REPORT
of
Urban Vision Partnership Limited
to the
Planning & Transportation Regulatory Panel
1st March 2007
Planning Applications and Related Development Control Matters
(Not considered to contain exempt information)
Non-members of the panel are invited to attend the meeting during
consideration of any applications included within the report
in which they have a particular interest.
AMENDMENT REPORT
APPLICATION No:
06/53387/FUL
APPLICANT:
Development Processes Group Plc
LOCATION:
Land Adjacent To The Former Ellesmere Public House
Walkden Road Worsley M28 7BQ
PROPOSAL:
Erection of a two storey building with additional level of
living accommodation in roof space to provide 11
apartments together with associated car parking and
alteration to existing vehicular access
WARD:
Walkden South
OBSERVATIONS:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
Since writing my report I have received additional comments from the Police Architectural
Liaison Advisor and the Consultant Arboriculturalist.
Police Architectural Liaison Advisor – have commented verbally that they have no objections
to the amended proposed layout but recommend lockable gate between the application site
and the adjoining shop, as detailed below I have attached this as an informative.
Consultant Arboriculturalist – no objections in principle but recommends conditions relating
to the extent and construction technique of the proposed geotextile to be used for the car
parking area and additional details relating to the root protection areas. The submitted root
protection details from the applicant should be increased in size to ensure the protection of the
three plane trees; there is enough space on site to accommodate the increase. I am satisfied
that that the additional conditions with ensure the protection of the trees on the adjacent
highway.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
To the south of the site is the former Ellesmere Public House, a Grade II listed building,
which is currently in use as offices. To the east, the site is bounded by Walkden Road, beyond
which are residential and commercial properties. To the north are further residential and
commercial properties. To the west are the rears of residential properties which front Brindley
Street. The application site is currently used for car parking.
There are three trees within the existing footpath to the front of the site. These are not the
subject of a Tree Preservation Order as they are on highway land, but given their size and
type, make an important contribution to the amenity of the area.
The application has been amended from that originally submitted, in relation to its design,
layout and elevation treatment. The proposed building would be L shaped and would be
largely three storeys in height. There would be a two storey element adjacent to 91 Walkden
Road. The proposed building would be a minimum of 6.6m from the back of the footpath on
Walkden Road and 8.2m from the north elevation of the Ellesmere. An area of open space
would be provided between the proposed building and the Ellesmere and between the
proposed building and the car parking area. Vehicular access into the site would be from
Walkden Road, utlising an existing access point adjacent to the Ellesmere. There would be a
separate pedestrian access point at the other northern of the site, close to 91 Walkden Road. A
total of nine car parking spaces would be provided to the front of the building.
SITE HISTORY
In November 2003, planning permission and listed building consent were granted for the
erection of a two storey extension to the Ellesmere to provide additional office
accommodation (ref: 03/46683/FUL and 03/46684/LBC). These permissions have not been
implemented.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – no objections but recommends conditions requiring the
undertaking of a risk assessment to establish the potential for on-site contamination and the
submission of a noise assessment.
United Utilities – no objections
Police Architectural Liaison Advisor – comments received relating to the original site layout
plan. The gap between the proposed building and the adjoining shop should be closed off with
a lockable gate of a minimum of 1.8m in height and the front garden and the car park should
be separated by a fence and self-closing gate at least 1.8m high. The 1.5m high fences and
gates to the car park should be 1.8m high, but the fence defining the front garden should be no
more than 1.1m high.
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 13th September 2006
A press notice was displayed in the Advertiser on 7th September 2006
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
2-16 Park Road
1A, 1-11 Brindley Street
2 Royle Street
79-91 (O), 132-166 (E) Walkden Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received letters of objection from the occupiers of five neighbouring properties in
response to the planning application publicity. The following issues have been raised:
Loss of light
Loss of parking in the area
Loss of privacy
Insufficient parking for the proposed development
The need for the proposal
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DP1: Economy in the Use of Land and Building
DP2: Enhancing the Quality of Life
DP3: Quality in New Development
UR1: Urban Renaissance
T9: Demand Management
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: ST11: Location of New Development
DES1: Respecting Context
DES9 - Landscaping
DES10: Design and Crime
DES11: Design Statement
H1: Provision of New Housing Development
H2: Managing the Supply of Housing
H8: Open Space Provision Associated with New Housing Development
A10: Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
CH2: Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building
DRAFT SUBMITTED REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DP1: Regional Development Principles
RDF1: Main Development Locations
L4: Regional Housing Provision
RT6: Parking Policy and Provision
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: the principle of the proposed
development; the design of the proposed building; impact on neighbouring residents; impact
on the highway network; and public open space. These will be discussed in turn below.
The Principle of the Proposed Development
Policy ST11 outlines the sequential approach to the bringing forward of land for development
and details the order in which sites for development should be brought forward: existing
buildings; previously developed land which is well served by a choice of means of transport
and is well related to housing, employment, services and infrastructure; previously developed
land in other locations provided that adequate levels of accessibility could be achieved; and
finally greenfield sites in locations which are, or would be made to be, well served by a
choice of transport and well related to employment, services and infrastructure.
Policy H1 requires all new housing development to comply with a number of criteria,
including: contribute towards the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the area; be
built at an appropriate density; provide a high quality environment and adequate level of
amenity; and make adequate provision for open space.
Policy H2 requires the release of land for housing development to be managed in accordance
with the sequential approach set out in Policy ST11.
Policy HOU1 of the recently adopted Housing Planning Guidance states that within West
Salford, Broughton Park, Claremont and the northern part of Weaste and Seedley, the large
majority of dwellings within new developments should be in the form of houses rather than
apartments. Apartments are likely to be most appropriate form of development on the city’s
Town and Neighbourhood Centres.
Policy HOU2 states that where apartments are proposed, they should provide a broad mix of
dwelling sizes, both in terms of the number of bedrooms and the net residential floorspace of
the apartments. Small dwellings (i.e. studios and one bedroom apartments) should not
predominate, and a significant proportion of three bedroom apartments should be provided
wherever practicable. Smaller dwellings undoubtedly have a role to
play in meeting the needs of some one and two person households, but they should not be
allowed to dominate new apartment developments and should have a floorspace and layout
that makes them adaptable to changing needs (typically 57 square metres or above).
