PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
APPLICATION No:
05/50247/OUT
APPLICANT:
Salford Royal Hospitals NHS Trust
LOCATION:
Hope Hospital Eccles Old Road Salford M6 8HD
PROPOSAL:
Modification of Condition 01 of planning permission
00/40937/OUT to extend the period for submission of details of
the siting, design, external appearance, means of access and
landscaping of the redeveloped hospital buildings for a further to
two years
WARD:
Weaste And Seedley
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to the whole of the existing Hope Hospital site that covers an area of
approximately 15 hectares and that is bounded by Stott Lane to the east, the M602 motorway to the
south, Devonshire Road and residential properties to the west and Eccles Old Road to the north. It
specifically excludes the Stott Lane playing fields.
The application is made under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and seeks
to extend the life of the outline planning permission for the selective redevelopment of Hope
Hospital that includes the demolition of buildings and structures and the erection of new buildings,
landscaping and the laying out of internal service roads, the provision of revised access
arrangements, surface and multi storey car parking and other associated works.
Section 73 applies to applications for planning permission for the development of land without
complying with conditions subject to which a previous planning permission was granted. In this
case the applicant is seeking to extend the life of the outline permission. Legislation states that on
such an application the local planning authority shall consider only the question of the conditions
subject to which planning permission should be granted. If a local planning authority decides that
planning permission should be granted subject to conditions differing from those subject to
conditions differing from those subject to which the previous permission was granted they shall
grant permission accordingly. If they decide that planning permission should be granted subject to
the same conditions as those subject to which the previous permission was granted then they shall
refuse the application.
The application seeks to modify condition 1 of the existing outline planning permission
(00/40937/OUT) to extend the period for the submission of reserved matters by a further two
years. As currently worded the condition requires application for reserved matters to be made no
later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of the permission (8 December
2000). As the preferred bidder has only just been chosen within the last few weeks it is not
1
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
possible to submit all reserved matters applications by 8 December this year. The Trust therefore
requests that the time period be extended by a further two years and that the condition be reworded
as follows:
Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of
two years beginning with the date of this permission…
SITE HISTORY
There have been a considerable number of planning applications on the site but those relevant to
this application are the following.
99/39299/OUT – outline permission for the selective redevelopment granted in April 2000.
00/40937/OUT – modification to one of the conditions relating to the timing of junction and access
arrangements granted in December 2000
PUBLICITY
The application has been publicised by means of both site and press notices.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 to 137 and 2 to 104 Meadowgate
1 to 9 and 2 to 16 Osbourne Road
1 to 23, 8 to 20, flats 1 to 18 Portland House and flats 1 to 18 Zyburn Court Park Road
1 to 18 Ryecroft Avenue
1 to 11 and flats 1 to 14 Meadow Court Stott Lane
1 to 8 Timothy Close
1 to 31, 6 to 52, 1A, 3A, 5A and 15A Trafalgar Road
1 to 11 and 2 to 16 Vauban Drive
1 to 16 Verdun Avenue
1 to 21, 2 to 18, 1A and 4A Vestris Drive
St James’ Church and 1 to 22 Vicarage Close
1 to 8 Belmont Avenue
1 to 9 and 19 to 39 Bradfield Avenue
2 to 8, 16 to 36, 5 to 9, 27 to 45, 44 and 46 Devonshire Road
189 to 215, 219 to 225, 212, 214, 220 to 228, 254 and 264 Eccles Old Road
9 to 41 and 10 to 32 Victoria Road
1 to 11, 2 to 10, 2A to 2D, 11A and 15 Wilton Road
These are all those notified of the previous outline applications.
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received no letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application
publicity.
2
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DP1 Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: SC1 Provision of Social and Community Facilities, SC9 Health Care Facilities, T4
Public Transport, T13 Car Parking.
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: EHC4 Hope Hospital
Other policies:A1 Transport Assessments and Travel Plans, A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and
Motorcycle Parking in New Developments.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are whether the conditions can be altered as
suggested by the applicant and whether the other existing conditions are acceptable or any new
conditions are necessary having regard to the development plan.
Policy ECH4 states that the modernisation and expansion of health care facilities at Hope Hospital
will be permitted provided that:
i)
all development proposals form part of a co-ordinated programme set out within an
approved masterplan;
ii)
transport issues are addressed in a co-ordinated manner, particularly through the
development of a Travel Plan and improvements to public transport, cycling and
pedestrian, car parking, and access/egress provision;
iii)
neighbouring uses, particularly residential, would not suffer an unacceptable reduction
in amenity or safety, for example through the impact of traffic or car parking associated
with the hospital;
iv)
the long-term recreational use of Stott Lane Playing Fields is protected; and
v)
development is of a high quality of design consistent with the policies of the Design
Chapter
The previous approval was considered to be in conformity with the policies of the adopted UDP.
The policies in the revised deposit draft strengthen the support for the redevelopment of the
hospital. Similarly the proposal also conforms with the policies of the RSS in that the
redevelopment of the hospital takes place as previously developed land.
The preferred bidder for the redevelopment of the hospital has only recently been selected and it is
therefore reasonable that greater time is taken to allow submission of reserved matters. The
timetable has been beyond the control of both the Trust and the City Council and has to a
3
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
considerable extent been held up by central government. I therefore have no objections to the
extension of the time period for the submission of reserved matters.
The main issue to be addressed is whether or not the previously approved conditions are adequate.
Since planning permission was first approved traffic levels have increased. The Trust has accepted
that the junction improvements at Stott Lane and Eccles Old Road, that will introduce an
additional lane on Stott Lane as it approaches Eccles Old Road, are a priority. I have therefore
attached an additional condition requiring that these junction improvements are constructed before
any other development commences unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning
authority.
In addition the contaminated land condition has been reworded to reflect current wording of that
condition.
Previously the Trust entered into legal agreements regarding the implementation of a Green
Transport plan for the site and highway works relating to modified access points on Stott Lane and
Eccles Old Road and I have also attached a condition requiring these legal agreements to be carried
forward under this application.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The Trust has agreed to the early implementation of junction improvements to Eccles Old Road
and Stott Lane.
CONCLUSION
The main planning issues relating to this application are whether the conditions can be altered as
suggested by the applicant and whether the other existing conditions are acceptable or any new
conditions are necessary. It is accepted that greater time is needed for the submission of reserved
matters and the Trust has accepted that the improvements to the junction of Stott Lane and Eccles
Old Road are now a priority.
RECOMMENDATION
That authority be granted to be the Strategic Director of Customer and Support Services to enter
into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and Section
278 of the Highways Act 1980.
Conditions
1. Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of two
years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later
than whichever is the later of the following dates:-
4
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
(a) the expiration of five years from the date of this permission; or
(b) 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.
2. No individual phase of development shall be started until full details of the following reserved
matters as relevant to the particular phase have been submitted to and approved by the Local
Planning Authority:
- the layout of the site, including the disposition of buildings and roads and provision for
parking and servicing;
- plans and elevations showing the design of buildings and other structures;
- the colour and type of facing materials to be used for all external walls and roofs;
- the means of access to the site and the buildings;
- a landscape scheme for the site which shall include details of trees and shrubs to be planted,
any existing trees to be retained, or felled indicating the spread of the branches and trunk
positions, walls, fences, boundary and surface treatment.
3. The details required by Condition 2 of this permission shall have regard to the Site
Development Strategy Outline Masterplan dated March 1999 and to the principles of
development as set out in the Green Transport Plan Framework, Explanatory Statement and
Traffic Impact assessment Scoping Study documents dated April 1999 and Presentation of the
Trust's Emerging Site Development Strategy for Hope Hospital document, or any variation to
the above documents that shall first be approved by the Local Planning Authority, that were
approved under planning permission 99/39299/OUT.
4. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation
report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority (LPA). The investigation shall address
the nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on site and shall
include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the
Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focusing primarily on risks to human health and
controlled waters. The investigation shall also address the implications of ground conditions
on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services
and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems
and property. The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the LPA prior to the
start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works contained within
the approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the site. Prior
to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be submitted
to the LPA for approval. The Site Completion Report shall validate that all works undertaken
on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the LPA.
5
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
5. No development shall commence until full details of the access and junction improvements on
Stott Lane and Eccles Old Road have been approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority and no building shall be occupied until those accesses and junction improvements
have been constructed in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority.
6. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the undertaking
of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4)(a-d) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
or a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 has
been made and lodged with the Local Planning Authority, and the Local Planning Authority
has given its approval in writing. The planning obligations will provide for the continued
implementation of a phased Green Travel Plan for the site and for highway works on Stott
Lane and Eccles Old Road relating to modified access as required by policy A1of the Revised
Deposit Draft Replacement City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R001 Section 92
2. Standard Reason R002 Reserved Matters
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R028A Public safety
5. Standard Reason R026A Interests of highway safety
6. To ensure the continued implementation of a phased Green Travel Plan for the site and for
highway works on Stott Lane and Eccles Old Road relating to modified access as required by
policy A1 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement City of Salford Unitary Development
Plan.
APPLICATION No:
05/50432/FUL
APPLICANT:
Breezebanner Ltd
LOCATION:
309-315 Bury New Road Salford M7 2YN
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a 10 storey
development comprising 126 apartments and 1143 sq.m of
6
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
retail/office floorspace (A1,A2,B1) with associated car parking
and landscaping
WARD:
Broughton
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a site close to the junction of Bury New Road and Great Cheetham
Street. The site is bounded by a MacDonalds restaurant to the north and by a car showroom and
repair garage to the south. To the west, beyond Hilton Street is a public swimming pool, a primary
electricity sub-station and residential development.
The site has a frontage to Bury New Road of 50m and has a depth of 55m. The site is currently
occupied by a variety of old industrial and commercial buildings ranging in height from two to
three storeys. The closest dwellings are 19m from the proposed building.
It is proposed to demolish the existing buildings and erect a 10 storey development comprising 126
apartments, two levels of retail and commercial floorspace fronting Bury Old Road and a garden
deck at second floor.
The scheme would provide a mix of one, two and three bedroomed apartments and has been
designed so that it presents a two storey active frontage to Bury New Road. There would be a total
of 41 one bed apartments, 78 two bed apartments and 7 three bed apartments. The residential floor
above the office and retail units is recessed by 1.6m with the seven floors above this being on the
same line as the first two floors. The materials for the ground and first floor would be polished
pre-cast concrete panels and large format glazing. The upper floors would be predominantly
glazed.
SITE HISTORY
There have been no previous applications of any significance on this site although the applicant
previously submitted a development on a smaller part of this site for a 14 storey development that
has yet to be determined.
CONSULTATIONS
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Unit – has a number of concerns regarding
detailed security matters that have been addressed by the architects.
Director of Environmental Services – has no objections to the application in principle but requests
that conditions be attached regarding noise and contaminated land.
7
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Environment Agency – no objections in principle but requests a condition regarding contaminated
land as the site is within 250m of a landfill site.
Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – The site is well located in relation to public
transport being within walking distance of the bus stops on Bury New Road. The use of the site for
high density residential development is supported as it maximises the benefits of the site’s good
public transport accessibility.
United Utilities – no objections providing that the site is drained on a separate system with only
foul drainage connected into the foul sewer.
Central Salford URC – no objections to the proposal.
PUBLICITY
The application has been publicised by means of both site and press notices
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
294, 296, MacDonalds, RRG and 293 to 303 Bury New Road
31 to 47 Hilton Street
308 to 318 Great Cheetham Street East
1 to 9 Pentlands Avenue
55 to 64 Rialto Gardens
Flats 1 to 35 Malimson Bourne, Hilton Street North
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received one letter of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The
following issues have been raised:Loss of light
Loss of privacy
Increase in traffic
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DP1 Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings, EC8 Town Centres – Retail,
Leisure and Office Development
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
8
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Other policies: DEV2 Good Design, H1 Meeting Housing Needs, T13 Car Parking, EC3 Re-Use
of Sites and Premises, S2 Location of New Retail Development
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DES1 Respecting Context, A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in
New Developments, DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours, S2B Retail and Leisure
Development Outside Town and Neighbourhood Centres, DES5 Tall Buildings
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of the proposed
development is acceptable; whether the design is acceptable; whether there would be an impact on
the amenity of neighbouring residents; whether the proposed level of car parking is acceptable;
whether there would be an acceptable contribution towards open space and environmental
improvements in the vicinity; and whether the proposed development complies with the relevant
policies of the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary Development Plan. I
shall deal with each of the issues in turn below.
