PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
APPLICATION No:
04/48536/FUL
APPLICANT:
Northern Estates (Manchester) Ltd
LOCATION:
400-402 Lower Broughton Road Salford 7
PROPOSAL:
Conversion of existing premises into 10 flats and erection of new
building on adjacent land to form 10 flats
WARD:
Broughton
At the meeting of the Panel held on the 19th August 2004 consideration of this application was DEFERRED
FOR AN INSPECTION BY THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
FURTHER ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
Following the site visit earlier this year, Members requested further information from the applicant with
regards to car parking and the number of flats in the vicinity. The applicant has commissioned a study of the
area which looked at the impact of the proposed development on highway safety and parking provision in
the area, particularly in light of the nearby football training ground and the proposed development adjacent
to 418 Lower Broughton Road for eight apartments. It should be noted that the original application adjacent
to 418 Lower Broughton Road has been withdrawn and a revised scheme for one pair of semi-detached
dwellings submitted. The study found that at the busiest times at the Cliff training ground (7-9pm on
weekdays and on Saturday mornings), no congestion or queuing occurs on Lower Broughton Road and
there is no difficulty in parking. In relation to the proposed development of the Cliff, the study concluded
that that development and this proposed scheme would be unlikely to have a material effect on the operation
of the highway network, as the level of traffic generated by the two schemes would be likely to be less than
one vehicle every nine minutes. I agree with the findings of this report and can confirm that I have no
objections to the application on highway grounds.
In terms of the second issue, I have investigated the number/percentage of flats in the area and compared
those to Greater Manchester. The information has been compiled using Census data and recent
developments in the area. This shows that the percentage of purpose built blocks of flats and apartments and
converted dwellings totals 28%, with houses/bungalows totalling 71%. This compares to 15% and 84%
respectively in Greater Manchester. Whilst this would indicate that there is a higher proportion of flats in
the Cliff, I also consider it important to view this in the context of density. Members will be aware that
PPG3 advocates the efficient use of land, particularly within urban areas, and promotes densities above 30
dwellings per hectare. Based on the information to hand, the density in the Cliff is 24 dwellings per hectare,
which is below the PPG3 minimum. I therefore consider the provision of some higher density
accommodation within the area to be in accordance with PPG3, as it encourages the efficient use of land.
The scheme has been amended from that originally submitted as a result of the concerns of local residents.
The proposal now includes a path from the car park at the rear of the site to the front. I consider that this
would improve the scheme.
1
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Finally, the applicant’s agent has submitted a statement in support of the application. This states that given
the poor structural condition of the properties, their conversion would entail considerable expense. They
assert that the retention of the properties into single dwellings would not be financially viable, and that
requiring them to be retained as such would result in the buildings remaining vacant and derelict and an
eyesore within the Conservation Area.
I consider that the conversion of these properties, and the erection of an additional building, would result in
significant improvements to the area. The properties have been vacant for a considerable length of time and
their conversion would result in their re-use. I consider that the re-use of the properties, and the significant
visual improvements to the area which would occur as a result, outweighs concerns regarding the number of
flats in the area, for the reasons outlined above. I therefore recommend approval.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
Since writing my report, a number of Councillors have raised concerns relating to parking in the
surrounding area, particularly in light of the close proximity of the site to the Cliff football training ground.
I can confirm that any dangerous parking in the area, for example at junctions, could be controlled by the
introduction of waiting restrictions. I am however of the opinion that, in light of the maximum car parking
standards advocated by the Government in PPG13 and in Policy A10 of the UDP, the proposed level of car
parking associated with this application is acceptable. My recommendation therefore remains one of
approval.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My previous observations are set out below:-
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application relates to two vacant dwellings, 400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road, and the land to the
south, between 400 Lower Broughton Road and 1 The Priory. The site adjacent to 400 Lower Broughton
Road is currently vacant and occupied only by shrubs and a number of self seeded trees. It is generally
overgrown and in a poor condition, having been vacant for a number of years.
400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road would be converted into ten one-bedroomed flats. The proposed new
building would accommodate three two-bedroomed flats and seven one-bedroomed flats. The proposed
new building would be located a minimum of 6m from the back of the footpath and would have a 14.6m
frontage to Lower Broughton Road. It would be 8m from the rear elevation of 1 The Priory and 6m from the
alley to the rear of the site. The proposed new building would be part four/part three storeys, excluding the
basement, with the lower element closest to 1 The Priory.
Car parking for the residents of the proposed flats would be provided to the rear of the properties, accessed
from an alley off The Priory. A total of ten spaces would be provided. The site is located within the Cliff
Conservation Area.
2
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
SITE HISTORY
In January 2004, an application was submitted for the conversion of 400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road
into ten flats and the erection of a new building on adjacent land to form eleven flats (ref: 04/47652/COU).
That application was withdrawn in March 2004 as a result of my concerns regarding the design and siting of
the proposed building.
In August 1991, planning permission was granted for the erection of a three storey building comprising ten
flats together with associated landscaping, car parking and construction of a new vehicular crossing on land
adjacent to 400 Lower Broughton Road (ref: E/28442)
In March 1991, planning permission was granted for the conversion of 400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road
into eight self contained flats (ref: E/27657)
In May 1984, planning permission was granted for the conversion of 400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road
into eight self contained flats (ref: E/16726)
CONSULTATIONS
The Director of Environmental Services – no objections
Environment Agency – no objections
The Cliff Residents’ Association – objects to the application. The Resident’s Association has no confidence
that the current owner would develop the site
Police Architectural Liaison Officer – no comments received to date
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 8th July 2004
A press notice was published on 1st July 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
404 – 410 (E), 417, 421 – 429 (O), 447 Lower Broughton Road
1 – 7 (O) Priory Avenue
1 – 3 (O), 4 – 6 (E) The Priory
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received sixteen letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity, four of which
are from the same objector. The following issues have been raised:
The area needs more family homes
There is an oversupply of flats in the area
3
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
The proposal would not be in keeping with the character of the Conservation Area
There would be insufficient car parking
The proposal would result in a loss of privacy
The proposal would result in the removal of what is currently a ‘green site’
The proposal would result in overdevelopment of the site
It is unlikely that the proposed development would take place
The proposed development is contrary to Policy H5 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement
UDP
There would be an increase in noise and disturbance
Entrances into the proposed apartments from the rear is unacceptable
There would be insufficient amenity space within the site
The proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the character of the remaining
dwellings in the terrace, which should be listed
The proposed development would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety
The proposed development would result in the felling of a number of trees
400 & 402 Lower Broughton Road are home to bats
There would be insufficient room for refuse storage
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: H1 – Meeting Housing Needs
H5 – Dwellings Sub-Divided into Self-Contained Flats or in Multiple Occupancy
EN11 – Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas
EN13 – Works to Listed Buildings and Buildings within Conservation Areas
DEV1 – Development Criteria
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: CH5/5 – Works Within Conservation Areas (The Cliff)
Other policies: H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
H5 – Provision of Residential Accommodation Within Existing Buildings
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
PLANNING APPRAISAL
I consider the main planning issues relating to this application to be as follows: whether the principle of the
proposed development is acceptable; whether there would be a detrimental impact on the character of the
Cliff Conservation Area; whether the access and parking arrangements are satisfactory; whether the loss of
trees within the site would be acceptable; and whether the proposed development complies with the
provisions of the relevant policies of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs.
These will be discussed below.
The Principle of the Proposed Development
Policy H1 of the Adopted UDP 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.
4
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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 lead to an oversupply of any particular type of residential
accommodation.
Adopted Policy H5 states that proposals for the sub-division of dwellings into self-contained flats will only
be permitted where a number of criteria can be satisfied, namely where the proposal would not have an
unacceptably adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring residential properties or on the character of
the surrounding area by reason of noise and disturbance, loss of privacy, the siting, design and appearance
of any external alterations or extensions, the cumulative effect of the concentration of such uses or parking
and servicing requirements, where adequate amenity/open space is provided, where the property is of a
larger type, where there would be no impact on amenity or highway safety as a result of traffic generation
and finally where satisfactory provision is made for access, parking and servicing.
Draft Policy H5 updates Adopted Policy H5 and also states that such proposals will only be permitted
where there would not be a detrimental impact on the regeneration of the local area.
Adopted Policy DEV1 outlines a number of criteria to which regard should be had in the determination of
planning applications. Of most relevance to this application are the location of the proposed development,
including its relationship to existing and proposed land uses, the size and density of the proposed
development, the relationship to the road and public transport networks, the likely scale of traffic
generation, the visual appearance of the development and landscaping and open space provision.
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.
Given that there have been a number of other permissions for the conversion 400 and 402 Lower Broughton
Road into flats and the erection of a building on the adjacent site to accommodate flats, I consider that the
principle of this proposal has already been accepted. However, given that these permissions were granted
prior to the Adoption of the UDP, I consider it important to assess the proposal against the each of the
criteria of policy H5 of both the Adopted and Revised UDPs. The application proposes additional
residential accommodation within an existing residential area, the principle of which I consider to be
acceptable, particularly given that both 400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road were originally dwellings.
Given the proposed use and the number of units, I do not consider that this application would result in an
unacceptable level of noise or disturbance. I do not consider that such concerns warrant refusal of the
application.
As part of the refurbishment of the existing properties, the original windows would be reinstated. The only
new windows proposed would be within the roof and to the basement. I do not consider that the installation
of these additional windows would result in a loss of privacy to neighbouring residents. The proposed new
building would be in excess of 21m from No. 417 on the opposite side of Lower Broughton Road. 3 The
Priory is not directly to the rear of the proposed new building and I am therefore satisfied that there would
not be an unacceptable level of overlooking. On the above basis, I am of the opinion that the proposal would
not result in an unacceptable loss of privacy and I have no objections to the application in this regard. I am
satisfied that the application also accords with Adopted Policy DEV1 and Draft Policy DES7.
The siting, design and appearance of the proposal, particularly in the context of the site’s location within a
Conservation Area will be discussed in more detail below. With regard to the cumulative effect of the
concentration of such uses, whilst I acknowledge local residents’ concerns regarding the loss of family
5
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
accommodation and the increase in one-bedroomed flats in the area, I am of the opinion that such concerns
do not warrant refusal of the application. A large number of properties in this area are occupied by families
and are not one-bedroomed flats. This scheme also proposes three two-bedroomed flats and I consider it
reasonable to assume that these could be occupied by families. I also consider it important that a range of
types and tenures of residential accommodation are provided and I consider that this proposal would
contribute to this.
The application proposes a total of ten car parking spaces (50% provision). In view the guidance contained
within Planning Policy Guidance Note 13, which emphasises the need to reduce reliance on the private car
and encourage the use of alternative modes of transport, and in light of the Council’s maximum car parking
standards, I do not consider it reasonable to require the applicant to provide any more car parking than they
wish to provide. There are no parking restrictions on this section of Lower Broughton Road. Given that the
majority of the apartments would have only one bedroom and in view of the site’s location in relatively
close proximity to Bury New Road and the public transport links, I do not consider it necessary to require
one car parking space per apartment.
Amenity space would be provided in the form of the front garden area to Nos. 400 and 402 and the area to
the front of the proposed building. The amount of amenity space provided within the site has been
determined by the location of the proposed new building. I am of the opinion that the size and siting of the
proposed new building would be in keeping with the character and appearance of the conservation area. I
consider that to require the applicant to provide more amenity space within the site would be to the
detriment of the Conservation Area and would result in an inferior scheme to that currently proposed. I am
of the opinion that the need to ensure that the proposal enhances the character and appearance of the
conservation area to be of more importance than the provision of amenity space in this instance. I do not,
however, consider that the proposal constitutes overdevelopment of this site. I consider that, in light of the
above and given that the majority of the apartments proposed would be one bedroomed, it would be
unnecessary and unreasonable to require the provision of additional amenity space within the site. I
therefore have no objections to the application in this regard. As required by Adopted Policy H5, the
properties in question are relatively large and I consider them to be appropriate for this type of conversion.
As stated above, I consider the level of car parking proposed to be sufficient. The proposed car parking area
would be accessed from an alley off The Priory, which is not a main thoroughfare. I do not consider that this
proposal would have a detrimental impact on highway safety and I therefore have no objections to the
proposal in this regard.
Finally, in terms of regeneration, I am of the opinion that this proposal would result in improvements to
what are currently vacant and unattractive properties and a neglected and overgrown piece of land. I
consider this to be an important consideration, particularly in relation to the site’s location within a
conservation area. I do not therefore consider that the regeneration of the local area would be detrimentally
affected.
In light of the above, I consider that this application broadly complies with the relevant provisions of Policy
H5 of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs.
Impact on the Cliff Conservation Area
Adopted Policy EN11 states that in considering planning applications for development in conservation
areas, the Council will consider the extent to which the proposal is consistent with the desirability of
6
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
preserving or enhancing the conservation area. The Council will have the need to encourage high standards
of development which are in keeping with the character of the area.
Adopted Policy EN13 states that in considering proposals to alter buildings within conservation areas, the
Council will have regard to a number of criteria, including the importance and condition of the building.
Draft Policy CH5 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP states that development within
conservation areas will only be permitted where it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of
the area. Regard will be had to whether the proposal is of a high standard of design and retains or improves
features which contribute to the character or appearance of the conservation area.
The proposed new building includes a number of features present within the original buildings. These
include the bay windows, brick arches above the windows and doors, dentils below the fascia boards and
string courses. The use of such architectural features ensures that the proposed building would be in
keeping with adjacent buildings. As with the neighbouring properties, the proposed building would have a
vertical emphasis. The height to both the eaves and the ridge of the proposed building would be similar to
that of 400 Lower Broughton Road. The siting of the proposed building would respect the established
building line of the existing terraced properties. In light of the above, I am satisfied that the siting and
design of the proposed building would be satisfactory and in keeping with the character and appearance of
the conservation area. The proposed development would result in the refurbishment of two vacant, derelict
and unattractive properties and the development of a vacant and overgrown piece of land. In view of this, an
in light of the above, I am of the opinion that the proposed development would enhance the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and that the proposal complies with the above policies.
There are a number of other issues which have been raised by objectors which I will deal with in turn.
Firstly, it has been alleged that the existing properties are home to bats. As a result of this claim, the
applicant commissioned a bat survey. The survey found that, as the properties have no floors, ceilings or
other internal features, the interiors of the buildings are unsuitable to be used for roosting bats. There is the
possibility that the south facing gable weather boarding may be used by a maternity colony of bats in the
summer. The survey recommends that an additional survey be undertaken prior to the commencement of
the development in order to confirm that, as far as possible, bats are absent from the premises. I am
therefore satisfied that the applicant has undertaken all necessary steps in this regard and do not consider
that concerns relating to bats warrant refusal of the application.
One of the objectors has suggested that the row of terraced properties within which Nos. 400 & 402 are
situated should be listed. Whilst the buildings possess some architectural detailing, a number have been
significantly extended and altered, both internally and externally. I am therefore of the opinion that they are
not worthy of listing.
Concerns have also been raised regarding the loss of trees as a result of this proposal. I can confirm that the
Council’s arboricultural officer has visited the site and is of the opinion that none of the trees are worthy of
protection. Although there are a large number of trees on the site, the majority are self seeded. It is however
recommended that the three largest trees within the site should be replaced in accordance with Council
policy. I have therefore attached a condition requiring the provision of a minimum of six trees within the
site. Subject to the above, I have no objections to the application in this regard.
Finally, a number of objectors have expressed concerns relating to the lack of room within the site for refuse
storage. I am however of the opinion that there would be sufficient space to the rear of the site to
7
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
accommodate a number of the larger type of refuse storage facilities, rather than individual wheelie bins for
each of the flats. I am satisfied that such concerns could be addressed. I have attached a condition requiring
the submission, approval and implementation of a scheme for refuse storage.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The scheme has been amended from that proposed by the previous application. The height of the section of
the building closest to 1 The Priory has been reduced in order to lessen the impact on that property.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I am of the opinion that the proposed development would result in the refurbishment of two
properties which have been derelict for a considerable length of time, as well as the development of a vacant
and unattractive site which currently detracts from the character and appearance of the area. I consider that
the proposal would enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area. I am satisfied that the
application accords with the relevant provisions of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft
Replacement UDPs. I therefore recommend approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of one year beginning with the date of this
permission.
2. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Director of Development Services before development is started. The
scheme shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences and boundary and
surface treatment. As part of the scheme, a minimum of six trees shall be provided within the site, the
species and location of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services prior to the commencement of development. The approved scheme 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 Director of Development Services.
3. 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
Director of Development Services. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials,
unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Director of Development Services.
4. Standard Condition F03X Surfacing
5. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a scheme for cycle and refuse storage
within the curtilage of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation of any of
the apartments hereby approved and shall be available at all times the premises is in use.
8
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
6. 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 Director of
Development Services. The approved scheme shall be implements prior to first occupation of any of the
apartments hereby approved, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Director of Development
Services.
(Reasons)
1. Reason: So as not to prejudcie the future redevelopment of the site
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R013A Use of parking areas
5. Reason: 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 and in order to ensure
sufficient provision for refuse storage, in accordance with Policy DEV1 of the Adopted Unitary
Development Plan
6. Reason: In order to encourage waste recycling, in accordance with Policy MW11 of the Adopted City
of Salford Unitary Development Plan
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.
3. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
9
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
H1 - Meeting Housing Needs; H5 - Dwellings Sub-Divided into Self-Contained Flats or in Multiple
Occupancy; EN11 - Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas; EN13 - Works to Listed
Buildings and Buildings within Conservation Areas; DEV1 - Development Criteria
4. The applicant is advised to undertake an additional bat survey prior to the commencement of the
development, in accordance with the advice provided in the applicant's bat survey dated 3rd March
2004.
5. This permission relates to the amended plan received on 11th November 2004 which shows the
inclusion of a path from the car park
APPLICATION No:
04/49437/FUL
APPLICANT:
Mr Steinmez
LOCATION:
Land Adjacent To 5 Hope Street Salford 7
PROPOSAL:
Erection of two pairs of semi -detached houses together with associated
car parking and creation of new vehicular and pedestrian access
(amendment to planning approval 03/47037/FUL)
WARD:
Broughton
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to land adjacent to 5 Hope Street, Salford 7. The site is located within the Cliff
Conservation Area. The dwellings which formerly occupied the site (nos. 1-7 Hope Street) were
demolished in the region of twenty years ago and the site has been vacant since that time. It is now occupied
by grass and shrubs. Surrounding properties are predominantly residential, although there is a public house
to the rear of the site.
It is proposed to erect a two pairs of semi-detached dwellings on the site. The proposed dwellings would be
sited a minimum of 5.2m from the back of the footpath and each would have a bay window at the front.
They would be 6.8m wide, 10.5m in length, 6.5m to the eaves and 9.9m to the ridge. Each of the properties
would have a dormer window at the front. Gardens would be provided to the rear of each property, with
off-street parking to the front of the proposed dwellings.
10
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
This application is an amendment to a scheme approved in December 2003. The main difference is the
retention of the footpath between the two pairs of semi-detached dwellings, whereas the approved scheme
comprised four terraced properties with the footpath diverted around the site. This amendment is sought as
the applicant has encountered difficulties in obtaining the necessary diversion order for the right of way.
Such an order would not be required for this scheme to go ahead.
SITE HISTORY
In December 2003, an application for the erection of 4 three storey town houses together with associated car
parking and creation of a new vehicular access was approved (ref: 03/47037/FUL).
In August 2003, an application for the erection of 4 five-bedroomed houses, 3 two bedroomed apartments
and 1 three bedroomed apartment, together with the creation of a new access and closure of a public right of
way was withdrawn as result of my concerns and the concerns of local residents.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – no comments received to date
Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – no comments received to date
Open Spaces Society – no comments received to date
Ramblers’ Association – no objections
Peak and Northern Footpath Society – no comments received to date
Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – no comments received to date
United Utilities – no objections
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 23rd November 2004
A press notice was published on 25th November 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
2, 2A Back Hope Street
Abbeyfield House, 4-28 (E), 2A, 2B, 2C Hope Street
443, 444, 446, 452 – 462, 459, 444B Lower Broughton Road
1-24 Sarnia Court, 329, 378-382 Great Clowes Street
13 Priory Avenue
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received not received any letters of representation in response to the application publicity.
11
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: H1 – Meeting Housing Needs
DEV2 – Good Design
EN11 – Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: CH5/5 – Works Within Conservation Areas (The Cliff)
Other policies: H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are as follows: whether the principle of the proposed
development is acceptable; whether the proposed development would be in keeping with the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area; whether there would be an impact on the amenity of neighbouring
residents; and whether the application accords with the relevant policies of the Adopted and Revised
Deposit Draft Replacement UDP. I will deal with each of the issues in turn below.
Principle of the Proposed 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.
In light of the recent approval for the redevelopment of the site for residential purposes, I consider the
principle of the proposed development to already have been accepted. The site was occupied by houses
until their demolition approximately twenty years ago. The site is a brownfield site within an urban area
surrounded by residential properties. In light of the above, I am of the opinion that the proposal accords with
the relevant policies of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs.
Impact on the Conservation Area
Adopted Policy EN11 states that in considering applications for development in conservation areas, the
Council will assess the extent to which the development is consistent with the desirability of preserving or
enhancing the area. High standards of design, which are in keeping with the character of the conservation
area, will be encouraged.
Adopted Policy DEV2 states that planning permission for new development will not normally be granted
unless the Council is satisfied with the quality of design and the appearance of the development. Regard
should be paid to existing buildings, townscape and the character of the surrounding area.
12
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Draft Policy CH5 of the First Deposit Draft Replacement UDP updates Policy EN11 of the Adopted UDP.
Draft Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context. In assessing the extent to
which this has been achieved, regard will be paid to a number of factors, including the relationship to
existing buildings and the scale of the proposed development in relation to its surroundings.
As stated above, this application is almost identical to that previously approved. The design of the dwellings
remains largely unaltered, and I am therefore satisfied that this is acceptable. The proposed design is similar
to that of surrounding residential properties, particularly in terms of the bay and dormer windows. The
detailing above and below the windows would also add interest to the proposed dwellings and would again
be similar to nearby houses. I have attached a condition requiring samples of materials for the walls on roof
of the proposed dwellings to be submitted prior to the commencement of the development. This will ensure
that the materials used are of a high quality and in keeping with the area. Some of the surrounding
properties have front driveways, as is proposed by this application. The proposed development would
enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area and would greatly improve what is currently
a vacant, overgrown and unsightly piece of land. I consider that the proposal accords with the relevant
policies of the development plan in with regard to design and the conservation area.
Impact on Amenity
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 proposed properties would be a minimum of 26m from the properties on the opposite side of Hope
Street. Although there are facing habitable room windows, I am satisfied that this distance is sufficient to
ensure that there would not be an unacceptable level of overlooking or loss of privacy. There would be a
minimum of 13.3m between the rear of 446 Lower Broughton Road and the gable of one of the proposed
dwellings. There are no habitable room windows on the gable of the proposed dwelling, but there are
habitable room windows on the rear elevation of No. 446. Although this is slightly below the distance
ordinarily required between habitable room windows and a three storey building, this relationship was
considered acceptable when the previous application was approved due to the benefits which would be
accrued as a result of this proposal. I therefore have no objections to the application in this regard.
Other Issues
The application site was purchased from the Council in 1996, at which time a covenant was imposed. This
stated that none of the land which was within the curtilage of the former dwelling at 7 Hope Street (to the
east of the site) was to be used for any purpose other than domestic garden purposes. For this development
to proceed, the applicant, who is aware of this covenant, would have to apply to have the covenant lifted. As
this matter is the subject of separate legislation, planning permission can be granted for the redevelopment
of the site, but development could not proceed until the covenant has been lifted. I have attached an
informative advising the applicant of this situation. I do not however consider it reasonable or necessary to
attach a condition restricting the use of the land to the rear of the properties to domestic garden purposes
only.