Policy DP1 of RSS requires economy in the use of land and buildings. It states that
development plans should adopt a sequential approach to meeting housing needs as follows:
firstly, the effective use of existing buildings and infrastructure within urban areas; secondly,
the use of previously developed land; and finally the development of previously undeveloped
land, where it would avoid areas of important open space, is well located in relation to houses,
jobs, other services and infrastructure and is or can be made accessible by public transport,
walking or cycling.
Policy DP1 of Draft RSS also encourages the effective use of land, buildings and
infrastructure and advocates the sequential approach to meeting development needs, as
outlined in Adopted RSS Policy DP1.
The principle of development on this site has been established through the granting of
planning permission in 2003 for the erection an extension to the former Ellesmere Public
House on this site. It is a brownfield site in an urban area, and its re-use complies with the
provisions of national and local government policy and guidance.
In relation to the principle of residential development on the site, it is well served by public
transport, being only a short distance from Walkden train station and a number of bus services
operating along Walkden Road. It is within 400m of Walkden town centre and the services
and facilities therein. The provision of apartments on the site would contribute to the
provision of a mix of dwelling types and sizes in the area, which is largely characterised by
houses rather than apartments.
The proposal consists of seven two bedroom apartments and four one bedroom apartments.
All except one of the one bedroom apartments would have a floor area of above 57m2. The
application site is constrained in various way and the design of the building has been affected
by the existing trees and the impact on the setting of the Listed Building. The planning
application was submitted several months prior to the Adoption of the Housing Planning
Guidance. The majority of the apartments would be two-bedroom and although there is a
lack of three-bedroom apartments the overall scheme consists of quite a small number of
apartments, in an area that consists of predominantly family dwellings. I would therefore
consider the size and density of apartments to be acceptable in terms of Policy HOU2.
The Design of the Proposed Building
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 DES9 relates to landscaping and considers that development will be required to
incorporate hard and soft landscaping provision, where appropriate.
Policy DES10 states that development will not be permitted unless it is designed to
discourage crime, anti-social behaviour and the fear of crime.
Policy DES11 requires applicants for major developments to demonstrate that the proposal
takes account of the need for good design. A written statement should be submitted which
explains the design concepts and how these are reflected in the development’s layout, scale
and visual appearance, the relationship to the site and its wider context and how the proposal
meets the Council’s design objectives and policies.
Policy CH2 states that planning permission will only be granted for development that would
not have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any Listed Building.
The design of the proposal has been amended following discussions between the applicants
and Urban Vision and the Council’s Design and Heritage team. This has resulted in a more
contemporary design which would provide a contrast to the adjacent Listed Building, whilst
respecting its character and setting. It has also resulted in the provision of an area of open
space between the proposed building and the Ellesmere. The proposed building would be
lower in height than the Ellesmere. The building would be constructed using stone and render
for the elevations and aluminium for the roof. The applicants have submitted samples of the
stone to be used, which would be similar in terms of colour and texture to the stone of the
Ellesmere. I have attached a condition requiring the submission of samples of all the materials
to be used for the external elevations of the building in order to ensure that they are of a
sufficiently high quality and enhance the setting of the Listed Building and the surrounding
area generally.
The Council’s Design and Heritage team has questioned the revised layout of the building,
which results in the car parking being provided in front of the proposed building (between the
building and the trees) rather than at the side as originally proposed, and the proposed
building set further back within the site. They have commented that the street scene will
suffer from the building being set back and that other properties in the area are at the back of
pavement. However the existence of the trees has to a large extent dictated the location of the
building within the site, as setting the building at the back edge of pavement would have an
unacceptable impact on the trees and would be likely to require their removal. On balance, I
consider that the need to retain the trees, given their contribution to the amenity of the area, is
more important than the need to locate the building closer to the footpath, and I am therefore
satisfied with its proposed siting.
The Greater Manchester Police Authority have commented that there should be fencing
between the front garden and the car park and the proposed fencing and gates to the car park
should be 1.8m high. The proposed fencing would be 1.5m in height. This aspect of the
application has been looked at in detail by the Council’s Design and Heritage team who have
advised the applicant on the height and design of the proposed fencing to ensure that it would
not have an unacceptable impact on the setting of the adjacent Listed Building. I have
attached a note informing the applicant of the comments relating to a lockable gate between
the application site and the adjoining shop I have also attached a condition requiring details
of landscaping including all details of the proposed fencing within the site and samples of the
proposed fencing is included within the materials condition. I am satisfied that this will ensure
that the landscaping and boundary treatment meets the criteria of Adopted Policy DES9.
In view of the above, I am satisfied that the design of the proposed building would enhance
the character of the area and would enhance the setting of the listed building. I therefore
consider that the application accords with the above policies.
Impact on Residential 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 amendments made to the layout of the building have resulted in it being located closer to
the residential properties to the rear of the site. 1A Brindley Avenue lies directly adjacent to
the application site and south west of the proposed development. No 1A Brindley Avenue
has number of windows on the east elevation. All of the windows overlook the existing
Listed Building due to its orientation. The adjacent dwellings on Brindley Avenue lie south
west of the proposed development and would be in excess of 22m from the side and rear
elevations. I would therefore not consider there would be an unacceptable impact with
regards to overshadowing. All of the windows on the rear elevation of the proposed building
would be to non-habitable rooms (kitchens and bathrooms). The applicant has confirmed that
these would be obscure glazed in order to protect the amenity of neighbouring residents. A
condition has been attached to ensure that this is the case, and in view of this, I am satisfied
that there would be no unacceptable level of overlooking or loss of privacy on the residents to
the rear of the site as a result. All the habitable rooms would be located within the front
elevation of the building. There would be a minimum of 26m between the closest habitable
room windows within the proposed building and the properties on the opposite side of
Walkden Road. This exceeds the 21m ordinarily required between facing habitable room
windows and is therefore considered sufficient to ensure that the residents opposite would not
be unacceptably detrimentally affected by the proposal. This distance is also sufficient to
ensure that the building would not have an unacceptable overbearing impact on residents.
Impact on the Highway Network
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.
Policy T9 of RSS relates to demand management. It also covers the issue of car parking
standards and states that standards should be more restrictive in urban areas to reflect local
characteristics, such as higher levels of public transport and higher development density.
