuity.

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

(iii) The authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application to be issued (subject to the conditions and reasons stated in the reports) on completion of the above- mentioned legal agreement. Page 4 Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel - 16th March 2017 5

98. *16/69279/FUL – FORMER HOPE HIGH SCHOOL, ECCLES OLD ROAD, SALFORD M6 8GG – THE ERECTION OF 64 DWELLINGS, THE LAYING OUT OF ROADS AND FOOTWAYS; HARD AND SOFT LANDSCAPING, WALLS AND FENCES AND DRAINAGE; AND OTHER ASSOCIATED WORKS

RESOLVED: THAT planning permission be granted, subject to (a) the planning conditions listed in the reports and (b) condition 11 being amended to secure a revised scheme for the north-eastern corner of the site in relation to the need for and design/layout of the proposed emergency access/public access and public realm, with authority to discharge the condition being delegated to the Chair of the Panel in conjunction with the Assistant Director for Planning & Housing, and that:

(i) The Strategic Director for Environment & Community Safety be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Sections 111 of the Local Government Act 1972, Section 2 of the Local Government Act 2000 and Section 1 of the Localism Act 2011 and Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to secure the following heads of terms:

- £209,698 towards the regeneration and improved access to the historic core of Buile Hill Park including the area of Buile Hill Mansion, the former depot buildings and conservatory;

- £362,392 towards the investment at St. Luke’s C of E Primary School;

- £335,934 towards the provision of affordable housing elsewhere within the city.

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

99. *17/69416/FUL – LAND FORMERLY OUR LADY THE LANCASHIRE MARTYRS SCHOOL, WICHEAVES CRESCENT, WORSLEY M28 0HF – ERECTION OF 73 RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS, TOGETHER WITH ASSOCIATED WORKS

RESOLVED: (1) THAT planning permission be granted, subject to the planning conditions listed in the reports, and that:

- Open space – renovation of the existing children’s play area in Peel Park, Little Hulton (please refer to resolution (2) below) - Affordable Housing – off-site provision via clawback clause

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

(2) THAT investigation be undertaken as to whether the Section 106 monies relating to open space improvements could be directed to a nearby local park instead of Peel Park, Little Hulton, with the final decision regarding the investment of the monies being delegated to the Chair of the Panel in conjunction with the Assistant Director for Planning & Housing.

Page 5 Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel - 16th March 2017 6

100. PLANNING APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY

The Strategic Director for Environment & Community Safety submitted a report containing details of planning applications which he had determined under delegated authority during February and March 2017 and were not, therefore, for consideration by the Panel.

RESOLVED: THAT the content of the report be noted.

101. PLANNING APPEALS

The Strategic Director for Environment and Community Safety submitted a report which provided details of appeals that had recently been received.

RESOLVED: THAT the content of the report be noted.

Page 6 Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel - 16th March 2017 7

APPENDIX A 9.30 Session

APPLICATION REF. & OBJECTING IN FAVOUR WARD ADDRESS COUNCILLORS 16/69161/FUL Masood Akhtar* Councillor P. Wilson 68 Edward Avenue David Minshull* Councillor Hesling* Salford M6 8DA Mr Akhtar Mike Calderwood

16/69233/FUL Chris Noble* Joanne Sweeney* 13 Park Road Jane Mayman* Mark Sweeney Eccles M30 9JQ Lavinia Williams David Burrell Barbara Burrell

16/69247/FUL Robert Dunford* Mrs Farrar Councillor Balkind* Stanwell Road Playing Julie-Ann Morris* Greg Durkin* Fields Mrs Warrington Jeanette Findley Stanwell Road Larissa Moulin-Villar Swinton M27 5TD 16/69276/FUL Adrian Jackson Former Ford Mill Site Peter Blake Ford Lane Salford M6 6PE 17/69346/FUL Councillor P. Wilson* 182 Weaste Lane Councillor Hesling Salford M5 5JL

11.30 Session

APPLICATION REF. & OBJECTING IN FAVOUR WARD ADDRESS COUNCILLORS 16/68439/FUL Mr. Carew* Paul Gwynne* Pendleton House Mrs. Carew Broughton Road Sylvia Bluer Salford 16/69216/FUL Emma Williams Erie Basin Stuart McCrone Salford Quays 16/69279/FUL Paula McIntosh-Kemp* Mike Stone* Councillor P. Wilson* Former Hope High School Mrs. Clague* George Stevenson* Councillor Hesling Eccles Old Road Alan Clague* Salford M6 8GG Mrs. Hopkins

17/69339/FUL Richard Bryan* James Eccles* Councillor R. Garrido* Land South East Of David Crompton* Jessica Manfield Councillor Collinson* 513 Booths Hall Road Aqiv Saghir Worsley Manchester 17/69416/FUL Mr. Massey Land Formerly Our Lady John Jones* The Lancashire Martyrs Steve Hughes School Helen Hartley Wicheaves Crescent Worsley M28 0HF

* Indicates those who made representations to the Panel. Page 7 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5

REPORT

Strategic Director for Environment and Community Safety

To the

Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel

6th April 2017

Planning Applications and Related Development Control Matters

(Not considered to contain exempt information)

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

MAIN REPORT

Page1 9

PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

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

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS

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

1. The appropriate ‘Development Information Folder’ for each planning application on the Agenda. The contents of the folder include the following documents:

(a) The submitted planning application (forms, plans and supporting documents and Information)

(b) Correspondence with statutory and other consultees;

2. Any previous planning applications and subsequent Decision Notices (if issued referred to in each planning application report on this Agenda.

3. Any Tree Preservation Order referred to in each planning application report on the agenda.

4. Any Conservation Area Plan referred to in each planning application report on the agenda.

5. The “Standard Planning Conditions Etc…’Booklet’.

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

These Background Papers can normally be inspected between the hours of 8.30 am and 4.30 pm on any weekday (except Bank Holidays) at Urban Vision Partnership Ltd reception at Emerson House, Albert Street, Eccles. Whilst background papers will be made available for inspection as quickly as possible, immediate access cannot be guaranteed. It is therefore advisable wherever practical, to make an appointment by telephoning (0161) 779 4852. Alternatively the planning application forms, plans and supporting information is available on the Council’s web site http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/

Publications

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

The Government in particular has published a large number of circulars and Statutory Instruments in addition to the primary legislation and these are available from Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, which has a bookshop in Manchester.

The following Local Authority publications are available for inspection at Emerson House, Albert Street, Eccles , they can also be viewed on the Council’s web site http://www.salford.gov.uk/planning-policy.htm

Page2 10 If you do not have personal access to the Internet, free access is available to registered members at each of the sixteen libraries in the city .

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

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

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

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

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

Page3 11 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: 06.04.2017

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 RSOS = Referred to Secretary of State

Irwell Riverside

16/68336/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am

PROPOSAL: Part demolition and refurbishment of existing former police headquarters, including two storey extension to the roof and five storey extensions within the courtyard of the building, comprising 117 one, two and three bed apartments and erection of 23 five bed townhouses together with associated landscaping and highway works.

LOCATION: Former Salford Police Headquarters Crescent Salford M5 4NL

APPLICANT: Stama Developments (Salford) Ltd

Page 12 Pendlebury

16/68858/FUL RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE

TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am

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

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

APPLICANT: Mr C Beard

Walkden South

16/69058/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am

PROPOSAL: Creation of new access to include parking spaces, hard standing, access ramp, concrete steps and erection of 2.4m high fence and gates, installation of a disabled toilet, together with retrospective permission for cormorant deterrent features (poles on land and on fishing refuges), placement of shipping container for use as storage and associated lean-to shelter.

LOCATION: Whittlebrook Reservoir Howclough Drive Worsley M28 3FS

APPLICANT: Mr Norman Holden

Pendlebury

17/69369/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 09.30am

PROPOSAL: Change of use to a waste transfer station handling both non-hazardous and hazardous waste and the siting of a portable office cabin

LOCATION: Former Pilkington Tiles Rake Lane Clifton Swinton Manchester M27 8LP

APPLICANT: Ms Quarless

Page 13

Swinton South

16/69247/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 11:30am

PROPOSAL: Erection of a new 2 Form Entry, 420-pupil primary school and 30-pupil nursery, with covered linking walkway to an existing sports hall (to be internally re-configured); access, car parking, associated outdoor sports and play facilities, hard and soft landscaping and associated infrastructure.

LOCATION: Stanwell Road Playing Fields Stanwell Road Swinton M27 5TD

APPLICANT: Mr Craig Moynihan

Ordsall

17/69389/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 11:30am

PROPOSAL: Temporary car parking use of plots of 3 former buildings

LOCATION: Waterfront Quay Salford M50 3XW

APPLICANT: TH Real Estate

17/69493/FUL RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE

TIME OF MEETING: 11:30am

PROPOSAL: Detailed application for the comprehensive redevelopment of Land at Furness Quay, Salford to deliver 593 apartments/townhouses (Use Class C3) Application comprises external alterations to Custom House and provision of 4 storey vertical extension, external alterations to Furness House and provision of 6 storey vertical extension, development of 27 storey focal point residential tower block and development of a residential block of up to 13 storeys with associated access improvements, landscaping, public realm improvements and parking Re-Submission of 16/68676/FUL

LOCATION: Furness Quay Salford M50 3XZ

APPLICANT: Mr Gareth Morgan

Page 14

Worsley

16/69281/HYB RECOMMENDATION: Referred to Secretary of State

TIME OF MEETING: 13:30pm

PROPOSAL: A part detailed and part outline planning application to establish a new RHS Garden proposing the following: (a) Full planning permission for the use of land and buildings in and around the existing walled garden as a garden centre and ancillary activities, including retail sales of plants and goods, plant displays, horticultural sales and advice, show gardens offering sale of garden and landscape concepts, holding of horticultural events, and facilities for visitors, groups and children, including learning and teaching gardens; renovation works to former potting sheds; conversion of former stable blocks to cafe and office use; creation of demonstration and teaching allotments; development of a car park, coach parking, cycle parking and associated infrastructure; horticultural service yard; compost site and pond and associated access track; development of Welcome Building to include RHS Garden ticket sales and entry, gift shop, indoor and outdoor plant sales, greenhouse, cafe, kitchen, classroom and associated external areas; visitor gardens; formation of new lake; site perimeter boundary treatment; works to the existing Leigh Road western access, including the widening of Leigh Road, formation of a signal controlled junction and new pedestrian footway; the widening and re-alignment of the site access road and associated works; electricity sub-station and gas kiosk; SUDS; hard and soft landscaping; and site infrastructure. (b) Outline planning permission for the creation of an RHS garden including a range of gardens, landscapes, woodland and meadow walks; formation of new watercourses and drainage infrastructure; internal access roads; learning centre; events building; lakeside cafe; renovation of terraces; glass house; use of existing eastern Leigh Road access for servicing; renovation of former civil defence bunker and its use as an exhibition space; and development of school of horticulture.

LOCATION: Site Of The Former Worsley New Hall, Leigh Road, Salford M28 2LJ

APPLICANT: Mr David Alexander

Page 15 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5a PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL PART I SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

APPLICATION No: 16/68336/FUL APPLICANT: Stama Developments (Salford) Ltd LOCATION: Former Salford Police Headquarters, Crescent , Salford, M5 4NL, PROPOSAL: Part demolition and refurbishment of existing former police headquarters, including two storey extension to the roof and five storey extensions within the courtyard of the building, comprising 117 one, two and three bed apartments and erection of 23 five bed townhouses together with associated landscaping and highway works. WARD: Irwell Riverside

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application relates to the former Crescent Police Station, which was built in the 1950s as a divisional headquarters for the police force. The site covers an area of 0.74 hectare and the front half of the site lies within the Crescent Conservation Area. The site is bordered to the east by Irwell Place beyond which is Faraday House, a vacant former Salford University building, and by the University’s main surface car park. To the south the site is bordered by railway lines that are approximately 3m below the level of the site. Beyond the railway is the Cemex production plant. To the west the site is bordered by the dwellings in Fire Station Square, by the former Fire Station, which now accommodates University offices, and by Albert Bentley Place, the square

Page 17

$4ftlg5zg.rtf to the front of the former fire station buildings. To the north the site is bordered by Crescent dual carriageway beyond which is the University’s Maxwell building.

The former Fire Station and the dwellings in Fire Station Square are all locally listed. There is a grade II listed telephone kiosk at the corner of the building adjacent to Albert Bentley Place and a grade II listed war memorial within Albert Bentley Place some 33m from the building.

The site also lies within the area covered by the Crescent Development Framework.

To the rear of the site, adjacent to the railway, is the line of the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal.

Description of Proposal

It is proposed to convert the existing main building to residential accommodation. The existing roof is to be removed and two additional floors of accommodation provided, the proposed building would be 3m higher than the existing. The vast majority of the existing façade of the main building remains unaltered as a result of the proposed scheme. To the rear of the existing building, garage structures on the eastern boundary are to be demolished. On the Irwell Place elevation the existing two storey brick structure is also to be demolished.

On the large yard to the rear of the police station an ‘L’ shaped terrace of four storey townhouses is proposed. The terrace is located 22.5m from the rear boundary of the site and 4m from the boundary with Irwell Place and the University surface car park to the south. The gable of the ‘L’ is 4.5m from the boundary of the private rear garden to the north and the main terrace is 22.5m from the closest rear yard on the terrace of houses on Fire Station Square that lie to the north. The townhouses are faced in brick with a zinc roof.

The layout provides for the first terrace of dwellings on Irwell Street to have both pedestrian and, in most cases, vehicular access from the street. Only the first eight of the terrace of eleven dwellings can take vehicular access from the street as this is the limit of the adopted highway on Irwell Place with the remainder of the highway being privately owned by the University. The last three dwellings take pedestrian access only from a path within the curtilage of the site.

A total of 117 apartments would be accommodated in the retained main building.

The mix of dwellings is as follows: 5 studios – 3.5% 50 one-bed apartments – 36% 58 two bed apartments – 41.5% 4 three bed apartments – 3% 23 five bed houses – 16%

Parking is provided for 47 cars including three disabled parking spaces. 30 secure cycle spaces are provided.

As a result of noise constraints due to the Cemex plant no private gardens are proposed. Spaces about the buildings will be planted with meadow species and would be subject to a management regime. To the rear of the site, on the line of the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal, communal allotments are proposed.

The existing brick wall to Fire Station Square on the northern boundary of the site is to be retained. To the front of the building the existing 1.1m high railings, which currently just exist on Irwell Place, are to be replicated and provided to the rest of the retained police station building on its three public facing elevations. A single new pedestrian and vehicular access gate, in the same approximate location as the existing vehicular access to the site, is proposed to a height of 3.5m. It would be set back from the highway and would be located between the old and new buildings.

On the Irwell Street elevation the same 1.1m high railings and gates would be provided to the first terrace of eleven dwellings. A 2.4m high acoustic fence backed by hedge planting would be provided to the second terrace of eight dwellings. This fence would be 4m from the rear kitchen window in the townhouses. Beyond this there is 3m high acoustic fencing which wraps round the rear of the site. This fence would also be located on the part of the site that is retained for the future restoration of the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal. Should the Canal be restored and the fence still be required it would be moved forward closer to the dwellings to the rear of the site. It would be a minimum of 5.25m from the rear of these dwellings.

Page 18

$4ftlg5zg.rtf The houses are designed with an open ground floor that has its kitchen to the rear closer to the site boundaries and the living area overlooking the internal amenity area and car parking.

The existing basement of the building is to be used in part for accommodation. This use of the basement is addressed in greater detail below in the section regarding the amenity of future occupiers.

The development of the site is phased so that the townhouses to the rear of the site are built in the first two phases with the conversion of the retained building forming the final phase.

The application is supported by the following documents and reports:  Air Quality Report  Crime Impact Statement  Ecology Report  Heritage Statement  Noise Impact Assessment  Phase 1 Geo-Environmental Site Assessment  Sustainability Assessment  Transport Assessment  Planning Obligations Pro-forma  Design and Access Statement

As a result of concerns expressed by officers and neighbouring residents the scheme has been significantly amended since it was submitted by a reduction in the number of townhouses proposed to the rear as well as their siting and detailed design. Originally two terraces were proposed the second of which was located in close proximity to the existing dwellings on Fire Station Square.

Pre-application discussions commenced in the autumn of 2014. Given the low rise nature of the development and the fact that it accords with the requirements of the Crescent Development Framework, with regard to the retention of the existing building and the provision of family housing, there have not been any meetings with Places Matter in this instance.

Relevant Site History

No relevant site history.

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH within Conservation Area Date Displayed: 5 August 2016 Reason: Planning App in Conservation Area

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 14 July 2016 Reason: Planning App in Conservation Area

Neighbour Notification

The occupiers of 41 neighbouring properties have been notified of the submitted application and of the amended plans.

Representations

Objections were originally received from seven neighbouring residents of Fire Station Square as well as from the operators of the Cemex site on Hope Street to the south. Salford University has also made representations. The residents’ original grounds of objection are as follows:  Proposed houses are too tall and far too close to the rear of houses on Fire Station Square resulting in significant overlooking, loss of privacy, loss of sunlight, loss of light and a very overbearing outlook. Habitable rooms and private gardens will go from no overlooking whatsoever to significant and overbearing overlooking. At their closest the proposed elevated 3 storey buildings are just 4m from the common boundary – this is clearly unacceptable

Page 19

$4ftlg5zg.rtf  Lack of parking spaces  Insufficient mitigation is in place to address the noise, dust and other environmental issues that future residents would suffer as a result of the Cemex plant  New dwellings on the site should be limited to two storeys  The noise report does not accurately reflect the 24 hour operations on the Cemex site. Despite being further away from the plant than the proposed houses, residents of Fire Station Square frequently have cause to make complaints about noise disturbance both to Cemex and to Salford and the Environment Agency  Increase in noise and disturbance  Construction works may result in damage to an historic boundary wall within the Conservation Area  It is not fair that residents amenity is so significantly reduced just in order to make converting the former police station viable. The Council should consider whether keeping the former police station is a viable option or whether façade retention or complete demolition is a better option.

Most of the objections also welcomed the principle of the redevelopment of the existing building and the site.

Since these original objections were received five of the objectors, including the chair of the Salford Crescent Neighbourhood Association, have withdrawn their objections in response to the amended site layout and have written expressing their support for the proposed development. One letter commends the developers for their consideration of objections raised by residents to the initial plans but continues to raise concerns regarding lack of parking and asks that the Council consider extending the permit parking scheme in Fire Station Square to 24 hours and 7 days a week in order to mitigate the effects of increased demand for parking as a result of this and other developments in the area. Two letters though refer to the prospect of students being attracted by the five bedroom townhouses. They point out that all the bedrooms are of similar size. Two further letters of support have been received from residents who had not previously objected to the scheme.

The operators of the Cemex plant were originally concerned that the applicant’s submitted noise report was inadequate in that it contained no assessment of noise resulting from existing operations at the Hope Street site. Since these comments were made they have been in discussions with the applicant’s noise consultants and have facilitated further noise measurements being taken from within their site. The main concern that Cemex have is that future residents’ complaints will result in the plant being forced to close contrary to policy E5 of the UDP. As a result of the amendments that have been made and the conditions that are proposed Cemex is now satisfied with the proposals and do not object to permission being granted.

The University originally made the following comments:  The University welcomes the proposal to address the former Police Station, which has been an eyesore on the Crescent for a number of years  The scheme provides an opportunity to broaden the mix of accommodation options for students, potentially in a way that complements the University’s own student accommodation at Peel Park.  The affordability of the accommodation is potentially an issue for students.  The University is concerned that access to the development is from Irwell Place as this currently also serves the University’s main surface car park and therefore the development may add to congestion, particularly for vehicles exiting Irwell Place on to Crescent. A review of the phasing of the traffic lights at this junction may be necessary to mitigate these impacts.

The University has not responded to the amended site layout.

Consultations

Design For Security - The proposed development should be designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations contained within section 3.3 of the submitted Crime Impact Statement and a planning condition should be added to reflect the physical security specification listed within the Crime Impact Statement.

Highways - No objections subject to the introduction of a 20mph speed limit on Irwell Place.

Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management - The site is a brown field site in flood zone 1 in the core conurbation critical drainage area. Conditions are recommended with regard to surface water drainage.

Page 20

$4ftlg5zg.rtf Canal and River Trust - Requested more information regarding the impact of the proposed development on the line of the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal.

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit - The information submitted with the application includes an ecological appraisal. This appraisal has been undertaken by experienced ecological consultants whose work is known to the Ecology Unit. The survey found the former police station to have potential to support a hibernation roost for bats as well as having moderate bat roost potential. Further surveys of the building have been submitted.

All species of bat and their roosts are protected under UK and European legislation and are a material consideration when determining planning applications. As the scheme is now phased, the proposals are acceptable. All the measures, including additional surveys ahead of phases 2 and 3, construction method statements and enhancement proposals should be required by condition.

Notwithstanding the above, the appraisal found the garages and the scattered scrub on site to have potential to support nesting birds and a condition regarding breeding birds should be attached to any permission.

In line with the requirements of the NPPF it is also recommended that biodiversity enhancement measures be incorporated into the development as outlined in the ecological appraisal and a condition to this effect be attached to any permission.

Urban Vision Environment (Air and Noise) – The applicant’s noise consultant has submitted a revised noise assessment report that considers noise impacts on the proposed development. In summary the report considers a revised site layout and massing and uses further sound data and acoustic modelling to demonstrate how the revised site can satisfy noise criteria for residential use. The principal noise sources the report assesses are the Cemex coating plant and rail loading facility, the railway line and road traffic noise on the A6, Crescent.

The new site layout is a significant improvement over the previous one in terms of noise mitigation from the Cemex plant. The proposed townhouses located nearest the southern boundary to Cemex are in an ‘L’ shape and the proposed four storey construction will be beneficial in sheltering the majority of the proposed development from the Cemex and railway noise sources. Consequently the amenity space between the townhouses and the retained building benefits from reduced noise levels.

In addition, various noise mitigation measures are recommended in the report, including acoustic double glazing to various specifications to satisfy internal noise level criteria; a ventilation strategy including mechanical means; acoustic barrier fencing to varying heights depending on the proximity to the Cemex site; and a design sound insulation value for the roof and walls of the building envelope.

The revised layout is a significant improvement and goes a long way to addressing the concern that noise complaints would arise from future residents. The developer has offered the following additional measures:  Fixed lights to all opening windows facing Cemex  Removal of all private amenity areas  Orienting housing layouts so that living rooms face away from Cemex

Further discussions have taken place between the applicant and Cemex and further revised information has been received and previous concerns have now been addressed. The external courtyard created between the townhouses and the apartment building benefits from reduced noise levels.

In addition various noise mitigation measures are recommended including acoustic double glazing to various specifications to satisfy internal noise level criteria; a ventilation strategy including mechanical means; acoustic barrier fencing to varying heights depending on the proximity to the Cemex site; and a design sound insulation value for the roof and walls of the building envelope.

Windows that can be opened to habitable rooms (i.e. bedrooms and living rooms) are potentially a weakness in the acoustic integrity of buildings, and so the developer’s proposal to provide fixed lights to all opening lights to bedrooms facing CEMEX is to be welcomed. I would go further and recommend that this should apply to the habitable rooms of all the housing units that face south and east on submitted plan. Means of ventilation to those rooms would be by mechanical means. Providing opening windows to habitable rooms on the south and

Page 21

$4ftlg5zg.rtf on the east facing facades of the town house buildings will increase the likelihood of complaints of noise intrusion from future residents.

Urban Vision Environment (Land Contamination) - A phase 1 site assessment has been submitted. The report contains details of a desk study carried out at the site and it recommends further work to confirm the presence and distribution of potential on-site contamination. Conditions are therefore recommended.

United Utilities - No objections subject to conditions regarding surface water drainage.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

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

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

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

Unitary Development Plan CH3 - Works Within Conservation Areas This policy states that work in conservation areas will only be permitted where it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation area. Consideration will be given to the extent that the proposal i) retains or improves features that contribute to the character or appearance of the conservation area ii) are of a high standard of design iii) retains mature trees iv) secures environmental improvements and enhancements v) protects views into an out of the conservation area.

Unitary Development Plan CH4 - Demolition Buildings in Conservation Area This policy states that demolition will only be permitted where i) the structure makes no positive contribution to the character of the area ii) there is no viable use of the structure or the cost of repairing and maintaining it is prohibitive to its future use iii) proposals make a vital contribution to the regeneration of the local area.

Unitary Development Plan CH7 - Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal This policy states that planning permission will be granted for the restoration of the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal. Development that would prejudice the reinstatement of the canal and its towpath will not be permitted. Developer contributions will be sought where the restoration or improvement of the canal or towpath is necessary to enable development.

Unitary Development Plan CH8 - Local List of Buildings of Architectural Interest This policy states that the impact of development on any building, structure or feature that is identified on the council’s local list of buildings, structures and features of architectural, archaeological or historic interest will be a material planning consideration.

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

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

Page 22

$4ftlg5zg.rtf 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 DEV5 - Planning Conditions and Obligations This policy states that development that would have an adverse impact on any interests of acknowledged importance, or would result in a material increase in the need or demand for infrastructure, services, facilities and/or maintenance, will only be granted planning permission subject to planning conditions or planning obligations that would ensure adequate mitigation measures are put in place.

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

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

Unitary Development Plan H4 - Affordable Housing This policy states that in areas that there is a demonstrable lack of affordable to meet local needs developers will be required by negotiation with the city council to provide an element of affordable housing of appropriate types.

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

Unitary Development Plan H8 - Open Space Provision with New Housing This policy states that planning permission will only be granted where there is adequate and appropriate provision for formal and informal open space, and its maintenance over a twenty-year period. Standards to be reached will be based upon policy R2 and guidance contai8ned within Supplementary Planning Documents.

Unitary Development Plan MX1 - Development in Mixed-use Areas

Page 23

$4ftlg5zg.rtf This policy states that a wide range of uses and activities (housing, offices, tourism, leisure, culture, education, community facilities, retail, infrastructure, knowledge-based employment) are permitted within the identified mixed use areas (Chapel Street East. Chapel Street West, Salford Quays, Ordsall Lane Riverside Corridor).

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

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

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 - 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.

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

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

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

Appraisal

It is considered that the main planning issues to be considered in the determination of this application are as follows:

Page 24

$4ftlg5zg.rtf  Whether the principle of development is acceptable  The extent to which the scheme accords with the Crescent Development Framework  Whether the design and appearance is of sufficient quality  The impacts on heritage assets  The extent to which scale and layout impacts on the amenity of neighbouring residents  Whether the amenity of future residents is acceptable  Whether the mix and size of dwellings is acceptable  Whether the effect on highways is acceptable  Whether sufficient parking is provided  Whether the application sufficiently mitigates the impact from adjacent industry  Whether environmental impacts are acceptable  Whether the development sufficiently mitigates its impacts in accordance with the Planning Obligations SPD

Following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) it is necessary to consider the weight which can be afforded to the policies of the Council's adopted Unitary Development Plan (paragraph 215 NPPF 27th March 2012).

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

Principle of Development

Paragraph 17 of the NPPF states that the planning system should proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver new homes that the country needs and that every effort should be made objectively to identify and then meet the housing needs of an area. It also states that planning should always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants. It goes on the encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed and states that heritage assets should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance.

Paragraph 49 of the NPPF states that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

Paragraph 51 of the NPPF states that local planning authorities should bring back into use empty buildings.

In terms of housing need, Salford has a five year housing supply. That said it is considered that the site comprises brownfield land within a highly sustainable location. The existing building has been vacant for some time and the Council, as landowner, has identified no likelihood of securing appropriate employment use as required by policy E5 of the UDP. The site lies within the area covered by policy MX1 of the UDP, which identifies housing as an appropriate use. Further the proposed development accords in principle with the Crescent Development Framework

In this context, subject to the impacts of the proposed development being acceptable, it is considered that the principle of the development is acceptable having regard to the policies of the UDP and the National Planning Policy Framework

Crescent Development Framework

The Framework was adopted in 2014 and sets out the Council’s vision for the area. At paragraph 1.2 it confirms that it will be a material consideration in the determination of planning applications within the area. A key objective is to increase the number of residents living in the area and to protect and enhance the quality of life of existing residents. The Framework also refers to the need to ensure that development conserves and enhances the historic environment of the Crescent.

The site lies within the New Windsor area and the Framework identifies this wider area as primarily being developed for residential use with a mix of houses and apartments. Specifically with regard to this former Police Headquarters the Framework states that “In 2012 the Council is seeking development which could re-use as much as possible of the structure, particularly the frontage on Crescent and Albion Place….The Council will

Page 25

$4ftlg5zg.rtf require that as much as possible of the building is re-used.” The Framework goes on to state that “in making proposals for development of the yard, account will need to be taken of the proximately of houses on Fire Station Square and the need to preserve the route of the canal.” The Framework makes clear that the existing building contributes to the character of the area. Figure 7 of the Framework confirms that the existing main building is to be retained and that the yard to the rear is to be redeveloped. The Framework also states that “redevelopment of the yard may include a pedestrian link between Albion Place (now Albert Bentley Place) and Irwell Place”.

With regard to housing mix the Framework states at paragraph 8.4.2 that a mix of houses and apartments should be provided along with a broad mix of dwelling sizes. It also states that the area provides an opportunity to build larger family dwellings including three bedroomed houses. The proposals are considered to accord with this requirement albeit that the houses have five bedrooms rather than three.

The proposals retain the existing main building and provide 140 new dwellings. While the pedestrian link referred to above is not provided, partly as it would have to cross land owned by a third party, it is considered that the proposal therefore accords with the main aims and requirements raised by the Development Framework.

Design and Appearance

The only significant alteration to the existing former police headquarters is that the existing roof is removed and two floors of accommodation provided in a new roof structure. This new structure is set behind the front of the existing parapet to the building by a distance of 1.3m from the front façade of the existing parapet. The new structure is faced with zinc cladding has windows that directly reflect the window pattern below. These two additional floors sit behind a cor-ten frame that sits 1m forward of the zinc and directly behind the parapet. This new addition to the building would be just 3m higher than the existing roof ridge height.

A new pedestrian entrance is provided on the Crescent elevation and this is framed by a cor-ten surround that reflects the massing of the existing pedestrian entrance to the building that faces Albert Bentley Place. The only other change to the main elevations of the existing building is that some stone carving detailing on the two large windows on the front elevation is replaced with glazing to habitable rooms.

On the rear of the existing building a roof top terrace would be provided providing communal amenity space for residents.

In the yard to the rear of the existing building the new townhouses have four storeys. These townhouses are faced in brick and have large full height windows to habitable rooms. They are designed with open plan ground floors with kitchens to the rear and living space to the front facing the communal open space in the centre of the site.

Noise from the Cemex plant is such that no private rear gardens are proposed as the noise levels would exceed World Health Organisation guidelines, instead communal areas are proposed, which would have a satisfactory noise environment in the centre of the site.

With regard to the comments of the Design for Security team the Crime Impact Statement has already informed the design of the scheme and detailed security specifications are controlled through building regulations. There is therefore no need for a condition.

With regard to the Canal and Rivers Trust the panel will be updated on the Trust’s response to the amended plans and details once it has been received. It is considered though that given that no permanent structure is proposed on the route of the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal and the proposed fencing that crosses it can be moved off the line of the Canal, the interests of the Trust are adequately safeguarded.

The detailed design of the two additional floors of accommodation on the retained police station building and the townhouses has been significantly improved during the processing of the application. The removal of the basement car parking though has resulted in the need for this parking to be provided at ground floor level. While this is less satisfactory than the original submitted layout it is not considered that it has any significant detrimental effect on the scheme. Further the amendments to the layout have been driven by amenity issues with regard to the residents of Fire Station Square and the noise environment created by the Cemex plant while at the same time retaining a scheme that is viable.

Page 26

$4ftlg5zg.rtf It is considered that the proposed new dwellings and the proposed additional floors to the former police headquarters exhibit the necessary degree of architectural quality in accordance with the requirements of the design policies of the UDP, the Design SPD and the NPPF.

Heritage Assets

Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that when considering whether to grant planning permission for development that affects a listed building or its setting “special regard” will be given to the “desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses”.

Councils also have a special statutory duty imposed by Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 that requires Local Planning Authorities to pay, "special attention in the exercise of planning functions to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area."

The effect of these sections is that decision-makers considering harm to heritage assets cannot simply treat the desirability of preserving the setting of a listed building as a mere material consideration to which they can simply attach the weight they see fit in their judgment. The statutory duty provided by section 66(1) of the Act goes beyond that and treats the preservation of the setting of a listed building as presumptively desirable. The effect of the statutory requirement is to impose a duty on decision-makers to give “considerable importance and weight” or “high priority” to the desirability of preserving listed buildings and their settings.

One of the core principles of the NPPF is to “conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance”.

Paragraph 131 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that in determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of:  The desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation;  The positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality; and  The desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness.

Paragraph 132 states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the assets conservation. It goes on to point out that significance can be harmed or lost through development within its setting.

Paragraph 133 states that where substantial harm occurs, permission should be refused, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh the harm or where a number of criteria apply that includes where the harm is outweighed by the benefit of bringing the site back into use.

Paragraph 134 states there where a development proposal leads to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use.

Policy CH2 of the UDP states that permission will not be granted for development that would have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building.

In the annex to the NPPF the setting of a heritage asset is described as “the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve.

Page 27

$4ftlg5zg.rtf Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral”.

The two nationally listed structures are a war memorial and a telephone kiosk. As noted above only the front half of the site, that part containing the main building and the outbuildings, lies within the Crescent Conservation Area. The building is not locally listed but the adjacent former fire station buildings, now occupied by the University, and the dwellings in Fire Station Square are all locally listed. The fire station buildings are listed for their aesthetic, landmark and social/communal value. The dwellings are listed for their aesthetic and group value.

The existing main building is designed in neo-Georgian style but used advance construction technology for its era with the basement of the building serving as a bunker in the event of an emergency event. The existing building is distinctive and plays a positive role in the conservation area. As stated above the retention of the main building is welcomed and is supported by the Crescent Development Framework.

The two listed structures are of aesthetic and communal significance. Together they point to the significance of this part of the conservation area. The structures in themselves though are like many such structures across the country. Both are located adjacent to and within a setting of existing buildings. It is not considered that the two additional floors of accommodation that replace the existing roof of the former police station have any significant effect upon the setting of these two listed structures.

With regard to effect upon the conservation area the key aspect of the proposed scheme is that it retains the existing building and brings it back into use. The contemporary approach to the detailed design of the two additional floors is welcomed. It is considered that the cor-ten frame and the setting back of the proposed two floors of accommodation both draws attention to the new and different of the building in a manner that respects the key features of the original dwelling while at the same time modernising them.

The former fire station building, now occupied by Salford University, and the houses of Fire Station Square are all locally listed buildings as well as being located within the Crescent Conservation Area. The proposed houses respect the neighbouring buildings in terms of the use and scale and are now located over 20m away. With regard to the former fire station buildings the scale of the additional floors of accommodation is such there would be a less than substantial impact upon the setting of these buildings.

It is considered that the proposals have a neutral effect on the setting of the two listed structures. With regard to the conservation area the bringing back into use of the existing building has a positive effect on the character and appearance of the conservation area. It is considered that the additional floors of accommodation preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area.

The proposals accord with the requirements of policies CH2, CH3 and CH7 of the UDP and with the requirements of the NPPF and the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

Impact on Neighbours

The submitted scheme proposed two terraces of dwellings to the rear of the main building. The objections received related to the close proximity of the nearest terrace to existing neighbouring dwellings. As a result of discussions with neighbours the applicant has removed the terrace closest to Fire Station Square so that there is now a minimum interface between habitable room windows of 24m. Proposed windows are 21.5m from existing rear gardens and there are no habitable room windows in the gable of the house closest to 25 Fire Station Square, which has a garden that is very private and not currently overlooked in any way.

It is considered that the interests of neighbours have been addressed through the amended site layout and it is noted that letters of support for the amended plans have been received.

It is considered that the amenity of existing residents is sufficiently protected in accordance with the requirements of policy DES7 of the UDP.

Amenity of Future Residents

During pre-application discussions with the applicant it was accepted that a compromise between the quality of the new development to the rear of the site and the amenity of future residents of dwellings in the basement of

Page 28

$4ftlg5zg.rtf the existing building might be considered acceptable. As a result of the strong objections to the originally submitted scheme by residents of Fire Station Square and Cemex the layout that had been agreed with officers, which included basement parking and a large central communal area has been altered such that an ‘L’ shape terrace of dwellings facing open space and surface car parking is now proposed.

It is accepted that the originally submitted layout could not have been supported and that the new layout satisfies both Cemex, with regard to noise, and the residents of Fire Station Square with regard to privacy and overlooking. The applicant has argued that the practicalities of retaining the existing building, which was built as a police headquarters with secure cells in the basement and a concrete roof means that use of the basement as residential accommodation is necessary. These habitable rooms within the basement all benefit from light-wells or from high level windows to the internal courtyard. These high level windows to the only bedrooms in eight of the smaller basement apartments would not normally be considered to provide adequate amenity space to future residents. These apartments do benefit from a small amount of private amenity space to the front. Taking account of the fact that the scheme retains and brings back into use a distinctive building within a conservation area in accordance with the Council’s adopted guidance for the area it is considered that the habitable room accommodation highlighted above is acceptable.

With regard to the future reinstatement of the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal it would be necessary, should the noise environment remain the same, to move the acoustic fencing from the rear of the site to the rear of that part of the site that would remain for the exclusive use of residents. This would bring the acoustic fencing to a distance of 5.2m from the rear of the townhouses at the back of the site. The noise environment for these residents would be improved. An informative is added with regard to the reinstatement of the canal and the need to move the acoustic fencing.

There is a distance of 4m from fencing on the common boundary with the University car park and eight of the townhouses. As with all the townhouses there is no habitable room at ground level and it is considered that this distance is therefore acceptable.

On balance it is considered that the level of amenity for future residents is acceptable in accordance with the requirements of policy DES7 of the UDP.

Housing Mix

Paragraph 50 of the NPPF sets out that local planning authorities should deliver a wide choice of high quality homes and create sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities. Policy H1 of the UDP states that all new housing developments will be required to contribute towards the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area in terms of size, type, tenure and affordability. This policy is supplemented by policies in the Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance. Policy HOU1 of the Housing SPG states that within this area apartments will normally be the most appropriate form of housing provision. Policy HOU2 of the Guidance seeks to ensure that where apartments are considered appropriate they should provide a broad mix of dwelling sizes, both in terms of number of bedrooms and the net residential floorspace. Studios and one bed apartments should not predominate and a significant proportion of three bedroom apartments should be provided wherever practicable. The reasoned justification clarifies that the majority of apartments should have two or three bedrooms with a floorspace of 57sq.m or more.

The proposed development has the following accommodation mix: Studios and one beds – 39.3%. Sizes - 29.2sq.m to 55.3sq.m Two beds – 41.4%. Sizes - 53.3sq.m to 93.2sq.m Three beds – 2.9%. Sizes - 86.2sq.m to 95.9sq.m Five beds – 16.4%. Size – 142.9sq.m

It is considered that this represents a broad mix of dwelling types and sizes.

The mix and size of dwellings therefore fully accords with the requirements of Housing Planning Guidance, policy H1 of the UDP and the advice contained in the Crescent Development Framework.

Highways and Parking

The site lies within a highly accessible location on a major public transport route and within walking distance of Salford Crescent train station. The level of parking proposed is considered appropriate and acceptable in

Page 29

$4ftlg5zg.rtf accordance with Council standards. The level of bicycle storage exceeds the minimum level required by the UDP.

The proposed use as dwellings is considered to have a broadly similar impact upon the highway network as the previous use as a police headquarters. The revised layout allows visibility splays of 2.4m by 43m to be provided.

It is considered therefore that the proposal is in accordance with UDP policies A8 and A10 of the UDP and will not have a severe impact on the local highway network in accordance with the requirements of the NPPF.

Impact of Cemex and Amenity of Future Residents

To the south of the site is the existing Cemex plant which manufactures cement, concrete asphalt and supplies a significant proportion of the construction projects within the regional centre and beyond. Members will be aware of the impacts of the existing plant on applications for residential development through the apartment scheme at Hulme Street (16/68405/REM), which was considered by Panel on 15 September 2016.

The applicant’s noise consultants have met with the consultants working for Cemex and the noise environment for future residents has been one of the other main drivers with regard to the amendments that have been submitted since the application was first submitted.

The Council’s noise consultant has reviewed the revised details and is satisfied, subject to conditions, that future residents will benefit from a satisfactory level of amenity. In addition it is considered that the proposed residential development will not have any significant detrimental impact upon the operations conditions of the Cemex plant.

It is considered that the amenity of future residents is sufficiently secured in accordance with the requirements of policy EN17 of the UDP. It is also considered that the interests of Cemex are sufficiently secured in accordance with the requirements of policy E5 of the UDP

Flood Risk and Drainage

The site is located in flood zone 1, which is categorized as low risk and currently comprises hard surfacing. The proposals will introduce areas of soft landscaping that will result in a significantly improved situation with regard to flood risk and surface water drainage. Conditions are attached to ensure that this takes place.

There are no consultee objections to the scheme and it is considered that the drainage issues arising from the proposed development are acceptable.

Ecology

The existing site is predominantly hard surfaced and subject to self-seeded vegetation. There are no mature trees on the site. The significant increase in the amount of soft landscaping on the site is therefore of considerable ecological benefit.

As it is proposed to phase the development initial concerns of the Greater Manchester Ecology Unit are now resolved and conditions are attached.

It is considered therefore that the ecological value of the site is enhanced as a result of the proposed development.

Contaminated Land

Paragraph 121 of the NPPF states that decisions should ensure that the proposed site is suitable for its new use taking into account ground conditions, including pollution arising from previous uses and any proposals for mitigation including land remediation or impacts on the natural environment arising from that remediation.

The site is a former police station and servicing of vehicles took place on the land to the rear of the building. In addition the site contained its own fuel supply for police vehicles.

Page 30

$4ftlg5zg.rtf The site assessment submitted with the application identifies that further work including a mitigation strategy and verification is necessary. The findings of the report are agreed with.

The proposal therefore complies with paragraph 121 of the NPPF.

Sustainability

The City Council’s Sustainable Design and Construction SPD seeks to ensure that sustainable design and construction measures are integrated into new developments. Compliance with this SPD is demonstrated through submission of a sustainability checklist. The applicant has provided details of how the design and construction of the scheme would minimise energy consumption and maximise sustainability. The following measures are proposed:  Mechanical Ventilation Heat Recovery units to all apartments  High efficiency lighting  SuDS to the car park and planting areas  Rainwater gathering in the form of water butts  Areas of green/brown roof  All dwellings will achieve Lifetime Homes standard

It is considered that the development will meet the City Council's aspirations in terms of sustainability and the requirements of the SPD.

Planning Obligations

UDP Policy DEV5 advises that if new development is likely to result in a material increase in the need or demand for infrastructure, services, facilities and/or maintenance, planning permission will only be granted if suitable mitigation measures are put in place. This policy is supported by the Planning Obligations SPD which explains the city council’s overall approach to the use of planning obligations, and sets out detailed advice on the use of obligations to ensure that developments mitigate their impacts by making an appropriate contribution to projects that will ensure the needs generated by the development are met.

It is noted that, in accordance with the NPPF, planning obligations should only be sought where they are considered necessary to make a development acceptable in planning terms, directly related to the development; and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

The site lies within a mid/high value area where full contributions and affordable housing from both apartments and houses is required.

Given the scale of the development being proposed, it is considered that a significant level of investment would be required to mitigate against the impacts it will have on the surrounding amenities. Policy OB6 details that the city council will seek a financial contribution towards the provision or improvement of public realm on a case by case basis from relevant development. The appropriate scale of any contribution will be negotiated having regard to site specific circumstances. Policy OB6 also outlines that the costs of delivering public realm can be significant. Therefore it may be the case that within a particular area, the delivery of public realm works is considered to be the highest priority. The area in which the application site is located is considered such an area.

The proposed development itself would be located approximately 200 metres from the planned Meadows Bridge and its accompanying public square. The bridge would represent an essential new link from the Crescent to the Meadows, providing access to a fundamental area of open space within the Regional Centre and will offer enhanced connections to Irwell River Park. The estimated cost of delivering the bridge and associated public realm is £4m. The council requires new development which will directly benefit from the provision of the bridge to support the costs of its delivery.

Within the locality of the proposed development the council has in recent years led on the delivery of highway improvements along the Chapel Street corridor to improve connectivity and help mitigate the impacts of the scale of development predicted within the area. The second phase of these works has always been to deliver additional required public realm improvements along the Crescent corridor. Such works would seek to provide a

Page 31

$4ftlg5zg.rtf more attractive environment and improve connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists to areas of work, leisure and education.