CONCLUSION
13
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
In conclusion, I consider the proposed development to be acceptable. It would result in the re-use of a
previously developed site and would enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area. I
therefore recommend approval.
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
Director of Development Services. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials,
unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Director of Development Services.
3. Standard Condition C01X Landscaping
4. All windows and openings to habitable rooms shall be acoustically dual glazed to the standards of the
Noise Insulation Regulations 1975 (as amended). An alternative would be to install sealed double
glazed units comprising glass of 10mm laminated 6.4mm with a 12mm air gap. The unit shall be
installed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations to avoid air gaps when fitting the
frames and should be kept closed at all hours of school activity. Alternative means of mechanical
ventilation, which must be sound attenuated, should also be provided.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
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
14
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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 is advised that connections to the sewers require approval from United Utilities
4. The applicant is advised to contact the Council's Highways Maintenance Section regarding the footway
crossings
5. The applicant is advised to contact the Council's Property and Development Section on 0161 793 3794
regarding the covenant on part of the site
APPLICATION No:
04/49466/FUL
APPLICANT:
M.A.Din
LOCATION:
476 Great Cheetham Street East Salford 7
PROPOSAL:
Variation of Condition 02 on planning permission 04/48350/COU to
allow for opening hours Mon-Sat 11am - 11pm (re-submission of
planning application 04/49118/FUL)
WARD:
Broughton
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to an existing mid terrace and seeks to vary the hours of operation of an existing hot
food take away. The authorised hours of operation are currently 8.00am till 6.00pm six days a week.
The proposal seeks consent to open Monday to Saturday from 11.00am until 11.00pm.
The property is within a defined Key Local Centre, Dudley Street, within the adopted plan. To the rear of
the property and opposite are residential properties. There are no parking restrictions in place outside the
shop.
SITE HISTORY
In June this year, planning permission was granted for the change of use of the premises from shop to shop
for the sale of hot food (04/48350/COU). A condition was attached to that approval which specified the
requested hours of operation :“The use hereby permitted shall NOT be operated on Sundays and Bank Holidays and shall ONLY be
operated between the hours of 8.00am and 6.00pm”
15
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
In October this year, planning permission was refused to vary the hours of operation to allow for opening
hours 11.00am-11.00pm (Mon-Thurs/Sunday) 11.00am-12 midnight (Fri-Sat). The reason for refusal
states :“The proposed extended opening hours would be seriously detrimental to neighbouring residents
and would injure the character and amenity of the area by reason of noise and disturbance and
general activity and thus would be contrary to policy S5 of the City of Salford Unitary Development
Plan and policy S4 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary Development Plan”
Planning permission was refused in 1995 for the change of use from retail with living accommodation
above to hot food takeaway with living accommodation above at 478 Great Cheetham Street East
(95/34175/COU)
Planning permission was refused in 2002 for the change of use from shop to shop for the sale of hot food at
472 Great Cheetham Street East (02/44642/COU)
Both of these application were refused due to the relationship of residential properties directly above and
adjoining the application sites.
PUBLICITY
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
13 – 29 (o) Buile Street
462 – 472 (e), 478 – 488 (e), 335 – 347 (o) Great Cheetham Street East
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received a petition in support of the proposal with 256 signatures. I have also received a request from
Councillor King that this application be determined by the panel.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
None
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
S5 – Control of Food and Drink Premises, S3 Key Local Centres
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
S4 Amusement Centres and Food and Drink Uses
PLANNING APPRAISAL
16
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
I consider that the main issues concern the impact of the extended use on neighbouring residential occupiers
due to, noise, disturbance, and highway implications.
Policy S5 states that the Council will normally only permit proposals for A3 uses where they would not
have an unacceptably adverse impact on the amenities of surrounding residential properties or significantly
prejudice highway safety. Where an A3 use would directly adjoin a residential unit, it is normally
considered unacceptable as noise, disturbance, fumes and odours adversely affect the occupiers. Policy S4
of the revised replacement plan UDP updates policy S5 of the adopted UDP.
Policy S3 seeks to retain, consolidate and improve Salford’s key local centres. Changes of use to A3 will
normally be permitted unless there would be an unacceptable effect on the amenity, environment, vitality or
viability of the key local centre either individually or by the cumulative effect of such a development.
The area has not been identified as a neighbourhood centre within the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement
Plan.
In approving the initial change of use application, consideration was given to a previous planning refusals at
472 and 478 Great Cheetham Street East . These application were refused due to the relationship of a
residential properties to the proposal, specifically residential directly above the proposals. There is no
residential directly adjoining 476 Great Cheetham Street, as such planning permission for the use of the
premises for hot food was approved. Condition two of that approval reflected the proposed hours of
operation.
There are no residential properties directly adjacent to the application site. However, there is residential
accommodation opposite and to the rear. Whilst the centre is no longer identified as a neighbourhood
centre within the replacement plan, there are a number of retail uses evident within this and the
neighbouring terrace and a number of vacant A1 uses. Moreover, the premises adjoining currently operates
as a news agent/off licence. I can find no record of any restrictive hours for this neighbouring property.
The applicant has informed me that the newsagent/off licence currently closes at 11.00pm.
The existing uses that neighbour the proposal site and those retail uses within the existing Key Local Centre
is a material consideration in this instance. The applicant has indicated that the hours of opening would be
reduced from those on the previous application. The hours of opening in this instance would be between
11.00am and 11.00pm from Monday through to Saturday, no opening is proposed on Sunday.
I consider that the proposed hours of operation, similar to those of the neighbouring use and those of
existing retail uses within the centre would have no further impact upon the neighbouring properties
opposite or to the rear. I have attached a condition restricting the hours of operation to 11.00pm six days a
week with no Sunday and Bank Holiday openings.
As such I consider that the proposed extended hours would accord with policies S5 of the adopted plan and
S4 of the revised replacement plan. I do not consider that there are any other material considerations which
outweigh this view.
CONCLUSION
Having considered all the issues raised by this proposal, I consider that the proposed extended opening
hours would not have an unacceptable effect on the residential amenity of neighbouring properties when
compared to the opening hours of the previous use and existing neighbouring uses of the key local.
17
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. The use hereby permitted shall NOT be operated on Sundays and Bank Holidays and shall ONLY be
operated between the hours of 8.00am and 11.00pm
2. Details of the fume extraction system serving the cooking or/and food preparation areas shall be
designed such that there will be no odour or noise nuisance to residential premises and shall be
approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the change of use taking place. The extraction
system approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be installed prior to the commencement of the
proposed use, and shall be used whenever the cooking equipment is in use.
3. Prior to the development hereby approved coming into use, the applicant shall provide a litter bin to the
front of the premises. The applicant shall first submit details of the design and position of the litter bin
(in liaison with the Director of Environmental Services), for the written approval of the Director of
Development Services.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
2. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
S5 - Control of Food and Drink Premises
S3 Key Local Centres
APPLICATION No:
04/48423/REM
APPLICANT:
Elite Homes North Ltd
LOCATION:
Akzo Nobel (UK) Limited Dean Road Cadishead
PROPOSAL:
Details of siting, design, external appearance of 75 dwellings, associated
landscaping, car parking, construction of new vehicular access on Dean
18
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Road, footpath link to Allotment Rd, revised internal road layout to
connect to Magenta Avenue
WARD:
Cadishead
Events following the deferral of the application
This application was deferred at the meeting of the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel on 21 st
October 2004 so that further discussions could be held with the applicant to try and identify additional
means of vehicular access as members raised concern about Dean Road being the sole point of access.
Following further discussions it has been identified that it is possible to construct a loop-road which links
through onto Magenta Avenue. In order to accommodate the amended road layout, several of the proposed
properties closest to Magenta Avenue have been relocated so that, rather than forming a ‘full-stop’ to what
was originally a cul-de-sac, they would be situated either side of the road allowing it to link through to
Magenta Avenue.
There are a number of issues relating to the creation of the loop-road which links to Magenta Avenue:
The applicant has rights of access over Magenta Avenue to the site.
This scheme provides for the road to connect up to Magenta Avenue via a 2m strip of land located
between the application site. The developer also has rights of access over this 2m strip of land.
Kaufman and Broad Ltd (owners of the Magenta Avenue Scheme) state that they have no objection
to the developer accessing the site via Magenta Avenue.
The developer has rights to maintain the 2m strip of land detailed above.
Following legal advice, it has been concluded that a Grampian-style condition cannot be used to
ensure Magenta Avenue is made up to adoptable standards through to Liverpool Road.
Although a Grampian-style condition cannot be attached to this application, an alternative condition has
been attached to make the physical link possible and to ensure no impediment can be imposed on the use of
the link.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Further observations
Following the Site Inspection of the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel on 14th October 2004, I
have received a total of 35 additional letters of representation. One is from Councillors Mann and Hudson
who wish to register their strong objection to the proposed traffic arrangements. They believe that the
proposed arrangements are not satisfactory in regard to safety and traffic flow. Dean Road is already
congested being a narrow road with on street parking. Access by the Fire, Ambulance and Police services is
restricted by these proposals and it is a difficult route via Allotment Road. Access onto Liverpool Road,
particularly for a right turn, is hazardous now without increasing that by probably more than a hundred
instances per day if this proposal is adopted. Local Members have always taken the view that the most
sensible solution would be to make up Magenta Avenue and access the development from there. There does
not seem to be any reasonable argument as to why this should not be the case. The proposed traffic
arrangements should be reconsidered.
A second letter received is from Kaufman and Broad Ltd, the owners of Magenta Avenue, who have been
asked by a local resident to clarify the right of way situation. They confirm that there is a right of way for
19
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
the occupiers of the Akzo Nobel site to access their land along Magenta Avenue and that right has never
been in doubt and they have never been consulted by Akzo Nobel or the applicant concerning that right of
way.
The remaining letters raise the following concerns: the amended plans still show a ‘single’ access and not
the ‘double’ access which was a condition of the original approval; profit for the builder and convenience
for the Council is being put before the safety of residents including children; and the sole use of Dean Road
for access is unsuitable and that a loop road access using Magenta Avenue and Dean Road should be
provided.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
At the meeting of the Panel held on the 7th October 2004 consideration of this application was DEFERRED
FOR AN INSPECTION BY THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This reserved matters application relates to the site of the former Akzo Nobel ink works. Outline planning
permission was granted in Dec 2000 for the development of land for residential purposes and a further
approval for a time extension was approved earlier this year. The reserved matters for consideration are
siting, design, external appearance, means of access and landscaping.
The site, which covers an area of 2.2 hectares, is bounded by the railway embankment to the north, the Irlam
Industrial Estate to the north east, and by residential development on all other boundaries.
A total of 75 dwellings are proposed, comprising 43 two-storey detached dwellings (24 four-bed and 19
three-bed) in addition to 31 apartments in a 2.5/3.5 storey block (30 two-bed and 1 one-bed). A number of
the dwellings include provision for conservatories to the rear. A mixture of driveways, double driveways
and garages have been identified for each of the detached dwellings. 100% parking is proposed for the
apartments. Vehicular access into the residential development would be from Dean Road – this would be
the sole access to the development for residents. An emergency access is proposed from Allotment Road
and would be restricted by bollards.
Landscaping proposals have been submitted which include details of fencing and planting within private
gardens and the public areas. A 2 metre high acoustic fence is proposed to the boundary adjacent to the
railway. An area of informal public open space (POS) is proposed. This would be located centrally within
the site, adjacent to the railway boundary.
A design statement, highways statement and noise assessment have been submitted with the application.
SITE HISTORY
03/47123/OUT - Variation of condition 1 on planning permission 00/41510/OUT to extend the time for
submission and implementation of reserved matters in respect of outline planning application for
development of land for residential purposes. Approved 15.01.2004
20
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
03/46491/FUL - Works for the remediation of contaminated land. Approved 18.09.2003
00/41510/OUT - Outline planning application for development of land for residential purposes. Approved
07.12.2000
99/39868/OUT - Outline planning application for development of land for residential purposes. Approved
03.02.2000
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – Recommend a contaminated land condition is attached to any
planning approval. The noise assessment submitted has been considered and there is potential for noise
from the railway line and industrial estate and a condition is therefore recommended requiring acoustic
glazing to the habitable room windows of a number of specified plots.
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Unit – A number of comments have been made: a knee rail
is recommended between plots 14 and 15 to prevent cars taking a short cut across the grass, fences to
railway and open space boundaries should be 2.1m high, there should be no unrestricted access between the
front and rear of dwellings, front doors to upper level flats are hidden under underpasses – all entrance
doors should face directly onto the street, do not like the recessed front door to the Windermere house type
– the recess will give a hiding place where the door can be attacked unseen from the road.
Greater Manchester Geological Unit – Records indicate that there are no mines, quarries or landfill sites
within 250m of the application site. In their opinion, the site is not at risk from migrating landfill gas, from
known sources. Due to the industrial history of the site, there may be a risk of historical contamination and
this should be investigated further. It is advised that a detailed site investigation is undertaken.
United Utilities – No objection, providing that, if possible, the site is drained on a separate system, with foul
drainage only connected into the foul sewer. Surface water should discharge to the water
course/soakaway/surface water sewer and may require the consent of the Environment Agency. Full details
must be discussed with United Utilities. A public sewer runs along part of the site and United Utilities will
not permit building over it. An access strip of no less than 6m wide (measuring at least 3m either side of the
centre line of the sewer) is required. Site layout modifications/ diversion of sewer at applicants expense
may be necessary – applicant advised to contact United Utilities at an early stage. Deep rooted shrubs and
trees should not be planted in the vicinity of the sewer. A separate metered supply to each unit will be
required – please contact United Utilities regarding connection to the water mains. The applicant should
check whether the electricity substations at the end of Allotment Road are within their land ownership and
that United Utilities maintenance and/or access rights are maintained.
Environment Agency – No objection in principle. A condition is recommended requiring a desk top study
to identify all previous uses and potential contaminants, a site investigation, a method statement and
remediation strategy.
Network Rail – No objection in principle, subject to attached terms and conditions. Guidance provided to
the developer on fencing, requirement for detailed plans and sections to be submitted to Railtrack prior to
commencement of development, surface water discharge, ground support/ loadings, protection of railway,
lighting, landscaping and future ownership.
21
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
PUBLICITY
A press notice was published on 10th June 2004
A site notice was displayed on 4th June 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
2 – 8 (e) Alfred Street (Albert Street)
68 – 80 (e) Allotment Road
1 – 58 (e) Dean Road
1 – 7 Richard Reynolds Court, Dean Road
1 – 3 (o) Jellicoe Avenue
20 – 32 (e) Nelson Drive
2 – 16 (e) Rivington Grove
4 – 8 (e), 658 – 662 (e), Council Offices, Liverpool Road
2 – 20 (e) Magenta Avenue
1 – 11 Quill Court
2 – 8 (e), 1 – 11 (o), 15 – 25 (o) Sienna Close
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received a 60-name petition objecting to the use of Dean Road on the grounds of safety and quality of
life. I have also received 51 letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application
publicity. The following issues have been raised:-
-
-
-
concerns raised regarding proposed ‘emergency access’ on Allotment Road. Such emergency
access to private housing is not required under any circumstances and that anyone who implies this
has some ulterior motive for requesting it. Should be provided at the end of Magenta Avenue.
Emergency access using Allotment Road is unacceptable because of the distance along Prospect
Road then Allotment Road
There is an alternative access to the site – Magenta Avenue
The reduced visibility splay referred to in the Traffic Report is dangerous and unacceptable when
there is a practicable alternative
Four storey flats will overshadow the proposed houses in Magenta Avenue, as does the existing tall
wall at the side of the existing development
Traffic report in favour of using Dean Road does not take into account the fact that there are 45
large detached houses which are likely to be occupied by families using 3 or more cars and the flats
will be occupied by families having two cars
Objection to the proposed use of Dean Road as the access to the development – Dean Road is
narrow, not straight and is restricted to one car width over most of its length due to the parked cars
on both sides of the road. Passing spaces may well be available during quite times of the day, but
the situation later in the day is totally different as a parked car occupies every available space on
both sides of the road.
An estimated 300 – 400 extra car movements per day through Dean Road would be intolerable
A traffic increase of the proportions envisaged (more than double existing) must have a detrimental
affect on safety
22
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
-
-
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Considerable numbers of children live and play on Dean Road and the implications for their safety
is obvious
Previous traffic report by TPK Consulting conflicts with the submitted traffic report – the original
report was based on only 66 houses that were to be low cost houses yet did not support the Dean
Road only access
The Traffic Report is seriously flawed and is not impartial as it is paid for by the developer. Fails to
identify accidents at the junction of Dean Road/ Liverpool Road.
Currently damage to vehicles on a daily basis due to narrow width of Dean Road, due to vehicles
turning and reversing
Turning from Liverpool Road into Dean Road is hazardous
Dean Road should remain as a cul-de-sac and a turning circle should be incorporated at the end of
the road
Everybody will use Dean Road as a thoroughfare onto Allotment Road or even a shortcut through
to New Moss Road when the traffic is built up on Liverpool Road
Public open space will be for the use of the development only and not the residents of this densely
populated area
Objection to loss of trees
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
EN5 Nature Conservation
H6 /H11 Open Space Provision within Housing Developments
DEV1 Development Criteria
T13 – Car Parking
DEV2 Good Design
DEV4 Design and Crime
DEV7 – Development of Contaminated Land
EN20 – Pollution Control
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY(INCORPORATING PRE-INQUIRY
CHANGES)
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None.
H8 Open Space Provision Associated With New Housing Development
DES1 Respecting Context
DES11 Design and Crime
DES13 – Design Statements
DES9 Landscaping
A2 Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
EN13 – Contaminated Land
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: vehicular access to the proposed development and
traffic generation, the density of the proposed development, the siting of the dwellings, the provision of
open space within the development, the design and external appearance of the development, the level of car
parking provision, contaminated land remediation and whether the proposal complies with the relevant
23
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
provisions of both the adopted Unitary Development Plan and the Replacement Plan. I will deal with each
in turn below.
Vehicular Access and Traffic Generation
Adopted Policy DEV1 states that regard should be had to a number of criteria in the determination of
planning applications, including the relationship to the road and public transport networks and the likely
scale of traffic generation.
The majority of the objections raised relate to vehicular access and traffic generation, in particular, the use
of Dean Road as the vehicular access to the development, increase in traffic and the impact of this on
residential amenity and safety and the proposed emergency access to the development.
Firstly, with reference to concerns raised regarding Dean Road being the sole vehicular access to the site, it
is necessary to consider the planning history to this site and the adjacent residential development at
Magenta Avenue. Outline planning permission was approved in 2000 for the development of land for
residential purposes and all matters were reserved. In consideration of that application, it was considered
that the most appropriate form of development would be via a loop road between Dean Road and Magenta
Avenue. Conditions were therefore attached to the planning approval requiring the provision of a loop road
between Magenta Avenue and Dean Road and the making up of Magenta Avenue, between the site access
and Liverpool Road, to adoptable standards.
A second outline planning application for the development of land for residential purposes with all matters
reserved was subsequently submitted in 2000, which sought the removal of the previously attached
conditions relating to the loop road and the making up of Magenta Avenue to adoptable standards. In the
Report to Panel, it was not considered that the opening up of Dean Road would necessarily result in an
unacceptable increase in traffic or lack of highway safety and nor was it considered appropriate or desirable
to fetter the applicant by making improvements to land outside his control a condition of any planning
approval. Planning permission was subsequently approved without these two conditions. Planning
permission was approved earlier this year for the variation of condition 1 on planning permission
01/42510/OUT to extend the time for submission and implementation of the reserved matters in respect of
the outline planning application for development of land for residential purposes, again, no conditions were
attached requiring a loop road or the making up of Magenta Avenue.
In 2003, a planning application was received for the erection of 16 dwellings together with associated car
parking and alteration to existing, and construction of new vehicular access on land off Magenta
Avenue(03/45589/FUL). Planning permission was approved, subject to conditions, including a condition
requiring Magenta Avenue to be made up to adoptable standards, extending up to and including the western
boundary to the current planning application site boundary to the west. A planning application was
subsequently received for the variation of this condition (03/46904/FUL). The applicant had no objection to
making Magenta Avenue up to adoptable standards, but wished to vary the requirement to extend the road
up to and including the western boundary, to the Akzo Nobel Inks site (ie the current application site
boundary) and to make the whole length up to adoptable standards. The report to Panel considered the two
outline planning approvals at the Akzo Nobel site and stated that whilst it was a desirable end to achieve,
taking into account the past history, it is not essential to either the Magenta Avenue site or the Akzo Nobel
site and thus cannot be considered necessary. It was therefore recommended that the permission be varied
to allow Magenta Avenue to be made up to adoptable standards to the extent as shown on the submitted
plans, ie up to 5 metres from the boundary to the Akzo Nobel site boundary.
24
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Following earlier concerns, the applicant has made a number of amendments to the proposed development,
to ensure adequate driveway lengths and visibility within the development. Consideration has been given to
the planning history to the site and the details contained within the highways assessment, in particular with
regards to the existing highway circumstances on Dean Road and the proposed traffic flow. I do not
consider that the use of Dean Road as the sole vehicular access to the application site would be detrimental
to highway safety. With reference to the junction of Dean Road and Liverpool Road, there have already
been improvements to allow a right turn lane facility on Liverpool Road, furthermore, the volume of traffic
using Liverpool Road is expected to decrease following completion of the bypass in 2005. Traffic calming
measures are proposed within the proposed development and on Dean Road and would be subject to a
Section 278 Agreement.
Objection has been raised regarding the proposed emergency access point on Allotment Road and the need
for this has been questioned. I can confirm that emergency access points are covered in the document
‘Layout of Roads in Residential Areas’. Should a cul-de-sac exceed 250 metres in length, an emergency
access point will be required. The cul-de-sac starts at the junction of Dean Road with Liverpool Road, the
length of the proposed road is therefore such that the emergency access route is required. The access would
only be used if needed for emergency access by, for example, fire engines. A condition is recommended to
ensure full details of the bollards proposed to ensure that there is no unauthorised access.
Open Space Provision and Landscaping
Policy H6 requires adequate provision of informal open space and children’s play within new housing
developments. This policy is linked to Policy H11 which sets out a sliding scale for such provision. Policy
H8 of the Replacement Plan requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and
informal open space within housing developments. In accordance with these policies, the applicants have
agreed to make a contribution towards open space, through a combination of on-site informal open space
provision and the provision of a commuted sum towards open space in the vicinity, in-lieu of on site formal
provision.
The pre-enquiry changes to policy H8 of the Replacement Plan state that residential development will also
be required to include an adequate provision of private amenity space. Policy DES9 of the Replacement
Plan relates to landscaping and states that developments will be required to incorporate satisfactory hard
and soft landscaping.
I consider that the proposals for open space provision are in accordance with policies H6 and H11, policy
H8 of the Replacement Plan and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on open space. I also
consider that there is an adequate level of private amenity space associated with both the apartments and the
detached dwellings and that the landscaping proposals are satisfactory.
Siting of the Dwellings and Density
Adopted Policy DEV1 states that regard should be had to a number of criteria in the determination of
planning applications, including its relationship to existing and proposed land uses, the size and density of
the proposed development, the effect on sunlight, daylight and privacy for neighbouring properties and the
visual appearance of the development. Replacement Plan 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.