Policy RT6 of Draft RSS states that local authorities should develop a coordinated approach
to parking provision as part of an all-embracing strategy to manage travel demand. Plans and
strategies should incorporate maximum parking standards (parking for disabled people being
the only situation where minimum standards will be applicable); manage car use by
implementing workplace, education and personal travel plans which should be developed
alongside public transport, cycling and pedestrian network improvements; and provide
dedicated and secure parking facilities for cycles and two wheel motorised vehicles;
A total of nine car parking spaces would be provided within the site, including one space for
disabled drivers. The applicants also propose to revise the car parking layout to the front of
the Ellesmere by providing a total of eight spaces for the existing offices. An area for the
storage of bicycles would also be provided within the site. Given the number of apartments
proposed, the site’s proximity to public transport links and Walkden town centre and the
provision of cycle storage within the site, the number of car parking spaces is considered to be
acceptable and in line with the above policies. Whilst I acknowledge residents’ concerns
regarding the loss of the existing car park on the site as a result of the proposals, it should be
noted that this is not a public car park and is only available for use by the occupiers of the
offices in the Ellesmere. Whilst the proposal would result in the loss of some of this car
parking, I do not consider that this would have an unacceptable detrimental impact on
highway safety, given the proximity of the site to public transport links.
Open Space
Policy H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and informal
open space within housing developments. The amount of open space to be provided shall
meet the identified need deriving from the development. It shall be calculated having regard
to the aim of achieving the standards of Policy R2 and by reference to the approach set out in
Supplementary Planning Documents. The open space will be provided either as part of the
development or through an equivalent financial contribution on a standard cost per bed space
for both capital and maintenance.
In accordance with the above, the applicants have agreed to make a contribution of £15, 660
towards the provision of public open space in the vicinity of the site. A condition has been
attached requiring the applicant to enter into a Section 106 agreement. This is in accordance
with Policy H8 and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on open space
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
Following discussions with Urban Vision and the Council’s Design and Heritage team, a
number of improvements have been made to the scheme. These have resulted in a more
contemporary design and the use of materials which would respect the setting of the listed
building. The amended scheme will also ensure that the existing trees to the front of the site
are retained.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the proposal represents efficient use of a previously developed site within an
urban area. It is in close proximity to public transport facilities and Walkden town centre. The
design would respect the setting of the listed building and the surrounding area in general.
Given the layout and design of the building, there would be no unacceptable detrimental
impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents through overlooking or loss of privacy. The
application accords with the relevant policies of the UDP and RSS and I therefore recommend
that it be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions and that the Strategic Director of Customer and
Support Services be given authority to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the provision of improved local open
space/play equipment.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03 Three year time limit
2. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples and details of
the materials for the external elevations, roof and boundary treatment of the development
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials, unless agreed otherwise in
writing by the Local Planning Authority.
3. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted
to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is started. Such
scheme shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary
and surface treatment and shall be carried out within 12 months of the commencement of
development and thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning
Authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of the initial implementation of
the planting scheme shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
4. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the
commencement of the development hereby approved, the finished floor levels of the
building shall be a minimum of 300mm above the level of the adjacent road.
5. The windows in the rear elevation of the building hereby approved shall be obscurely
glazed prior to first occupation of the block of apartments and shall be maintained as such
thereafter.
6. The cycle and refuse storage facilities shown on the approved plans shall be provided and
made available for use prior to occupation of any of the apartments hereby approved and
shall be retained thereafter, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning
Authority
7. The car parking spaces shown on drawing no. 2647:01 Rev C shall be made available
prior to first occupation of any of the apartments hereby approved and shall be available
at all times the premises is in use.
8. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a noise assessment
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such an
assessment shall assess the impact of noise from Walkden Road and shall identify noise
attenuation measures to reduce the impact of noise on the residents of the development
hereby approved. The approved attenuation measures shall be implemented in full prior to
first occupation of any of the apartments hereby approved and retained thereafter.
9. Prior to the commencement of development a desk study shall be been submitted and
agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The study shall investigate and
produce an assessment of the risk of the potential for on-site contamination. If the desk
study identifies potential contamination, prior to commencement of development the
developer shall submit a site investigation report for the approval of the Local Planning
Authority. The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of ground
contamination and ground gases on site and shall include an identification and assessment
of the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA,
focusing primarily on risks to human health and controlled waters. The investigation
shall also address the implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site
workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services and landscaping schemes
and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems and property.
The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority
prior to the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works
contained within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to
occupation of the site.
Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be
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.
10. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme detailing the extent of the Geoweb
and Geotextile materials, construction method and stage of implementation to be used for
the car park of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The constriction of the car park hereby approved shall be
carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.
11. Notwithstanding the submitted arboricultural reports dated 16th September 2006 and 5th
January 2007 full details of the Root Protection Areas and mitigation measures for the
three London Planes situated on the adjacent highway shall be submitted to and approved
in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved Root Protection Areas shall be
implemented in accordance with the submitted details.
Reason(s)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
3. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
4. Reason: In order to reduce the risk of flooding, in accordance with Policy EN19.
5. Standard Reason R005B Amenity - neighbours
6. In order to encourage the use of more sustainable transport modes and in order to
encourage waste recycling, in accordance with Policy A10 of the Adopted UDP.
7. Standard Reason R026B Interests of highway safety
8. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
9. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
10. Standard Reason R036B Good aboricultural practise
11. Standard Reason R036B Good aboricultural practise
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The applicant is advised to contact United Utilities regarding connections to the sewer
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 this permission relates to the following plans:
4. The applicant is advised that construction works should not take place outside the
following hours:
Monday to Friday: 08:00 - 18:00
Saturday: 08:00 - 13:00
Construction should not take place on Sundays and Bank Holidays
5. The Police Architectural Liaison Advisor advise that a 1.8m high lockable gate be erected
between the proposed building and the adjacent shop, please ensure these details are
included within the required landscape scheme.
6. Please note this approval relates to the following plans:
Drawing No.
Revision
2647:01
2647:07
2647:08
2647:09
2647:11
2647:12
2647:14
2647:15
C
A
A
A
APPLICATION No:
06/53592/OUT
APPLICANT:
Eccles Masonic Hall Ltd
LOCATION:
Eccles Masonic Hall Half Edge Lane Eccles M30 9BA
PROPOSAL:
Outline planning application for the layout, scale,
appearance and means of access for a new masonic hall and
42 dwellings
WARD:
Eccles
OBSERVATIONS:
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The recommendation has been updated to explicitly authorise the Strategic Director of
Customer and Support Services to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the payment of a commuted sum for improvements
to and maintenance of existing open space and replacement sports provision in the local area.
The heads of terms of the agreement, required by condition 16, are also clarified as being:
The provision of £59,658 for the provision of open space in the vicinity in accordance
with UDP Policies H8 and R2.