Considering the scale of development the following planning obligations have therefore been sought to mitigate the impacts of the development in accordance with the Planning Obligations SPD:  Open space - £530,310  Education - £100,178  Public Realm – £210,000  Affordable Housing – £627,250

The council will require planning obligations for affordable housing. The maximum financial contribution of £1,467,738 would be directed towards the provision of the Meadows Bridge and/or public realm improvements along the Crescent Corridor.

The applicant has submitted a viability appraisal that has been assessed by external consultants given the Council's ownership of the site. Their advice is that the development cannot sustain a financial contribution at this stage. Profit levels are such that the scheme is likely to generate a profit level less than would normally be considered acceptable by a developer. However a clawback mechanism is still advised.

Conclusions and Planning Balance

The proposal accords with the main thrust of the Crescent Development Framework in that the current building is retained and brought back into residential use providing a broad range of new homes including family accommodation.

The number of family houses has been reduced from 34 to 23 in order to address the constraints imposed by the noise environment and the proximity to residents in Fire Station Square. Given the amount of shared amenity space provided it is considered that a satisfactory level of amenity is provided for these family dwellings.

The adverse impacts of the proposed development have been considered and assessed. In particular the level of amenity afforded to a small proportion of the apartments would not normally be considered to be sufficient.

The site layout is to a significant degree dictated by external factors. In particular the width of the site means that two terraces of dwellings cannot be accommodated without having an unacceptable impact on the existing residents of Fire Station Square. The noise environment as a result of the Cemex plant is such that private gardens to the rear of dwellings cannot be provided. The nature of Irwell Place is such that it is only adopted to approximately two thirds of its length, the remainder being owned by Salford University and in part forming circulation space within its large surface car park.

On balance it is considered that that retention of the building with the conservation area and the degree of compliance with the adopted Crescent Development Framework outweighs the deficiencies in the scheme identified above. It is considered that the application accords with the relevant provisions of the development plan and represents sustainable development in accordance with the provisions of the NPPF.

Recommendation

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

1) The Strategic Director of Environment and Community Safety be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act to secure an assessment of the future viability of the development regarding the following maximum contributions:

- Open Space Provision - £530,310 - Education Contribution - £100,178 - Public Realm Infrastructure - £210,000 - Affordable Housing Contribution - £627,250

Page 32

$4ftlg5zg.rtf 2) That the applicant be informed that the Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions stated below, on completion of such a legal agreement;

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

Conditions

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

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

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the drawings set out on the drawing issue sheet 219_al(05) dated 20 March 2017

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

3. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 and Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (and any subsequent amending order), there shall be no development within the curtilage of any dwelling hereby approved as defined in Part 1 and Part 2 of Schedule 2 of the above Order without the prior grant of planning permission by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To prevent development which could harm local character and/or neighbouring amenity in accordance with policies DES1, and DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

4. Notwithstanding any information submitted with the application, no development shall take place until an investigation and risk assessment has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The assessment shall investigate the nature and extent of any contamination on the site (whether or not it originates on the site). The assessment shall be undertaken by competent persons and a written report of the findings submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any development takes place. The submitted report shall include:

i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination

ii) an assessment of the potential risks to:

* human health, * property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland, and service lines and pipes, * adjoining land, * groundwaters and surface waters, * ecological systems, * archaeological sites and ancient monuments;

iii) where unacceptable risks are identified, an appraisal of remedial options and proposal of the preferred option(s) to form a remediation strategy for the site.

The development shall thereafter be carried out in full accordance with the duly approved remediation strategy.

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

5. Pursuant to condition 4 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.

Page 33

$4ftlg5zg.rtf Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and to ensure the safe development of the site in the interests of the amenity of future occupiers in accordance with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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

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

7. The surface water discharge rate shall be restricted to 50% of the existing discharge rate in accordance with the Council's Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.

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

8. Drainage from the basement shall not be connected directly to sewers, in order to prevent a backflow.

9. 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.

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

Page 34

$4ftlg5zg.rtf (vii) a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition/construction works; (viii) measures to minimise disturbance to any neighbouring occupiers from noise and vibration, including from any piling activity; (ix) measures to prevent the pollution of watercourses; and (x) a community engagement strategy which explains how local neighbours will be kept updated on the construction process, key milestones, and how they can report to the site manager or other appropriate representative of the developer, instances of unneighbourly behaviour from construction operatives. The statement shall also detail the steps that will be taken when unneighbourly behaviour has been reported. A log of all reported instances shall be kept on record and made available for inspection by the local a planning authority upon request.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Page 35

$4ftlg5zg.rtf 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.

13. The following noise standards shall be attained with respect to residential accommodation on the site as stipulated in BS8233:2014 - Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings: (i) internal noise levels of less than 30 dB LAeq,8hour within bedrooms between 23.00 hours and 07.00 hours (ii) internal noise levels of less than 35 dB LAeq,16 hour within living rooms between 07.00 hours and 23:00 hours (iii) internal noise levels of less than 40 dB LAeq,16hour within other living areas (e.g. dining rooms) between 07.00 and 23.00 hours (iv) typical individual noise events from trains and road traffic, shall not be in excess of 45 dB LAmax in bedrooms between 23.00 and 07.00 hours

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

14. The windows to any habitable rooms in the south facing and the east facing elevations of the development's townhouses hereby permitted shall not have any lights capable of being opened and shall be retained thereafter as such.

15. Prior to the commencement of the development details of a scheme for the erection of an acoustic barrier along the south, west and east boundaries of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include provision for the relocation of the fencing should it require moving as a result of the reinstatement of the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal. The barrier shall be erected in accordance with the recommendations of the acoustic report 98842.1, dated 24th February 2017 and the approved scheme prior to first occupation of the development and retained thereafter unless required to move to reinstate the Canal.

16. Prior to the commencement of the development a scheme to demonstrate the use of ventilation measures which removes the need for future residents to open windows for cooling and ventilation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved ventilation measures shall ensure the standards in condition 13 above are not compromised and shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the development and thereafter be retained.

17. No development shall commence on phase 3 (as shown on the approved plans) until a further precautionary survey for bats has been undertaken and submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. If bats are found then a Method Statement that gives details and measures to be taken to avoid any possible harm to bats during construction works.

Reason: In the interests of bats, which are a protected species, in accordance with the requirements of the NPPF and national legislation regarding protected species.

18. Before occupation of the development hereby permitted full details of a scheme for ecological enhancement of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 36

$4ftlg5zg.rtf The scheme shall identify fully all measures proposed to enhance the ecological value of the site. A verification report shall be submitted for written approval to the Local Planning Authority confirming that all approved measures have been implemented in full prior to the final occupation of the site. All approved measures shall be retained and maintained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of the ecology of the site, in accordance with the requirements of policy EN9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the NPPF.

Notes to Applicant

1. STANDING ADVICE - DEVELOPMENT LOW RISK AREA

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

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

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

2. No vegetation clearance required by the scheme should take place in the optimum period for bird nesting (March to July inclusive) unless nesting birds have been shown to be absent by a suitably qualified person.

3. It must be noted that should the line of the Manchester, Bolton and Bury canal be reinstated then the acoustic fencing will need moving up to the boundary between the site and the line of the former Canal.

Page 37

$4ftlg5zg.rtf This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5b

http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

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

Additional Information

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

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

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

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

Page 39 They highlight that the Local Planning Authority (LPA) have not provided ‘clear and compelling’ evidence within the officer report to support the need to limit the number of car parking spaces at the development site and note this onus to provide evidence is on the LPA. The applicant states that the LPAs response as merely a restatement of policy A10 is perverse given the UDP was adopted in 2006 and the publication of the Ministerial Statement in 2015 clearly shows Governments position. They have also quoted case law to support that the ministerial statement should be a material consideration in the consideration of planning applications. The applicant draws upon previous information submitted in support of the application such as the Homes and Community Agency Employment Densities Guide as providing the necessary evidence to prove additional car parking is required at the site.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Page 40 Both businesses note that their current car parking requirement is currently provided for on the car parking of the adjacent unused offices which are to be redeveloped. They conclude the letter by confirming their support for the application and ask that the Council support their business.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

Page 41 The site to which this development relates comprises two office buildings to the west of the existing business park. The first building on the left when viewed from the vehicular access to the business park is Oak Court and is currently occupied by offices. The second building to the north of Oak Court is a vacant office building known as Birch Court. The units to the east of the application site, outside of the red line boundary, are all vacant and subject to a separate planning application ref. 16/67827/OUT for residential development.

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

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

Description of Proposal

Planning consent is sought for the demolition of the vacant Birch Court and formation and laying out of a car park, together with the installation of 2.0 metre high railings and gates around the site boundary. This is a resubmission of a scheme that was refused planning permission on 18 August 2016, ref. 16/67858/FUL (see relevant planning history section of this report below).

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

Publicity

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

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

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

Relevant Site History of the Clifton Business Park

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

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

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

Page 42 07/55681/FUL - Erection of a three storey building surrounding the existing single storey building to create an additional 3300 sq.m office floorspace – Refused 25 February 2008

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

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

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

Neighbours

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

Representations

None received

Consultations

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

Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management - No objections - recommend conditions

Urban Vision Environment (Air And Noise) - No objections

Design For Security - No objections – recommend informatives

Urban Vision Environment (Land Contamination) - No objections

Great Manchester Ecological Unit - No objections

Page 43 United Utilities – No objections

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

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.

Page 44 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 E5 - Development in Established Employment Areas This policy states that planning permission will only be granted for the reuse or redevelopment of sites or buildings within an established employment area for non-employment uses where the development would not compromise the operating conditions of other adjoining employment uses, and where one or more of the following apply: a) The developer can demonstrate there is no current or likely future demand for the site for employment purposes b) There is a strong case for rationalising land uses or creating open space c) The development would contribute to the implementation of an approved regeneration strategy or plan for the area d) The site is allocated for another use in the UDP.

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

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

Page 45 and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of safety and security.

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

Unitary Development Plan EN9 - Wildlife Corridors This policy states that development that would affect any land that functions as a wildlife corridor, or that provides an important link or stepping stone between habitats will not be permitted. Conditions and planning obligations may be used to protect, enhance or manage to facilitate the movement of flora and fauna where development is permitted.

Unitary Development Plan EN12 - Important Landscape Features This policy states that development that would have a detrimental impact on, or result in the loss of, any important landscape feature will not be permitted unless the applicant can clearly demonstrate that the importance of the development plainly outweighs the nature conservation and amenity value of the landscape feature and the design and layout of the development cannot reasonably make provision for the retention of the landscape feature. If the removal of an important existing landscape feature is permitted as part of a development, a replacement of at least equivalent size and quality, or other appropriate compensation, will be required either within the site, or elsewhere within the area.

Page 46 Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy

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

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

Appraisal

Principle of Development

Loss of employment land

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

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

UDP Policy E5 seeks to retain sites within employment use and states that planning permission will only be granted for the reuse or redevelopment of sites or buildings within an established employment area for non- employment uses where the following conditions are met:

1. the development would not compromise the operating conditions of other remaining employment uses; and 2. one or more of the following apply: a. the developer can clearly demonstrate that there is no current or likely future demand for the site or building for employment purposes; b. there is a strong environmental case for rationalising land uses or creating open space; c. the development would contribute to the implementation of an approved regeneration strategy or plan for the area; or

Page 47 d. the site is allocated for another use in the UDP.

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

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

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

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

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

Highway impact and parking

At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which the government wants to be seen as a golden thread running through both the plan making and decision making process. The NPPF outlines three dimensions of sustainability; economic, social and environmental. These dimensions give rise to a need for the planning system to perform a number of roles including the environment role.

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

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

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

Page 48 Whilst the Ministerial Statement (in March 2015) has made it clear that local planning authorities should look at parking provision for new developments on a case by case basis, taking into account any existing local parking pressures, the City Council's adopted UDP vehicle parking standards are a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, which haves gone through the full development plan adoption process and is considered a reasonable starting point for assessing whether the level of off-street parking resulting from the application would be acceptable. This is consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which stresses the importance of promoting sustainable transport and how local policies can influence this (NPPF para 29):

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

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

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

In comparison with the previous planning application submission, that was subsequently refused, the agent has submitted a planning statement arguing the case for the development and clarifying that the Oak Court building has a Net Internal Area (NIA) of 2010 sqm (the NIA is the lettable / usable area of the office but excludes corridors, stairwells, lifts, WCs and other communal areas). The building has two tenants who occupy the ground and first floors .The second floor is occupied by Hampstead Investments - the applicant. According to the information provided and based on guidance contained in the Homes Communities Agency Employment Densities Guide (2nd Edition 2010) the agent states that Oak Court would be capable of generating a figure of between 167 to 201 employees. The proposal seeks to provide 130 car parking spaces and according to the agent there would still be a shortfall of parking spaces when set against potential employees.

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

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

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

Page 49 In the agent’s opinion, if planning permission is granted for residential development on the eastern part of the Clifton Business Park via planning application ref. 16/67827/OUT, the car parking provided for the vacant office units and currently being used by the occupants of Oak Court will no longer be available. Thus, it would be vital that sufficient car parking is provided and failure to provide additional car parking spaces would harm the applicants’ prospects to grow their business and attract potential tenants. In addition, a lack of additional car parking provision could result in employees and visitors parking off-site, which could cause further problems within the surrounding streets.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Page 50 The application was reviewed by Urban Vision’s Sustainable Travel Officer who confirmed, with the previous submission, that the site is considered to be in a sustainable location within walking distance from Bolton Road which is well served by public transport with nearby facilities and services. This includes bus stops located within 5 minutes’ walk of the site (0.3 of a mile) served by the number 8, 22, 66, 19, 70, 71 and 73 which allow connections to Bolton, Manchester City Centre, Stockport, Eccles and other points around Greater Manchester. Services range from one bus every 10 minutes to one every hour. Local link is also available for the site, so out of normal office hours workers have links around Greater Manchester. In addition, footpaths and good pavements are provided throughout the site and surrounding areas and as such do not act as a barrier towards accessing the site on foot. The Travel Plan submitted by the agent states that the M60 is a barrier to pedestrians and cyclists, however, roads and off road walking and cycling routes are provided along the River Irwell and under the M60. Thus, despite the application site being situated out of town, Clifton Business Park is considered to be situated within a sustainable location.

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

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

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

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

Page 51 Visual Amenity

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

Crime and Design

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

Residential Amenity

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

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

Flood Risk

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

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

Drainage

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

Ecology

Page 52 The NPPF states that applications should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity and nature conservation interests by; avoiding significant harm; or where this is unavoidable, adequately mitigate or at last resort compensate for the harm; encouraging opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments; and permit developments that have the primary objective of conserving and enhancing biodiversity.

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

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

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

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

Recommendation:

Refuse

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

Page 53 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5c PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL PART I SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=NYRVPUN PHKM00

APPLICATION No: 16/69058/FUL APPLICANT: Mr N Holden LOCATION: Whittlebrook Reservoir, Howclough Drive, Worsley, M28 3FS PROPOSAL: Creation of new access to include parking spaces, hard standing, access ramp, concrete steps and erection of 2.4m high fence and gates, installation of a disabled toilet, together with retrospective permission for cormorant deterrent features (poles on land and on fishing refuges), placement of shipping container for use as storage and associated lean-to shelter. WARD: Walkden South

Page 55

$bzuckdty.docx Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application site relates a reservoir located at the end of How Clough Drive and is bounded to the north, east and west by residential properties. To the south is a field and an area of overgrown land. The application site is owned by Broughton Angling Club (BAC) and is used for coarse fishing. The site forms part of the Walkden Reservoir Site of Biological Importance.

Description of Proposal

Planning permission is sought for the creation of new access to include parking spaces, hard standing, access ramp, concrete steps and erection of 2.4m high fence and gates, installation of a disabled toilet, together with retrospective permission for cormorant deterrent features (poles on land and on fishing refuges), placement of shipping container for use as storage and associated lean-to shelter. The new access would allow members of the BAC to park on site, rather than outside on Howclough Drive. The fence and gates would be erected around the new access from Howclough Avenue.

The cormorant deterrents have already been erected and are as follows:

- Two Scaffolding poles with aerial deterrents (hawks) – approximately 6.65 metres in height, with one each located on the northern and southern edge of the site; - 10 Scaffoling poles, five on each side of the east and west banks, with some of these poles strung with line laced with ribbons and tape across the lake from one another; and - Six fishing refuges with a spinning ‘reflector ball’ which are approximately 1.05 metres in height.

It is of note that BAC and a number of residential properties are engaged in an on-going dispute over boundaries. This matter is separate from this planning application as such it will not be assessed in this planning application.

Publicity

Earliest Decision Date: 21st March 2017 Revised Expiry Date: No extension agreed

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Reason: Wider Publicity

Relevant Site History

15/66134/FUL - Installation of a disabled toilet (Refused 3rd June 2016)

“Insufficient information has been provided to fully assess the impacts of the proposed development on the Walkden Reservoir Site of Biological Importance contrary to UDP policy EN8 and Part 11 of the NPPF.”

Neighbour Notification

The occupiers of 24 neighbouring properties were notified of the planning application on 4th January 2017.

Neighbours and contributors were re-notified on February 28th 2017 following receipt of amended plans and changes to the description of development.

Representations

Four representations of support and 15 representations of objection were submitted to the Council.

The points raised in the representations of support can be summarised as follows:

- Improve disabled access - Improve opportunities of fishing - Permanent facilities would be beneficial for both residents and users of the Angling club;

Page 56

$bzuckdty.docx The points raised in the representations of objection can be summarised as follows:

- Proposals as whole are an eyesore; - Concerns over height of the poles; - Cormorant deterrents have an impact on other species of birds; - Deterrents are not working in preventing cormorants access the site; - Impact on view; - Impact on wildlife, ecology and Site of Biological Importance; - Better screening of shelter from public view; - Car park would create additional noise and be focal point for anti-social behaviour; - Intensification of use on site; - Highway safety and impact on children playing on street; - Increase in particulate pollution from run off and noise pollution; - Litter and anti-social behaviour caused by those using the fishing lake; - Lack of clarification and information on the plans; - Disruption from building works; and - Outstanding boundary issues.

Comments: The issues relating to impact on view and outstanding boundary issues are not material planning considerations and as such will not form part of the assessment.

Consultations

Environment Agency –

We have no objection in principle to the proposed development but we would like to make the following comments.

The construction must not impact upon the waterbody, and measures must be in place to prevent pollution and water runoff into Linneyshaw reservoir. The works must ensure any waste removal is undertaken by a responsible and permitted company. From prior discussions with the organisation, there were plans to install a toilet and treatment plan; this would need further discussion with us if they wish to go ahead with this aspect.

Greater Manchester Ecology Unit –

No objections to this application on ecology grounds; it’s not an offence to try to deter cormorants in this way and it is not considered that the deterrents will have much in the way of harmful effects on other wildlife.

Senior Flood Engineers –

No objection to this application. Advise that all drainage works are undertaken in accordance with Building Regulations Approved Document H.

Air and Noise –

The application site is outside the City Council’s Air Quality Management Area and no specific mitigation measures are required. In addition, there are no significant noise issues associated with the proposed development.

Lancashire Wildlife Trust – No response received

Highways – The proposed spaces would not be of adequate dimension.

Natural England – No Comments.

Planning Policy Development Plan Policy

Page 57

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

Unitary Development Plan EN8 - Nature Conservation of Local Importance This policy states that development that would adversely affect the nature conservation value of a Site of Biological Importance, a Local Nature Reserve, or a priority habitat for Salford as identified in the Greater Manchester Biodiversity Action Plan, will only be permitted where the benefits of the development clearly outweigh the reduction in the nature conservation interest of the site; the detrimental impact has been minimised as far as is practicable; appropriate mitigation measure have been provided. Conditions or planning obligations will be used to ensure the protection, enhancement and management of these sites and habitats.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Paragraph 73 states that access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation can make an important contribution to the health and well-being of communities.

Paragraph 109 states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible. In addition, by preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of social, air, water or noise pollution or land stability.

Appraisal

Principle

Officers understand that the application site has been in use as a fishing lake for some time; however it has been under the control of the current owners Broughton Angling Club (BAC) since 2009. The application proposals would help facilitate the continued use of the site as a private fishing ground. The principle of the use of the site is already established.

The proposals would install parking on site and the access has been changed to allow levelled access from a ramp from How Clough Drive. This would improve access for all users of Whittlebrook Reservoir and would introduce off-street parking for the first time. The proposed deterrent measures are to ensure that the fish stocks are not depleted.

Page 58

$bzuckdty.docx Subject to consideration of the issues set out below, the principal of the works proposed is considered to be acceptable.

Design and impact on amenity

The existing storage for the site is in the form of a shipping container and associated lean to shelter. The shipping container is well screened within the site towards the south east corner, with no dwellings located adjacent to it. Therefore it is not considered to have an impact on the streetscene. It is acknowledged that the container is visible from dwellings from Hopefold Drive; however this is on the adjacent side of the lake (in excess of 100 metres away). The proposed disabled toilets are also well contained within the site and not adjacent to any dwellings; therefore considered acceptable. The fence would be installed towards the bank and No. 20 Howclough Drive and as such this would be at a lower ground level than the highway.

The proposed fence, whilst at 2.40 metres would be set down and set back from the ground level from the street and No. 20. Therefore the height of this fence would not have an unacceptable visual impact upon the streetscene.

The deterrents would be visible from all dwellings which border the reservoir. The loss of a view is not a material planning consideration. The poles, whilst exceeding 6 metres in height, are very slim (approximately 100mm) and it is considered that their visual impact is acceptable. It is also considered that the Hawk and rope across the lake together with the bird scarers are also acceptable given their small scale.

Concern has been raised that the ‘spinning devices’ on the top of the fishing refuges could cause unacceptable glare. Officers on their second site visit to the Reservoir, which took place on a sunny day, noted that although they do reflect the sunlight, it is not considered that they lead to unacceptable glare and reflection to neighbouring dwellings.

As the use is not being intensified, it is not considered that the proposals will unacceptably harm the amenity of neighbouring occupiers.

Following discussions with the applicant, it is understood that the deterrents could be removed during times of the year where cormorants would not use the lake. As such, Officers will condition that they are only in place between October – April.

Therefore with regards to UDP Policies DES 1 and DES7, the proposals are considered acceptable.

Impact on ecology

The site is within a Site of Biological Importance (SBI). These sites are selected by their basis for ecological value and are tiered to one of three different grades; Grade A (county importance); Grade B (district importance); and Grade C (more than local importance). The application site is identified as a Grade C.

The cormorant’s deterrents have been installed in order to prevent further depletion of fishing stocks within the lake. GMEU have identified in their response that it is not an offence to deter cormorants. The RSPB website identifies that the cormorant is a species of ‘Green Status’ and therefore are a species that are found throughout the UK and the lowest level of conservation priority. The website also states that cormorants are ‘supreme fishers which can bring them into conflict with anglers and they have been persecuted in the past’. As such, it is considered that these birds pose a risk to the enjoyment of this reservoir as a recreational space for anglers. As no objection has been raised by GMEU and no harm to biodiversity has been evidenced it is not considered that there is sufficient reason to refuse this application on ecology grounds.

In relation disabled toilet, information has been submitted regarding the details of the septic tank, with no objections raised by the Urban Vision Drainage Team and GMEU. Although the Environment Agency have not objected they have requested that they be engaged further in discussions and so an informative has been added.

Page 59

$bzuckdty.docx Therefore with regards to UDP Policy EN8 and Paragraph 109 of the NPPF, the proposals are considered acceptable.

Highways and Car Parking

The proposals would install off-street parking for members. While Highways consider these spaces to be too small, Officers understand that members currently park on the end of Howclough Drive and therefore the proposals would improve the current situation as members can now park off-street. The proposals are not considered to directly lead to an increase in the number of members or traffic into this site and woul not result in any harm to the operation of the highway network.

The proposed development is considered to be acceptable and in accordance with policies A8 and A10 of the UDP.

Recommendation

Approve subject to conditions

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

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

2. The approved plans are:

- 01 Rev B (received 7th March 2017); - 03 Rev B (received 27th February 2017); - 04 Rev A (received 27th February 2017); - 06 Rev A (received 27th February 2017); - 11 Rev B (received 27th February 2017); - 12 Rev A (received 27th February 2017); - 13 Rev A (received 27th February 2017); - 14 (received 27th February 2017); - 20 Rev A (received 7th March 2017); - 22 (received 7th March 2017)

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.

3. The deterrents hereby approved shall only be on site between October and April each year.

Reason: In the interest of visual amenity in accordance with policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

Notes to Applicant

1. All drainage works are undertaken in accordance with Building Regulations Approved Document H. 2. You are advised to contact the Environment Agency to discuss further the details of the disabled toilet.

Page 60

$bzuckdty.docx Page 61

$bzuckdty.docx This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5d

http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

APPLICATION No: 17/69369/FUL APPLICANT: Bradley Park Waste Management LOCATION: Former Pilkington Tiles, Rake Lane, Clifton, M27 8LP PROPOSAL: Change of use to a waste transfer station handling both non- hazardous and hazardous waste and the siting of a portable office cabin WARD: Pendlebury

Description of site and surrounding area

The application site (approximately 0.73ha) comprises a vacant former industrial site that previously formed part of the Pilkington’s Tile Factory works, off Rake Lane within Clifton Industrial Estate. The site is accessed from the south through the Pilkington’s site, which itself is accessed via a dedicated access road off Rake Lane.

The site lies within Clifton Industrial Estate which is a large industrial area at the edge of the built up area of Clifton. The former Pilkington’s works adjoins the site to the west, whilst to the east lie existing industrial and manufacturing works that form part of Junction Eco Park. Beyond the site to the north lies the River Irwell. To the south of the site lies a wooded embankment, the access road to the Pilkington’s site, and beyond this the Manchester to Bolton rail line. The nearest residential properties to the site are located approximately 120m to

Page 63

$nqg4wplf.rtf the south at Falcon Crescent. There are also residential properties fronting Rake Lane approximately 150m to the east of the site.

The site comprises hardstanding together with a derelict former warehouse building which is located at the northern extent of the site, and a weigh bridge.

Description of proposal

The application proposes the change of use of the site to a waste transfer station handling both non-hazardous and hazardous waste, together with the siting of a portable office cabin.

The site would be used for the importation and storage of both non-hazardous and hazardous wastes in contained Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBC) and various sized drums. The application documents state that the sealed containers will not be opened, blended or mixed on site. Bunds will be installed within the building and around the building as a precautionary measure to prevent any potential spillages from the sealed containers reaching the local drainage network. The waste would be brought to the site and stored prior to onward bulk transport for recycling/treatment elsewhere. Up to a maximum of 10,000 tonnes of waste would pass through the site on an annual basis with a maximum of 50 tonnes stored on site at any one time.

The existing derelict warehouse building would be fitted with new cladding, and roller-shutter doors installed. The building would be used for the storage of the IBCs and drums. A pre-fabricated portacabin (measuring approximately 6m in length x 3.5m in width x 2.8m in height) would also be installed on the site to function as an office and toilet facilities for the site’s employees.

The applicant has confirmed that 1.8m high palisade fencing and access gates would be erected around the site’s perimeter, however given that the site does not adjoin highway this element does not require planning permission as it is permitted development under Schedule 2 Part 2 Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015.

The proposed hours of operation would be 0700 to 1700 Monday to Friday with no weekend or Bank Holiday working.

The applicant has confirmed that the site will operate under an Environmental Permit which is regulated by the Environment Agency. The applicant is in liaison with the Environment Agency and the application for an Environmental Permit would follow on from any grant of planning consent.

The following documents have been submitted in support of the application:  Planning Statement  Transport Statement

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 Date Displayed: 10 February 2017 Reason: Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 23 February 2017 Reason: Article 15 Standard Press Notice

Neighbour notification

A total of 14 neighbouring properties were notified of the application, and a site notice was displayed. The following properties were notified:  Units 9 and 16, Junction Business Park  Acorn Environmental, Rake Lane  Bargainmax Ltd, Rake Lane  C Coulter, Rake Lane  Consensus Leisure Ltd, Rake Lane  Former Pilkington Site, 346 Rake Lane  Greenhope Recycling, Rake Lane

Page 64

$nqg4wplf.rtf  Hahn Plastic Ltd, Rake Lane  Product Brokers Ltd, Former Pilkington Site, Rake Lane

Representations

No representations have been received to date.

Relevant site history

No relevant site history.

Consultations

Bury Council – No objection.

Environment Agency –

The development will require an Environmental Permit under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010. The Environment Agency makes a series of detailed comments in relation to the requirements for environmental permitting and advises the applicant to contact the Environment Agency to initiate discussions regarding the permitting requirements.

In the context of the proposed use and the site’s proximity to the River Irwell, planning permission should only be granted subject to a series of conditions to prevent the pollution of controlled waters from potential contamination on site.

Greater Manchester Fire Services – No comments received to date.

Highways –

The proposed development is anticipated to generate substantially reduced traffic volumes than the site’s previous land use would have done, and the expected associated traffic volumes are minimal. Therefore, the associated impact in relation to highway operations and road safety are likely to be minimal.

It is recommended that a Traffic Management Plan is introduced in relation to future operations in order to help safeguard other road users and reduce the impact on the nearby residential areas.

Minerals And Waste Planning Unit –

The proposal site is located within Area allocation SL2 ‘Clifton Industrial Estate’ of the Waste Plan. The Area is identified within the Waste Plan as potentially suitable for: Material Recovery Facility, Mechanical Heat Treatment, Mechanical Biological Treatment, Anaerobic Digestion and In-Vessel Composting.

The application proposal is suitable in principle in this location and would enable waste to be managed at a higher rung of the waste hierarchy, thus meeting the requirements of the Waste Plan in this regard. The proposal therefore meets the requirements of the Waste Plan in terms of the sustainability of the proposed use and the suitability of its location.

Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management – No objection.

Urban Vision Environment (Air And Noise) –

No objection. The application site lies outside the Council’s Air Quality Management Area, and no specific mitigation measures are required with regard to air quality. There are no significant noise issues associated with the operational phase of the development.

Urban Vision Environment (Land Contam) – No objection.

Page 65

$nqg4wplf.rtf Planning policy

Development plan policy

Unitary Development Plan ST13 - Natural Environmental Assets This policy states that development that would result in an unacceptable impact on any of the city's natural environmental assets will not be permitted.

Unitary Development Plan ST14 - Global Environment 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 E5 - Development within 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 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.

Page 66

$nqg4wplf.rtf Unitary Development Plan EN18 - Protection of Water Resources This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on surface or ground water.

Unitary Development Plan EN22 - Resource Conservation This policy states that development proposals for more than 5,000 square metres of floorspace will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the impact on the conservation of non-renewable resources and on the local and global environments, has been minimised as far as practicable; and full consideration has been given to the use of realistic renewable energy options, and such measures have been incorporated into the development where practicable.

Greater Manchester Joint Waste Development Plan Document The overarching aim of the DPD is to ensure sustainable waste management facilities are developed across Greater Manchester, to meet an identified capacity gap between 2012-2027. The document identifies existing waste infrastructure, allocates suitable sites and areas new waste facilities (including landfill) and includes Development Management Policies specific to facilitate sustainable waste developments.

Other material planning considerations

National planning policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Local planning policy

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: affordable housing, open space, education, transport, public realm, and other infrastructure and services where appropriate.

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

Page 67

$nqg4wplf.rtf Appraisal

The key issues for consideration in the determination of this application are:  Principle of the development  Design  Highways  Flood risk and drainage  Noise and air quality  Land contamination and land stability  Sustainability  Planning obligations

Principle of the development

The application site comprises previously developed land that previously formed part of the Pilkington’s Tile Factory works. The site lies within an established employment area at Clifton Industrial Estate, with the former Pilkington’s works adjoining the site to the west and the industrial and manufacturing works within Junction Eco Park adjoining the site to the east.

The proposal site lies within an area identified in the Greater Manchester Waste Development Plan Document (the Waste Plan) as being suitable for a range of waste management facilities – area SL2 Clifton Industrial Estate. Policy 5 of the Waste Plan states that applications for waste management development within the areas identified in the policy 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; and ii. the development will result in the highest practicable level of recycling and recovery of materials, in line with the principle of the waste hierarchy.

The policy identifies that the site would be potentially suitable to accommodate the following waste facility types: Material Recovery Facility, Mechanical Heat Treatment, Mechanical Biological Treatment, Anaerobic Digestion and In-Vessel Composting.

The scheme proposal would be for a waste transfer station for the storage and distribution of waste and would not involve any element of waste treatment. Waste transfer stations allow for waste to be held at a location for bulking and onward transfer to suitable treatment facilities. They can therefore reduce vehicle movements associated with waste transfer and enable waste to be managed at a higher rung of the waste hierarchy. The submitted documents have been reviewed by Greater Manchester Minerals and Waste Planning Unit who have confirmed that the application proposal is suitable in principle in this location and would enable waste to be managed at a higher rung of the waste hierarchy, thus meeting the requirements of the Waste Plan in this regard. As such it is considered that the application proposal is in accordance with the Waste Plan in this regard.

UDP Policy E5 is also relevant. The policy identifies that within established employment areas, planning permission will be granted for the following types of development where they are consistent with other relevant policies and proposals of the UDP: i. the modernisation and refurbishment of existing buildings; ii. the redevelopment of land and buildings for employment purposes; iii. improvements to access, circulation, parking and servicing, particularly where this would foster sustainable transport choices; iv. the environmental improvement of the area including, where appropriate, the landscaping of vacant sites; and v. improvements to property and personal security, where this is consistent with the need to maintain high standards of design.

Policy EMP1 of the Established Employment Areas SPD confirms that waste management facilities are an employment use for the purposes of UDP Policy E5. The scheme proposal would involve the redevelopment of vacant land within an established employment area in accordance with criterion ii) of UDP Policy E5.

Page 68

$nqg4wplf.rtf As such, it is considered that the principle of a waste transfer station on this site is in accordance with the requirements of the Waste Plan and Policy E5 of the UDP in this regard.

Design

UDP Policy DES1 identifies that development will be required to respond to its physical context, respect the character of the local area in which it is situated, and contribute towards local identity and distinctiveness. In this context, it must be recognised that the site lies within an existing industrial estate and has no visibility from the public highway. The proposed works would be minor in nature, in terms of the recladding of an existing warehouse / storage building and the installation of a portacabin on the site. It is not therefore considered that the proposal would raise any conflicts from a design perspective.

Highways

The submitted Transport Statement identifies that the site is anticipated to handle approximately 10 tonnes of sealed containers and drums per day, which would be transported to site by 7.5 tonne capacity vehicles, generating some 12 trips to the site per day. Having been stored at the site for nulling and onward transfer, the sealed containers and drums would then be loaded on to a 25 tonne articulated HGV to be transported from the site for onward treatment. It is anticipated that there would be 2 – 3 HGV loads transported from the site per week.

The Council’s Highways Engineer has reviewed the submitted documents and confirmed that the proposed development is anticipated to generate substantially reduced traffic volumes than the site’s previous use as part of the Pilkington’s Tile Factory works, and that the expected traffic volumes are minimal. As such, the Highways Engineer concludes that the associated impact in relation to highway operations and road safety would be minimal.

The Highways Engineer has recommended that a Traffic Management Plan be secured via condition. In the context of the minimal number of vehicle movements associated with the proposed development, and its location within an established industrial estate, it is not considered that this would meet the requirement for planning conditions to be necessary to make a development acceptable in planning terms and as such it is not considered that a condition can be applied. An informative is however recommended in this regard.

In this context, it is considered that the application proposal would be in accordance with the requirements of UDP Policies A2 and A8.

Air and noise

The Council’s Air and Noise Consultant has reviewed the submitted documents and raises no objection. The application site lies outside the Council’s Air Quality Management Area, and no specific mitigation measures are required with regard to air quality. In addition, there are no significant noise issues associated with the operational phase of the development. The application site lies within an existing industrial estate and given the limited number of vehicle movements associated with the proposed operation, there would be no significant impact from an air quality or noise perspective for residential properties on Rake Lane associated with future vehicle movements.

Land contamination and water pollution

NPPF paragraph 121 states that planning decisions should ensure that the proposed site is suitable for its new use taking account of ground conditions, including pollution arising from previous uses and any proposals for mitigation including land remediation or impacts on the natural environment arising from that remediation.

The Council’s Land Contamination Consultant has reviewed the submitted documents and raises no objection from a land contamination perspective. The Environment Agency has commented that in the context of the proposed use and the site’s proximity to the River Irwell, planning permission should only be granted subject to a series of conditions to prevent the pollution of controlled waters from potential contamination on site. Conditions are recommended in this regard.

Heritage

Page 69

$nqg4wplf.rtf Clifton Aqueduct is a Grade II listed structure which lies approximately 50m to the north east of the application site, and was built in the late 18th century to carry the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal over the River Irwell.

Paragraph 132 of the NPPF states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. It then continues to say that significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting and that as heritage assets are irreplaceable any harm or loss ‘should require clear and convincing justification’.

The application proposal involves the change of use of land together with the recladding of an existing derelict warehouse building, and the siting of a portacabin. The warehouse building is an existing structure, and therefore it is not considered that the application proposal would result in any impact on the setting of the listed structure. In addition, there is mature vegetation lining the course of the River Irwell along this stretch which affords significant screening of the application site.

Recommendation

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: Extg Site Plan – Drawing Number 16015: S1 Proposed Site Plan – Drawing Number 16015: S2

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

3 No development approved by this planning permission shall take place until a remediation strategy that includes the following components to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site has been submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Local Planning Authority: 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. The results of the site investigation and the detailed risk assessment referred to in (2) 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. 4. 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 (3) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.

Any changes to these components require the express written consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

Reason: To prevent pollution of controlled waters from potential contamination on site in accordance with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy

Page 70

$nqg4wplf.rtf Framework.

4 Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the local planning authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To prevent pollution of controlled waters from potential contamination on site in accordance with Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

5 Prior to first use of the development hereby permitted, a verification report demonstrating completion of works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plan (a “long- term monitoring and maintenance plan”) for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan. The long-term monitoring and maintenance plan shall be implemented as approved.

Notes to Applicant

1. If, during any works on site, contamination is suspected or found, or contamination is caused, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified immediately. Where required, a suitable risk assessment shall be carried out and/or any remedial action shall be carried out in accordance to an agreed process and within agreed timescales in agreement with the Local Planning Authority.

2. Due to the former land use(s), soil and /or groundwater contamination may exist at the site and the associated risks to controlled waters should be addressed by: i. Following the risk management framework provide in CLR11, Model procedures for the management of land contamination https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/managing-land- contamination ii. Referring to the Environment Agency guiding principles for land contamination and the land contamination sections in the Environment Agency’s Groundwater Protection: Principles and Practice  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/managing-and-reducing-land-contamination  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/groundwater-protection-principles-and-practice- gp3 iii. Further information may be found on the land contamination technical guidance pages on the direct.gov website  https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/land-contamination-technical-guidance

All investigations of land potentially affected by contamination should be carried out by or under the direction of a suitably qualified competent person and in accordance with BS 10175 (2001) Code of practice for the investigation of potentially contaminated sites. The competent person would normally be expected to be chartered member of an appropriate body (such as the Institution of Civil Engineers, Geological Society of London, Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, Institution of Environmental Management) and also have relevant experience of investigating contaminated sites. The Specialist in Land Condition (SilC) qualification administered by the Institution of Environmental Management provides an accredited status for those responsible for signing off LCR’s. For further information see - www.silc.org.uk

3. The CLAIRE definition of waste: development code of practice (version 2) provides operators with a framework for determining whether or not excavated material arising from site during remediation and /or

Page 71

$nqg4wplf.rtf land development works are waste or have ceased to be waste. The code of practice is available at: http://www.claire.co.uk Under the Code of practice:  Excavated materials that are recovered via a treatment operation can be re-used on site providing they are treated to a standard such they are fit for purpose and unlikely to cause pollution  Treated materials can be transferred between sites as part of a “hub and cluster” project  Some naturally occurring clean material can be directly transferred between sites.

Developers should ensure that all contaminated materials are adequately characterised both chemically and physically and that the permitting status off any proposed operations are clear. If in doubt the Environment Agency should be contacted on 03708 506 506 or at [email protected] for advice at an early stage to avoid any delays.

4. Contaminated soil that is, or must be, disposed of is waste. Therefore it’s handling, transport and disposal is subject to waste management legislation which includes:  Duty of Care Regulations 1991  Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005  Environmental permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010  The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 Developers should ensure that all contaminated materials are adequately characterised both chemically and physically in line with British Standard BS EN 14899:2005 “characterisation of waste” – sampling of waste materials – framework for the preparation and application of a sampling plan” and the permitting status of any proposed treatment or disposal activity is clear.

You should be aware that any permit may not be granted. Additional ‘Environmental Permitting Guidance’ can be accessed via the government website at: https://www.gov.uk/environmental-permit-check-if-you-need-one

5. Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods can result in risks to potable supplies from, for example, pollution / turbidity, risk of mobilising contamination, drilling through different aquifers and creating preferential pathways. Thus it should be demonstrated that any proposed piling will not result in contamination of groundwater.

6. The applicant should ensure that:  Parking for all employees is accommodated within the site with no obstruction or parking in such a manner as to restrict local highways including footways;  Deliveries should occur within the site operational periods with no vehicles waiting on highway;  HGV traffic should approach and depart the site via the appropriate highway network;  Drivers should be instructed to drive within the prescribed speed limits;  Drivers should pay due consideration to the more vulnerable road users, including cyclists and pedestrians;  ‘Site entrance ahead’ signs should be displayed on all approaches during working hours; and  Facilities should be put in place to ensure no deposition of mud / dirt on the highway.

Page 72

$nqg4wplf.rtf Agenda Item 5e PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL PART I SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

APPLICATION No: 16/69247/FUL APPLICANT: Mr Craig Monaghan LOCATION: Stanwell Road Playing Fields, Stanwell Road, Swinton, M27 5TD, PROPOSAL: Erection of a new 2 Form Entry, 420-pupil primary school and 30-pupil nursery, with covered linking walkway to an existing sports hall (to be internally re-configured); access, car parking, associated outdoor sports and play facilities, hard and soft landscaping and associated infrastructure. WARD: Swinton South

Introduction

This application was deferred at the Planning Panel meeting of the 16 March 2017 to enable further information relating to traffic management and car parking to be submitted and fully evaluated.

Phased expansion

It is worth re-emphasising that, if approved, the new Deans School would not immediately open as a 420-pupil primary school. It is envisaged that its expansion, from a 1FE to a 2FE facility, would be graded over a period of seven years. This would be achieved by admitting approximately 30 additional pupils into the school’s reception year group at the start of each academic year. As a result, the school would open in September 2017 with c.240 pupils (plus a 30-place Nursery), and it is anticipated that it would not reach its capacity of 420 pupils until September 2023. The school considers that grading the expansion in this manner will allow for matters such as traffic management and car parking to be monitored and addressed (where appropriate) before the maximum levels of trip generation and parking demands discussed in the original report are realised. This approach will be discussed further throughout the report.

Page 73 Staff parking

The Council’s Car Parking Standards are set out within Appendix C of its Unitary Development Plan. They are provided as maximum standards, meaning that greater levels of car parking should not normally be provided without clear justification. Under the standards, ‘higher/further education facilities’ should typically provide a maximum of one parking space per two members of staff. In the absence of any standards specific to Primary Schools, the applicant has chosen to apply the standards for higher education facilities to their proposed development. Once the school is at full capacity in 2023, it is anticipated that 83 Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) staff would be employed within it. On this basis it is considered that the provision of a 42-space car park should be sufficient to meet the parking demands generated by staff of a fully-expanded, 2FE Deans School. A robust Travel Plan has been submitted with the application, which includes targets to reduce single-occupancy staff car trips and a range of ‘soft measures’ to encourage staff to travel to school via sustainable modes. This will be supported by a condition that requires the submission of a Car Park Management Plan, which will be required to set out a strategy for reducing the overall demand for staff car parking. Finally, the school have indicated that, should a period of monitoring and review reveal a need for it, a ‘park and stride’ scheme could be set up in an appropriate location to prevent staff from parking on surrounding residential streets. It is however worth noting that many of the residential streets in the vicinity of the site are already covered by Residents’ Parking Schemes.

Use of the car park after school hours

The existing school operates an afterschool club, between 15:30 – 16:30, which is attended by an average of 10% of pupils. At opening day, this would equate to 24 children, rising to around 42 once the school is at full capacity.

The school have also agreed to a condition stipulated by Sport England, which requires a Community Use Agreement to be set up with a local sports team in relation to the use of the playing pitches and sports hall outside of school hours. It is, however, worth noting that these activities will necessarily be curtailed in the winter months due to the hours of available daylight.

The school have confirmed that the 42 space staff car park will be made available to parents picking up pupils from their afterschool club, and for any local sports team that uses the new facilities as part of the Community Use Agreement. It is considered that this level of provision will sufficiently accommodate the likely parking demands generated by the afterschool club associated with a 240 pupil school (i.e. at opening year). The parking needs associated with the Community Use Agreement will not be known until a particular sports club/activity groups has been identified. Given this, the school have committed to regularly monitoring and reviewing the use of its car park after school hours and will, if necessary, look to implement measures that will alleviate any after school traffic impacts on local residents that may be identified through the review process. These measures could include increasing the capacity of the staff/visitors car park or creating a new access into it from the north / offering spaces within other Council-owned car parks, for use during after school hours.