25
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
The proposal is for 75 dwellings on a 2.15 ha site, which equates to a density of 35 homes per hectare. In
consideration of the surrounding housing types, terrace and semi-detached, the housing mix and density is
considered acceptable.
With regards to amenity distances, I consider that the distances between the proposed dwellings and
apartments within the site would allow for satisfactory levels of amenity. With regards to the existing
dwellings on Rivington Grove, the applicant has amended the plans, to achieve distances of between 20m
and 21m from plots 17 to 21. Furthermore, these plots would be positioned at an angle and would not
directly face the existing dwellings. Conservatories are proposed to the rear of a number of the plots facing
the existing dwellings on Rivington Grove, whilst these would be sited less than 21m from the existing
dwellings, I do not consider that there would be any loss of privacy given the proposed boundary treatment
(1.8m fence) and existing planting and boundary treatments. As an extra measure of control, I have
recommended that permitted development rights are removed for these plots. With reference to the
objection in relation to the overshadowing of dwellings on Magenta Avenue, I can confirm that there would
be a minimum distance of 24.5 metres between plots 52 to 57 of the proposed 3 storey apartments and the
facing dwellings off Magenta Avenue which were approved under planning permission 03/45589/FUL. I
do not therefore consider that there would be any loss of privacy or overshadowing of these dwellings.
The proposal has been amended as a result of my earlier concerns relating to the relationship to existing
residential properties surrounding the site and amenity distances between proposed dwellings. In addition,
the siting of the proposed apartments has been amended to allow for natural surveillance of the public open
space. I am satisfied that the proposed detached dwellings would be a sufficient distance from neighbouring
dwellings so as not to result in unacceptable detrimental impacts to the amenity of existing residents.
Design and External Appearance
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 and policy DEV4 encourages greater
consideration of crime prevention and personal and property security in the design of new development.
Replacement Plan 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. Replacement Plan policy DES11 updates Policy DEV4 of the
Adopted UDP.
Policy DES13 of the Replacement UDP requires applicants for all major developments to submit a design
statement, detailing how the development takes account of the need for good design. This should detail the
design principles and design concept and how these are reflected in the developments layout, density, scale,
visual appearance and landscaping. A Design Statement has been submitted which considers urban design
principles. The proposed development has been designed to include a variety of house-types. A mixture of
materials are proposed including a variety of brickwork and render, a condition has been attached requiring
samples of materials to be submitted for approval. I consider that the variety in dwelling mix, housetypes
and materials will complement the character of the area. Following concern raised regarding a lack of
surveillance to the ‘fly-over’ apartment, the position of the access has been repositioned to the front
elevation.
I consider that the design and external appearance of the proposed dwellings is acceptable.
26
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Level of Car Parking Provision
Policy T13 of the UDP 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. Replacement Plan 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. I consider that the proposed arrangements for car parking for the detached
dwellings are acceptable and I consider that 100% parking provision is acceptable for the apartments, given
consideration of national planning guidance and the close proximity of the proposed development to
Liverpool Road and its associated bus services. Furthermore, cycle parking facilities have been identified
and the developer has indicated that a satisfactory level of disabled parking spaces would be provided. The
location of the parking areas for the apartments allows natural surveillance of these areas from the
apartments.
Contaminated Land and Noise
Policy EN20 states that the Council will encourage and support measures to reduce land contamination and
noise. It states that environmentally sensitive development, such as housing, will not normally be permitted
where existing pollution, including land contamination, is unacceptable unless it can be demonstrated that
the development includes sufficient improvement measures to reduce the nuisance to an acceptable level.
Replacement plan policy EN13 states that development proposals on sites known or thought to be
contaminated will require the submission of a site assessment as part of any planning application and that
remedial measures agreed as part of any planning permission will required to be completed as the first step
of the development.
The Environment Agency and the Greater Manchester Geological Unit both recommend that site
investigations are undertaken. Planning permission was, however, granted in 2003 for works for the
remediation of contaminated land. I have recently received confirmation from the Director of
Environmental Services that these works have partially been completed on site. A condition requiring the
submission of a site completion report for the City Council’s approval is required to be submitted prior to
the occupation of any dwelling, This report will be required to provide information on the previously agreed
remaining remediation issues to a specification accepted by the Director of Environmental Services and the
Site Completion Report shall confirm that the agreed level of gas protection and cover systems have been
implemented during construction.
With regards to noise, the noise assessment submitted has been considered and the Director of
Environmental Services has confirmed that there is potential for noise from the railway line and industrial
estate and as such a condition is recommended requiring acoustic glazing to the habitable room windows of
a number of dwellings, including plots 21 to 57.
Subject to satisfactory compliance with the recommended conditions, I am satisfied that this application
accords with Adopted Policy EN20 and Draft Policy EN13.
Other Matters
With reference to policy EN5 Nature Conservation, a small part of the application site lies within the
wildlife corridor, however as the railway line is in use, there would be limited public access and therefore
very little impact on the wildlife corridor from residents of the proposed development using the space,
furthermore, given previous land uses and the contaminated land remediation works, I do not consider that
27
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
the proposed development would have any significant detrimental impact on the wildlife corridor. With
regards to the objection raised concerning loss of trees, the previously approved contamination remediation
works would necessitate the removal of any trees within the site.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
Since the submission of the reserved matters application, several amendments have been made to the
scheme that have resulted in improvements to the proposal. The layout of the site has been amended so as to
reduce loss of privacy and overlooking to existing dwellings surrounding the site and also within the
development site. The developer will also enter into a Section 106 Agreement to secure a contribution
towards the provision and maintenance of open space and in the area.
CONCLUSION
The main issues in the determination of this application are the suitability of the vehicular access
arrangements, the design and scale of the proposal and its impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents
and the amenity provisions for future occupants. With regards to the use of Dean Road as the sole vehicular
access to the development, I am satisfied that the proposals are acceptable in terms of highway safety. I
consider that sufficient levels of amenity will be provided for neighbouring occupiers and for future
occupiers of the development. I consider that the redevelopment of this site for a residential use would make
a significant contribution to the improvement of the amenity of this area. I am satisfied that the application
accords with the relevant provisions of both the Adopted UDP and Replacement UDP.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Members are minded to grant planning permission subject to the conditions below once the legal
agreement has been signed:
that the Director of Corporate Services be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section
106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the payment of a contribution to the
provision of open space and a commuted sum for, and implementation of, environmental
improvements in the local area to the value of £124, 090;
that the applicant be informed that the City Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject
to the conditions stated below, on completion of such legal agreement;
that authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued, (subject to the
conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement,
that authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the S106
agreement within a reasonable period on the grounds that the proposals do not support the aim and
objectives of policies H6 and H11 of the City of Salford Adopted Unitary Development Plan.
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. 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 Director of Development
28
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Services.
2. Standard Condition F05D Provision of Parking
3. Prior to the commencement of the development the developer shall submit a traffic calming and street
lighting scheme for the development and Dean Road for the approval of the Director of Development
Services. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the 50% occupation of the dwellings, to
the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services.
4. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 and Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
(General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (and any subsequent amending order), there shall be no
development within the curtilage of plots 1 to 21 (inclusive) and 64 to 75 (inclusive) hereby approved
as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the above Order without the prior grant of planning permission by
the Local Planning Authority.
5. Prior to the occupation of the on site dwellings, the developer shall submit a site completion report for
the approval of the Director of Development Services. The report shall provide information on the
previously agreed remaining remediation issues to a specification accepted by the Director of
Development Services. The Site Completion Report shall confirm that the agreed level of gas
protection and cover systems have been implemented during construction of the site.
If any contamination issues are identified during development then appropriate action must be taken
with the approval of the Director of Development Services prior to the discharge of this condition.
6. The windows of the following habitable rooms: rear bedroom windows to plots 22 to 31; bedroom
windows to all elevations of plot 21 and all habitable room windows of plots 32 - 57 which face the
industrial estate, shall be acoustically treated by either: double glazed units of 8.4mm Solaglas Stadip
Silence Laminate Glass - (10-16mm) cavity - 10.8mm Solaglas Stadip Silence Laminate Glass or a
secondary glazing system comprising outer standard thermal double glazing of 4mm glass - (6-20mm)
air gap with an additional pane of 6mm secondary glazing with a cavity of at least 100mm between the
outer and inner windows. All the rooms specified above shall have mechanical ventilation to the
standard of the Noise Insulation Regulations (1988) as amended. This must be capable of providing a
ventilation rate of at least 37 litres/second and must be sound attenuated.
7. This permission shall relate to the amended plans received 27th September 2004 which show the
amended site layout, amended apartment details and disabled parking spaces.
8. Prior to the commencement of the development the developer shall submit a scheme for the proposed
emergency access point which shall include full details of design and siting of bollards and proposed
surfacing for the approval of the Director of Development Services. The approved scheme shall be
implemented prior to the first occupation of the development and the access point shall not be used for
vehicular access or egress, except in connection with the emergency services, to the satisfaction of the
Director of Development Services.
9. Proposed floor levels must not be less than 300mm above footway levels.
10. The landscape scheme hereby approved 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.
29
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the
Director of Development Services.
11. Prior to first occupation of any dwelling, vehicular and pedestrian access should be provided and
completed in its entirety, in accordance with the submitted drawings, and to the site boundary including
that with Magenta Avenue. Furthermore, no future developemnt, beyond that hereby permitted, will be
undertaken on the application site whether or not it would be otherwise permitted by the Town and
Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 that would hinder or prevent such
access without express planning permission first being obtained.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R026A Interests of highway safety
4. Standard Reason R037A Additional measure of control
5. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
6. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
7. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
7. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
8. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
9. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
10. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DEV 1 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan.
11. In order to ensure the proper development of the site and that no ransom strip will be caused to exist or
a future obstruction of access to Magenta Avenue created.
Note(s) for Applicant
1. Existing combined 150mm diameter public sewer in Allotment Road and adjacent to Dean Road
(please see attached plan). There is also an existing 150mm diameter combined public sewer at the rear
of plots 1 to 5 (running approximately beneath the fence line), this sewer may need diverting due to
proximity of buildings please contact United Utilities to discuss their requirements.
30
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
2. Separate surface water and foul systems will be required. New connections to existing public sewer will
require United Utilities approval. Maximum discharge will need to be agreed with United Utilities.
3. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from United Utilities dated 16th
June 2004.
4. Please contact the Director of Development Services (Engineering Design) regarding adoption.
5. Works on existing adopted highway will be subject to a s278 agreement (please contact the City
Council's Traffic Section)
6. The remaining remediation issues that need to be carried and have been agreed are (refer to letter dated
the 8th September 2004 to CEL); The validation report conclusions are subject, "to the suitable
placement of clean cover in the garden areas in accordance with the requirements of Salford City
Council". This should be carried out in conjunction with Salford City Council's standard requirements.
Details of the composition and source of the cover material must be provided within the remediation
statement and sampling must be undertaken to confirm that the material is suitable for use.In addition
with regards to the area to the north-west of the site i.e. the area of the former hydrocarbons spillage it is
required that as a minimum protection of the dwellings to characteristic situation 2 in CIRIA 149 is
provided. Particular emphasis should be placed on finding a protective membrane that is suitable to
prevent volatile ingress. The proposed specification and plans should be submitted and agreed prior to
installation. Please contact the Director of Environmental Services for further information.
7. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached e-mail and Terms and Conditions Note
from Network Rail dated 16th June 2004.
8. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from Greater Manchester Police
Architectural Liaison Unit dated 9th June 2004.
9. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
EN5 Nature Conservation
H6 /H11 Open Space Provision within Housing Developments
DEV1 Development Criteria
T13 - Car Parking
DEV2 Good Design
DEV4 Design and Crime
DEV7 - Development of Contaminated Land
EN20 - Pollution Control
31
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
APPLICATION No:
04/49374/FUL
APPLICANT:
Prestigious Living (NW) Ltd
LOCATION:
Land Adjoining Summerhill Mansion Nursing Home Chaplin Close
Salford 6
PROPOSAL:
Retention of 1.8m brick screen wall to Plot No. 3 (re-submission of
planning application 04/47491/FUL)
WARD:
Claremont
BACKGROUND
At the meeting of the Panel held on 2nd December 2004 consideration of this application was DEFERRED
FOR AN INSPECTION BY THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL.
My previous observations are set out below:
There have been several planning applications submitted at this site. This current application relates to one
aspect, boundary treatments and whether the existing boundary treatment impinges on the setting of the
grade II listed Summerhill Mansion nursing home.
A condition of an earlier planning permission required stone boundary walls to be erected. Condition 10 of
the previously approved planning permission 03/45775/FUL was worded: “Details of the design and
location of the stone boundary walls on plots 3,4,5 and 6 shall be submitted to and approved by the Director
of Development Services prior to construction. The walls shall be constructed, using the approved
materials, within four months of the date of this permission”. The reason for this condition was given as:
“Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DEV 1 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan”.
Application (04/47491/FUL) for the variation of condition 10, requiring the erection of a stone wall around
this plot was refused by the Panel in May this year as the proposal was considered to be out of keeping with
the adjacent Summerhill Mansion nursing home.
Following the refusal of 04/47491/FUL enforcement proceedings were begun and an initial court date of
23rd September 2004 was adjourned until 28th October 2004. Before the latter court date was reached the
applicant submitted this current application which the Council has to consider. As such enforcement
proceedings are on hold until the outcome of this application is known.
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
32
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
The application relates to land at Chaplin Close, which is set within the former grounds of Summerhill
Mansions Nursing Home. The applicant seeks to retain a brick garden wall to the west facing side of the
garden of 21 Chaplin Close. The wall faces the Grade II Listed Summerhill Mansion nursing home.
SITE HISTORY
In May 2004, planning permission was refused for Variation of Condition 10 (boundary wall treatment) on
application 03/45775/FUL to allow for erection of brick built wall on the garden elevation of the plot
fronting the Nursing Home and timber fences on all other boundary treatments. (04/47491/FUL). The
reason for refusal was given as:
“The proposed materials of the wall would be out of character with the existing adjoining Listed building to
the detriment of the visual amenity of the area and the setting of Summerhill Mansions Nursing Home,
contrary to policy EN12 of the Salford City Council Adopted Unitary Development Plan, 1995”.
In 2003, planning permission was granted for alterations to the apartment block, block three and gatehouse
block (Amendment to planning permission 01/42421/FUL) 03/45775/FUL. Condition 10 was imposed as
an additional condition to earlier approvals to require stone built walls around plots 3, 4, 5 and 6.
In 2002, planning permission was granted for the erection of 16 dwellings and 11 apartments, amendment
to planning permission 02/44701/FUL.
In 2001, planning permission was granted for the erection of sixteen dwellings, one - three storey building
comprising nine flats, and one gatehouse comprising two flats, together with associated car parking
(01/42421/FUL).
In 1995, planning permission was granted for the erection of 22 x 1 and 2 bed apartments, 10 x 3 and 4 bed
town houses, and 33 sheltered apartments, together with associated car parking and landscaping (ref:
95/34256/FUL). The development was of high density, with the townhouses sited along the boundary with
Keystone Close and Chaseley Fields, apartments within the north west corner, and the sheltered apartments
adjacent to Castleway. Both the townhouses and apartment blocks were effectively four storey, with a
height of just over 11m. The planning permission involved the construction of an access road, which has
been constructed and therefore the permission is extant.
In November 1994 planning permission was granted for the erection of 8 houses and 13 flats, together with
the associated works and construction of a new vehicular access (ref: E/32926).
In 1993 planning permission was approved for the erection of 57 retirement apartments, a 40 bed nursing
home and the conversion of the existing mansion to 8 flats (ref: E/30952).
In April 1991 planning permission was approved for the erection of 10 houses together with associated car
parking and construction of new vehicular access (ref: E/32046).
PUBLICITY
A Site notice was displayed on the 11th October 2004
Press notices were published on the 4th November 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
33
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
2 – 6 (e) Keystone Close
1 – 15 Chaplin Close & 21 – 31 odd Chaplin Close
Summerhill Mansions, Chaplin Close
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received two letters of objection from the same person in response to the planning application
publicity. To the previous refusal of proposed brick wall I received two objections. The following issues
have been raised:Detrimental impact upon the Listed Building as the wall should match the nursing home
Wimpey had to put a stone wall along the rear gardens of Keystone Close so why does this
not remain valid now
Waney lap fencing is out of character
Concern of the approach of the developer in not complying with planning conditions
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP3 Quality in New Development
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific: none
Other policies: DEV 1 Development Criteria
DEV 2 Good Design
EN12 Protection and Enhancement of Listed Buildings
FIRST DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific: none
Other policies: DES1 Respecting Context
CH4 Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building
PLANNING APPRAISAL
Policy DEV1 requires development to respect to the character of the development and its relation to
surroundings, including surrounding residential amenity and DEV2 requires good quality design. Policy
EN12 requires that development does not detrimentally effect the setting of a listed building. Policies of the
first deposit draft replacement unitary development plan are similar with regard to this application. DP3 is
concerned with quality in design.
The objector to this application and the two objectors to the previous application consider that the erection
of a brick wall facing Summerhill Mansions would detract from the character of the Listed Building and
that a stone wall would be more in keeping. The objectors also wanted all boundary walls within the
development to match the nursing home and not be waney lap wooden panel fencing.
Notwithstanding the previous refusal in assessing this current application it is important to consider what
the setting of the Listed Building entails and whether the boundary treatment of the houses in question are
perceived as part of the houses or as a boundary treatment to the Listed building. There is an estate road
34
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
between the houses and the nursing home the boundary treatment in question is clearly identifiable as part
of the houses and not the nursing home. Nevertheless this was the position at the previous refusal but the
application does have to be assessed on its merits and with regard to the setting.
At the time of the previous refusal the boundary of the garden facing the listed building was timber panels
and brick piers. Although the Panels resolution was to refuse the variation of the condition requiring stone
walls I consider that when viewed on site and in the submitted photographs with the application the brick
wall forms part of 21 Chaplin Close and is appropriate to that property as it is built in matching brick to the
house. The same brick wall also should rightly be assessed in terms of the impact of the setting of the listed
Summerhill Mansions. The now constructed brick infill panels do not in my opinion detract from the setting
of the listed building.
CONCLUSION
I consider the proposed boundary wall, in brick that matches the houses, to be appropriate for both the
setting of the houses and the setting of the Listed building. I also consider that the timber fence to the rear of
plots 3, 4 and 5 and others within the development to be appropriate as this would not affect the setting of
the Listed building. I recommend that planning permission be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve - unconditional
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP3 Quality in New Development
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific:
none
Other policies:
DEV 1 Development Criteria
DEV 2 Good Design
EN12 Protection and Enhancement of Listed Buildings
FIRST DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific:
none
Other policies:
DES1 Respecting Context
CH4 Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building
35
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
APPLICATION No:
04/49180/ADV
APPLICANT:
Spirit Group
LOCATION:
41 Monton Green Eccles
PROPOSAL:
Display of various externally illuminated and non-illuminated
advertising signs
WARD:
Eccles
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The proposal relates to The Bluebell Pub on Monton Green.
The proposal is for various illuminated and non-illuminated advertisements on the North and West
elevations of the building and for the erection of an illuminated double-legged post sign on the forecourt. A
directional sign to the car park and a disclaimer sign will also be displayed on the boundary wall that runs
along the western boundary of the site.
The applicant also intends to replace the existing externally mounted lamps with similar fittings. An
additional lantern will also be installed on the single storey side extension that lies to the west of the main
building.
To the west of the Bluebell there are offices and to the east there are residential properties. There are also
residential properties to the front and rear of the premises.
SITE HISTORY
Several applications have been submitted in the past for the display of an illuminated freestanding post sign.
The most recent application was approved in 1998 (ref. E23208)
CONSULTATIONS
Engineers - No objections. Any illumination should be in accordance with City Council standards.
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 12th of October 2004.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
9 to 23 (Odd) Mirfield Drive
37, 39, 43 and 49 Monton Green
6 to 18 (Even) Monton Green.
36
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 15 letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application publicity. The
following issues have been raised:The proposal is out of character with the Victorian/Edwardian nature of the area – the adverts would
therefore be an eyesore for residents/visitors to the area to endure.
The illuminated adverts/lamps would generate unnecessary light pollution.
The proposed adverts would create a distraction to drivers.
The John Barras brand and the live sporting events/big screen entertainment on offer would attract
undesirable clientele that would cause a nuisance and as such it is not an appropriate use in a residential
area.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: DEV1 – Development Criteria
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: DES1 – Respecting Context
DEV2 - Advertisements
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issue relating to this application is the impact that the proposed advertisements would
have on the visual amenity of the immediate neighbourhood. The impact the proposed adverts may have on
public safety also needs to be considered.
Policy DEV1 states that regard must be given to the visual appearance of any development and its
relationship to its surroundings. DEV2 states that consent will be only be given for the display of
advertisements where they would not have an unacceptable impact on amenity or public safety. PPG19
“Outdoor Advertisement Control” suggests that highway safety and amenity are the key considerations
when considering such applications.
The Bluebell pub is located opposite the Monton Green Conservation Area. I am of the opinion that the
proposed signage would not have an adverse impact upon the street scene as the signs are well designed, of
an appropriate size and scale for the building and the illumination that they project would be in accordance
with the City Council’s guidelines and as such it would not detract from the character of the conservation
area either.
The predominant land use surrounding the Bluebell is residential. Despite this I am of the opinion that the
signage would not have an adverse impact upon the residential amenity the neighbouring residents No
signage would be displayed on the eastern elevation or the rear elevation and therefore the residential
amenity those on Mirfield Drive and 43 Monton Green currently enjoy would not be affected by the
proposed development. The residential amenity an currently enjoyed by those opposite would not be
adversely affected either as these properties would be located approximately 40m away across Monton
37
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Green, screened by a number of trees on the green. Consequently, the noise and light pollution they would
experience as a result of the proposed advertisements would be minimal.
The established planning use of the premises is as a public house. This application does not therefore relate
to the use of the premises, it simply relates to the display of advertisements and therefore the type of
entertainment provided by the company is not a material planning consideration in the determination of this
application.
With regard to public safety and possible loss of visibility and the distraction to drivers that may arise as a
result of the proposal. I am of the opinion the proposal would not create a hazard or endanger people who
are taking reasonable care for their own and other people’s safety, as the illumination would be static and
within the Council’s approved guidelines.
CONCLUSION
The proposed advertisements would not have an adverse impact upon the street scene, the adjoining
conservation area or on the residential amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents. It is therefore
in accordance with policies DEV1, DES1 and DEV2 and consequently I recommend that the application be
approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition K01S Standard Advertisement Condition
2. Standard Condition K06 Luminance levels
3. The permission shall relate to the amended plan received on the 29th of November which shows signs C
and F and all the banners removed.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R034 Advert
2. Standard Reason R039 Amenity-advertisements
3. Standard Reason R019 Avoidance of Doubt
APPLICATION No:
04/49192/OUT
APPLICANT:
A And B Motors
LOCATION:
Land To The Rear Of A And B Motors Lester Road Little Hulton
38
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
PROPOSAL:
Outline application for the siting of a workshop extension and car
parking together with associated landscaping
WARD:
Little Hulton
At the meeting of the panel held on 18th May 2004 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 the rear of an established industrial unit on the Lester Road Industrial Estate. The
premises are currently used for the repair of motor vehicles. The site measures 0.46ha.
Outline planning permission is sought for the erection of a workshop extension and car parking area. The
proposal also includes a nature conservation area. Consent is only sought for the siting of the extension and
means of access. The proposal would be provided at the rear of the site. The extension would project 14m
from the rear (western) elevation. The majority of the site at the rear would be used for the parking of
vehicles awaiting repair.