The provision of £90,000 for the provision of sports pitches in the vicinity in accordance
with UDP Policy R1 and Policy GS13 of Salford’s Greenspace Strategy.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a 0.66 hectare site fronting Half Edge Lane in the Ellesmere Park
area of the City. The site currently accommodates a large, four storey, red brick building
occupying a central position within the site, surrounded by an extensive area of hardstanding
used for surface car parking on the northernmost half of the site and a former bowling green
and associated greenspace to the south. The site’s northern boundary with Half Edge Lane is
well defined by a two to three metre high brick wall. The site’s boundaries are further
strengthened by a group of over 60 trees, most of which are mature, broadleaved species that
are protected by a Tree Preservation Order (Ref: TPO 14). The site is currently used by
Eccles Masonic Hall Ltd as a meeting space for the Masons themselves and is also privately
hired as a venue for social functions.
Buildings in residential use surround the application site. Dwellings on Half Edge Lane,
Preston Avenue, Bindloss Avenue, Emerson and Crawley Avenue lie to the east, some seven
metres beyond the site boundary, and comprise a mix of semi-detached and terraced houses
and flats in buildings of up to three storeys in height. Eccleshome, a three-storey residential
home for the elderly operated by the Masonic Society, is located directly to the south.
Immediately to the west, lie detached and semi-detached dwelling houses on both Doughty
Avenue and Half Edge Lane, including a detached bungalow directly adjacent to the site (44
Half Edge Lane). A collection of larger, predominantly residential buildings lie to the north,
on the opposite side of Half Edge Lane, including a number of Victorian villa’s that have
been converted into flats and a recently developed four-storey apartment development that
directly faces the application site.
This outline application seeks consent for the layout, scale, appearance and access to a
development comprising a replacement Masonic Hall at the southern end of the site and a
four-storey residential apartment building fronting Half Edge Lane to the north. Landscaping
has been reserved for detailed consideration at a later date should permission be granted.
The proposed residential units are contained within a single ‘V-shaped’ block focused on the
Half Edge Lane frontage and the northeastern side of the site. A central courtyard area has
been incorporated to provide amenity space for future residents and a visual break between
the two buildings. Of the proposed 42 apartments, 3 would have three bedrooms (7%), 32
would have two bedrooms (76%), 7 would have one bedroom (17%) and 29 would have a
gross internal floorspace over 57 square metres (69%). All of the proposed units would have
a private terrace or balcony. The building’s two dominant facing materials are brick and
artstone. The scale and mass of the building on the Half Edge Lane elevation is broken up by
the introduction of a deeply recessed glazed link at the main pedestrian entrance point. The
proposed building has a flat roof and the fourth floor is deeply recessed and is clad in grey
coloured panels that acknowledge the characteristic natural slate roofs of Ellesmere Park.
The palette of materials is carried through to the proposed replacement Masonic Hall building
to ensure architectural continuity. Both buildings share a similarly scaled stone box feature
defining principal windows. The entrance to the Hall is via a well-defined entrance plaza
covered by a canopy, supported by pillars. The ground floor of the building would be used as
a public function room with ancillary bar and kitchen areas whilst the upper floor is devoted
solely to Masonic meeting rooms and ancillary facilities.
Both buildings on the site would be raised to accommodate undercroft car parking beneath. A
total of 105 car parking spaces are provided on site, 41 for the residential element, 57 for the
replacement Masonic Hall and seven overflow/visitor car parking spaces, above ground, on
the western boundary. A total of 10 disabled parking bays would be provided together with 9
secure motorcycle parking spaces and 17 secure cycle parking spaces. Vehicular and
pedestrian access to both buildings would be via the existing access point on Half Edge Lane
only. Pedestrian access to the apartments would be via a slip resistant, timber decked
walkway behind the trees leading to the glazed entrance point on the Half Edge Land
frontage, whilst a vehicular access road would lead to the entrance of the undercroft parking
area, beneath the raised courtyard, between the two buildings. Direct access to both buildings
from the undercroft parking area would be provided by both stairs and lifts. A drop off point
is provided in front of the car park entrance. Approximately half of the length of the front
brick boundary wall on Half Edge Lane would be lowered to one metre in height to
incorporate enhanced visibility splays.
The applicant has submitted the following documents in support of the application:
Design and Access Statement
Planning Statement
Transport Assessment
Tree Survey
Bat and Ecological Survey
Noise Assessment
Supporting Visualisations
A report documenting the Evolution of the Scheme
Financial Development Appraisal
BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE
The applicants have stated that this application is driven by the need to find a solution to the
retention and redevelopment of a Masonic Hall on the site. They state that the physical state
of the existing Hall has been in steady decline over a number of years and that recently
commissioned surveys concluded that the building is becoming increasingly unsound. The
total cost of remedying the building’s structural and mechanical/electrical faults is given at
over £1 million. They state that without access to such funds, they must either move to
another premises in the locality or develop a new purpose-built Hall. Their preferred option
is to develop a new, more space efficient Hall on site as this provides them with the
opportunity to develop a bespoke building that fully meets their operational requirements.
They state that this can only be achieved by introducing a relatively high number of housing
units onto the application site to finance the redevelopment.
SITE HISTORY
Numerous development proposals have come forward in recent years on this site. The City
Council has been engaged in a lengthy period of negotiation with developers in an attempt to
identify an acceptable approach to the redevelopment of the site. This application is the
culmination of those efforts.
Planning permission was refused on 21 October 2004 for the ‘demolition of existing Masonic
Hall and erection of a four storey building comprising 56 apartments together with
replacement Masonic Hall at basement level with associated access and landscape works’
(Ref: 04/48859/FUL) for the following reasons:
insufficient provision for open space and children’s play space;
design, scale and mass would adversely affect the character and appearance of the
area;
crime prevention;
insufficient car parking;
unacceptable impact on protected trees;
insufficient on-site open space;
unacceptable outlook from ground floor flats;
unsatisfactory information submitted on the potential for noise nuisance;
unsatisfactory information submitted on the potential impacts on highway safety.
A second application was submitted in December 2005 that sought outline planning
permission for the siting, design and means of access to a new Masonic Hall and the erection
of 49 apartments (Ref: 05/51917/OUT). This application was subsequently withdrawn
following objections from local residents at a public consultation event on 15 February 2006,
to allow for revisions to be made to the scheme.