Trip Generation

The applicant’s TA predicts that a total of 505 vehicular movements would be generated in the AM Peak by a 2FE school, once it has reached full capacity in 2023. This represents an increase of 238 vehicle movements over and above those that already take place with the existing 1FE Deans School. More specifically, this figure comprises of 103 extra ‘pupil trips’ into the school, and then 103 ‘pupil trips’ away from the school once the child has been dropped off. There would be an additional 32 ‘staff trips’ into the school, although no vehicles would leave within the peak hour given that the site represents their place of employment. It is also worth noting that a number of those vehicles taking their child to school would have been on the road network anyway, as part of their onward journey to work. The above referenced trips would be distributed across the highway network over the course of the peak hour. Details around the proposed trip distribution were included within the original report to Panel.

Traffic Management

The application includes a number of measures that are designed to manage traffic in and around school drop- off and pick-up times. They are designed to reduce the impact that school-generated traffic will have on the

Page 74 existing parking amenities of the area, and to maintain highway and pedestrian safety. Whilst these measures are referenced in the original report, more detail has been provided on them below: - One-way system, which would operate southbound along Shaftesbury Road from Stanwell Road to Salisbury Road. This would reduce vehicle conflicts down this narrow street and deter other road users from using it as a ‘rat-run’ to access Partington Lane from Worsley Road. - Introduction of a 20mph speed limit on residential streets to the south of the school site to slow traffic and reduce the potential for vehicle/pedestrian conflicts. - Introduction of ‘School Keep Clear’ markings for a length of the Stanwell Road highway in front of the school’s pedestrian entrance. - Amendments to existing waiting restrictions on Stanwell Road, which may include: i. Revisions to the waiting times that apply to them; ii. Introduction of double yellow lines to protect the vehicular entrance into the site; and iii. Removal of sections of single yellow lines to allow for the introduction of the ‘School Keep Clear’ markings. - Introduction of dropped kerbs and tactile paving at strategic crossing points within the surrounding residential streets. It is hoped that the provision of safe and usable walking routes will encourage parents to walk, rather than drive, their child to school.

The one-way, 20mph, ‘School Keep Clear’ and amendments to waiting restrictions are Traffic Regulation Orders and will require further public consultation to be undertaken before they can be implemented.

The school will regularly monitor and review traffic conditions on Stanwell Road and have indicated that they could provide somebody to patrol the street at pick-up/drop-off times to prevent unauthorised parking.

The residents parking bays on Stanwell Road and Shaftesbury Road (from Stanwell Road to Salisbury Road) prevent non-permit parking between the hours of 10:00 and 15:00 and allow limited time waiting (for non- residents) of 1 hour with no return within 2 hours. Local residents have previously expressed concern that these bays will become filled up with parents picking up / dropping off their children. However, it is considered that residents are likely to either be parked or have left the area during the drop-off period and parking should be available when they return home from work later in the day. Whilst the streets surrounding the development will become busy during the peak hours in the AM and PM, it is considered that local residents will still have adequate access to those on-street parking spaces that are covered by the Traffic Regulation Orders.

Construction Traffic

The applicant has produced a Construction Environment Management Plan that provides procedural details on matters such as construction hours, contractor parking, deliveries to site, and route management for construction vehicles. Also included within the Plan is a Community Engagement Strategy, which states that contact details will be distributed amongst local residents and posted on a public notice board outside the site. The Council’s Environment Team have reviewed the submitted CEMP and consider it to be acceptable for this site. A condition would be added to any permission that requires compliance with the CEMP for the lifetime of the build.

Swinton Ambulance Station

It is understood that the Swinton Ambulance Station, which is positioned at the western end of Stanwell Road, is utilised solely for vehicle maintenance and by ambulance crews between shifts. As such ambulances should not depart on an emergency call-out from this location. In any event, there are double yellow lines on either side of the station entrance on Stanwell Road, which should allow vehicles to access/egress the site freely.

Recommendation

Amend the following conditions:

Page 75 – The Deans Primary School, Revision B, dated 22/03/2017) throughout the entirety of the construction period, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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.

17. The Travel Plan Measures and Action Plan identified within Sections 7 & 8 of the submitted Travel Plan (‘Ramboll’ Ref: DNS_RUK_95_TP_0002 – March 2017), which are designed to promote and facilitate public transport use, walking, cycling and practices / facilities to reduce the need to travel and to reduce car use, shall be implemented in full unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Notwithstanding the requirement to implement certain measures prior to relocation, the remaining initiatives contained within the approved plan shall be implemented within 6 months of the school opening. The approved Travel Plan shall be reviewed annually thereafter.

Reason: To ensure an acceptable level of accessibility by public transport, cycling and walking is provided. This is in accordance with Policies EHC1, A2, A5, A8, A10 and DES2 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 2004-2016.

**********************************************************************************************************

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to a 2 hectare vacant site that comprises of playing fields and a sports hall. It is bound to the north by the Civic Centre car parks and buildings as well as the telephone exchange, all of which are set at a higher level than the playing fields. To the south is the Stanwell Road highway, and beyond that, the residential dwellings that front onto it. To the east is a public right of way (number 25) and various residential dwellings, and to the west is an ambulance station which is set at a lower level than the application site.

The site is enclosed on all sides by a range of boundary treatments, all of which exceed 2m in height. In particular, the Stanwell Road and eastern boundaries are defined by a 2.4m high brick wall. Vehicular access onto the site is achieved from Stanwell Road.

The site was formerly used as playing fields and a sports hall by St Ambrose Barlow RC Secondary School, with the main school site located south of the dwellings fronting Stanwell Road. However, in 2013 St Ambrose Barlow relocated to a new site in Wardley leaving both sites unused.

The site is not allocated on the UDP Proposals map.

Description of Proposal

Planning Permission is sought for the construction of a new two form entry (2FE - 420 pupil) primary school and a 30 pupil nursery. The school is intended to operate between the hours of 7.30am – 5.30pm Monday to Fridays. It would comprise of a new two-storey (8m) building with a flat roof. It would be finished in a grey ribbed profile metal cladding with high pressure laminate copper colour panels to the main entrance and eastern staircase.

The new building will provide formal classrooms as well as spaces for one-on-one teaching and areas for flexible use. In addition staff offices; a staffroom; meeting rooms; pupil and staff toilets; an office reception and reprographics area etc will be provided.

The development also includes the erection of a covered walkway link between the new school building and the existing sports hall. This would be single-storey in height (4m) with a flat roof and finished with glazing and metal cladding. As part of the proposed works, the sports hall is to be internally re-configured to provide a kitchen area; plant and server room; site manager’s office/store and a chair store at ground floor level. At first floor level the existing dance room is intended to be refurbished to form a studio. Minor external alterations have been proposed to create new doorways.

The development includes the creation of a car parking area to the south west corner of the site, which would provide 42 spaces including 3 disabled spaces. The car park would be accessed from Stanwell Road via an existing entrance point. It would be gated and segregated from the school with no access for pupils.

Page 76 Pedestrian access will be provided further along Stanwell Road, opposite Shaftesbury Road. It will remain locked during the daytime other than at school starting and finishing times. Managed access will be operated by the school reception.

A cycle store is proposed to the front of the main entrance which will provide partially covered lockable storage for up to 51 cycles. Three motorcycle bays have been proposed within the main car park.

Overall the development would provide approximately 1,924m2 of new floor space (not including the existing sports hall).

The sports fields are to be retained and re-lined to provide for a variety of summer and winter sports. In addition a level tarmacked area will be marked out to create further sports provision. Other hard and soft surface areas around the building will be used for outdoor learning and informal play.

Background

The application has been submitted by Salford City Council. Since 2011 they have adopted a new pupil strategy to manage ‘demand risk’ following the increase in demand for primary school places, which has increased to unprecedented levels since late 2010.

The Children’s services team are responsible for delivering the development, which will enable the relocation of the existing one-form-entry (1FE) Deans Primary School and Nursery from its existing site at Vicarage Road, Swinton. It will also allow for the capacity of the school to increase, to provide two forms of entry (2FE) with 420 places and a 30 place nursery.

To date SCC has created over 4,830 places via the expansion of existing school estates and it is envisaged that demand will continue to increase.

In order that the Local Authority can meet its statutory duty for providing school places and to ensure that sufficient places are available across this area to meet increased demand, the Deans Primary School has been identified for expansion for September 2017. Current forecasts are indicating that capacity for an additional one form entry (210 pupils) is required across the immediate area.

The existing school site is unable to accommodate expansion, hence the proposed new school, which is intended to open for the 2017 September school term. Its increase in size from a 1FE to a 2FE will be phased over a 7 year period, admitting 30 new reception pupils and supporting staff each year.

The applicant considers the site to be suitable, given that it is Council owned and is vacant and underused. The existing Sports Hall was originally used by the former St Ambrose Barlow High School, however new replacement facilities have been provided at the High School’s relocation site. The development will therefore utilise the initial investment made and help to speed up the build process.

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Affecting public right of way - Date Displayed: 5 January 2017 Reason: Article 13 affect public right of way

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News, Salford Edition – Date Displayed 12 January 2017 Reason: Article 15 - Affects Public Right of Way

Neighbour Notification

80 neighbour notification letters were sent on 4th January 2017

Representations

Seven objections have been received in response to the proposed development and the points raised within them can be summarised as follows:

Page 77  Concerns with the amount of traffic that will be using the surrounding roads, which are already used as a cut through between Partington lane and Worsley Road. The area will become congested with queuing cars. Oncoming vehicles cannot pass each other in some places. The school entrance should not be located off a narrow side road.  Concerns with the amount of parking that will be available to surrounding residents. The existing parking restrictions (10:00 – 15:00) will need to be extended.  The egress route for emergency vehicles from the Ambulance station may be blocked during school pick-up/drop-off times.  Concerns that large construction vehicles will not be able to access the site.  Objections to development on a quiet, green, urban space.  Concerns in relation to noise and litter have also been raised. Two letters of support have also been received, which can be summarised as follows:  Parking is not an issue for residents on Stanwell Road with the permit zones in place. The street can certainly cope with the increased traffic.  Proposal is welcomed as more high quality nursery and primary school sites are needed in the area.  Strongly agree with the proposed location, particularly as it makes use of the existing sports hall.  Agree with retaining existing trees and providing cycle storage to encourage more children to cycle to school. One of the letters of support also sets out a series of improvements that they would like to be incorporated into the scheme. These include:  Widening the main vehicular access and improving the internal vehicular circulation within the staff car park.  Improvements to the quality of public footpaths and street lighting in the area, particularly along the PROW to the east.

Relevant Site History

03/46804/FUL – Erection of 1.4m and 3m high palisade fencing and 3m high gates, and brick up ten windows – Approved, 20 October 2003

03/46681/FUL – Erection of four court badminton hall with ancillary facilities without complying with condition 4 (Restricted Use) on planning permission 02/44392/FUL) – Approved, 16 October 2003

02/44392/FUL – Erection of a four badminton court sports hall with ancillary facilities – Approved, 16 August 2002

Consultations

Design For Security - No comments received to date

Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management - No objections, subject to the imposition of standard conditions relating to the implementation of the submitted Drainage Strategy.

Highways - No objections – see relevant section of report.

Environment Agency – Recommend contaminated land condition

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit - No objections subject to conditions/informative in relation to nesting birds, ecological mitigation and trees

Urban Vision Arboriculturalist – No objections subject to imposition of standard conditions relating to tree protection, replacement planting and compliance with the submitted Arboricultural Statement.

Landscape Design - No objections

Rights Of Way - No comments received to date

Sport England - No objections, subject to the imposition of two conditions to secure a playing field condition survey and a community use agreement for the sports facilities.

Page 78 Urban Vision Environment (Air And Noise) - No objections subject to conditions relating to construction management plan and noise levels

Urban Vision Environment (Land Contam) – Recommend contaminated land condition and informative.

The Greater Manchester Pedestrian Assoc. - No comments received to date

The Open Spaces Society - No comments received to date

Peak and Northern Footpaths Society – If planning permission is granted please include a condition that there must be no obstruction of any public right of way. Should a temporary or permanent obstruction be unavoidable, then no development should take place until a diversion order has been confirmed and the diversion route, with a satisfactory surface and adequate width and way marking, is available for public use. This has been added as an informative.

Ramblers Association Manchester Area - No comments received to date

United Utilities: No objection subject to standard conditions relating to the drainage of foul and surface water.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan ST9 - Retail, Leisure, Social Community Provision This policy states that the provision of a comprehensive and accessible range of retail, leisure, social and community facilities will be secured by, protecting and enhancing the vitality and viability of existing town and neighbourhood centres, adopting a sequential approach to the location of new retail and leisure development and facilitating enhanced education, health and community provision that will be maintain and enhanced.

Unitary Development Plan DES9 - Landscaping

Page 79 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 behavior, 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 EHC1 - Provision, Improvement of Schools and Colleges This policy states that planning permission will be granted for the improvement, replacement or provision of new schools and colleges, provided that the development would i) not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring uses; ii) secure adequate, accessible playing field provision iii) be accessible by a range of means of transport iv) incorporate disabled access v) not give rise to unacceptable levels of traffic generation, impact on highway safety, parking or servicing; vi) make provision, where possible, for community use of buildings and grounds.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

- National Planning Policy Framework - National Planning Practice Guidance

Local Planning Policy

Supplementary Planning Document - Sustainable Design and Construction

Page 80 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 - 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.

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

Appraisal

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

 Principle of Development o Proposed use o Loss of existing playing fields . Context . Relevant policy and assessment  Proposed Facilities o Outdoor Sports and Recreation o Proposed school buildings  Amenity o Visual intrusion / overshadowing o Light glare / intrusion o Air and noise  Design and Layout o School buildings o Boundary Treatments  Design and Crime  Access, Highways and Parking o Sustainable location o Proposed access and servicing arrangements o Impacts on the Local Road Network o Parking arrangements  Flood Risk and Drainage  Trees and Landscaping  Ecology  Contaminated Land  Sustainability  Bins and Waste

Principle of development

With the exception of the existing Sports Hall, the site falls to be classed as greenfield land. Whilst up to 4,000sqm of it would be developed on to create the school buildings and associated car parking/playgrounds etc., the proposals seek to revert the site back to its educational use.

Page 81 NPPF paragraph 72 is the Governments most up to date planning policy on the provision of schools and fully reflects the Government’s commitment to the delivery of new schools. NPPF states that “the Government attaches great importance to ensuring that a sufficient choice of school places is available to meet the needs of existing and new communities. Local planning authorities should take a proactive, positive and collaborative approach to meeting this requirement, and to development that will widen choice in education. They should:

 give great weight to the need to create, expand or alter schools; and  work with schools promoters to identify and resolve key planning issues before applications are submitted.”

In August 2011 the Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government issued a Policy Statement – Planning for Schools Development which underlines the Government’s commitment to support the development of state funded schools and their delivery through the planning system. The Government considers that the creation and development of state-funded schools is strongly in the national interest and that planning decision- makers can and should support that objective, in a manner consistent with their statutory obligations. They indicate that a collaborative working approach should help to ensure that the answer to proposals for the development of state-funded schools should be, wherever possible, “yes”.

National policy therefore presents a high level of support for the provision of additional education facilities.

Salford is facing a significant increase in the demand for primary school places, and this demand is projected to continue to increase in future years. The City Council acknowledges through the requirements of the Planning Obligations SPD which includes education contributions for large scale developments that in order to address this demand there will need to be, “significant capital investment in the expansion of existing schools.” The document indicates that the City Council ”will seek to minimise the capital cost to developers as far as practicable, by seeking to expand existing schools in the first instance.”

In terms of local policy, saved UDP Policy EHC1 places a general presumption in favour of the provision and improvement of schools providing six fundamental criteria are met. The development will be assessed against these criteria later in the appraisal.

The City of Salford is split into 12 School planning Areas (SPA’s), with the Deans Primary School forming part of SPA5. Forecasts indicate that an additional one form of entry is required across this immediate area and the proposal that is the subject of this application forms part of the response and management of this identified need, to ensure that the City Council can meet its statutory duty for providing school places across this area.

It is understood that different options have been considered by the City Council for accommodating the additional growth required in SPA5. The existing Deans Primary School occupies a confined site surrounded by established buildings. An alternative site is therefore required to enable the school to be expanded. A number of sites have been reviewed within the SPA5 area, having regard to a range of criteria, including travel distance against pupil demand; location of the existing school; site area required; site availability and other restrictions. The Stanwell Road site has been selected as the preferred site through this process, with the main advantages being that it enables the school to be retained within its community; it will allow an existing sports facility to be re-used; and the lack of physical constraints that might prevent the school being delivered within the required timescales. Given the above, it is considered that the principle of providing a school in this location, and on greenfield land, is acceptable, subject to all other matters being satisfied; this includes the loss of the existing playing fields, which is discussed in more detail in the section below.

Loss of existing playing fields

Context

The application site previously provided playing fields and a sports hall for St Ambrose Barlow RC High School, although they have not been used since the school’s re-location to Wardley in 2013. The new site for St Ambrose Barlow is located off Ash Drive and was formerly occupied by Wardley High School until its closure in 1988. Council records show that the previous buildings were demolished in the mid 1990’s and the playing fields remained disused and became redundant. When St. Ambrose Barlow redeveloped the site in 2013, they provided 65,000sqm of new playing fields and associated outdoor recreation space, including an area of land that had previously fallen outside of the Wardley High site, but was purchased by the City Council to provide enhanced facilities for the new school.

Page 82 Relevant policy and assessment

As the development proposes to construct school buildings on an area of land that has been used as a playing field within the last five years, there is a statutory obligation to consult with Sport England as part of the application process.

Sport England consider that approximately 4,000sqm of the existing playing fields would be lost to the new buildings and associated hardstanding and therefore they have assessed the application in light of Paragraph 74 of the NPPF, and Sport England’s Playing Field Policy (which is presented within its Planning Policy Statement titled ‘A Sporting Future for the Playing Fields of England’). The NPPF states that: Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless: 1) An assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; 2) The loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or 3) The development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss.

In considering the exceptions set out above, the 4,000sqm of land to be developed at Stanwell Road cannot be considered to be ‘surplus to requirements’ as Salford’s Playing Pitch Strategy (2015) identifies shortfalls across all pitch types within the Swinton area. Sport England have also advised that the third exception does not apply to the development in this instance, as it relates to a Primary School, and not a purpose-built sports facility.

With respect to the second exception within Paragraph 74, Sport England consider that, in this instance, it would not be feasible or reasonable for the lost area of playing field to be replaced by new provision of equivalent or better quality elsewhere within the site. Instead, as an alternative form of mitigation, Sport England have requested that a formal assessment of the playing fields’ ground conditions (drainage and topography) is undertaken to ensure that they are capable of accommodating the additional curriculum and community usage. If necessary, a scheme to bring the pitches up to an ‘acceptable quality’ should be produced and implemented by the school within a year. Sport England also require the school to prepare a Community Use Agreement, which would secure the effective community use of the playing field and sports hall/changing facilities. Both obligations would need to be conditioned and subsequently satisfied in order to prevent Sport England from objecting to the application.

The applicant has acknowledged the importance of making sports facilities available to the local community and has confirmed a willingness to commit to the imposition of conditions that align with Sport England’s requirements. On this basis, it is considered that the loss of playing field space, as identified by Sport England, has been adequately justified and that the development is in broad compliance with Paragraph 74 of the NPPF.

Proposed Facilities

Outdoor Sport and Recreation

The second test set out within UDP Policy EHC1 requires new school developments to secure an adequate standard of playing field and other recreation provision in an accessible and convenient location. The application submission provides for such facilities within the confines of the school site. It states that they have been designed to comply with the space standards set out in the Department for Education’s Building Bulletin 103: Area Guidelines for mainstream Schools. The table below compares the minimum space standards recommended within BB103 (for a 2FE Primary School) with the actual level of provision that would be delivered on site as part of this development. Each type of provision has been listed in order of priority, as advised by the Guidelines.

Type of provision BB103 - Recommended Area Actual Area Provided Difference Hard Informal & Social 650sqm 1,320sqm +670sqm Hard Outdoor PE (Formal Games 1,030sqm 780sqm -250sqm Courts) Soft Informal & Social 1,500sqm 2,440sqm +940sqm

Page 83 Soft Outdoor PE (Playing Field) 8,400sqm 8,410sqm +10sqm Habitat 210sqm 1,125sqm +915sqm

In the main, the proposed Deans School will benefit from outdoor sports and recreation facilities that exceed the recommended minimum standards. Whilst it is recognised that there is a shortfall in the level of hard outdoor PE provision, a formal games court would still be provided that allows some PE or team games to be played without going off site. It is also worth noting that the existing Sports Hall, which covers 480sqm, will provide a similar function all year round. As noted above, the playing fields are generally level and well-drained and will be marked out to support a range of summer and winter sports. Therefore, it is considered that the development is in compliance with the second test within UDP Policy EHC1.

Proposed School Buildings

The application proposes 1,900sqm of new teaching accommodation, which will be provided over two floors. This figure would rise to approximately 4,000sqm if the floor-space within the existing Sports Hall was to be included also. The applicant’s submission indicates that the internal spaces within the new building have been designed to comply with Department for Education guidance documents BB93; BB100; BB101 and BB103, which set out recommended standards for the type and size of accommodation that should be provided within schools.

Amenity

Visual intrusion / overshadowing

The proposed school building would measure 8m in height and has been sited approximately 28m away from the nearest residential properties, on the opposite side of Stanwell Road. Such a relationship is considered to be acceptable and will not result in undue visual intrusion or overshadowing for the facing neighbours. The impact of the development on all other properties has been assessed and is considered to be in compliance with UDP Policy DES7.

Light glare/intrusion

An external lighting plan with associated lux levels has been submitted with the application and this has been assessed using the Institute of Lighting Professional Guidance Notes for the Reduction of Obtrusive Light. Inspection of the standards for ‘Zone E3’ (Suburban Surroundings), which the application site is considered to fall within, shows that the external lighting proposed for the school buildings and car parking area would comply with the pre and post curfew levels set out for luminaire intensity and light trespass into windows of the closest residential properties (on Stanwell Road). Therefore this aspect of the development is considered to have an acceptable impact on neighbouring residential amenity.

Air and Noise

The development site sits outside of the City Council’s Air Quality Management Area, but is supported by noise impact assessment compiled by Atkins and dated 9th December 2016.

The report considers the likely impact that the operational phase of the proposed school will have on existing, sensitive receptors (i.e. the dwellings to the south and to the south east of the site) and also gives advice on the control of noise during the construction phase of the development.

Various noise sources are identified and considered in the report, including the use of the outdoor play areas, plant and machinery, road traffic and construction works. Where necessary, noise mitigation is recommended, mainly through the use of appropriately worded conditions on any planning permission granted. The playing fields are intended to be used by the school only and would not be used during the evening.

Urban Vision Air and Noise have considered the report and are satisfied that noise need not be a constraint to the proposed development. Subsequently they have raised no objections to the proposal.

In terms of air quality, Urban Vision Air and Noise have recommended the implementation of an Environmental Construction Management Plan (CEMP) in order to control and dust emissions generated by the construction phase of the development.

Page 84 Conclusion

The assessment set out above has shown that the proposed development would not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents, subject to the addition of certain conditions. Therefore the proposal is considered to comply with the first test set out in UDP Policy EHC 1, and is also in accordance with UDP Policies EN17 and DES7.

Design and Layout

School Buildings

The proposed school building runs parallel to Stanwelll Road and measures approximately 51m in length and 8m in height. Grey ribbed metal cladding has been shown as the principal external finish. It is considered that the scale of the development is appropriate for the area, having regard to the existing sports hall and the two- storey houses on the opposite side of Stanwell Road. The building is set well back from the highway boundary (13m) whilst still adequately addressing the streetscene. The fenestration arrangement, proposed materials and, corner entrance feature are considered to provide an acceptable level of ‘visual interest’ to the external elevations.

The Design and Access Statement reports that the proposed elevations provide indicative details regarding cladding materials, and that the materials generally will be the subject of on-going assessment. Therefore it is recommended that a condition requiring the submission of material samples for agreement with the Local Planning Authority be attached to any planning permission.

Boundary treatments

The existing boundary treatment to the southern (Stanwell Road) and eastern perimeters of the site comprises of a 2.4m high brick wall, which is to be retained with the exception of a small area to allow adequate vehicular access to the staff car park. All other existing boundary treatments are to be retained.

Design and Crime

A Crime Impact Assessment has been submitted with the application. This has been produced by Greater Manchester Police’s Design for Security team and concludes that the layout of the proposed scheme is generally acceptable. Further evaluation of the condition of existing boundary treatments has been recommended and care should be taken to prevent the single-storey sports hall link from providing unauthorised access to the main roof.

Access, Highways and Parking

Sustainable Location The third test within UDP Policy EHC1 requires a new school to be accessible to the community that it serves by a range of means of transport, particularly foot, cycle, and public transport. The application site is situated in close proximity to Swinton town centre, adjacent to residential areas, existing public transport services and the site of the existing Deans Primary School and is therefore considered to be in a sustainable location.

Proposed Access and Servicing Arrangements An existing, currently redundant, vehicular access onto the site is located to its south west corner. This will be opened up and amended to allow entry into the proposed car parking area. An amended package of swept-path drawings have adequately demonstrated that the site can be serviced by refuse and delivery vehicles. The applicant has also shown that the appropriate visibility splays could be achieved for vehicles leaving the staff car park.

The existing pedestrian gate off Stanwell Road is also to be retained and will allow for easy access to the school’s reception and cycle storage facilities. A guard rail will be located along the edge of the footway in front of the pedestrian access, along with ‘School Keep Clear’ road marking on Stanwell Road.

The internal layout of the site allows for pedestrian and vehicle segregation, with a pedestrian route provided from the staff car park to the main entrance of the school building.

Page 85 The applicant has produced a package of plans showing works to be undertaken to the highway/public footpath immediately outside of the site, which includes the provision of dropped kerbs and tactile paving. Route audits of the local pedestrian network have recently been undertaken by officers in Highways and Transportation and a package of remedial works is in the process of being drawn up. It is likely these would be agreed and implemented as part of a license granted by Section 50 of the New Roads and Street Works Act (1991).

The applicant has stated that level accesses will be provided at all entry points into the school, as well as for hard standing areas/pathways directly adjacent to the buildings. This will allow easy pedestrian access across the site, including those with impaired mobility. The finished floor level within each building will be level with access provided to the upper floor by two staircases and a lift; thus, the development is considered to comply with the fourth test within UDP Policy EHC1.

Impacts on the Local Road Network

The application is supported by a Transport Assessment (TA) and Travel Plan (TP), compiled by Ramboll. The TA estimates that, at full capacity, the School would generate 505 vehicular trips during the AM Peak and 473 trips across the PM Peak. This is considered by the applicant to be a worst-case scenario, as it does not reflect the fact that some children will attend breakfast and after school clubs. There may also be instances of shared lifts to/from school. The TA goes on to assess the distribution and, subsequently, the highways impacts of these trips. In doing so, it removes the trips currently generated by the existing 1FE Deans School, which is located 550m to the north-west on Vicarage Road. The applicant has undertaken a capacity analysis for existing junctions in the vicinity of the site, which has recently been updated and expanded to include a future year scenario plus growth. Colleagues in Highways and Transportation have undertaken an initial review of the revised assessment and have requested further information, which will reviewed and reported on to Panel as part of an Amended Information Report.

It is the Local Authority’s policy to introduce a 20mph speed limit on highways adjacent to a new school. Considering the location of the school, and the likely routes to it, Officers have recommended that the majority of those residential streets enclosed by the application site, Partington Lane, Worsley Road and the main St. Ambrose Barlow site be subjected to a 20mph zone. It is noted also that parking on Shaftesbury Road effectively reduces the available running carriageway to single-file traffic, and thus school traffic using this route to approach and leave Stanwell Road will increase conflicts in this area. Consideration should therefore be given to introducing a one-way operation on Shaftesbury Road. A scheme of traffic management, supported by Traffic Regulation Orders and timetables for implementation, should therefore be agreed in with the Local Planning Authority.

Parking Arrangements

The proposals include a car park capable of accommodating 42 vehicles. The TA confirms that this will only be available to staff and visitors of the school, and is not to be used by parents at school pick-up / drop off. It is estimated that approximately 83 people would be employed at the school, once it reaches full capacity, and as such it is likely that demand for parking will exceed supply. To prevent large amounts of overspill car parking that might impact on the amenity of surrounding residents, it is recommended that the School produces a Car Park Management Plan and, more importantly, that they enhance their Travel Plan to provide greater commitment to encouraging sustainable travel. Conditions should therefore be added to any permission to secure these documents.

A covered and lockable storage area is proposed to the east of the pedestrian access for 51 cycles/scooters. This level of provision is considered to be acceptable for a school of this size.

Flood Risk and Drainage

The development would introduce new areas of hardstanding onto a site that exceeds one hectare in size, and is located within a critical drainage area. Accordingly, a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been submitted with the application, which also includes a Drainage Strategy for the site. This indicates that percolation tests have shown that it will be possible to drain the site into two soakaways, which are designed to accommodate a 1 in 100 year return plus climate change.

Page 86 Urban Vision’s Drainage Engineer has accepted the findings and approach presented in the FRA and recommended that the applicant’s Drainage Strategy be implemented prior to first occupation of the school to prevent an increased flood risk to downstream receptors, as a result from surface water runoff generated by the proposed development. This could be secured by condition. A further condition should restrict surface water discharge to a rate that is 50% of that recommended in Salford City Council’s SFRA.

Trees and Landscaping

The application is supported by an Arboricultural statement dated December 2016. A total of nine trees are proposed for removal, to facilitate the development of the staff car park. Successful retention of the boundary trees throughout the construction phase will require the erection of temporary protective fencing. A specification and proposed layout for this fencing has been supplied, although its final position will be determined by the project Arboriculturalist.

It is considered that the loss of nine trees can be adequately mitigated by replacement tree planting. The submitted site plan and accompanying landscape Design Strategy reveals that 12 new trees would be planted within the site. Subject to the details of this replacement planting being agreed, it is considered to represent adequate mitigation for those that will be lost to the development.

Overall, it is considered, that the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on existing trees within the site, in accordance with the Trees and Development SPD, subject to the attachment of conditions to ensure that the trees are fenced during the construction of the development and that the recommendations set out in the submitted Arboricultural Statement are adhered to. A third condition will seek to secure a scheme for replacement tree planting at the site.

Ecology

The application is supported by a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Report (Capita, Job No CS/089382, Issue 1, November 2016). The application site comprises an existing sports hall building, amenity grassland, scattered trees, scrub, tall ruderal vegetation and introduced shrubs. The site is located in an urban area of Swinton with the River Irwell located approximately 2.5 km to the north-east of the site. The Extended Phase 1 survey was undertaken on 22nd September 2016.

The trees, scrub and shrubs have the potential to support nesting birds. All birds, with the exception of certain pest species, and their nests are protected under the terms of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). GMEU have recommend a condition prohibiting works to trees, scrub and shrubs including vegetation clearance etc during bird nesting season, however as this is covered by other legislation an informative has been added rather than a condition.

In line with Section 11 of the NPPF, GMEU recommend that opportunities for biodiversity enhancement be incorporated into the new development including bat boxes; bird boxes; native tree and shrub planting; wildflower seeding; sensitive lighting and as such a condition is recommended requiring the submission of an ecological mitigation scheme for the written approval of the LPA.

It is considered, therefore that the proposed development would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact upon the landscape or wildlife interest at the site in accordance with UDP Policy EN12.

Contaminated Land

The application is supported by the following reports:  A Contaminated Land and Geotechnical Desk Study Report by Ramboll Environ, ref: 1620002880-TD- DS-02, December 2016.  A Ground Investigation Factual Report, Ramboll Environ, ref: 1620002880, December 2016.  A Contaminated Land Interpretive Report, Ramboll Environ, ref: 162002880-004, January 2017.

The first report provides details of a desk study carried out at the proposed development site, comprising a review of historical mapping and available environmental data. The report recommends that a site investigation with gas monitoring should be carried out. This investigation has been carried out, with the results from it reported in the second study, and interpreted in the third. The Interpretive report concludes that the risk to

Page 87 human health and controlled waters is low, with the site being categorised as characteristic situation 1 with regards to ground gas.

Urban Vision’s Environment Team have reviewed the above reports and consider that insufficient work has been undertaken with regards to the chemical analysis across the site. More samples of the made ground / topsoil should be taken for a site of this size given that it will be used as outdoor play-space for children. The sampling density for the northern half of the site should be increased also. Therefore it is recommended that a standard Contaminated Land condition be attached to any permission, which will ensure that a detailed Site Investigation Report is submitted for the Environment Team’s written approval. The condition will also require the report to identify and any remediation works that might be required, and for the applicant to incorporate them into the development. A similar condition has been recommended by the Environment Agency.

Sustainability

The building has been orientated so as to maximize natural daylight and ventilation. The design and access statement confirms that the building will comply with the 2013 Building Regulations and will provide an efficient heating and ventilation strategy as well as good thermal construction and air tightness reducing heat loss and running costs.

The proposed building is to be manufactured off site, based around a modular grid profile allowing for off-site fabrication and a much reduced construction programme. The off-site manufacture will also result in reduced vehicle movement to and from the site as well as reduced on site waste.

It is considered that the above measures will contribute to the efficient and sustainable use and control of the building.

Bins/Waste

A bin store is proposed to the west of the existing sports hall building within the proposed new car park area. It is intended that all servicing, deliveries and refuse collections will also be undertaken from within the car park area.

Conclusion

The proposed development will make a positive contribution towards addressing the need for further primary school places in the City. The development has been assessed against the relevant development plan policies and other material considerations and it is considered that the development is acceptable, subject to conditions listed below.

Recommendation

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of 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:

DNS_ALA_04_A_1003 Rev: P02 – Proposed Ground-Floor Plan DNS_ALA_04_A_1004 Rev: P02 – Proposed First Floor Plan DNS_ALA_04_A_1007 Rev: P02 – Proposed Roof Plan DNS_ALA_06_A_1006 Rev: P02 – Proposed Sections and Visual DNS_MMD_90_96_001 – Existing & Proposed Utilities DNS_MMD_90_96_002 – External Lighting DNS_PLI_91_Z_001 Rev: P03 – Site Plan DNS_PLI_97_Z_001 Rev: P01 – Boundary Treatments and Fencing Plan DNS-ALA-05-A-1005 Rev: P03 – Proposed Elevations Location Plan titled: The Deans School

Page 88 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3. (i) A Ground Investigation Report has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The majority of the report has been agreed to, however further investigation is required in the northern half of the site (specifically the sports pitches) to address the nature, degree and distribution of any land contamination in this area. The updated Ground Investigation Report, which shall also identify and assess the risk to receptors (focusing primarily on risks to human health and the wider environment,) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of any above- ground works; and

(ii) The details of any proposed Remedial Works shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Such Remedial Works shall be incorporated into the development during the course of construction and completed prior to the first occupation of the development; and

(iii) Prior to first occupation a Verification Report shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The Verification Report shall validate that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the LPA.

4. The development hereby approved shall adhere to the practices set out in the approved Construction Environment Method Statement (Laing o’Rourke – Construction Phase Health, Safety & Environmental Plan – The Deans Primary School, Revision B, dated 22/03/2017) throughout the entirety of the construction period, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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.

5. No development shall commence until all the retained trees within (or overhanging) the site, have been surrounded by substantial fences which shall extend to the extreme circumference of the spread of the branches of the trees (or such positions as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority). Such fences shall be erected in accordance with the details set out in Section 2.9 – ‘Specification for protective fencing’ of the submitted Arboricultural Statement entitled: The Deans, Stanwell Road, Salford (Capita: 9th December 2016), 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 protect the existing trees on the site in the interests of the amenities of the area and in accordance with policies EN12 and EN13 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

6. 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.

7. Prior to the development hereby approved being brought into use, a Landscape and Habitat Creation Scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved Scheme shall identify the opportunities for biodiversity enhancement on site including, but not limited to;  Bat bricks/boxes  Bird boxes

Page 89  Native tree and shrub planting The approved scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

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

8. The rating level (LAeq,T) from all plant and machinery associated with the development, when operating simultaneously, shall not exceed the typical background noise level (LA90,T) by more than -5 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 "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: To safeguard the amenity of existing neighbours of the development hereby approved, in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

9. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with Section 2.5 of the submitted Arboricultural Statement, entitled: The Deans, Stanwell Road, Salford (Capita: 9th December 2016).

Reason: In order to protect the existing trees on the site in the interests of the amenities of the area and in accordance with Policy EN12 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

10. The trees to be felled as part of the development hereby approved shall be replaced in accordance with a Tree Replacement Scheme, which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of: tree species; tree sizes (including the minimum height and circumference of stem at 1m from the ground level); a plan indicating the location of the replacement trees and a timetable for tree planting and details of aftercare. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with approved details and timetable and shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: To mitigate the loss of existing trees and to ensure that the site is suitably landscaped, having regard to Policy EN12 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

11. The Drainage Strategy submitted with the application (Ramboll, 09/12/2016 - ref: DNS_RUK_99_RP_0001) shall be implemented in full prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved.

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)

12. Notwithstanding the provisions of Condition 11, the rate of discharge of surface water from the development shall be restricted to 50% of the existing discharge rate, as per Salford City Council's SFRA, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage of/disposal of surface water from the site, in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

Page 90 13. (a) Prior to first occupation of the school, the following documents shall have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, after consultation with Sport England: (i) An Agronomy Report containing a detailed assessment of ground conditions (including drainage and topography) of the land proposed for the playing field, which identifies constraints that could affect playing field quality; and (ii) Based on the results of the assessment to be carried out pursuant to (i) above, a detailed scheme which ensures that the playing field will be provided to an acceptable quality and capacity to accommodate both curriculum and community use. The scheme shall include plans and a written specification of soils structure, proposed drainage, cultivation and other operations associated with grass and sports turf establishment and a programme of implementation. (b) The approved scheme shall be carried out in full, and within 1 year of the school becoming operational. The land shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the scheme and made available for playing field use in accordance with the scheme.

Reason: To ensure that the playing field is prepared to an adequate standard and is fit for purpose and to accord with UDP Development Plan Policy EHC1 and Paragraph 74 of the NPPF.

14. Prior to the first occupation of the school hereby approved, a community use agreement prepared in consultation with Sport England shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The agreement shall apply to the sports hall, changing facilities and outdoor pitches and shall include details of pricing policy, hours of use, access by non-educational establishment users, management responsibilities and a mechanism for review, and anything else which the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Sport England considers necessary in order to secure the effective community use of the facilities. The development shall not be used at any time other than in strict compliance with the approved agreement.

Reason: To secure well managed safe community access to the sports facility / facilities, to ensure sufficient benefit to the development of sport and to accord with UDP Policy EHC1 and paragraph 74 of NPPF.

15. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the associated provision for off- street parking has been completed and made available for use in accordance with approved plan DNS_PL1_91_Z_001 Rev: P03 (Site Plan). Such spaces shall be available at all times for the parking of a private motor vehicle.

Reason: To encourage drivers to make use of the parking and servicing areas and to ensure that the use of the land shall not give rise to hazards at the entrance/exit points in the interests of public safety and in accordance with policy A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

16. A scheme for the provision of onsite and off-site highway works together with any traffic management measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with a timetable that has first been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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

Page 91 18. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into first occupation until a Car Park Management Plan has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the approved Management Plan shall be adhered to unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of neighbours in accordance with policies DES7 and A10 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and the NPPF.

19. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, the development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until a scheme for the provision of 51 covered and secure cycle parking spaces has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details relating to the materials and height of any cover/enclosure and identify the means of securing the cycles. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme, made available for use prior to the first occupation of the development and 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.

Notes to Applicant

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

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

 If, during any works on site, contamination is suspected or found, or contamination is caused, the Local Planning Authority (LPA) shall be notified immediately. Where required, a suitable risk assessment shall be carried out and/or any remedial action shall be carried out in accordance to an agreed process and within agreed timescales in agreement with the LPA.

 The applicants are advised that there must be no obstruction of any public right of way. Should a temporary or permanent obstruction be unavoidable, then no development should take place until a Diversion Order has been confirmed and the diversion route, with a satisfactory surface and adequate width and way marking, is available for public use.

Page 92 Agenda Item 5f PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL PART I SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

APPLICATION No: 17/69389/FUL APPLICANT: TH Real Estate LOCATION: Waterfront Quay, Salford, M50 3XW, , PROPOSAL: Temporary car parking use of plots of 3 former buildings WARD: Ordsall

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application relates to three former office buildings (Capital House, Telegraph House and Enterprise House) and their associated car parks, situated on Waterfront Quay. The site is located on a peninsula of land, bound by the Ontario Basin to the north and the St. Francis; St. Louis; and St Peter Basins to the south. Beyond this is Merchants Quay. The Manchester- to-Eccles Metrolink line intersects Waterfront Quay to the east, with the ‘Salford Quays’ tram stop located nearby to the south-east.

Capital House has reportedly been vacant for some years, whilst Telegraph House and Enterprise House are now also vacant, following the local relocation of their commercial occupiers. In February 2017 the LPA granted prior approval for the demolition of all three two-storey buildings following the submission of an application under Part 31 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended) -ref: 17/69341/DEMCON.

The land to which this application relates is also the subject of an Outline consent, granted in March 2017, for a major mixed-use development known as ‘Pier 7’ (ref: 16/67568/OUT). This

Page 93

$ache310w.rtf comprises of inter alia 600-800 apartments and 600-900sqm of supporting commercial floorspace.

Description of Proposal

TH Real Estate, the developers behind the Pier 7 scheme, are seeking consent to use the Waterfront Quay site for car parking for a temporary period of 12 months, whilst it awaits construction of the development proposed under 16/67568/OUT. The existing parking areas that previously served the office buildings would remain unaltered, whilst the land previously occupied by the office buildings would be covered in crushed stone surfacing but not formally laid out with parking bays. The applicant’s supporting statement estimates that 246 of the existing 248 parking bays would be retained in-situ, and up to a further 183 would be created within the footprints of the demolished buildings.

It is intended that the car park will be used specifically by employees at ‘Talk Talk’’s new offices, which are located a short walk from the site within the former Soapworks Factory.

No alterations are proposed to the roadway, vehicle access points, street lighting or frontage railings that exist along Waterfront Quay. Some changes are proposed to provide short-term street frontage boundaries for the plots relating to Telegraphic House and Enterprise House.

Publicity

Earliest Decision Date: 1st March 2017

Revised Expiry Date: 10th April 2017

Site Notice: N/A

Press Advert: N/A

Relevant Site History

52 neighbour notification letters were sent on 8th February 2017.

Representations

Three letters of objection have been received in response to the proposed land use and the points raised within them can be summarised as follows:  People will not pay to use the new car park when they can park on the surrounding estate for free.  The car park will result in an extra 200 cars coming in and out of Waterside/Merchants Quay at peak times, along narrow streets where children live. This is not a minor increase.  Encouraging an extra 200 vehicles onto Merchants Quay can only cause further problems for the existing (parking) pressures on the surrounding streets. When the car park closes and development starts, surely the Talk Talk cars will just park on the unrestricted parts of Merchants Quay.

Page 94

$ache310w.rtf  Traffic associated with the development will use the Merchants Quay junction with Trafford Road, rather than the Waterside Quay junction, as it involves a shorter wait time.  The Residents’ Parking Scheme should be put in place before the new car park is opened rather than before the new apartments become occupied.  The development is not in keeping with the need to increase modal shift to cycle, tram, bus and walking. Talk Talk should be looking for more sustainable solutions.  The car parks will delay development for a further year. They are not in keeping with the residential nature of the area and are ugly, hazardous and misplaced.

Site History

Waterside Quay 17/69341/DEMCON - Prior notification for the demolition of Capital House, Enterprise House and Telegraph House – Prior Approval Granted, 1st February 2017.

16/67568/OUT - Outline application with all matters reserved for a mixed use development comprising of up to 63,000m2 (GIA) floorspace to include residential (600-800 apartments use class C3), and ground floor retail, restaurant and local service uses (600 - 900m2 total from use classes A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, D1 and D2), up to 350 basement parking spaces together with access and landscaping – Approved 17th March 2017.

The Soapworks, Ordsall Lane, Salford (site of Talk Talk’s offices) 12/62570/DISCON - Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 13 (Travel Plan) attached to planning permission 09/58270/HYB – Approved, 20th December 2012.