The Principle of the Proposed Development
Adopted Policy EC3 states that where existing industrial and non-retail commercial sites become
vacant, the City Council will seek to re-use or redevelop them for similar or related uses, except
where one or more of the following criteria apply. These include where the sites or premises could
be used for other purposes without resulting in a material or unacceptable shortfall in the range of
sites or premises available for economic development, where alternative employment generating
development would be more appropriate, or there is a strong environmental case for rationalising
land uses or creating open space.
Adopted Policy H1 states that the Council will endeavour to ensure that the city’s housing stock is
able to meet the housing requirements of all groups within Salford by promoting a number of
measures, including the release of land to accommodate new house building.
Draft Policy H1 states that new housing development should contribute to the provision of a
balanced mix of dwellings within the local area and not contribute to an oversupply of any
particular type of residential accommodation.
Draft policy DES5 states that tall buildings will be permitted where a number of criteria apply.
These include where the scale is appropriate to its context and location and where the building
would be of the highest quality design and construction. Advice from CABE on tall buildings is
also relevant.
9
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Adopted policy S2 states that the City Council will normally require all new retail development to
be located in or immediately adjacent to existing shopping centres unless it is to meet purely local
needs. Draft policy S2B of the replacement plan states that planning permission would be granted
for retail development outside town and neighbourhood centres where a number of criteria can be
satisfied.
RSS Policy EC8 encourages new retail and office development within existing centres and
confirms that a sequential approach to retail development must be adopted in accordance with
PPG6 Town Centres and Retail Development (now PPS6 Planning for Town Centres)
PPG3: Housing is also relevant and it highlights the need to develop previously developed
brownfield sites and states that where appropriate higher densities should be considered especially
in places with good public transport accessibility.
The site is previously developed land and is in a highly accessible location in close proximity to
the regional centre and the services and facilities therein. It also lies directly opposite the Leicester
Road neighbourhood centre. In assessing the appropriateness of the retail floorspace I am mindful
that the proposed amount of floorspace is comparatively small, that the site lies adjacent to an
existing neighbourhood centre and that the floorspace is part of a larger residential/office scheme.
I consider therefore that the principle of the redevelopment of the site is acceptable and in
accordance with national government guidance, regional guidance and City Council policies. The
application proposes a mix of uses, namely residential, commercial and retail, including active
uses at ground floor level along Bury New Road. The application has been amended from that
originally submitted and significant changes have been made from the first application on the
smaller site area, and the applicant now proposes to provide 1,143sq.m of commercial
accommodation within the site. The existing floorspace on the site provides employment to 12
people. The new floorspace would provide jobs for between 50 and 80 people. I consider that the
replacement of outdated and inappropriate commercial floorspace with that proposed is
acceptable.
With regard to the height of the building the development has been reduced in order to better
comply with both City Council and CABE advice. I am satisfied that, given the site’s close
proximity to the Bury New Road and Great Clowes Street junction and to the site of the former
Rialto cinema which had a far greater presence on this junction than the existing MacDonald’s
building, and that the design is of the highest quality, that this building would be appropriate to its
context and location.
Given the level of commercial accommodation proposed and the mix of apartment types and sizes,
I am satisfied that the proposed development incorporates a satisfactory mix of uses and therefore
complies with the above policies.
Design
10
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Adopted Policy DEV2 states that planning permission will not normally be granted unless the
Council is satisfied with the quality of the design and the appearance of the development.
Draft Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context and to respect the
character of the surrounding area. In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with this
policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings
and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.
The design of the building has been amended from that originally submitted as a result of
discussions between the applicant, the URC and the Council’s architectural advisor and urban
designer. The building will comprise colour coated metal panels and will have a large amount of
glazing. The building has been designed to a very high standard and would make a positive
contribution to the street scene and the surrounding area generally. Following these amendments, I
have no objections to the scheme on design grounds, and I have not received any objections in
relation to design from any of the relevant parties.
Amenity
Draft Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a satisfactory
level of amenity. Development which would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the
occupiers or users of other developments will not normally be permitted.
I have received one objection from a neighbouring resident regarding the impact of the proposed
development on their amenity, and in particular loss of light and privacy. The siting of the
development is such that the direct window to window distance would be 57m and whilst there are
no adopted standards for this type of development this distance is acceptable. At the rear of the site
habitable room windows of two dwellings on Hilton Street would face the two storey elevation of
the proposed car park and landscaped podium. The distance here would be 19m from the proposed
building to habitable room windows and I find this an acceptable distance. The 10 storey element
of the building would, at its closest be over 30m from the nearest dwelling and at an angle to it so
that I do not consider that the proposed development would be considered to be overbearing. I am
satisfied that the proposed development does not have any significant detrimental effect on any
neighbouring property.
Security
Adopted Policy DEV4 encourages greater consideration of crime prevention and personal and
property security in the design of new development. Regard will be had to a number of factors
including the provision of security features.
Draft Policy DES11 updates the above policy.
As discussed above, the Police Architectural Liaison Officer has provided a number of comments
on the scheme. Although he initially had a number of concerns with regard to the proposals, these
11
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
concerns have now been addressed following discussions with the applicant. In light of the above,
I have no objections to the application in relation to safety and security.
Car Parking
Adopted Policy T13 states that the Council will ensure that adequate parking and servicing is
provided to meet the needs of new development, in accordance with the Council’s standards and
that car parks are designed to a high standard, with particular regard to access arrangements,
surface materials, boundary treatments and security measures.
Draft Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists
and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s maximum standards. It also states that the
maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded.
Draft Policy A1 requires planning applications for developments which would give rise to
significant transport implications will not be permitted unless they are accompanied by a transport
assessment and, where appropriate, a travel plan.
The development includes a total of 131 car parking spaces. Given the number of apartments
proposed (126), this would equate to just over 100% provision. National and local planning policy
emphasise the need to reduce reliance on the private car and encourage the use of more sustainable
modes of transport. The proposal also includes cycle parking facilities, in accordance with Draft
Policy A10. There would be no provision for visitor parking to the retail units, as the proposed car
parking would be for residents of the proposed apartments only. However, given the location of
the site, I am of the opinion that the majority of the visitors to the retail units would travel on foot
from the surrounding residential properties, or by public transport. In light of the above policy
framework, and in view of the site’s location in proximity to the regional centre and bus facilities,
I consider the proposed level of car parking to be acceptable and in accordance with the Council’s
maximum parking standards.
I have no objections to the proposed access from Hilton Street.
Open Space and Environmental Improvements
Policy H6 requires adequate provision of informal open space and children’s play within new
housing developments. This policy is linked to Policy H11 that sets out a sliding scale for such
provision.
The applicant has agreed to make a contribution of £159,475 towards the provision of open space
within the vicinity of the site. This is based on the total number of bedspaces proposed.
I have attached a Grampian condition requiring the applicant to meet this policy via a Section 106
agreement prior to the commencement of the development.
12
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Other Issues
Concerns have also been raised regarding the increase in traffic as a result of the proposal. I
acknowledge that the proposed development would result in an increase in traffic. However, I
consider that the limited number of car parking spaces proposed and the site’s proximity to public
transport links mean that such an increase would be relatively minimal. I do not consider that any
increase would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety or would warrant refusal of the
application.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The scheme has been amended following discussions with the Council’s architectural advisor, the
URC, and the applicant. These discussions have resulted in the amendments to the design, site
area, mix of apartment types and the increase in commercial floorspace across the overall scheme.
The changes have resulted in significant improvements to the scheme. The applicant has also
agreed to make a significant contribution towards open space and environmental improvements in
the area.
CONCLUSION
The proposal would make effective use of a previously developed site and prominent site in
proximity to the regional centre. The scheme would secure the redevelopment of an unattractive
and under-utilised site and incorporates a mixture of uses, including active uses on the Bury New
Road frontage. I am of the opinion that a scheme of such quality as this will act as a catalyst for the
wider regeneration of the area. I am satisfied that the proposed development would not have a
detrimental impact on highway safety. I therefore recommend that the application be approved.
It is recommended that authority be given for the Strategic Director of Customer and Support
Services to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act
and Section 278 of the Highways Act.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is started. Such scheme
shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary and surface
treatment and shall be carried out within 12 months of the commencement of development and
thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or
13
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the Local
Planning Authority
3. No development shall be started until samples of the facing materials to be used for the
external elevations of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the
approved materials.
4. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation
report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority (LPA). The investigation shall address
the nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on site and shall
include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the
Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focusing primarily on risks to human health and
controlled waters. The investigation shall also address the implications of ground conditions
on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services
and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems
and property. The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the LPA prior to the
start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works contained within
the approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the site. Prior
to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be submitted
to the LPA for approval. The Site Completion Report shall validate that all works undertaken
on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the LPA.
5. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the undertaking
of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4)(a-d) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act,
1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning Authority, and the Local Planning
Authority has given its approval in writing. The planning obligation will provide that a
commuted sum as required by Policies H6 & H11 of the City of Salford Adopted UDP 1995,
H8 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan 2003 and SPG7 Provision of Open Space
and Recreation Space Associated with New Residential Development will be paid to the Local
Planning Authority for open space and recreation space purposes.
6. The net retail floorspace (excluding ancillary storage or office space) of the retail units hereby
approved shall not exceed 600sq.m
7. No development shall commence until an external lighting scheme has been submitted to and
agreed in writing by the Local Planning authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented
in full prior to the occupation of any apartment.
8. Standard Condition F03X Surfacing
9. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme for the provision of recycling facilities
within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
14
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
The approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to the occupation of any apartment.
10. Prior to the commencement of development an assessment shall be undertaken to determine
the external noise levels from the surrounding roads and all other noise sources that the
residential units will be subjected to (day time and night time). The assessment shall detail
what steps have to be taken to mitigate the disturbance from the above. The assessment shall
have due regard to Planning Policy Guidance Note 24 - Planning and Noise and achiving
BS8233:1999 in all habitable rooms. The assessment and mitigation measures shall be
submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of
development. Once agreed, all identified noise control measures shall be implemented in full
and retained thereafter.
11. Noise emitted from any plant and equipment (including externally mounted plant) shall not
exceed the background level (La90,t) at any time as measured at the boundary of the nearest
noise sensitive property.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R008A Development-Buildings in vicinity
4. Standard Reason R028A Public safety
5. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation space
for future occupiers in accordance with policies H6 & H11 of the City of Salford Adopted UDP
1995 and H8 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan.
6. In accordance with policy S2B of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary
Development Plan
7. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
8. Standard Reason R013A Use of parking areas
9. To ensure that waste is recycled efficiently in accordance with policy W1 of the Revised
Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary Development Plan.
10. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
11. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
15
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from the Environment
Agency.
2. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied
prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent
renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the
Council.
3. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from North West Water.
APPLICATION No:
05/50752/FUL
APPLICANT:
Dain Properties Ltd
LOCATION:
Site 79 Wellington Road Eccles
PROPOSAL:
Erection of one three storey and one four storey buildings
comprising 24 apartments together with associated car parking
and alteration to existing vehicular access
WARD:
Eccles
At the meeting of the panel held on the 18th August 2005 consideration of this application was
DEFERRED FOR AN INSPECTION BY THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION
REGULATORY PANEL.
My previous observations are set out below:
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a currently vacant site with a detached dis-used garage unit located
within the main open area of the site. The site has a large number of trees and shrubs located on the
perimeter. The site is bounded by Wellington Road to the East and the M602 Motorway to the
south. The site is enclosed by the rear gardens of residential properties from Ellesmere Avenue and
Wellington Road. The site area measures 0.27ha.
There is a mixture of residential properties in the area including large detached properties on either
side of Wellington Road. There are also semi-detached and detached properties on Ellesmere
16
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Avenue; here there are a variety of house types including a bungalow. There are also two large
detached apartment blocks located on the corner of Wellington Road and Half Edge Lane and
Ellesmere Avenue and Wellington Road.
It is proposed to demolish the garage block on the site and erect two separate apartment blocks.
One would be located at the site entrance fronting Wellington Road, the other, block located
within the site fronting on to the M602 Motorway. The apartment building fronting Wellington
Road will house three two-bedroom apartments over three stories. The main block will house 21
two-bedroom apartments. The building will be four stories to the front (including apartments
located within the front roof space) and three stories to the rear.