CONSULTATIONS
Strategic Director of Environmental Services - No objection in principle providing conditions
are attached to any consent to secure the following:
hours of construction works and operations be limited to protect the amenity of
neighbouring residents;
noise from fixed plant and machinery is limited to protect neighbouring residents
from noise nuisance;
adequate glazing and ventilation be installed to mitigate the effects of road traffic
noise to protect the amenity of future occupiers; and
the submission of a detailed site investigation report, including appropriate mitigation
measures, be submitted, approved in writing and implemented in full prior to first
occupation to address on-site gas and ground contamination; and
that the proposed Masonic Lodge’s hours of operation be restricted to protect
residential amenity;
that a noise mitigation strategy addressing noise emanating from the proposed Hall be
submitted and approved in writing before development commences and thereafter
implemented in full.
United Utilities – No objection in principle. Advice is provided.
The Environment Agency – No objection in principle. Advice is provided
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Officer – No objection in principle but
wishes to see private garden areas fenced and gated to ensure visitors are kept to the entrance
fronts of the buildings.
Greater Manchester Ecology Unit – Commenting on the submitted Bat and Ecological
Survey, state that despite being carried out by a suitably qualified surveyor, the bat survey
was not comprehensive in scope due the time of year the survey was carried out and the fact
that the roof space and cellar were not fully inspected. Nonetheless, the surveyor concluded,
“there are a multitude of potential roosting places for the pipistrelle bat associated with the
exterior of the building… [and that]…the likelihood of some use … [of the building]…is fairly
high’. The survey also highlighted that two bat species have been recorded in the area and on
the development site itself.
All species of bats and their roost sites are specially protected and on that basis they
recommend that further survey work for bats be required, and if found, appropriate mitigation
measures be agreed in writing before development commences and subsequently
implemented in full.
As all nesting birds, their eggs and their young are legally protected; it is also recommended
that any vegetation or tree removal works required be carried out outside the optimum birdnesting season (March to July inclusive) unless nesting birds have been shown to be absent.
Ellesmere Park Residents Association – No response to date.
PUBLICITY
The application has been advertised by way of site and press notices.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
21-23A (odds) Half Edge Lane, Eccles
29-53 (odds) Half Edge Lane, Eccles
40-44 (evens) Half Edge Lane, Eccles
60-64 (evens) Half Edge Lane, Eccles
Flats 1-17 (inclusive) 25 Half Edge Lane, Eccles
Clarendon Business Centre, 38 Half Edge Lane, Eccles
2-36 (evens) Preston Avenue, Eccles
19-29 (odds) Preston Avenue, Eccles
33-61 (odds) Preston Avenue, Eccles
4-9 (inclusive) Crawley Avenue, Eccles
1-11 (inclusive) Doughty Avenue, Eccles
1-7 (inclusive) Emerson Avenue, Eccles
Flat 7, Firwood Court, Ellesmere Road, Eccles
2 Bindloss Avenue, Eccles
26-52 (evens) Bindloss Avenue, Eccles
3 Bindloss Avenue, Eccles
9-31 (odds) Bindloss Avenue, Eccles
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 10 letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The
following issues have been raised: Loss of trees will have a detrimental visual impact and result in a loss of privacy
Design not in keeping with surroundings in terms of scale, massing, height and
density and character
Increased traffic generation resulting in additional demand for on-street car parking to
the detriment of highway safety
Noise nuisance particularly in respect of the Masonic Hall itself
Overlooking and loss of privacy
Accuracy of submitted plans
The need for additional flats/apartments in the area is questioned
The proposal would lead to an oversupply of apartments in the area
Visual impact of blank gable facing the 44 Half Edge Lane
Loss of sunlight and daylight
Accuracy of submitted Transport Assessment
Loss of TV Reception
Drainage capacity questioned
Loss of trees and impact on remaining trees
Poor state of the public footpath on Half Edge Lane in front of the application site
making access for people with disabilities difficult
Traffic calming required on Half Edge Lane
Negative impact on property values
Loss of overspill car parking facility for Hope Hospital
Construction works may have an adverse effect on neighbouring properties
Light pollution created by vehicle headlights on the site
Despite submitting an objection to the proposal as a whole, one local resident did welcome
the replacement of the Masonic Hall that they consider an eyesore.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
The following policies from the adopted RSS are considered to be of relevance:
DP1 – Economy in the use of Land and Buildings
UR4 – Setting Targets for the Recycling of Land and Buildings
UR7 – Regional Housing Provision
ER13 – Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
None
Other policies: ST11 – Location of New Development
ST12 – Development Density
ST14 – Global Environment
DES1 – Respecting Context
DES2 – Circulation and Movement
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES10 – Design and Crime
H1- Provision of New Housing Development
H2 – Managing the Supply of Housing
H4 – Affordable Housing
H8 – Open Space Provision Associated with New Housing
Development
A1 – Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
A8 – Impact of Development of the Highway Network
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments
Policy EN10 – Protection of Species
Policy EN13 – Protected Trees
Policy EN17 – Pollution Control
Policy R1 – Protection of Recreation Land and Facilities
Policy R2 – Provision of Recreation Land and Facilities
DEV5 – Planning Conditions and Obligations
OTHER LOCAL PLANNING POLICY AND GUIDANCE
Ellesmere Park Supplementary Planning Document
Housing Planning Guidance
Salford Greenspace Strategy
Design and Crime Supplementary Planning Document
Trees and Development Supplementary Planning Document
Nature Conservation and Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document
DRAFT SUBMITTED REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
The following policies of the Draft RSS – The North West Plan (March 2006) are considered
to be of relevance:
DP1 – Regional Development Principles
L4 - Regional Housing Provision
EM16 – Energy Conservation and Efficiency
EM17 – Renewable Energy
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are whether the principle of the proposed
development is acceptable; whether the density proposed is acceptable; whether an acceptable
mix of residential units is proposed; whether the design of the building is acceptable; whether
there would be an unacceptable impact on the amenity of users and neighbouring residents;
whether the applicant has adequately issues relating to crime prevention; whether the
proposed access arrangements and level of car, motorcycle and cycle parking are acceptable;
whether there would be an acceptable contribution towards open space and environmental
improvements in the vicinity; whether the proposed development would result in the
unacceptable loss of, or damage to, protected trees; whether the ecological impact of the
proposal is acceptable; whether the loss of the existing bowling green is acceptable in policy
terms and whether the proposed development complies with other relevant policies of the City
of Salford Unitary Development Plan. I shall deal with each of the issues in turn below.