12/61465/HYB - Full planning permission (in accordance with Class E of Part 3 of the General Permitted Development Order 1995) for the change of use, alteration and extension of former factory buildings to employment (B1 and/or B8); and/or hotel (C1); and/or retail (A1); and/or restaurant/café (A3); and/or bar (A4); and/or non-residential institutional uses (D1); and/or leisure uses (D2). Full planning permission for improvement to existing access, associated servicing, car parking, landscaping and internal pedestrian and highway works. Outline planning permission (in accordance with Class E of Part 3 of the General Permitted Development Order 1995) for mixed-use scheme comprising employment (B1); and/or residential (C3); and/or hotel (C1); and/or retail (A1); and/or restaurant/café (A3); and/or bar (A4); and/or takeaway (A5); and/or non-residential institutional uses (D1); and/or leisure uses (D2); car parking and associated open space and landscaping works, with variation of conditions 4 (parameter plans), 11 (timing of implementation, highway works) and 33 (approved plans) on planning permission 09/58270/HYB – Approved 26th September 2012.

09/58270/HYB - Full planning permission (in accordance with Class E of Part 3 of the General Permitted Development Order 1995) for the change of use, alteration and extension of former factory buildings to employment (B1 and/or B8); and/or hotel (C1); and/or retail (A1); and/or restaurant/café (A3); and/or bar (A4); and/or non-residential institutional uses (D1); and/or leisure uses (D2). Full planning permission for improvement to existing access, associated servicing, car parking, landscaping and internal pedestrian and highway works. Outline planning permission (in accordance with Class E of Part 3 of the General Permitted Development Order 1995) for mixed-use scheme comprising employment (B1); and/or residential (C3); and/or hotel (C1); and/or retail (A1); and/or restaurant/café (A3); and/or bar (A4); and/or takeaway (A5); and/or non-residential institutional uses (D1); and/or leisure uses

Page 95

$ache310w.rtf (D2); car parking and associated open space and landscaping works – Approved, 30th September 2010.

Consultations

Highways - No objections

Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management - No objections

Manchester Ship Canal Company - No comments received to date

Urban Vision Environment (Air and Noise) - No objections

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan A11 - Provision of Long Stay Commuter Car Park This policy states that planning permission will not be granted for long stay surface commuter parking unless it is provided i) in association with new development; or ii) for a temporary period on land proposed for redevelopment. Developments must i) provide high levels of personal and vehicular security; ii) not prejudice the development of the site for other purposes; iii) be consistent with the UDP’s regeneration strategy.

Unitary Development Plan ST4 - Key Tourism Areas This policy states that the following areas will be protected and enhanced as tourism destinations and tourism development will be focused primarily within 1. Salford Quays 2. Chapel Street 3. Worsley Village, Barton Swing Aqueduct and the Bridgewater Canal Corridor.

Unitary Development Plan ST7 - Mixed-use Development This policy states that mixed use development schemes that minimise the need to travel will be focused towards specific areas including Lower Broughton.

Unitary Development Plan MX1 - Development in Mixed-use Areas This policy states that a wide range of uses and activities (housing, offices, tourism, leisure, culture, education, community facilities, retail, infrastructure, knowledge-based employment) are permitted within the identified mixed use areas (Chapel Street East. Chapel Street West, Salford Quays, Ordsall Lane Riverside Corridor).

Page 96

$ache310w.rtf Unitary Development Plan DES6 - Waterside Development This policy states that all new development adjacent to the Manchester Ship Canal will be required to facilitate pedestrian access to, along and, where appropriate, across the waterway. Schemes should incorporate a waterside walkway with pedestrian links between the walkway and other key pedestrian routes and incorporate ground floor uses and public space that generate pedestrian activity. Where it is inappropriate to provide a waterside walkway, an alternative route shall be provided. Development should protect, improve or provide wildlife habitats; conserve and complement any historic features; maintain and enhance waterside safety; and not affect the maintenance or integrity of the waterway or flood defences. All built development will face onto the water, and incorporate entrances onto the waterfront; be of the highest standard of design; be of a scale sufficient to frame the edge of the waterside; and enhance views from, of, across and along the waterway, and provide visual links to the waterside from surrounding areas.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

- National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) - National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG)

Local Planning Policy

Planning Guidance - MediaCity UK and Quays Point This guidance relates to the intention to establish mediacity uk on approximately 220 ha of land in and around Salford Quays and Trafford Wharfside, with the 14.8 ha Quays Point site at its core. The Vision is to create a globally significant new media city. The intention is to create a modern digital city for the UK, where creative talent is drawn by the quality and excitement of the environment and the range and mix of people.

Page 97

$ache310w.rtf It is not considered that there are any local finance considerations that are material to the application.

Appraisal

The main planning issues to be considered in the determination of this application are as follows: - - The principle of the development; - Drainage - Access, highways and parking

Principle of Development

Policy Context

This application seeks consent to create a temporary area of surface car parking, on a site that is located on Waterfront Quay, which sits within the wider Salford Quays area. This location has been identified within Policy MX1 of the UDP as being suitable for the development of a vibrant mixed-use area with a broad range of uses and activities. More specifically, the reasoned justification to the policy explains that the Quays area will continue to develop as an internationally important visitor destination and as one of the region’s primary office locations…… These functions will continue to be complemented by residential, retail and leisure uses that will produce a distinctive mixed-use area. The policy goes on to explain that, in determining what would be acceptable, regard should be had to: i. the positive impact that the proposed development could have on the regeneration of the wider area; ii. the use on adjoining sites and the extent to which the proposed development would support the objective of maintaining a mix and balance of uses throughout the mixed-use area; iii. the contribution that the proposed development would make towards securing activity in the area throughout the day; iv. the prominence of the location, particularly in relation to key pedestrian and other transport routes; v. the size of the site; and vi. the potential to support the establishment, expansion and success of the Knowledge Capital, in accordance with Policy E 3 ‘Knowledge Capital’.

UDP Policy A11 states that planning permission will not be granted for long-stay surface commuter parking other than in the following circumstances: (a) When expressly provided in association with new development; or (b) For a temporary period on land proposed for redevelopment.

It goes on to explain that planning permission will only be granted where the development would: i. Provide high levels of personal safety and vehicular security; ii. Not prejudice the development of the site for other purposes; and iii. Be consistent with the regeneration strategy of the UDP.

The reasoned justification for Policy A11 states that the use of surface car parking on a long- stay basis can represent an inefficient use of land and deter built development, and that it

Page 98

$ache310w.rtf can also undermine efforts to reduce reliance on the private car and secure a modal shift towards public transport and other more sustainable travel modes.

The council’s joint planning guidance with Trafford on MediaCity:UK and Quays Point (January 2007), in line with the council’s UDP, supports a mix of uses within the Salford Quays area (Policy MC:UK2). Page 9 of the guidance confirms that car parking should not dominate new developments.

Applicant’s Supporting Statements

Various supporting statements have been submitted on behalf of the applicant. These seek to provide justification for the introduction of a surface car park in a key location that is allocated for mixed-use development.

The applicant explains that the extended area of car parking proposed within the application would be leased to Talk Talk, who are moving into the Quays this year (from Warrington and Irlam) where they will consolidate 1,300 staff. This represents the second largest letting attracted into the Quays, after the BBC in 2007. However the company needs to positively manage the process of transition into a more urban travel context and therefore, in the first year of operation, they will require some temporary and local parking so that the initial move can be made palatable to staff. The Waterfront Quay site is in close proximity to the Soapworks and ideally placed to meet this transient need.

The existing parking areas within the application site can already be used for parking and would meet a considerable proportion of Talk Talk’s needs. Adding the demolition plot areas allows for all of their immediate transition needs to be met in one place at Waterfront Quay. This is understood to be the nearest available site to the offices within the Soapworks and therefore it is Talk Talk’s preferred location.

The applicant has applied to explicitly formalise a time limited 12-month temporary use of the application site for parking. If granted, such a permission would fall away after 12 months, meaning Salford City Council would have full control to decide on the merits of any subsequent, temporary applications (albeit that none are envisaged). This degree of control would not be the case if Talk Talk were to make use of other parking locations for which no consents were required.

The applicant has also stated that the opportunity to rent the parking areas for a short while to a single business will provide a guaranteed income that will, in practice, self-fund the demolition of the existing buildings and begin the process of the positive redevelopment of Waterfront Quay. Preparing the site in this way will allow Phase 1 of the Pier 7 scheme to be marketed as a ‘clear site’, which would make it much more attractive to development partners looking to invest in a new development.

Officer Assessment

It is clear that the use of the application site for surface car parking does not represent the most efficient use of land in this key location. However, the applicant’s stated commitment to the redevelopment of the site through the scheme proposed under application 16/67568/OUT, and the role that leasing the land for car-parking could play in kick-starting the build, is noted. Additionally, great weight is attached to the short-term nature of the

Page 99

$ache310w.rtf development (12 months), which is considered to be comparable to the time required to prepare and submit a Reserved Matters application, secure approval and commence discharging conditions. The proposed use as car parking would not prejudice the future development of the site, by virtue of the fact that no permanent buildings or infrastructure is required to support it. A further benefit would be that the active use of the land is likely to discourage vandalism.

On the basis of the above, it is considered that the temporary use of the land for car parking could speed up, rather than restrict, the redevelopment of the site and the resulting efficient use of land. Therefore, in this instance, there are no objections to the short-term use of this particular site for surface car parking, and as such the application is considered to be in broad compliance with UDP Policy A11. It is however worth noting that, whilst all applications will be judged on their own merits, any future applications to extend the use of the site for car parking will be judged unfavourably if they are deemed to be delaying the future redevelopment of the site for a more efficient use of land. It is also worth noting that there is an extant permission for the comprehensive redevelopment of the site which provides a degree of comfort that the site will indeed be redeveloped.

Impact on the Streetscene

It is considered that the use of this key strategic site as a large surface car park would result in some harm being caused to the streetscene and character of the wider Quays area. However, this harm would only occur for a limited period and would be readily reversible once the use ceases. Furthermore the active use of the site is considered to be less visually harmful than a large area of derelict land surrounded by hoardings, which could be the result if the applicant chose to demolish the buildings in advance of any redevelopment. Therefore the development is not considered to be in conflict with UDP Policies DES 1 and DES6.

Drainage

The application site is located within Flood Zone 2, by virtue of its proximity to the Quays. Furthermore the ground appears to be contaminated, which is a product of its industrial / maritime history. Normally an application in such a location would be supported by a Flood Risk Assessment, a Drainage Strategy and the introduction of an oil separator. In this instance however, the Council’s Drainage Engineer considers that it would be onerous and unreasonable to require these measures to be secured given the nature of the proposed use and the temporary period for which it will operate. Nevertheless, should any further consents be sought on this site that would effectively extend the lifespan of the car parks beyond 12 months, it is likely that the above measures would be sought to mitigate against any longer- term impacts and to reflect the increasing permanence of the use. On this basis it is considered that the development would not conflict with UDP Policies EN17 and EN19.

Highways

As set out earlier in this report, the proposed car park would utilise 246 existing parking spaces that were associated with three former office buildings. It is estimated that up to a further 183 spaces could be informally accommodated on areas of crushed stone following the demolition of these buildings. The applicant has estimated that the net effect of this interim car park would be a 25% increase in parking/vehicle movements at Waterfront Quay for a 12 month period, which would then be followed by a net reduction once the ‘Pier 7’

Page 100

$ache310w.rtf scheme is operational. They consider that the existing vehicular access arrangements to Waterfront Quay will be readily able to accommodate this short term increase, although the temporary nature of the permission sought will allow for review in any case. As tenant, Talk Talk will control the use of the private car parking areas and will restrict use to their own employees as pass-holders.

The Council’s Highways Engineer has acknowledged the temporary nature of the proposed use and the future redevelopment plans for the site. It is worth noting that a Travel Plan condition was attached to the planning permission that allowed Talk Talk to occupy office space within the nearby Soapworks. Under the terms of this condition, Talk Talk will be obliged to demonstrate to the City Council how their employees will increase modal shift towards more sustainable modes of transport (cycle, tram, bus and walking). On this basis, Highways consider the scheme to be in conformity with the appropriate UDP Policies and as such have raised no objections to the application. Similarly, TfGM have raised no objections to the temporary use of the land as car parking.

Recommendation: Approve

Conditions

1. The use hereby approved shall cease within 12 months of the date of the decision notice.

Reason: The application has been made for temporary consent only.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:  A101 Rev: C – Proposed Site Plan  A101 Rev: C – Proposed Site Plan (Car Parks ‘A’ & ‘B’);  A102 – Proposed Meter Housing and Armco Barrier Elevations;  A103 Rev: C – Proposed Site Plan (Car Park ‘C’); and  Site Location Plan (Telegraphic House, Capital House and Enterprise House, Salford Quays)

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

Informatives

The proposal complies with the development plan and would improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. It therefore comprises sustainable development and the Local Planning Authority worked proactively and positively to issue the decision without delay. The Local Planning Authority has therefore implemented the requirement in Paragraphs 186-187 of the NPPF.

Page 101

$ache310w.rtf This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5g

http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

APPLICATION No: 17/69493/FUL APPLICANT: Fortis Developments Ltd LOCATION: Furness Quay, Salford, M50 3XZ PROPOSAL: Detailed application for the comprehensive redevelopment of Land at Furness Quay, Salford to deliver 593 apartments / townhouses (Use Class C3) Application comprises external alterations to Custom House and provision of 4 storey vertical extension, external alterations to Furness House and provision of 6 storey vertical extension, development of 27 storey focal point residential tower block and development of a residential block of up to 13 storeys with associated access improvements, landscaping, public realm improvements and parking Re-Submission of 16/68676/FUL WARD: Ordsall

Page 103 Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The site (1.5 hectares) is located on the north side of Furness Quay, a cul-de-sac access road that serves a group of office buildings. Furness Quay connects to The Quays road to the south, which in turn connects to Trafford Road. The site is currently occupied by three office buildings located on the western part of the site - six-storey Custom House and its two-storey annex and eleven-storey Furness House. A Metrolink tram viaduct crosses the western edge of the site, to the west of Custom House and Furness House. The remainder of the site comprises surface car parking, with small areas of amenity landscape and trees.

The buildings immediately surrounding the site are within office and light industrial/warehousing use, with the exception of the Dock Office, a Grade II Listed building on the eastern side of Furness Quay which is currently being converted to residential use. The wider area comprises a mix of office, commercial and residential uses.

Relevant Site History

Planning permission refused by the City Council’s Planning Panel on the 19 January 2017 for the comprehensive redevelopment of Land at Furness Quay, Salford to deliver 593 apartments/townhouses (Use Class C3). Application comprises external alterations to Custom House and provision of 4 storey vertical extension, external alterations to Furness House and provision of 6 storey vertical extension, development of 27 storey focal point residential tower block and development of a residential block of up to 13 storeys with associated access improvements, landscaping, public realm improvements and parking (ref: 16/68676/FUL).

The application was refused for the following reason:

‘The proposed development would constitute an overdevelopment of the site and would lack a sense of place. The applicant has not taken the opportunity to deliver a high quality residential environment within the development. Specifically, a significant number of apartments/duplex townhouses within the development would receive insufficient light and would be provided with a poor outlook; the development would lack sufficient resident's amenity space; the site layout and proximity of the buildings to each other would result in overshadowing of the public realm within the site; and the site layout would be over dominated by surface car parking. The development is therefore contrary to policies DES5, DES7 and H1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.’

Prior Approval granted on 20 April 2016 for the change of use of Custom House and Furness House from B1(a) (offices) to C3 (dwellinghouses) to provide 122 apartments (ref: 16/67787/P3JPA), as amended via letter dated 12 August 2016 confirming agreement to the reduction in the number of apartments proposed to 114.

Prior Approval granted on the 23 June 2015 for the change of use of Custom House from B1(a) (offices) to C3 (dwellinghouses) to provide 60 apartments (ref: 15/66339/P3JPA).

Planning Permission granted on 13 April 2015 for alterations to the elevations of Custom House including external cladding and installation of new windows (ref: 15/65928/FUL).

Description of Proposal

This application is a resubmission of application ref: 16/68676/FUL refused by the City Council’s Planning Panel on 19 January 2017 (see Relevant Site History above). The reason for refusal of the previous application cited an overarching concern that the proposed development would constitute an overdevelopment of the site in respect of the quality of the residential environment that would be created, specifically in relation to the following:

 The number of apartments/duplex townhouses that would receive insufficient light and a poor outlook.  The lack of resident's amenity space on the site.  The site layout and proximity of the buildings to each other resulting in overshadowing of the public realm within the site.  The site layout would be over dominated by surface car parking.

The applicant has sought to address the reason for refusal by making the following amendments to the scheme:

Page 104  Removal of car parking spaces and increased amenity landscaping  Inclusion of adjoining land to the south within the proposed landscaping scheme  Submission of a detailed planting strategy  Revisions to window arrangements in Custom House, Furness House and Block 2 to improve daylight levels

Notwithstanding the amendments that have been made to the scheme as outlined above, the application remains the same as previously submitted in respect of the number of residential dwellings proposed, the height, scale and siting of the proposed new buildings and extensions to existing buildings on the site, and the pedestrian and vehicular access to the site. A description of the development is provided below.

This application seeks planning permission for 593 apartments/duplex townhouses on the site to be provided within extensions to Custom House and Furness House and the construction of two new buildings. The applicant also intends to convert Custom House and Furness House from office use to provide 114 apartments/duplex townhouses. The conversion of these buildings to residential use does not form part of this planning application as the buildings benefit from prior approval consent under the provisions within the General Permitted Development Order that allow for the conversion of buildings from office to residential use without the need to apply for planning permission (see relevant planning history above).

The development, the subject of this planning application, would comprise the following elements:

• Four storey roof extension to Custom House, increasing its height from six-storeys to ten storeys, to provide 18 apartments. • Six storey roof extension to Furness House, increasing its height from eleven-storeys to seventeen storeys to provide 35 apartments. • External alterations to the elevations of Custom House and Furness House involving the over-cladding of the buildings. • The demolition of the two-storey annex to Custom House and the construction of a twenty-seven storey building to provide 268 apartments (Block 2). • The construction of a part ten, part twelve, part thirteen storey ‘H-shaped’ building to provide 272 apartments/duplex townhouses (Block 3) • The provision of 108 surface car parking spaces and 303 cycle parking spaces. • The aspiration to provide a new publically accessible pedestrian link through the site connecting Trafford Road to The Quays road.

The application, as originally submitted under ref: 16/68676/FUL, proposed 645 residential units including the construction of a new building fronting onto Trafford Road (Block 4). However, the application was amended by the applicant during the assessment of the previous application to remove Block 4 from the scheme. This amendment was made as a result of concerns raised by planning officers about the design and footprint of Block 4. It is understood that the applicant is still keen to construct a building on the eastern half of the site adjacent to Trafford Road and therefore this part of the site has been identified for future development on the site plan. Any proposals for a building on this part of the site will be subject to a separate planning application.

Page 105 The proposed site plan is provided in figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Proposed Site Plan

Publicity

Site Notice: Non HH Article 15 & Non HH Setting of Listed Building Reason: Article 13 & Affecting Setting of Listed Building Date Displayed: 20 February 2017

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Reason: Article 13 Standard Press Notice Affecting setting of Listed Building Date Published: 2 March 2017

Neighbour Notification

Consultation letters were sent to 106 neighbouring properties, as follows:

 1 - 3 (cons) Aubrey Street  15 - 173 (odd) Labrador Quay  Maple Leaf Service Station, 138 Trafford Road  Navigation House, 1 Furness Quay  Northern House, 24 Furness Quay  Parkside Court, 22 Furness Quay  Units 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 & 9, Sovereign Enterprise Park, King William Street  The Lighthouse, 14 The Quays

Representations

There have been no representations (in objection or support) received in response to the publicity and neighbour notification.

Page 106 Consultations

Transport for Greater Manchester (TFGM) - no comments received at the time of writing this report

UV Highways - no objections subject to conditions.

The City Council’s Highways comments are summarised as follows:

The situation regarding highways is same as with the previous submission and the reduced car parking provision would result in a reduced highway impact.

The development is well served by public transport facilities, will provide substantial on-site cycle parking provision, will be subject to a travel plan, has limited on-site car parking and subsequently should have minimal highway impact.

Environment Agency - no objection subject to conditions

The Environment Agency have advised that they have no further comments to add to their previous letter dated 09 September 2016 regarding consultation reference, 16/68676/FUL. The Environment Agency’s previous comments are provided below.

We have no objection in principle to the proposed development but we would like to make the following comments. We have been provided with a copy of the following report to review with respect to potential risks to controlled waters from land contamination:

• WML Consulting. Phase 1 Desk Study & Preliminary Geo-Environmental Assessment. Furness Quay, Salford. Client: Beaumont Morgan Developments. Reference: 7186/G/01: Dated: 05/05/2016.

The site is situated in a sensitive location with respect to controlled waters. The Erie Basin and Ontario Basin are located to the northwest and south of the site. From available mapping the drift geology comprises alluvium (secondary a aquifer). In the extreme east of the site, the alluvium appears to be underlain by Till (secondary undifferentiated). The solid geology comprises Sherwood Sandstones (principal aquifer).

Historic potentially contaminative sources have been identified on the site associated with railway land, steam saw mills with timber yard, chimney, crane and a race course. Potential for UXO has been identified. An electricity sub-station has been identified in proximity to the northern site boundary.

An off-site petrol filling station has been identified immediately east of the site. The provided report recommends that a Phase 2 site investigation and Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment is undertaken for the site and we broadly concur with this recommendation.

We consider that planning permission should only be granted to the proposed development as submitted if planning conditions to secure the following are included. Without these conditions, the proposed development on this site poses an unacceptable risk to the environment.

• a scheme to dispose of foul and surface water. • a remediation strategy that includes measures to deal with the risks associated with contamination • a verification report demonstrating completion of works set out in the approved remediation strategy.

Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management - no comments received at the time of writing this report

It is considered that the comments made by the City Council’s Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management in response to the previous application ref: 16/68676/FUL are equally relevant to the current application. Their previous comments are provided below.

The City Council’s Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management has raised no objections subject to conditions to secure the following:

 ensure the development is of flood resilient construction up to the 1,000 year flood level.

Page 107  apartments with thresholds below this level to be constructed as duplex with internal staircases, to provide a safe refuge above this level.  refuge areas are provided above the 1:500 year flood level (23.99m AOD) for all properties on the ground floor.  a flood evacuation plan be produced and periodically reviewed; and residents made aware of this.

Urban Vision Environment (Air and Noise) - no objection subject to conditions

The City Council’s Air & Noise consultant has advised that their comments on the previous application ref: 16/68676/FUL are equally relevant to the current application. The City Council’s Air & Noise consultant previous comments are provided below.

I have no objection to the proposed development. The application is supported by an air quality assessment report and by a noise assessment report.

Air Quality

The report by REC Ltd is dated 28th July 2016. The report assesses existing and future air quality, both with and without the development, for the operational phase of the development. It also considers the air quality impacts from the development’s demolition/construction phase.

The application site is partly inside the City Council’s Air Quality Management Area (AQMA). Notwithstanding this the report concludes that the overall impact on air quality from the operational phase will be negligible as air pollutant levels are expected to be below relevant air quality standards. Consequently, the site is suitable for residential development without mitigation measures.

In terms of the demolition/construction phase the impacts of dust can be reduced to an acceptable level providing good practice control measures are deployed. The report outlines appropriate control measures for the different aspects of construction.

In summary I agree with the findings of the air quality assessment report. If you are minded to give an approval in this case the standard CEMP condition to control dust and other environmental issues during the demolition/construction phase is recommended.

Noise

The report is by Wardell Armstrong, and it is dated August 2016.

The report assesses noise impacts from a number of sources surrounding the development site, including road traffic, the Metrolink and commercial uses. Vibration impacts from the Metrolink are also assessed. The authors of the report have worked to the City Council’s internal and external noise standards, and it is concluded that the standards will be met. Parts of the development will require noise mitigation measures to be deployed (e.g. up- rated acoustic glazing and ventilation) and the report details the required measures on a block by block and room by room basis.

The vibration aspects from the Metrolink are considered to have a ‘low probability for adverse comment’ by future occupiers of nearby dwellings.

I have considered the report and I am satisfied with its findings, its conclusions and with the recommended noise mitigation measures. If you are minded to give an approval in this case conditions are recommended to ensure the necessary noise standards are met within the development.

Urban Vision Environment (Land Contamination) - no objection subject to condition

The City Council’s Land Contamination consultant comments as follows:

The following report has been submitted:

Page 108  Phase 1 Desk Study and Preliminary Geo-Environmental Assessment, WML Consulting, Ref: 7186/G/01, May 2016

The report contains details of a desk study based on historical mapping and available environmental data. The report concludes that a Phase 2 Site Investigation is required to investigate the identified potential pollutant linkages further. I concur with this. Therefore a condition is recommended to require the submission of a site investigation report, details of any necessary remedial works and a verification report to validate that all necessary remedial works have been undertaken.

Historic England - no comments received at the time of writing this report

In response to the consultation on the previous application ref: 16/68676/FUL Historic England advised that they do not consider it necessary for this application to be notified to Historic England under the relevant statutory provisions. It is considered that this response is equally relevant to the current application.

UV Arboriculture - no comments received at the time of writing this report

It is considered that the comments made by the City Council’s arboriculture consultant in response to the previous application ref: 16/68676/FUL are equally relevant to the current application. Their previous comments are provided below.

A BS 5837 Arboriculture Report has been supplied to support the planning application. The report gives a fair and accurate appraisal of the trees on site. The removal of 29 trees and groups is proposed to facilitate the development. Of the proposed removals, 3 are category U, 18 are category C and 8 are category B. Category U trees should be removed regardless of whether a development goes ahead or not and category C trees should not be allowed to constrain a development; all other recorded trees are to be retained.

The loss of the category B trees is not ideal, however, the trees proposed for removal are central to the site and have a low amenity value when compared to the larger, better quality trees around the site perimeter which offer better amenity value and are being retained. The loss of trees can be mitigated by incorporating new planting into the scheme. Given the nature of the groups, it would not be possible to replace the number of stems in similar amounts. The amount of green space proposed is considered a reasonable size to accommodate replacement planting.

Successful retention of the remaining trees throughout the development phase will require the trees to be protected with temporary protective fencing. A Tree Protection Plan (TPP) has been supplied which shows the layout of the temporary protective fencing although an indication of the type of fencing to be used has not been included. An Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) has not been supplied nor have details of mitigation planting. An AMS, to include details of the type of temporary protective fencing to be used, should be requested via condition, along with details of replacement planting.

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit (GMEU) - no objection subject to conditions.

The GMEU have advised that they commented on the previous application for this site ref: 16/68676/FUL for which this a re-submission. The ecological reports submitted at that time are still valid, therefore our previous comments of the 19th & 26th September 2016 for 16/68676/FUL apply for this application too.

The previous comments made by GMEU are provided below.

The ecological assessment found evidence of a bat roost and recommended further emergence surveys. The only other likely ecological constraints are nesting birds and loss of trees.

Bats

A bat assessment was carried out for the three existing buildings. Evidence of a bat roost was located in the two storey section of Custom House, with the main building assessed as low risk and Furness House assessed as moderate risk. Further emergence surveys were recommended. Note, the finding of the bat roost means that the demolition of this building will require a licence. From a planning perspective I am confident that a licence would be issued by Natural England.

Page 109 The emergence surveys confirmed the presence of the bat roost identified as part of the initial survey and found no evidence of any other bat roosts on site. The roost that was found was confirmed as a natters roost only the second located in Greater Manchester. However despite its rarity, the roost was only for low numbers of bats on an occasional basis i.e. therefore assessed as not being of significant importance in terms of the conservation status of this species. Whilst unfortunate that the roost is to be lost I accept the consultant’s assessment. Mitigation is proposed via the provision of replacement roosting opportunities.

Nesting Birds

The landscape masterplan indicates the loss of a number of trees and the ecological assessment recommends clearance outside the bird nesting season.

Loss of trees

Other than the bat roost the overall value of the site is very low, ecological interest is restricted to the trees and shrubs around the site and associated habitat they provide for nesting birds. The landscape plan indicates new planting that appears to approximately mitigate for those lost. There is also adequate additional space on site for further planting. I am therefore happy that mitigation can be provided on site and that the detail can be conditioned. I recommend a condition to secure the submission of a landscape plan.

Design For Security - no objection subject to conditions

Greater Manchester Police Design for Security comment as follows:

The proposed development should be designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations contained within section 3.3 of the submitted Crime Impact Statement dated (27/05/2016 – URN: 2015/1075/CIS/01) and a planning condition should be added to reflect the physical security specification listed within section 4 of the appendices within the submitted Crime Impact Statement. (Please see www.designforsecurity.org/secured-by design/ or www.securedbydesign.com for more information).

In summary, the application is supported subject to further consideration of the above matters.

Manchester Airport - no objection

Manchester Airport advise that the proposed development has been examined from an aerodrome safeguarding aspect and Manchester Airport has no safeguarding objections to the proposal

NATS (Air Traffic Control) - no comments received at the time of writing this report

It is considered that the comments made by NATS in response to the previous application ref: 16/68676/FUL are equally relevant to the current application. Their previous comments are provided below.

NATS advise that the proposed development has been examined from a technical safeguarding aspect and does not conflict with their safeguarding criteria. Accordingly, NATS (En Route) Public Limited Company ("NERL") has no safeguarding objection to the proposal.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Page 110 measures to make adequate provision for the needs of the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists, and, wherever appropriate, maximise the use of public transport; and the protection and enhancement of rail and water-based infrastructure to support the movement of freight and passengers.

Unitary Development Plan ST12 - Development Density This policy states that development within regional centres, town centre and close to key public transport routes and interchanges will be required to achieve a high density appropriate to the location and context.

Unitary Development Plan ST13 - Natural Environments Assets This policy states that development that would result in an unacceptable impact on any of the city's natural environmental assets will not be permitted.

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

Unitary Development Plan DES5 - Tall Buildings This policy states that tall buildings will be permitted where: the scale of the development is appropriate; the location is highly accessible; the building would positively relate to adjacent public realm; is of high quality design; makes a positive contribution to the skyline; would not detract from important views; would not cause unacceptable overshadowing or overlooking, detrimental to the amenity of neighbouring occupiers; be no unacceptable impact on the setting of a listed building or value of a conservation area; be no unacceptable impact on microclimate; be no unacceptable impact on telecommunications; and there would be no unacceptable impact on aviation safety.

Page 111 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 CH2 - Development Affecting the Setting of Listed Buildings 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 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 A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Parking in New Development This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded; and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of safety and security.

Page 112 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 R4 - Key Recreational Areas This policy states that development within, adjoining or directly affecting a key recreation area will only be permitted if consistent with the following: the i) protection and enhancement of the existing and potential recreational use of the area; ii) protection and improvement of amenity of the area; iii) the protection of existing trees, woodlands and other landscape features; iv) the provision, improvement and maintenance of new areas of woodland planting; v) the provision, improvement and maintenance of public access; vi) the provision, improvement and maintenance of accessible, open land recreation uses; and vii) the provision, improvement and maintenance of the quality and diversity of wildlife habitats.

Unitary Development Plan DEV7 - Protection of Aviation Safety at Manchester This policy states that development that would have an unacceptable impact on the operational integrity or safety of Manchester Airport will not be permitted.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy

Page 113 Supplementary Planning Document - Nature Conservation and Biodiversity This policy document expands on the policies of the Unitary Development Plan relating to the issues of nature conservation and biodiversity, and seeks to ensure that all stakeholders have a clear understanding of how those policies should be implemented and their desired outcome.

Appraisal

The issues for consideration in the determination of this application are:

 Principle of Development  Site Layout, Design and Appearance  Public Realm and Landscape  Impact on Heritage Assets  Residential Amenity  Highways, Parking and Access.  Flood Risk and Surface Water Management  Ecology  Pollution  Sustainability  Planning Obligations

Page 114 Principle of Development

The application site lies within the Salford Quays mixed use area as identified under UDP Policy MX1/3. This policy supports the development of vibrant mixed use areas with a broad range of uses and activities and identifies housing as being an appropriate use. The policy sets out a series of criteria to which regard will be had in determining the appropriate mix of uses on individual sites.

 the impact the development on regeneration of the wider area  the use of adjoining sites  the extent to which the development would support the objective of maintaining a mix and balance of uses throughout the area  the contribution the development would make towards securing activity through the day  the prominence of the location in relation to pedestrian and transport routes

The reasoned justification to this policy confirms that the Salford Quays area will continue to develop as an internationally important visitor destination, and one of the region’s primary office locations. It identifies that these functions will be complemented by residential, retail and leisure uses to produce a distinctive mixed use area.

Complementing UDP Policy MX1, the MediaCity and Quays Point Planning Guidance provides a framework for the development of MediaCity on approximately 220ha of land in and around Salford Quays and Trafford Wharfside. The planning guidance identifies a series of key principles and strategic objectives to inform the development of the wider MediaCity area within which the application site lies. These include the creation of a cohesive and vibrant mixed use area with a distinctive sense of place and character, and the delivery of a high quality built environment to enhance the profile and environment of MediaCity and create a thriving economic and leisure location.

Policy MC:UK2 of the Planning Guidance sets out the range of uses that will be promoted across the wider MediaCity area. This identifies that some further residential development will be appropriate in the waterfront parts of Salford Quays, albeit it is envisaged that new residential uses will not be a dominant component in the wider MediaCity area where existing land use patterns are largely envisaged to remain.

It is noted that, in accordance with paragraph 47 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) the City Council has a five year housing land supply. When assessing proposals for new housing developments, this is a material consideration with reasonable weight attached to it.

The site occupies a sustainable location, being close to Salford Quays Metrolink stop, MediaCityUK and the commercial, retail and leisure facilities in Salford Quays. The surrounding sites comprise a range of uses and the development would form part of an increasing residential presence in the area, with the conversion of the Dock Office from office to residential use and the redevelopment of sites on Trafford Road, Waterfront Quay and Clippers Quay for housing.

With regard to the criteria set out in UDP Policy MX1/3 it is considered that the redevelopment of the site for residential use would have a positive impact on the regeneration of the wider Salford Quays area and would support the objective of maintaining a mix and balance of uses throughout the area. The site is located close to public transport and pedestrian routes and the residential occupation of the site would increase the amount of activity on the site throughout the day when compared with the previous office use where activity would have been limited to working hours during weekdays.

In addition, the residential occupation of the site is unlikely to compromise the operating conditions of the existing neighbouring office and light industrial/warehousing uses, subject to appropriate noise insulation of the proposed new residential units. It is considered that the proposed new residential use would complement the existing employment uses in the area.

It should be noted that the principle of the change of use of the existing office buildings on the site to residential use has already been established via a prior approval consent granted under the provisions within the General Permitted Development Order. These provisions allow for the conversion of buildings from office to residential use without the need to apply for planning permission (see relevant planning history above). Therefore the loss

Page 115 of the existing office floorspace to residential use is not a material planning consideration in the assessment of this application.

In conclusion, it is considered that the principle of residential use on the application site is appropriate for the area and therefore acceptable. The redevelopment of the site for residential use would contribute to the growth of Salford Quays as a vibrant mixed use area with a range of uses and activities. On this basis the application complies with UDP Policy MX1/3 and the MediaCity and Quays Point Planning Guidance in respect of the principle of the development.

Development Density

UDP Policy ST12 promotes high density development in regional and town centres and close to key public transport routes and interchanges. The site is located within the regional centre and close to a key public transport routes. It is therefore considered that the site is suitable for high density development and complies with Policy ST12. UDP Policy H1 states that development within designated ‘mixed use areas’ should have a development density of no less than 50 dwellings per hectare. The density of the development would comply with this policy.

Dwelling Mix and Tenure

The application seeks planning permission for 593 apartments/duplex townhouses; the dwelling mix is set out in table 1 below. In addition, table 2 sets out the dwelling mix for the 593 apartments/duplex townhouses when combined with the 114 apartments/duplex townhouses already permitted via prior approval for the conversion of Custom House and Furness House from office to residential use.

Table 1: Current Planning Application Proposed Dwelling Mix

Studio 1 Bed 2 Bed 3 Bed Total Block 2 55 101 97 15 268 Block 3 22 99 140 11 272 Custom House 0 9 4 5 18 Furness House 0 7 17 11 35 Total 77 216 258 42 593 % 13% 36% 44% 7%

Table 2: Site Wide Dwelling Mix (including Dwellings Granted Prior Approval)

Studio 1 Bed 2 Bed 3 Bed Total Block 2 55 101 97 15 268 Block 3 22 99 140 11 272 Custom House 1 21 26 6 54 Furness House 2 34 48 29 113 Total 80 255 311 61 707 % 11% 36% 44% 9%

UDP Policy H1 seeks to ensure that new housing developments contribute towards the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings in terms of size, type, tenure and affordability. Policy HOU1 of the City Council’s Housing Planning Guidance (2006) advises that apartments will normally be the most appropriate form of housing provision within the Regional Centre given the very high level of accessibility, the scale of the existing buildings, and the need to support that area’s development as a vibrant ‘city centre’ location. Paragraph 4.7 of the reasoned justification to the policy does however recognise the need to ensure that developments within the Regional Centre provide a broad mix of dwelling types to support more mixed and sustainable communities. This will include the provision of larger dwellings that are more adaptable to a variety of needs and that have their own outdoor space such as roof terraces or gardens.

Policy HOU2 of the Housing Planning Guidance seeks to ensure that where apartments are considered appropriate they should provide a broad mix of dwelling sizes, both in terms of number of bedrooms and the net residential floorpsace. Studios and one bed apartments should not predominate and a significant proportion of three bedroom apartments should be provided where practicable. Paragraph 4.31 of the reasoned justification

Page 116 to this policy clarifies that the majority of apartments should have two or three bedrooms, with a floorspace typically of 57 square metres or above. It also confirms that a significant proportion of three bedroom apartments should be provided unless it can be demonstrated that this is impracticable, and these should be in a mix of locations within the development rather than simply being in the form of penthouses.

In the current application, 51% of the dwellings would have two or more bedrooms and when combined with the dwellings already granted prior approval this would increase to 53%. With regard to the floorspace of the dwellings, in both the current application and when combined with the dwellings already granted prior approval, all of the two and three bed dwellings would have a floorspace of 57sq/m or more. In addition, the current application would include 25 duplex townhouses with their own private entrance at ground floor level within Block 3 comprising 3 x one-bed units, 18 x two-bed units and 4 x three-bed units. The prior approval consent also includes 9 x two-bed and 3 x three-bed duplex townhouses within the converted Custom House and Furness House.

The dwelling mix proposed in terms of the number of units with two or more bedrooms and the size of the dwellings in terms of floorspace would be in accordance with Policy HOU2 in both the current planning application and also when combined with the dwelling mix in the conversion of Custom House and Furness House. When each block is considered in isolation, Block 2 would not comply with Policy HOU2 in that only 42% of the units would have two or more bedrooms and a floorspace of 57sq/m or more. However, Block 3, Custom House and Furness House would all individually comply with Policy HOU2.

It would be preferable to see a dwelling mix in accordance with Policy HOU2 within each building in the development. However, the development as a whole, including the dwellings granted prior approval for conversion to residential, would meet the requirements of Policy HOU2. Therefore, it is considered that the development would provide a good mix of dwellings in terms of number of bedrooms and floorspace and is therefore acceptable.

In accordance with the City Council’s Planning Obligations SPD, the development should provide five dwellings as affordable housing; this is calculated as 20% of the duplex townhouses proposed as part of the planning application. It is noted that, on the basis City Council’s strategic viability assessment, affordable housing is not required as a proportion of any apartments proposed as part of this development.

The applicant states that the development would not be financially viable if affordable housing was provided on site or off site, or if an equivalent commuted sum was provided. The applicant has submitted a viability assessment which has been reviewed by the City Council’s consultant surveyors. An assessment of planning obligations for this scheme, including provision of affordable housing, is provided in the Planning Obligations section of this report below.

Site Layout, Design and Appearance

UDP Policy DES1 states that development will be required to respond to its physical context, respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated, and contribute towards local identity and distinctiveness. The policy advises that in assessing the extent to which any development complies with this policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings and landscape, the character, scale and pattern of streets and building plots, and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.

The Design Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) ‘Shaping Salford’ seeks to ensure that new development within the City is both distinctive and “fits in”. The SPD advises that design of new development should honor Salford’s past and reflect its ambitions for the future. The SPD identifies the local character of Salford Quays as being ‘based on its large public spaces, expanses of waterside and exciting modern architecture with these elements combining to provide the backdrop for new developments in the area.’ The SPD advises that the ‘area will take on a dense and compact city block character, generally eight to ten storeys, punctuated by appropriate landmark buildings and open spaces. Buildings must not be set in isolation but must be well connected with their neighbours. Building edges will, where possible, form the boundary between public and private space.’

Site Layout

The development would comprise four buildings. Custom House and Furness House, in the western part of the site, would be retained and increased in height. The existing two-storey annex to Custom House would be

Page 117 demolished and a new twenty-seven storey building (Block 2) constructed adjacent to Custom House and Furness House. This new building would have a similar footprint to the existing two-storey annex. To the east of Furness House, in the centre of the site, a part ten, part twelve, part thirteen storey building with an ‘H-shaped’ footprint (Block 3) is proposed.

The proposals include an aspiration to provide a pedestrian route through the site linking Trafford Road to The Quays. This route would be accessible to the public and would run along the southern part of the site. However, the connection to The Quays is dependent upon the applicant gaining access rights across a small strip of land to the south of the Metrolink tram viaduct which is not within the applicant’s ownership. The development has also been designed to allow for a pedestrian route to run through the site from south to north to enable a connection through into the neighbouring sites to the north and Anchorage Metrolink stop beyond if the existing industrial sites to the north are brought forward for redevelopment in the future.

Vehicles would access the site via the existing vehicle access off Furness Quay. Car parking is proposed in two areas on the site - to the west of the Metrolink tram viaduct and to the east of Block 3. The car parking to the west of the Metrolink tram viaduct would be accessed via a new vehicle route running from the site entrance, underneath Block 3 and along the northern edge of the site. Access to the parking to the east of Block 3 would be directly adjacent to the site entrance. The rest of the site would be landscaped and would provide for pedestrian access only. The previous application (ref: 16/68676/FUL) also included surface car parking in- between Custom House, Furness House and Block 2, however, in response to the reason for refusal of the previous application this element of the car parking has been removed from the scheme and replaced with landscaped amenity space.

The ground floors of Custom House, Furness House and Block 3 would include front doors serving duplex townhouses, providing direct access from these dwellings into the public realm within the development. The duplex townhouses would also have a small terrace area to the front to provide defensible space to these dwellings. The apartments on the upper floors would be accessed via communal entrances off the public realm.

UDP Policy DES1 states that regard should be given to the character, scale and pattern of streets and building plots, including plot size; the relationship to existing buildings and other features that contribute to townscape quality and the impact on, and quality of, views and vistas. UDP Policy DES2 states that the design and layout of new development should enable pedestrians to orientate themselves, and navigate their way through an area by providing appropriate views, vistas and visual links.

The site layout would create a cluster of three buildings - Custom House, Furness House and Block 2 in the western part of the site, alongside Block 3 - the ‘H-shaped’ block in the centre of the site. The site is landlocked with very limited street frontage onto Furness Quay and little discernible street pattern around the site for the proposed development to connect into. The challenge here is to deliver a successful and attractive new residential development that is well connected and integrated with its surroundings out of what is currently an enclosed office park type environment.

The eastern part of the site adjacent to Trafford Road is currently identified for future development on the proposed site plan and landscape plan. The applicant intends to submit a separate planning application for a new building on the eastern part of the site in the future.

It is considered that the site layout, in particular the arrangement of Custom House, Furness House and Block 2, provides an appropriate response to the site and its surroundings. The development would allow for public access though the site from Trafford Road to Furness Quay and also, subject to obtaining access rights, onto The Quays. These new pedestrian connections would assist in opening up the site and improve connections between the site and its surroundings. It is therefore considered that the development would comply with UDP Policies DES1 and DES2 in respect of site layout.

Height and Scale

The area surrounding the application site is characterised by a variety of buildings heights. More specifically, office buildings of two, three and five storeys and the six-storey Dock Office to the south of the site accessed off Furness Quay. A four-storey office building and seven storey multi-storey car park to the west of the site, beyond which is the four-storey Labrador Quay residential development. To the north, an industrial estate comprising single-storey warehouse buildings and a petrol station and to the east across Trafford Road is Ordsall Park and a seven-storey hotel building.

Page 118 UDP Policy DES1 states that when assessing new development, regard should be had to the scale of the proposed development in relationship to its surroundings and the relationship to existing buildings and other features that contribute to townscape quality. UDP Policy DES5 seeks to ensure that proposals for tall buildings are of high design quality and construction and make a positive contribution to the skyline.

The existing buildings on the site, Furness House and Custom House, have a strong visual presence due to their height, curved footprint and distinctive architectural style when compared to other buildings in Salford Quays. The retention and refurbishment of these two buildings is supported.