The proposal includes provision for 18 car parking spaces with three available at the rear of block
one and 15 available in three locations around block two. Of the car parking spaces provided two
are allocated for disabled users. There is amenity space provided at the rear of block one and two
areas provided at the rear of block two.
The overall appearance is of a contemporary building composed from a limited palette of modern
materials making subtle reference to the building blocks of the past.
SITE HISTORY
A previous application 05/50211/FUL for the erection of 28 apartments was withdrawn in May
2005.
CONSULTATIONS
United Utilities – No objection in principle but provides advice.
Director of Environmental Services – No objection subject to a number of conditions relating to a
full site investigation and noise attenuation measures as well as alternative mechanical ventilation.
Police Architectural Liaison Officer –No objection subject to a number of detailed security
measures.
Environment Agency – No objections
Highways Agency – No objection.
PUBLICITY
The application has been advertised by means of both site and press notices
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
17
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Ground to second floor flat 81 Wellington Road
Flat 1 & 2 81 Wellington Road
Flat 1-5 82 Wellington Road
Flat 2-6 82 Wellington Road
Flat 1 & 2 91 Wellington Road
9191A Wellington Road
Flat 1 & 3 92 Wellington Road
Flat 2 92 Wellington Road
Flat 1- 17 Westcliffe, 94 Wellington Road
Flat 2 – 16 Westcliffe, 94 Wellington Road
Flats 1,2,3 86- 88 Wellington Road
1-17 Annesley Court, Monton Road
2-18 Annesley Court, Monton Road
80-94 Wellington Road
81-91 Wellington Road
Flat 1-15, 94 Wellington Road
Flat 2-14, 94 Wellington Road
3-15 Ellesmere Avenue (Including 7A Ellesmere Avenue)
43 Derby Road
99 Houghton Lane
2 Half Edge Lane
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 18 letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity.
following issues have been raised:
Over development
Insufficient car parking and access
Loss of light and sunlight
Over shadowing
Over bearing
Highway safety
Over use of the sewer
Discrepancies in the plans submitted
Development should be reduced to two storey buildings
Noise of gates
Loss of trees
Building line of block one not in keeping with Wellington Road
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: UR4 Setting Targets for the Recycling of Land and Buildings
18
The
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: DEV1 Development Criteria, DEV2 Good Design, DEV4 Design and Crime, T13
Car Parking, H1 Meeting Housing Needs, H6 and H11 Open Space Provision Within New
Housing Developments,
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: DES1 Respecting Context, DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours, DES11
Design and Crime, H1 Provision of New Housing Development, H8 Open Space Provision
Associated with New Housing Developments, A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle
Parking in New Development.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the principle of the development, whether
the design, form and layout of the proposal accords with the relevant provisions of the
development plan and whether the proposal is acceptable in relation to the neighbouring properties
on Wellington Road and Ellesmere Avenue.
The Principle of Residential Development
Adopted Policy H1 states that the Council will endeavour to ensure that the city’s housing stock is
able to meet the housing requirements of all groups within Salford by promoting a number of
measures, including the release of land to accommodate new house building.
Draft Policy H1 states that new housing development should contribute to the provision of a
balanced mix of dwellings within the local area.
National planning policy guidance is also relevant. PPG3: Housing highlights the need to develop
previously developed brownfield sites and where appropriate higher densities should be
considered.
The site has previously been developed and is a brownfield site as detailed in PPG 3, as such, I
consider that the principle of the redevelopment of this site for residential accommodation is
acceptable and accords with the thrust of the policies highlighted above.
Design, Layout and Interface Distances
Adopted policy DEV1 states that the City Council will have regard to a number of factors when
dealing with applications for planning permission. These factors include the location of the
proposed development and its relationship to existing land uses, the relationship to the road
19
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
network, the potential for noise nuisance, the visual appearance of the development and the effect
on neighbours.
Adopted policy DEV2 states that the City Council will not normally grant planning permission
unless it is satisfied with the quality of design and the appearance of the development and policy.
Draft Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context and to respect the
character of the surrounding area. In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with this
policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings
and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.
Draft Policy DES11 updates Policy DEV4 of the Adopted UDP.
Policy DES7 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP requires all new developments to
provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity. Development which would have an
unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users of other developments will not
normally be permitted.
Block 1
The proposed location of block one is between the site entrance and 81 Wellington Road. 81
Wellington Road does not have any habitable room windows on its gable elevation facing the
proposal. The apartment building will house three separate two-bedroom apartments. I consider
the building to be in keeping with the other properties in Wellington Road. The proposal is located
approximately 21.5m from the front elevation of 84 Wellington Road. I consider that due to the
proposed building being comparable in height to the neighbouring properties in the street on
Wellington Road that the separation distances of 21.5m which is the same as the other properties in
Wellington Road is acceptable in this instance as does not result in an over bearing or dominant
feature in the street scene. I am of the opinion that block one is in accordance with DEV1 and
DEV2 of the adopted UDP and DES7 of the Revised UDP.
Block 2
The site lies across the M602 Motorway from Eccles Town Centre. The area is characterised as
residential. The proposal maintains approximately 32.5m separation distance between the
proposed habitable room windows on the gable elevation of block two to the rear elevations of the
semi-detached properties’ of 81 and 83 Wellington Road. This distance combined with the
different orientations of the proposal relative to the properties on Wellington Road is considered
acceptable.
The proposal maintains 25m separation distance between the proposed habitable room windows
on the rear elevation of block two and the rear elevation of Annesley Court on Wellington Road
due to both the proposal and Annesley Court being three storey buildings the Councils normal
standards would require 27m-separation distance between ground floor and three storey facing
20
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
habitable room windows. I consider due to the buildings not being entirely directly facing each
other and the constrains imposed by the size of the site that on balance given the proposal is only
2m short of the Councils requirements that the benefits of the regeneration of the site outweigh the
need to maintain 27m separation distance in this instance. I am of the opinion that the proposal will
not result in a significant detrimental impact upon the amenity of the residents of Annesley Court
and I consider that the proposal will not appear over bearing or dominant.
The proposal maintains 34.5m separation distance to the rear elevation of 3 Ellesmere Avenue this
distance is acceptable and would not result in a detrimental impact upon the amenity of the
residents of 3 Ellesmere Avenue.
There is 23m-separation distance from the nearest part of block two to the rear elevation of 5
Ellesmere Avenue. As there are no habitable room windows within this proposed gable. As such I
consider there would be no detrimental impact on the amenity of the residents of 5 Ellesmere
Avenue.
The proposal maintains 31m separation distance between the proposed habitable room windows
on the gable elevation of block two to the rear elevation of 7 Ellesmere avenue. Although this
property is a bungalow the proposal maintains sufficient separation distance in accordance with
the Councils normal standards. As such I consider the proposal would not result in an over bearing
or dominant structure. I also do not consider the proposal will result in any significant loss of
amenity in relation to over shadowing.
Block two maintains approximately 27.5m separation distance from the habitable room windows
on the gable elevation to the habitable room windows on the rear elevation of 7a Ellesmere
Avenue. This distance accords with normal standards I also note that whilst 7a Ellesmere Avenue
is set further back from the neighbouring properties and closer to the proposal, that due to the
significant different orientation of the proposal I consider that there will be no detrimental impact
on the privacy on the residents of 7a Ellesmere Avenue.
I consider that the existing boundary treatments will ensure that the privacy of future occupiers of
the proposal would be safeguarded. I consider that this is comparable with other developments
within the Eccles area and is considered acceptable. I consider that sufficient amenity space is
provided within the site for the future occupiers of the development.
With regard to the design I consider this to be of high quality. The scheme was assessed by the
Council’s architectural consultant during the pre-application discussions, who is of the opinion
that this is a well thought out and well executed scheme. I consider that the proposal is in
accordance with the relevant policies of the UDP. I do not consider the proposal will result in an
over bearing or dominant structure. I consider that Block one and Block two are both well
designed and are sympathetic to the constraints of the site. I consider the buildings to be in keeping
with the layout of the site and do not constitute over development.
21
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Car Parking
Policy T13 of the adopted plan states that the Council will ensure that adequate parking and
servicing is provided to meet the needs of new development, in accordance with the Council’s
standards and that car parks are designed to a high standard, with particular regard to access
arrangements, surface materials, boundary treatments and security measures.
Policy A10 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP requires development to make
adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the
Council’s maximum standards. It also states that the maximum car parking standards should not be
exceeded.
The objections received refer to the amount of car parking and access proposed. Whilst I
acknowledge that the proposed level of car parking would not provide 1 space per apartment.
There would be 18 spaces for the 24 apartments. I consider that the location of the proposal close
to Eccles town centre with sufficient amenities and public transport is such that the proposed level
is acceptable and would accord with the principles of Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 :
Transport.
I have no highway objections and I am of the opinion that the level of parking proposed across the
site is acceptable.
Open Space
Adopted Policy H6 requires adequate provision of informal open space and children’s play within
new housing developments. This policy is linked to Policy H11 that sets out a sliding scale for such
provision.
Draft Policy H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and informal
open space within housing developments.
In accordance with the above policies, the applicant has agreed to make a contribution towards the
provision and maintenance of open space in the vicinity. In accordance with the recently adopted
Supplementary Planning Guidance, the contribution in this regard would be £68,756. I am
satisfied that the application therefore accords with Adopted policies H6 and H11 and Draft Policy
H8.
Design and Crime
Adopted Policy DEV4 encourages greater consideration of crime prevention and personal and
property security in the design of new development. Regard will be had to a number of factors
including the provision of security features.
Draft Policy DES11 updates Policy DEV4 of the Adopted UDP.
The Police Architectural Liaison Officer (ALO) has commented on the application and is of the
opinion that the scheme is acceptable with appropriate security measures.
22
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
The applicant has received a copy of the advice offered by the ALO.
In conclusion, I am of the opinion that the scheme complies with the policy guidance highlighted
above.
Other Issues
Additional information has been provided by the developer to show the correct ridge heights of the
adjoining properties in Ellesmere Avenue and also the approximate height of 7a Ellesmere
Avenue. I have conducted further site visits in order to ascertain the ground levels of the proposal
in relation to its neighbouring properties. I have re-consulted the objectors and neighbours to
inform them of new information. Whilst I note there is approximately 1m difference in the ground
levels of properties on Ellesmere Avenue to the proposal site I am of the opinion that this
difference does not result in a significant detrimental increase in the affect of the proposal on these
properties. As such I consider that the proposal does not have a significant over bearing or
dominant effect upon the amenity of the residents of Ellesmere Avenue.
The Director of Environmental Services has not objected to scheme in principle and has not raised
any concerns relating to the amenity of neighbouring residents in relation to the proposed
entrance/exit gates.
There is only one TPO tree on the site which is the large Ash tree located behind the proposed car
park for Block one. It is proposed to retain this tree and a condition has been attached requiring a
substantial fence to be erected around the tree. I consider that the landscaping scheme conditioned
for this development will allow for a significant amount of replacement tree planting of which the
developer has also agreed to.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
Pre-application discussions were held that have resulted in improvements to the
scheme.
£68,756 will go towards environmental improvements in the local area.
CONCLUSION
This is a brownfield site close to the heart of the regional centre. It is appropriate that it is
developed to a high density commensurate with its location. The scheme is well designed and is of
very high quality. The buildings are arranged so that the street frontage is complemented at the
same time provides a high standard of living accommodation and environment to future residents.
The development will have long-range visibility across the M602 Motorway and will be a good
23
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
addition to the character and appearance of the area. The development will not result in any
significant adverse harm on the amenity of the neighbouring residents. I consider the proposal will
result in a positive contribution to the regeneration.
I consider that the development accords fully with the provisions of the development plan and that
there is no detrimental effect on any interest of acknowledged importance. I recommend that
permission is granted subject to the following conditions.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation
report for the approval of the LPA. The investigation shall address the nature, degree and
distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on site and shall include an
identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental
Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focusing primarily on risks to human health and controlled
waters. The investigation shall also address the implications of ground conditions on the
health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services and
landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems and
property. The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the LPA prior to the start
of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works contained within the
approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the site. Prior to
discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be submitted to
the Local Planning Authority for approval. The Site Completion Report shall validate that all
works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Local
Planning Authority.
3. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is started. Such scheme
shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary and surface
treatment and shall be carried out within twelve months; of the commencement of
development and thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning
Authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced to the
satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority
4. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a noise assessment shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This assessment should
follow PPG24 guidelines towards assessing the noise from the surrounding road network,
including the M602 Motorway. The assessment shall identify all noise attenuation measures
and alternative means of ventilation which may be determined appropriate to reduce the impact
24
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
of noise on the residential properties on site and achieve the requirements of BS8233 for
internal noise levels. Unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority, all
approved noise control and ventilation measures shall be implemented prior to first occupation
of any of the apartments hereby approved and thereafter retained.
5. No development shall commence until an external lighting scheme for the apartments has been
submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such scheme as is
approved shall be implemented in full prior to the occupation of any dwelling.
6. Not withstanding the details on the approved plans, the applicant shall submit a scheme
showing full details of the boundary treatment within two months of the commencement of
development for the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The approved
scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the apartments and retained
therafter.
7. Before the development hereby permitted is brought into use that part of the site to be used by
vehicles shall be laid out, surfaced and sealed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning
Authority and shall thereafter be made available at all times the premises are in use.
8. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the undertaking
of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4)(a-d) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act,
1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning Authority, and the Local Planning
Authority has given its approval in writing. The planning obligation will provide that a
commuted sum as required by Policies H6 & H11 of the City of Salford Adopted UDP 1995,
H8 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan 2003 and SPG7 Provision of Open Space
and Recreation Space Associated with New Residential Development will be paid to the Local
Planning Authority for open space and recreation space purposes.
9. Standard Condition C04X Fencing of Trees protected by T.P.O.
10. No development shall commence until a scheme of recycling facilities for the apartments has
been submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development Services. Such
scheme as is approved shall be implemented in full prior to the occupation of any dwelling.
11. Proir to the first occupation of the apartments, the cycle store shall be erected and fully
available for use and shall be retained thereafter unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
12. Prior to commencement of development details of external materials for the walls and roof
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Plannng Authority and the
development shall be carriee out in accordance with the approved particulars.
(Reasons)
25
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
e
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R028A Public safety
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
5. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
6. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
7. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
8. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation space
for future occupiers in accordance with policies H6 & H11 of the City of Salford Adopted UDP
1995 and H8 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan 2003.
9. Standard Reason R010A Protect TPO trees
10. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
11. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
12. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the Applicant
should take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of their proposal.
Developers must also seek permission from the Coal Authority before undertaking any
operation that involves entry into any coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and
adits and the implementation of site investigations or other works. Property specific summary
information on any past, current or proposed surface and underground mining activity to affect
the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The Coal Authority Mining Reports
Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk
2. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied
prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent
renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the
Council.
26
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
3. The applicant is advised that a separate surface water storage system is required to limit the
discharge of surface water to 15 litres per second. The applicant shall contact United Utilities
prior to the commencement of development. The applicant should also discuss the requirement
of access needed by UU in relation to a public sewer.
APPLICATION No:
05/50851/FUL
APPLICANT:
Mr And Mrs R Howell
LOCATION:
Land Beween 11-13 Chapel Road Swinton M27 0HF
PROPOSAL:
Erection of a detached dwelling
WARD:
Worsley
At the meeting of the panel held on the 18th August 2005 consideration of this application was
DEFERRED FOR AN INSPECTION BY THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION
REGULATORY PANEL.
My previous observations are set out below:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ADDITI
ONAL OBSERVATIONS
Since writing my original report I have received an email from Councillor MacDonald stating that
he objects to the application.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application site is the side garden of 13 Chapel Road, Swinton, the area is residential in nature.
There are various different types of properties in the area including terraces, semi-detached and
detached properties. The rear boundary of the site is the head of a cul-de-sac.
The proposal is to erect one detached dwelling in the side garden of the property. The proposal
would measure 5.1m wide by 10m long with a height of 7.9m. The proposal would have a gable
and two dormer windows on the rear elevation.
27
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
PLANNING HISTORY
A previous planning application was submitted in October 2004, and the application was
withdrawn 04/49143/FUL. The current application has additional details relating to boundary
treatments and a change in the location of the parking spaces.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – no objections but recommends a condition requiring a gas
investigation.
PUBLICITY
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
4, 6, 9, 11, 15, 17 Chapel Road
1 and 2 Shorland Street
18 and 19 Aldersgate Court
2 Catherine Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received one letter of objection and one petition signed by ten residents in response to the
planning application publicity. The following issues have been raised:Proximity to No.11
Impact of proposal on maintenance of No.11
Loss of sunlight
Loss of privacy
Noise
Increase in traffic
Future development potential of No.11
Design
Loss of value of existing properties
Increase in youths in the area
Providing a through passage between Shorland Street and Chapel Road
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: None
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
28
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: H1 – Meeting Housing Needs
DEV2 – Good Design
T13 – Car Parking
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the design of the proposed
building is acceptable; whether there would be a detrimental impact on residential amenity;
whether the proposed level of parking is acceptable; and whether the proposal complies with the
relevant policies of the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary Development
Plans. I shall deal with each of these issues in turn.
Design
Adopted Policy DEV2 states that planning permission will not normally be granted unless the
Council is satisfied with the quality of the design and the appearance of the development.
Draft Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context and to respect the
character of the surrounding area. In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with this
policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings
and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.
As mentioned the area is residential in nature and there are various different housing types in the
area including terrace, detached, semi-detached and flats. The proposal is a modern design and the
height of the proposal is similar to existing properties. There are two dormer windows in the rear
elevation of the proposal. Despite an absence of dormer windows in the immediate vicinity I
would not consider the addition of these windows to be unacceptable and I would not consider the
proposal to be out of character with the area.
Amenity
Draft Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a satisfactory
level of amenity. Development which would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the
occupiers or users of other developments will not normally be permitted.
The proposal would be situated close to the boundary with No.11 and would project 1m beyond
the rear elevation of the property. The proposed front elevation would be flush with the existing
29
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
front elevation of No.11. No.11 has a kitchen door adjacent to the proposal and a bedroom
window on the first floor. I would not consider the projection have an unacceptable impact on
sunlight although it may be reduced in the early evening. Kitchens are not considered to be
habitable rooms, I would therefore not consider the proposal to have an unacceptable impact on the
occupier of No.11. I would not consider that the introduction of an additional dwelling would
create an unacceptable level of noise. The construction process may be inconvenient for a short
time but disturbance from construction work is addressed by other legislation.
No.1 Shorland Street is situated to the rear of the proposal. I would not consider the proposal to
have an impact on the privacy of this property as it is already overlooked by the existing properties.
No.13 has an existing bedroom window and door on the side elevation. A condition would be
attached to ensure the door was located to the front of the existing property and the bedroom
window to be located at the rear. The alterations would not require planning permission and then
conditions to ensure that living conditions of existing neighbouring residents will be safeguarded.
I would not consider the proposal to have an unacceptable impact on the privacy or amenity of
existing residents in accordance with Draft Policy DES 7
Car Parking
Adopted Policy T13 states that the Council will ensure that adequate parking and servicing is
provided to meet the needs of new development.
No.13 would have one car parking space located to the rear of the property. There has been an
opening at the rear in the past, the rear boundary would be 1m in height to ensure adequate
visibility. The proposed dwelling would have one car parking space located to the front. I would
consider the level of car parking to be acceptable.
I have received one objection relating to parking at the rear of the proposed development. The
application has been amended and parking is now proposed to the front of the proposal. I would
not consider the proposal to create an unacceptable increase in the level of traffic. I have no
objections on highway grounds.
Other Issues
There have been several additional issues raised in objections. The proposal would have an impact
on the future maintenance and development if No.11. The proposal would be situated on land
wholly owned by No.13. A homeowner cannot rely on land owned by another to access of repair
their own property.
There would not be a through passage created by the proposal, No.13 would have a rear opening
for the use of a car parking. No.13 could create an opening to the rear of their property without
planning permission.
30
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Loss of value to existing properties is not a planning consideration.
I would not consider the proposal to contribute in the increase in the number of youths in the area.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The application has been amended. The car parking space of the proposed dwelling is now
situated to the front of the proposal.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I am of the opinion that the proposal complies with the relevant policies of both the
Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs and there are no material considerations
which outweigh this finding. I therefore recommend that the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples of the materials for
the external elevations and roof of the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials,
unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority
3. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation
report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the
nature, degree and distribution of ground gases on site and shall include an identification and
assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990,
Part IIA, focusing primarily on risks to human health. The investigation shall also address the
implications on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures,
on services and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including
ecological systems and property.
The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Director of Development
Services prior to the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial
works contained within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to
occupation of the site.
Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be
submitted to the Director of Development Services for approval. The Site Completion Report
31
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
shall validate that all works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those
agreed by the Director of Development Services.
For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land Condition, the
applicant/developer is advised to contact the Pollution Control Section of the Directorate of
Environmental Services (TEL:0161 793 2046).
4. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the finished floor levels of
the properties hereby approved shall be a minimum of 300mm above the adjacent road level.
5. Prior to the commencement of development the existing window and door in the side elevation
of No.13 Chapel Road shall be relocated as described in point 9 of the plan received 21/07/05.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R028A Public safety
4. In order to reduce the risk of flooding
5. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied
prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent
renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the
Council.
APPLICATION No:
05/50919/REM
APPLICANT:
Shepborough Development Co Limited
LOCATION:
Agecroft Commerce Park Agecroft Road Pendlebury Swinton
PROPOSAL:
Details of siting, design, external appearance and means of access
for two industrial/warehouse (B2/B8) units (Units 4 and 5)
together with associated landscaping
32
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
WARD:
15th September 2005
Irwell Riverside
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application site is located within the Agecroft Commerce Park. The site is currently vacant.
The two units, units 4 and 5, are located in the south-western corner of the Commerce Park. To the
east of the units is Bunzl and to the west is a railway line, beyond which are a number of residential
properties. The remainder of the Commerce Park comprises a mixture of light industrial units and
warehouse buildings. Some of the land within the Commerce Park, to the north of the application
site, is currently vacant. However, outline planning permission has recently been granted for B1,
B2 and B8 uses.
Consent is sought for details of the siting, design, external appearance, means of access and
landscaping for the two units. The units would be accessed from a road to the north, which is
currently being constructed as part of a separate phase of the Commerce Park. Unit 4 is located
adjacent to the northern boundary of the site, with Unit 5 to the south. Unit 4 would front the
proposed access road and would comprise a total of 6,457sqm floorspace. A total of 64 car parking
spaces, including four spaces for disabled people, would be provided between the proposed unit
and the access road. To the rear of the unit would be a service area, beyond which would be a
landscaped area including trees and native planting. Unit 5 would comprise a total 5,574sqm
floorspace with 58 car parking spaces, including four spaces for disabled drivers. The service area
for Unit 5 would be located to the south of the proposed building. Unit 4 would be a maximum of
13.2m in height and Unit 5 would be a maximum of 13.8m.
SITE HISTORY
In November 2003, planning permission was granted for the details of the siting, design and
external appearance of one Business (B1)/Industrial (B2)/Warehousing (B8) speculative unit (Unit
4) including means of access together with the siting of gate house (ref: 03/46854/REM).
In January 2002, outline planning permission was granted for the development of the part of the
former Agecroft Colliery site and Brindle Heath Sidings to form a commerce park, including light
industrial, general industrial, warehousing uses and intermodal facility (ref: 00/41657/OUT).
In June 2005, an application to extend the period for submission of reserved matters in respect of
outline planning application 00/41657/OUT for the development of land to form a commerce park
including light industrial, general industrial, warehousing and intermodal facility was approved
(ref: 05/50437/OUT).
CONSULTATIONS
33
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Director of Environmental Services – no objections but recommends conditions relating to noise
levels and site investigations.
Environment Agency – no objections but recommends condition relating to the storage of
chemicals, surface water drainage and vehicle washing.
Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – no objections
Railtrack – no comments received to date
Central Salford Urban Regeneration Company – no objections
Open Spaces Society – no comments received to date
Peak and Northern Footpath Society – no comments received to date
Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association - no comments received to date
Ramblers’ Association – no objections
Health and Safety Executive – no objections
Bury Metropolitan Borough Council – no comments received to date
Greater Manchester Ecology Unit – no comments received to date
Lancashire Wildlife Trust – no comments received to date
PUBLICITY
The application has been advertised by both site and press notices.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 – 78 (E) Park Lane West
1 – 5, 41 – 51 (O), 92 – 114 (E) Bank Lane
1 – 10 West Drive
1 – 21(O) Broomhall Road
1 – 75 Dalton Drive
2 – 12 (E) Agecroft Road
Units 1 - 15, Manor Lodge, Agecroft Road
14 – 82 (E) Agecroft Road
1 – 12 Dauntsey Avenue
1 – 22 Central Avenue
34
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
1 – 32 Dettingen Street
2 – 56 (E) Dell Avenue
1 – 87 (O) Duchy Road
1 – Egmont Street
1 – 47 (O), 2 – 88 (E) Enville Road
1 – 21 Houghton Street
1 – 32 Minden Street
1 – 63 Pevensey Street
64, 66 St John Street
1 – 9, 63 – 71 (O) Tellson Street
2 – 102 (E) Broomhall Road
1 – 65 Deepdale Drive
Grosvenor House, Shearer Way
Units 1 – 23 Agecroft Enterprise Park, Shearer Way
Securicor, Nimans, Tallyman Way
Units 1 – 18 Network Centre, Lamplight Way
Bunzl, Lamplight Way
Amber Shield, Canary Way
Squirrel Distribution, Lamplight Way
REPRESENTATIONS
I have not received any letters of representation/objection in response to the planning application
publicity.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: none
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: EC10/2 – Major High Amenity Sites in Strategic Locations (Agecroft
Valley)
EN23 – Croal-Irwell Valley
EN17 – Croal Irwell Valley
Other policies: DEV2 – Good Design
EN9 – Landscaping
T13 – Car Parking
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: E3/12 – Sites for Employment Development
Other policies: DES1 – Respecting Context
35
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES9 – Landscaping
A10 – Provision of car, cycle and motorcycle parking in new developments
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the design of the proposed
buildings is acceptable; whether the proposed landscaping scheme is acceptable; whether the
proposed level of car parking is acceptable; whether there would be any impact on the amenity of
neighbouring residents; and whether the proposed development accords with the provisions of the
Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs. I shall deal with each matter in turn
below.
Design
Adopted Policy DEV2 states that planning permission will not normally be granted unless the
Council is satisfied with the quality of the design and the appearance of the development.
Draft Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context and to respect the
character of the surrounding area. In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with this
policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings
and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.
The design of the proposed units would be similar to the existing units within the Commerce Park.
Given their location within the Commerce Park, the distance between the proposed buildings and
residential properties and the nature of the proposed uses, I consider their height to be acceptable.
The applicant has indicated that the materials for the buildings would comprise profiled steel
cladding for the roof and walls. I have attached a condition requiring samples of the materials to be
submitted and agreed, which will ensure that the materials are of a sufficiently high quality and an
appropriate colour. I therefore consider that the scheme accords with the above policies.
Landscaping
Adopted Policy EN10 states that the Council will seek to protect and enhance landscape quality
within the city through the provision of improved standards of landscaping within all new
developments.
Draft Policy DES9 states that developments will be required to incorporate appropriate hard and
soft landscaping provision. Where landscaping is required as part of a development, it must be of a
high quality, reflect and enhance the character of the area, not detract from safety and security,
form an integral part of the development, be easily maintained and respect adjacent land uses.
The proposed landscaping scheme incorporates hedgerows and trees along the outer boundaries of
both units. 2.4m high weld mesh fencing would be provided around the perimeter of the site,
36
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
which the applicant has indicated would be green. A strip of close mown grass and a hedge would
be provided between Unit 4 and the access road. To the rear of Unit 4, between the service yard
and the western boundary, would be an area of close mown grass, native screen planting and trees.
A hedgerow and trees would also be provided along the western boundary of the site, adjacent to
the existing public footpath, behind which would be the 2.4m high fencing. The fencing would be
set back in this location in order to improve the attractiveness of the footpath for pedestrians.
The landscaping scheme has been amended from that originally submitted following discussions
with the Council’s Landscape Architect. The number of trees to be planted along the outer
boundaries of the site and adjacent to the footpath has been increased and palisade fencing has
been replaced with weld mesh fencing. I am satisfied that the number of trees to be planted is
appropriate and that the type, height and colour of the fencing is acceptable. I am of the opinion
that the proposed landscaping scheme is of a high quality and would make a positive contribution
to the character and appearance of the area. I have attached a condition requiring the landscaping
scheme to be implemented within eighteen months of the commencement of the development. I
am satisfied that the proposal complies with the above policies.
Car Parking
Policy T13 states that the Council will ensure that adequate parking and servicing is provided to
meet the needs of new development, in accordance with the Council’s standards and that car parks
are designed to a high standard, with particular regard to access arrangements, surface materials,
boundary treatments and security measures.
Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and
motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s maximum standards. It also states that the
maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded.
Cycle storage areas would be provided within the curtilage of both sites. Each would
accommodate eight bicycles, which, based on the proposed floorspace, accords with Draft Policy
A10. I have attached conditions requiring the cycle storage areas to be provided prior to
occupation of each of the units. I am therefore satisfied that this will encourage the use of more
sustainable modes of transport in accordance with local and national policies.
Amenity
Draft Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a satisfactory
level of amenity. Development which would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the
occupiers or users of other developments will not normally be permitted.
I have not received any objections from the Director of Environmental Services in relation to this
proposal. He has recommended that a condition be attached relating to maximum noise levels. I
am satisfied that this condition will ensure that the neighbouring residents will not be unacceptably
detrimentally affected as a result of this proposal.
37
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Other Issues
The Director of Environmental Services has also recommended that a condition requiring site
investigations be attached to the permission. Such a condition was attached to the outline
permission and it is not therefore necessary to attach a condition to a reserved matters approval.
The Environment Agency has recommended a number of conditions. However, due to the nature
of these conditions, I do not consider that it would be reasonable to attach them to the reserved
matters permission, as they should and could have been dealt with at outline stage.
The site would be accessed from a road which is currently under construction as part of the
redevelopment of the area of the Commerce Park to the north. The Council is currently preparing a
Section 38 adoption agreement in relation to that road. I therefore have no objections to the
proposed access into Units 4 and 5.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The application has been amended from that originally submitted. The number of trees to be
planted within the site has increased, palisade fencing has been replaced with mesh and cycle
parking and parking spaces for disabled drivers have been incorporated into the scheme.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I consider the design of the proposed buildings and the landscaping scheme to be
acceptable and in keeping with the remainder of the Commerce Park. I am satisfied that there
would be no unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents and I have
no objections to the means of access into the site. I therefore recommend that the application be
approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples of the materials for
the external elevations and roof of the buildings shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials,
unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
2. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the landscape scheme
hereby approved shall be carried out within 18 months of the commencement of development
and thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Any
trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the
38
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Local Planning Authority.
3. The cycle storage facilities for Unit 4 shown on drawing number 4014-003C shall be provided
and made available for use prior to occupation of Unit 4 and shall be retained thereafter.
4. The cycle storage facilities for Unit 5 shown on drawing number 4014-007C shall be provided
and made available for use prior to occupation of Unit 5 and shall be retained thereafter.
5. The fencing hereby approved shall be painted green RAL6005 prior to its erection on site and
shall be retained as such thereafter.
6. The fencing hereby approved shall be erected prior to first occupation of the units hereby
approved and shall be retained thereafter.
7. The car parking spaces for Unit 5 shown on drawing number 4014-007C shall be provided and
made available for use prior to occupation of Unit 5 and shall be retained thereafter.
8. The car parking spaces for Unit 4 shown on drawing number 4014-003C shall be provided and
made available for use prior to occupation of Unit 4 and shall be retained thereafter.
9. The level of noise from any fixed plant or equipment within the site shall not exceed 40dBL
Aeq, 5min at any time, as measured 1m from the gable boundary of 3 Dettingen Street.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. In order to encourage the use of more sustainable transport modes, in accordance with Policy
A10 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary Development Plan
4. In order to encourage the use of more sustainable transport modes, in accordance with Policy
A10 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary Development Plan
5. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
6. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
7. Standard Reason R012A Parking only within curtilage
8. Standard Reason R012A Parking only within curtilage
9. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
39
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The applicant is advised that any facilities for the storage of chemicals should be sited on
impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls,
The volume of the bunded compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank
plus 10%. If there is multiple tankage, the compound should be at least equivalent to 110% of
the capacity of the largest tank, or 25% of the total combined capacity of the interconnected
tanks whichever is the greatest. All filling points, vents, gauges and sight glasses should be
located within the bund. The drainage system of the bund should be sealed with no discharge
to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework should be located above
ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipe outlets
should be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund.
2. The applicant is advised that, prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water
sewer or soakaway system, all surface water drainage to Manchester, Bolton & Bury Canal &
River Irwell should be passed through an oil interceptor designed and constructed to have a
capacity and details compatible with, the site being drained. Roof water should not pass
through the interceptor.
3. The applicant is advised that all areas used for the washing of vehicles should be contained and
connected to foul sewers to prevent the discharge of contaminated drainage to underground
strata or controlled waters.
4. The applicant is advised that all downspouts should be sealed directly into the ground ensuring
the only open grids present around each dwelling are connected to the foul sewage systems.
5. The applicant is advised that no rainwater contaminated with silt/soil from disturbed ground
during construction must drain to the surface water sewer or watercourse without sufficient
settlement.
6. The applicant is advised that, if waste is to be imported to the site for levelling or land raising
purposes for example, hardcore, rubble, demolition waste,
excavated soil/sub-soil, this may require to be registered with the Environment Agency as
exempt from the need for a Waste Management Licence, under the Environmental Protection
Act 1990. The applicant is advised to contact the Agency regarding the proposed means of site
preparation.
APPLICATION No:
05/50929/FUL
APPLICANT:
Tender Pedic Ltd
40
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
LOCATION:
Land To Rear Of Ordsall Sports Centre Off Trafford Road
Salford 5
PROPOSAL:
Erection of three - part five, part six and part seven storey
buildings comprising 176 apartments together with hard and soft
landscaping, associated car parking and alteration to existing and
construction of new vehicular access
WARD:
Ordsall
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to part of the site of the former Quays Campus of Salford College. I will
explain the background to the wider Quays Campus site and then explain the site subject of this
current application.
Background to Quays Campus Site
The Quays Campus site is bounded by Craven Drive to the north and east, Trafford Road to the
west and Ordsall Lane to the south. The education buildings were demolished in 1999. Planning
permission was approved in outline in 2002 (01/42541/OUT) for a mixed use development
comprising offices, hotel, retail units, retail/food/drink units, new vehicle access and car parking.
The outline permission also divided the quays campus site into plots. Planning permission has
been approved for apartments on an adjacent plot to this current application (04/48147/FUL). The
retail units have been completed and are occupied by Tesco and Carphone Warehouse whilst the
residential consent is being developed by David McLean Homes. Planning permission has also
been approved this year for offices (05/50001/OUT) fronting onto Trafford Road. There is also a
current application for a hotel (05/50807/FUL) which also fronts onto Trafford Road.
Completed retail units, Ordsall Fit City leisure centre, office permissions and the current
application for the hotel cover roughly half of the Quays Campus site, on the Trafford Road side.
The David Mclean scheme and the site subject of this current application cover roughly half the
site at the Craven Drive side of the site.
Current Application Site
The proposed residential scheme, would be located between Craven Drive which is to the north
and east, Ordsall Leisure Centre to the west and also the David McLean residential development to
the south. This application has been submitted in full for the erection of three residential blocks
containing 176 one and two bedroom units, 124 car parking spaces and landscaping. The three
residential blocks have parking at ground floor level, with apartments at first floor level and above.
The blocks have varying heights, all ranging from five to seven storeys, including the ground floor
parking level. The five storey elements are at the Craven Drive side of the site with the height
41
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
increasing toward the Trafford Road part of the site. The five storey elements are a minimum 26m
from facing gables and 35m from front elevations of houses on Craven Drive.
All blocks are designed with flat roofs with each top floor being finished in contrasting materials to
the rest of the main elevations. The walls are designed with contrasting coloured masonry,
brickwork and panelling at the upper floor levels. Full height windows are proposed with some
balconies adjoining the frame of the building and some set within.
The site is surrounded by a number of mature trees subject to a TPO. The applicant does not
propose removal of trees within the site but does propose additional tree planting around the site.