Principle of the Redevelopment of the Site
UDP Policy ST11 seeks to ensure that new development is located on the most sustainable
sites within the City and that less sustainable sites are only brought forward where necessary.
The re-use and conversion of existing buildings is made a priority followed by previously
developed land in locations that are well served by a variety of means of transport and are
accessible to housing, employment, services and other infrastructure.
Policy H2 requires the release of land for housing development to be managed in accordance
with the sequential approach set out in Policy ST11.
RSS Policy DP1 requires economy in the use of land and buildings. It states that development
plans should adopt a sequential approach to meeting housing needs as follows: firstly, the
effective use of existing buildings and infrastructure within urban areas; secondly, the use of
previously developed land; and finally the development of previously undeveloped land,
where it would avoid areas of important open space, is well located in relation to houses, jobs,
other services and infrastructure and is or can be made accessible by public transport, walking
or cycling. RSS Policy UR4 adds to these objectives stating that:
“The redevelopment and re-use of vacant sites and buildings within
urban areas should be a priority…[and that]…additional development
should be encouraged to make best use of such sites in sustainable
locations”
Policy DP1 of Draft RSS also encourages the effective use of land, buildings and
infrastructure and advocates the sequential approach to meeting development needs, as
outlined in Adopted RSS Policy DP1.
“
Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (PPS3), provides a definition of previously
development land:
”
Previously-developed land is that which is or was occupied by a
permanent structure including the curtilage of the developed land and
any associated fixed surface infrastructure
The re-use of the existing building is not considered viable due to its poor state of repair.
Conversion to residential use would also result in unacceptably low densities given the size of
the plot. Nonetheless, the principle of development on the site is considered appropriate and
performs well against UDP Policy ST11 given the predominance of residential uses in the
surrounding area and that fact that the site is within walking distance of key public transport
infrastructure, including Eccles Railway Station, Eccles Transport Interchange (Metrolink and
numerous Bus Services) and the Eccles Old Road Quality Bus Corridor, together with the
facilities and services provided by Eccles Town Centre.
Given the fact that the proposal involves the development of previously developed land in a
sustainable location, the redevelopment of the site is supported in principle insofar as it would
accord with the sequential approach to development as set out in PPS1, PPS3, Policy DP1 of
RSS and UDP Policies ST11 and H2 and Policy DP1 of the Draft RSS.
Principle of Proposed Uses
”
“
UDP Policy H2 seeks to ensure that an adequate supply of new housing is provided across the
City in accordance with targets set out in the Regional Spatial Strategy. In response, the
policy seeks to restrict housing development in areas where there is evidence of an
unacceptable actual or potential oversupply of housing .
Draft RSS Policy L4 increases the City’s annual rate of housing provision to 1,600 dwellings
per annum, a threefold increase from current provision set out in RSS Policy UR7 at 530
dwellings per annum.
The applicants have stated that the continued use of the existing building as a Masonic Hall is
not viable due to its poor state of repair and the scale of the costs associated with returning it
to acceptable modern standards. They go on to state that developing part of the site for
housing is the only way to secure the development of replacement facilities.
As a Masonic Hall is a lawful, established use on the site, the provision of a replacement
facility is not in question however, the introduction of housing onto the site is subject to the
requirements of UDP Policy H2.
At the current time there is no clear evidence of an oversupply of housing in this area. In
addition, evidence at the national, regional and level suggests that household growth is likely
to continue, and as a result Draft RSS Policy L4 seeks to significantly increase the City’s
annual housing target. The provision of 42 housing units on the application site is therefore
considered to be in full accordance with UDP Policy H2.
Density
UDP Policy ST12 states that development within the regional centre, town centres, and close
to key public transport routes and interchanges will be required to achieve a high density
appropriate to the location and context.
UDP Policy H1 states that new housing development should be built at appropriate densities
which will be no less than 30 dwellings per hectare throughout the City and no less than 50
dwellings per hectare on sites within or adjoining designated mixed use areas, town and
neighbourhood centres and major transport nodes along good quality public transport
corridors. It goes on to state that these standards may be varied, having regard to other
criteria listed in the policy.
…
“
The proposed development creates a density of 70 dwellings per hectare. Whilst more than
double the minimum citywide requirement, the proposed density is considered acceptable
given the site’s sustainable location, particularly in respect of its proximity to Eccles Town
Centre and its associated rail, bus and Metrolink facilities. This suitability is reflected in the
higher densities of numerous developments nearby such as Oak Mount directly opposite the
site at 100 dwellings per hectare. The flexible and responsive approach to housing densities
set out in UDP Policy H1 is further endorsed in national planning policy. The recently
published Planning Policy Statement 3 – Housing (PPS3) states that higher densities:
when well designed and built in the right location can enhance the
character and quality of an area. Successful intensification need not
mean high rise development or low quality accommodation with
inappropriate space. Similarly, in Conservation Areas and other local
areas of special character where, if proper attention is paid to achieving
”
good design, new development opportunities can be taken without
adverse impacts on their character and appearance
Although the density proposed is higher than average in this part of the City, I am satisfied
that a high quality design solution has been found that successfully integrates the
development into its surroundings, in accordance with the policies contained within the
Ellesmere Park SPD that seek to protect the special character of the area (see below). On that
basis, and given the site’s sustainable location, I consider the proposed density to be in
accordance with UDP Policies ST12 and H1 and therefore have no objection in principle to
the application in this regard.
Housing Type and Size
UDP Policy H1 states that new housing development should contribute to the provision of a
balanced mix of dwellings within the local area in terms of size and type.
Planning Guidance for Housing has replaced the draft Housing Supplementary Planning
Document (SPD) and was recently adopted by the Council. Whilst the guidance does not
form part of the Local Development Framework, it is a material consideration in the
determination of planning applications and specifically supplements UDP Policy H1. The
guidance seeks to secure a sustainable mix of dwelling to meet housing need and contains a
number of specific policies discussed in turn below:
Policy HOU1 - Type of New Dwellings
This policy states that the large majority of new dwellings in this part of the City should be in
the form of houses rather than apartments to reflect the general character of the area and the
generally lower levels of accessibility compared to other parts of the City. The policy goes on
to allow alternative approaches on individual sites where there are specific circumstances that
justify this and advocates apartments as the most appropriate form of new housing in the
City’s defined Town and Neighbourhood Centres to help maximise the number of people who
have excellent access to local facilities.