The development would rise in height from east to west, with the lowest part of the development being Block 3 (part ten, part twelve, part thirteen storeys), and the extension to Custom House (ten-storeys); with Furness House rising to seventeen storeys and the highest part of the development being Block 2 (twenty-seven storeys). The height and scale of the development is illustrated in figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Height and scale of the development within its context

The height and scale of the proposed development would significantly exceed the height and scale of the buildings immediately adjacent to the site. However, it is noted that the height and scale of development in the local area is beginning to change with planning permission recently granted for a development of up to twenty- one storeys on the eastern side of Trafford Road approximately 230 metres to the south-east of the site and a building of up to twenty storeys at the eastern end of Waterfront Quay approximately 200 metres to the south of the site.

The extensions to Custom House and Furness House alongside Block 2 would create a cluster of tall buildings in the western part of the site, thereby helping to identify the development on the skyline given its lack of street frontage. Block 2, at twenty seven storeys, would have a strong visual presence within Salford Quays as it would be the tallest building within the Quays outside of the MediaCityUK development to the north-west, where the tallest building granted consent is thirty-one storeys.

It is considered that the height and scale of the development would be appropriate for the site and the local area. The cluster of Custom House, Furness House and Block 2 would make a positive contribution to the

Page 119 skyline and would reflect the changing character of this part of Salford Quays. It is considered that the development complies with UDP Policies DES1 and DES5 in respect of its height and scale.

Wind Impacts

A wind assessment was submitted with the planning application, which assesses the wind conditions likely to arise from the proposed development. The assessment indicates that there would be a general increase in wind speeds within the site following the construction of the development when compared to the existing conditions. The assessment identifies a number of areas where the suitability of use would alter from being comfortable for sitting to only comfortable for standing. The affected areas would be around Custom House, Furness House and Block 3 and would be primarily due to winds from the west and south west. The report recommends that increased wind conditions within the pedestrian environment can be mitigated through landscaping and planting.

The balconies on the upper levels of Block 2, particularly the corner apartments, would be exposed to windy conditions that would exceed the criteria for sitting and standing. As a result the balconies have been designed with 2.5 metre high balustrades to provide a comfortable environment for residents using these balconies.

Outside the site, the assessment shows an increase in wind speeds in some of the open areas around the existing warehouse buidlings to the north of the site. These areas are understood to be predominantly used for vehicular access and circulation and would remain suitable for general pedestrian circulation, standing and leisure walking following construction of the development.

The report concludes that whist there would be an increase in wind levels within the site as a result of the development, this increase is not expected to be excessive and wind comfort levels would generally remain within the recommended wind comfort and safety levels. Through appropriate landscaping and planting it would be possible to ensure areas to be used for seating within the site would provide a comfortable environment.

Detailed Design and Appearance

UDP Policy DES1 states that regard will be had to the quality and durability of proposed materials and their appropriateness to both the location and the type of development. Policy DES5, seeks to ensure that proposals for tall buildings are of high design quality and construction and make a positive contribution to the skyline.

The extensions and alterations to the facades of Custom House and Furness House have been designed to respect the existing design and character of the building. The elevations of the buildings would be clad with glazed curtain walling, with a combination of transparent and opaque panels. The existing horizontality of both buildings would be maintained on the south facing elevation of Custom House and the east facing elevation of Furness House with projecting grey steel balconies to the upper floors and timber style brise soleil above the windows on the lower levels. In addition, the floor levels would be expressed in banding of light coloured aluminium panels. This banding would extend around both buildings onto the north facing elevation of Custom House and west facing elevation of Furness House to continue the horizontal expression. The glazed curtain walling on these elevations would be complemented by two vertical bands of textured powder coated aluminium cladding panels in shades of reds and oranges.

The elevations of Block 2 would be finished in red/orange and grey metal cladding arranged with a vertical emphasis. This vertically would also be expressed via an external exposed exoskeleton steel structure. Light coloured metal cladding in horizontal bands would define the floor levels at every two storeys and grey metallic cladding is proposed for the top four levels to define the top of the building. The roof of the building would project out over the top four floors.

Block 3 would comprise a similar palette of materials to Furness House and Custom House but does not seek to replicate their design. The elevations would be finished with powder coated curtain walling with glazing and ceramic infill panels and textured powder coated aluminium panels.

The design of the building elevations and the material palette proposed is considered appropriate for the development and the wider area, noting that existing buildings within Salford Quays comprise a variety of different materials and architectural styles. The development therefore complies with UDP Policies DES1 and DES5 in respect of its detailed design and appearance.

Page 120 In order to ensure high quality materials and details are delivered in the development, a condition is recommended, if planning permission is granted, to require the submission of details and samples of all materials proposed, including details and samples of the cladding system with its jointing and caps.

Design and Crime

The applicant has submitted a crime impact assessment undertaken by Greater Manchester Police to assess the development in respect of its potential impact on crime and anti-social behaviour. The report advises that the routes within the development are wide and well overlooked by the proposed apartments, allowing for good sightlines and natural surveillance opportunities. The route from Trafford Road to The Quays would provide access to the Metrolink and other destinations within the Salford Quays and MediaCityUK, areas. The report also highlights the importance of the design of the space underneath the Metrolink tram viaduct to ensure this space does not generate antisocial behaviour. The report recommends that this area should be illuminated to a high standard and subject to CCTV monitoring. In addition, the pedestrian route under the viaduct connecting to The Quays should be as wide as possible.

All four buildings would provide opportunities for activity and natural surveillance at ground floor level in the form of either living accommodation as part of duplex townhouses including front doors directly off the public realm within Custom House, Furness House and Block 3 and a resident’s amenity space, entrance foyer and management office in Block 2.

It is considered that, subject to a high quality landscape scheme, including lighting and CCTV for the site and in particular the space around and underneath the tram viaduct, the development has been designed to ensure it does not increase opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour in accordance with UDP Policy DES10 and the City Council’s Design and Crime SPD.

Public Realm and Landscape

The key concern raised by the City Council’s Planning Panel in refusing the previous application (ref: 16/68676/FUL) related to the landscape and public realm strategy. The Panel were concerned that the development would not provide sufficient amenity for residents and a poor outlook from some of the proposed apartments due to the provision of a significant amount of hard landscaping, and in particular surface car parking.

In order to address these concerns, the applicant has revised the landscape masterplan for the site to remove the car parking spaces proposed inbetween Custom House, Furness House and Block 2 and replace with amenity landscaping. This area would principally serve as semi private amenity spaces for residents of the scheme, but would also be accessible to the general public and would provide additional pedestrian connectivity routes across the site. The revised site landscape plan is provided in figure 3 below.

Page 121 Figure 3: Proposed Site Landscape Plan

This area is shown on the submitted landscape masterplan as being divided into three distinct areas. The first area would use simple soft landscaped mounds with feature trees and seating to create an area for informal recreation, the second would provide a soft surfaced flexible children’s play space edged by planting and none intrusive boundary details and the third would provide an activity zone with more formal exercise/recreation equipment for the use of residents. Low walls and planting would provide a buffer between the resident’s amenity areas and the surrounding footpaths. Ground floor duplex townhouse units would also be defined by low boundary walls, railings or vegetation to add animation to this area and define the locations of private space.

In addition, a row of parking spaces on the northern site boundary adjacent to Block 2 has been incorporated into the landscaping scheme. This serves to further reduce the amount of hard surfaced car parking areas on the site.

The revised landscape masterplan also includes proposals to incorporate a triangular plot of land to the south western edge of the application site boundary into the landscape scheme. The applicant has advised that this plot has been included in response to comments in relation to the lack of public amenity space previously proposed and to address comments in relation to the layout of the proposed development resulting in overshadowing of the public realm and comments in relation to overdevelopment.

The applicant has advised that this parcel of land has for many years been used as part of the car park associated with Custom House and Furness House and had been considered by the previous owner to form part of the same ownership as the wider site. This is evidenced by its current use as car parking associated with the existing office buildings. However, in the process of acquiring the site it became apparent to the applicant that this parcel of land was held under a separate title in third party ownership. As discussions were ongoing with regards to how to regularise this land ownership situation at the time the previous application was submitted, this area was excluded from the application site boundary. However, it has always been the applicant’s intention to register this land through the appropriate means upon completion of the site acquisition and ultimately incorporate it within the wider scheme of amenity landscaping

A detailed planting strategy for the whole site has been submitted with the revised application, which provides the level of detail that would normally be submitted as part of a discharge of condition application for landscaping. As part of this, the applicant has sought to include Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) through the use of tree pits and rainwater retaining planting beds.

Page 122 The new areas of amenity landscape would be provided in addition to the four main areas of public realm proposed in the previous application that was refused. This would comprise a ‘garden avenue’ located within the centre of the site in a north/south alignment; a ‘neighbourhood square’ located adjacent to and beneath the Metrolink viaduct, the proposed east/west pedestrian route through the site and an ‘arrival courtyard’ adjacent to the site entrance off Furness Quay. Existing trees around the perimeter of the site would be retained were possible and the development would also include a resident’s terrace amenity space on the roof of the ten- storey part of Block 3. The site would be completely open to the public and would include a pedestrian route off Trafford Road with the aspiration to also provide a connection to The Quays road.

The applicant has submitted a shadowing study of the landscape masterplan which demonstrates that, generally, the southern part of the site would receive sunlight in the morning during the summer months whilst the northern part of the site would receive sunlight in the evening. The area in-between Furness House and Block 3 would receive sunlight during the middle of the day but would be in shade or partial shade in the morning and evening. In addition, the area in-between Custom House, Furness House and Block 2 would be in shadow for the majority of the day.

The City Council’s Landscape Consultant has reviewed the revised landscape masterplan and has commented that it is a high quality submission and that it is good to see the incorporation of SUDs/rain gardens to tackle the issue of surface water run-off/mitigating flood risk. Whilst, if planning permission is granted, it is expected that the landscape masterplan proposed would be delivered in full on site, it is still recommended that a condition be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to require further details to be submitted in relation to tree pits and management/maintenance to demonstrate the developers intentions to appropriately look after what is provided.

The City Council is committed to ensuring that trees planted around the City are given the best possible growing conditions and the benefits that this brings in terms of healthy trees and reduced maintenance liabilities. The City Council’s Landscape Consultant has advised that the sizes of the tree pits currently indicated on the drawings are too small and would have in-sufficient rooting volume for the trees to achieve their growth potential. As such they would not fulfil the desired visual impact on the development and the associated benefits that this will bring.

It is considered that the revised landscape scheme would provide an attractive ‘green’ environment for residents and visitors to the site. The quality of the landscape proposed would be a great asset to the development and is a significant improvement on the scheme proposed within the previous application. It is therefore considered that the revised application addresses the concerns raised by the City Council’s Planning Panel in their reason for refusal of the application in respect of landscape and amenity space.

In addition to the condition recommended by the City Council’s Landscape Consultant, it is recommended that a condition be attached to require the submission of a car parking management strategy which sets out how the site will be managed to ensure only the dedicated car parking spaces proposed on the site will be used for car parking and how residents and visitors will be prevented from parking on other parts of the site proposed for pedestrian use only.

It is also recommended that the provision of the new public pedestrian link across the site connecting to Trafford Road and The Quays and to safeguard the potential for a future pedestrian connection to the north (if land to the north of the site is brought forward for development) is secured via a Section 106 agreement.

Impact on Heritage Assets

The development has the potential to impact on the setting of two Grade II listed heritage assets. The Dock Office located approximately 85 metres to the south of the site and its adjoining entrance gateway fronting Trafford Road. Any development on the application site will fall within the setting of these heritage assets and therefore the impact of the proposed development upon these assets must be considered. The applicant has submitted a heritage assessment as part of the application.

Page 123 One of the core planning principles of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), is to “conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance”. Paragraph 132 of the NPPF states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. It then continues to say that significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting and that as heritage assets are irreplaceable any harm or loss ‘should require clear and convincing justification’.

Paragraph 133 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 substantial harm or loss is outweighed by substantial public benefits. Paragraph 134 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.

The significance of a heritage asset relates to the value of the asset because of its heritage interest which may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. However, significance derives not only from an asset’s physical presence but also from its setting. In the annex to the NPPF the setting of a heritage asset is described as ‘the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral’.

One of the main views of the Dock Office is seen when approaching from the south along Trafford Road. The proposed development would form part of the setting of the Dock Office, especially the taller buildings on the site including the new twenty seven storey block and Furness House which would stand seventeen storeys once extended. However, there is a reasonable separation between the application site and the Dock Office with the site of Navigation House and the access road, Furness Quay, in-between which would help to reduce any impact and ensure that the proposed development would not be too overbearing upon the heritage assets.

It is also important to recognise that nothing is static and landscapes change over time especially urban landscapes such as this. In this respect it is noted that the Dock Office itself is currently being extended and refurbished with a new modern extension on the roof. In this context it is considered that, subject to the careful choice and use of materials, the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact upon the setting and therefore consequently the significance of the Dock Office or the entrance gateway.

Residential Amenity

Impact on Neighbouring Dwellings

The nearest neighbouring residential properties to the development site are the Quay Serviced Apartments and Solux Apartments on Labrador Quay located approximately 135 metres to the north-west of the site and the proposed new apartments within the Dock Office located approximately 85 metres to the south. UDP Policy DES7 states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users of other developments.

The nearest part of the proposed development to the apartments on Labrador Quay would be the twenty-seven storey Block 2. The distance between the existing and proposed buildings combined with the existence of the Anchorage multi-storey car park and The Lighthouse office building in-between Labrador Quay and the application site would mean that there would be little impact on the amenity of existing residents of Labrador Quay as a result of the development in respect of loss of daylight, sunlight or privacy. A resident of Labrador Quay has raised concerns that the development would overshadow Erie Basin which lies to the north of Labrador Quay. Again, it is considered that the distance between the proposed development and Erie Basin would mean that that would be little impact on Erie Basin by way of overshadowing.

With regard to the Dock Office, the nearest part of the proposed development to the Dock Office would be Block 3. Again, the distance between the proposed new development and the Dock Office would ensure that there would be little impact on the amenity of future residents of the Dock Office.

The applicant has submitted a daylight and sunlight study undertaken in accordance with the Building Research Establishment (BRE) guidance – Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight (2009) to demonstrate whether there would be any impact on the levels of daylight and sunlight that would be received within these

Page 124 neighbouring residential properties as a result of the proposed development. The study concludes that 100% of the rooms and windows tested for these neighbouring properties would experience levels of daylight and sunlight in compliance with the BRE guidance following construction of the development.

This proposed development therefore complies with UDP Policy DES7 in relation to amenity impacts on neighbouring properties.

Level of Amenity within the Proposed Development

In addition to the concerns raised about the landscape strategy for the site, the City Council’s Planning Panel raised concerns about number of apartments/duplex townhouses within the development that would receive insufficient light. In response to these concerns the applicant has increased the size of the window openings within Custom House, Furness House and Block 2 to provide floor to ceiling window arrangements wherever practicable. The expanded window openings would maintain the overall design approach for the development by replacing previously proposed opaque blanking panels with transparent glazed units. It is also proposed to provide higher specification glazing with increased transmittance values and to provide internal finishes that maximize reflectance of the available daylight.

The applicant has submitted an updated daylight and sunlight study undertaken in accordance with the Building Research Establishment (BRE) guidance – Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight (2009) to demonstrate the levels of daylight and sunlight that would be received within the proposed new residential units.

It is acknowledged that the conversion and extension of Custom House and Furness House and the footprint of Block 2, being based on the footprint of the Custom House annex, present challenges in respect of the conversion of former office buildings with deep office floor plates to residential use, resulting in long narrow rooms. The updated daylight study confirms that the proposed revisions to the windows would improve the daylight results with an increase in the number of apartments that would meet or exceed the target set out in the BRE guidance.

Specifically, in relation to Custom House, the window amendments would increase compliance with the BRE guidance targets from 12% to 76% of windows and the window amendments to Furness House would increase compliance from 38% to 88%. These figures relate only to the lower levels and units overlooking the courtyard area.

With regard to Block 2, the size of the windows has also increase to allow more daylight to penetrate these rooms and the window specification improved. However, windows that are set back behind balconies have remained unchanged as increases in window sizes would not translate to improved daylight results due to the impact of overhanging balconies. The applicant considered setting these windows forward and removing the balconies. However, it was considered that the balconies are an essential amenity space and should be retained as part of the development and this approach is supported by planning officers. It is noted that the BRE guidance recognises that in a situation where private amenity space is proposed in the form of balconies, the assessment can be taken from the primary façade rather than the set-back position of the window within the balcony. The updated daylight study demonstrates that the measures to improve transmittance and reflectance and the increase size of windows would result in an increase in the levels of compliance with the BRE guideline targets from 7% of windows overlooking the courtyard at lower levels to 88%.

With regard to Block 3, it was considered that the window arrangements for this block proposed in the previous planning application would be provide a good quality environment for residents and therefore this part of the development remains the same as previously submitted.

With regard to overlooking and loss of privacy, the distance between the elevations of Custom House, Furness House and Block 2 would be circa twenty metres and the distance between Furness House and Block 3 and between the two wings of Block 3 would be circa twenty three metres. It is considered that these distances between windows serving habitable rooms within the development would be acceptable and would provide a good level of amenity for residents.

In terms of resident’s private amenity space, the majority of the dwellings In Block 2, Custom House and Furness House would include a small outside terrace to provide private amenity space for residents. In addition, a communal inside ancillary resident’s space (154.49sq/m) would be provided at ground floor level in Block 2. In

Page 125 Block 3 only a small number of dwellings would be provided with a private outside amenity space in the form of small terraces, however, residents would have access to a communal roof garden at ninth floor level.

Highways, Parking and Access

The site benefits from a high level of public transport accessibility, with Salford Quays Metrolink stop located within 400 metres of the site and frequent bus services within 400 metres of the site along Trafford Road connecting Salford to Manchester. Good access is also available on foot and by cycle to nearby local facilities.

There are currently 327 car parking spaces on the site that served the previous office use within Custom House and Furness House. The revised scheme would include 60 car parking spaces (compared to the 108 spaces proposed in the previous application) to serve the proposed residential units, which equates to a parking ratio of 1 space per 11.8 residential units or 8.5% car parking provision. The applicant has advised that car parking spaces would be allocated as part of the sales process.

This level of car parking provision is considered to be appropriate given the sustainable location of the site in close proximity to public transport options via the Metrolink and bus routes. In addition, the proposed site plan indicates that 303 cycle parking spaces would be provided on the site which equates to one cycle parking space per 2.3 dwellings or 43% cycle parking provision. This level of provision is supported and would provide a good level of cycle parking to serve the development.

The applicant has submitted a transport assessment which examines the potential trip generation for the development using the industry standard national trip database TRICS. In relation to the previous TfGM queried the potential trip generation set out in the transport assessment as they were concerned that a significant proportion of residents living in the new development would own cars and would park their vehicles elsewhere if they are not allocated a car parking space on site.

The queries raised by TfGM were noted, however, there is no available on-street parking in the immediate area. Some is available in areas to the north-east, beyond Trafford Road, in the residential areas near Phoebe Street; however, any long-term parking in these areas would not be very secure and therefore is unlikely to be attractive to future residents. Car parking charges in the existing car parks in Salford Quays are relatively expensive, especially in relation to long stay parking and contract parking that could be utilised by residents does not appear to be available in the immediate vicinity of the site. On this basis, it is considered that the development is unlikely to prove attractive to any potential future residents who have car parking requirements and are not able to secure a parking space on site.

If a proportion of residents did choose to park off-site, then as the locations of the available parking opportunities are relatively remote from the development, then the associated traffic would be distributed over the wider highway network and therefore the impact would subsequently be diluted. When this traffic is distributed across the highway network, in accordance with available off-site parking locations, then the respective increase in traffic on the local road network is likely to be minimal.

The City Council’s Highways Consultants have reviewed the transport assessment and raise no objection to the development, commenting that the site is well served by existing public transport facilities and the development would provide a good level of on-site cycle parking provision and would be subject to a travel plan. In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed development would not have an unacceptable impact on highway safety or the function of the highway network in accordance with UDP Policy A8. In addition, the proposed level of car and cycle parking is considered to be acceptable in accordance with UDP Policy A10

In respect of Metrolink capacity, the applicant has submitted an assessment of the impact of the development which concludes that the development is unlikely to have a significant impact on the capacity of the Metrolink. TfGM have reviewed this assessment and consider that suitable capacity exists on Metrolink services to serve the development.

With regard to servicing, vehicle access to the site would be provided via Furness Quay, including access for refuse collection vehicles. Refuse stores are identified within each of the buildings at ground floor level. It is considered that a condition should be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to secure the submission of details of refuse collection arrangements for the development to ensure that these would satisfactorily serve the development.

Page 126 Flood Risk and Surface Water Management

The application site is located within Flood Risk Zone 2 and has a medium probability of flooding from the Manchester Ship Canal. The site is also located within a Critical Drainage Area and lies within a “low spot” within Salford Quays, with the land adjacent to the water being higher than the site. A Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been submitted.

UDP Policy EN19 states that development will not be permitted where it would be subject to an unacceptable risk of flooding, materially increase the risk of flooding elsewhere or result in an unacceptable maintenance liability for the City Council or any other agency in terms of dealing with flooding issues. In addition, UDP Policy EN18 seeks to ensure that development would not have an unacceptable impact on surface or ground water. Salford’s Flood Risk and Development planning guidance expands further on these policies.

Paragraph 103 of the NPPF advises that development must be appropriately flood resilient and resistant, including safe access and escape routes where required, and any residual risk should be safely managed, including by emergency planning. Priority should also be given to the use of sustainable drainage systems.

As part of the application for prior approval for the conversion of Custom House and Furness House to residential use it was established that the land levels to the south of the Custom House and Furness House are higher than the predicted flood depths and this creates a bund which would protect the buildings in a 1 in 100 year flood event, with climate change factored in. In the case of a 1:500 year flood event, the flood risk assessment identifies that the buildings would be susceptible to flooding at ground floor level. In order to ensure that this level of flood risk does not impact on the safety of future residents, the scheme has been designed with communal areas at ground floor level in Block 2 and duplex dwellings at ground/first floor levels in Custom House, Furness House and Block 3 providing a refuge at first floor level. The City Council’s flood risk and drainage engineer has reviewed the application and raised no objection to the proposed development in respect of flood risk and drainage, subject to conditions. It is therefore considered that the proposed development would comply with UDP Policies ENV18 and EMV19 and the relevant parts of the NPPF.

Ecology

The applicant has submitted an ecological appraisal, bat survey and tree survey for the site. The site is currently occupied by three buildings in addition to hardstanding occupied as car parking and ancillary amenity landscaping. The bat survey identified a bat roost in the two-storey annex to Custom House and similar features with potential for roosting bats in Furness House, which is considered to have moderate potential for bats. The ecology report also identified that the site has potential for nesting birds.

With regard to the bat roost, it is noted that all species of bat and their roosts are protected under UK and European legislation and are a material consideration when determining planning applications. Since a bat roost has been found on the site, under the terms of the Habitats Directive and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended), which enacts the Directive into the UK, a licence may be required from Natural England to derogate the terms of this legislation before any work can commence that may disturb bats. Before a licence can be granted the following tests must be satisfied:

i. That the development is ‘in the interest of public health and public safety, or for other imperative reasons of overriding a public interest, including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequence of primary importance for the environment’; ii. That there is ‘no satisfactory alternative’; iii. That the derogation is ‘not detrimental to the maintenance of the populations of the species concerned at a favorable conservation status in their natural range’.

With regard to the derogation tests, it is considered that the redevelopment of a vacant brownfield site to provide new housing is of overriding public interest as it would have clear social and economic benefits for the City. The demolition of the building, where the bat roost has been identified, is considered acceptable by the City Council due to the benefits of bringing the site back into use. The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) has

Page 127 reviewed the application and with regard to the third test and has commented that ‘despite its rarity, the roost was only for low numbers of bats on an occasional basis i.e. therefore assessed as not being of significant importance in terms of the conservation status of this species’. Therefore it is considered that the third test can be satisfied and the local natural conservation status of bats would not be affected by the development.

The development would result in the removal of 29 trees and groups on the site. Of the trees to be removed, eight are Category B trees (Category B being trees of moderate quality and value). The loss of the Category B trees is not desirable; however, the trees proposed for removal are located centrally within the site and have low amenity value. The City Council’s Arboricultural Consultant has reviewed the proposals and raised no objection, commenting that the loss of the trees can be mitigated by incorporating new planning into the proposed development.

Pollution

The principle of the redevelopment of the site for residential purposes is considered acceptable in respect of any potential impacts relating to land contamination, air quality and noise. It is recommended that, if planning permission is granted, conditions be included in respect of land contamination, to require the submission of a further phase of site investigation, details of remedial works required and a verification report to validate that all remedial works have been undertaken. In respect of air quality and noise, conditions are recommended to ensure that sufficient standards are met within the development. It is considered that, subject to conditions, the development would not have a detrimental impact on air pollution by reason of noise and vibration or to pollution of the soil or water in accordance with UDP Policy EN17

Sustainability

The City Council’s Sustainable Design and Construction SPD seeks to ensure that sustainable design and construction measures are integrated into new developments. The application includes the provision of solar photovoltaic (PV) panels on the roof of all four buildings. It is intended that the energy generated would be fed into the landlord supply to power communal facilities such as lifts, lighting and other building services. Surplus energy generated would be fed back into the grid. It is considered that the development would meet the City Council's aspirations in terms of sustainability and the requirements of the SPD and is therefore considered to be acceptable in this regard.

Planning Obligations

The application proposes the redevelopment of the site to provide 593 residential units. Given the scale of the development an assessment of its impact on nearby transport infrastructure, public realm, open space and education provision is required in accordance with UDP Policy DEV5 and the Planning Obligations SPD (2015). If considered necessary, planning obligations will be sought to mitigate the impact of the development.

It is noted that, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 204) planning obligations should only be sought where they are necessary to make a development acceptable in planning terms, directly related to the development; and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

The development is likely to result in the increased use of the public realm within the vicinity of the site, in particular pedestrian routes and crossings, as a result of the increase in residents. Planning obligations have therefore been sought to mitigate against these impacts. With regard to education and affordable housing contributions, the level of planning obligations required in this case is applied to the duplex townhouse units only. In accordance with the Planning Obligations SPD, education and affordable housing contributions are not applied to the apartments within the scheme.

The applicant, whilst in agreement to provide a financial contribution, has advised that for reasons of scheme viability the development cannot support the level of contribution considered by the City Council as appropriate to mitigate its impacts, in accordance with the Planning Obligations SPD. The applicant has submitted a viability appraisal in support of their position.

A review of the applicant’s viability appraisal undertaken by the City Council’s consultant surveyors concluded that the applicant’s assertions that the scheme cannot support the level of contribution sought is sound. On this

Page 128 basis the applicant and the City Council have agreed a contribution of £1,100.000. This contribution would be secured via Section 106 agreement and would be directed towards the following:

i. The resurfacing of, and works to improve transport and pedestrian connectivity on and to the Quays Loop Road from Sovereign Point to Trafford Rd, and/or ii. Affordable housing (financial contribution for provision off-site).

It is also recommended that a clawback mechanism be included in the Section 106 agreement. This would secure a further contribution from the applicant, up to the maximum contribution identified, should the viability of the development increase in the future. It is recommended that any clawback monies be directed towards either of the two projects identified above.

In addition, it is recommended that a clause be included in the Section 106 agreement to secure the proposed new pedestrian access routes across the site connecting to Trafford Road and The Quays and to safeguard the potential for a future pedestrian connection to the north, if land to the north of the site is brought forward for development.

Recommendation

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

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

 a financial contribution of £1,100.000 to deliver: i. The resurfacing of, and works to improve transport and pedestrian connectivity on and to the Quays Loop Road from Sovereign Point to Trafford Rd, and/or ii. Affordable housing (financial contribution for provision off-site).

 a clawback mechanism to secure an increase in the level of contribution up to the maximum level required by the Planning Obligations SPD should the viability of the development increase in the future as the scheme is delivered. Clawback monies to be directed towards either of the two projects identified above.

 to secure new pedestrian access routes across the site connecting to Trafford Road and The Quays and to safeguard the potential for a future pedestrian connection to the north if land to the north of the site is brought forward for development.

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

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

Conditions

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

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

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

(000)001 Rev A Site Location Plan S-002 Site Plan as Existing S-200 Rev J As Proposed Site Plan 3397 05 Rev F Landscape Masterplan 3397 06 Hardworks Plan 3397 07 Planting Plan

Page 129 CH-200 Rev D Proposed Ground and First Floor CH-201 Rev D Area Plans Lv02-06 CH-202 Rev D Area Plans Lv07-09 CH-203 Rev A Roof Plan Lv10 CH-300 Rev D Proposed South Elevations CH-301 Rev D Proposed East and West Elevations CH-302 Rev E Proposed North Elevation CH-400 Rev C GA Sections FH-200 Rev D Ground Floor Town Houses FH-201 Rev D Area Plans Lv1-10 FH-202 Rev D Area Plans Lv11-15 FH-203 Rev A Roof Plan Lv16 FH-300 Rev D Proposed East Elevations FH-301 Rev D Proposed West Elevation FH-302 Rev D Proposed North and South Elevations FH-400 Rev B GA Sections B2-201 Rev B Proposed Ground Floor Plan B2-202 Rev C Proposed 1st & 2nd Floor Plan B2-203 Rev C Proposed Typical Level 3-22 Floor Plans B2-204 Rev B Proposed Level 23 & 24 Floor Plans B2-205 Rev B Proposed Level 25 & 26 Floor Plans B2-206 Rev B Proposed Roof Plan B2-301 Rev E Proposed South Elevation B3-302 Rev C Proposed West Elevation B2-303 Rev C Proposed North Elevation B2-304 Rev C Proposed East Elevation B2-400 Section A B3-200 Rev F Floor Layout Area Plan Lv0 B3-201 Rev F Floor Layout Area Plan Lv1 B3-202 Rev C Typical Floor Layout Area Plan Lv2-7 B3-208 Rev C Typical Floor Layout Area Plan Lv8-9 B3-210 Rev C Floor Layout Area Plan Lv10 B3-211 Rev C Floor Layout Area Plan Lv11 B3-212 Rev C Floor Layout Area Plan Lv12 B3-213 Roof Layout B3-301 Rev C South Elevation B3-302 Rev C East Elevation B3-303 Rev C North Elevations B3-304 Rev B North Elevation B B3-305 Rev C West Elevation B3-306 Rev C Block 3 West Central Elevation B3-307 Rev C Block 3 East Central Elevation B3-400 Proposed Section A B3-401 Proposed Section B S-410 Rev A Proposed Site Sections Sub – 200 Proposed Substation 3397 01 Tree Constraints Plan 3397 04 Tree Protection Plan by DEP Landscape Architecture, dated Sept 16 Flood Risk Assessment Report ref: CLE30115/005/02) by RPS dated December 2016 Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment ref: LE13454 001 by Wardell Armstrong darted August 2016 Landscape Strategy Document Rev H, by DEP Landscape Architecture, dated 09.03.2017

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

3. Prior to the commencement of construction in respect of any of the buildings on the site, including any works of excavation or demolition, a Construction Method Statement shall be 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:

Page 130 (i) the times of noisy 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); (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) wheel washing facilities; (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 prevent disturbance to any adjacent living accommodation from noise and vibration, including from any piling activity; (ix) measures to prevent the pollution of watercourses; (x) measures to prevent disturbance from light pollution to nearby wildlife, and (xi) a community engagement strategy which explains how local neighbours will be kept updated on the construction process, key milestones, and how they can report instances of unneighbourly behaviour from construction operatives. The statement shall also detail the steps that will be taken when unneighbourly behaviour has been reported. (xii) Construction and demolition methods to be used, including methods of working adjacent to the Metrolink Hazard Zone, including use of cranes

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of neighbours and local wildlife in accordance with policies EN8, EN9, DES7 and EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the recommendations set out in the Flood Risk Assessment Report ref: CLE30115/005/02) by RPS dated December 2016. Specifically, the development shall be of flood resilient construction up to at least the 1 in 1000 year modelled flood level (25.82m AOD); any apartments with thresholds below this level shall be constructed as duplex with internal staircases to provide a safe refuge above this level; refuge areas shall be provided above the 1:500 year flood level (23.99m AOD) for all properties on the ground floor; and, a flood evacuation plan shall be produced, including a timetable for review and residents shall be made aware of the plan.

Reason: To ensure the development is constructed to reduce the risk of flooding and to safeguard the amenity of residents if a flood event occurs in accordance with policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

5. Prior to the commencement of drainage works on site a strategy of surface water drainage for the site using sustainable drainage methods shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Surface water discharge rate is restricted to 50% of the existing discharge rate as per Salford City Council's Strategic Flood Risk Assessment. The strategy should demonstrate that the disposal of surface water from the site will not exacerbate existing flooding. No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground on land affected by contamination will be permitted. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved strategy and retained thereafter.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory method of surface water disposal and reduce the risk of flooding in accordance with policies EN18 and EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

6. Prior to the commencement of construction, a Site Investigation Report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of land contamination on site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors focusing primarily on risks to human health and the wider environment.

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

7. Details of any proposed Site Remedial Works as recommended by the Site Investigation Report shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such Remedial Works shall be

Page 131 incorporated into the development during the course of construction and completed prior to occupation of the development.

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

8. Prior to first occupation of the development a Verification Report shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Verification Report shall validate that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

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

9. The following noise standards shall be attained with respect to residential accommodation on the site as stipulated in BS8233:2014 - Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings:

i. internal noise levels of less than 30 dB LAeq,8hour within bedrooms between 23.00 hours and 07.00 hours ii. internal noise levels of less than 35 dB LAeq,16 hour within living rooms between 07.00 hours and 23:00 hours iii. internal noise levels of less than 40 dB LAeq,16hour within other living areas (e.g. dining rooms) between 07.00 and 23.00 hours iv. typical individual noise events from passing road traffic and trams, shall not be in excess of 45 dB LAmax in bedrooms between 23.00 and 07.00 hours v. external noise levels shall comply with the recommendations set out in the Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment ref: LE13454 001 by Wardell Armstrong darted August 2016

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

10. Prior to the commencement of construction of each of the buildings on site, including the extensions to Custom House and Furness House (excluding demolitions and works below ground), a ventilation strategy for each building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The ventilation measures shall ensure the standards detailed in Condition 9 are not compromised and shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the relevant building and thereafter be retained.

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

11. Prior to the commencement of construction all the retained trees within (or overhanging) the site (as shown on Tree Protection Plan Drawing, No: 3397-04) shall be surrounded by substantial fences. Such fences shall be erected in accordance with a specification to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the development and shall remain on site until all development is completed and no work, including any form of drainage or storage of materials, earth or topsoil shall take place within the perimeter of such fencing.

Reason: To safeguard existing trees on and/or within the vicinity of the site in accordance with policy EN12 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

12. Prior to the commencement of construction an Arboricultural Method Statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved Arboricultural Method Statement.

13. Any trees that are agreed to be felled shall be replaced in accordance with a tree replacement scheme which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. The scheme shall include details of: tree species; tree sizes (including the

Page 132 minimum height and circumference of stem at 1m from the ground level); plan indicating the location of the replacement trees, a timetable for tree planting and details of aftercare.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

14. Prior to the commencement of construction of the facades of each of the buildings on site, including the extensions to and recladding of Custom House and Furness House, and notwithstanding the details shown on the drawings hereby approved, detailed drawings, samples and a schedule of materials of the following items shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed using the approved materials.

a) Elevations b) Windows c) Entrances and doors d) Roof and Parapets e) Balconies and Balastrades f) Boundary Treatments

Reason: To safeguard the amenity, appearance and character of the area in accordance with policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

15. With the exception of the details required in accordance with Condition 16 below, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the Landscape Strategy by DEP Landscape Architecture, Rev H dated 09.03.2017 and approved drawing refs: 06 Hardworks Plan, dated March 2017 and 07 Planting Plan dated February 2017 and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

16. Notwithstanding any details shown on the drawings hereby approved, full details of the following elements of the landscape strategy for the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the implementation of landscape works on the site.

i. tree pits (the sizes of the tree pits currently indicated on the drawings are too small and have insufficient rooting volume for the trees to achieve their growth potential. As such they will not fulfil the desired visual impact on the development and the associated benefits that this will bring) ii. boundary treatments for the site iii. a scheme to provide pedestrian access into the site from Trafford Road and The Quays road iv. a management/maintenance plan for the landscaping on the site v. a timetable for implementation of the landscaping works on site

The approved scheme, including those elements of the scheme required by Condition 15 above, shall be fully implemented and maintained in accordance with the agreed timetable for implementation and any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced with the same species within twelve months.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

17. Prior to first occupation of the development, and subject to their being no separate planning permission granted for the redevelopment of the eastern part of the site, a hard and soft landscape scheme for the eastern part of the site adjacent to Trafford Road, including boundary treatments, external lighting and elements to mitigate against the loss of trees, shrubs and bird nesting habitat, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include full details of the new pedestrian access into the site from Trafford Road and full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, including a timetable for implementation and a maintenance plan. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented and maintained in accordance with the agreed timetable for implementation and any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced with the same species within twelve months.

Page 133 Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

18. Prior to first occupation of the development a car parking management plan and site wide servicing strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The car parking management plan shall include measures to ensure that residents only park in the designated car parking spaces on the site. Prior to first occupation of the development the agreed car parking management plan and site wide servicing strategy shall be implemented on site and adhered to thereafter.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area and ensure that the car parking and servicing for the development is properly managed in accordance with policy DES9 and A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

19. Prior to first occupation of any of the buildings on the site an updated Travel Plan for the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed Travel Plan shall be implemented and reviewed in accordance with the timetable set out within the Travel Plan.

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

20. Prior to commencement of construction of each of the buildings on site, including the extensions to Custom House and Furness House (excluding demolitions and works below ground) full details of secure and covered cycle parking facilities on site for the residential units within the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The cycle parking shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to first occupation of the residential units and retained thereafter.

Reason: To ensure sufficient cycle parking is provided for the development in accordance with policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

21. Prior to commencement of construction of each of the buildings on site, including the extensions to Custom House and Furness House (excluding demolitions and works below ground) full details of the refuse and recycling facilities on the site to serve the building, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The refuse and recycling facilities shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to first occupation of the residential units and retained thereafter.

Reason: To ensure sufficient refuse and recycling facilities are provided for the development in accordance with policy DES2 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

22. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 and Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (and any subsequent amending order), there shall be no development on the site as defined in Part 2 of Schedule 2 of the above Order without the prior grant of planning permission by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To prevent development which could harm local character and/or neighbouring amenity in accordance with policies DES1, and DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

Notes to Applicant

1. The applicant is advised that the demolition of the two storey annex to Custom House is likely to cause harm to natters bats as identified in the Bat Survey and Mitigation Report, Furness Quay, July 2016 by Verity Webster and shall not in any circumstances commence unless a license has been issued by Natural England pursuant to Regulation 53, of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 authorising the specified activity/development go ahead: or the applicant has received a statement in writing form the relevant licensing body to the effect that it does not consider that the specified development will require a license

2. No works to trees or shrubs shall occur between the 1st March and 31st August in any year unless a detailed bird nest survey by a suitably experienced ecologist has been carried out immediately prior to clearance.

Page 134 3. If, during any works on site, contamination is suspected or found, or contamination is caused, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified immediately. Where required, a suitable risk assessment shall be carried out and/or any remedial action shall be carried out in accordance to an agreed process and within agreed timescales in agreement with the Local Planning Authority.

4. The applicant is advised that residents of the development should be encouraged to sign up to receive flood warnings.

5. The following advice is provided by the Environment Agency:

Land Contamination

Where deep foundations are proposed we recommend the developer follows the guidance set out within our document ‘Piling and Penetrative Ground Improvement Methods on Land Affected by Contamination’ which is available on our website at the following address: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140328084622/http://cdn.environment- agency.gov.uk/scho0501bitt-e-e.pdf

We recommend that the developer undertakes any further works in line with the guidance provided within ‘CLR11 Model Procedures’, ‘Guiding Principles for Land Contamination’ and ‘Groundwater Protection: Principles and Practice’ which are available on our website at the following addresses: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/land-contamination-technical-guidance

Waste to be reused on site

Excavated materials that are recovered via a treatment operation can be re-used on-site under the CL:AIRE Definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice. This voluntary Code of Practice provides a framework for determining whether or not excavated material arising from site during remediation and/or land development works are waste.

Developers should ensure that all contaminated materials are adequately characterised both chemically and physically, and that the permitting status of any proposed on site operations are clear. If in doubt, we should be contacted for advice at an early stage to avoid any delays.

We recommend that developers should refer to our: Position statement on the Definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice and; website at https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/environment-agency for further guidance.

Waste to be taken off site

Contaminated soil that is, or must be disposed of, is waste. Therefore, its handling, transport, treatment and disposal is subject to waste management legislation, which includes: • Duty of Care Regulations 1991 • Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 • Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010 • The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 Developers should ensure that all contaminated materials are adequately characterised both chemically and physically in line with British Standards BS EN 14899:2005 'Characterisation of Waste - Sampling of Waste Materials - Framework for the Preparation and Application of a Sampling Plan' and that the permitting status of any proposed treatment or disposal activity is clear.

Where infiltration techniques are to be used for surface water disposal the appropriate levels of treatment may need to be applied.

Any car park surface should be impermeable and there should be a suitable series of treatment to prevent the pollution of groundwater. Please see CIRIA SUDS Manual (C697) for guidance on drainage attenuation, storage and treatment.

Page 135 We would like to refer the applicant/enquirer to our groundwater policies in Groundwater Protection: Policy and Practice (GP3). This sets out our position for a wide range of activities and developments including: • Discharge of liquid effluents • Land contamination • Drainage

Further information on SUDS can be found in; • the CIRIA C697 document SUDS manual • HR Wallingford SR 666 Use of SuDs in high density developments • CIRIA C635 Designing for exceedance in urban drainage – good practice • the Interim Code of Practice for Sustainable Drainage Systems. The Interim Code of

Practice provides advice on design, adoption and maintenance issues and a full overview of other technical guidance on SUDS. The Interim Code of Practice is available on our website: www.ciria.org.uk

Approved Document Part H of the Building Regulations 2000 establishes a hierarchy for surface water disposal, which encourages a SUDS approach. Under Approved Document Part H the first option for surface water disposal should be the use of SUDS, which encourage infiltration such as soakaways or infiltration trenches. In all cases, it should be established that these options are feasible, can be adopted and properly maintained and would not lead to any other environmental problems. For example, using soakaways or other infiltration methods on contaminated land carries groundwater pollution risks and may not work in areas with a high water table. Where the intention is to dispose to soakaway, these should be shown to work through an appropriate assessment carried out under Building Research Establishment (BRE) Digest 365.

Page 136 Agenda Item 5h

http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

APPLICATION No: 16/69281/HYB APPLICANT: Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) LOCATION: Site of the former Worsley New Hall, Leigh Road, Salford PROPOSAL: A part detailed and part outline planning application to establish a new RHS Garden proposing the following:, (a) Full planning permission for the use of land and buildings in and around the existing walled garden as a garden centre and ancillary activities, including retail sales of plants and goods, plant displays, horticultural sales and advice, show gardens offering sale of garden and landscape concepts, holding of horticultural events, and facilities for visitors, groups and children, including learning and teaching gardens; renovation works to former potting sheds; conversion of former stable blocks to cafe and office use; creation of demonstration and teaching allotments; development of a car park, coach parking, cycle parking and associated infrastructure; horticultural service yard; compost site and pond and associated access track; development of Welcome Building to include RHS Garden ticket sales and entry, gift shop, indoor and outdoor plant sales, greenhouse, cafe, kitchen, classroom and associated external areas; visitor gardens; formation of new lake; site perimeter boundary treatment; works to the existing Leigh Road western access, including the widening of Leigh Road, formation of a signal controlled junction and new pedestrian footway; the widening and re-alignment of the site access road and associated works; electricity sub-station and gas kiosk; SUDS; hard and soft landscaping; and site infrastructure., (b) Outline planning permission for the creation of an RHS garden including a range of gardens, landscapes, woodland and meadow walks; formation of new watercourses and drainage infrastructure; internal access roads; learning centre; events building; lakeside cafe; renovation of terraces;

Page 137 glass house; use of existing eastern Leigh Road access for servicing; renovation of former civil defence bunker and its use as an exhibition space; and development of school of horticulture. WARD: Worsley

Introduction

The applicant, the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS), is the UK’s leading gardening charity. All of its activities are funded through membership subscriptions as well as donations, sponsorship and income from their gardens and associated retail and plant sales. The RHS has more than 465,000 members across the UK and further afield. The main activities of the RHS comprise:

Gardens The RHS has four Gardens at Wisley, in Surrey, its flagship garden, Rosemoor in Devon, Hyde Hall, Essex and Harlow Carr in North Yorkshire, which combined receive 1.9 million visitors each year. The RHS is also affiliated to 200 Partner Gardens across the UK and overseas. Through its Gardens, the RHS aims to provide access to diverse plant collections, examples of innovative and attractive planting design and good horticultural practices. All the Gardens hold regular talks, demonstrations and walks.