The applicant has submitted a transport assessment and planning statement with the
application. The planning statement explains the history of the site, describes
the proposal and assesses the proposal against the Councils planning policies.
Supporting evidence is also included which analyses marketing of the site and the
commercial market at Salford Quays. The transport statement explains that the
proposed development is in accordance with planning policies, and that the use of
this part of the site as residential would result in less car trips than the
originally consented mix of uses.
SITE HISTORY
The site history below relates to the whole Quays Campus site.
In 2005, planning permission was granted for offices (05/50001/OUT).
In 2004, planning permission was granted for offices (04/47654/OUT).
In 2004, planning permission was granted for the erection of six blocks containing 287 residential
units (04/48147/FUL).
In 2003, planning permission was granted for four blocks containing 320 apartments
(03/46190/FUL).
In April 2002, planning permission was granted in outline for mixed use development- offices
(19,081sq.m - max.7 storey), hotel (3548sq.m - max 4 storey), retail units (779 and 407sq.m),
retail/food/drink units (687 and 389 sqm) new vehicle access and car parking (01/42541/OUT).
In 2001, outline planning permission for office development was renewed for the site to the south
of Archie Street (01/42550/OUT).
A current application is also being processed for two hotels on land at Quays Campus, bordering
Trafford Road and Metrolink, (05/50807/FUL).
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – No comments on this application. Ground condition
recommended on adjacent site.
42
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – no objection to the development,
recommends supporting measures to be implemented by the developer to encourage travel by
modes other than by private car.
United Utilities – no objections, suggested conditions which I have passed onto the applicant.
Environment Agency – no objections condition recommended regarding ground conditions and
landfill gas.
Trafford MBC – No comments received to date.
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Unit – Strongly object to the proposed
development as it will generate crime and disorder and present a serious threat to the lifestyles of
the residents and adjacent buildings. The unit also do not want any access points from the
application site onto Craven Drive and would like all entrances to the flats to be overlooked. The
unit also calls for a robust dedicated access control system and a crime prevention statement.
Central Salford Urban Regeneration Company – No comment raised.
PUBLICITY
The application has been advertised by means of both press and site notices.
The following neighbours were notified:
1 to 23 odd Craven Drive
57 Craven Drive
1 to 7 Lord Napier Drive
38 to 44 Clarke Avenue
5 Clarke Avenue
Ordsall Sports Centre
211 Trafford Roads c/o Stephen Hughes of Powis Hughes
Tesco Express, Trafford Road
Neighbourhood Co-ordinator
Arbuckles, Capital Quay
Frankie and Bennys, Capital Quay
Chiquitos, Capital Quay
Hanrahans, Capital Quay
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received no letters/representations in response to the application publicity.
43
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP3 Quality in New Development
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: SC16/1 Sites for the Provision of Education Facilities
Other policies: DEV1 Development Criteria, DEV2 Good Design, DEV4 Design and Crime, R1
Protection of Recreation Land and Facilities, EN7 Conservation of Trees and Woodlands, H1
Housing Supply, H6 & H11 Open Space Provision.
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICIES
Site Specific: MX1/3 Development in Mixed Use Areas – Salford Quays
Other policies: DES1 Respecting Context, H1 Supply of Housing, H8 Open Space Provision
Associated with New Housing Development, DES2 Circulation and Movement, DES5 Tall
Buildings, A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments, DES7
Amenity of Users and Neighbours, DES11 Design and Crime, R1 Protection of Recreation Land
and Facilities.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the suitability of this land use at the site,
the mixed use designation within the emerging UDP, the impact of the buildings upon the
streetscene, the level of parking, design and crime and provision of childrens play space and
informal open space.
Principle of Development.
I am satisfied the proposed development does not conflict with education or recreation provision
within the City; given the removal of the education buildings in 1999 and also subsequent
approvals providing funding for improved recreation facilities locally.
Policy H1 requires that an adequate supply of housing is brought forward with higher densities
being required at accessible locations such as this site. The site is allocated within the emerging
plan as a mixed use area under MX1/3. Acceptable uses within MX1/3 include residential, offices
and tourism. The principle of the development of the whole Quays Campus site for a mixture of
residential, offices, retail and hotel uses has been established by previous approvals and these uses
are acceptable with regard to MX1/3. The policy does not specify what proportion of uses should
be included in a particular site but does require that the location be developed with a vibrant mix of
uses including housing, offices, tourism, hotels, retail and leisure. The policy also states that regard
should be had to the positive impact the development would have on the regeneration of the wider
area, whether the proposal would maintain a balanced mix of uses and contribute toward activity
44
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
during the day. The policy further requires consideration of the prominence of the location
including pedestrian routes and the size of the site and existing and previous uses.
The Quays Campus site would be split roughly 50% housing and 50% commercial uses if this
proposal were granted with regard to extant and built schemes. I am satisfied this mix of uses
would conform with MX1. I am also satisfied that the intended pedestrian route through the site
between Craven Drive will be a key pedestrian route. I consider that the principle of adding high
density residential units to the existing mixed use scheme to be in accordance with policies H1 and
MX1/3.
Amenity
Policies DEV1, DES7 and DES1 require that the proposed development respects the context of the
site and surroundings and does not unduly impinge upon local residential amenity. The minimum
distance of 26m to gable ends of properties on Craven Drive is consistent with the Councils
standard separation distances.
I consider the 35m distance to the facing two storey houses on Craven Drive to be acceptable. I
also find the relationship between this proposed development with the adjacent David Mclean site
to be acceptable at this location. The developer has submitted a shadow study which shows the
proposed flats would have a shadowing impact on some properties on Craven Drive in the evening
in summer and afternoon in winter. Given the distance between the proposed flats and houses on
Craven Drive I do not consider that there will be a significant detrimental impact upon residential
amenity on Craven Drive through an unacceptable loss of daylight/sunlight.
Policies DEV2 and DES1 require developments to be to a good design that has its own identity and
respects local areas. I consider that the scale and mass of the proposed buildings are appropriate for
this site within the mixed use area. The articulation provided by contrasting materials and
fenestration pattern will result in a development that has a positive impact upon the site and the
surrounding area. Furthermore the placing of the car parking under the buildings and creation of
open courtyards and landscaping within and around the development will enable a landscaping
scheme and provide for circulation around the buildings in accordance with policy DES2. I
consider that the buildings and spaces around the buildings will add value and quality to the built
environment.
Construction has started on the residential scheme to the south, approved by members last year,
and residents have alerted Councillors to the loss of some TV reception. Given the mass and height
of this proposed development I consider the impact of loss of TV reception to be a material
planning consideration. I recommend a condition requiring submission of a scheme detailing how
the development may effect TV reception and also proposing remedial measures, if required.
Trees
All trees will remain at the site and the treescape would not change. The applicant proposes a long
and short term tree planting scheme. The exact detail of tress to be planted is not included and I
recommend a landscaping condition.
45
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Open Space
Policies H8, H6 and H11 require open space and children’s play space on site or a contribution for
open space provision off site. The applicant wishes to provide a financial contribution for open
space and children’s play space and local environmental improvements. For the number of
bedspaces proposed the Councils SPG on open space in new developments requires a total figure
of £167,152 for equipped play space and informal open space has been established. This
commuted sum is in lieu of appropriate play space and informal open space on site.
Design and Crime
The architectural liaison unit of the police are concerned about recessed entrances allowing
opportunities for crime because of a lack of surveillance. The police are also concerned about
gated controlled pedestrian access onto Craven Drive being problematic for safety and security. As
a result of the comments of the police I have agreed in principle a solution to ensure no recessed
entrances to the apartments. I have also agreed with the applicant that there should only be one
short pedestrian route through the site and that the parking areas would be secured from this
walkway. I recommend a condition to ensure appropriate details are submitted and agreed. The
addition of apartments to the site would increase natural surveillance within and around the site as
such I consider that the proposal is in accordance with policy DEV4 and DES11. These
amendments would be in accordance with PPS1 and MX1/3 in encouraging an access barrier to be
permeated by allowing an overlooked direct route from the housing on Craven Drive to the Leisure
Centre and to Trafford Road.
Car Parking
Policy T13 requires developments to include appropriate and sufficient car parking. Current
government policy is to restrict the amount of parking provision on new developments, as part of
the strategy of minimising the use of the car and planning policy guidance note 13 establishes
maximum parking standards for a variety of uses. Policy A10 echoes this guidance and I consider
this a relevant material planning consideration. I consider that the level of parking provision is
acceptable for such a residential scheme in this location close to public transport links including
buses and the Metrolink. I have added a condition requiring cycle facilities and motorcycle
facilities to be installed prior to the occupation of apartments. I cannot under current planning
policies recommend the suggestions of GMPTE but I have passed these comments onto the
applicant. I am satisfied with the findings and conclusions of the transport statement.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
I have secured amendments to the scheme over several pre-application meetings with the
applicant. I consider the layout of the scheme has been improved through pre-application
discussions. The application has also been amended to ensure that future residents will have a
choice of entrances to the apartments from both within the undercroft parking areas and also
directly from the communal landscaped areas. Amendments have ensured that the development
will allow greater surveillance over the link between Craven Drive and Trafford Road. The
proposal includes a commuted sum payment of £167,152.
46
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
CONCLUSION
No objections have been received by any resident, although TV reception is known to be a
problem locally. I am satisfied that the development of the site would be in conformity with the
provisions of policies within both the adopted and draft replacement UDPs and that there would be
no detrimental effect on any neighbouring property as a result of this development. I am satisfied
that the development conforms to both local and national policy and that it makes a significant
contribution to the continued regeneration of this part of the City. I therefore recommend that the
application be approved subject to the following conditions.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. No development shall be started until full details of the colour and type of facing materials to
be used for the walls and roofs of the development have been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Director of Development Services.
3. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the undertaking
of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4)(a-d) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act,
1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning Authority, and the Local Planning
Authority has given its approval in writing. The planning obligation will provide that a
commuted sum as required by Policies H6 & H11 of the City of Salford Adopted UDP 1995,
H8 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan 2003 and SPG7 Provision of Open Space
and Recreation Space Associated with New Residential Development will be paid to the Local
Planning Authority for open space and recreation space purposes.
4. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation
report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the
nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on site and shall
include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the
Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focusing primarily on risks to human health and
controlled waters. The investigation shall also address the implications of ground conditions
on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services
and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems
and property.
The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning Authoity prior to
the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works contained
within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the
site.
47
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be
submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The Site Completion Report shall
validate that all works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by
the Local Planning Authoity.
5. Prior to the commencement of development the developer shall submit a report, which shall be
undertaken by a body approved by the Independent Television Commission, detailing the
existing level and quality of TV reception. Prior to first occupation of the development the
developer shall submit, for the approval of the Local Planning Authority, a scheme that will
detail measures to remedy any identified television signal reception problems which have been
caused as a result of the development hereby approved. The scheme, which shall be verified
by a body approved by the Independent Television Commission, shall identify such measures
necessary to maintain at least the pre-existing level and quality of signal reception. The
approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation of any residential property.
6. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is started. Such scheme
shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary and surface
treatment and shall be carried out within twelve months of the commencement of development
and thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Any
trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the
Local Planning Authority
7. Prior to the commencement of development the developer shall submit, for the approval of the
Local Planning Authority, a scheme to detail measures to ensure entrances are overlooked and
do not provide recesses. Once approved the development shall be implemented in accordance
with the approved scheme.Prior to the commencement of development the developer shall
submit a scheme to detail measures to ensure entrances are overlooked and a pedestrian and
bicycle only route between blocks two and three that will allow access from Craven Drive to
Trafford Road. Once approved the scheme shall be implemented prior to the occupation of any
residential unit hereby approved, and shall thereafter remain open.
8. Prior to the commencement of development the developer shall submit, for the approval of the
Local Planning Authority, a scheme detailing a pedestrian and bicycle only route between
blocks two and three that will allow access from Craven Drive to Trafford Road. The scheme
shall ensure parking areas and the external defensible space of the development are secure.
Once approved the scheme shall be implemented prior to the occupation of any residential unit
hereby approved, and shall thereafter remain open for public use.
9. Prior to the commencement of development the developer shall submit a scheme detailing the
type, number and location of disabled, cycle and motorcycle parking within the each of the
blocks. Once approved such disabled, cycle and motorcycle parking shall be installed prior to
the occupation of any dwelling in the associated block and such disabled, cycle and motorcycle
48
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
parking spaces shall thereafter be maintained.