The proposal would maintain 16m from the north western corner to the corner of the closest residential
property. The proposal would not directly face any of the residential properties on Manchester Road West.
The site at the rear is designated a Site of Biological Interest (SBI), Marsh and Pool at Greenheys. The
majority of the area identified as an SBI would be lost to facilitate this proposal. The proposal would
provide an alternative nature conservation area, which would be managed and maintained by way of a new
S106 agreement. It would comprise of three elements:A corridor of open scrub along the west side of the site and the Wharton Lane;
Marsh/wet ‘inundation’ grassland in the north/north east part of the site; and
Grassland on the north/north west bank.
It is proposed that this nature conservation area and strip would connect the marsh on the north side of the
site to the larger SBI known as, Ponds North of Cleworth Hall, to the south west of the site also in Little
Hulton. The proposal would match in size the part of the site, which is considered to have ecological value
at present.
SITE HISTORY
Planning permission was recently refused for an identical outline scheme (04/47874/OUT). The reason for
refusal states: “Insufficient ecological information have been submitted to enable the full implications of the proposed
development to be assessed.”
A public inquiry is time tabled for early next year with regard this refusal.
39
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
In 1996, planning permission was approved for the erection of 3 metre high brick boundary wall and 3.3m
high (96/35115/FUL)
In 1995, planning permission was approved for the erection of single storey extension to rear of vacant
building (95/34185/FUL)
The applicant agreed to enter into a Section 106 agreement as part of this approval to manage and
maintain the Site of Biological Interest. The agreement required a management plan “for the future
management maintenance and enhancement of the S.B.I.” to be provided within 6 months of the
commencement of development.
In 1994, planning permission was approved for the change of use from manufacturing/warehouse use to
motor vehicle repair centre together with associated car parking
CONSULTATIONS
Greater Manchester Ecology Unit – Advise that the site has deteriorated since the site was last inspected
and the area of most ecological interest (marsh/marshy grassland with a characteristic species assemblage)
has reduced in size to an area not more than about 500m2 towards the centre of the site. This deterioration
has been caused by scrub encroachment on the site causing subsequent shading, drying and nutrient
enrichment. The marsh will continue to deteriorate and reduce in size and species diversity if action is not
taken to restore and subsequently manage the site. If no action is taken the site can be expected to lose its
important ecological features and will cease to justify designation as an SBI within 5-10 years.
The ecologist considers that the site could be restored albeit it would constitute a considerably onerous task
involving the clearance of encroaching scrub by cutting and uprooting, and then stripping a layer of topsoil.
Important plants will need to be moved from the site and then reinstated after topsoil stripping.
Management of scrub by cutting and uprooting would then be required on an annual basis to prevent future
scrub encroachment.
However, due to the condition of the site at present, the need to protect and enhance ecological value, and
the limited amount of important habitat which remains, the ecologist supports this scheme as it would
provide a new nature conservation area and preserve the remaining elements on the site of ecological value.
Details of drainage would have to be provided with the submission of any reserved matters application.
Director of Environmental Services – no comments
PUBLICITY
The application has been advertised by means of both site and press notices.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
Units 1 – 6, Garage Premises, Lester Road
231 – 243, 231A, 237 Manchester Road West
Wharton House, 6, 10, 11 Wharton Lane
REPRESENTATIONS
40
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
I have received one objection in response to the planning application publicity. The following issues have
been raised:Lack of maintenance
Lack of enforcement has resulted in the current situation
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
None
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
EN5 Nature Conservation, EN9 Derelict and Vacant Land, EC4 Improvements to
Employment Areas, DEV1 Development Criteria
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
EN7C/10 Nature Conservation Sites of National Importance
E5 Development Within Established Employment Areas, DES7 Amenity of Users
and Neighbours
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the proposed development would result in
the loss of a Site of Biological Importance and whether the proposal complies with the relevant policies of
both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs and the implications for the living
conditions of neighbouring residents These issues will be discussed in turn below.
Ecology
Policy EN5 of the adopted plan states that the City Council will seek to improve the environment for nature
through:
ii) the protection of Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Local Nature Reserves and Sites of
Biological Importance…
The reasoned justification states, “The preparation of detailed management plans and the use of
management agreements with landowners can provide the opportunity to ensure that such management is
carried out”.
Policy EN9 of the adopted plan states that the City Council will encourage the use of derelict and vacant
sites taking account of:iii) the existing and potential ecological and recreational value of the site…
As the applicant did not manage the site it has returned to its natural state, including some incursion of
scrub and drying out.
41
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Policy EN5 also indicates that planning approval will not normally be granted for development that would
have an unacceptable impact upon such sites. The reasoned justification indicates that where development
proposals would damage a protected site, the applicant will be required to demonstrate that the potential
benefits of the development exceed the decrease in the nature conservation value of the site, and that such
decrease has been kept to a minimum and compensated for by appropriate habitat creation / enhancement
elsewhere within the or surrounding area.
Policy EN7C of the revised deposit draft replacement plan states that development that would adversely
affect the nature conservation value of an SBI will only be permitted where the benefits of the development
clearly outweigh the reduction, the impacts have been minimised and appropriate mitigation has been
provided to ensure that the overall nature conservation interest of the area is not diminished.
The previous scheme was refused due to a lack of ecological information. The application itself was
somewhat premature as it was provided at an inappropriate time of the year to fully assess the ecological
merits of the SBI. A survey has now been undertaken by the applicant’s ecologist and Derek Richardson,
Principle Ecologist at the Ecology Unit. This survey was undertaken in July of this year.
Although the site has deteriorated significantly since the time of the last survey, the GMEU, consider that
an area of 0.1ha of sufficient ecological merit to warrant the downgraded designation of Grade ‘C’, SBI.
The site has a net lost 0.3ha of ecological value since the last survey. The applicant is prepared to enter into
a legal agreement to safeguard and consolidate the existing SBI by way of a new management plan within
three months of the date of this decision. A legal agreement would also be entered into to safeguard,
manage and maintain the proposed nature conservation area. The ecologist supports the proposed nature
conservation area as it would safeguard the further loss of nature conservation interest on the site.
The proposal, albeit in outline, identifies an alternative nature conservation area which would be managed
and maintained. It would comprise of three elements; a corridor of open scrub along the west side of the site
and the Wharton Lane; Marsh/wet ‘inundation’ grassland in the north/north east part of the site; and
Grassland on the north/north west bank. This proposal would provide a similar level of land for nature
conservation when compared to the remaining land on the site considered of ecological value.
The benefit of this proposal would provide a specific area around the periphery of the site which would be
managed and maintained. The elements of ecological value would be relocated within this newly formed
area. Moreover, as the scheme would provide a grassland corridor along the western boundary, an
ecological link would be provided to link the proposed marsh/wetland to the SBI in the south west.
In conclusion, I consider that the proposed nature conservation area would benefit the site, ensure that the
ecological merits of the site are not loss forever and would connect this site with the larger SBI to the south
west. As such I consider that the overall nature conservation interest of the site would be retained and
therefore supported by policies of the adopted and revised deposit draft development plans.
Employment Use
Adopted policy EC4 seeks to improve employers operating conditions by encouraging the improvement of
land and premises and promoting improvement of employment areas generally.
Policy E5 of the Revised Deposit Draft UDP, Development within Established Employment Areas, seeks to
promote the re-use or redevelopment of sites or buildings within an established employment areas for
employment uses.
42
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Therefore, the principle of the development accords with policies of the development plan as discussed
above in relation to the use of the site for employment purposes.
Siting 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 network, the potential for noise
nuisance, the visual appearance of the development and the effect on trees.
The proposal would be sited some 16m (corner to corner) from the closest residential property. The
proposed extension would match the width of the existing rear elevation, projecting 14m into the site. It
would not be directly situated behind the closest residential property. As such I am satisfied that the
proposal would not result in an over bearing impact upon this neighbour as it maintain sufficient separation.
The car parking element of the proposal would continue to be screened by the mature trees along the
northern common boundary and the proposed nature conservation area. I do not consider that the parking of
motor vehicles in this area would be unduly noisy within the context of the wider industrial nature of the
area. I have attached conditions regarding the hours of operation pueumatic equipment to match those of
the original consent in order to safeguard residential amenity. As such, I do not consider that this element
would have any detrimental impact upon the neighbouring residential elements.
In conclusion, I do not consider that the amenity of the neighbouring residents would be unduly affected by
this proposal and would accord with the development plan policy outlined above.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I am satisfied that the measures proposed to mitigate the loss of the SBI and siting of the
proposal is acceptable in this instance. I therefore recommend that the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION
That Members are minded to grant planning permission subject to the conditions below once the legal
agreement has been signed:
- that the Director of Corporate Services be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section
106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the management and maintenance of the
Site of Biological Interest and proposed nature conservation area;
- that the applicant be informed that the City Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to
the conditions stated below, on completion of such legal agreement;
- that authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued, (subject to the
conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement,
- that authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the S106 agreement
within a reasonable period on the grounds that the proposals do not support the aim and objectives of
policies EN5 of the City of Salford Adopted Unitary Development Plan.
43
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A02 Outline
2. Standard Condition B01X Reserved Matters
3. The development hereby permitted shall ONLY be operated between the hours of 8.00am- 6.00pm
Mondays to Fridays and 8.00am to 1.00pm on Saturdays. The use shall only be operated for emergency
purposes on Sundays.
4. The use and operation of pueumatically controlled hammers and saws shall be contained within a
suitable enclosure inside the building the details of which shall first be submitted and agreed in writing
by the Director of Development Services prior to the use commencing.
5. Details of the vehicle spraying process including the position and design of any paint booth, the
proposed means of discharging fumes odours and other emissions associated with the vehicle spraying
process from the building, shall be first submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services prior to the use commencing.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R001 Section 92
2. Standard Reason R002 Reserved Matters
3. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
4. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
5. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
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 decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
44
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
EN5 Nature Conservation
EN9 Derelict and Vacant Land
EC4 Improvements to Employment Areas
DEV1 Development Criteria
APPLICATION No:
04/49477/FUL
APPLICANT:
Michael Anthony Developments
LOCATION:
The Welcome Inn Madams Wood Road Worsley
PROPOSAL:
Demolish existing public house and erection of ten new dwellings
together with associated creation of new vehicular accesses
WARD:
Little Hulton
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to the site of a vacant public house, The Welcome Inn, in Little Hulton. The site
comprises of the vacant pub building and car parking area. The site is bounded by residential properties on
three sides, all of which are two storey in height. To the west of the existing car park is an unused site
containing a number of self seeded trees.
The proposal seeks to erect 10 dwellings mainly along the Madams Wood Road frontage. It would provide
four pairs of semi detached dwellings and two detached. Off street parking provision would be provided for
each of the proposed dwellings, the access for which would be off Madams Wood Road. One pair of semi’s
would front Jonquil Drive
All of the accommodation would provide 3 bedrooms. Both the detached and semi detached properties
would incorporate a porch feature with pitched roof above. Soldier course detail is repeated above the
windows on both types of properties. The detached properties would have ridges that run front to back,
whereas the semi’s would have their ridges running left to right.
CONSULTATIONS
United Utilities – No objection subject to the maintenance of a 3m easement around the public sewer
Environment Agency – No objection, advice provided
Police Architectural Liaison Officer – Advice provided
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 16th November 2004
A press notice was displayed 18th November 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 – 5 Buttercup Avenue
1 – 5 Jonquil Drive
45
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
20 – 26 Madams Wood Road
11 – 13 (o), 16 – 20 (e) Mortlake Close
1 – 16 Narcissus Walk
220 – 228 (e) Peel Lane
REPRESENTATIONS
I have not received any representation in response to the application development.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
None
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
H1 Meeting Housing Needs, DEV1 Development Criteria, DEV2 Good Design,
DEV4 Design and Crime, T13 Car Parking
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
H1 Provision of New Housing Development, DES1 Respecting Context, DES11
Design and Crime, A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Development,
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of residential development
in this location is acceptable; and whether the proposal complies with the provisions of the relevant policies
of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP. These issues will be discussed in turn
below.
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.
46
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
The site has previously been developed and considered as a brownfield site, as such, I consider the principle
of the redevelopment of this site for residential accommodation to be acceptable and accords with the thrust
of the policies highlighted above. This has to be balanced against the loss of a potential tourism asset and
existing building.
Design, Layout and Siting
Adopted Policy DEV1 identifies a number of issues that should be taken into account when determining
applications, including the visual appearance of the development, its relationship to its surroundings and the
amount, design and layout of car parking provision.
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.
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 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.
The proposal would provide four blocks of semi detached properties and two detached properties. All of
the accommodation would provide 3 bedrooms. Both styles would also incorporate a porch feature with
pitched roof above. Soldier course detail is repeated above the windows on both styles of properties. The
detached properties would have ridges that run front to back, whereas the semi’s would have their ridges
running left to right.
I am of the opinion that the variation in the styles of roofs with the semi’s also including a front facing pike
element would introduce a rhythm across the Madams Wood Road frontage. I am also of the opinion that
the proposal would be in keeping with the character of the area and that the design of the proposal would
complement the surrounding residential properties.
The proposal would maintain the minimum separation distance to the existing surrounding properties.
Separation distances within the site would be maintained through the orientation, position of and use of
facing windows. As such, I am also of the opinion that the design and siting of the scheme would maintain
sufficient separation in accordance with the adopted SPG to ensure the amenity and privacy of future
residents.
Each of the properties would have a front and rear garden. I am of the opinion that the level of amenity
space is appropriate in this instance and would accord with policy DEV1 of the adopted plan and DES1 of
the replacement plan.
The Police Architectural Liaison Officer (ALO) has commented on the application. He has suggested that
the position of block A be repositioned further away from Mort Lane. The applicants agent has amended
the scheme in accordance with this suggestion. I have forwarded a copy of the comments made by the ALO
to the applicant’s agent. I have attached a condition requiring details of the landscaping and boundary wall
47
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
to be approved prior to the commencement of development. I am therefore satisfied that the proposal would
accord with policy DEV4 of the adopted and DES11 of the replacement.
The proposal would provide an off street parking for each of the dwellings. I am satisfied that the proposal
accords with policy T13 of the adopted and A10 of the replacement.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
Prior to the submission of the proposal the applicant entered into discussions regarding the siting of the
proposal. The recommendations have been incorporated into the design and layout of the scheme.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I am satisfied that the site is brownfield and therefore the principle of the redevelopment for
residential purposes is acceptable. The site is within a residential context and meets Council standards with
regard to privacy and overlooking. I consider that the scheme is well designed and that therefore the
development would be in compliance with the development plan and should therefore be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following 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 roofs
of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development
Services.
3. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to and
approved by the Director of Development Services 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 Director of Development Services.
4. 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.
48
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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 LPA.
5. Notwithstanding condition two of this approval a scheme detailing the perimeter wall shall be
submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of
development. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation.
6. Standard Condition L02G Amended Plans
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R007A Development-existing building
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R028A Public safety
5. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
6. Standard Reason R019 Avoidance of Doubt
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 decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
H1 Meeting Housing Needs
DEV1 Development Criteria
49
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
DEV2 Good Design
DEV4 Design and Crime
T13 Car Parking
3. The applicant is advised to contact United Utilities on 01925 234000 regarding existing sewers on the
site and future connections.
4. The applicant is advised to contact The City Council's Main Drainage Section on 0161 793 3810
regarding the highway drain that crosses the site
APPLICATION No:
04/49453/FUL
APPLICANT:
Spurgeons Childcare
LOCATION:
Little Hulton Early Years Centre Longshaw Drive Little Hulton
Worsley
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing community centre, erection of two storey front
extension and refurbishment of existing early years centre to create
new 'Sure-Start Centre'
WARD:
Little Hulton
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to the Little Hulton Early Years Centre on Longshaw Drive. The site comprises of
a single storey building which provides a nursery and a two storey community centre. The site is
approximately 1.5m lower the level of Manchester Road East. The Manchester Road East elevation is
bounded by a 1.5m stone wall. There are a number of mature and semi mature trees within the site and
outside its western boundary. The existing two storey pre-fabricated community centre would be
demolished to accommodate this integrated proposal.
To the west of the site are residential properties with a footpath parallel to the side boundary running from
Manchester Road East to Langshaw Drive. To the south is the Little Hulton Community School. To the
east is Brierley House.
The proposal seeks to erect a two storey building which would extend the existing building and services.
The proposal itself would be positioned to the north of the existing childcare facility, at an angle to the line
of the A6. The proposed building would provide a core service of childcare provision supported by a range
of community facilities, healthcare support accommodation and administration space.
Seven trees would have to be removed to accommodate this proposal.
SITE HISTORY
In 2003, planning permission was approved for the installation of roller shutter door over main entrance
(02/45225/FUL)
50
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
CONSULTATIONS
The Director of Environmental Services – No objection in principle subject to conditions
The Early Years Team – no response to date
PUBLICITY
Two site notice were displayed 1st December 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
Brierley Community Centre, Little Hulton Community School, Brierley House Day Care Centre,
Longshaw Drive
416, 382, 388 – 390 (e) Manchester Road East
7 – 30 (con) Red Rose Gardens (County Road)
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received no letters of objections in response to the application publicity
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
None
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
DEV1 Development Criteria, DEV2 Good Design, SC1 Provision of Social and
Community Facilities, SC9 Health Care Facilities, EN7 Conservation of Trees and
Woodlands
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
DES1 Respecting Context, DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours, DES11
Design and Crime, EHC1 Provision and Improvement of Health and Community
Facilities, EN10 Protected Trees
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether design and siting of the proposal is
acceptable, whether the scheme outweighs the loss of trees currently on the site; whether is it appropriate to
intensify facilities on this site, whether the existing car parking and servicing arrangements are sufficient
and whether the proposal complies with the provisions of the relevant policies of both the Adopted and
Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP. These issues will be discussed in turn below.
Design, Layout and Siting
51
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Adopted Policy DEV1 identifies a number of issues that should be taken into account when determining
applications, including the visual appearance of the development, its relationship to its surroundings and the
amount, design and layout of car parking provision.
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.
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 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.
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.
Policy DES11 updates Policy DEV4 of the Adopted UDP.
The proposal would redevelop the existing community facilities on site, as such I am satisfied that the
principle of this proposal has already been established. The new structure is two-storey in order to
minimise the building’s footprint and convey a strong presence to the main road. The second floor is
conceived as a floating plane that bridges over the end of the existing supported on diagonal V-props. The
ground floor, containing the community space and a crčche, is recessed underneath and is composed largely
of full height expanses of wall and glazing. On the south side, the first floor extends out for a whole
structural bay (approximately 5m) to give additional floor space.
There are no habitable windows within the gable of the closest residential property to the west and would
maintain 15m to this gable.
The orientation of the proposal is such to provide a land mark building which also advertises itself as a
community facility. The appearance of the building would comprise of modern materials including
glazing, blue engineering brick, render and metallic silver cladding.
The majority of the surrounding properties in the area along the A6 corridor are two storeys in height. This
application also proposes a two storey building, albeit from a lower ground level, which I consider to be
acceptable in light of the surroundings. I am satisfied that, subject to the use of satisfactory materials, the
design of the proposal would be of a sufficiently high quality, and would therefore accord with the above
policies of the development plan.
Trees
Policy EN7 encourages the conservation of trees and woodland through supporting the retention of trees
and aims to ensure that new tree planting is designed to contribute to landscape quality.
Policy EN10 of the Revised Replacement Plan states that development that would result in the unacceptable
loss of trees will not be permitted.
52
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
There are a number of trees on the site. Seven of the trees to the north of the site would be felled to
accommodate the proposal. None of the trees on the site benefit from a tree preservation order. A tree
survey has been commissioned by the applicants agent. The findings and the analysis of the City Council’s
arboricultural officer will be portrayed to members prior to the panel meeting.
I do not consider that the space remaining within the curtilage is sufficient to accommodate this panel’s two
for one replacement tree policy. However, the applicant’s agent has agreed a two for one replacement.
Should it be considered by the arboriculatural officer that there is insufficient space within the curtilage of
the building to accommodate an additional fourteen trees, the applicant’s agent has agreed to provide the
replacement trees elsewhere within the area.
Policy EN7 states that where the loss of trees is unavoidable a sufficient level of replacement trees would be
required. Subject to the provision of replacement trees I am of the opinion that the proposal would accord
with the development plan.
Car Parking and Access
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.
The applicant has indicated that a total of two additional disabled spaces.
Vehicular access to the site will continue to be provided via an existing gate and roadway leading off
Longshaw Drive, mainly for the purposes of deliveries to the kitchen. There is currently no formal parking
allocation with staff parking in the adjoining Bierley House car park or the neighbouring Little Hulton
District Centre. A new pedestrian access would be provided off the footpath to the west of the site. Pick up
and drop off is currently provided on Longshaw Drive.
The existing site accommodates 50 childcare places. The proposal would increase that provision to 80
childcare spaces for the entire site. Internal alterations to the existing building would provide for the
childcare provision. The majority of the new floor space would accommodate the community facilities,
including family room, community lounge and office accommodation. There would be no formal hours
where children would arrive and leave the site at the same time.
I have no highway objection.
The site is located on the main arterial corridor through Little Hulton. The site is well served by public
transport, in fact there is a bus stop directly outside the site on the A6. Moreover, the Hulton District Centre
public car park is located 80m to the west.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
53
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Prior to the submission of the scheme two meetings were held to discuss the orientation and design of the
proposal. The recommendations have been incorporated into the submission of the application.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I am satisfied that the design of the proposal is acceptable within context of the surrounding
uses and the policy framework in this instance. I therefore recommend that the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following 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 external
elevations of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services.
3. 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 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 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 LPA.
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. For each of the seven trees to be felled, two replacements shall be planted during the next available
planting season. The type and position of replacement trees shall be first approved in writing by the
Director of Development Services.
54
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R028A Public safety
4. 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 decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
DEV1 Development Criteria
DEV2 Good Design
DEV4 Design and Crime
SC1 Provision of Social and Community Facilities
SC9 Health Care Facilities
T13 Car Parking
EN7 Conservation of Trees and Woodlands
APPLICATION No:
04/48888/FUL
APPLICANT:
Prospect (GB) Limited
LOCATION:
Showmans Guild Site Broadway Salford 5
PROPOSAL:
Erection of three six-storey blocks comprising 180 apartments together
with creation of new vehicular access, car parking and associated
landscaping
WARD:
Ordsall
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
55
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
This application relates to a vacant 1 hectare site, formerly used as a Showman’s Guild site. To the north of
the site, at a significantly higher level, is a timber yard, to the north-east are two-storey dwellings on Quay
View, to the east is the Lowry Centre coach park and the uses to the west and south on Broadway are
predominantly industrial and commercial.
Permission is sought for 180 apartments to be provided within three blocks. 100 two-bed apartments and 80
one-bed apartments are proposed. Each block comprises 60 apartments and is 6 storeys in height. The three
blocks are orientated at right angles to Broadway and there is a 21 metre separation distance between them.
A design statement has been prepared which considers the site context, urban design principles and the
proposed materials. A mixture of materials is proposed including render, cedar boarding and steel panels.
170 parking spaces would be provided within the site, in the form of surface parking and ground floor
undercroft parking areas. Provision has been identified for disabled parking and cycle storage. Two
vehicular access points are proposed onto Broadway and there would be five pedestrian access points. Two
communal garden areas would be provided between the blocks and the embankment to the north would be
landscaped.
The application is accompanied by an acoustic report. A statement has been submitted in respect of the loss
of the Showman’s site.