Shows The RHS organises world class flower shows including Chelsea, Hampton Court Palace and Tatton Park, as well as seasonal shows at the RHS Gardens and the Society’s halls in London. Partnership shows include the

Page 138 RHS Spring Show in Cardiff (in conjunction with Cardiff Council), and the RHS helps to organise the Malvern Spring and Autumn Gardening Shows (organised jointly with the Three Counties Agricultural Society). From 2017 the RHS will deliver a new show at Chatsworth in Derbyshire; 500,000 people attend RHS Shows each year.

Education The RHS aims to share practical knowledge and inspire people of all ages and abilities with an interest in plants and gardens. The RHS provides horticultural skills and qualifications through courses, traineeships and apprenticeships. For children, the RHS runs the Campaign for School Gardening to encourage as many children as possible to get growing. To date approximately 30,000 primary and secondary schools have joined the campaign.

Communities The RHS’s outreach work supports communities to transform lives through the power of plants and gardening. It is the national organising body for the annual ‘Britain in Bloom’ campaign, which promotes horticulture in the community for the benefit of local people and the environment. The RHS is also linked to community groups through its ‘Greening Great Britain’ national campaign and the ‘It’s Your Neighbourhood Scheme’, which supports community groups in cleaning up and greening up their immediate local environment.

Science and Advice The RHS’s Science Team are world leaders in horticultural science, and are experts in plant naming and descriptions, plant pests and diseases and gardening in a changing world. They also conduct research into the benefits of gardening for health, wellbeing, ecology and the environment, and provide a gardening advice service, which in 2015, benefitted almost 16 million people worldwide.

RHS Retailing, Plant & Garden Centres (RHS Enterprises) The RHS offers shopping opportunities in all four Gardens and at all of its shows. Proceeds from these activities, plus income from various product licenses and events at the Royal Horticultural Halls and Conference Centre, are reinvested so that the RHS can do more to promote gardening and help gardeners.

In 2015, the RHS launched its ‘Vision’ which aims:

“To enrich everyone’s life through plants, and make the UK a greener and more beautiful place.”

This Vision is supported by ten strategic objectives:

1. Be known, loved and trusted as the charity for all gardeners. 2. Safeguard and advance the science, art and practice of horticulture for the benefit of future generations and the environment. 3. Transform communities through gardening. 4. Create world-leading horticulture that inspires people to garden. 5. Nurture and grow membership throughout the UK. 6. Provide a voice for all gardeners, sharing and building expert knowledge. 7. Delight customers with exceptional service and products. 8. Be a great place to work where everyone makes a difference. 9. Have efficient business practices that deliver maximum income for charitable purpose. 10. Make horticulture a career to be proud of.

In 2015 the RHS also announced a ten year, £160 million investment programme, which included a pledge to find and develop a site for a fifth RHS Garden. Subsequently, the RHS announced its intention to create its fifth Garden at the site of the former Worsley New Hall in Salford, to be known as ‘RHS Garden Bridgewater’. The proposed development is a collaboration between the RHS, Salford City Council and Peel Land and Property.

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application site comprises 63.6 hectares (157 acres) and comprises the grounds of the former Worsley New Hall, located on the south side of Leigh Road (A572). Immediately to the north of the site, on the northern side of Leigh Road, is a row of large detached residential properties sat within generous plots and set back from Leigh Road. Beyond these properties, to the north are Worsley Park Marriott Hotel and Country Club, Worsley Park Golf Course and the Grade II Listed Worsley Old Hall.

Page 139 Immediately to the south of the site is the Bridgewater Canal and towpaths. The canal is set within a raised platform edged with belts of trees running along both sides. To the east of the site, is the northbound slip road and roundabout of Junction 13 of the M60 motorway. Further east, beyond the M60 is Worsley Village and surrounding residential area. Immediately to the west is an area of open fields, beyond which is the residential area of Boothstown.

The site is located within the Greater Manchester Green Belt and part of the site is designated as a Site of Biological Importance. The Site is also located within a designated Mineral Safeguard Area under Policy 8 of the Greater Manchester Joint Minerals Development Plan Document.

The site slopes from north to south with the majority of the fall (approximately 12 metres) occurring within the northern third of the site. The slope tends to flatten through the middle third of the site before levelling off in the southern third. The site is accessed, by both vehicles and pedestrians, from a single access point off Leigh Road in the north-west corner of the site.

There are four Grade II Listed buildings/structures on the site - The Gardener’s Cottage, Worsley Hall Ice House, The Bothy and the entrance gates to the former Worsley New Hall. The site is also included in the City Council’s Local List of Heritage Assets due to its architectural, historical and local interest, its aesthetic and social/communal value and the collective value of the landscape (group value). There are archaeological assets on the site, specifically the foundations of Worsley New Hall.

The site can be divided into four character areas –

Site of the Former Hall and Terraced Gardens Located towards the north eastern corner of the site are the remnants of the former Worsley New Hall’s foundations and front wall, as well as a terraced staircase and fountain from the terraced garden. This part of the site has remained unoccupied for a long period of time and has become overgrown. The boating lake to the south of the Hall and gardens remains partially intact, however, the eastern half of the lake is now silted over and there remains a small stone grotto folly on what was historically an island in the centre of the lake.

To the west of the former Hall is a concrete civil defence bunker, beyond which to the west is the Grade II Listed 18th Century Ice House. All that is visible of the Ice House externally is a blocked up door in a section of stonework which reflects the shape of the vault inside.

To the north of the former Hall are the Grade II Listed entrance gates, which are visible from Leigh Road. This is not the original location of the gates; the entrance was moved when the road network was developed to the east. To the west of the entrance gates, are the piers of the former bridge that connected Worsley New Hall and Worsley Old Hall to the north.

The Garden Centre Site and Middle Wood Scout Camp The existing site access from Leigh Road is located in the north western corner of the site and connects into an access road running along the western boundary of the site. Worsley Garden Centre, including the walled garden, the Gardeners Cottage and the Bothy are located at the southern end of the access road. This collection of buildings and the land surrounding them (hereafter referred to as ‘The Garden Centre Site’) are enclosed by the external walls of the original kitchen garden to the south, west and east, with significant tree coverage along the southern boundary and to the north east and south west corners.

To the north, the Garden Centre Site is bound by the existing access road to the Scout Camp. Middle Wood Scout Camp is moving to alternative premises at Hollin Wood prior to the proposed development taking place. Planning permission for the new scout camp was granted by the City Council in July 2016.

Middle Wood In the centre of the site is Middle Wood, an area of dense woodland that separates the site of the former Hall and terraced gardens from the Gardener’s Cottage and walled garden. Trees and vegetation have overgrown the former Hall and terraced gardens and Middle Wood is now largely indistinguishable from the site of the former hall and terraced gardens.

The Meadow and Agricultural Field

Page 140 The land along the north western edge of the site, adjacent to the existing access point off Leigh Road and to the north of Middle Wood Scout Camp, comprises an open field that has previously been used for agricultural purposes. The strip of land to the south of the site that sits between the Bridgewater Canal, Middle Wood and the Garden Centre Site and the area of woodland that now covers the site of the former Hall and terraced garden, comprises an open meadow with a small but prominent copse of trees towards the west of the site.

Site History

It is understood that the site remained largely undeveloped up until the end of the 18th Century and comprised mostly of woodland. The first structure to be built was the Gardeners Cottage in 1834, housing the head gardener of the estate. Worsley New Hall was built for the 1st Earl of Ellesmere between 1840 and 1845 by the architect Edward Blore. The Gardens were developed and enhanced over a period of 50 years. The Kitchen Gardens were constructed in the early 1840s, and provided vegetables, fruit and flowers to the Hall. By the end of the 19th century the kitchen gardens gained an outer wall, making it one of the largest walled gardens in the UK.

The formal entrance gates were added in 1851 and the sloping grounds to the south of the Hall were organised into a formal terraced garden. By 1857 there were six terraces in total, separated by stone balustrades and accessed by a series of steps and gravel paths. The terraces featured three fountains. Beyond the terraced garden was landscaped parkland, which extended southwards towards a lake. An area of woodland ‘Middle Wood’ separated the formal gardens from the gardener’s cottage and the walled kitchen gardens. The Bothy was built in the late 19th century to house unmarried gardeners. A boiler in the cellar of the Bothy provided heating to the Kitchen Garden glasshouses.

During World War I, John Egerton, 4th Earl of Ellesmere lent the Hall to the British Red Cross, for use as a hospital. The hospital closed in 1919. During World War II the War Office requisitioned parts of the Hall and the grounds. The 2nd and 8th Battalions of the Lancashire Fusiliers occupied the site in 1939 and 1940, using the Hall's basements as air raid shelters, and digging training trenches in the grounds. The Hall suffered from a catastrophic fire in 1943 and was subsequently demolished in 1949.

From the 1940’s the lake and other parts of the grounds have been used by the Middle Wood Scout Camp. In the 1950’s an area of land at the western end of the former Hall building was purchased in 1956 by the War Office for the construction of a civil defence bunker, which remains on site. More recently the site has largely been privately managed woodland and agriculturally tenanted land; and in the past 40 years parts of grounds have been used as a Garden Centre.

Relevant Planning History

On 27 February 1997 planning permission was granted for land adjacent to Worsley Old Hall and 163 Hectares either side of Leigh Road to provide two golf courses, the change of use and extension of existing farm buildings to provide a hotel, conference and leisure facilities incorporating golf clubhouse and provision of car parking (ref: 95/33737/FUL. This application relates to land either side of Leigh Road at Worsley New Hall and Worsley Old Hall. The golf course on the north side of Leigh Road at Worsley Old Hall was the only part of the permission implemented.

A planning application was submitted in July 2004 relating to the Worsley New Hall site and land to the south and west of the Bridgewater Canal across the boundary of Salford and Wigan Council. The application proposed the development of a Forest Park comprising a Forest Centre including Eco Village, Timber Initiative and Woodland Wildlife Centres, timber workshop, children's woodland adventure play area and treetop walkway; equestrian centre; all weather and turf track racecourse and equestrian eventing area; cross country eventing course; grandstand and associated buildings; refurbishment of Malkins Wood farmhouse to residential accommodation for equestrian centre manager; refurbishment of Moss House Farmhouse and conversion and extension of two barns to form a hotel (80 guests); golf course and clubhouse and change of use of agricultural building for golf course maintenance; footpath and riding trails and cyclepaths; roads and connection to J13 M60, replacement canal bridge, new canal bridge and bridge over Shaw Brook; car parking; landscaping including ground remodelling creation of water bodies and woodland planting; site infrastructure including fencing, lighting, services and sub stations; and site accommodation works including culverts and watercourse diversions. (ref: 04/48900/HYBEIA)

Page 141 The plans for the former Worsley New Hall Site included the provision of a golf course and greenspace. An appeal against non-determination of this application was submitted to the Planning Inspectorate in November 2008. Following a public inquiry the planning application was refused by the Secretary of State on 13th October 2009 (Appeal Ref: APP/U4230/A/08/2089906 and APP/V4250/A/08/2089891).

Description of Proposal

The applicant has submitted a ‘hybrid’ planning application – part outline and part detailed. The detailed part comprises phase one of the development and the outline element (with all matters reserved) seeks to establish the broad parameters for future phases. A masterplan has been developed which illustrates how the site could develop over the next 10 to 15 years. The masterplan is based upon the RHS’s aspirations for the future development of the site and it is intended that the garden would be opened to the public in phases, subject to funding, over the next decade. A copy of the illustrative masterplan is provided in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Proposed Illustrative Masterplan

Detailed Planning Application

The detailed part of the planning application comprises the restoration of the walled garden and the continued use of this area and surrounding buildings as a garden centre, the construction of a new Welcome Building with

Page 142 associated landscaping and a new lake, the car parking, including coach parking, site infrastructure, including site access junction and access road, and a horticultural service yard, composting area and servicing road and initial clearance works in Middle Wood and at the lake. The RHS has advised that this first phase of works is expected to be completed by June 2019 for the opening of the garden to the public, with the new Welcome Building and lake being completed a year later.

Outline Planning Application

The outline element of the planning application comprises the later phases of the development, including the creation of an arboretum, a glasshouse, a lakeside restaurant, renovation of the terraced garden and Civil Defence bunker and creation of a Northern College of Horticulture. These future phases of the development will be subject to future Reserved Matters application(s). Outline details of these future phases is provided below.

 Works to the woodland between the site of the former New Hall and the eastern boundary of the site.  Expanded external plant sales area of the Welcome Building  Lakeside restaurant to the east of Middle Wood.  A learning centre, events building and teaching garden to be developed in the area of the scout camp.  Creation of a glasshouse on the site of the former New Hall.  Renovation of the terrace gardens.  Renovation of the Civil Defence bunker and its use as an exhibition and event space.  Creation of a Northern College of Horticulture.

Publicity

Site Notice Non HH Article 15 Date Displayed: 17 January 2017 Non HH Setting of Listed Building 20 January 2017 Reason: Article 13 Affecting Setting of Listed Building

Press Advert: Manchester Weekly News Salford Edition Date Published: 19 January 2017 Reason: Article 15 Standard Press Notice 26 January 2017 Affecting setting of Listed Building

Neighbour Notification

Notification letters were sent to 1059 neighbouring properties.

Representations

The City Council has received 59 comments in response to the publicity and neighbor notification, comprising 24 objections and 34 in support. In addition Councilors Clarkson, Compton and R Garrido have advised that they have strong reservations regarding the transport proposals for the development. The objections received from residents are summarised below with an officer response.

Key: O = Objection, R = Planning Officers Response

O Highways Impacts  There is insufficient highways/transport infrastructure in place to cope with the demands of the development. Significant improvements to the highway infrastructure are needed as part of these proposals  The development will increase traffic congestion, Leigh Road is already congested at rush hour, the area cannot cope with any further increase in traffic  The new traffic lights will slow down traffic on Leigh Road and cause a backlog onto the M60 slip road in the evening rush hour.  The increased traffic would increase pollution levels in the area and result in increased poor health  There is no pedestrian access to the site, no footpath on the south side of Leigh Road and the path on the north side is extremely narrow.  The plans should include access for cyclists  The site is poorly served by public transport and people will be forced to use their cars. Public

Page 143 transport to the site should be improved  Parking on local roads could be a problem if the car park is full or by people who do not want to pay the parking fee (if there is one). This would inconvenience residents.

R The proposed development has been assessed by the City Council’s Highways Consultants, TfGM and Highways England who have advised that the development would not have an unacceptable impact on highway safety or the function of the highway network. Further details on this assessment are provided in the ‘Consultations’ section and ‘Highways, Parking and Access’ section of this report below.

O Green Belt, Greenspace & Wildlife  The development would result in the loss of greenspace. People of Boothstown have less access to free open space per capita than any other area in Salford, more open space is needed.  Given the impacts on the residents of Boothstown and Worsley, residents should have free access to the Garden.  The development would disrupt wildlife and their habitats, these should be protected.  Object to development on Green Belt land  Object to the loss of trees and hedgerows

R The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) has reviewed the application and consider that it would result in an increase in biodiversity interest on the site. Further details on this assessment are provided in the ‘Ecology and Trees’ section of this report below.

O Concern that the development will result in flooding in the area

R The development would incorporate a sustainable urban drainage strategy (SuDS) that would sustainably manage surface water on the site and reduce the risk of flooding. Further details are provided in the ‘’Flood Risk and Surface Water Management’ section of this report below.

The comments in support of the application are summarised below:

 The development would bring regeneration to the area.  The development would provide a safe meeting place for our elderly population, help improve mental health for the elderly and help reduce loneliness.  Health benefits by encouraging increase in physical fitness and therefore reducing obesity, the opportunity to improve mental health providing an area of peaceful relaxation.  The development would promote the physical, psychological and social benefits of gardens and gardening  Inspiring and supporting the community and local gardeners to make their own spaces greener.  The development would provide state-of-the-art education facilities where students can learn the practical aspects of horticulture.  Benefits to the young people of Salford with opportunities for work, study and access to horticulture.  Economic benefits through provision of learning, training, apprenticeships, volunteering opportunities, employment and investments.  Attracting tourism to the area, boosting locals businesses such as hotels, restaurants, pubs and services.  The development would provide a leisure facility.  It is encouraging that the RHS sees so much potential in this site.  The very great prestige that hosting one of the RHS's five major gardens will bring to Salford.  The Garden will raise the profile of Salford across the country.  A successful garden will lead to improvements to local transport links.  Any increase in traffic volumes should be outside peak times.  Traffic is an issue but this needs a more strategic solution.  The designs are sympathetic to the local environment and will turn the site into a beautiful garden.  It will help the local environment and wildlife by increasing diversity and creating more habitats for nature.  Preserve the heritage of the area by restoring the lake and historic buildings.

Consultations

Senior Engineer Flood Risk Management - no objection subject to conditions

Page 144 Comments from the City Council’s Flood Risk Management Consultant are summarised as follows:

The drainage strategy proposed for the site is acceptable in principle. The strategy will need to be refined during the detailed design stages and supported by calculations to demonstrate the existing and proposed runoff rates, that there would be no flooding in a 30 year event and no internal flooding in a 1 in 100 year plus climate change event. A condition is recommended to require a surface water drainage strategy for the site to be submitted to the City Council for approval.

Canal And River Trust – no comment

The Canal and River Trust advise that the application falls outside the notified area for its application scale, therefore there is no requirement for the City Council to consult the Trust in their capacity as a Statutory Consultee.

Environment Agency - no objection subject to conditions

The Environment Agency advise that they have no objection in principle to the proposed development, their comments are summarised as follows:

Ecology

We are generally supportive of RHS development proposals at Worsley, with development outlining the adoption of above ground sustainable urban drainage techniques as part of scheme design, the retention and opportunities for biodiversity enhancement proposals integrated into proposals, enhancement or creation of new wetland habitats, and the adoption of biodiversity management strategy through the course of construction. It is important to ensure that the landscape within the site is managed in such a way as to protect the ecological value of the site including the lake, adjoining local wildlife site, and connecting Shaw Brook waterbody, therefore a condition is recommended to require the submission of a Landscape Management Plan for approval by the City Council.

In addition, a condition is recommended to require the submission of a method statement to put appropriate control measures in place regarding the invasive species Japanese knotweed, Himalayan balsam, Rhododendron, Montbretia present on the site.

Contaminated Land

The previous use of the site may have led to the presence of contaminated made ground which presents a medium risk of contamination that could be mobilised during construction to pollute controlled waters. Controlled waters are particularly sensitive in this location because the site is located adjacent to the Bridgewater Canal and upon Secondary A aquifer and Principal aquifer (in the south west corner of the site).

The reports submitted in support of this planning application provide us with confidence that it will be possible to suitably manage the risk posed to controlled waters by this development. Further detailed information will however be required before built development is undertaken, therefore a planning condition is recommended to require the submission of a remediation strategy to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site and a verification report for approval by the City Council.

Greater Manchester Ecological Unit - no objection subject to conditions

The Greater Manchester Ecological Unit (GMEU) advise that they have no objection in principle to the proposed development, their comments are summarised as follows:

The ecology surveys that have been undertaken in support of the application have been undertaken by suitably qualified consultants and are generally to appropriate and proportionate standards. I would not consider that any further surveys need to be conducted prior to determining the application.

However, given the very large scale of the development and the long time-scales that may be involved in developing the scheme some surveys may need to be repeated in future years to provide suitably up-to-date information to inform detailed planning and development stages.

Page 145 In conclusion, I would not raise any overall objections to the development proposals on ecological grounds, but certain precautions are recommended in order to protect nature conservation interests. Overall this major development proposal should lead to an increase in local (and City-wide) biodiversity interest.

Arboriculture - no objection subject to conditions

The City Council’s Arboriculture Consultant has provided the following comments.

A BS 5837 Arboriculture Report has been supplied by Christians Environmental to support a planning application for the site; the report gives a fair and accurate appraisal of the trees and groups on site.

It is proposed that several phases undertaken over many years will be employed to restore and improve the landscape of the site. A landscape scheme has been supplied which shows how the proposal has been envisaged. Whilst this covers the entire site, the drawing can be considered as indicative only. An overarching Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) has been supplied which breaks the site down into 17 distinct areas.

The AIA aims to uphold several core principles to aid in adhering to the management plans and to guide strategies. These include retaining veteran trees, large trees or trees with ecological merit; manage trees for safety through appropriate works or removal; move targets and pedestrian out of harm’s way by moving paths away from trees with significant defects which are still considered worthy of retention, all whilst considering the landscape aesthetics for each area.

Due to the nature and scale of the site, implementing the management in each plot will need to be done on an ad-hoc basis with many decisions being made on the ground and adhering to a strict removal and replanting plan will not always be practicable. Whilst the AIA for each site outlines the strategy, further details such as approximate tree numbers being removed and replaced, details of any proposed construction and the appropriate measures taken to protect trees, etc., are not yet included.

The 17 areas each have an individual AIA written to highlight the specific strategic proposals within these plots and a general construction-based Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) has been supplied which gives details of the type of temporary protective fencing that would be employed to protect retained trees during construction works. A more detailed proposal and site specific AMS would be required for each of the 17 blocks, to include details of new planting.

The loss of trees on the site would normally require mitigation planting however as there is a considerable amount of new trees to be established and general landscape improvements proposed, a formal re-stocking plan is not considered necessary. Conditions are recommended to ensure that appropriate tree protection measures are put in place on site prior to commencement of construction works, to require the planting of replacement trees within the next available planting season following removal and for a combined proposal/AMS/re-planting plan to be submitted for each to the 17 areas identified.

Highways - no objection subject to conditions

The City Council’s Highways Consultant advise that they raise no objections to the proposed development subject to conditions to require the submission of a Travel Plan, Event Management Plan, to ensure that the proposed site access works and works to the M60 Junction 13 roundabouts are implemented and to ensure that the car, coach and cycle parking is provided.

Transport For Greater Manchester (TFGM) - no objection subject to conditions

Comments received from TfGM are summarised as follows:

 Highways Impact - TfGM have undertaken additional assessment work and sensitivity testing of the RHS Bridgewater site access junction to ensure a robust approach in terms of the trip distribution assumptions for traffic accessing and leaving the site. The analysis work demonstrates that the junction will operate satisfactorily in all scenarios tested.  Event Management Plan - a package of mitigation measures will be required on event days. This can be developed through the Event Management Plan which should be required via a condition. This should include details of the management of car parking, mitigation measures such as network monitoring, review of signal timings etc.

Page 146  Site Accessibility - a review of the existing public transport provision along Leigh Road has demonstrated that the site is accessible by bus with connections to Wigan, the Trafford Centre, Piccadilly Gardens and Leigh at varying 15 minute to hourly intervals. Information about bus timings should be made available to staff and displayed on the RHS Bridgewater website for visitors to help encourage modal shift to public transport.  Shuttle Bus - the Travel Plan references provision of shuttle bus connection with Eccles Interchange and Walkden Station on event days and possibly summer weekends. This would be welcomed and it is recommended that this is developed further as part of the Travel Plan.  Active Travel - in order to maximise the benefits of the site’s location to encourage active travel, it should be ensured that the pedestrian and cycling environment, within and around the site, is designed to be as safe, attractive and convenient as possible, including natural surveillance where possible.  Cycle parking - it is important to ensure that adequate infrastructure and facilities are provided to encourage staff and guests to travel by sustainable modes. The Framework Travel Plan references the provision of covered cycle parking provided on site close to the main entrance. Cycle parking should be provided in accordance with SCC standards. It is noted that shower and changing facilities will also be provided for staff and volunteers within the horticulture service yard. The development should be future proofed to allow for additional secure cycle parking to be provided at a later date should it be required.  Travel Plan - it is important to influence travel patterns at the beginning of occupation and therefore a robust Travel Plan should be employed to support the development. The Travel Plan should feature a range of measures promoting a choice of transport mode, and a clear monitoring regime with agreed targets. If the Travel Plan is to be successful, it will be dependent on establishing a culture of sustainable travel behaviour at the outset, rather than on changing already established travel practices.  It is noted that electric charging bays will be provided within the car park which is welcomed.

Highways England - no objection subject to conditions

The comments made by the Highways Agency are summarised as follows:

 The proposed development is leisure based and not employment or residential; and as such will take time to develop a visitor base and generate significant levels of trips. This is reflected in the one year, five year and ten year visitor estimates provided by the developer (50,000, 340,000, and 700,000 respectively).  The proposed development predominantly operates outside of the AM peak period, avoiding this period of significant congestion and operational issues.  In the PM peak period, the nature of traffic flows across the M60 West results in significant congestion in the M60 clockwise direction. In considering the development proposals, the tidality of traffic from the development will be predominately departing traffic from the site during this peak period

Government policy states that development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe. Highways England took a view that the impact of this development on the strategic road network could not be classed as severe.

Should Salford Council grant consent to this application, Highways England would recommend that a Travel Plan and Event Management Plan be conditioned.

Historic England - no comment

Historic England have advised that they do not wish to offer any comments and suggest the City Council seek the views of our specialist conservation and archaeological advisers, as relevant.

Design for Security - no objection subject to conditions

Design for Security advise that the development should be designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations contained within Section 3.3 of the submitted Crime Impact Statement and a planning condition should be added to reflect the physical security specification listed within section 4 of the appendices within the submitted Crime Impact Statement.

Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service - no objection subject to conditions

Page 147 The Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS) advise that they have no objection in principle to the proposed development, their comments are summarised below.

GMAAS have reviewed the Archaeological Desk Based Assessment submitted by the applicant and advise that it meets the aims for such an assessment set-out in the NPPF paragraph 128. GMAAS accepts the recommendations of the report and advises that any further investigation could be undertaken as a condition of planning consent. GMAAS also suggest that, in view of the outline character of much of the proposal, that any Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) should include sufficient flexibility to accommodate archaeological investigations where a potential below ground impact is identified from future detailed proposals.

Urban Vision Environment (Air and Noise) – no objection subject to conditions

The City Council’s Air and Noise Consultant has raised no objection to the proposed development, their comments are summarised below.

As the site has both air quality and noise implications to consider, the application is supported by assessments on both aspects.

Air Quality - the assessment was undertaken by Hoare Lea and the report is dated 19th December 2016. The author of the report consulted me prior to undertaking the study. While the report concludes that air quality impacts from both phases of the development are not significant it does suggest that the site operator adopts sustainable transport modes to/from the development, in accordance with the Greater Manchester Air Quality Action Plan. I note that the development of a Travel Plan is discussed in the submitted Transport Assessment Plan. I have considered the air quality assessment report and I am happy with its findings, its conclusions and its recommendations. I would, however, recommend a condition to require the submission of a Construction Environmental Management Plan.

Noise - the noise assessment report is by Hoare Lea, and it is dated 6th December 2016. The author consulted me prior to undertaking the study when we agreed the scope of the assessment, the methodology for determining existing background and ambient noise levels and design noise targets. I have considered the noise assessment report and I am satisfied with its content, its findings and its conclusions. Therefore if you are minded to give an approval in this case a condition is recommended to ensure that noise from all commercial type activities, including fixed plant and machinery, associated with the development, when operating simultaneously, shall not exceed the background noise level (LA90,T) by more than -5 dB at any time when measured at the boundary of the nearest noise sensitive premises.

Urban Vision Environment (Land Contamination) - no objection subject to conditions

The City Council’s Land Contamination Consultant has made the following comments:

The following report has been submitted: • Phase 1 Desk Based Ground Investigation, ROC Consulting, Ref: JB/AS/p1 3556, November 2016.

The above desk study comprises a review of historical and geological mapping, available environmental data and historic investigation reports carried out at the site. The report reveals various sources of potential contamination across the site and surrounding areas, including the existing made ground, the former boiler house, underlying peat and infilled features. In addition, the potential for shallow worked coal seams has been identified.

In order to investigate the potential pollutant linkages and geotechnical issues further, an intrusive site investigation is recommended. I have considered the submitted report and am satisfied with its conclusions. Conditions are recommended to require the submission of a Site Investigation Report, details of any proposed remedial works and a Verification Report.

Planning Policy

Development Plan Policy

Unitary Development Plan ST1 - Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods

Page 148 This policy states that development will be required to contribute towards the creation and maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods.

Unitary Development Plan ST5 - Transport Networks This policy states that transport networks will be maintained and improved through a combination of measures including the extension of the network of pedestrian and cycling routes; the expansion and improvement of the public transport system and the enhancement of support facilities; the maintenance and improvement of the highway network; the provision of new road infrastructure where this will support the city's economic regeneration; requiring development proposals, highway improvement schemes and traffic management measures to make adequate provision for the needs of the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists, and, wherever appropriate, maximise the use of public transport; and the protection and enhancement of rail and water-based infrastructure to support the movement of freight and passengers.

Unitary Development Plan ST10 - Recreation Provision This policy states that a comprehensive range of accessible recreation opportunities will be provided through 1) the protection, improvement and reorganisation of existing recreation sites; 2) the development of a regional park; 3) developing a network of Key Recreation Areas; 4) provision of new recreation facilities on sites allocated in the UDP; 5) the development of a series of Local Nature Reserves; 6) improvement of access between urban areas and the Countryside; 7) use of planning obligations to provide new and enhanced recreation facilities.

Unitary Development Plan DES9 - Landscaping

Page 149 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.

Page 150 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 EN23 - Environmental Improvement Corridors This policy states that development along any of the city’s major road, rail and water corridors will be required to preserve, or make a positive contribution to the corridor’s environment and appearance.

Unitary Development Plan CH5 - Archaeology and Ancient Monuments This policy states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would have an unacceptable impact on an ancient monument, site or feature of archaeological importance, or its setting. Planning conditions will be imposed to record and evaluate, excavate and preserve remains of local archaeological value, prior to the commencement of the development.

Unitary Development Plan CH8 - Local List of Buildings, Structures and Features of Architectural, Archaeological or Historic Interest This policy states that the impact of development on any building, structure or feature that is identified on the council’s local list of buildings, structures and features of architectural, archaeological or historic interest will be a material planning consideration.

Greater Manchester Joint Minerals Development Plan Document (2013) This Development Plan Document seeks to ensure that proposed non-mineral development within safeguarded areas do not prevent the ability of minerals on the site to be mined in the future.

Other Material Planning Considerations

National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

Local Planning Policy

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

Page 151 Supplementary Planning Document - Design ‘Shaping Salford’ 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.

Appraisal

The issues for consideration in the determination of this application are:

 Principle of Development  Landscape Masterplan, Design and Appearance  Impact on Heritage Assets  Ecology and Trees  Highways, Parking and Access  Flood Risk and Surface Water Management  Residential Amenity  Pollution  Sustainability  Mineral Safeguarding

Principle of Development

The site is located within the Greater Manchester Green Belt as identified on the City of Salford UDP Proposals Map. Saved UDP Policy EN1 and Section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) set out the planning policy against which planning applications in the Green Belt should be determined. The NPPF attaches great importance to the Green Belt and identifies its fundamental aim as being ‘to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence’ (paragraph 79).

Paragraph 87 of the NPPF advises that ‘as with previous Green Belt policy, inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances’. Paragraph 88 continues that ‘local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt’ and that ‘very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm is clearly outweighed by other considerations’.

Page 152 In accordance with Saved UDP Policy EN1 and paragraph 89 of the NPPF, the construction of new buildings in the Green Belt is inappropriate development. However, the NPPF identify exceptions to this approach whereby some types of development are considered not inappropriate in the Green Belt. These exceptions are set out below:

 buildings for agriculture and forestry;  provision of appropriate facilities for outdoor sport, outdoor recreation and for cemeteries, as long as it preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it;  the extension or alteration of a building provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building;  the replacement of a building, provided the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces;  limited infilling in villages, and limited affordable housing for local community needs under policies set out in the Local Plan; or  limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.

In addition, in accordance with paragraph 90 of the NPPF, the following forms of development are also not inappropriate in Green Belt provided they preserve the openness of the Green Belt and do not conflict with the purposes of including land in Green Belt.

 mineral extraction;  engineering operations;  local transport infrastructure which can demonstrate a requirement for a Green Belt location;  the re-use of buildings provided that the buildings are of permanent and substantial construction; and  development brought forward under a Community Right to Build Order.

The following elements of the RHS Bridgewater development could be considered to fall under the categories of development listed under paragraphs 89 and 90 of the NPPF that are deemed to be not inappropriate in the Green Belt.

 The restoration of the walled garden and the continued use of this area and surrounding buildings as a garden centre (3rd & 4th exceptions of paragraph 89 and in part 4th exception of paragraph 90).  The horticultural service yard (1st exception of paragraph 89).  Footpaths, lakes and other changes to landform (2nd exception of paragraph 90).

There are, however significant elements of the proposal that do not fall under the exceptions and would not maintain the openness of the Green Belt, including the Welcome Building, car parking and access works, the lakeside restaurant, glasshouse and parts of the perimeter fence (noting that a large extent of the fence may be permitted development under Part 2, Class A of the General Permitted Development Order).

Considering the RHS Bridgewater proposals as a whole, the development is considered to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt which, by definition, is harmful to the Green Belt (NPPF paragraph 87). Therefore, in order for the development to be considered acceptable very special circumstances must be demonstrated. In order to come to a decision as to whether very special circumstances exist, it is necessary to understand the level of harm arising such that it can be weighed against other considerations. Whilst it is noted that Salford’s Draft Local Plan proposes the allocation of the site for the RHS Bridgewater Garden, retaining its Green Belt status, at the current time limited weight can be afforded to the plan and therefore this does not negate the need to demonstrate very special circumstances.

The impacts of the proposal have been assessed against the essential characteristics of the Green Belt, their openness and permanence (NPPF paragraph 79), and the purposes of including land in the Green Belt (NPPF paragraph 80).

Impact on Openness

Page 153 The Greater Manchester Green Belt (GM GB) Assessment (2016) describes ‘openness in a Green Belt sense as lack of built development more than visual openness, although the two often go hand in hand. The key distinction is that where vegetation provides visual enclosure this does not reduce Green Belt openness, even though it might in practice mean that development would have less visual impact.’ (paragraph 3.63).

With specific reference to the part of the Green Belt within which the application site is located the GM GB Assessment describes that within the site there is a ‘strong sense of openness because urbanising features are set within a mixed land use of woodland and small lake to the east and farmland to the west’ (GM GB Assessment, Appendix 4.7, parcel SA23).

Viewed from the site’s periphery, there is a strong visual sense of openness, with existing buildings largely hidden by mature trees, even during winter months. Whilst the proposed development would retain large areas of open land, it would introduce a significant level of new development to the site, particularly so in the site’s south western corner. The different elements of the development and their impact on openness are considered in turn below. i. Restoration of the Walled Garden and continued use of this area and surrounding buildings as a garden centre

As outlined above, these works could be regarded as ‘not inappropriate’ under exceptions in paragraphs 89 and 90 of the NPPF. Nevertheless, it is considered that these works would be unlikely to have any significantly greater impact on the sense of openness than the current situation. ii. Welcome Building, car parking, access road and horticultural yard

In the south western corner of the site there would be a significant concentration of development, including a new access road along the western boundary, the Welcome Building, car parking and horticultural services yard. Together, these elements would introduce a significant level of new built development and hard standing. In terms of the visual impact, whilst views across the site from Leigh Road are largely obscured, there are open views into this part of the site immediately west of the existing access road.

There are also clear views from Green Belt land to the west and from the raised towpath along the Bridgewater Canal. These elements of the proposal are likely to be prominent from the tow-path and whilst views are in part obscured by existing trees, the coverage, particularly in the winter months, is not consistent. Impacts further to the south beyond the canal are likely to be limited given the raised canal and existing woodland on either side. There may also be some views from the M60 motorway and slip road but these are again likely to be limited.

In terms of mitigating the visual impact, the Welcome Building has been designed to lessen its impact on the landscape being clad in larch and with a green roof, largely single storey (8.4 metres at its highest point) and set within the slope of the site. The buildings within the horticultural yard, some of which reach 6.5 metres in height, have been designed to have an agricultural appearance, and as described above, these buildings are likely to be regarded as ‘not inappropriate’ under paragraph 89 of the NPPF and therefore the impact can be considered in this context.

In terms of the access road and car parking proposals, the illustrative masterplan shows landscaping, including tree planting, along the route and throughout the car park. The applicant’s Landscape and Visual Assessment also describes that this part of the site “will incorporate a large amount of native tree planting and hedgerow planting” and that this would be in keeping with the characteristics of the local landscape and once established would assist in accommodating the proposed buildings and hardstanding in the landscape and limiting their effects on openness.

Overall, it is considered that the cluster of development in the site’s south western corner would have a significant adverse impact on openness, through the introduction of new buildings and hardstanding. Whilst the horticultural services yard contributes to this impact, as described above, the use could be regarded as not being inappropriate development in the Green Belt. These features are likely to be prominent in views across the site, particularly from the canal tow-path and land to the immediate west, but also in views from Leigh Road to the west of the access road.

Whilst proposed tree and hedgerow planting could mitigate the visual impact to some extent from certain positions around the site, in addition to the use of gravel across the car parking area, any such landscaping

Page 154 would need to be very considerable if it was to obscure views of the access road, car parking and Welcome Building such that the impacts were significantly diminished all year round. iii. Restaurant, glass house and school of horticulture

A new restaurant building, glass house and school of horticulture are proposed for the north eastern corner of the site, situated within the Middle Wood Site of Biological Importance. Whilst the design of these elements has not yet been provided, in principle, further development would again have an adverse impact on openness within the site. It would seem likely that these elements could be designed so that their visual impact would be limited, with the encircling mature woodland helping to mitigate the impact further. iv. Perimeter fence

The perimeter of the site would be defined by two types of fencing, ‘estate-style’ fencing on the western and southern boundaries and Paladin-type weldmesh fencing with a dark green polyester powder coated finish on the north and eastern boundaries, with the exception of visually sensitive areas, such as in the vicinity of the listed gates, where ‘estate-style’ fencing would be used. In addition, the curtilage of West Lodge (which is in private ownership) would be defined using a timber boundary fence accompanied by hedge planting. Lockable gates would also be installed at the access road.

On the north and eastern boundaries, the perimeter fence would be set back from adjacent roads so that it blends into the surroundings and on the western boundary the perimeter fence would be accompanied by native species hedge planting, supplemented by tree planting. On the southern boundary the ‘estate style’ fencing would be erected without hedge planting in response to the parkland/meadow character of much of the southern part of the site and to provide a more transparent vista from the canal tow path.

Conclusion regarding openness

The proposal would undoubtedly have an adverse impact on the openness of the site due to the introduction of new built development. This would be particularly significant in the south western corner of the site where the proposed car parking would introduce a considerable area of hardstanding. The parkland nature of the proposal would however ensure that a sense of openness would remain over a considerable part of the site.

It is possible that existing woodland and proposed landscaping could mitigate the visual impacts to some extent and from particular viewpoints. However, the proposals for the south western corner of the site are likely to remain a prominent feature in the landscape as compared with the current open aspects.

Impacts on the purposes of including land within the Green Belt

The proposed development has been assessed against the five purposes that Green Belt serves as defined within paragraph 80 of the NPPF.

Purpose 1 - to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas

The GM GB Assessment identifies that the site currently performs strongly against this purpose. It identifies that there is a “strong sense of openness because urbanising features are set within a mixed land use of woodland and small lake to the east and farmland to the west” and that the “parcel plays a strong role in inhibiting ribbon development to the south and east of the A572 and along the road leading to the Garden Centre and Scout Hall”. (GM GB Assessment, Appendix 4.7, parcel SA23)

In terms of the unrestricted sprawl of the urban area it is important to recognise the parkland nature of the proposed development which would retain large areas of open land, and that it relates specifically to the site and its former historic gardens. The proposal therefore relates to a very specific opportunity. Nevertheless, the proposal would bring new urbanising features to the site, significantly so in the site’s south western corner where a mix of buildings and extensive parking areas would bring a significant change to the site’s existing countryside character. It is considered that the specific nature of the proposed development and its self- containment is unlikely to weaken control of unrestricted sprawl on of built up areas.

Purpose 2 - to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another

Page 155 The GM GB Assessment identifies that the site currently performs strongly against this purpose, providing a “critical gap between the settlements of Boothstown and Ellenbrook to the west and Worsley to the east” (GM GB Assessment, Appendix 4.7, parcel SA23).

The introduction of urbanising features could be regarded as diluting this separation to some degree, however it would appear that a sense of separation between these two settlements would be preserved through the retention of large areas of open land to the site’s southern and northern boundaries, as well as the mature woodland and original boundary wall along much of Leigh Road to the north. Additional native tree planting to further limit views of the built elements of the proposal could further mitigate any negative impacts in this regard, although this should be balanced against the attractive open views currently available.

Purpose 3 - to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment

The GM GB Assessment identifies that the site performs strongly against this purpose describing that “there is limited / no sense of encroachment with the parcel being generally free of urbanised built development” and that “it has an intact and rural in character and displays characteristics of the countryside” (GM GB Assessment, Appendix 4.7, parcel SA23). Despite the retention of large areas of open land the scheme would undoubtedly affect the site’s countryside character through the introduction of new buildings, parking areas, entrance road, perimeter fence and a more formalised landscape character.

Similar to the discussion on openness above, whilst the visual impacts of the encroachment could be mitigated to some extent and from certain aspects by existing and proposed landscaping, the proposals for the south west corner would be expected to have a significant impact on the existing character of the area.

Purpose 4 - to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns

The GM GB assessment describes that “the parcel plays a role in setting the historic settlement of Worsley, but to a limited degree” (GM GB Assessment, Appendix 4.7, parcel SA23). However, provided that the impacts of the development can be managed such that they are not detrimental to the village of Worsley and approaches to it, the enhancement of the historic significance of the site could be considered to expand and enhance the historical context of the area.

Purpose 5 - to assist in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land

The proposal is site specific, relating to the former Worsley New Hall site, and is not therefore considered to weaken the focus on the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The economic benefits of the scheme, adding to the tourism offer of the conurbation, could potentially have a positive role in supporting the development of other urban sites.

Conclusions on the impact on the Green Belt

The proposal is inappropriate development within the Green Belt which by its nature is harmful to the Green Belt. The parkland nature of the proposal and the retention of existing mature woodland should preserve a sense of openness across a considerable part of the site. However, it is considered that the introduction of new buildings and car parking would have a significant impact on openness, particularly so given the concentration of development proposed for the south western corner of the site. Based on current tree cover, this element of the scheme would be a prominent feature along the canal tow path, from land to the immediate west and from certain viewpoints along Leigh Road.

Whilst additional landscaping could obscure the visual impacts of development from certain aspects, the impact on openness would still be expected to be significant. Despite this impact, the parkland nature of the proposal, with extensive areas of open land, does however mean that the proposed development could be accommodated on the site with a relatively limited conflict with, and enable the site to continue to perform, a number of the purposes of including land within the Green Belt. The continued separation of Worsley and Boothstown is perhaps most significant in this regard.

The case for special circumstances

The RHS have set out a comprehensive case to demonstrate that very special circumstances exist to justify the proposed development within the Green Belt, this focuses on five key benefits of the development which either

Page 156 individually or in combination are capable of constituting very special circumstances necessary to justify the granting of inappropriate development in the Green Belt. These five benefits are summarised below. i. Improvements to the local natural and historic environment

The proposed development would return the historic site of the former Worsley New Hall to active use, creating a world class garden and horticultural centre for the pleasure of local residents. The extensive new planting on the site would encourage new habitats to emerge, which would further enhance the existing biodiversity offer on the site. The planting of new trees, hedgerow, flowers and vegetation would considerably improve the character of the surrounding area, creating a highly attractive landscaped environment. ii. Improving the tourism offer locally and regionally

RHS Garden Bridgewater would build on the existing visitor offer, continuing to broaden the appeal of Salford as a visitor destination and support longer stays through opportunities for linked trips. The Garden would enhance the clustering of existing tourism attractions in Salford and the North West and help to strengthen Salford’s position as a local, regional and UK destination.

RHS Garden Bridgewater would be the fifth RHS Garden, with the RHS having a recognised track record in securing visitors and generating economic value for their localities, which is then further invested in the RHS’s work. The forecast annual visitor numbers to RHS Garden Bridgewater are 327,000 by 2024 and 600,000 to 700,000 by 2029. iii. Benefits of the proposed development to the local and regional economy

It is expected that RHS Garden Bridgewater would generate £13.8m GVA per annum to the local economy by 2029, creating up to 326 direct and indirect jobs. The programme of works is anticipated to support 290 construction jobs, rising to 410 construction jobs across all phases. In addition, evidence from other RHS Gardens shows that approximately 40% of RHS Garden Bridgewater’s goods and services are purchased in the local area, equating to an estimated £350,000 spend per annum. iv. Enrichment of the RHS’s education agenda and community involvement

RHS Garden Bridgewater would engage at least 180 volunteers in 2024 and 20 trainees and apprentices per year by 2024. A minimum of 160 Salford residents are expected to benefit from employment, training and volunteering activities. The RHS intend to create partnerships with local schools, colleges and youth groups to provide training and horticultural inspiration to young people and create partnerships with local universities to research horticultural and environmental science, social history and the regenerative benefits of gardening. The Garden would support community gardening projects developed with and for local people and organisations, such as Britain in Bloom and It’s Your Neighbourhood. At least 30 community gardening projects would be developed with local people by 2029, extending across the region to reach tens of thousands of people. The proposals for a Community Allotment would encourage cohesion through residents growing their own food and consider their interactions with the environment and improving diets. The proposed School of Horticulture would provide RHS Garden Bridgewater with the facilities needed to deliver education and training. v. Improving health and well-being

RHS Garden Bridgewater would deliver a high quality environmental asset for Salford and engage the public in the horticultural agenda more widely to generate health and well-being benefits across a wider area. The Garden would encourage local people to "green" their own environments, and thereby increase the quality of overall green space across the City. The RHS would manage and maintain the garden and woodland to an exceptionally high standard for generations to come.