Given the fact that all the proposed dwellings are in the form of apartments, the proposals
would only accord with this policy if exceptional circumstances were shown to exist that
justify taking an alternative approach. Paragraph 4.14 recognises that there will be individual
sites where particular circumstances indicate deviating from the aforementioned approach and
lists a number of examples where this may be the case including the urban design context, the
physical characteristics of the site, high levels of public transport accessibility and the overall
provision of a broad range of dwelling types.
In this case, it is considered that exceptional circumstances exist that justify accepting the
development of apartments on the site. The reasons for reaching this recommendation are as
follows:
One of the two main reasons for this policy is to reflect the generally lower levels of
accessibility compared with other parts of the City. The site is highly accessible in
terms of its proximity to both public transport infrastructure and local facilities being
within easy walking distance of Eccles Town Centre (approximately 400 metres to
the south) and its associated railway station, Metrolink and Bus Transport
Interchange and the Eccles Old Road Quality Bus Corridor. In addition, Half Edge
Lane itself is also served by two bus services (No.s 19 and 22). This high degree of
accessibility is comparable and in some instances preferable to many areas of the
Regional Centre where apartments are identified as being the most appropriate form
of housing provision.
The second reason for this policy approach is to protect the existing character of more
suburban areas. In this instance, following lengthy negotiations with council officers
over the past couple of years, the proposed development is considered to be a high
quality design solution that positively responds to its setting and context ensuring the
character of this part of Ellesmere Park is protected (see below). Indeed, larger
buildings, many of which have been developed as or converted into apartments, are
an established feature in this part of Ellesmere Park, including the residential
buildings immediately to the south and north of the application site.
The provision of 42 apartments on the site is a form of enabling development needed
to fund the provision of a new, purpose built Masonic Hall. The provision of houses
on the site would inevitably result in far lower densities rendering the scheme
unviable. The applicant has submitted a financial appraisal to substantiate their
claims that has been reviewed by the Council’s consultant surveyors who confirmed
that the proposals, though profitable, provide a significantly lower return than would
normally be expected. These findings should be understood in the context that the
Masonic Lodge would not develop the site themselves, rather an independent
developer would develop the site and in return the Masonic Lodge would receive the
replacement Hall.
The proposed development includes a broad mix of dwelling sizes. Of the proposed
42 apartments, 3 would have three bedrooms (7%), 32 would have two bedrooms
(76%), 7 would have one bedroom (17%) and 29 would have a gross internal
floorspace over 57 square metres (69%). All of the proposed units would have a
private terrace or balcony.
As discussed above, officers have been in lengthy discussions with the applicant over
the past couple of years to identify an appropriate solution to the future development
of the site long before the publication of the initial Draft Housing SPD document.
The proposals were therefore substantially developed, following the advice of
officers, long before the adoption of this guidance on 20th December 2006. The
application itself was received on the 3rd October 2006.
For the reasons stated above, I consider there to be exceptional circumstances associated with
this application that justify an alternative approach to that set out in Policy HOU1 of the
Housing Planning Guidance and therefore consider the proposed development of 42
apartments in this location acceptable in this case.
Policy HOU2 – Size of New Dwellings
This policy states that where apartments are proposed they should provide a broad mix of
dwelling sizes in terms of the number of bedrooms and their net residential floorspace. It
goes on to state that small dwellings should not predominate and a significant proportion of
three bedroom apartments should be provided wherever practicable.
The proposed housing mix is considered to satisfy these policy requirements in that balanced
mix of apartments have been provided. Of the 42 apartments, 3 would have three bedrooms
(7%), 32 would have two bedrooms (76%), 7 would have one bedroom (17%) and 29 would
have a gross internal floorspace over 57 square metres (69%). All of the proposed units
would have a private terrace or balcony.
Given exceptional circumstances exist that justify an alternative approach to housing type, I
consider the requirements of UDP Policy H1 and the Housing Planning Guidance to have
been met in relation to housing type and size and I therefore have no objection to the proposal
in this regard.
Affordable Housing
UDP Policy H1 states that new housing development should contribute to the provision of a
balanced mix of dwellings within the local area in terms of tenure and affordability.
UDP Policy H4 states that in areas where there is a demonstrable lack of affordable housing
to meet local needs, developers will be required, by negotiation with the Council, to provide
affordable housing, of appropriate types, on all residential sites over 1 hectare or in housing
developments of more than 25 dwellings.
Policy HOU3 of the Councils Housing Planning Guidance supplements UDP Policy H4 by
stating that on all residential sites over 1 hectare, irrespective of the number of dwellings, or
in housing developments of 25 or more dwellings, 20% of the dwellings should be in the form
of affordable housing. A lower proportion of affordable housing may be permitted where
material considerations indicate that this would be appropriate. Exceptional circumstances
include where there are exceptional costs associated with the development or where the
scheme was substantially developed before the adoption of the Guidance on 20 December
2006.
In this case both of the exceptions cited above apply.
Firstly, the proposed development is a form of enabling development in that the provision of
42 apartments on the site is needed to fund the provision of a new, purpose built Masonic
Hall, that is in itself an exceptional cost associated with the development. Similarly, the
development of a high quality, bespoke residential building and the provision of a large area
of undercroft car parking to ensure the character of Ellesmere Park is duly protected also
significantly raise costs to a high level relative to the value of the site. The applicants
therefore claim that the requirement for on-site affordable housing provision or equivalent
commuted sums would render the scheme unviable.
In response to the Guidance and other policy requirements, the applicant submitted a financial
appraisal to substantiate their claims. The appraisal has been reviewed by the Council’s
consultant surveyors who confirmed that the proposals, though profitable, provide a
significantly lower return than would normally and reasonably be expected. These findings
should be understood in the context that the Masonic Lodge would not develop the site
themselves, rather an independent developer would develop the site and in return the Masonic
Lodge would receive the replacement Hall. I am therefore satisfied that the introduction of an
affordable requirement would render the scheme unviable and the applicant’s claims are
accurate.
Secondly, as already discussed, officers have been engaged in a lengthy period of negotiation
with the applicants in an attempt to identify an acceptable approach to the redevelopment of
the site and this application represents the culmination of those efforts. Negotiations were
well advanced prior to the publication of the Draft Housing SPD and proceeded on the basis
that affordable housing provision would not be required and the proposals were developed on
that basis. Following the withdrawal of a previous scheme, the application was resubmitted
on 3rd October 2006; over two months prior to the adoption of the Housing Planning
Guidance on 20th December 2006. I therefore consider that the scheme, having the benefit of
substantial pre-application discussion and amendment, was ‘substantially developed’ before
the adoption of the guidance.