SITE HISTORY
96/35735/FUL - Erection of two 1.8m steel palisade type gates at west entrance to the above site. Approved
15.11.1996.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – There is concern regarding the compatibility between the activities of
the wood yard and the proposed residential use. The submitted plans show that the apartments overlook the
look yard from the third storey upwards. There is an additional concern about the top storey having
balconies. The timber yard starts its operations at 6am when it loads lorries with timber for distribution. In
addition to early morning site visits, unattended noise monitoring undertaken on the site for 15 hours
overnight to include the morning activities, indicated that there is not only an increase in the general back
ground noise level but also there are short bursts of noise from the loading process which would cause sleep
disturbance through an open window, these are measured as an LAmax. There have been some assumptions
when calculating the level of noise as an LAmax that would be expected in the bedrooms of the nearest
apartments. BS8233 states that for a reasonable standard at night individual noise events should not
normally exceed 45 dB LAmax. With this in mind there is a need to attenuate that noise to an acceptable level.
A condition has been recommended requiring a further noise assessment to be undertaken, to determine the
precise mitigation measures for the building faēade, windows and balconies.
Environment Agency – Condition required for contaminated land site investigation.
Police Architectural Liaison Unit – A number of detailed concerns have been raised regarding design and
crime. Developer has provided amended plans which address a number of these concerns. A condition is
recommended for a lighting scheme and Safer Parking Scheme.
56
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
United Utilities – No objection to the proposal providing that if possible the site is drained on a separate
system, with only foul drainage connected into the foul sewer. There is a sewer crossing the site and United
Utilities will not permit building over it.
Showman’s Guild Lancashire Branch – No comments received.
PUBLICITY
A press notice was published on 9th September 2004.
A site notice was displayed on 1st September 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 – 27 (o) Quay View
2 – 22 (e) Quay View
2 – 42 (e) Joule Close
Timber Yard, Montford Street
5 Ohio Avenue
L.B. Batley, Ohio Avenue
Air Products, Broadway
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received two letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application publicity.
The following issues have been raised:the objection raised is in relation to ownership of the embankment between the timber yard and the
application site.
the impact on the timber business has not been assessed. Should the apartments be built as
described then residents will complain because:
o Sideloader Fork Lift Trucks are in operation from 6.00am each morning
o Some of the apartments directly face the timber site
o The garden areas are very close to the timber site
the proposed development is within a commercial/industrial area, only being bounded by one
residential property.
G E Robinson’s have operated from their present site continuously since 1918. It would be unfair
for their business to be adversely affected by a new housing development.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP3 Quality in New Development
SD1 The North West Metropolitan Area
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None.
Other policies: H1 Meeting Housing Needs
H6 & H11 Open Space Provision
57
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
DEV1 Development Criteria
T13 Car Parking
DEV2 Good Design
DEV4 Design and Crime
EN20 Pollution Control
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None.
Other policies:
ST11 Location of New Development
H1 Provision of New Housing Development
H8 Open Space Provision Associated With New Housing Development
EHC5 Sites for Travelling Showpeople
DES1 Respecting Context
DES11 Design and Crime
DES13 – Design Statements
DES9 Landscaping
A2 Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the loss of the Showman’s Guild site and whether
the principal of residential development is acceptable, whether there will be a sufficient level of amenity for
future occupiers, the relationship between the development and existing adjoining uses, whether enough
information has been submitted to assess the design and external appearance of the proposed development
on the streetscene and whether the proposal complies with the relevant provisions of both the adopted
Unitary Development Plan and the Replacement Plan.
Principle of Residential Development
Policy SD1 of the Regional Spatial Strategy states that development should be focused within the
North-West Metropolitan Area, which includes Salford. With regards to the principle of the proposed
development, the site is located within an area of mixed uses. The site is not allocated within either the
adopted or Replacement UDP’s. It is a brownfield site and based on the sequential approach to development
outlined in Replacement UDP policy ST11, development of this site would meet criteria 1B (i) and ii)
through the re-use of previously developed land in a location well related to housing, employment, services
and well served by a choice of public transport. The site is, however, recognised as a private site for
travelling showpeople in policy EHC5 of the Replacement UDP and Circular 22/91 “Travelling
Showpeople” requires the applicant to demonstrate whether there is any demand for such a use. The
applicant has submitted a statement in respect of the loss of this use, which considers the policy context,
current provision of sites and a justification for the loss of this site. The Lancashire Branch of the
Showman’s Guild has been consulted on this planning application, but no comments have been received.
The reasoned justification of policy EHC5 states that there is currently a high level of provision with an
under-use of some sites. In view of this and having considered the applicant’s statement, I do not consider
that the loss of this site would have a detrimental impact on the provision of sites for travelling showpeople
within the City.
58
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Adopted UDP policy H1 details the need for new housing and supports the proposal through criteria (ii) the
release of land to accommodate new house building. Replacement plan policy H1 requires that all new
housing developments meet a range of criteria, including, to contribute towards the provision of a balanced
mix of dwellings, not lead to an oversupply, provide accommodation at an appropriate density, provide a
high quality environment and make adequate provision for open space. I consider that the development is of
an appropriate density in a location close to a range of public transport modes and will contribute to a
balanced mix of size.
Residential amenity/ relationship to surrounding uses
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 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.
Policies DEV1, DES1 and DES7 require consideration to be given to residential amenity and to provide
well designed development that fits in with the character of the area. The Director of Environmental
Services has raised concerns about the potential loss of amenity to future residents from the existing levels
of noise experienced at the site, in particular from the timber yard. This matter has also been raised by the
timber yard in their written objection. The blocks have been orientated at right angles to both the timber
yard and Broadway in an attempt to minimise future noise nuisance. The Director of Environmental
Services has undertaken detailed noise investigations and is now satisfied that, subject to a further noise
investigation, adequate mitigation measures, such as acoustic dual glazing, non-opening windows,
mechanical ventilation, balcony screening and acoustically treated faēade can be incorporated into the
building fabric so as to mitigate disturbance to future residents.
With regards to the relationship to existing dwellings, the distance between the corner of Block C and the
corner of 23 Quay View is 18.5 metres. The development would not directly face these dwellings and the
site level is at a lower level of approximately 5 metres. There are no windows proposed to the gable
elevation of Block C. A sunlight study has been produced which shows that the level of sunlight to the
dwellings on Quay Close would be largely unaffected until late afternoon. I do not therefore consider that
there would be any significant loss of privacy, light or amenity to these residents.
Policies DEV4 and DES11 require development to be designed to minimise the risk of crime and
Supplementary Planning Guidance – Designing Out Crime encourages natural surveillance for new
developments. The Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Unit has raised some concerns with
regards to secure by design considerations and the applicant has made a number of amendments to the
proposed development which address most of these concerns.
I consider that the proposed development would provide sufficient levels of natural surveillance for
communal gardens and parking areas. I have some reservations with regards to the western area of car
parking, parts of which are remote from the proposed apartments. Amended plans have been received
which indicate that some of these spaces have been deleted from the proposal. Alternative uses for this area
are however problematic. There is a sewer running across this area and in addition to this the size and shape
of the site is such that development of it would prove difficult. An alternative would be to provide amenity
59
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
space here, however, this would be remote from the apartments and its position is such that it would be
unlikely to be used by residents. Landscaping may also be problematic given the sewer running under the
site. If this part of the site were removed from the application site to be considered at a future date, I
consider that there is a strong likelihood that it would become overgrown and problematic. A draft secure
by design statement has been submitted. The applicant proposes a scheme of lighting and CCTV
surveillance for this area, furthermore, the site would be secured by the proposed boundary treatments and
gates. I therefore consider the proposal to be in accordance with policies DEV4 and DES11
Design and Appearance of the Proposed Development
Adopted UDP 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. Policies DEV2 and DES1
seek to encourage the enhancement of the environment through good design. A Design Statement has been
submitted that considers the site’s context and urban design principles.
I consider that the proposed design is of a high standard and complements the character of the surrounding
area. The applicant has indicated that the proposed materials would be a mixture of render, cedar boarding
and steel. I am satisfied that the principle of such materials is acceptable and have however attached a
condition requiring the submission and approval of all materials prior to the commencement of the
development in order to ensure that they are of a suitably high quality and ensure that the proposed building
would make a positive contribution to the area. I am satisfied that the design and external appearance of the
proposed development is acceptable and would be in keeping with the character of the area.
Traffic Generation and Car Parking Provision
Policy T13 requires developments to have adequate and appropriate car parking and servicing and identifies
minimum parking standards. Within the revised deposit draft UDP there are no standards for car parking for
dwellings and the emphasis is on maximum parking standards, in line with national (PPG3 and PPG13) and
regional planning guidance (RPG13) and the desire to have less reliance on travel by private car. 94%
parking provision has been identified for the development. Given the location of the site at close proximity
to Salford Quays and the tram and bus services, I consider that this level of parking is acceptable. I have no
highway objections to the proposals.
Amenity Space, Open Space Provision and Landscaping
Policy H6 requires adequate provision of informal open space and children’s play within new housing
developments. This policy is linked to Policy H11 which sets out a sliding scale for such provision. Policy
H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and informal open space within
housing developments. In accordance with these policies, the applicant has agreed to make a financial
contribution towards open space. This would be through the provision of a commuted sum towards open
spaces in the vicinity.
With regards to the provision of amenity space within the site, two communal garden areas are proposed
between Blocks A and B and B and C. In addition, high quality landscaping proposals have been submitted
for the landscaping provision both within the site and to the site boundaries and the embankment to the
north.
I therefore consider that a satisfactory level of amenity space has been identified for the proposed houses
and apartments.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
60
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Pre-application discussions were held with the developer
Amended plans received addressing concerns regarding design and security
In accordance with policies H6/H11 and H8, the applicant has agreed to make a financial
contribution of £191,967 towards open space improvements in the local area.
CONCLUSION
The main issues in the determination of this proposal are the suitability of residential development on this
site, the design and scale of the proposal and its impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents. I do not
consider that the proposed development would result in any significant detrimental impact on neighbouring
residents and I consider that the scale and siting of the development is appropriate. I consider that the
regeneration of this site with this well-designed contemporary development, would make a significant
contribution to the visual amenity of the area.
RECOMMENDATION
-
that the Director of Corporate Services be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section
106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the payment of a commuted sum for, and
implementation of, improvements to existing open space, such open space shall be in close
proximity to the development site in accordance with policies H6 and H11 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan in the local area to the value of £191,967
-
that the applicant be informed that the City Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject
to the conditions stated below, on completion of such legal agreement;
-
that authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued, (subject to the
conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement,
-
that authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the S106
agreement within a reasonable period on the grounds that the proposal would be contrary to policies
H6 and H11 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
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
Director of Development Services. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials,
unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Director of Development Services.
3. The car park screens hereby approved shall be treated in a colour which is to be agreed in writing prior
to the commencement of the development by the Director of Development Services.
4. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation report
for the approval of the Director of Development Services. The investigation shall address the nature,
degree and distribution of ground gases on site and shall include an identification and assessment of the
61
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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 shall validate that all
works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Director of
Development Services.
5. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a scheme showing the provision of
bin storage and waste recycling facilities within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Director of Development Services. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first
occupation of any of the apartments hereby approved, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the
Director of Development Services.
6. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to and
approved by the Director of Development Services 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 Director of Development Services.
7. There shall be no development on the site until a scheme to protect the occupiers of the proposed
development from both traffic noise from Broadway and activities from within the adjacent wood yard
has been submitted to and approved by the Director of Development Services. The scheme should pay
particular attention to noise from fork lift truck activities in the early hours of the morning. The scheme
should not only address an LAeq noise level but also the LAmax(fast) from the site and should comply
with the recommendations contained within BS4142 & BS8233.2). The method of assessing the noise
from the timber yard shall be agreed in writing with the Director of Development Services prior to any
assessment taking place. The Director of Development Services shall be given 7 days notice of the
noise measurements being undertaken to allow a representative of the City Council to be present. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved particulars prior to the occupation of
any of the apartments unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Director of Development Services.
8. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, full details of the design and
materials for the electricity substation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
particulars.
9. This permission shall relate to the amended plans received on 2nd December 2004 and 17th November
which show amendments to site layout and design.
10. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme for the proposed lighting and CCTV
62
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
surveillance of the car parking areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services. Such details shall ensure that all lighting points away from the surrounding
residential properties. The approved scheme shall be completed prior to the occupation of any part of
the development.
11. Prior to the commencement of development, a Secured By Design statement shall be submitted to, and
approved in writing by, the Director of Development Services. The statement shall examine all aspects
of site security, including: site entrances, internal layout, car parking areas and external security
measures. The findings of the statement shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the
development unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Director of Development Services.
12. The emergency exit doors and stairs of the development shall not be opened or used for entrance or
egress other than in cases of emergency.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
5. Reason: In order to encourage waste recycling, in accordance with Policy MW11 of the Adopted City
of Salford Unitary Development Plan
6. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
7. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
8. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
9. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
10. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
11. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with policy
DEV 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
12. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DEV 1 of
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Note(s) for Applicant
63
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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. For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land Condition, the
applicant/developer is advised to contact the Environmental Protection Section of the Directorate of
Environmental Services on 0161 925 1316
3. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
H6 - Open Space Provision within New Housing Developments; H11 - Open Space Provision within
New Housing Developments; DEV1 - Development Criteria; DEV2 - Good Design; DEV4 - Design
and Crime; T13 - Car Parking
4. 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:
04/49291/FUL
APPLICANT:
Tupelo Ltd
LOCATION:
Land Bounded By Viaduct Street King Street
Blackfriars Road Salford 3
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing buildings and erection of 12 blocks of 3-15
storeys comprising 578 apartments, 2295sm of class A1, A2, A3 and B1,
retail/office floorspace, 428 parking spaces & associated landscaping
WARD:
Ordsall
Queen Street And
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to the sites of the Honda and Smart car dealerships on Blackfriars Road. The site
covers an area of just under 1 hectare and is bounded by Blackfriars Street to the west, Viaduct Street to the
south beyond which is the railway viaduct and King street to the north beyond which lies industrial
premises, surface car parking and cleared sites.
It is proposed to demolish the buildings on the site and erect a series of individual buildings set on a raised
podium. The site lies within the Exchange, Greengate area where the City Council is working with Ask
64
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Property Developments and Network rail to secure the transformation of the area. Opposite the site on
Blackfriars Road are a number of Listed Buildings including the Tennis and Rackets Club.
The proposals have been developed in parallel with the Strategic Development Framework for the
Exchange, Greengate area.
The proposals would include four rectangular towers set in pairs at right angles to Blackfriars Road. These
towers would be 15 and 13 storeys high and would lie in the heart of the site. Around the perimeter of the
site would be smaller buildings, ranging in height between eight and three storeys all of which would
contain active uses at ground floor level.
The two 15 storey blocks are located closer to Trinity Way and are half the width of the 13 storey blocks.
The higher blocks are located opposite the Listed Buildings on Blackfriars Road but are set back from the
perimeter of the road frontage by between 4m and 19m. In addition the smaller buildings around the
perimeter of the site that are at back of pavement are much more comparable with the Listed Buildings in
terms of height.
The development would comprise a total of 578 apartments and 2300sq.m of retail and commercial
floorspace in a number of small units. A total of 428 car parking spaces would be provided on two
basement levels. A new street would be formed in the centre of the site that would connect Blackfriars
Road to King Street. Vehicular access into the site would be from Viaduct Street and the new road that
bisects the site.
It is proposed to use a mottled blue/black brick with a semi-glazed finish, that takes its cue from the dark
brickwork of the adjacent railway viaduct, to the perimeter base of the development and to four small three
storey commercial buildings that are located on the King Street frontage between the taller blocks. On the
upper storeys of the four towers there would be a mix of grey terracotta rainscreen and glazing with
frameless glass balustrades to balconies. On the upper storeys of the other buildings there would be a mix
of the same dark brick, render and Douglas fir rainscreen boarding.
SITE HISTORY
There is no site history relevant to the application.
CONSULTATIONS
Greater Manchester Archaeological Unit – The site has significant archaeological interest and a condition
should be attached ensuring that a programme of archaeological works takes place.
United Utilities – No objections but provides advice.
Director of Environmental Services – No comments to date.
Police Architectural Liaison Officer – No response to date.
Environment Agency – No response to date.
PUBLICITY
65
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
The application has been advertised by means of both site and press notices
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
5 to 11, 27 to 33, 43 and the Black Friar public house Blackfriars Road
39, 47, 51 and 55 Queen Street
27 Gravel Lane
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received no letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application publicity.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DP1 Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings, SD1 The North West Metropolitan Area –
Regional Poles and Surrounding Areas
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: EC14/2 Improvement Proposals
Other policies: DEV1 Development Criteria, DEV2 Good Design, DEV4 Design and Crime, T13 Car
Parking, EN12 Protection and Enhancement of Listed Buildings, H1 Meeting Housing Needs, H6 and H11
Open Space Provision Within New Housing Developments, CS3 Central Salford.
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: MX1/1 Development in Mixed Use Areas
Other policies: DES1 Respecting Context, DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours, DES11 Design and
Crime, DEV6 Incremental Development, 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, CH4 Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building.
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 Listed Buildings on Blackfriars Road.
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. PPG3
66
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
also states that, when considering conversions, a more flexible approach is required with regard to densities,
car parking, amenity space and overlooking.
The site has previously been developed and is a brownfield site, 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 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.
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 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.
The site lies within the regional centre and it is not considered that the usual privacy and overlooking
distances are appropriate in this part of the city. A minimum of 20m is maintained between each of the
blocks. This is comparable with other developments within the regional centre and is considered
acceptable. I consider that sufficient amenity space is provided within the site in the form of high quality
hard landscaping and planting. These internal amenity areas are gated and there is a high level of security
incorporated into the scheme.
With regard to the design I consider this to be of high quality. The scheme has been assessed by both the
Council’s head of architecture and by Peter Hunter, the Council’s architectural consultant, and they are of
the opinion that this is a well thought out and well executed scheme that will significantly improve the
environment of the local area.
Effect on Listed Buildings
Policy EN12 states that the Council will not normally permit any development that would be detrimental to
the setting of a Listed Building or the environmental quality of the surrounding area.
Policy CH4 states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would have an
unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building.
67
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
The reasoned justification to policy CH4 states that the setting of a listed building forms an integral part of
its character, and may consist of adjoining open space or nearby buildings that form part of the street scene.
In this instance there are two Listed Buildings on the opposite side of Blackfriars Road, the Real Tennis and
racquets Club at number 33 and the old Manchester Baths at number 31. The facade on that side of the road
is continuous and made up of buildings of varying heights which present a broken skyline.
The proposal deliberately provides a series of lower buildings that vary in height on the street frontage. The
taller blocks are deliberately set back from the street frontage and at right angles to it, thus creating a street
scene that echoes and compliments the existing southern faēade of buildings.
I consider that the proposal has a positive effect on the setting of the Listed Buildings as it removes from the
site the inappropriate and poorly designed car showrooms that did not complement the southern facade of
buildings and replaces it with a well designed group of buildings.
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 level of car parking for the scheme is well below 100% as would be expected in this city centre
location. 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 £239,280. I am satisfied that
the application therefore accords with Adopted policies H6 and H11 and Draft Policy H8.
Other Issues
The applicant has agreed to contribute an additional £578,000 towards environmental improvements in
accordance with the Council’s normal policy with regard to developments in the Chapel Street area.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
pre-application discussions were held that have resulted in improvements to the scheme and the
need for a new road opening up the area to the east of Blackfriars Road
68
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
£578,000 will go towards environmental improvements in the local area and over £230,000 will go
towards improvements to children’s play facilities and open space in the area.
CONCLUSION
This is a brownfield site within 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 a street frontage on this side of Blackfriars Road complements that on the
southern side that contains two Listed Buildings and at the same time provides a high standard of living
accommodation and environment to future residents. The development introduces active uses at ground
floor around the perimeter of the site and opens up the land to the rear by the provision of a new street.
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
-
that the Director of Corporate Services be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section
106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the payment of a contribution to the
provision of open space and children’s play equipment and a commuted sum for, and
implementation of, environmental improvements in the local area to the value of £817,280;
-
that the applicant be informed that the City Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject
to the conditions stated below, on completion of such legal agreement;
-
that authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued, (subject to the
conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement,
-
that authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the S106
agreement within a reasonable period on the grounds that the proposals do not support the aim and
objectives of the Chapel Street Regeneration Project.
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 Director of Development Services 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 24 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 Director of Development Services.
3. No development shall be started until samples of all facing materials to be used on the development
have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development Services.
69
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
4. Standard Condition F03X Surfacing
5. No development/demolition shall take place within the proposal area until the applicant has secured the
implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of
investigation which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development
Services.
6. No A3 retail unit shall be brought into use unless and until a detailed scheme for the extraction system
which treats fumes and odours before their emission to the atmosphere so as to render them innocuous
has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall detail
how the extraction unit will be attenuated and mounted to minimise the transmission of airbourne and
structure bourne noise and vibration. The works forming the approved scheme shall be completed
entirely in accordance with the approved scheme and thereafter the works forming the approved
scheme shall at all times remain in place.
7. The hours of operation of any A3 unit shall be between the hours of 8am and 12 midnight only.
8. 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 ont he 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 the risk to human health and controlled waters. The investigation shall also
address the implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of the site workers, on nearby
occupied building structures, on services and landscaping schemes and on the 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 the 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.
9. No development shall commence until a scheme for the provision of recycling facilities has been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development Services. Such scheme shall be
implemented in full prior to the occupatiuon of any dwelling.
10. No development shall commence until a scheme for the provision of cycle storage has been submitted
to and agreed 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. Before the any individual A3 use commences a litter bin shall be provided in accordance with details of
its design and siting, to be approved in writing by the Director of Development Services, and shall be
maintained thereafter at all times.
12. No noise from any amplified equipment from either the Class A1 or Class A3 uses shall be audible in
any residential accommodation.
70
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
13. There shall be no deliveries to either the Class A1 or Class A3 units except between 8.00am and
10.00pm from Monday to Sunday inclusive.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R008A Development-Buildings in vicinity
4. Standard Reason R013A Use of parking areas
5. To make a record of remains of archaeological interest in accordance with policy EN14 of the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan.
6. Standard Reason R027A Amenity and quietude
7. Standard Reason R027A Amenity and quietude
8. To ensure a safe form of development that poses no unacceptable risk of pollution in accordance with
policy DEV1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan
9. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
10. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
11. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
12. Standard Reason R027A Amenity and quietude
13. Standard Reason R027A Amenity and quietude
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. This permission shall relate to the amended plans that show alterations to the car parking numbers and
layout and to the alterations to the four commercial blocks on the King Street frontage.
71
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
3. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
DEV1 Development Criteria, DEV2 Good Design, CS3 Central Salford, DEV4 Design and Crime, T13
Car Parking, EN12 Protection and Enhancement of Listed Buildings, H1 Meeting Housing Needs, H6
and H11 Open Space Provision Within New Housing Developments.
4. This development is subject to the planning obligation entered into by the applicant under Section 106
of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, prior to the granting of planning permission.
5. The applicant's attention is drawn to the need to intercept surface water draining from the development
prior to its entering the highway across a footway, to meet the requirements of Section 103 of the
Highways Act 1980.
6. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from the Environment Agency.
7. 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:
04/49322/FUL
APPLICANT:
Kingsfold Developments
LOCATION:
Land Adjacent The River Irwell On Derwent Street Salford 5
PROPOSAL:
Erection of one part eight-storey/part nine-storey block comprising 63
apartments together with associated carparking and landscaping
WARD:
Ordsall
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a former employment site off Derwent Street. To the north of the site, is a casino
and drive-through hot food use, to the south of the site is the Derwent Street Industrial area and to the east,
the River Irwell.