Conclusion on the case for special circumstances

The City Council considers the proposed development to be of strategic significance not only to Salford but to the North West of England. The development would be only the fifth RHS national garden in the country and would be the largest in the North of England (second largest to Wisley in the country) and is projected to be one of the key visitor destinations in the North West by 2029. On this basis, and in light of the benefits outlined by

Page 157 the applicant, it is considered that the case for very special circumstances to justify granting planning permission for inappropriate development in the Green Belt has been made.

Landscape Masterplan, Design and Appearance

Saved UDP Policy DES1 states that development will be required to respond to its physical context, respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated, and contribute towards local identity and distinctiveness. The policy advises that in assessing the extent to which any development complies with this policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including, the impact on, and relationship to existing landscape and any notable landscape or environmental feature or species; the impact on, and quality of, views and vistas; the scale of the proposed development in relationship to its surroundings and the quality and durability of proposed materials and their appropriateness to both the location and the type of development.

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.

In addition, Saved UDP Policy DES9 seeks to ensure that landscaping within proposed developments is of high quality in terms of design and materials and reflects and enhances the character of the area and the design of the development.

The NPPF attaches great importance to the design of the built environment and stresses that good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning, and should contribute positively to making places better for people (paragraph 56).

The RHS has developed a masterplan for the site which envisages how the Garden would develop over the longer term. This is based upon a series of landscape and horticultural zones as described below

1. Boundary Planting

The area of woodland that encloses the site on the north side. This framework of trees is important to the setting the RHS Bridgewater and would be maintained and managed in accordance with good silvicultural practice

2. Entrance Road

The existing entrance road would be realigned from the junction on Leigh Road to form a sweeping driveway skirting the western and southern sides of the garden centre site. The road would be aligned to retain as much of the existing beech hedge as possible, and avoid impact on existing woodland. The landscape areas to either side of the road would be planted as a verge with standard trees, incorporating native species hedge planting and a swale to manage surface water runoff.

3. The Car Park & Horticultural Services Yard

The car park would be located in the area of low-lying ground to the south of the garden centre site and would be screened by a wide swathe of perimeter planting. The car park would be set out in bays aligned north to south, each separated by a landscape strip which would incorporate swales for drainage with native planting. The car park carriageway and coach parking bays would be surfaced with bitmac, the car parking bays would will be finished in a porous loose-laid gravel over geo-grid.

The Horticultural Services Yard would provide space for glasshouses, poly tunnels and shade tunnels, cold frames, plant and workshop storage sheds. This is described as the ‘working heart’ of the garden where new planting arrives or is grown before going into the main gardens. The buildings within the Yard would be finished in timber cladding with a lower level brick plinth at the base and a simple metal roof system. The Yard would be enclosed by a perimeter fence.

4. The Welcome Building and lake

Page 158 The Welcome Building would be located to the south east of the garden centre site, offering immediate views of the garden to the north and a newly-formed lake to the east. From this location, the building would act as an orientation space, from where visitors would access the gardens.

The concept for the Welcome Building is to provide a number of visitor functions within one interconnected, flexible and open-plan building, whilst maintaining extensive views into the surrounding landscape. The building has been designed to be a modest intervention in the landscape, with a low lying, single storey horizontal form. The main roof would comprise a greenroof system supported by a series of structural ‘trees’ that would run the length of the building, formed from concrete columns and engineered timber flitch branches. These ‘trees’ would also extend outside the building envelope. The elevations of the building would comprise a continuous line of glazed curtain walling interrupted by a number of larch clad boxes that would house facilities such as a kitchen, WC’s, offices and a learning studio. A glazed slot within the roof would run the length of the building and bring natural light into the centre of the space. Solar shading would be provided to glazed areas with larch timber louvred screens.

The interior of the building would provide generously proportioned spaces that benefit from high levels of natural daylight. The building has been designed predominantly as one open space, the visitor flow between the building's various uses and functions. From the main entrance space where visitors could purchase tickets and access WC facilities, the visitor could flow along the axis of the building north through to the gardens and Garden Centre. Alternatively the visitor could navigate south through the gift shop, internal plant sales, café, greenhouse and eventually outside to external plant sales.

The Welcome Building would also include a learning studio comprising up to two classrooms designed for visiting school groups. This space would be divided by a moveable partition, allowing flexibility, and would overlook an external play garden for outdoor activities.

5. The Meadow

Beyond the lake to the east is the meadow. The long term objective for this area is that it would be gradually changed into a species diverse meadow with scattered clumps of trees. A new access track would be built from the southern edge of the new lake to the far south eastern corner of the meadow where a composting area would be located. This would be screened by new native planting that would appear to be part of the existing boundary planting of the canal embankment.

6. The Garden Centre Site

The garden centre site comprises a sequence of walled spaces from an outer garden (slip garden) enclosed by a low wall on the outside, through an intermediate garden which has a high wall on three sides, to an inner space which has high walls all around. The intention is that the garden experience becomes gradually more intense and also more colourful as you approach the centre, with the entire area of garden laid out for cultivation. This area would be a garden centre, from the outset which would combine horticultural display with retail through the area,

The stables buildings would be refurbished and converted to provide a new garden centre café. A glass link is proposed in-between the two stables buildings to create a café seating space. The garden spaces to the east of the stables would be restored to create a productive garden. Three greenhouses would be replaced, and existing access routes and footpaths repaved. Low hedges would be planted to provide definition and enclosure.

The Potting Sheds would be refurbished and converted to house a number of retail units for the sale of plants and related goods. The proposed works also include a new glazed infill entrance through the Potting Sheds to create a new entrance to the walled garden

The Curator's Garden - this garden is located at the western side of the site, in the area surrounding the Gardeners Cottage. This garden would be developed as a “Curator’s Garden” with planting beds that explore innovation in planting and test locally sourced specimens and varieties; initially, the garden would include a series of beds of annual and biennial wildflower species.

7. Middle Wood

Page 159 Middle Wood occupies a central position in the site. It is dominated by birch, sycamore and oak with some ash, chestnut, yew and occasional ornamental specimens. The understorey is dominated by Rhododendron ponticum but there are also some Victorian rhododendron hybrids. It is envisaged that a programme of thinning and rhododendron removal would be undertaken and a number of key vistas through the wood would be established. In the initial phase of works the path network would be limited to the restoration of the historic network of paths that already exists on site. There are two buildings envisaged in the masterplan for this area which form part of the outline element of this application – a lakeside restaurant and a learning centre.

8. The Arboretum

It is proposed that the field in the north-west corner of the site would be developed as an arboretum. This field is currently enclosed on its north-west side by a hedge and on the west side by a very mature beech hedge along the existing access road. Both these hedges would be removed as a result of the proposed access road works. Further east along Leigh Road there is a belt of mature trees which would be retained. Elsewhere in the field the proposal is gradually to build up a collection of trees suited to the environment of the north-west. The edges of Middlewood would be thinned and new trees introduced to break down the hard edge between the wood and the field.

9. The Old Lake

The lake is approximately half its original extent and the banks are overgrown with trees. It is envisaged that restoration of the lake would be carried out in the first phase of the development. This would involve dredging of silt, removal of trees growing out of the banks and improvement of the lake edge condition. Research is currently being undertaken as to the feasibility of raising the water level to something closer to its original level. Chemical analysis indicates that the silt to be extracted has a low fertility making it an ideal material to spread on the existing meadow. This enables the meadow to be sown with wild flowers which would be much more successfully established in areas of lower fertility

10. The Formal Garden and Site of Worsley New Hall

At present the terraces are overgrown with trees and scrub, though the central area has recently been cleared. In the first phase it is envisaged that the landform of the terraces would be restored to a mown grass. The full development of the formal garden and the site of the Hall would come forward in subsequent phases of development. The RHS’s long term objective is to restore the terraces as a display garden that reflects the scale and impact of the original scheme and it is also possible that the terraces may be used as a setting for events and shows. There is also a long-term ambition to build a large glasshouse and a horticultrual school on the site of the Hall.

11. The Eastern Pleasure Ground

The Eastern Pleasure Ground comprises the area between the formal garden and the motorway slip road to the east. It includes several fine, mature trees and the remnants of a formal lime avenue which would be retained. There are significant numbers of larch which would be thinned to create a more open woodland canopy. The area of woodland would be maintained as an important screen of the formal garden from the motorway slip road.

Other Works

In addition to the works outlined above, footpaths and access tracks would be installed in Phase 1. The footpath network would link the Garden Centre Site with the Welcome Building, the Horticultural Yard in the west of the site with the Garden Centre Site to the north, and the meadow and compost areas to the east of site. The footpaths and access tracks would be surfaced in a variety of materials including bonded gravel, bound gravel, exposed aggregate concrete and bitmac.

Electricity and Gas would be brought to the site via two small buildings to be located at the north of the site, accessible off the access road. These buildings would be integrated into the surroundings through earthmounding, screen planting and hedges, using native plant species.

Page 160 The RHS have committed to providing new buildings and structures on the site of exceptional design quality. This is reflected in the design of the Welcome Building and the sensitively designed alterations proposed to the existing buildings. It is also considered that the landscape masterplan demonstrates exceptional design quality. The site is currently overgrown and the proposed development would bring significant improvements to the environmental quality of the site. Whilst the design details for the later phases of the development are not known at this stage, the details submitted for Phase 1 provide the City Council with confidence that the quality of the first phase will be reflective of what would be proposed in future reserved matters application(s). It is therefore considered that the proposed development complies with Saved UDP Policies DES1, DES8, DES9, the Design Supplementary Planning Document and the NPPF in respect of its design and landscape quality.

Design and Crime

The applicant has submitted a crime impact assessment undertaken by Greater Manchester Police to assess the development in respect of its potential impact on crime and anti-social behaviour. The assessment advises that the development would be a significant attraction for the region, drawing large numbers of visitors. It is considered to be a development that would not generate significant levels of crime. Clearly, with a development of this nature, there needs to be a balance between creating a secure site without detracting from the ambience of the place. In particular, the assessment highlights the following features that would make a positive contribution to the prevention of crime and fear of crime, as follows:

 The buildings (existing and proposed) are largely grouped, in appropriate locations, adjacent to the main car park and around the walled garden. Such grouping facilitates supervision, by both staff and visitors, of the spaces around the buildings themselves as well as the car park and many of the pathways within the site.  Residential accommodation for the ‘gardener’ is provided on the site, which would ensure that there is some supervision of the site at all times.  Car parking is provided on the site.  There would be only one vehicle and pedestrian route into the site, which would focus movement to and from the site. The entrance would be secured with gates.  A perimeter fence is proposed for the site which, along with the level change and field drains around the Bridgewater Canal, would provide a reasonable degree of security to the boundaries.  There would be a reasonable level of staffing required to manage entry to the site, to maintain the gardens and attend to customers in the shop and cafés. Uniformed staff would be conspicuous and are likely to challenge inappropriate behaviour by visitors, whilst also their visibility would deter the actions of those who might offend.

The assessment also identifies some points for future consideration, as follows:

 Installation of an arm vehicle barrier to prevent access onto the access road at the mouth of the junction of Leigh Road or relocate the gates to the junction to prevent access when the garden is closed.  Advise against a pedestrian access to the development from the Bridgwater Canal towpath.  Cycle parking should be provided in front of the Welcome Building. Cyclists should be encouraged to lock both wheels and the crossbar to a stand rather than just the crossbar and, therefore, a design of cycle stand that enables this method of locking is recommended  Low intensity lighting should be used to illuminate the main buildings, the car park and the vehicle route through the site.

With regard to the first point, the development includes the provision of gates part way down the access road to prevent access to the site outside of opening hours. This is considered sufficient to prevent unauthorised access and would allow any vehicle accidently turning into the site from the junction on Leigh Road space to turn around to exit the site without hindering traffic on Leigh Road.

With regard to the second point, discussions are on-going about the provision of a pedestrian/cycle access from the Bridgewater Canal towpath. This is seen as a desirable access to encourage walking and cycling to the site. The safety of pedestrians and cyclists would be considered in the design of any access from the Canal towpath.

With regard to the third and fourth points, cycle parking and lighting would be provided for the development. Conditions are recommended to require the provision of the cycle parking prior to the opening of the Welcome Building and details of a lighting scheme to be provided as part of the landscape masterplan.

Page 161 Other measures identified relating to traffic calming, waymarking in the car park and security specifications for the buildings, including the installation of CCTV are considered to be technical details beyond the remit of planning. It is recommended that an informative be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to draw the applicant’s attention to these points.

Impact on Heritage Assets

As identified in the site description above, the site is included on the City Council’s local list of heritage assets. It also includes a number of historic and archaeological features that formed part of the Worsley New Hall estate including; the site and remains of the former New Hall, a walled garden, stables and boiler house, grotto, lake and a concrete war bunker. The site also includes four Grade II Listed buildings/structures - the Gardener’s Cottage, the Bothy, the Ice House and the entrance gates to the former Worsley New Hall.

Listed and Locally Listed Assets

The Garden Cottage was built in 1834 for the head gardener of Worsley Hall and is located on the west side of the walled garden. It is of a Gothic Revival style in rock-faced stone with a slate roof and comprises two storeys, with a three-storey octagonal tower on the front elevation.

The Bothy, situated to the north of the walled garden, is a single-storey building built in the 1870s with a cellar beneath it that housed the boiler to heat the hot houses and greenhouses. As the boiler needed to be fuelled around the clock the Bothy also provided accommodation for young unmarried gardeners.

The Ice House was built at the same time as Worsley New Hall, around 1840. This is a “cup and dome” style, characterised by an entrance tunnel and a circular ice chamber with a dome and steep sloping sides leading down to a drain. It comprises a brick barrel-vaulted subterranean structure with a hammer dressed stone arranged in a segmental section with a doorway within it. It’s original siting, to the west of the now demolished New Hall was key to its function as it needed to be close to the lake which provided a supply of winter ice but also sufficiently close to the Hall to easily access the store.

The entrance gates date from around 1850 and comprise double wrought and cast iron carriage gates flanked by smaller pedestrian gates with ornate scrollwork at the top and bottom. The gates were originally positioned at the entrance to the New Hall on Leigh Road, opposite the Church of St Mark, however, they were later moved some 100m further west along Leigh Road to form a new east entrance to the property.

Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that when considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting “special regard” will be given to the “desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses”. The implication of the choice wording “special regard” is that these factors should be given additional weight in decision making and not simply the same weight as any other material consideration.

One of the core planning principles of the NPPF is to “conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance”. Paragraph 132 of the NPPF states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. It then continues to say that significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting and that as heritage assets are irreplaceable any harm or loss “should require clear and convincing justification’.

Page 162 In the annex to the NPPF the setting of a heritage asset is described as “the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral”.

Overall the proposed development would see a range of environmental and horticultural improvement works across the whole site including vegetation clearance, replanting (including tree screening and ornamental planting), and a woodland management strategy, all of which would enhance the character of the landscape. The proposals would result in a return of the majority of the site to its original garden function and as such the principle of the proposal is very much welcomed in terms of the impact upon the associated heritage assets on site as these works can only serve to improve the setting of these assets. Certainly, these works would complement and be beneficial to the locally listed Worsley Park.

With regards to the Gardener’s Cottage, there are currently a range of modern 20th century buildings to the north east of the gardener’s cottage that house the retail element of the garden centre. As part of the proposed development these would be demolished and works completed to restore the walled garden. The demolition of these modern buildings with the renovation works to the walled garden area and the clearance of vegetation would immediately and significantly improve the setting to the Gardener’s Cottage. It would also enable the relationship between the cottage and the walled garden to be better understood thus increasing the significance of the listed cottage.

With regard to the works of repair and refurbishment proposed to the heritage assets on the site, an indication of intended works has been given within the application submission but very few specific details have been provided. The principle of the improvement works are welcomed, however, as the nature of these works are finalised, it may be that an application for listed building consent will be required for the works. It is recommended that an informative be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to advise the applicant of their obligations in respect of the listed buildings on the site.

As described in the description of the proposals above, the site would be enclosed by ‘estate-style’ and paladin fencing. In the vicinity of the listed entrance gates, ‘estate-style’ fencing is proposed which is considered to be appropriate in terms of its appearance. The relationship of the proposed fencing to the gates and its impact upon the setting of the gates is an important consideration. The applicant has advised that the fencing would be set well away from the listed gates and an indicative plan has been submitted, however no specific details. Therefore, it is recommended that a condition be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to require full details of the location and design details of the boundary fencing to be submitted to the City Council for approval.

In conclusion, the proposal would bring back to life the historic grounds at Worsley New Hall and provide a new RHS fifth garden which would be of benefit to the City and residents alike. The proposal would also safeguard some of the City’s heritage assets which is very much welcomed. It is therefore considered that the proposed development complies with the relevant sections of the NPPF outlined above and Saved UDP Policies CH2 and CH8 which seek to ensure that proposed development does not have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building

Archaeology

In accordance with NPPF paragraph 128, the application is supported by an archaeological desk based assessment. The report draws together a range of published and unpublished documentary sources, index information, imagery and cartography in providing the assessment of the site’s archaeological potential. In this, the report benefits from a series of reports by CFAA (now Salford Archaeology) on archaeological investigations undertaken in recent years.

The Greater Manchester Archaeological Advisory Service (GMAAS) has reviewed the information submitted in respect of archaeology. GMAAS advise that in terms of assessing the impact of the proposals upon the archaeological potential and significance of the assets the report offers a clear view regarding the likely impact upon the buildings of the existing walled garden. However, much of what is proposed has only been submitted in outline. Where detailed proposals are yet to be worked-up, such as the creation of gardens, landscapes, new watercourses, drainage, access roads, a learning centre, an events building, and a lakeside café the impact is more difficult to assess. However, GMAAS advise that the report is acceptable and meets the aims for such an assessment set-out in the NPPF paragraph 128.

Page 163 The report recognises that there is a potential for Prehistoric archaeology to exist below ground in the south and west of the study site along with a low potential for Roman archaeology in the north. In addition the report identifies a high/moderate potential for sub-surface remains to survive associated with ancillary buildings near the New Hall, including the stables and the pump house. The report recommends that further archaeological investigations are undertaken in the areas of undeveloped pasture in the north-west, west and south of the study site along with further investigation of the sub-surface remains of the Hall’s ancillary buildings.

The report has not offered any assessment or recommendations regarding the specifics of the garden archaeology. It is assumed that as the formal and kitchen gardens were only established in the mid-nineteenth century the detail of their layout and content may not be held to be of particular significance. The report does acknowledge that the proposals would bring the kitchen garden back into a related use, and that the proposals would enhance the heritage significance and sustainability of the gardens and buildings.

GMAAS accepts the report’s recommendations and suggests that any further investigation could be undertaken as a condition of the planning consent, if granted. GMAAS also suggest that, in view of the outline character of much of the proposal, that any Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) prepared by an archaeological contractor should include sufficient flexibility to accommodate archaeological investigations where a potential below ground impact is identified from future detailed proposals.

In light of the assessment and comments made by GMAAS, it is considered that the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact upon the archaeological potential of the site and as such the application complies with Saved UDP Policy CH5.

Ecology and Trees

The applicant has submitted an Ecological Assessment Report, including an Extended Phase 1 Habitat survey, a National Vegetation Classification Survey, a Bat Assessment, Badger Survey and Breeding Bird Survey. The report identifies that one locally designated Site of Biological Importance (SBI) lies wholly within the application site boundary; this is Middle Wood which is a Grade B SBI designated on the basis of the habitat (mature plantation woodland) and the breeding bird assemblage it supports. There are also a number of SBI’s located within one kilometer of the site and a designated local nature reserve within 600 metres of the site (Worsley Woods).

Saved UDP Policy EN8 seeks to ensure that development does not have a detrimental impact on the nature conservation value of sites of biological importance. This policy is further supplemented by the City Council’s Nature Conservation and Biodiversity SPD.

Impact on the Middle Wood Site of Biological Interest (SBI)

The proposed development would result in the removal of trees within Middle Wood and the provision of public access into the SBI. The SBI comprises mature plantation woodland with a lake and areas of grassland and supports populations of birds. The woodland includes sycamore, oak, birch, lime, and beech. There are also occasional horse chestnut, rowan and ash with the understorey being characterised by rhododendron. Areas are inter-planted with larch to the east of the site. Hawthorn and elder occur frequently with occasional holly and hazel.

The woodland ground flora is sparse in places. Creeping soft-grass is dominant in places with common bent and wavy hair-grass. Nettle is locally abundant with frequent bramble and occasional remote sedge, yellow pimpernel, hedge garlic, red campion, germander speedwell, Dryopterid ferns (male & broad buckler) and tufted hair-grass.

Opposite leaved golden saxifrage occurs rarely in damp areas. Japanese knotweed is invading and is locally frequent in some areas, particularly round the entrance to the scout camp. Areas of grassland occur to the north of the lake. These support abundant Yorkshire fog with sweet vernal grass, false oat grass and greater birdsfoot trefoil. Creeping thistle, rosebay willowherb, bramble and dock are also present. Clearings to the western end of the site are grass with mown Yorkshire fog. These formed camping areas for the former Scout camp.

The lake supports fringing reed sweet-grass, yellow flag, sweet flag, yellow & white water lily and bulrush. Marsh ragwort and lady fern occur as marginal vegetation or in the stone work round the lake. Common reed

Page 164 forms a small reed swamp within the associated willow carr. The lake is now shallow and is silted-up, succeeding in places to marsh/swamp.

The illustrative masterplan for the site indicates that there would be some potentially harmful impacts on the SBI arising from the development, including tree thinning and opening up the woodland to large numbers of visitors. Mitigating this harm is the potential of the development to enhance the biodiversity value of the wider site through direct intervention (e.g. creation of new water bodies, improving existing water bodies, introduction of a much more diverse flora) and through more indirect measures (e.g. improvements to education and access to nature). It is also noted that the development is very large and would be phased over a number of years. The applicant has advised that tree removal within Middle Wood would be phased to allow removal of low value trees and planting of new specimens to be undertaken without losing the woodland nature of the site. This would also help to mitigate any harmful ecological impacts. The woodland would also benefit from rhododendron thinning and removal of other invasive species.

The provision of the new site access will cause the loss of sections of a beech hedge. To compensate for this loss replacement beech hedgerow would be incorporated into the landscaping of the new access and additional hedgerow planting along the southwest boundary of the site would comprise a native species rich mix to maximise biodiversity value.

The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) has reviewed the report submitted by the applicant and has advised that overall the impact of the proposed development on the SBI are viewed as potentially positive for wildlife, providing sufficient precautions are taken during the development of the site to protect existing wildlife interests. GMEU recommend that:

 large, mature and veteran trees within the established woodland are retained wherever possible and suitably protected during the course of any development works.  new tree and shrub planting are sought as part of any detailed landscape proposals for the wider site that may be submitted as compensation for tree losses.  Further surveys of trees for their potential to support bats will need to be carried out as detailed proposals for selected tree removals come forward. Any trees identified as having bat roosting potential should be retained if at all possible.  Landscaping plans should include proposals for retaining existing areas of diverse woodland ground flora and for enhancing the diversity of woodland ground flora by selected introductions. In particular, native bluebells are found throughout the woodland and this plant should be retained and protected wherever possible.  Any dredging or de-silting of the lake should be undertaken in a manner sympathetic to aquatic wildlife (e.g. at an appropriate time of year and in a phased and properly supervised manner).

Impact on Protected Species i. Bats

The applicant’s bat assessment has identified five active bat roosts on the site and three inactive roosts. However, for the active bat roosts, activity was found to be very low and no hibernation or maternity roosting identified. The proposed development would include some demolition and refurbishment works and therefore some roosts would be affected, either through roost loss of modification. On this basis the applicant proposes a bat mitigation approach based on ensuring a variety of roosting habitats are available throughout the phased development and seeks to retain at least some bat roosting features in all retained and refurbished buildings where possible. The following mitigation measures are proposed:

 Works must be completed outside the peak season for bats (May - August).  Replacement roosting opportunities to be provided prior to the start of works to ensure continuity of roost sites prior to the next active bat season.  Prior to demolition or refurbishment works of any buildings with confirmed roosts, a toolbox talk would be provided by a suitably qualified ecologist to contractors.  Temporary works such as refurbishments would ensure that bat roosting features are incorporated into the completed structure and where possible these would replicate the types of features present prior to works.  If works to other properties with inactive roosts are undertaken between May and August, they must proceed under a Method Statement.

Page 165  If works have not proceeded by May 2018, repeat nocturnal survey are likely be required to determine current roost status for any bat mitigation licence.

All UK species of bat and their roosts are protected under UK and European legislation and are a material consideration when determining planning applications. Bat roosts have been found on the site and these would be affected by the development proposals. Therefore, under the terms of the Habitats Directive and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended), a licence may be required from Natural England to derogate the terms of this legislation before any work can commence that may disturb bats. Before a licence can be granted the following three tests must be satisfied:

i. That the development is “in the interest of public health and public safety, or for other imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequence of primary importance for the environment”; ii. That there is “no satisfactory alternative”; iii. That the derogation is “not detrimental to the maintenance of the populations of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range”.

In considering planning applications that may affect European Protected Species, Local Planning Authorities are bound by Regulation 9(1) and 9(5) of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 to have regard to the Habitats Directive when exercising their function. Government Circular 05/06 gives guidance to local authorities on how these issues should be considered. All three tests must be satisfied before planning permission is granted on a site. During the licence application process Natural England will ask the Local Planning Authority for evidence that the above three tests were properly considered during the determination of the planning application.

With regard to the first test, it is considered that the proposed development is of over-riding public interest as it would have clear social and economic benefits for Salford and the wider Greater Manchester area. Bringing the site back in to more active management would also deliver ecological and environmental benefits to the site. With regard to the second test, the proposals have been carefully considered and any loss of bat roosts is only proposed where necessary. Therefore, it is considered that the first and second tests have been satisfied.

With regard to the third test, GMEU have reviewed the application and note that roosting activity has been single or very low numbers of more common bat species. Mitigation for impact on bats has been put forward in section 4.23 of the Ecological Assessment Report submitted in support of the application. GMEU have advised that the measures described are acceptable and that providing the measures described are implemented then the third test can be satisfied and the conservation status of bats can be maintained. GMEU recommend that a condition be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to require the mitigation measures for bats to be implemented. GMEU also recommend that if demolition/conversion works of the buildings and structures supporting bat roosts have not commenced within one year of the date of the last bat surveys (which were undertaken in September 2016) then updated surveys for bats will need to be conducted. The updated survey information should be used to update the mitigation measures for bats.

Certain trees have also been identified that have at least some bat roosting potential, although it is unclear at this stage which trees will be removed as part of the scheme. Further surveys of trees for their potential to support bats should be undertaken as detailed proposals for tree removals come forward. Any trees identified as having bat roosting potential should be retained. ii. Badgers

The applicant’s ecological assessment identified evidence of low level use of the site by badgers. Although currently it would appear that badger setts would not be directly harmed by the scheme, there are badger setts nearby and badgers are mobile in their habits. Badgers and their setts are protected under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

GMEU have recommended that, given the long time-scales involved in implementing this project, the site be re- surveyed for the possible presence of badgers either at annual intervals or before the commencement of each phase of development, whichever is the sooner. If badgers are found to be present by survey and are considered likely to be harmed by the scheme then a Method Statement must be prepared giving details of measures to be taken to avoid any possible harm to badgers. Once agreed, this Method Statement must be

Page 166 implemented in full. It should be noted that the implementation of a Method Statement may require a separate license to be obtained from Natural England. iii. Nesting Birds

Habitats within the development site provide suitable nesting habitat for a range of bird species in the area, in particular, the woodland within the site contains a large number of breeding commons birds. The applicant anticipates that in the long term the positive management of the woodland and the creation of a wider range of habitats and increased variety of planting would have a positive effect on the bird assemblage of the site. As a precaution, during early construction phases a variety of bird boxes would be installed on trees and buildings to provide additional nesting habitats while new habitats establish.

All nesting birds their eggs and young are protected under the terms of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Therefore it is recommended that all vegetation clearance and tree removal should be undertaken outside of bird breeding season. If this is not possible, the areas to be cleared should first be checked by a suitably qualified ecologist. GMEU have advised that they support the proposals for enhancing the potential for nesting birds on the site by erecting a range of suitable bird nesting opportunities across the site, including on retained and new buildings and structures. iv. Biodiversity Management Strategy

The RHS has submitted a Draft Biodiversity Management Strategy (BMS) which includes

 best practice construction working methods  habitat creation proposals  legally required mitigation actions  requirement for control of invasive species  strategies for achieving biodiversity gain in newly created habitats  strategies for managing existing habitats for wildlife  identification of further surveys and actions that may be required as a result of the ongoing works to the site  identification of any monitoring or reporting requirements

GMEU advise that they welcome the preparation and submission with the application of an overarching ‘Biodiversity Management Strategy’. This Strategy, and any updates to the Strategy that may be necessary as detailed proposals for the scheme come forward, should be required to be implemented by a Condition placed on any permission granted to the scheme.

In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed development would lead to an increase in local, and City-wide, biodiversity interest. The development therefore complies with Saved UDP Policy EN8 and the City Council’s Nature Conservation and Biodiversity SPD.

Trees

The RHS have advised that the first and most important policy that the development will uphold in respect of the trees on the site is to retain as many old, historic or veteran trees as possible within the wider landscape. This would involve managing them appropriately and working around them as needed. It would be necessary to remove a significant number of trees from the site however, there is likely be an equally significant amount of tree planting and improved tree management and ultimately greater diversity in terms of species and age range across the entire site over time.

The RHS currently manages a large stock of trees at all four of its gardens. An arborist would be appointed as part of the initial horticultural team at RHS Bridgewater to provide the necessary professional skills to manage the tree stock in an appropriate way and monitor works undertaken. It is envisaged that much of the woodland management would require on site decision making and this would allow the appropriate level of planning in advance and during actual works.

The RHS has submitted an Arboricultural Report in accordance with A British Standard (BS) 5837 and an Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) in support of the application. The AIA breaks the site down into 17 distinct areas.

Page 167 Phase 1 of the development, would see the clearing of the majority of trees and vegetation from the walled garden area. The majority of these trees are either self‐seeded birch and willow whips that have taken over since the regular maintenance at the site stopped, or old nursery stock that has become overgrown and very densely planted. There is also a row of large Leylandii to be removed and various other trees. Most of the trees to be removed are of very low quality and offer very little in terms of long term amenity to the area. The loss of these trees would be mitigated by new tree planting, which would increase the overall canopy cover on the western part of the site as well as the overall quality of the trees. The species would be chosen from the species that grow along the Bridgewater Canal. This would offer continuity and help to blend the new development into the surrounding landscape.

Phase 1 would also require arboricultural works in the Middle Wood area particularly the lower areas. The first aim would be to address any tree safety issues and remove poor quality stock. Selected removals would also take place to open up the landscape along existing historical paths and to create new landscape vistas to enhance the site. The opportunity to enhance some of the existing woodland glades provides opportunity to improve both the garden experience and to create newplanting opportunities for a future generation of trees. The ultimate aim is to actively manage these areas to create a more species and age diverse tree collection through retaining the best trees, removals (particularly of sycamore which currently limits diversity) and planting a new generation of trees.

The latter phases of the development would undergo various amounts of change using a number of different strategies to ensure that high quality trees of significance would remain and become more prominent within their settings.

Whilst there would be a significant number of trees removed from the site, there would likely be an equally significant if not greater amount of tree planting and tree improvement across the entire site. It is therefore considered that the proposed development complies with UDP Policy EN12 which seeks to ensure that development does not have a detrimental impact on important landscape features.

Highways, Parking and Access

The site is well connected to the surrounding highway network situated off Leigh Road offering a direct connection to Junction 13 of the M60, providing links to local neighbourhoods such as Boothstown, the wider Greater Manchester area (M60 orbital network), Yorkshire and Lancashire to the north (M62/M61), Manchester City Centre to the east (M602), Warrington and Merseyside to the west (M62) and Cheshire to the south (M60/M6).

Leigh Road benefits from regular bus services to Leigh and Wigan to the west and The Trafford Centre and Manchester City Centre to the east. From Manchester City Centre, connections can be made by bus and tram to the wider Greater Manchester conurbation as well as local and national rail services. Walkden, Moorside and Patricroft also offer local rail connections to locations across the North West region including Liverpool, Southport, Blackburn, Wigan and Kirkby.

Highways Impact

It is acknowledged that there are already issues of congestion at peak times in the area local to the application site and that this is a key concern for residents. It is not appropriate for this application to seek to address the issues that already exist. This is a matter most appropriately addressed at a wider more strategic level. It is, however, important to consider any impacts that the proposed development could have on local highway conditions, and consider any mitigation measures that may be required.

The applicant has advised that for the other RHS Gardens across the country, peak activity occurs around lunchtime with very little generation of traffic around the morning and evening peak periods. Opening hours for the other RHS Gardens on a weekday is generally 10:00 to 16:30 in the winter months and 10:00 to 18:00 hours in the spring, summer months and early autumn. At the weekends and on bank holidays and event days the Gardens tend to open an hour earlier at 09:00. These are the opening hours also proposed for RHS Garden Bridgewater. In addition, whilst visitor behaviour cannot necessarily be predicted, it is common sense to consider that visitors to the Garden, especially if they are local to the area, are likely to avoid travelling to/from the Garden in the peak traffic hours, instead preferring not to get caught in commuter traffic.

Page 168 A distinction should also be made between the proposals for RHS Garden Bridgewater being a leisure based development which is likely to take time to develop a visitor base and generate significant levels of traffic, and other forms of development such as employment or residential which are likely to generate a more instant increase in traffic. It is also noted that RHS Garden Bridgwater, as a leisure based development, would have different visitors arrival and departure times when compared to residential or office development that tend to generate more activity during the peak hours.

A distinction should be made between the proposals for RHS Garden Bridgewater being a leisure based development which is likely to take time to develop a visitor base and other forms of development such as employment or residential which are likely to generate a more instant increase in traffic. Furthermore, as leisure based development the Garden would have different visitor arrival and departure times when compared to residential or office developments that tend to generate more activity during the peak hours. Evidence from the RHS Garden Wisley shows that the pattern of arrivals and departures to the Garden is gradual over the day and it is expected that this would also be the case for RHS Garden Bridgwater.

The applicant has submitted a Transport Assessment that has been considered by the City Council’s Highways Consultants, Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) and Highways England. In assessing the traffic implications of the proposed development, the applicant’s transport consultants have used data from RHS Wisley, which is the RHS’s busiest Garden site and comparable to the proposals for RHS Garden Bridgewater, to simulate a full arrival and departure profile for RHS Garden Bridgewater.

In relation to the impacts on the Junction 13 roundabouts, the testing of the various scenarios found that traffic generated by the proposed development would be minimal during the peak periods and the small amount of traffic generated at these times is unlikely to be discernible given the already congested nature of these roundabouts.

An improvement scheme has been identified in order to mitigate the effects of any additional traffic during the highest departure times, which would provide a widened flared approach for the Leigh Road arm of Junction 13 of the M60. This improvement would also have benefits at other times of the day, including the morning peak when traffic leaving the garden would be low. It is also proposed to improve pedestrian crossing facilities around the northern parts of the two roundabouts of Junction 13 as the current crossing provision is poor.

The RHS have advised that they intend to hold events at RHS Garden Bridgewater, however the exact nature of these events is yet to be established. Events may generate a significant amount of traffic and parking demands which needs to be carefully managed. The RHS has provided information about the type of events that they hold at their other Gardens and the form of traffic and parking management measures they put in place. It is recommended that a condition be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to require the submission of an Event Management Plan for the Garden prior to any events taking place.

It is therefore considered that the proposed development would not have an unacceptable impact on highway safety or the function of the highway network in accordance with UDP Policy A8.

Site Access

The site is currently accessed via a minor ‘t’ style priority junction located in the north west corner of the site providing access via a single lane tarmac road. The RHS aim to attract in the region of 700,000 visitors to the garden, therefore highway works are proposed to improve the Leigh Road junction to improve safety for all road users and visitors.

The improved Leigh Road junction would incorporate a widening of the road with the addition of a right turn lane and a left turn lane to enter the site. Traffic signals would also be provided to allow safe access, egress and pedestrian crossing. Access to driveways along Leigh Road would be maintained by incorporating a service lane to the north of the junction, which would incorporate speed tables to discourage through traffic.

A new footway would be provided on the south side of Leigh Road to the east and alongside the eastern side of the access road itself. This new footway would connect to the existing footway on the north-side of Leigh Road as well as provide access from a re-positioned westbound bus stop. The eastbound bus stop would also be relocated as part of the works.

Page 169 The signals are expected to be subject to MOVA control. This would optimise the signal control based on demand. During the highway peak periods, particularly the morning peak when traffic turning out of the garden would be low, it is anticipated that the Leigh Road approaches would be ‘on green’ for the majority of the time.

Testing of the proposed new access junction into the Garden on Leigh Road has demonstrated that the proposed access could sufficiently cope with traffic entering and leaving the Garden.

Parking

Car parking for the garden is proposed in the area south of the walled garden. This would be located conveniently for access to the Welcome Building to be situated immediately to the east, and for access to the Garden Centre to the north. The layout of the car park would be based on a simple primary two-way circuit route to provide easy, intuitive access to the car spaces. Bays are orientated north-south, aligned to the garden centre site in the north, and to the canal in the south; footpath routes connecting directly to the Welcome Building would be located at the end of each bay, and along a central spine, where trolley parks would be located. Disabled car park bays would be located in the area of parking closest to the main entrance; step free access and a pedestrian priority crossing link to the entrance area outside the Welcome Building. Car parking would be free and introduced on a phased basis over time as visitor numbers grow. The application proposes a maximum of 867 car parking spaces and electric car charging points would also be provided. In terms of cycle parking, 112 spaces are proposed.

Separate coach and minibus parking would be provided in the south east corner of the car park, outside the circuit road. This would allow coach passengers to alight from their coach and walk to the entrance of the Welcome Building without needing to cross the road. Secure cycle stands would be provided in an area to the north of the car park, close to the entrance to the Welcome Building. The proposed level of car and cycle parking is considered to be acceptable

Sustainable Transport

The RHS have submitted a Framework Travel Plan which sets out how they will promote sustainable travel to and from the proposed RHS Garden Bridgewater. It is anticipated that the number of visitors to the Garden when it first opens would be relatively low (circa 50,000 in the first year) and would grow over time. As part of the Travel Plan for the Garden, travel activity would be monitored and adapted to, with plans for ongoing review as the Garden becomes more established.

The RHS advise that, as with the operation at RHS Wisley, at busier visitor times such as on event days, the demand from visitors to RHS Garden Bridgewater is likely to be sufficient to provide shuttle bus connections. This provision is being considered as part of the Travel Plan for the development to provide bus connections to Eccles interchange.

Located adjacent to the Bridgewater Canal the site benefits from the canal trail which provides good access to both the national and local cycle network. There is an aspiration to enhance the site’s relationship with and accessibility to the Bridgewater Canal in the future, with the potential to introduce a key pedestrian link between the site and the canal towpath. This detail is yet to be agreed, due to the involvement of third parties and land outside of the control of the RHS, however the masterplan for the site makes indicative provision for this connection. The Bridgewater Canal also provides opportunity for boat links back to the Worsley Marina or beyond to the centre of Manchester via the extended canal network.

Servicing

Servicing and refuse collection for the Welcome Building would take place from a service yard to the south of the building accessed from a dedicated service road that also passes the horticultural yard. This would allow delivery vehicles to be separated from visitor traffic. The service yard would also provide access to the gravel track servicing the southern boundary of the site and compost area. Details of servicing arrangements for the buildings proposed in future phases of the development would be submitted with future reserved matters application(s).

Flood Risk and Surface Water Management

Page 170 The site is located within Flood Zone 1 and therefore is defined within the NPPF as being at low risk of flooding from river and seas (less than a 1 in 1,000 annual probability). In terms of pluvial flood risk, i.e. flooding resulting from rainfall generated overland flows, the Salford Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) and Environment Agency flood maps identify there being an onsite risk. This is likely to be due to the topography of the site. The site is also located within the Salford North West Critical Drainage Area.

Therefore, in accordance with the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, surface water runoff is to be restricted to green field run off. The applicant has submitted a Flood Risk Assessment and Surface Water Drainage Statement in support of the application.

A description of the site is provided in the site description section of this report above, however of particular relevance to flood risk and surface water, it is noted that the site is predominately occupied by trees and vegetation, with some buildings located around the walled garden area,. The other use is as a former Middlewood Scout Camp which occupied the woodland in the middle of the site and includes a number of buildings. The site slopes from north to south with the majority of the fall (approximately 12 metres) occurring within the northern third of the site. The slope tends to level through the middle third of the site before leveling off in the southern third.

With regard to the ground conditions, the applicant’s FRA identifies that the northern and central areas of the site is typically clay imbedded with fine sand and gravels overlain by a significant depth of top soil. To the south the ground is underlain by peat. These ground conditions, owing to the presence of peat and clay soils, precludes the use of soakaways and infiltration methods of drainage. The areas of the site underlain with peat may also be susceptible to ground water flooding, the applicant’s investigations have identified that in the general areas of the peat the ground water level is shown to be as close to the surface as 200mm.

The drainage strategy for the site would comprise a Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SuDS) discharging to a watercourse. A holistic drainage strategy for the entire site has been developed as the future phases of the development have inter-dependence on the surface water drainage infrastructure which is to be installed as part of phase 1.

With regard to surface water, this would be collected via a number of swales and pass through a series of SuDS structures which would act to slow the velocity of the surface water, treat any hydrocarbon pollutants and provide attenuation storage. The surface water treatment and attenuation system would include:

• Swales and potential filter strips adjacent to highways • Porous pavement with 30% void foundation providing attenuation • Balancing lakes • Bio-retention basin.

In more detail, the existing lake on the site would be dredged and brought back into use. This lake would capture surface water run-off from the surrounding areas of the site, in particular the former terrace gardens to the north of the lake. Water levels in the lake would be controlled via a weir structure. During heavy rainfall the water from the lake would discharge into a swale which would create a brook type water feature running through the site. The swale would also drain the hard landscaping with the garden area. The swale would discharge into the proposed new lake to be located adjacent to the welcome building. The welcome building would drain directly into this lake. Control of water levels within the lake would also be controlled via a weir structure.

The car park, to be located in the south-western corner of the site, would be constructed using a permeable paving solution comprising reinforced gravel for the car parking spaces with the access road and circulation route to be formed of tarmac. The applicant has advised that the use of tarmac is to provide for longevity and

Page 171 robustness in the structural design. The foundations for the car park would comprise 30% void stone and would slow down the passage of surface water through the system and provide the main attenuation feature of the site. The voids within the foundation would also promote the development of bacteria which would specifically target and remove hydro carbons which may result from leaks within the car parking area.

The main access road into the site would drain via a swale which would also connect into the car park sub- structure. The car park would have a single outfall point with the water being conveyed within trapezoidal channels into a bio-retention pond. The discharge from the new lake would also flow via trapezoidal channels into this bio-retention pond. The bio-rentention pond would be designed and planted with the requirement to remove potential hydro-carbon pollutants. Flows from the bio retention pond would be controlled via a vortex control device before discharging into the surface water sewer running though the site, before flowing into Shaw Brook water course.

The applicant has advised that in areas where the development proposals are only to refurbish the existing buildings the drainage strategy is to remain as existing.

The strategy for the removal of foul water from the site will depend on further investigation of the existing combined sewer which runs west to east through the centre of the site. If this investigation identifies that land levels do not allow for a gravity connection to the sewer then the applicant has identified that either a foul water pumping station could be installed and/or an on-site treatment plant. The most appropriate solution will be identified following the site investigations.

The City Council’s Flood Risk and Drainage Engineer has reviewed the information submitted and advised that the drainage strategy is acceptable in principle. The strategy will need to be refined as the detailed design is progressed and supported by calculations to demonstrate the existing and proposed runoff rates, that there would be no flooding in a 30 year event and no internal flooding in a 1 in 100 year plus climate change event. It is recommended that this additional information be secured via a condition attached to the planning permission, if granted, to require the submission of s surface water drainage strategy for the site based on the strategy already submitted.