10. No dwelling shall be occupied until the associated provision for off street parking has been
completed and made available to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Such spaces
shall be available at all times for the parking of a private motor vehicle.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation space
for future occupiers in accordance with policies H6 & H11 of the City of Salford Adopted UDP
1995 and H8 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan 2003.
4. Reason: In the interests of public safety in accordance with policy DEV 1 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan.
5. To provide a remedy to the identified loss of TV reception as a result of the development hereby
approved and to ensure that the development at least maintains the existing level and quality of
television signal reception as advised in PPG 8: Telecommunications and policies DEV1 of the
Adopted UDP and DES7 of the Deposit Draft UDP.
6. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
7. Reason: To safeguard the security of the area in accordance with policy DEV4 of the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan and DES11 of the Revised Deposit Unitary Development
Plan.
8. Reason: To ensure improved pedestrian connectivity in accordance with policy DEV1 of the
City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and DES2 and A10 of the Revised Deposit Unitary
Development Plan.
9. Reason: To ensure that the development is accessible for people with disabilities in
accordance with policy DEV 5 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and policy
A10 of the Salford City Council Draft Deposit Unitary Development Plan.
10. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from North West Water.
49
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
2. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from the Environment
Agency.
3. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied
prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent
renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the
Council.
APPLICATION No:
05/51000/FUL
APPLICANT:
R Lane
LOCATION:
1 Woodlands Road Worsley M28 2QG
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing bungalow and erection of a new detached
dwelling
WARD:
Worsley
At the meeting of the panel held on the 18th August 2005 consideration of this application was
DEFERRED FOR AN INSPECTION BY THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION
REGULATORY PANEL.
My previous observations are set out below:
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application site is situated on Woodlands Road. The area is residential in nature. The proposal
is to demolish the existing bungalow and replace it with a two storey dwelling. The site is located
between the rear gardens of properties on Walkden Road and Briarfield Road.
The footprint of the proposal would be larger than the existing bungalow. The proposal would
measure 16m X 17.2m with a height of approximately 9m at its highest.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – No objections but does recommend a condition relating to a
gas membrane.
PUBLICITY
50
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
2 Woodlands Road
440 -448 (evens) Walkden Road
17 Leaconfield Road
1 – 9 (odds) Briarfield Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received nine letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity.
following issues have been raised:-
The
Increase in height
Loss of privacy
Loss of light
Loss of view
Loss of value to surrounding properties
Out of character with existing properties
Boundary treatment
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: None
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DEV2 – Good Design
T13 – Car Parking
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the design of the proposed
building is acceptable; whether there would be a detrimental impact on residential amenity;
51
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
whether the proposed level of parking is acceptable; and whether the proposal complies with the
relevant policies of the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary Development
Plans. I shall deal with each of these issues in turn.
Design
Adopted Policy DEV2 states that planning permission will not normally be granted unless the
Council is satisfied with the quality of the design and the appearance of the development.
Draft Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context and to respect the
character of the surrounding area. In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with this
policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings
and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.
The proposal is a detached dwelling in a residential area. The proposal is two-storey and would
have a hipped roof and gable end on either side. The main part of the proposal would be
approximately 9m at its highest and 5m to the eaves. Close to the boundary with properties on
Walkden Road is a garage with a room in the roof space. The height of this element would be
approximately 7.8m. There is also a single storey element close to the boundary with the
properties on Briarfield Road, the height of this element would be approximately 3.8m. The
proposed development is of a high quality design and although it is larger than those properties in
the immediate vicinity, there are individual larger properties in the wider vicinity.
In conclusion, I am satisfied with the design of the proposed building and consider that it accords
with the above policies.
Amenity
Draft Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a satisfactory
level of amenity. Development which would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the
occupiers or users of other developments will not normally be permitted.
The proposal has been reduced by 0.5m in height and the gable end closest to the boundary with
properties on Briarfield Road has been hipped. The result in the reduction in height is that the
proposal would be slightly lower in height than those properties on Walkden Road and would be
approximately 1m higher than the properties on Briarfield Road.
With regards to privacy, there are no habitable room windows on the side elevation of the
proposal, except two small obscure glazed bedroom windows on the elevation facing properties on
Briarfield Road. There are habitable room windows on the front and rear elevation on both the
ground and first floor of the proposal. The application site is currently overlooked by the
surrounding two-storey properties and the properties themselves currently overlook each other
52
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
with the exception of the rear garden of No.448 Walkden Road. The proposal would introduce
habitable room windows at first floor level to both the front and rear elevation. The proposal
would be in excess of 25m from the property facing the application site on Woodlands Road and
would be 13m from the rear boundary. Beyond the rear boundary is the garden area of No.7
Briarfield Road. The proposal would be more than 28m from the rear garden of No.448 Walkden
Road. I would consider the distance of proposed habitable room windows from existing properties
and gardens to be acceptable and in excess of current policy.
The Councils normal standards require minimum distances are 13m from ground floor habitable
room windows to two storey gables and 9m from ground floor habitable room windows to single
storey gable ends. The proposal would be 20m from the main rear habitable room windows of the
properties situated on Walkden Road. The single storey element would be 11m from the rear
elevation of 1 Briarfield Road and a further 1.5m from 3 Briarfield Road. 1 Briarfield Road has a
detached garage along the boundary with the application site. The two-storey element would be
approximately 13.6m from the rear elevation of No.1 and a further 1.5m away from the rear
elevation of No.3 Briarfield Road. I would consider the proposal to be in excess of minimum
standards and therefore would not consider the proposal to have an unacceptable impact on the
amenity of neighbours.
Car Parking
Adopted Policy T13 states that the Council will ensure that adequate parking and servicing is
provided to meet the needs of new development, the proposal would include a garage with a
driveway of approximately 12m in length. I would consider the level of parking provision
acceptable for one dwelling.
Other Issues
Additional issues have been raised by objections, the issue of loss of property value and loss of
view are not a planning consideration.
An issue has been raised relating to proposed boundary treatment. If the applicant wanted to
remove any existing boundary treatment with joint ownership it would have to be discussed with
owners. The applicant could put up 2m high boundary fencing in the rear garden without planning
permission.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
After discussing concerns from residents regarding the height of the proposal with the applicant,
the applicant has reduced the height by 0.5m and amended a gable end to a hipped roof to reduce
the impact on neighbours. One bedroom window has been omitted from the rear elevation.
CONCLUSION
53
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
In conclusion, I am of the opinion that the proposal complies with the relevant policies of both the
Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs and there are no material considerations
which outweigh this finding. I therefore recommend that the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples of the materials for
the external elevations and roof of the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials,
unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority
3. Prior to the approved dwelling being brought into use the glazing for the first floor windows in
the east elevation, shall be obscured, and shall be retained thereafter.
4. Prior to the commencement of development plans for the gas membrance shall be submitted
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed plans shall then be
implemented in accordance with he approved particulars prior to occupation.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
4. Standard Reason R028A Public safety
Note(s) for Applicant
1. Drainage connections must be to Building Regulation Approval
2. The house may be vulnerable to flooding
3. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied
prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent
renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the
Council.
54
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
4. With regard to Condition 04, a minimum level of gas protection should be provided on the
proposed development. This should follow best practice construction industry guidance such
as CIRIA report 149, characteristic situation number 2. In order to meet this condition the
protection should include ventilation of confined spaces within building, well constructed
ground slab, proprietary gas membrane and minimum penetration of ground slab by services.
Any membranes installed should strictly adhere to manufacturers recommendations. Should
further authoritative, robust and scientific information be provided that proves there is no such
gas risk then the need for such protection may be reviewed.
For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land Condition, the
applicant/developer is advised to contact the Environmental Protection Team in the
Environment Directorate (Tel: 0161 737 0551).
5. The responsibility to properly address contaminated land issues, including safe development,
irrespective of any action taken by this authority, lies with the owner/developer of the site. The
applicant/developer is requested to contact the Councils Environmental Protection Unit as
soon as is practicable should contamination be encountered during development of the site.
Historical map searches have identified a former potentially contaminative use (i.e. may be a
former industrial use, an infilled feature such as a pond etc.) that may effect the development of
the site. You need to ensure that your builder and the building control officer dealing with the
developer are aware of this so that appropriate precautions can be taken to protect the
developer, the public, the environment and the future occupants from contamination issues.
Disclaimer:
The responsibility to properly address contaminated land issues, including safe development
and secure occupancy, and irrespective of any involvement by this Authority, lies with the
owner/developer of the site.
For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land Advisory, the
applicant/developer is advised to contact the Environmental Protection Team in the
Environment Directorate (Tel: 0161 737 0551).
6. The applicant is advised that the windows of all habitable rooms to the southern and western
elevations facing Walkden Road and the area to the south where the motorway junction is
located could be acoustically dual glazed to the standards of the Noise Insulation Regulations
1975 (as amended). An alternative could be to install sealed double glazed units comprising
glass of 10mm and laminated 6.4mm with a 12mm air gap. The unit shall be installed in
accordance with the manufacturers recommendations to avoid air gaps when fitting the frames.
Alternative means of ventilation, which must be sound attenuation could be provided.
7. The planning permission relates to the amended plans recieved 5th August 2005 that show a
reduction in the overall height and the omission of one rear window.
55
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
APPLICATION No:
05/51074/FUL
APPLICANT:
Fairclough Homes Ltd
LOCATION:
A K Plant Clifton Road Eccles
PROPOSAL:
Erection of a detached dwelling, three mews dwellings and one
three storey building comprising 18 apartments together with
associated bin store, car parking and construction of new
vehicular access
WARD:
Eccles
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a 0.26 hectare site which at present is in commercial use as A K Plant
Hire. Planning permission is sought for the erection of 22 dwellings comprising 18 two-bed
apartments, 4 four-bed dwellings with associated car parking, landscaping and amenity space. This
development represents Phase 2 of a residential development. Planning permission for Phase 1
immediately adjacent to the south of this site was approved earlier this year (05/49866/FUL).
There are a number of existing buildings at the site associated with the plant hire use.The main
building fronts Clifton Road and is set back 9m from the road. To the rear of this building is a yard
where equipment is stored. There are a number of ancillary buildings around the periphery of the
yard. The buildings are constructed of either brick or metal cladding.
Adjoining the site to the north-east is a large detached brick-built property at 36 Clifton Road,
which is in business use and beyond this property there are residential properties. To the east, on
the opposite side of Clifton Road are two-storey residential premises. To the south-west is a large
industrial site, on which planning permission has recently been granted for residential
development (05/49886/FUL) and beyond that at a distance of approximately 100 metres, the
M602 motorway. To the north-west is Greenside Court, which is a residential development made
up of four three-storey blocks of flats. On this boundary there is a brick wall of approximately 2.5
metres in height.
A three-storey block comprising 18 apartments and a 2.5 storey detached dwelling would front
Clifton Road. The apartment building would be set back a minimum distance of 7 metres from the
back of the pavement on Clifton Road. The footprint of the apartment block would be a maximum
of 16 metres x 28 metres and would have a height of 8.1 metres to the eaves and 11 metres to the
ridge of the roof. The central section of the building, 9.2 metres in width, would project forward of
56
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
both the front and rear elevations by 1.5 metres. The detailing of the front and rear elevations
would include soldier course cills and arched soldier course lintels, patio doors with Juliet
balconies at 1st and 2nd floor levels, hipped roof structures extending above the main eaves line,
and mock Tudor detailing. Habitable room windows would face front and rear, with kitchen/diner
windows to the side elevations. Entrances would be provided to the front and rear of the block.
There would be a minimum distance of 25.5 metres from the front of the proposed apartment
building and the terraced dwellings on the opposite side of Clifton Road and there would be a
distance of 30 metres from the rear of the proposed apartment building and the habitable room
windows of the flats at Greenside Court to the rear of the site. 18 car parking spaces, in addition to
two disabled persons parking spaces, would be provided to both the front and rear of the apartment
building. The rear car park would be accessed from the adjoining Phase 1 site, which is also in the
ownership of the applicant. An area of landscaped amenity space would be positioned to the rear
measuring approximately 22 metres by 12 metres. Two timber structures to provide bin storage
and cycle storage, each measuring 4.4 by 2.4 metres by 2.2 metres in height, would be positioned
adjacent to the boundary with Greenside Court.