Permission is sought for a part eight, part nine storey block comprising 63 apartments. A mix of unit sizes
is proposed and there will be 27 one bed apartments, 35 two-bed apartments and one three-bed duplex
apartment.
A design statement has been prepared which considers the site context, urban design principles and the
proposed materials. 40 parking spaces would be provided within the site, in the form of surface parking and
ground floor undercroft parking areas. Provision has been identified for disabled parking, cycle storage and
bin storage within the undercroft area. Vehicular access is from Derwent Street. Amenity space is provided
on the River Irwell side of the site and there would be pedestrian access for residents to the River Irwell
72
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Walkway. Amenity space and landscaping is also proposed to the Derwent Street part of the site, adjacent to
the parking area.
The application is accompanied by an acoustic report and ground investigation report.
SITE HISTORY
01/42316/OUT - Outline planning application for the erection of a seven storey building comprising 48
apartments with associated car parking. Approved 01.05.2002.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – Concerns raised regarding noise from the adjacent industrial units
and casino use. Conditions are recommended regarding noise and contaminated land.
Environment Agency – Condition required for contaminated land site investigation.
Police Architectural Liaison Unit – Concerns regarding design and crime.
United Utilities – No objection to the proposal providing that if possible the site is drained on a separate
system, with only foul drainage connected into the foul sewer. Detailed advice provided for developer.
Manchester Ship Canal Company – No comments received.
Greater Archaeological Unit – No comments received.
Manchester City Council – No comments received.
PUBLICITY
A press notice was published on 31st October 2004
A site notice was displayed on 1st November 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
Units 1 to 6 Derwent Street Industrial Area, Derwent Street
Unit 1 and Units 9 – 14 Slough Industrial Estate
Grosvenor Casino, McDonalds Restaurant, KFC Restaurant, Regent Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received no letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application publicity.
I have received one letter of support of the proposals.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP3 Quality in New Development
73
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
SD1 The North West Metropolitan Area
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None.
Other policies: H1 Meeting Housing Needs
H6 & H11 Open Space Provision
DEV1 Development Criteria
T13 Car Parking
DEV2 Good Design
DEV4 Design and Crime
EN20 Pollution Control
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: MX1/4 – Development in Mixed Use Areas
Other policies: ST11 Location of New Development
H1 Provision of New Housing Development
H8 Open Space Provision Associated With New Housing Development
DES1 Respecting Context
DES11 Design and Crime
DES13 Design Statements
DES5 Tall Buildings
DES6 Waterside Development
DES9 Landscaping
A2 Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are whether the principal of residential development is
acceptable, the density of the development, whether there will be a sufficient level of amenity for future
occupiers, whether the height, design and external appearance of the proposed development is satisfactory,
if the level of car parking is appropriate and whether the proposal complies with the relevant provisions of
both the adopted Unitary Development Plan and the Replacement Plan.
Principle of Residential Development and Density
Policy SD1 of the Regional Spatial Strategy states that development should be focused within the
North-West Metropolitan Area, which includes Salford. The principle of residential development at the site
has been established in the currently valid outline planning permission. The site is allocated under
Replacement Plan Policy MX1/4, which allows for a mixed range of uses alongside the River Irwell. Key
considerations of Policy MX1/4 include the site’s prominent location fronting the riverside, its potential
contribution to regeneration, maintaining a mixed balance of uses, contribution towards daytime activity,
site constraints, existing and previous land-use and adjoining sites and the extent to which the proposal
supports the maintenance of an appropriate mix of uses within the area. The introduction of an additional 15
apartments in this application to the existing outline approval for 48 apartments is not a significant change
with regard to the principle of accommodating residential use at the site.
74
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Policy H1 of the Adopted UDP allows for the release of land to accommodate new dwellings as one of the
measures by which Salford’s housing needs will be met. Key criteria of policy H1 of the Replacement Plan,
which identifies the provision of new housing development, are that a balanced mix of dwellings are
provided of an appropriate density with the provision of adequate open space and a high quality
environment without having an unacceptable impact on the housing market.
PPG3: Housing (paragraph 58) states that Local Planning Authorities should encourage the efficient use of
land by avoiding developments with less than 30 dwellings per hectare, encouraging a density of 30 to 50
dwellings per hectare, which makes more efficient use of land (as appropriate at this site), and to seek a
greater intensity of development where there is good public transport accessibility such as urban centres or
around major nodes along good quality public transport corridors. The proposed density of 63 dwellings at
the 0.15 hectare site calculates to 420 dwellings per hectare.
The site is close to Manchester City Centre, Salford Quays, Regent Road neighbourhood centre and
Sainsbury’s supermarket on Regent Road. Thus, the availability and close proximity of local services
enables the site to be suitable for the type and scale of use proposed and would encourage a reduction in car
use. The site is also well served by public transport. Consequently I consider the proposed density is
appropriate for this site and the principle of residential use is acceptable for the site.
The development comprises a mix of one and two bedroom apartments. The proposals have also been
amended to include one three bed apartment. I consider this dwelling mix to be appropriate.
Height, Design and Appearance of the Proposed Development
Adopted UDP 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. Policies DEV2 and DES1
seek to encourage the enhancement of the environment through good design. A Design Statement has been
submitted that considers the site’s context and urban design principles, as required by Draft UDP Policy
DES13.
Criterion (iii) of Replacement Plan Policy DES5: Tall Buildings requires such development to positively
relate to and interact with the adjacent public realm, particularly in terms of recognizing its scale and not
discouraging the use of public spaces. Replacement Plan Policy DES9 seeks residential development
adjacent to the River Irwell to facilitate an accessible, safe, attractive and overlooked waterside walkway
linked to other key pedestrian routes and criterion (3) of the policy states that ground floor uses should
generate pedestrian activity. Planning permission has recently been approved for a five/six storey building
adjacent to the River Irwell to the south of the site and facing the site is a five storey industrial building
located at the opposite side of the River Irwell. The proposed building will be visually prominent on
entering the City on Regent Road and I am satisfied with the height and scale of the proposal in this
location.
The applicant has indicated that the proposed materials would be a mixture of brick, cedar boarding and
render. I am satisfied that the principle of such materials is acceptable and have attached a condition
requiring the submission and approval of all materials prior to the commencement of the development in
order to ensure that they are of a suitably high quality and ensure that the proposed building would make a
positive contribution to the area. I am satisfied that the design and external appearance of the proposed
development is acceptable and would be in keeping with the character of the area.
Site Layout, Car Parking, Cycle Storage, Bin Storage
75
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Policies DEV4 and DES11 require development to be designed to minimise the risk of crime and
Supplementary Planning Guidance – Designing Out Crime encourages natural surveillance for new
developments. The Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Unit has raised some concerns with
regards to secure by design considerations and the applicant has made a number of amendments to the
proposed development which address most of these concerns. Habitable room windows provide
overlooking of the proposed surface car park, thereby helping to deter crime. I consider that the proposed
development would provide sufficient levels of natural surveillance for the communal gardens and parking
areas.
Policy T13 requires developments to have adequate and appropriate car parking and servicing and identifies
minimum parking standards. Within the revised deposit draft UDP there are no standards for car parking for
dwellings and the emphasis is on maximum parking standards, in line with national (PPG3 and PPG13) and
regional planning guidance (RPG13) and the desire to have less reliance on travel by private car. 63%
parking provision has been identified for the development. Given the location of the site at close proximity
to the Regional Centre and the bus services on Regent Road, I consider that this level of parking is
acceptable.
Plans have been amended to allow satisfactory provision for cycle storage and bin and recycling provision
within the undercroft parking area.
Amenity Space, Open Space Provision and Landscaping
Policy H6 requires adequate provision of informal open space and children’s play within new housing
developments. This policy is linked to Policy H11 which sets out a sliding scale for such provision. Policy
H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and informal open space within
housing developments. In accordance with these policies, the applicant has agreed to make a financial
contribution towards open space. This would be through the provision of a commuted sum towards open
spaces in the vicinity.
With regards to the provision of amenity space within the site, communal garden areas, which would be
landscaped, are proposed to the front and rear of the building. The developer has amended the plans to
provide a greater level of amenity space and landscaping provision. I consider that a satisfactory level of
amenity space has been identified for the proposed houses and apartments.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
S106 for financial contribution towards open space improvements
Amended plans received to address concerns raised in relation to site layout, amenity space
provision, design and crime, design and external appearance of the proposed development.
CONCLUSION
The main issues in the determination of this proposal are the design, height and scale of the proposal and its
impact on the visual amenity of the area. I consider that the scale, height and siting of the development is
appropriate. I consider that the regeneration of this site would make a significant contribution to the visual
amenity of the area.
RECOMMENDATION
76
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
-
that the Director of Corporate Services be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section
106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the payment of a commuted sum for, and
implementation of, improvements to existing open space, such open space shall be in close
proximity to the development site in accordance with policies H6 and H11 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan in the local area to the value of £90, 521.
-
that the applicant be informed that the City Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject
to the conditions stated below, on completion of such legal agreement;
-
that authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued, (subject to the
conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement,
-
that authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the S106
agreement within a reasonable period on the grounds that the proposal would be contrary to policies
H6 and H11 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. Prior to commencement of the development; the developer shall undertake an assessment to determine
the external noise levels from the surrounding roads, the industrial units and the nearby casino that the
proposed residential elements will be subjected to (day time and night time). The developer shall detail
what steps have to be taken to mitigate the disturbance from the above. The assessment shall have due
regard to the Department of the Environment Guidance PPG 24 - Planning and Noise, achieving
BS8233: 1999 in all habitable rooms. This assessment and mitigation measures shall be submitted for
the approval of Development Services prior to commencement of the development. Once agreed, all
identified noise control measures shall be implemented and thereafter retained.
3. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation report
for the approval of the Director of Development Services. 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 shall validate that all
works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Director of
Development Services.
4. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans, 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 Director of Development Services. The
77
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the
Director of Development Services.
5. The car park screens hereby approved shall be treated in a colour which is to be agreed in writing prior
to the commencement of the development by the Director of Development Services.
6. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to and
approved by the Director of Development Services 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 Director of Development Services.
7. This permission shall relate to the amended plans received on 2nd December 2004 which show
amendments to site layout and design.
8. 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.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
3. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
4. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
5. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
6. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
7. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
8. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
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
78
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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. 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) 737 0551).
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.
4. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
H6 - Open Space Provision within New Housing Developments; H11 - Open Space Provision
within New Housing Developments; DEV1 - Development Criteria; DEV2 - Good Design; DEV4 Design and Crime; T13 - Car Parking
APPLICATION No:
04/49293/FUL
APPLICANT:
Mr J Camilleri
LOCATION:
Clifton Park Hotel Manchester Road Clifton Swinton
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing hotel and erection of one two storey and three
three-storey blocks comprising 36 apartments together with associated
car parking, alterations to existing vehicular access and associated
works
WARD:
Pendlebury
At the meeting of the Panel held on 2nd December 2004 consideration of this application was DEFERRED
FOR AN INSPECTION BY THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL.
My previous obervations are set out below:
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to the Clifton Park Hotel formerly known as the Gay Willows. The site comprises
of a hotel located at the top of a narrow driveway, with a detached bungalow to the west and separate
residential properties to the rear of the hotel. The entrance is bounded by a two storey residential property
and the rear garden of two cottages on Dixon Drive. The hotel appears on the Council’s own list of
buildings of architectural and historical interest.
Oakwood Avenue bounds the eastern side of the site comprises of two storey semi-detached properties
bungalows. Dixon Drive comprises of a mixture of two storey properties and bungalows.
79
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Dixon Drive is a Public Right of Way. The part of Dixon Drive which serves the residential properties is
able to accommodate vehicular traffic, is unmade and un-adopted. Two access points are currently located
on Dixon Drive that serve the hotel. These access points are used infrequently and are currently gated.
There is a belt of mature trees to the west of the site which wrap around the existing bungalow and have
been afforded a Tree Preservation Order. The horse chestnut trees located in the neighbouring properties
adjacent to the access have not been afforded the protection of a preservation order. No trees are proposed
to be removed to accommodate this proposal.
The site is generally flat although there is a significant change in levels outside the site to the north leading
down into the valley. The trees located on this embankment are also the subject of a preservation order.
The proposal seeks to erect 36 two bedroom apartments within six blocks forming four distinct blocks. The
existing access would facilitate the scheme. No access is proposed onto Dixon Drive from the site. Forty
car parking spaces would be provided, four of which would be for disabled people.
Blocks A and B would be located to the left hand side of the access. They would be three storey in height.
Block B would be parallel to the access with its gable facing the access road. Block A would be sited 90
degrees to Block B. Block A would be 1m from the adjoining common boundary. There would be no
habitable windows within the gables of block A. The ridge would be a maximum height of 9.8m. The main
frontage of block B would be 14.2m from the neighbouring common boundary. Both blocks would
maintain a minimum distance of 3.6m to the canopy of the neighbouring TPO’d trees. Private amenity
space would be provided to the rear of each block. Six apartment would be provided in each of these blocks
(twelve in total).
Blocks C and D would be located on the right hand side of the access, centrally within the site. These
blocks would be joined together. They would be two storey in height, 6.8m to ridge closest to the common
boundary, stepping up to 7.5m. It would be 1.2m from the common boundary at its closest point. There are
no habitable windows directly facing the neighbouring bungalow. The closest habitable window would be
situated 5m from the common boundary, orientated away from the neighbouring property. Private amenity
space would be provided to the rear. Six apartments would be provided in this combined block.
The majority of the apartments would be provided in a part 21/2 part 3 storey block to the rear of the site.
This block is referred to as E, F and G would provide 18 of the apartments. Blocks E and F would be 21/2
storey, utilising the roof space for a third floor. Block E would be 3m from the eastern boundary with
Oakwood Avenue, 9.8m from the main element of 16 Oakwood Drive. The rear elevation would be 7m
from the boundary with the adjoining Public Right of Way. The ridge height of the 21/2 storey element
would be 10.4m. Due to the change in levels between the site and the closest neighbouring on Oakwood
Drive, the ridge height would be 3.6m higher than that of 16 Oakwood Drive.
SITE HISTORY
A similar scheme for 38 apartments was withdrawn from consideration earlier this year (04/48767/FUL)
CONSULTATIONS
80
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
The Director of Environmental Health – No objection – recommends that a noise assessment be undertaken
and a site investigation
United Utilities – No objection – connection and details of the proposed sewer system would require United
Utilities approval
Police Architectural Liaison Officer – No objection and provides advice
Environmental Agency – No objection, suggest a condition regarding surface water
Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – No response
Open Spaces Society – No response
Ramblers Association – Objects to the proposal – No response
Peak and Northern Footpaths Society – No response
PUBLICITY
A press notice was displayed in the Advertiser 14th October 2004
A site notice was displayed on the main entrance on 11th October 2004
1 - 2, 7 - 8, Longoaks, The Woodlands, Wydnnor Cottage Dixon Drive
359 - 369 (odd), 343 - 351 (odd), Oakwood, 346, 348 Manchester Road
1 - 3 (o), 2 - 16 (even) Oakwood Drive
14 - 48 (even) Kirkstile Place (Moss Colliery Road)
1, 2 and 4 Fielders Way
1 - 5 Wicket Grove
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 12 letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The following
issues have been raised:Dixon Drive would be narrowed
Loss of Turning Facility on Dixon Drive
Over development
Insufficient Car parking provision
Loss of privacy
Loss of light
Development too high
Impact on sewers (both during construction and future capability)
Loss of trees
Access onto Dixon Drive
Disruption to access of Dixon Drive
Vandalism
Access to the site
Loss of value
Height of retained wall
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies:
Other policies: None
None
81
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
H1 – Meeting Housing Needs, H6 – Open Space Provision within New Housing
Developments, H11 – Open Space Provision within New Housing Developments,
DEV1 Development Criteria, DEV2 – Good Design, DEV4 – Design and Crime,
T13 – Car Parking EN7 Conservation of Trees and Woodlands, TR5 – Protection
of existing and potential assets.
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
H1 – Provision of New Housing Development, H8 – Open Space Provision
Associated With New Housing Developments, DES1 – Respecting Context,
DES11 – Design and Crime, A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle
Parking in New Development, EN10 Protected Trees
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of residential development
in this location is acceptable; whether adequate provision would be made for open space; whether the
proposed level of car parking is sufficient; whether the development would have any impact upon the
TPO’d trees; whether it is appropriate for the existing building on the local list to be demolished and loss of
a hotel (tourism asset) and whether the proposal complies with the provisions of the relevant policies of
both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP. These issues will be discussed in turn
below.
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. PPG3
also states that, when considering conversions, a more flexible approach is required with regard to densities,
car parking, amenity space and overlooking.
The site has previously been developed and considered as a brownfield site, as such, I consider the principle
of the redevelopment of this site for residential accommodation to be acceptable and accords with the thrust
of the policies highlighted above. This has to be balanced against the loss of a potential tourism asset and
existing building.
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 which sets out a sliding scale for such provision.
82
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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 £71,487. I am satisfied that the
application therefore accords with Adopted policies H6 and H11 and Draft Policy H8.
Design, Layout and Siting
Adopted Policy DEV1 identifies a number of issues that should be taken into account when determining
applications, including the visual appearance of the development, its relationship to its surroundings and the
amount, design and layout of car parking provision.
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.
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 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.
A modern three storey building is roughly equivalent to a two storey Victorian property. The three storey
blocks A and B would be 2.9m higher than the ridge height of 2 Dixon Drive. It would be located adjacent
to the rear garden and would be 12m from the rear of Dixon Drive. As such I do not agree that the proposal
would be inappropriate or overbearing.
The main elevation of block B would be 13m from the boundary of 2 Dixon Drive. There is a large Horse
Chestnut tree located at the bottom of the rear garden. This tree is not considered worthy of a preservation
order. However, the proposal would maintain sufficient space from the canopy of the tree in accordance
with the Council’s own SPG for trees so not to affect the tree during construction or pressure in the future
from residents of the scheme. I am satisfied that the siting of this block in relation to the bottom of this
neighbouring garden and the position of the horse chestnut tree is sufficient to ensure the privacy of the
existing residents of Dixon Drive.
The applicants agent has amended the proposal so that the position of the main block (E, F and G) would be
further from the neighbouring property on Oakwood Avenue. The internal configuration of block C and D
has also been amended to ensure that the closest element of the building to the existing neighbour in none
habitable windows. I am satisfied that the elements of the proposal would maintain sufficient separation to
ensure that the scheme would not have a detrimental impact upon privacy, sun light and day light.
The proposal would maintain the minimum separation distance to the existing surrounding properties.
Internal separation distances would be maintained through the orientation, position of and use of facing
83
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
windows. As such, I am also of the opinion that the design and siting of the scheme would maintain
sufficient separation in accordance with the adopted SPG to ensure the amenity and privacy of future
residents.
The scheme would provide the private amenity space to the rear of the each of the blocks. I am of the
opinion that the level of amenity space is appropriate in this instance and would accord with policy DEV1
of the adopted plan and DES1 of the replacement plan.
The Police Architectural Liaison Officer (ALO) has commented on the application. He has a number of
security issues relating to detailed matters, including the amount of defensible space and gated access. I
have forwarded a copy of the comments made by the ALO to the applicant’s agent. I have attached a
condition requiring details of the landscaping and fencing to be approved prior to the commencement of
development.
Trees
Policy EN7 encourages the conservation of trees and woodland through supporting the retention of trees
and aims to ensure that new tree planting is designed to contribute to landscape quality.
Policy EN10 of the Revised Replacement Plan states that development that would result in the unacceptable
loss of trees will not be permitted.
There are a number of trees on the site which benefit from a tree preservation order. These trees are located
to the west of the site and form a belt along the Dixon Drive boundary. The trees would be retained as part
of this scheme to the rear of blocks A and B. The City Council’s arboricultural officer has inspected these
trees and is of the opinion that the proposal would maintain sufficient space to the trees and their canopies.
He has concluded that the trees would not be affected by the construction of the proposal or from pressure in
the future to be pruned.
Whilst I acknowledge that trees have been removed from the site prior to the submission of the first
application. They were not protected by a preservation order and no consent was required to fell them.
In conclusion, I am satisfied that the proposal accords with the policies highlighted above regarding trees.
Car Parking and Access
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.
The applicant has indicated that a total of 40 car parking spaces would be provided, four of which would be
marked for disabled provision. I have no highway objection to the application. Given that the site is
location on major route in and out of City and one that is well served by public transport, I consider the level
of car parking to be appropriate and in accordance with the Council’s maximum car parking standards.
84
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Turning the proposed access. The City Council’s highway engineer is of the opinion that the proposed
access is sufficient for the proposal. Moreover, I have attached a condition regarding the access road into
the site be laid out, drained, surfaced and sealed prior to the commencement of development. No access,
pedestrian or vehicular, would be provided onto Dixon Drive.
Whilst, there is currently an emergency access onto Dixon Drive which aids turning of vehicles it is not
considered a requirement in this instance. However, the applicant has amended the scheme so that a
recessed area would be provided for the residents on Dixon Drive which would continue to aid
manoeuvring.
As such, I am satisfied that the proposal would accords with the adopted and replacement plan policies in
this instance.
Remaining Issues
There is a public water main which runs adjacent to the site. United Utilities have no objection to the
scheme provided that a 2.5m easement is maintained. The proposal would be set into the site and would not
encroach into the easement. Therefore, I do not consider the issues raised regarding drainage to be matters
of concern in this instance.
Loss of commercial value is not a material planning consideration.
The building appears on the Council’s own list of buildings of architectural and historical interest and is
categorised as grade C. The property has been extended and altered over the years and has only a few of the
original features remaining. It is not considered therefore that building is worthy of retention.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The applicant has amended the scheme from that previously withdrawn. The main block which would be
positioned in the location of the former hotel had been moved to the south away from the Public Right of
Way at the rear of the site. The Council’s highway engineers is satisfied that the proposal would not affect
the right of way, nor would any of the proposed boundary treatment.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I am satisfied that the design of the proposal is acceptable and the surrounding uses and the
isolated location outweighs the policy framework in this instance. I therefore recommend that the
application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following 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 external
elevations of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services.
85
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
3. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to and
approved by the Director of Development Services 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 Director of Development Services.
4. Standard Condition F03X Surfacing
5. Standard Condition J04X Bin Stores
6. 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.
7. No development shall commence until an external lighting scheme for the apartments has been
submitted to and agreed 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.
8. 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 LPA.
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).
9. Prior to commencement of the development; the developer shall undertake an assessment to determine
the external noise levels from the surrounding roads that the proposed residential elements will be
subjected to (day time and night time). The developer shall detail what steps have to be taken to
mitigate the disturbance from the above. The assessment shall have due regard to the Department of the
Environment Guidance PPG 24 - Planning and Noise, achieving BS8233: 1999 in all habitable rooms
(including the balcony area). This assessment and mitigation measures shall be submitted for the
approval of Development Services prior to commencement of the development. Once agreed, all
identified noise control measures shall be implemented and thereafter retained.
86
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
10. This permission shall relate to the amended plan received on 22nd November 2004 which shows
re-positioning of the scheme.