Residential Amenity

The nearest residential dwellings to the site are located on the north side of Leigh Road. These properties are large detached houses set back from the highway. Saved UDP Policy DES7 states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users of other developments. It is considered that the proposed development would have no impact upon the amenity of these properties in terms of loss of daylight, sunlight or privacy given that the new buildings proposed in both the detailed and outline elements of this application would be located a sufficient distance away from the site boundary. In addition, the new buildings would be heavily screened by existing vegetation along the northern boundary of the site. It is therefore considered that the proposed development would comply with Saved UDP Policy DES7 in relation to amenity impacts on neighbouring properties.

Pollution

Land Contamination

The applicant has submitted a Phase 1 Desk Based Ground Investigation in support of the application. The report reveals various sources of potential contamination across the site and surrounding areas, including the existing made ground, the former boiler house, underlying peat and infilled features. In addition, the potential for shallow worked coal seams has been identified. In order to investigate the potential pollutant linkages and geotechnical issues further, an intrusive site investigation is recommended.

The City Council’s Land Contamination Consultant has reviewed the report and recommendations and is satisfied with its conclusions. It is recommended that a condition be attached to the planning permission, if granted, to require the submission of a Site Investigation Report to address the nature, degree and distribution of land contamination on site and identify and assess the risk to receptors focusing primarily on risks to human health and the wider environment. Following this, details of any proposed remedial works shall be submitted and a verification report to validate that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the City Council.

Page 172 Noise

The RHS has submitted a noise assessment in support of the application. The report considers two likely noise sources that may impact on nearby residents, namely on-site plant and machinery and road traffic. The report also identifies another noise source, an electrical sub-station, which is proposed on the access road.

In respect of plant and machinery the report concludes that expected noise targets are achievable. This is to include the electrical sub-station, which is likely to have tonal aspects to consider. In respect of road traffic noise, the report assesses future scenarios both with and without the development. Predictions are made for the years 2019, 2024 and 2029 and it finds that noise would increase as a consequence of the development by 0.2dB, 0.3dB and 0.5dB for each respective year. In conclusion, the report says that this increase is considered to be negligible when assessed to criteria in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Section 3, Part 7.

The City Council’s Air and Noise Consultant has reviewed the submitted report and raises no objections subject to a condition to ensure that all commercial type activities, including fixed plant and machinery, associated with the development, when operating simultaneously, would not exceed the background noise level (LA90,T) by more than -5 dB at any time when measured at the boundary of the nearest noise sensitive premises.

Air Quality

An air quality report has been submitted in support of the application. In terms of the operational phase of the development, the report establishes the existing air quality in respect of the two pollutants of interest, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulates. These two pollutants are predominantly as a consequence of road traffic. The report then assesses existing air quality and it predicts likely future concentrations (with and without the scheme). Pollutant concentrations are then compared to air quality objectives set by the Government to protect human health.

The application site is located outside the City Council’s Air Quality Management Area however; it is in proximity to the Area to the east (including the motorway network). Notwithstanding this, the report finds that existing conditions within the study show acceptable air with measured concentrations of the two pollutants NO2 and particulates below the air quality objectives.

The report recognises that additional road traffic generated by the development would affect air quality at existing properties along the local road network. However, the assessment has demonstrated that there would be negligible impact on NO2 and particulate concentrations at relevant locations, both with or without the development. Predicted concentrations of the two pollutants have been shown to remain below the air quality objectives at all receptors and it is concluded that the overall impacts of the operational phase of the development are judged to be insignificant. Therefore no mitigation measures are required for the operational phase of the development.

In terms of the construction phase of the development the report considers there to be a risk of dust emissions (mainly track-out from construction vehicles) unless mitigation measures are deployed. The report in chapter 7 outlines the various recommended mitigation measures.

While the report concludes that air quality impacts from both phases of the development are not significant it does suggest that the site operator adopts sustainable transport modes to/from the development, in accordance with the Greater Manchester Air Quality Action Plan.

The City Council’s Air and Noise Consultant has reviewed the submitted report and raises no objections subject to a condition to require the submission of a Construction Environmental Management Plan. It is considered that the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact on air quality by reason of noise or vibration, pollution to the air, water or soil and therefore complies with UDP Policy EN17.

Sustainability

The City Council’s Sustainable Design and Construction SPD seeks to ensure that sustainable design and construction measures are integrated into new developments. The Energy Statement submitted as part of this planning application details the sustainable design and construction techniques proposed to improve the energy efficiency of new and existing buildings as part of the detailed application. This includes the use of LED lighting, high quality glazed, underfloor heat pumps and reclaimed rainwater store for green house irrigation. In

Page 173 particular, the Welcome Building would incorporate a green roof, rain water harvesting, ground source heat pumps, solar shading and cross ventilation.

It is considered that the measures proposed for Phase 1 of the development are acceptable in respect of sustainability and energy efficient and comply with the aims and objectives of the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD.

Mineral Safeguarding

The site is located within a mineral safeguarding area. The Greater Manchester Joint Minerals Plan, April 2013 seeks to ensure that proposed non-mineral development within safeguarded areas do not prevent the ability of minerals on the site to be mined in the future. It is considered that the scale and nature of the development proposed, and in particular the landscape approach to the development, would not unduly impact on the ability of minerals to be extracted from the site in the future, if found to be viable. Therefore, there is no requirement for the prior extraction of minerals in advance of construction

Referal to Secretary of State

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 application must be referred to the Secretary of State because the development is considered to be inappropriate development within the Green Belt.

Recommendation

Refer the application to the Secretary of State with a resolution that a hybrid planning permission be granted for the proposed development subject to the conditions set out below.

Conditions

1. The commencement of the ‘Full’ detailed component of the development, as referenced on drawing No. 101 Rev C, shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

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

100 Rev B Existing Site Plan 101 Rev C Proposed Masterplan Outline and Detailed Areas 102 Rev C Proposed Illustrative Masterplan 103 Rev C Proposed Illustrative Masterplan Phasing 483-01-104 Rev C Proposed Walled Garden Centre Area and Welcome Building General Arrangement 483-01-105 Rev D Proposed Walled Garden Centre Area and Welcome Building Phases 1a, 1b 483-01-106 Rev D Proposed Walled Garden Centre Area and Welcome Building Final (Phase 4) 107 Rev B Proposed Walled Garden Centre Area Descriptions 109 Site Location Plan

002 Rev E Welcome Building Level 00 003 Rev B Welcome Building Level 01M – Mezzanine Level 004 Rev E Welcome Building Roof Plan 200 Rev E Welcome Building Proposed East Elevation 201 Rev E Welcome Building Proposed West Elevation 202 Rev E Welcome Building Proposed North Elevation 203 Rev E Welcome Building Proposed South Elevation 204 Rev B Welcome Building Proposed South Boundary Elevation 205 Rev B Welcome Building Elevation Study 1 206 Rev B Welcome Building Elevation Study 2 210 Rev D Welcome Building South Section

Page 174 211 Rev D Welcome Building North Section

300 Rev E Existing Stables Level 00 Plan 301 Rev B Existing Stables Level 01 Plan 302 Rev B Existing Stables Roof Plan 310 Rev E Existing Stables Sections 311 Rev B Existing Stables Short Elevations 312 Rev D Existing Stables Long Elevations 313 Rev B Existing Stables Section

320 Rev B Existing Potting Sheds Level 00 Plan 321 Rev B Existing Potting Sheds Roof Plan 330 Rev B Existing Potting Sheds Section 331 Rev C Existing Potting Sheds Elevation

350 Rev C Proposed Stables Level 00 Plan 351 Rev B Proposed Stables Level 01 Plan 352 Rev B Proposed Stables Roof Plan 360 Rev C Proposed Stables Sections 361 Rev C Proposed Stables Short Elevations 362 Rev C Proposed Stables Long Elevations 363 Rev C Proposed Stables Elevation Study 384 Rev B Proposed Stables Section

370 Rev C Proposed Potting Sheds Level 00 Plan 372 Rev C Proposed Potting Sheds Roof Plan 380 Rev C Proposed Potting Sheds Section 381 Rev C Proposed Potting Sheds Elevation 382 Rev C Proposed Potting Sheds Elevation Study

400 Rev C Horticultural Yard Wider Site Plan 401 Rev B Proposed Horticultural Yard Level 00 402 Rev B Proposed Horticultural Yard Roof Plan 405 Rev E Proposed Horticultural Yard Elevations 410 Rev D Proposed Horticultural Yard Storage Building 411 Rev D Proposed Horticultural Yard Glasshouse & Poly Tunnels 412 Rev C Proposed Horticultural Yard Storage Shed, Compost Store & Plant Room 413 Rev C Proposed Horticultural Yard Storage Building Phase 2

UV007149-0000-DR-0001 Rev 02 M60 John Gilbert RBT Pedestrian Crossing Improvements UV007149-0000-DR-0002 Rev 02 M60 Worsley Courthouse RBT Pedestrian Crossing Improvements UV007149-0000-DR-0003 Rev 02 General Arrangement Primary Access

Biodiversity Management Strategy, ref: Ref 5880.008, by TEP, dated December 2016 Ecological Assessment Report, ref: 5880.007, and Biodiversity Management Strategy, ref: Ref 5880.008, by TEP, dated December 2016 Tree Site Report, Appraisal and Plans Rev A, ref: RHS‐BS‐001, by Christians Environmental, dated November 2016

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

3. Details of the following reserved matters in relation to the ‘Outline’ component of the development, as referenced on drawing No. 101 Rev C, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the relevant phase of the development is implemented. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the reserved matters approved.

a) Access b) Appearance c) Layout

Page 175 d) Landscaping e) Scale

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act (General Development Procedure Order) 1995 as amended and to enable the Local Planning Authority to retain adequate control over the proposed development.

4. Application(s) for the approval of all the reserved matters pertaining to the ‘Outline’ component of the development, as referenced on drawing No. 101 Rev C, and referred to in the preceding condition (Condition 3) must be made not later than the expiration of seven years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 92(2)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

5. The commencement of the development of the ‘Outline’ component of the development, as referenced on drawing No. 101 Rev C, must be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates:

(i) The expiration of ten years from the date of this decision notice. (ii) The expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters, or in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 92(2)(b) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

6. Prior to the commencement of each phase of the development, including any works of excavation or demolition and notwithstanding any information submitted with the application, a Site Investigation Report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of land contamination on the relevant part of the site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors focusing primarily on risks to human health and the wider environment.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the future users of the development and to protect the water environment in accordance with Saved Policies EN17 and EN18 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. Details of any remedial works identified as being necessary on the site in the Site Investigation Report for each phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such remedial works shall be incorporated into the development during the course of construction and completed prior to first occupation of the relevant phase of the development and retained thereafter.

8. Prior to first occupation of each phase of the development, a Verification Report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The Verification Report shall validate that all remedial works undertaken on site for the relevant phase of the development were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Local Planning Authority under Condition 7 of this planning permission.

9. Prior to the commencement of each phase of the development, including any works of excavation or demolition, a Construction Method Statement shall be 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:

Page 176 i. the times of noisy 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); 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. wheel washing facilities; 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 prevent disturbance to any adjacent living accommodation from noise and vibration, including from any piling activity; ix. measures to prevent the pollution of watercourses; x. measures to prevent disturbance from light pollution to nearby wildlife, and xi. a community engagement strategy which explains how local neighbours will be kept updated on the construction process, key milestones, and how they can report instances of unneighbourly behaviour from construction operatives. The statement shall also detail the steps that will be taken when unneighbourly behaviour has been reported. xii. Construction and demolition methods to be used, including methods of working adjacent to the Metrolink Hazard Zone, including use of cranes

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of neighbours and local wildlife in accordance with Saved Policies EN8, EN9, DES7 and EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

10. Prior to the commencement of each phase of the development on the parts of the site affected by Japanese knotweed, Himalayan balsam, Rhododendron and Montbretia, including any works of excavation or demolition, a detailed method statement for removing or the long-term management/control of these invasive species on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The method statement shall include proposed measures that will be used to prevent the spread of Japanese knotweed, Himalayan balsam, Rhododendron and Montbretia during any operations e.g. mowing, strimming or soil movement. It shall also contain measures to ensure that any soils brought to the site are free of the seeds/root/stem of any invasive plant covered under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended. The development shall proceed in accordance with the approved method statement.

Reason: To prevent the spread of Japanese knotweed, Himalayan balsam, Rhododendron and Montbretia, which are invasive species, and to conserve and enhance the natural and local environment by minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, in accordance with Saved Policies EN8, EN9, EN10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, the Nature Conservation and Biodiversity SPD and paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

11. Prior to the commencement of drainage works for each phase of the development, a strategy of surface water drainage for the relevant phase of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The strategy shall be based on the strategy submitted with the application (ref: Section 5.0, Flood Risk and Surface Water Drainage Assessment, ref: AR/PMCF/3556/NOVEMBER 2016, by RoC Consulting, dated November 2016) The strategy shall employ sustainable drainage methods and include details of how water quality will be improved and how surface water discharge rates shall be restricted to greenfield runoff rates. The approved strategy(s) shall be implemented prior to first occupation or use of the relevant phase of the development 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 Saved Policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and to provide betterment in terms of water quality and surface water discharge rates and to meet the requirements in the following documents;  National Planning Policy Framework  Water Framework Directive and the North West River Basin Management Plan

Page 177  National Planning Practice Guidance and 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)

12. Prior to the commencement of each phase of the development, a programme of archaeological works and a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) for the relevant part of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The programme of archaeological works shall be undertaken in accordance with the WSI which shall cover the following:

1. A phased programme and methodology of investigation and recording to include: - archaeological evaluation through trial trenching - dependent on the above, a further scheme of targeted archaeological excavation - archaeological watching brief 2. A programme for post investigation assessment to include: - analysis of the site investigation records and finds - a detailed analysis and publication of the significant clay pipe assemblage recovered from previous excavations - production of a final report on the significance of the archaeological and historical interest represented. 3. Deposition of the final report with the Greater Manchester Historic Environment Record and dissemination of the results commensurate with their significance 4. Provision for archive deposition of the report and records of the site investigation. 5. Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the approved WSI.

Reason: to record and advance understanding of heritage assets impacted on by the development and to make information about the archaeological heritage interest publicly accessible in accordance with Saved UDP Policy CH5 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and Section 12, Paragraph 141 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

13. Prior to the commencement of any phase of the development all the retained trees within (or overhanging) the relevant part of the development site shall be surrounded by substantial fences which shall extend to the extreme circumference of the spread of the branches of the trees (or such positions as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority). Such fences shall be erected in accordance with a specification for the relevant phase of the development to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall remain until all development within the relevant phase is completed and no work, including any form of drainage or storage of materials, earth or topsoil shall take place within the perimeter of such fencing.

Reason: To safeguard existing trees on and/or within the vicinity of the site in accordance with Saved Policy EN12 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

14. Prior to commencement of any works within any of the 17 areas identified in Section 3 of the Tree Site Report, Appraisal and Plans Rev A, ref: RHS‐BS‐001, by Christians Environmental, dated November 2016, a combined proposal / Arboricultural Method Statement / planting plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Unless the work is for: a. Essential safety works along public highways, footpaths or adjacent to occupied buildings. b. The removal of any non-native trees or shrubs. c. Works to be undertaken on any trees (native or non-native) with a stem diameter of less than 40cm at 1.2m from ground level. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved.

Reason: To safeguard existing trees on and/or within the vicinity of the site and the amenity of the area in accordance with Saved Policies EN12 and DES9 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework

15. Prior to the commencement of the hard and soft landscape works for each phase of the development, and

Page 178 notwithstanding any details shown on the drawings hereby approved, details of the hard and soft landscape works for the relevant phase of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted details shall include long term design objectives, long term landscape management objectives, the overarching approach to planting and maintenance, details of new habitats and above ground SUDs features to be created, details of any proposed landscape buffers around existing or new water bodies, details of external lighting. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area, ensure the protection of wildlife and supporting habitat and secure opportunities for the enhancement of the nature conservation value of the site in accordance with Saved Policies DES9, EN8, EN9 and EN10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

16. Prior to the commencement of construction of each building within each phase of the development, (excluding demolitions and works below ground), and notwithstanding the details shown on the drawings hereby approved, detailed drawings, samples and a schedule of materials of the following items shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The relevant part of the development shall be constructed using the approved materials.

a) Elevations b) Windows / glazing c) Entrances and doors d) Roof(s)

Reason: To safeguard the amenity, appearance and character of the area in accordance with policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

17. Prior to the commencement of construction of any boundary treatments around the perimeter of the site, and notwithstanding the details shown on the drawings hereby approved, detailed drawings and a schedule of materials for the proposed boundary treatments around the perimeter of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submission shall include detailed drawings and supporting information to demonstrate how the proposed boundary treatment will relate to and not adversely affect the setting of the Grade II Listed entrance gates on the northern boundary of the site. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity, appearance and character of the area and the setting of the Grade II Listed entrance gates in accordance with Saved Policies DES1 and CH2 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

18. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the Biodiversity Management Strategy, ref: Ref 5880.008, by TEP, dated December 2016 and any such updated to the strategy that may be required for each phase of the development (as per drawing ref: 103 Rev C) that shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the protection of wildlife and supporting habitat and secure opportunities for the enhancement of the nature conservation value of the site in accordance with Saved Policies EN8, EN9 and EN10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

19. The measures to mitigate against the impact on bats shall be implemented on site in accordance with the details set out in Section 4.23 of the Ecological Assessment Report ref: 5880.007, by TEP, dated December 2016.

Reason: To ensure the protection of bats and supporting habitat and secure opportunities for the enhancement of the nature conservation value of the site in accordance with Saved Policies EN8, EN9 and EN10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

20. The car parking (including disabled parking), coaching parking and cycle parking associated with the development, shall be provided on site prior to the opening of the relevant phase of the development to

Page 179 the public and shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: To ensure sufficient car, coach and cycle parking is provided for the development in accordance with Saved Policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework

21. The site access works and highway improvement works shown on the drawings listed below shall be implemented prior to first opening of the Garden to the public and shall be retained thereafter.

UV007149-0000-DR-0003 Rev 02 General Arrangement Primary Access UV007149-0000-DR-0001 Rev 02 M60 John Gilbert RBT Pedestrian Crossing Improvements UV007149-0000-DR-0002 Rev 02 M60 Worsley Courthouse RBT Pedestrian Crossing Improvements

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

22. Prior to first opening of the Garden to the public, an updated Travel Plan for the Garden shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan shall be designed to raise awareness of opportunities for reducing travel by car for both staff and visitors, and should feature a range of measures and initiatives promoting a choice of transport mode, and a clear monitoring regime with agreed targets. The agreed Travel Plan shall be implemented and reviewed in accordance with the timetable set out within the Travel Plan. An annual monitoring report on the Travel Plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority in accordance with the timetable set out within the Travel Plan. Updating of the Travel Plan shall be undertaken in response to the findings of the monitoring report and submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval.

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

23. No planned events shall be held at the site until an Events Transport Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with the Local Highways Authority, Transport for Greater Manchester and Highways England. The Events Transport Management Plan shall include details of:

 Results of at least 6 months monitoring of visitor numbers, car park usage and visitor transport modes recorded within the 12 months prior to submission, and associated analysis.  Traffic routing information and directional signage proposals  On-site car park management  Off-site shuttle bus service proposals, locations and timetables  Emergency vehicle provisions  Pre-event information/communication  Review periods for the Events Transport Management Plan and details of contributory partners.

The Events Transport Management Plan shall be implemented in full when events are held that have the potential to exceed on-site car parking capacity.

Reason: To ensure the effective operation of the highway network during planning events in accordance with Saved Policies ST5, A2, A8 and A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

24. The rating level (LAeq,T) from all commercial type activities, including fixed plant and machinery, associated with the development, when operating simultaneously, shall not exceed the background noise level (LA90,T) by more than -5 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 "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.

Page 180 Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with policy EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework

Notes to Applicant

1. The following documents were submitted in support of the application:

 Air Quality Assessment Rev 3, by Hoare Lea, dated December 2016  Crime Impact Statement Version A, ref: 2016/0588/CIS/01, by Greater Manchester Police, dated February 2017  Design and Access Statement by Hodder & Partners, dated 21 December 2016  Ecological Assessment Report, ref: 5880.007, and Biodiversity Management Strategy, ref: Ref 5880.008, by TEP, dated December 2016  Energy Statement Rev 1, by Hoare Lea, dated November 2016  Flood Risk and Surface Water Drainage Assessment, ref: AR/PMCF/3556/NOVEMBER 2016, by RoC Consulting dated November 2016  Heritage and Archaeological Assessment ref: EM/22804/02, by CgMs, dated December 2016  Indicative Site Perimeter Fencing dwg ref: SK-075 Rev A  Landscape and Visual Assessment, 5880.01.001, by TEP, dated December 2016  Noise Impact Assessment Rev 2, by Hoare Lea, dated December 2016  Phase 1 Desk Based Ground Investigation Rev 2, Ref: JB/AS/p1 3556, by RoC Consulting, dated November 2016  Planning Statement, ref: 26639/A5/PS/HW/vr, by Barton Willmore, dated December 2016  Service Vehicles General Arrangement Tracking, dwg ref: CIV-006 Rev 1 and Servicing Strategy Note  Stage 2 Road Safety Audit ref: RSA 71b-16, by Urban Vision, dated December 2016  Statement of Community Engagement by Barton Willmore, dated December 2016  Transport Assessment, ref: M16023-02D TA, by TTHC, dated December 2016 and Supplementary Transport Assessment by TTHC dated March 2017  RHS Bridgewater Framework Travel Plan Update, ref: M16023-03D FTP, by TTHC, dated March 2017  Tree Site Report, Appraisal and Plans Rev A, ref: RHS‐BS‐001, by Christians Environmental, dated November 2016

2. Although the Environment Agency does not have close proximity groundwater level monitoring data for this site, the low lying areas of the site may experience near surface groundwater levels which may impede attempts at infiltration drainage. In particular, local groundwater level monitoring carried out by the Coal Authority in the Coal Measures strata indicates that groundwater levels are likely to be circa 25.5 m AOD in the vicinity of Worsley Delph to the east side of the site, rising to circa 33 m AOD or even higher in the vicinity of Mosley Common to the west. The groundwater quality in the Coal Measures and the Collyhurst Sandstone may also be poor, being characteristically high in iron.

3. The applicant is advised that no removal of or works to any hedgerows, trees or shrubs or works to or demolition of buildings or structures that may be used by breeding birds should take place between 1st March and 31st August inclusive, unless a competent ecologist has undertaken a careful, detailed check of vegetation and buildings for active birds' nests immediately before the vegetation is cleared and/or buildings demolished and provided written confirmation that no birds will be harmed and/or that there are appropriate measures in place to protect nesting bird interest on site. Any such written confirmation should be submitted to the local planning authority.

4. If, during any works on site, contamination is suspected or found, or contamination is caused, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified immediately. Where required, a suitable risk assessment shall be carried out and/or any remedial action shall be carried out in accordance to an agreed process and within agreed timescales in agreement with the Local Planning Authority

Page 181 Page 182 Agenda Item 6

ITEM NO. 6

REPORT OF THE Strategic Director for Environment and Community Safety

TO THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL ON 6th April 2017

TITLE: PLANNING APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY

RECOMMENDATION: That the report be noted

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To set out details of applications determined by the Strategic Director for Environment and Community Safety in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS: (Available for public inspection) Details of the applications are available on the Council’s Public Access Website http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/default.aspx If you would like to access this information in an alternative format, please contact the planning office on 0161-779 6195 or e-mail [email protected]

KEY DECISION: NO

DETAILS: See attached schedule

KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: Performance Management

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND IMPLICATIONS:N/A

ASSESSMENT OF RISK:N/A

SOURCE OF FUNDING: N/A

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A

OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED:N/A

CONTACT OFFICER: Viv Prytharch 0161 779 4852

WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S): As specified in the attached schedule

Page 183

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 184 DELEGATED DECISIONS BY DCM

APPLICATION No: 17/69499/ART16 DATE VALID: 14.02.2017

APPLICANT: Trafford Council

LOCATION: Article 16 -Trafford Council Land At, Lock Lane, Partington

PROPOSAL: Article 16 Consultation from Trafford Council (Application Ref 86160/OUT/15) to extend the time limit for the implementation of planning permission H/OUT/68617 (Outline application, including details of access, for residential development of up to 550 dwellings; associated footpath, landscaping and ecological works.)

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69581/ART16 DATE VALID: 28.02.2017

APPLICANT: Lucy Broadwell

LOCATION: Article 16 Itv Studios Trafford Wharf Road Trafford Park M17 1FZ

PROPOSAL: Article 16 consultation from Trafford Council (Application 90517/FUL/17) Proposed two storey building located on the edge of the existing film LOT which will provide filming space, storage space and scenic facades.

DECISION: ART 10 /16 Application determined by LPA DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

Page 185 APPLICATION No: 17/69631/ART16 DATE VALID: 28.02.2017

APPLICANT:Lucy Broadwell

LOCATION: Article 16 Itv Studios Trafford Wharf Road Trafford Park M17 1FZ Trafford

PROPOSAL: Article 16 consultation from Trafford Council (Application 90514/FUL/17) Proposed two storey building located on the edge of the existing film LOT which will provide filming space, storage space and scenic facades.

DECISION: ART 10 /16 Application determined by LPA DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69309/ADV DATE VALID: 17.01.2017 WARD: Barton APPLICANT:STAR PUBS & BARS

LOCATION: Kings Head Hotel 535 Barton Lane Eccles M30 0HY

PROPOSAL: Display of two illuminated and five non-illuminated signs

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69434/PDE DATE VALID: 02.02.2017 WARD: Barton APPLICANT: Mr P Ward C/o Mr David Young

LOCATION: 143 Trafford Road Eccles M30 0JG

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey rear extension.

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 March 2017

Page 186 APPLICATION No: 16/69289/HH DATE VALID: 18.01.2017 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs Leach And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 236 Leigh Road Worsley M28 1LE

PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69409/HH DATE VALID: 01.02.2017 WARD: Boothstown APPLICANT: Mr Richard Mansell And Ellenbrook LOCATION: 9 Edenvale Worsley M28 1YR

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory, removal of the lower front bay and erection of a single storey front and single storey rear extension, installation of side window at ground floor level.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/68785/ADV DATE VALID: 24.08.2016 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT: Mr B Watson

LOCATION: Spark Studio 208 - 210 Great Clowes Street Salford M7 2ZS

PROPOSAL: Display of one non-illuminated post mounted sign

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 March 2017

Page 187 APPLICATION No: 16/69286/FUL DATE VALID: 17.01.2017 WARD: Broughton APPLICANT: Mr Simon Stott

LOCATION: 17 Alexander Gardens Salford M7 1RY

PROPOSAL: Installation of a new entrance and associated car parking, remodel of 35 existing single bed flats, wardens house and communal area into 38 two bed flats and 1 accessible single bed flat, together with alterations to elevations to include rendering

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69210/ADV DATE VALID: 17.01.2017 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT: Mr Paul Fisher

LOCATION: Part Ground And Part First Floor Unit 4 Chancerygate Business Centre Soapstone Way Irlam M44 6BL

PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for the display of one internally illuminated fascia sign

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69338/ADV DATE VALID: 17.01.2017 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT:STAR PUBS & BARS

LOCATION: Coach And Horses Liverpool Road Cadishead Irlam M44 5DB

PROPOSAL: Display of six illuminated signs and

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 March 2017

Page 188 APPLICATION No: 17/69449/PDE DATE VALID: 03.02.2017 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT: Mr Uddin C/O Linda Hardicker

LOCATION: 37 Mona Way Irlam M44 6GG

PROPOSAL: Proposed rear conservatory

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69466/DEMCON DATE VALID: 08.02.2017 WARD: Cadishead APPLICANT: Salford City Council

LOCATION: Irlam Council Offices Astley Road Irlam M44 5LL

PROPOSAL: Prior notification for the demolition of Irlam Council offices

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69374/HH DATE VALID: 24.01.2017 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT:Mr Thai Tran

LOCATION: 3 May Road Swinton M27 5FS

PROPOSAL: Erection of a first floor side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 20 March 2017

Page 189 APPLICATION No: 17/69380/HH DATE VALID: 30.01.2017 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT: Mr J Grimshaw

LOCATION: 33 Welwyn Drive Salford M6 7PR

PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey side extension, part first floor part two storey rear extension and demolition of existing detached garage

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69420/HH DATE VALID: 02.02.2017 WARD: Claremont APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs R GRATRIX

LOCATION: 3A Daisy Bank Avenue Swinton M27 5FU

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory, erection of a two storey rear extension, construction of rear roof dormers and alterations to the existing roof and elevations (Resubmission of planning application 16/68093/HH)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/68554/FUL DATE VALID: 26.10.2016 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT: Rev Christopher Adelowo

LOCATION: 25 Church Street Eccles M30 0BJ

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the change of use from A1 (Shop) to D1 (Non-Residential Institutions) charity purposes, evening worship and evening meetings.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 March 2017

Page 190 APPLICATION No: 16/68763/DISCON DATE VALID: 08.09.2016 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT: Mr Karmjit Lyal

LOCATION: Stableford Hall Stableford Avenue Eccles M30 8AP

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of conditions 3 (bats), 4 (land contamination), 5 (crime prevention), 6 (landscape, 7 (materials) attached to planning permission 13/64214/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69098/HH DATE VALID: 06.12.2016 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT: Mr Jonathan Camilleri

LOCATION: The Old School House Stableford Avenue Eccles M30 8AP

PROPOSAL: Proposed hip to gable roof extension to include the construction of a rear roof dormer, and the removal of a chimney

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 23 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69135/HH DATE VALID: 03.01.2017 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT: Mr David Harding

LOCATION: 1 Victoria Crescent Eccles M30 9AN

PROPOSAL: Single storey side and rear extension, and partial demolition of existing day room.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

Page 191 APPLICATION No: 17/69355/HH DATE VALID: 18.01.2017 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT: Mr STUART MOON

LOCATION: 75 Pine Grove Eccles M30 9JW

PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey side and part two storey, part first floor rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69357/TPO DATE VALID: 18.01.2017 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT: Mr Ian Simms

LOCATION: 5 Abbey Grove Eccles M30 9QN

PROPOSAL: Fell one Sycamore (T1) and fell one Elm (T2)

DECISION: Split decision DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69474/TREECA DATE VALID: 08.02.2017 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT: Mr Jonathan Harris

LOCATION: 18 Ellesmere Road Eccles

M30 9FD

PROPOSAL: Fell one Lime (T1) and one Sycamore (T2)

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

Page 192 APPLICATION No: 17/69485/TPO DATE VALID: 13.02.2017 WARD: Eccles APPLICANT: Mr Price

LOCATION: 11 Bradford Road Eccles M30 9FB

PROPOSAL: Crown thin by 20% one Oak (T1) and one Beech (T2)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69257/FUL DATE VALID: 12.01.2017 WARD: Irlam APPLICANT: Mr MARTIN HODKINSON

LOCATION: 2-6 George Street Irlam M44 6HW

PROPOSAL: Change of use from vacant community hall to 4 No. self contained flats at ground floor level and a 5 bed HMO at first floor level, together with alterations to elevations

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 15/66634/LBC DATE VALID: 13.07.2015 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT: Mr X1 Developments Riverside

LOCATION: Salford Magistrates Court Bexley Square Salford M3 6DD

PROPOSAL: Listed Building consent for the replacement of existing roof lantern/light to same design as original.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 March 2017

Page 193 APPLICATION No: 16/68695/LBC DATE VALID: 17.08.2016 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT: Mr N Beighton Riverside

LOCATION: 4 Acton Square Salford M5 4NY

PROPOSAL: Construction of two lightwells to basement rooms at front of building

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69163/FUL DATE VALID: 09.01.2017 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT: Mr George McDonough Riverside

LOCATION: Allerton Building And Theatre University Of Salford Frederick Road Salford M6 6PU

PROPOSAL: Proposed creation of new dementia hub including removal of 1no existing window, installation of a new entrance door, with a new steel frame, timber and render clad canopy and redevelopment of a small section of the existing courtyard to provide a small dementia garden with timber trellis entrances for users and visitors to the hub.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69274/ADV DATE VALID: 27.01.2017 WARD: Irwell APPLICANT: Miss Charlotte France Riverside

LOCATION: Crescent House University Of Salford Crescent Salford M5 4PF

PROPOSAL: Display of two non-illuminated fascia signs on two University buildings

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 March 2017

Page 194 APPLICATION No: 16/69132/FUL DATE VALID: 06.01.2017 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT: Mr Alfredo Moghimi

LOCATION: 1A Union Terrace Bury Old Road Salford M7 4ZH

PROPOSAL: Change of use from A1 Shops and retail outlets to A5 Hot food and takeaway

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69240/HH DATE VALID: 15.12.2016 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs Y. Koval

LOCATION: 139 Moor Lane Salford M7 3GB

PROPOSAL: Erection of a part single part two storey side extension, two storey rear extension, together with alterations to the front elevation.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69336/FUL DATE VALID: 19.01.2017 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT: Mr Monath

LOCATION: 50 Singleton Road Salford M7 4LN

PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey rear extension to create a dwelling unit (granny flat type accommodation)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 March 2017

Page 195 APPLICATION No: 17/69358/TPO DATE VALID: 18.01.2017 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT: Mr Wolfson

LOCATION: 18 Cavendish Road Salford M7 4WW

PROPOSAL: Crown lift three trees to a height of 5m above ground level (T1 Beech; T2: Beech; T3: Sycamore)

Reason: To abate nuisance from low branches.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69450/PDE DATE VALID: 03.02.2017 WARD: Kersal APPLICANT: Mr John Wood C/o Mr Tom Brown

LOCATION: 13 Northallerton Road Salford M7 3TP

PROPOSAL: Single storey rear extension.

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69334/FUL DATE VALID: 17.01.2017 WARD: Langworthy APPLICANT: Belinda Shannon

LOCATION: 45 Brown Street Salford M6 5RY

PROPOSAL: Conversion from single dwelling to two self contained flats, together with erection of a single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 March 2017

Page 196 APPLICATION No: 16/67568/OUT DATE VALID: 04.01.2016 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT:TH Real Estate For Warburg -Henderson KAG Pan-Europa Fonds No

LOCATION: Waterfront Quay Salford Quays Salford M50 3XW

PROPOSAL: Outline application with all matters reserved for a mixed use development comprising of up to 63,000m2 (GIA) floorspace to include residential (600-800 apartments use class C3), and ground floor retail, restaurant and local service uses (600 - 900m2 total from use classes A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, D1 and D2), up to 350 basement parking spaces together with access and landscaping

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69272/FUL DATE VALID: 11.01.2017 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT: Mr Peter Mills

LOCATION: Collier Street Baths 2 Collier Street Salford M3 7DW

PROPOSAL: Erection of a protective scaffold that will provide weather protection to the building. The structure comprises external scaffold to the perimeter of the building designed to support a corrugated sheet roof and monoflex vertical faces. It also co mprises an extension to the already existing scaffold frame to provide vertical propping to corrugated roof sheets.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 March 2017

Page 197 APPLICATION No: 16/69273/LBC DATE VALID: 11.01.2017 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT: Mr Peter Mills

LOCATION: Collier Street Baths 2 Collier Street Salford M3 7DW

PROPOSAL: Listed Building Consent for the erection of a protective scaffol d that will provide weather protection to the building. The structure comprises external scaffold to the perimeter of the building designed to support a corrugated sheet roof and monoflex vertical faces. It also comprises an extension to the already existing scaffold frame to provide vertical propping to corrugated roof sheets.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69283/FUL DATE VALID: 12.01.2017 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT: The Anchorage Management Company Limited

LOCATION: 2 Anchorage Quay Salford M50 3XE

PROPOSAL: The refurbishment and re-clad of existing management suite. New landscaped paving area and curtain walling addition to existing building entrance.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 9 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69347/ADV DATE VALID: 27.01.2017 WARD: Ordsall APPLICANT: Mr Mark Griffiths

LOCATION: J D S Trucks Broadway Salford M50 2UW

PROPOSAL: Display of six illuminated signs and one non-illuminated sign.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 22 March 2017

Page 198 APPLICATION No: 17/69320/HH DATE VALID: 26.01.2017 WARD: Pendlebury APPLICANT:IRENA TUCKER

LOCATION: 45 Wedgwood Road Swinton M27 8RS

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the erection of a single storey rear extension and construction of new external steps and decking

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 6 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69134/HH DATE VALID: 28.11.2016 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT: Mr Eric Peake North

LOCATION: 14 Charlton Drive Worsley M27 9RT

PROPOSAL: Demolition of a shed, erection of a single storey side extension and erection of a front dormer

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69376/ADV DATE VALID: 26.01.2017 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT:Ms Jan Clark North

LOCATION: 732 Bolton Road Swinton M27 6EW

PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for retention of one internally illuminated ATM collar sign and fascia board.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

Page 199 APPLICATION No: 17/69426/HH DATE VALID: 02.02.2017 WARD: Swinton APPLICANT: Mr J Huddart South

LOCATION: 53 Barton Road Swinton M27 5LQ

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the increase in height to existing garage

DECISION: Approve - unconditional DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69161/FUL DATE VALID: 01.12.2016 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT: Mr M Akhtar And Seedley LOCATION: 68 Edward Avenue Salford M6 8DA

PROPOSAL: Variation of opening hours attached to planning permission 12/61647/FUL

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69166/HH DATE VALID: 01.02.2017 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT: Mr D Forth And Seedley LOCATION: 16 Victoria Road Salford M6 8EY

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing side extension and erection of two storey side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 22 March 2017

Page 200 APPLICATION No: 16/69279/FUL DATE VALID: 04.01.2017 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT: Mr Mike Stone And Seedley LOCATION: Former Hope High School Eccles Old Road Salford M6 8GG

PROPOSAL: The erection of 64 dwellings, the laying out of roads and footways; hard and soft landscaping, walls and fences and drainage; and other associated works

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 17 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69346/FUL DATE VALID: 30.01.2017 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT: Mr Aram Shebani And Seedley LOCATION: 182 Weaste Lane Salford M5 5JL

PROPOSAL: Change of use from C3 (dwelling house) to 7 bed HMO (house in multiple occupation) (Sui Generis) and formation of light well to front of property.

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69433/TPO DATE VALID: 03.02.2017 WARD: Weaste APPLICANT: Mr Christopher Coussons And Seedley LOCATION: 41 Victoria Road Salford M6 8FZ

PROPOSAL: Pollard three limes trees (T1 - T3)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 March 2017

Page 201 APPLICATION No: 16/69256/FUL DATE VALID: 06.01.2017 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT: Miss Leanne Elkin North

LOCATION: Unit G9 Ellesmere Retail Park New Ellesmere Approach Worsley M28 3UD

PROPOSAL: Amalgamation of vacant units G8B and G9 together with a change of use from A1 (shop) to A3 (restaurants and cafes)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69432/HH DATE VALID: 03.02.2017 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT: Mr Ben Hardman North

LOCATION: 257 Bolton Road Worsley M28 3QB

PROPOSAL: Retrospective planning application for the erection of a single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve - unconditional DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/68259/HH DATE VALID: 03.02.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT: Mr Lee Plaister

LOCATION: The Lodge Old Warke Dam Woodstock Drive Worsley M28 2WP

PROPOSAL: Construction of first floor front balcony on pillars together with balustrading.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 9 March 2017

Page 202 APPLICATION No: 16/68331/FUL DATE VALID: 03.02.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT: Mr Lee Plaister

LOCATION: The Lodge Old Warke Dam Woodstock Drive Worsley M28 2WP

PROPOSAL: Erection of one new dwelling

DECISION: Refuse DATE DECISION ISSUED: 9 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69118/HH DATE VALID: 09.12.2016 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT: Becky Hughes

LOCATION: 15 Poplar Road Swinton M27 0HL

PROPOSAL: Single storey rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 14 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/69202/HH DATE VALID: 09.01.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT: Mrs Sally Cordwell

LOCATION: 12 Welbeck Road Worsley M28 2SL

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing conservatory, erection of a single/two storey rear extensions, to include Juliet balcony and balcony platform, raised decked area and stairs together with raising of the ridge height to accommodate first floor level living, alterations to driveway and installation of a shipping container for storage

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 March 2017

Page 203 APPLICATION No: 17/69303/HH DATE VALID: 12.01.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT: Mr Shan Khambata

LOCATION: 9 Oaklands Road Swinton M27 0ED

PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey side and rear extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 15 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69331/HH DATE VALID: 30.01.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT: Mr Peter Hill

LOCATION: 14 Roe Green Worsley M28 2RF

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey side extension

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69350/HH DATE VALID: 31.01.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT: Mr William Smith

LOCATION: 6 Colwyn Road Swinton M27 0EU

PROPOSAL: Demolition of the existing single-storey extension. Erection of a single storey rear extension, first floor extension with juliette balcony and single storey garage to the rear garden.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

Page 204 APPLICATION No: 17/69443/HH DATE VALID: 06.02.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT: Mr Christopher Halliwell

LOCATION: 8B Beatrice Road Worsley M28 2TN

PROPOSAL: Erection of a first floor side and single storey rear extension.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 27 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69484/TREECA DATE VALID: 13.02.2017 WARD: Worsley APPLICANT: Mr Oliver Metcalfe

LOCATION: 135 The Green Worsley M28 2PA

PROPOSAL: Fell one Birch (T1)

DECISION: No Objections DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 16/68969/FUL DATE VALID: 21.10.2016 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT: Mrs Ellie Hirons South

LOCATION: Tyne Court Worsley M28 0SN

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing sheltered accommodation block and construction of 1no block, three storey high to provide 36 apartments, with associated car parking and landscaping, as well as new boundary treatments and driveways to 3 existing bungalows.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 8 March 2017

Page 205 APPLICATION No: 16/69288/DISCON DATE VALID: 03.01.2017 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT: Countryside Properties (UK) Ltd C/o Agent South

LOCATION: Land To The South Of Holyoake Road Walkden Worsley M28 3DL

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of conditions 3 (contam), 5 (surface Water), 6 (noise), 8 (footway/kerbing), 9 (highways), 10 (traffic), 13 (cemp), 14 (materials), attached to planning permission 16/68126/FUL

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69397/COU DATE VALID: 01.02.2017 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT: Mr David Jebreel South

LOCATION: Unit 4 Old Co Op Buildings High Street Worsley M28 3JH

PROPOSAL: Change of use from A1 (Shop) to Dual Use A3 (Food and Drink) and A5 (Hot Food Takeaway)

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 24 March 2017

APPLICATION No: 17/69403/DISCON DATE VALID: 01.02.2017 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT:Ms Louise Morrissey South

LOCATION: Burgess Farm Hilton Lane Worsley Manchester M28 3TL

PROPOSAL: Request for confirmation of compliance of condition 2 (lighting. Attached to planning permission 16/68300/REM.

DECISION: Condition Request determined DATE DECISION ISSUED: 10 March 2017

Page 206 APPLICATION No: 17/69425/TPO DATE VALID: 31.01.2017 WARD: Walkden APPLICANT: Mrs Joanne Painter South

LOCATION: Abbeyfield House Bridgewater Road Worsley M28 3JE

PROPOSAL: Crown lift to 3m above ground and crown thin by 20% seven lime (T1 - T6 and T8). Crown lift to 2m above ground and crown thin by 20% one silver birch (T9). Crown lift to 3m above ground and crown thin by 20% one ash (T11). Fell T12.

DECISION: Approve DATE DECISION ISSUED: 13 March 2017

Page 207 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 7

ITEM NO. 7

REPORT OF The Strategic Director for Environment and Community safety

TO THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL ON 6th April 2017

TITLE: PLANNING APPEALS

RECOMMENDATION: That the report be noted

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To set out details of appeals received and determined

KEY DECISION: NO

DETAILS: See attached schedule

KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: Performance Management

EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND IMPLICATIONS:N/A

ASSESSMENT OF RISK:N/A

SOURCE OF FUNDING: N/A

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by N/A

OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED:N/A

CONTACT OFFICER: Liz Taylor 0161 779 4803

WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S): As indicated in the attached schedule.

Page 209 PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

REPORT OF NEW PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS RECEIVED

APPLICATION No: 16/68637/FUL

APPLICATION DECISION LEVEL: Panel Decision

OFFICER Approve RECOMMEND’N:

APPEAL SITE: 28 Cavendish Road Salford M7 4WW

PROPOSAL: Conversion of single dwelling house into 5.no one bedroom self-contained apartments together with associated car parking including retention of first floor rear patio doors and installation of Juliet balconies

WARD: Kersal

APPELLANT: Mr Samuel Lock

DATE RECEIVED: 21 March 2017

Appeal against refusal of planning application.

The reason for refusal states:

The conversion of the property into five self-contained flats would result in the loss of a single family dwelling house within an area characterised by large single family dwelling houses, increasing the intensity of occupation of the property detrimental to the character of the area and the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties contrary to Policies H1 and H5 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

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 Paragraphs 186-187 of the NPPF.

Page 210