The proposed detached dwelling fronting Clifton Road would be set back 14 metres from the back
of pavement and 5.5 metres from the front of the apartment building. The dwelling would be
two-storey with dormer windows to the front elevation and rooflights to the rear and would
incorporate an integral garage. A garden is proposed to the rear of the dwelling, with
parking/turning to the front. There would be in excess of 30 metres between the front of the
dwelling and the existing dwellings on the opposite side of Clifton Road and a distance of 24
metres to the rear boundary of the site.
A terrace of three dwellings is proposed to the northern part of the site, between the side of 22 – 30
Greenside Court and the rear of the office building at 36 Clifton Road. The dwellings would be two
storey with dormer windows within the roofspace to the front elevation and habitable windows to
the front and rear elevations only. Private gardens are proposed to the rear. There would be a
distance of 10 metres between the habitable room windows to the rear of these dwellings and the
site boundary. Two parking spaces are proposed adjacent to the boundary of Greenside Close and
one space adjacent to the boundary with 36 Clifton Road.
SITE HISTORY
04/49622/OUT - Outline planning application for the erection of 17 residential units. Approved
03.02.2005.
CONSULTATIONS
57
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
United Utilities – Refer to advice contained within their letter regarding 05/49866/FUL dated 14th
February 2005. No objection subject to suitable drainage. The presence of two public sewers and
necessary easements is highlighted which United Utilities will not allow building over. Further
general advice is also given.
Director of Environmental Services – Recommends a site investigation condition, a condition
requiring trickle vents to be installed on habitable room windows to the south-west elevations and
a note to the developer regarding hours of working.
Environment Agency – No objections, recommend condition regarding land contamination.
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Officer – No comments received
Chief Executive (Economic Development) – No comments received.
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 22nd July 2005
A press notice has been published.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 – 48 Greenside Court, Monton Road, Eccles
54 Clifton Road
143, 145, 147 Monton Road
1 – 12 Clifton Avenue
Decorshade, Clifton Avenue, Monton
17(a,b,c) 19(a,b,c) 21(a,b,c) 23(a,b,c) 25(a,b,c) 27(a,b,c) 29(a,b,c) 31(a,b,c) Clifton Road
42 – 54 (e) Clifton Road
37 – 59 (o), 59a, 67 Clifton Road
Clifton House 34 – 36 Clifton Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received one letter of representation / objection in response to the planning application
publicity. The following issues have been raised: erosion of the area as an industrial estate
 size of the development will have an adverse effect on the area with regard to traffic
 the time taken to build a site of this size and the plant needed will be horrendous on
an already congested road, especially as heavy industrial traffic is already using the
road and car parking is very limited.
 development at the site would affect the business operating at J. Hughes Welding &
Engineering – people will complain about noise, industrial traffic etc. after they
58
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
have bought a property in an area like this and don’t consider the fact that the
industrial sites were there before them and have been for many years.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP1 Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings
DP3 Quality in New Development
SD1 The North West Metropolitan Area – Regional Poles and Surrounding Area
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
DEV1 – Development Criteria
DEV2 – Good Design
DEV4 – Design and Crime
EC3 – Re-use of Sites and Premises
H1 – Housing Supply
H6/H11 – Open Space Provision
T13 – Car Parking
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: ST11 – Location of New Development
DES1 – Respecting Context
H1 – Supply of Housing
H8 – Open Space Provision Associated with New Housing
Development
DES11 – Design and Crime
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle, and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are whether the principle of residential
development is acceptable, the scale, design and layout of the development and its impact on the
amenities of neighbouring occupiers, and the amenity provisions for future occupants, car parking,
design and crime and the provision of open space.
Principle of development
Policy SD1 of the Regional Spatial Strategy states that development should be focused within the
North-West Metropolitan Area, which includes Salford. The development would see the re-use of
brownfield land thus complying with criteria 1b of Policy ST11 and the guidance contained within
59
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 – Housing (PPG3), which seeks to prioritise the development of
such land over land which has not been previously developed (greenfield land).
Policy EC3 states that, where existing non-retail commercial premises become vacant, the city
council will seek to re-use or redevelop them for similar uses except where one or more of three
criteria are satisfied. The first criterion states that development must not result in a material or
unacceptable shortfall in the range of sites available for economic development. This site is only
one of three employment sites in this otherwise residential road. I consider that the principle of
residential development has been established by the outline planning approval for residential
development on this site which was granted in February 2005 (04/49622/OUT). In addition,
planning permission (05/49866/FUL) was granted in March 2005 at the large industrial site
adjacent to the south-west to be developed for residential purposes.
The surrounding area is predominantly residential, therefore I am satisfied that the proposal would
respect the character of the area.
Scale, design and layout of the development and impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers
Policy DP1 seeks to ensure that development makes the most efficient use of land. Both H1
policies seek to increase the amount of housing within the City with the revised alterations to the
UDP requiring a minimum density of 30 units per hectare. These policies also seek to ensure that
the City’s housing stock is able to meet the requirements of all groups within Salford by providing
a wide range of accommodation. The proposed density would be 85 dwellings per hectare, I am
satisfied the scale of development is appropriate having regard for the sites characteristics and its
location close to Monton Road. The mix of dwellings proposed would offer greater variety for the
immediate surrounding area and is acceptable in my opinion.
Policy DEV1 requires development to respect its local context and states that regard must be given
to a number of factors including the likely scale of traffic generation and the impact of
development on sunlight and privacy. Policies DP3 and DEV2 seek to encourage high standards of
design. Policy DES7 states that development will not be permitted where it would have an
unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers of other developments.
I consider that the design and detailing of the proposed development would provide interest in the
streetscene. The massing of the buildings is comparable to existing buildings in the area. The
design, external appearance, siting and massing also reflect that of the development that has
recently received planning approval on the adjacent site. Details of the proposed materials have not
been submitted. I have however, recommended a condition requiring samples to be submitted, to
ensure that the buildings reflect the character of the area.
I am satisfied that the separation distances that would be maintained between the habitable room
windows of the existing properties surrounding the site and those of the proposed dwellings are in
accordance with the City Council’s normal standards. I am also satisfied that the proposed
60
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
development would not have any unacceptable impact on the amenity of surrounding residents in
terms of overbearing or loss of light to windows or garden areas.
With regards to traffic generation and the objection raised, the proposal would result in the
removal of a relatively large commercial premises and as such, development of the site for
residential purposes would result in fewer commercial vehicles using Clifton Road, which in my
opinion would make a positive contribution to the residential amenity of the area. Any
disturbances caused during the construction phase of the development are an acceptable
consequence in my view, especially given the longer term benefits that this development would
offer the area.
Car Parking
Policies T13 and A10 require developments to include appropriate and sufficient car parking and
current government and Council policy is to restrict the amount of parking provision within new
developments and to encourage greener modes of travel. I consider that the provision proposed is
acceptable for such a residential scheme in this location. Disabled parking spaces have been
located close to the entrances of the apartments. Whilst the car park to the rear of the apartment
building would be accessed via the adjacent site, the site is within the control of the applicant, and
this application currently under consideration represents Phase 2 of their residential development.
I have recommended a condition to ensure that the access to the parking area and the associated
parking spaces are made available prior to the first occupation of the apartment building. I have no
objections with regard to highway safety. Cycle parking has been identified to the rear of the site.
Design and Crime
Policies DEV4 and DES11 require development to be designed to minimise the risk of crime. I
consider that the proposed development would provide sufficient levels of natural surveillance, in
particular to the parking areas and I consider the proposal to be in accordance with Policies DEV4
and DES11.
Amenity provision for future occupants
With regards to policies DEV1 and DES7, I consider that the position of the proposed apartment
building is likely to result in a certain degree of shading to the adjacent proposed dwelling,
however, the integral garage is located immediately adjacent to this building and the master
bedroom and lounge would be located to the other side of the dwelling and given that the
prospective purchasers would be aware of the siting and height of the adjacent apartment building,
I do not consider that there would be any unacceptable impact on the amenity of future residents.
With regards to the objection raised in relation to the future operating conditions of J. Hughes
Welding & Engineering, I consider that the future occupants would be aware of the nature of the
surrounding uses, prior to purchasing the dwellings, furthermore, this business is not located
directly opposite the site and is positioned closer to Monton Road.
61
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Policies H6 & H11 and also H8 require appropriate formal and informal open space within
developments. These policies also require a contribution for open space provision which is
outlined in Supplementary Planning Guidance – Provision of Open Space and Recreation Space
Associated with New Residential Development. As such the applicant is required to make adequate
provision for open space or contribute through a commuted sum payment to local environmental
improvements. A total sum of £57, 047 is levied. A condition has been attached to ensure the legal
agreement is signed prior to the commencement of development.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
A series of pre-application discussions took place with the developer to hone the details of
the proposal.
A financial contribution of £57, 047 would be secured to enable improvements to existing
open space and recreation space improvements in the local area, which may include
improvements to Monton Walkway or Shackleton Street playground.
CONCLUSION
The main planning issues relating to this application are whether the principle of residential
development is acceptable, the scale, design and layout of the development and its impact on the
amenities of neighbouring occupiers, and the amenity provisions for future occupants. I am
satisfied that the principle of residential development is acceptable and that the scale, design and
layout is also acceptable. I do not consider the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the
amenities of neighbouring occupiers and that the proposal would provide future occupants with a
satisfactory level of amenity. I consider the application to be in accordance with the provisions of
the UDP and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan and therefore recommend approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that authority be given for the Strategic Director of Customer and Support
Services to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990.
Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. No development shall be started until samples of the facing materials to be used for the walls
and roof of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
62
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Planning Authority.
3. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is started. Such scheme
shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary and surface
treatment and shall be carried out within 12 months of the commencement of development and
thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or
shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the Local
Planning Authority
4. No dwelling shall be occupied until the associated vehicular access to the site and provision for
off street parking has been completed and made available for the use of that dwelling. Such
vehicular access and parking spaces shall be available at all times for the parking of a private
motor vehicle.
5. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the undertaking
of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4)(a-d) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act,
1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning Authority, and the Local Planning
Authority has given its approval in writing. The planning obligation will provide that a
commuted sum as required by Policies H6 & H11 of the City of Salford Adopted UDP 1995,
H8 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan 2003 and SPG7 Provision of Open Space
and Recreation Space Associated with New Residential Development will be paid to the Local
Planning Authority for open space and recreation space purposes.
6. Prior to first occupation of the dwellings the windows of all habitable rooms on the South West
Elevation shall be fitted with Acoustic Trickle Vents.
7. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation
report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the
nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on site and shall
include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the
Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focusing primarily on risks to human health and
controlled waters. The investigation shall also address the implications of ground conditions
on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services
and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems
and property.
The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior
to the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works contained
within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the
site.
Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be
63
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The Site Completion Report shall
validate that all works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by
the Local Planning Authority.
8. Prior to the first occupation of the development, the cycle parking provision indicated on the
plans shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority and such provision
shall be made available at all times.
9. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a scheme showing the
provision of waste recycling facilities within the site shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to
first occupation of any of the dwellings hereby approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by
the Local Planning Authority.
10. Full details of the acoustic boundary treatment to the south-west boundary of the site shall be
submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The approved boundary
treatment shall be erected prior to first occupation of the development and shall thereafter be
maintained.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R012A Parking only within curtilage
5. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation space
for future occupiers in accordance with policies H6 & H11 of the City of Salford Adopted UDP
1995 and H8 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan 2003.
6. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
7. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
8. To ensure that adequate provision is made for the parking of bicycles within the curtilage of
the site in accordance with policy DEV1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
9. In order to encourage waste recycling, in accordance with Policy MW11 of the Adopted City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan
10. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
64
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
15th September 2005
Note(s) for Applicant
1. Please find enclosed a copy of the letter from United Utilities which offers advice to the
developer.
2. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied
prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent
renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the
Council.
3. Construction works shall not be permitted outside the following hours:
Monday to Friday 08:00 to 18:00
Saturdays
08:00 to 13:00
Construction works shall not be permitted on Sundays or Bank or Public Holidays.
Access and egress for delivery vehicles shall be restricted to the working hours indicated
above. To ensure that site working only takes place during normal working hours in order to
restrict the times during which any disturbance and nuisance may arise.
4. For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land Condition, the
applicant/developer is advised to contact the Environmental Protection Team in the
Environment Directorate (Tel: 0161 737 0551).
65
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
66
15th September 2005
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
67
15th September 2005