11. Standard Condition C04X Fencing of Trees protected by T.P.O.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R008A Development-Buildings in vicinity
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R013A Use of parking areas
5. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
6. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
7. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
8. Standard Reason R028A Public safety
9. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
10. Standard Reason R019 Avoidance of Doubt
11. Standard Reason R010A Protect TPO trees
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 decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
H1 - Meeting Housing Needs
H6 - Open Space Provision within New Housing Developments
87
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
H11 - Open Space Provision within New Housing Developments
DEV1 Development Criteria
DEV2 - Good Design
DEV4 - Design and Crime
T13 - Car Parking
EN7 Conservation of Trees and Woodlands
APPLICATION No:
04/48964/FUL
APPLICANT:
Abbotsound
LOCATION:
Former Weaste Bus Depot Eccles New Road Salford 5
PROPOSAL:
Erection of one eight storey block and one six storey block containing
200 apartments incorporating retention of facade fronting Eccles New
Road and Hessell Street
WARD:
Weaste And Seedley
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The site is the former Weaste Bus and Tramway Depot which is bounded by Eccles New Road, Hessel
Street, Humber Street and James Corbett Road. The Depot is listed as grade A on the local list of buildings
structures and features of architectural, archaeological and historic interest, with its principal elevations
including the clock tower fronting Eccles New Road and Hessel Street. The depot building covers
approximately half the site whilst the remaining site is open ground. Across Humber Street is a row of two
storey terraced housing. Numbers 1 to 27 are 10 metres from the existing Depot where it fronts onto
Humber Street, the depot ranges in height from 9 metres to 12 metres in height. Over James Corbett Road
and Hessel Street are industrial uses whilst across Eccles New Road is a residential development under
construction. A Metrolink tram stop is located on Eccles New Road in front of the site.
Planning permission is sought for the erection of two blocks containing a total of 200 apartments with 115
car parking spaces. The facades along Hessel Street and Eccles New Road would be retained and the
Humber Street facade would be demolished as would the remainder of the Depot.
Block one would be built behind the existing Eccles New Road and Hessel Street facades which would be
retained as part of the development. The clock tower would also be retained. Block one would have three
perpendicular wings to the main Eccles New Road facade. Behind the retained facades are four storeys of
flats with corridors and communal spaces are proposed backing onto the retained facades. The two new
build wings rise to 6 storeys with sloping roofs with the aspects looking south, east and west. The applicant
has indicated the materials for the roofs and walls would match the existing building. Around each wing
would be private garden areas, parking some of which would be in garages within the building and
landscaping. The nearest new build element of block one, which is six storeys to houses on Humber Street is
24 metres with facing windows slightly angled.
Block two would be a new build part six part nine storey block that would front onto James Corbett Road
containing 80 apartments. Proposed materials are brick cladding and glazing. The nearest element of block
88
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
2, a six storey blank gable, to houses on Humber Street is 25metres. The block is set 6 metres back from
James Corbett Road and follows the curve of that road into Hessel Street in a ‘J’ shape. Parking and
landscaping for the site is provided around the development and apartments on upper floors have small
balconies.
The application has been submitted with a design statement. The developer also proposes to incorporate a
turning head for use by residents of Humber Street.
CONSULTATIONS
Environment Agency – No objections. Recommend condition site investigation.
Director of Environmental Health – Recommend against granting planning permission due to internal noise
impacts upon future occupiers and nearby businesses and proximity of neighbouring industrial uses.
Recommends noise and site investigation be attached for an approval.
HSE – No objections.
GMPTE – No objections
UU – No objections
Police – Recommend robust boundary treatments and the scheme should be to secure by design standards.
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 1st September 2004
Press notice was published on 9th September 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 to 12 Belmont Street
533 to 535 odd and 571 Eccles New Road
1 to 43 odd Humber Street
A Plant Hire, Weaste Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 3 letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The following issues
have been raised:Light pollution from car headlights into a house
Increased pollution from cars
Not enough on site car parking
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP1 Economy in the use of Buildings
DP3 Quality in New Development
SD1 The North West Metropolitan Area
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
89
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DEV1 Development Criteria,
DEV2 Good Design,
DEV4 Design and Crime,
T13 Car Parking,
EC3 Re-use of Sites and Premises,
H1 Meeting Housing Needs,
H6 & H11 Open Space Provision,
EN7 Conservation of Trees and Woodlands
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
H9/36 Sites fro New Housing
ST11 Location of new development
H1 Provision of New Housing
DES1 Respecting Context
DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 Design and Crime
H8 Open Space Provision Associated with New Housing Development
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are suitability of the intended use on the site, the
density proposed, the impact of the new buildings upon neighbouring occupiers, the impact of the building
on the streetscene and upon the locally listed structure and the level of parking proposed.
Policy H9/36 requires at least 50 units per hectare. As the use is allocated in the emerging UDP for housing
I consider that the use to be appropriate especially as the building is vacant. The proposed density of
development at 191 units per hectare is a high PPG3 density however the site is immediately adjacent to a
tram stop and a bus corridor as well as employment areas. I consider the density to be appropriate to this site
within the Central Salford area.
The councils separation distances are maintained for block 2. Block 1 is 24m away from the two storey
houses on Humber Street although the angle of facing properties is such that I am satisfied with this
separation. As the bulk of the depot will be demolished facing houses on Humber Street I consider the
impact of the replacement building to be appropriate with regards to daylight and privacy. Objection has
been raised to headlights shining into one house on Humber Street. Seventeen cars would access Humber
Street with the other 98 car spaces coming from Hessel Street.
The building is locally listed for its historic interest as well as the ornate front facade and side facades. As
the scheme would retain the prominent elevations and clock tower I am satisfied that the main aspects of the
local listing would be preserved. I recommend that the retention of the facades be controlled through S106
Obligation. The new build elements are designed to be in keeping with the retained facades and would I
consider contribute to the ongoing regeneration of the area.
The applicant wishes to enter into a S106 Obligation under H6, H11 and H8 for open space, play space and
environmental improvements off site. The S106 commuted sum would be £195,530. Incidental open space,
balconies and landscaping are also proposed within the development.
90
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Objection has been raised to the level of parking. I consider that 57% parking at the site is acceptable given
the excellent public transport options from the site in addition to cycle parking on the site.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
Pre-application discussions resulted in a scheme that retained the principal facades. During the application
process the scheme has been amended to allow for improved separation distances and more incidental
amenity space.
CONCLUSION
I consider that the scheme is appropriate in terms of neighbouring residents amenity and in terms of its
impact upon the streetscene and the locally listed building. I consider the density and level of parking
proposed to be appropriate. I recommend approval subject to the following legal obligation and conditions.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Members are minded to grant planning permission subject to the conditions below once the legal
agreement has been signed.
i.
That the Director of Corporate services be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section
106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the following:
a commuted sum payment of £195,530. for formal open space, childrens play space
and local environmental improvements.
Retention of Eccles new Road and Hessel Street facades.
ii.
That the applicant be informed that the City Council is minded to grant planning permission on
completion of such legal agreement
iii.
That authority is given for the decision notice relating to the application to be issued, subject to the
conditions and reasons stated below, on completion of such legal agreement.
iv.
That authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the S106
agreement within a reasonable period on the grounds that the proposals do not support the aim and
objectives of the area.
Approve Subject to the following 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, roofs,
doors, windows and balconies of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by
the Director of Development Services.
3. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to and
approved by the Director of Development Services 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
91
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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 Director of Development Services.
4. Standard Condition F02X Parking Spaces
5. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted the developer shall submit a scheme
for the approval of the Local Planning Authority detailing the type, siting and number of bicycle and
motorcycle parking spaces and recycling facilities for each of the two blocks within the development.
Once approved such scheme for block 1 shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of any unit
within block 1 and such scheme for block 2 shall be shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of
any residntial unit within block 2. Such spaces shall be made available at all times the premises are in
use.
6. Prior to the commencement of development, the developer shall submit a site investigation report for
the approval of the Director of Development Services. The investigation shall address the nature,
degree and distribution of contamination and ground gases on the site and its implications on the risk to
human health and controlled water receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990,
Part IIA. The investigation shall also address the health and safety of the site workers, also nearby
persons, building structures and services, landscaping schemes, final users on the site and the
environmental pollution in ground water. The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the
Director of Development Services prior to the start of the survey, and recommendations and remedial
works contained within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to occupation
of the site. A site completion report including details of post remediation ground conditions for the site
shall be completed and submitted to the Director of Development Services prior to occupation of the
site.
7. Prior to the commencement of the development; the developer shall undertake and assessment to
determine the external noise levels from the nearby industrial units and Eccles New Road that the
proposed residential elements will be subjected to (day time and night time). The developer shall detail
what steps have to be taken to mitigate the disturbance from nearby industrial units and Eccles New
Road. The assessment shall have due regard to the Department of the Environment Guidance PPG24
_Planning and Noise, achieving BS8233: 1999 in all habitable rooms. This assessment and mitigation
measures shall be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority prior to the
commencement of development. Once approved such measures shall be installed prior to the
occupation of the development and shall be thereafter maintained.
8. Prior to commencement of development the applicant shall submit a scheme showing the type, design,
colour, location, and height of railings and gates for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. Such
approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of any residntial unit hereby
approved.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
92
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
5. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
6. Standard Reason R028A Public safety
7. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
8. 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. This development is subject to the planning obligation entered into by the applicant under Section 106
of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, prior to the granting of planning permission.
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.
4. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP1 Economy in the use of Buildings
DP3 Quality in New Development
SD1 The North West Metropolitan Area
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DEV1 Development Criteria,
DEV2 Good Design,
DEV4 Design and Crime,
T13 Car Parking,
93
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
EC3 Re-use of Sites and Premises,
H1 Meeting Housing Needs,
H6 & H11 Open Space Provision,
EN7 Conservation of Trees and Woodlands
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
H9/36 Sites fro New Housing
Other policies:
ST11 Location of new development
H1 Provision of New Housing
DES1 Respecting Context
DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 Design and Crime
H8 Open Space Provision Associated with New Housing Development
APPLICATION No:
04/49201/COU
APPLICANT:
Ian Wallwork
LOCATION:
308 Worsley Road Swinton
PROPOSAL:
Retention of car park
WARD:
Worsley
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application relates to a property on Worsley Road, Worsley. The premises are occupied by Wallwork
Opticians.
The proposal is to retain the former garden area as a car park. The garden area to the rear of 308 Worsley
Road was previously an overgrown garden mostly enclosed by a fence. The fence has been removed and
the entire garden area has been covered in tarmac and is being used as a car park. A Council enforcement
officer received a complaint on 15 June 2004 regarding the above and after a site visit it was concluded the
works required planning permission. A retrospective planning application was subsequently submitted.
The surrounding area is residential and Worsley United Reform Church is adjacent to the application
property.
94
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
SITE HISTORY
An application for the retention of air conditioning units and a rota spike on the rear elevation was
submitted at the same time as this application and also appears on the agenda.
An application was approved on 13 May 2003 for the erection of a single storey rear extension and
construction of steps to the entrance (02/45329/FUL).
PUBLICITY
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
Worsley United Reform Church
302 to 306 (e) Worsley Road
1 to 3 (O) Houghton Lane
1 Fulmere Court
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received three letters in response to the planning application publicity. One is in favour of keeping
the car park and two object. The applicant also posted one hundred letters to the surrounding residential
properties and we have received seventy-one replies back. Sixty-one are in favour of keeping the car park,
six object and four are neither for nor against its retention. The following issues have been raised from those
who objected:
-
Road safety/pedestrian safety issues
Car park is inappropriate in a residential area
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:DEV1 – Development Criteria
T13 – Car Parking
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
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: the effects on residential amenity, the safety issues
relating to having the kerb dropped to allow access into the car park and whether the proposal complies with
the relevant policies of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs.
95
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Impact on residential area
The property is in use as a commercial unit, however it is located in a predominantly residential area and so
it could be considered the tarmac car park is not in keeping with the residential surrounds. Alternative
designs that incorporated landscaping and boundary treatment to give the car park a more attractive
appearance were suggested to the applicant, however they wish the application to be determined based on
what is existing.
Safety issues
The kerb would need to be dropped the length of the car park and appropriate access protection road
markings added for the car park to meet their criteria and be useable. The applicant has shown on a plan one
disabled space 3.6m wide and six spaces 2.45m wide. The spaces are at right angles to the road. The depth
is not enough for 45 degree parking, as over 8m would be required. It could be considered this layout is not
suitable in a residential area in terms of pedestrian safety, as cars will be reversing back into the road and if
the vehicle is between two other vehicles visibility is reduced.
(CAR PARK STANDARDS for medical/health facilities = 1 space per 2 staff + 3 per consulting room. Mr
Wallwork has 7 full time staff and 1 consulting room in use = 6/7 spaces required).
Compliance with policy
The City of Salford Unitary Development Plan (UDP) was adopted in November 1995. The Plan is in
review and a Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan was published in November 2003.
Policy DEV1 requires appropriate consideration to be given to factors such as the relationship of the
proposed development with existing land uses and the visual impact of the development.
Policy T13 requires car parks to be designed to a high standard with particular regard to access
arrangements, surface materials, boundary treatment and security measures.
Policy DES1 states that development will be required to consider factors such as the street scene and the
character of the area.
Policy A10 relates to new developments however the principles of not exceeding the maximum car parking
standards of the UDP and providing car park facilities in a manner consistent with the provision and
maintenance of adequate standards of security and safety can be applied.
The car park does not comply with the above policies as it is not appropriate in a predominantly residential
area and seriously injures the street scene. Dropping the crossing the length of the car park to allow access
could potentially be a safety issue for pedestrians when cars are reversing out of the car park.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion the proposed development does not comply with policy and is not appropriate in a
predominantly residential area. I therefore recommend the application to be refused.
96
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
RECOMMENDATION:
Refuse for the following reasons:
(Reasons)
1. The retention of the car park at the rear of the property would seriously injure the street scene on
Houghton Lane and have detrimental impact on residential amenity as it is out of character with the
residential area. This is contrary to Policy T13 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
APPLICATION No:
04/49244/FUL
APPLICANT:
Ian Wallwork
LOCATION:
308 Worsley Road Swinton
PROPOSAL:
Retention of air conditioning units and rota spike on rear elevation
WARD:
Worsley
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application relates to a property on Worsley Road, Worsley. The premises are occupied by Wallwork
Opticians.
The proposal is to retain the three air conditioning units and the rota spike located on the rear elevation of
the property. A Council enforcement officer received a complaint on 15 June 2004 regarding the
installation of the above and after a site visit it was concluded that the works required planning permission.
A retrospective planning application was subsequently submitted.
The surrounding area is residential and Worsley United Reform Church is adjacent to the application
property.
SITE HISTORY
An application for the continued use of the former rear garden area as a car park was submitted at the same
time as this application and also appears on the agenda.
An application was approved on 13 May 2003 for the erection of a single storey rear extension and
construction of steps to the entrance (02/45329/FUL).
97
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
CONSULTATIONS
Environmental Services: There can be noise problems with air conditioning units so it is recommended that
they are only operated during the day when the premises are open.
Architectural Liaison Officer – He was unable to comment on the need for a security measure i.e. the rota
spike. Alternatives to the existing rota spike were:
* Removal of any climbing aids allowing easy access onto the single storey roof, e.g. boxing in rainwater
goods, removing/bringing flush window cills, etc.
* Increasing the height of the single storey extension. This has successfully been used and offers a
sympathetic appearance. Typically this consists of the erection of welded wire mesh fencing with a high
density of mesh mounted on upstands. This should be flush with the external brickwork thus eliminating
any climbing aids. An example of this treatment can be seen on Chester Road, Manchester at the BMW
Mini dealer adjacent to Parkers bulbs/Garden Centre.
PUBLICITY
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
Worsley United Reform Church
302 to 306 (e) Worsley Road
1 to 3 (O) Houghton Lane
1 Fulmere Court
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received one letter of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The following
issues have been raised:
-
Causing a distraction whilst driving along Houghton Lane
Highly visible
Not in keeping with surrounding area
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:DEV1 – Development Criteria
DEV3 – Alterations/Extensions
DEV4 – Design and Crime
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:DES1 – Respecting Context
DES8 – Alterations and Extensions
DES11 – Design and Crime
98
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the air conditioning units and rota spike
have an impact on the street scene and the amenity of the neighbouring residents and whether the proposal
complies with the relevant policies of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs.
Planning Policy
The City of Salford Unitary Development Plan (UDP) was adopted in November 1995. The Plan is in
review and a Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan was published in November 2003.
Policies DEV1, DEV3 and DEV4 all require development to take into consideration the appearance of the
proposal and the appearance of the surrounding area.
DEV1 requires appropriate consideration to be given to factors such as the relationship of the proposed
development with existing land uses and the visual impact of the development.
DEV3 requires all alterations to existing buildings to complement the general character of the surrounding
area, and they should also respect the amenities of the neighbouring residents.
DEV4 encourages crime prevention measures and property security but not at the expense of the
appearance of the development.
Policies DES1, DES8 and DES11 reiterate the points mentioned above. DES8 also discusses the design of
the alterations and how it must be ensured that the resultant building appears an attractive and coherent
whole.
Impact on street scene and living conditions
The three air conditioning units are 87 x 87cms, 87 x 62cms and 52 x 60cms. They are positioned on the
rear elevation of the recent single storey extension. The rota spike is approximately 3.8m long and extends
along the width of the extension above the air conditioning units. The air conditioning units and rota spike
are in a very prominent position even though they are located on the rear elevation. The property is on the
corner of Worsley Road and Houghton Lane. The rear of the property has an extremely open aspect and so
the units and rota spike can be clearly seen from Houghton Lane by neighbouring residents and road users.
These fixtures are intrusive and consequently seriously injure the street scene.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion the proposed development is contrary to planning policy seriously injures the street scene and
has a detrimental impact on the amenity of the neighbouring residents. I therefore recommend the
application to be refused and that enforcement action be taken to secure the removal of the units and rota
spike.
RECOMMENDATION:
99
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Refuse For the following Reasons:
(Reasons)
1. The air conditioning units and rota spike are highly visible and incongruous features which are out of
character with the residential area. They are an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of the
area and the amenity of neighbouring residents. The application is therefore contrary to policies Dev3
and Dev4 of the Adopted City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, and policies DES1 and DES11 of
the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary Development Plan.
APPLICATION No:
04/49277/FUL
APPLICANT:
Linden Homes (NW) Ltd
LOCATION:
251 AND 253 Worsley Road Swinton
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing dwellings and erection of a 2/3/4 storey block
comprising 25 apartments, 30 parking spaces, garage block and
creation of new vehicular access and associated landscaping
WARD:
Worsley
At the meeting of the panel held on 2nd December 2004 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 the site of two existing bungalows situated close to the junction of Worsley Road
with the East Lancashire Road. The site is within a residential area and is bounded to the east by a three
storey block of flats and the west by three storey Victorian semi-detached houses. To the north, beyond
Henniker Street, which is unadopted, lies the New Ellesmere hotel and public house. To the south beyond
Worsley Road lies housing and a bowling green.
It is proposed to demolish both bungalows and erect a part 2, part 3 and part 4 storey block of apartments
comprising 24 apartments. An additional flat would be provided above a garage block to the northern
boundary of the site. Vehicular access would be from Henniker Street and the access points on to Worsley
Road would be closed. Pedestrian access would be from both roads and the development would have both
a front and back door.
The building is designed well with the third floor being accommodated within the roof space with windows
to the upper floors being provided in small pitched-roof dormers. The main roofs would be hipped and the
main four storey element does not dominate. The building would also incorporate bays that reflect those on
the adjacent Victorian buildings. The overall height is comparable to both adjacent buildings.
The site covers an area of just over 0.25 hectare and the proposed development represents a density of 95
dwellings per hectare.
100
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
SITE HISTORY
There have been no previous applications on the site relevant to this application.
CONSULTATIONS
Environment Agency – no objections
United Utilities – No objections but provides advice
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Unit – No objections but provides advice.
PUBLICITY
The application has been advertised by means of both site and press notices.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
255 to 269, 1 to 9 Brindley Lodge and 216 to 242 Worsley Road
2 to 8 and Brookfield Dale Street
1 to 5 Kildare Road
New Ellesmere public house Henniker Street
2 to 10 Folly Lane
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 25 letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application publicity. The
following issues have been raised:Henniker Street is not appropriate as access to such a large development.
Loss of amenity
Inadequate car parking
Henniker Street could be opened up to the East Lancs Road
The building would be out of character and detract from the streetscape
Overdevelopment of the site
Overlooking and loss of privacy
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies:
Other policies: DP1 Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: H1 Meeting Housing Needs, DEV1 Development Criteria, DEV2 Good Design, DEV4
Design and Crime, T13 Car Parking, H6 Open Space Provision Within New Housing Developments
101
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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, H8 Open Space Provision Associated With New Housing Developments
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the principle of such a development, the effect on
neighbouring residents and the acceptability of the development itself.
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. PPG3
also states that, when considering conversions, a more flexible approach is required with regard to densities,
car parking, amenity space and overlooking.
The site has previously been developed and considered as a brownfield site and therefore I consider the
principle of the redevelopment of this site for residential accommodation to be acceptable and accords with
the thrust of the policies highlighted above. The site is located close to Swinton town centre and close to
main transport routes and therefore I consider that the density of development is appropriate.
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 network, the potential for noise
nuisance, the visual appearance of the development and the effect on trees.
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.
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 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.
102
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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.
The development meets the Councils normal standards with regard to privacy and overlooking and I am
satisfied that the development is well designed and would not have a significant effect on the occupiers of
neighbouring properties.
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 which 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 £57,522. I am satisfied that the
application therefore accords with Adopted policies H6 and H11 and Draft Policy H8.
Car Parking and Access
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.
The applicant has indicated that a total of 30 car parking spaces would be provided. I have no highway
objection to the application. Given the site’s location in close proximity to public transport links and
Swinton town centre I consider the level of car parking to be appropriate and in accordance with the
Council’s maximum car parking standards.
Henniker Street would not be opened up to the East Lanscashire Road as a result of this development and I
have no objections to the development on highway grounds. The closure of the existing access points on to
Worsley Road is a benefit.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
the application has been amended to improve the level of amenity space on the site
£57,500 will be contributed by the developer towards play facilities and open space in the local
area.
CONCLUSION
The main issues relate to the principle of the development, the effect on neighbours and the details of the
development. The site is brownfield and therefore the principle of the redevelopment for apartments is
acceptable. There are apartments adjacent to the site and the scheme meets Council standards with regard
to privacy and overlooking. I consider that the scheme is well designed and that therefore the development
103
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
would be in compliance with the development plan subject to the following conditions and the developer
entering into a legal agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
That Members are minded to grant planning permission subject to the conditions below once the legal
agreement has been signed:
- that the Director of Corporate Services be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section
106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the payment of a contribution to the
provision of open space and a commuted sum to the value of £57,522;
- that the applicant be informed that the City Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to
the conditions stated below, on completion of such legal agreement;
- that authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued, (subject to the
conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement,
- that authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the S106 agreement
within a reasonable period on the grounds that the proposals do not support the aim and objectives of
policies H6 and H11 of the City of Salford Adopted Unitary Development Plan.
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 Director of Development Services 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 Director of Development Services.
3. The windows to the dining areas in Units 3 and 11 shall be obscure glazed and non-opening and shall be
maintained as such at all times.
4. No development shall be started until samples of the 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.
5. Standard Condition F03X Surfacing
6. 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 apartment.
7. No development shall commence until an external lighting scheme for the apartments has been
104
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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 apartment.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
4. Standard Reason R008A Development-Buildings in vicinity
5. Standard Reason R013A Use of parking areas
6. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
7. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
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. This development is subject to the planning obligation entered into by the applicant under Section 106
of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, prior to the granting of planning permission.
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.
4. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals of
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweight this finding:
H1 Meeting Housing Needs
H6 Open Space Provision Within New Housing Developments
H11 Open Space Provision Within New Housing Developments
DEV1 Development Criteria
DEV2 Good Design
105
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
DEV4 Design and Crime
T13 Car Parking
5. The approval shall relate to the amended plans that show an increase amenity area adjacent to Henniker
Street.
APPLICATION No:
04/49460/OUT
APPLICANT:
Mr And Mrs D Lever
LOCATION:
Old Warke Walkden Road Worsley
PROPOSAL:
Outline planning application for the demolition of existing dwelling and
the erection of three detached houses and formation of new access
WARD:
Worsley
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application is in outline with approval sought for the siting of three dwellings on the site and means of
access from Walkden Road. All other matters are reserved for determination at a later date. The site is
currently occupied by a detached dwelling with vehicular access achieved from Walkden Road. The
existing building is not listed or within a conservation area. It is however on the Council’s local list of
buildings of local architectural or historic importance.
To the west of the site is Walkden Road. The site is otherwise surrounded by residential properties of a
mixture of types, sizes and designs.
It is proposed to erect three detached dwellings within the site. Although external appearance and design
have been reserved for future determination, the applicant has indicated that the dwellings would
incorporate single storey elements, including garages. Each of the dwellings would therefore have its own
drive and parking area. The dwellings would be irregular in shape.
SITE HISTORY
In October 2004, planning permission was granted for the erection of a first floor side/front extension and a
conservatory at rear (ref: 04/49001/HH)
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – no objections but recommends a condition requiring acoustic glazing
Environment Agency – no objections
United Utilities – no objections to the principle of the proposal, but advises that there is a sewer crossing the
site
106
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
Greater Manchester Archaeological Unit – no objections to the application subject to the submission of an
archaeological building survey
PUBLICITY
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
2 Aviary Road
474, 478, The Spinney, Walkden Road
6 – 8 (E) The Warke
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received three letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The following
issues have been raised:
Overlooking and loss of privacy
Loss of an important building
Increase in traffic
Highway safety
Councillor MacDonald has requested that this application be determined by the Panel.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: none
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: H1 – Meeting Housing Needs
DEV1 – Development Criteria
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are as follows: whether the principle of the proposed
development is acceptable; whether there would be an impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents;
and whether the application accords with the relevant policies of the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft
Replacement UDP. I will deal with each of the issues in turn below.
Principle of the Proposed Development
107
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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.
The existing building is not listed or in a conservation area. It is however on the Council’s Local List of
buildings of local historic or architectural importance and is Grade A, which is the highest grade. The
property has been visited by the Council’s Conservation Officer, who has thoroughly inspected both the
exterior and interior of the building. Advice on the application has also been sought from the Greater
Manchester Archaeological Unit and English Heritage. Following his site inspection, the Conservation
Officer is of the opinion that the property is not worthy of listing. Records do indicate that there was a
building on this site in the 15th century, the Council’s Conservation Officer has not found any evidence that
any part of the existing building is from the 15th century. It is likely that the 15th century building was
demolished and this building subsequently constructed during the late 17th century. The only evidence that
this building dates from the late 17th century is a small number of timbers in the roof. These are however in
a poor condition and have been damaged at some time in the past.
The building has been substantially altered over time, having been rendered and with a number of
extensions added. In light of the above, the building is not considered to be of anything more than local
importance and not worthy of listing. Whilst I acknowledge local residents’ concerns regarding the loss of
the building, as the building is not worthy of listing, I can have no objections in planning terms to its
demolition. Following discussions with the Greater Manchester Archaeological Unit, I have attached a
condition requiring the implementation of a programme of archaeological work, in accordance with the
guidance in PPG16. This will include an archaeological building survey and an existing archaeological desk
based assessment. This will have to be completed and approved prior to the demolition.
The application site is located within a predominantly residential area. Given its existing use, I have no
objections to the re-use of the site for residential purposes. The proposal would make efficient use of a
previously developed site, in accordance with national and UDP policy. I consider that the application
accords with the relevant policies in this regard.
Amenity of Neighbouring Residents
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.
As stated above, this application only seeks approval for means of access and the siting of three dwellings.
Design, external appearance and landscaping are therefore reserved for determination at a later date. This
therefore means that the locations of windows are not known at this stage. It is however necessary to ensure
that dwellings could be located as shown on the plan submitted without having an unacceptable detrimental
impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents, or the future residents of the proposed dwellings.
There would be a minimum of 13m between the rear of 8 The Warke and the two storey element of the
southern dwelling. There are habitable room windows on both the ground and first floors of No. 8.
However, subject to there being no main habitable room windows facing that elevation, which will be
considered when the reserved matters application is submitted, I am satisfied that 13m is sufficient to
ensure that the proposed dwelling would not be overbearing. There are no windows on the western
108
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
elevation of 6 The Warke and I am therefore satisfied that the relationship between that property and the
proposed dwelling to the east of the site is acceptable. There are habitable room windows on the rear
elevation of 2 The Aviary. There would however be a minimum of 21m to the rear of the closest proposed
dwelling. This would be sufficient to allow habitable room windows in the rear elevation of the proposed
dwelling without there being an unacceptable level of overlooking or loss of privacy of either existing or
future residents. There are no habitable room windows on the side elevation of 478 Walkden Road. I
therefore consider the relationship between that property and the proposed dwelling to the west of the site to
be acceptable.
Whilst the exact locations of windows will be considered when the reserved matters application is
submitted, I am satisfied that, based on the information provided, the siting of the proposed dwellings is
acceptable and would not result in an unacceptable of overlooking or loss of privacy. I am satisfied that the
application accords with Draft Policy DES7.
Other Issues
Residents have also raised concerns regarding highway safety issues and increases in traffic as a result of
this proposal. Relocating the access to a more central location is intended to make access and egress safer.
United Utilities have responded to the application and whilst they have no objections to the proposal, they
have confirmed that a sewer crosses the site and they would not permit building over it.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, whilst I recognise that the Old Warke is of some local architectural and historic importance,
it is not worthy of listing. I therefore have no objections to its demolition. The proposed scheme would
make efficient use of a previously developed site and would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact
on the amenity of neighbouring residents or highway safety. The application complies with the relevant
provisions of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP. I therefore recommend that
the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A02 Outline
2. No development shall be started until full details of the following reserved matters have been submitted
to and approved by the Local Planning Authority:
- plans and elevations showing the design of all buildings and other structures;
- the colour and type of facing materials to be used for all external walls and roofs;
- 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,
109
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
fences, boundary and surface treatment.
3. Unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Director of Development Services, the finished floor levels
of the builidngs hereby approved shall be a minimum of 300mm above the adjacent road level.
4. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the means of vehicular access
from Walkden Road has been constructed and laid out in accordance with the approved plans.
4. Any gate at the vehicular entrance to the site must be a minimum of 5.5m from the rear of the adopted
footway
5. The windows of all habitable rooms of the properties which face both Walkden Road and the M60 shall
be acoustically dual glazed to the standards of the Noise Insulation Regulations 1975 (as amended). An
alternative would be to install sealed dual glazed units comprising 10mm and laminated 6.4mm with
12mm air gap. The unit shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations to
avoid air gaps when fitting the frames. Alternative means of ventilation, which must be sound
attenuated, shall be provided. The above shall be installed prior to first occupation of any of the
dwellings hereby approved and maintained thereafter.
6. No development/demolition shall take place within the application site until the applicant has secured
the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme which
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development Services
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R001 Section 92
2. Standard Reason R002 Reserved Matters
3. In order to reduce the risk of flooding
4. Standard Reason R026A Interests of highway safety
5. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
6. In order to make a record of the current building for archive purposes, to inform the detailed design of
the scheme and to record any buried remains of archaeological interest that might be destroyed by the
development.
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
110
PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16TH DECEMBER 2004
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.
3. The applicant is advised to contact United Utilities regardin the sewer passing through the site and
connections to the water mains
4. The applicant is advised to contact the Council's Highways Maintenance Section regarding the
adoptabillity of the realigned footway
5. The applicant is advised that the responsibility to properly address contaminated land issues, including
safe development, irrespective of any action taken by this authority, lies with the owner/development of
the site. The applicant/developer is requested to contact the Council's Public Protection Unit as soon as
is practicable should contamination be encountered during development of the site.
6. The applicant is advised to contact the Greater Manchester Archaeological Unit regarding Condition 6.
7. The applicant is advised that this permission relates to the amended plan received on 23rd November
2004 which shows changes to the siting of the dwellings
APPLICATION No:
04/49421/DEEM3
APPLICANT:
Wentworth High School
LOCATION:
Wentworth High School Wentworth Road Eccles
PROPOSAL:
Erection of 2.4m high boundary fencing adjacent to Chatsworth Road
entrance and on part of northern boundary
WARD:
Eccles
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to Wentworth High School on Wentworth Road in Eccles. The application is for the
erection of 2 sections of 2.4m high weld mesh fencing, a 57m long stretch along the Chatsworth Road
entrance (Section A) and a 70m stretch on the northern boundary alongside the playing fields (Section B).
The fence would be powder coated in green (RAL 6005). The weld mesh fencing will be replacing 1.5m
high railings.
There are residential properties to the south, east and west of the school and Eccles College and public
playing fields lies to the North.
111
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th December 2004
SITE HISTORY
In February 2000 an application was approved for the erection of two sections of 2.4 metre high palisade
fencing (Ref - 99/40254/DEEM).
In November 2001 an application for the erection of 2.4m high palisade security fencing (Ref 00/41439/DEEM3).
In July 2002 an application for the siting of portable building, relocation of existing security fencing,
erection of 2.4m high mesh fencing and gates around staff car park was approved (Ref 02/44309/DEEM3).
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 10th of November 2004.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
18 to 24 (Even) Chatsworth Road
17 to 25 (Odd) Chatsworth Road
75 to 85 (Odd) Salisbury Road
35 and 45 Westminster Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 1 representation / objection in response to the planning application publicity. The following
issues have been raised:Loss of trees/hedgerows
Loss of a long established short cut from the estate to Eccles via Westminster Road
The loss of a long established short cut from the estate to Eccles via Westminster Road is not a material
planning consideration.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: DEV1 – Development Criteria
DEV4 – Design and Crime
SC4 – Improvement/Replacement of Schools
EN7 – Conservation of Trees and Woodlands
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: DES1 – Development Criteria
EHCOA – Provision and Improvement of Schools and Colleges.
DES11 – Design and Crime
112
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th December 2004
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the visual appearance of the proposed fencing both
in relation to the street scene and the impact on residential properties. The impact that the proposed fencing
would have on the trees that run along the 2 sections also needs to be considered.
Policies DEV1 and DES1 identify a number of issues that should be taken into account when determining
planning applications, these include the visual appearance of the development and its relationship to its
surroundings. DEV4 and DES11 outline how the City Council will encourage crime prevention in order to
promote personal and property security but not at the expense of high quality design. Weld mesh fencing is
recommended by the Police Architectural Liaison Officer as the most appropriate type to be used on road
frontages as it does not provide a fortress effect as it is designed to allow views through the panelling thus
giving the effect of keeping the aspect open. This quality in combination with the fact the fencing will also
be powder coated to ensure it blends in with its surroundings means that I am of the opinion that the use of
weld mesh fencing would not have an adverse impact upon the street scene or the residential amenity
currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents.
Policy EN7 outlines how the City Council will encourage the conservation of trees and woodlands. There
are 6 mature trees, within the school grounds, that run along the boundary where section A would be
erected. One of these trees would have to be removed to erect the proposed fencing. The tree is however a
poor specimen and therefore as the fence is being erected to make the school more secure in accordance
with DEV4 and DES11 I do not have any objections to its removal, especially as the treescape along this
frontage would be retained as the tree which would be felled will be replaced on a 2 for 1 basis. There are
also 6 trees on the playing field that lies adjacent to the boundary where section B would be erected. The
health of these trees would not be adversely affected by the proposed fencing.
CONCLUSION
It is not envisaged there will be any adverse impact upon the street scene, the character of the area or the
residential amenity currently enjoyed by the neighbouring residents, as the proposed fencing is appropriate
for uses in residential areas as it improves security without not fortifying the facility The development
would not have an adverse impact upon the treescape either as only 1 tree would be affected by the proposal
and this would be replaced on a 2 for 1 basis. The proposed development is therefore in accordance with the
policies contained within the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the Revised Deposit Draft
Replacement Plan. I therefore recommend that the application is approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. Prior to erection the fence hereby approved shall be treated in green (RAL 6005).
3. During the first available planting season following the felling of the ash tree hereby granted consent, it
shall be replaced by 2 standard oak trees in accordance with British Standard 3936:Part 1:1965
113
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th December 2004
(Specification for Nursery Stock Part 1: Trees and Shrubs) and which shall have a clear stem height
from the ground of 1.8m, a minimum overall height from the ground of 2.75m, a minimum
circumference of stem at 1m from the ground of 8 cm. The location of the replacement tree(s) shall be
agreed in writing by the Director of Development Services.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
APPLICATION No:
04/49231/DEEM3
APPLICANT:
Education And Leisure Services
LOCATION:
Land At Phoebe Street Salford 5
PROPOSAL:
Outline application for use of land for primary school, nursery and
childrens centre with associated car parking, playgrounds and playing
fields
WARD:
Ordsall
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This is an outline planning application with all matters reserved for the erection of a new primary school,
nursery and children’s centre. Vehicular access to the site and the siting of the buildings and their design
and external appearance, the associated car parking provision, playing fields, playgrounds, landscaping
would all be considered at the reserved matters stage.
The site is 2.2 hectares in size. Dwellings on the site have recently been demolished and the site is presently
grassed with a number of trees to the boundaries. To the north is St Josephs RC primary school, to the south
is Radclyffe primary school and there is residential development to the east and west. There are public
rights of way that cross the site.
It is intended that the proposed school would replace the two existing primary Schools in Ordsall (Radclyfe
and St. Clements)
114
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th December 2004
SITE HISTORY
00/41714/DEEM3 - Prior Notification for the demolition of dwellings. Approved 01.02.2001.
01/42330/DEEM3 - Landscaping of land. Approved 01.06.2001.
CONSULTATIONS
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Unit – The site is located within an area of significant
crime. Strongly recommend early consultation with the Unit to ensure that the detailed proposals reduce the
opportunity for crime and achieves a Secure by design Award. Clarification is welcomed on the proposed
pedestrian route via Mayflower Avenue and the different uses require clear delineation.
Peak and Northern Footpaths Society – No comments received.
Greater Manchester Pedestrians association – No comments received
Ramblers Association – No objections.
Open Spaces Society – No comments received
Sport England – No Objections. Whilst it is recognised that the new school may, in the long-term, replace
Radclyfe and St. Clements primary schools in the locality, details have not been provided indicating the
future use or redevelopment of these schools. Issues relating to the future use or redevelopment of these
sites, and the associated playing fields would be the subject of further planning applications. It is considered
that the proposal is consistent with Planning Policy Objective 10. It is recommended, that the following
issues are taken forward to reserved matters stage, and covered by suitably worded planning conditions: 1)
The playing pitch should be designed, constructed and maintained in accordance with Sport England
guidance note ‘Natural Turf for Sport’, details should be submitted and approved prior to the
commencement of the development 2) the playing pitch should be made available prior to the occupation of
the new school buildings. The creation of a new school represents an opportunity to create a facility which
will be of benefit to the wider community also. Consideration should be given to ensure that the design of
the new school does not preclude community use of the proposed playing pitch, and can provide easy access
to supporting toilet and changing facilities.
PUBLICITY
A press notice was published on 10th October 2004
A site notice was displayed on 15th October 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 – 35 (o) Napier Green
17 – 28 Ryall Avenue
1 – 16 Ryall Avenue South
St Josephs RC Primary School, St Josephs Drive
St Josephs RC Presbytery, St Josephs Drive
115
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th December 2004
18 – 34 Summerseat Close
Radclyffe Primary School, West Craven Street
7 – 9 (o) Stern Avenue
12 – 16 (e) Mayflower Avenue
1 – 5 (o) Cutter Close
1 – 4 Brigantine Close
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received no letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application publicity to
date.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
UR2 – An Inclusive Social Infrastructure
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: H8/2 – Housing Area Improvement and Renewal
Other policies: SC4 Improvement/Replacement of Schools
R1 Protection of Recreation Land and Facilities
DEV1 Development Criteria
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None.
Other policies:
EHC0A Provision and Improvement of Schools and Colleges
DES1 Respecting Context
DES2 Circulation and Movement
A1 Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
DEV5 Planning Conditions and Obligations
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are whether the principal of the use of the land for a
primary school, nursery and children’s centre is acceptable and whether adequate playing pitch provision
can be incorporated into the site.
RSS Policy UR2 states that local planning authorities should allow for the varied provision of facilities for
education and have regard to the impacts of proposed developments on the health of local communities.
The site is allocated under area policy H8/2 of the Adopted UDP. This policy designates the area for public
sector housing area improvement and renewal, which indicates that the council has identified this area as
suffering from various social, environmental and physical problems and will encourage improvement and
regeneration activity. Policy SC4 states that the City Council will endeavour to make good any deficiencies
in school facilities through the development of replacement facilities subject to availability of adequate
resources. The policy seeks to ensure that the supply of school buildings and support infrastructure is
116
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th December 2004
sufficient to meet local needs and that the condition of school buildings is compatible with current
requirements.
Policy EHC0A states that planning permission will be granted for the provision of new schools and
colleges, and also for the improvement or replacement of schools and colleges on existing sites, provided
that the development would not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring uses; secure
an adequate standard of playing field and other recreation provision in an accessible and convenient
location; be accessible to the community it serves by a range of means of transport, particularly foot, cycle,
and public transport; incorporate adequate provision for disabled access; not give rise to unacceptable
levels of traffic congestion, or have an adverse impact on highway safety in terms of traffic generation,
parking or servicing; and make provision, wherever possible, for community use of the buildings and
grounds.
Policy A1 requires that a travel plan be submitted where appropriate to ensure access by other means than
the private car whilst Policy DEV5 allows this to be controlled through the imposition of conditions. I have
attached a condition requiring a traffic assessment and a travel plan to be submitted.
The Ordsall Development Framework identifies the development of a school on this site as a key proposal.
In this Framework the new school site forms part of a larger community campus, that includes the playing
field of the adjacent St Joseph’s RC primary school. Development of this site will potentially release the
other two school sites for none education related development in the future. The reuse/ redevelopment of
these buildings and the retention or relocation of the playing pitch provision would therefore be given
consideration at that stage.
In cases where existing recreation land is proposed to be developed Policy R1 explains planning permission
would not normally be granted unless an equivalent replacement site is provided. Whilst this application
proposes the closure of the two existing schools and their associated recreation provision, details have not
been provided and as such, I consider that this matter would be given further consideration at such time.
Indicative plans have been submitted for information purposes only that show that there would be
satisfactory space within the site for playing pitch provision. A condition is recommended to ensure that
adequate provision is made within the site for recreation provision and that the details should be provided at
the reserved matters planning stage.
I consider the principle of a new school to be in accordance with policies SC4 and EHC0A. When more
detailed proposals are prepared for the reserved matters application, the provision of sports facilities must
be given very careful consideration and should accord with policies R1 and EHC0A. Sport England have
also advised that the creation of a new school represents an opportunity to create a facility which will be of
benefit to the wider community also and that consideration should be given to ensure that the design of the
new school does not preclude community use of the proposed playing pitch, and can provide easy access to
supporting toilet and changing facilities. At this stage as no details have been provided and such details
would need to be included in a reserved matters application, I would advise the applicant to consider
carefully on-site sports provision both during construction of the school and in the long term.
CONCLUSION
I am satisfied that the redevelopment of this site for educational purposes is acceptable and is not contrary to
policies R1 and EHC0A with regard to sports provision however these policies will have a bearing on the
future reserved matters application. The development would make a positive contribution to the area and
117
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th December 2004
would result in the redevelopment of a vacant site. Conditions have been attached requiring satisfactory
recreation provision, in addition to the rights of way closures.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A02 Outline
2. Standard Condition B01X Reserved Matters
3. Prior to the submission of any reserved matters application the developer shall submit details, for the
approval of the Director of Development Services, of the proposed level of provision and the design,
construction and maintenance of the sports provision at the school. Once approved, sports provision for
the school shall be implemented prior to the first occupation and use of the school buildings and shall
thereafter be maintained.
4. Prior to the first submission of any reserved matters application the developer shall submit a travel plan
for the approval of the Director of Development Services. The travel plan shall address measures to
reduce the reliance on the private car to access the site, the methodology for which shall be agreed by
the Director of Development Services prior to submission. Once approved such measures shall be
implemented and shall thereafter be maintained.
5. Prior to the first submission of any reserved matters application the developer shall submit a transport
assessment for the approval of the Director of Development Services. The transport assessment shall
address vehicular, pedestrian, motorcycle, bicycle and LGV egress and ingress from the site.
Recommendations of the assessment, once approved, shall be implemented prior to the occupation of
the replacement school and shall thereafter maintained.
6. Finished ground floor levels shall be 300mm above adjacent ground level.
7. No development shall commence unless and until the necessary consents have been obtained for the
closure of the rights of way.
8. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation report
for the approval of the Director of Development Services. 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 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.
118
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th December 2004
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 shall validate that all
works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Director of
Development Services.
9. No development shall take place unless and until a scheme for protecting the school from noise from
the A5063 and A57 and the adjacent Phoebe Street has been submitted to and approved in writing by
the Director of Development Services; all works which form part of the approved scheme shall be
completed before the school is occupied.
10. Externally mounted plant and equipment shall be insulated in accordance with a scheme submitted to
and approved by the Director of Development Services before the development hereby approved is first
brought into use. Such works shall be completed before first use and shall be retained at all times
thereafter.
11. This permission shall not relate to the details of siting and access shown on the submitted plans, nor
does it imply that permission is likely to be forthcoming for such details.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R001 Section 92
2. Standard Reason R002 Reserved Matters
3. Reason: In order to ensure sufficient sports provision in accordance with policy R1 of the Adopted City
of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
4. Reason: To ensure sustainable modes of travel are used in accordance with policy DEV1 of the
Adopted UDP.
5. Reason: To protect the interests and safety of traffic on surrounding roads in accordance with policy
DEV 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
6. Reason: To avoid flooding of the new school in accordance with policy DEV1 of the Adopted UDP.
7. To ensure the appropriate procedures are carried out and to safeguard existing rights of way, in
accordance with Unitary Development Plan DEV1.
8. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
9. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
10. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DEV 1 of
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
11. Standard Reason R019 Avoidance of Doubt
119
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th December 2004
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
SC4 Improvement/Replacement of Schools
R1 Protection of Recreation Land and Facilities
DEV1 Development Criteria
2. A number of pubic sewers cross the site, minimum easements of 3 metres to each side will be required,
however distances may be greater depending on their depth. Suggested separate drainage system,
possible storage on surface water system to limit discharge to 7L/s/Ha, all to United Utilities approval.
Please contact United Utilities regarding sewer adoption and the Director of Development Services
(Engineering Design Section) regarding Section 38 road adoptions.
3. For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land Condition, the applicant /
developer is advised to contact the Director of Environmental Services on 737 0551.
4. For further discussions regarding the requirements of the noise condition, the applicant / developer is
advised to contact the Director of Environmental Services on 737 0551. Please note guidance such as
PPG24, WHO guidelines, BS4142 (1997).BS8233:1999,Department of education guidelines.
5. The level of insulation to be provided and / or noise permitted from externally mounted machinery shall
aim to be such that the rated level of noise emitted from the development is below the existing
background level by at least 5dB(A). You are advised to contact the Director of Environmental
Services on 737 0551 to discuss the measurement methodology and monitoring position.
6. 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.
120
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
121
16th December 2004