In conclusion, it is considered that the scheme would be rendered unviable if affordable
housing provision were required and that the proposals were substantially developed before
the adoption of the guidance. I therefore do not consider it appropriate to secure an element
of affordable housing in this case and therefore have no objection to the application in this
regard.
Design, Scale and Massing
UDP Policy H1 states that new housing development should create a high quality residential
environment and be consistent with other UDP policies.
UDP 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.
UDP Policy DES2 requires the design and layout of new development to be fully accessible
to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists to, through and around the
site, enable pedestrians to navigate their way through an area by providing appropriate views,
vistas and transport links, enable safe, direct and convenient access to public transport
facilities and other local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians,
cyclists and other road users.
UDP Policy DES4 outlines that development which adjoins public space shall be designed to
have a strong and positive relationship with that space. In particular buildings should clearly
define the space around them, including streets through the continuity of street frontages and
building lines for example and the visual impact of car parking should be minimised.
UDP Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a
satisfactory level of amenity, in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout.
Development which would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or
users of other developments will not normally be permitted.
Although not within the Ellesmere Park Conservation Area, the application site falls within
Sub Area 3 of the recently adopted Ellesmere Park SPD. This document defines the special
character of the area and stresses the importance of particular features such as trees on street
frontages, front gardens and brick and stone front boundary walls. The following policies are
considered to be of particular relevance:
Policy EP5 – Layout and Scale of New Developments states that development should retain
the spacious character of the area in term of the scale, massing and site coverage of buildings,
the spacing of buildings to retain visual breaks and the creation and retention of amenity
space around buildings. It goes on to stress the need to reflect the typical layout of existing
plots in terms of retaining a strong building line set well behind boundary walls and front
garden areas and ensure building heights are consistent with surrounding developments.
Policy EP6 – Building Details and Materials states that building elevations should incorporate
design details to avoid featureless elevations. The use of traditional Victorian building
materials and the need to incorporate building design details that characterise the area
including red brick, stone detailing and substantial brick and stone boundary walls.
Policy EP7 – Highways, Boundaries and Front Gardens states that the treatment of highways,
boundaries and front gardens within new developments should follow the typical pattern of
development. In this area (sub-area 3), this consists of, working from the road to the building,
pavement, substantial brick or stone wall with stone cappings, trees or shrubbery planted
directly behind the wall and then front gardens up to the building line.
Policy EP8 – Provision of Private Amenity Space states that apartment developments should
provide useable private communal gardens on the basis of 18 square metres for the first two
apartments, plus 5 square metres for each additional apartment.
Policy EP9 – Car Parking, Cycle Parking and Servicing states underground car parking
should be investigated for new built apartment developments and that surface car parking
should be located at the side or rear of new developments.
Policy EP10 – Trees and Landscaping states that existing mature trees and landscaping should
be retained where practicable and that new trees should be provided directly behind boundary
walls fronting the highway where there are existing gaps in provision.
Policy EP11 – Bin Storage states that sufficient space should be provided in all developments
to accommodate recycling and domestic waste bin storage in a visually unobtrusive location.
Despite receiving numerous objections from local residents on design grounds, I consider the
design of the proposed development to be a high quality, bespoke design solution that
successfully respects and protects the character and appearance of Ellesmere Park, despite the
relatively high density proposed. The application has been the subject of extensive preapplication discussions and negotiations with officers to address the shortcomings and
fundamental flaws in previous applications and the views of local residents were sought at a
public consultation event arranged by the applicant. I therefore have no objection in principle
to the development on design grounds, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
I will deal with each element of the proposed design, in turn below.
Layout
Currently, the proportion of the site occupied by the existing Masonic Hall is relatively low
and given its central position, set well back from the established building line, and the high
degree of enclosure provided by the high brick boundary wall and line of protected, mature
trees along the Half Edge Lane frontage, the visual relationship between the existing building
and the street is uncharacteristically weak.
The proposed layout of the development addresses this irregular visual break in the
streetscene by ensuring the front elevation of the apartment building is aligned with and
strengthens the established building line on Half Edge Lane whilst at the same time ensuring
the existing brick wall (albeit partially lowered to accommodate adequate visibility splays),
mature tree-lined boundary and front garden area are retained, in full accordance with Policies
EP5, EP7, EP10 of the Ellesmere Park SPD and UDP Policies DES1 and DES4.
Similarly, despite the higher density and site coverage, the position of buildings on the site
remain in a central position, to retain visual breaks between the proposed buildings and
surrounding properties, ensuring extensive areas of soft landscaping and the protected
boundary trees are retained. This ensures the character and appearance of Ellesmere Park is
protected and the amenity of neighbouring properties is safeguarded in full accordance with
the City Council’s adopted aspect distances. Indeed, despite the proposed density and amount
of built form, the proportion of soft landscaped area would remain at a similar level to the
existing layout due to the provision of undercroft car parking allowing for the creation of
private outdoor amenity space above in the form of a courtyard garden between the two
buildings. This ensures the minimum amount of private amenity space required by Policy
EP8 of the Ellesmere Park SPD is far exceeded insofar as 236sqm is required and over 1000
square metres is proposed.
The provision of extensive undercroft car parking ensures the visual impact of parking is
minimised in accordance with Policy EP9 of the Ellesmere Park SPD and effectively removes
the sea of surface car parking that currently visually dominates the site.
The visual impact of bin storage would be effectively minimised through the provision of
waste storage areas in the undercroft parking area. On collection days, bins would be
transferred to secured and well-screened refuse collection bay at the side of the apartment
building near the vehicular entrance on Half Edge Lane allowing for easy and efficient
collection. This strategy is considered an acceptable strategy in full accordance with Policy
EP11 of the Ellesmere Park SPD.
Scale and Massing
Although the proposed scale and mass of the proposed development is greater than the
existing Masonic Hall and surrounding buildings (with the exception of Eccleshome
immediately to the south) the detailed design, layout and retention of extensive areas of soft
landscaping on the periphery of the site ensure that a positive relationship between the
proposed development and surroundings is maintained and that the character and appearance
of Ellesmere Park is protected.
At four storeys, the height of the proposed apartment building is higher than most of the
surrounding buildings, whilst the replacement Masonic Hall at the rear of the site drops down
to two storeys and is considerably lower than the adjacent Eccleshome residential care home.
The roof of the proposed flat block is only 2 metres higher than that of the existing Masonic
Lodge and only slightly exceeds the height of the four-storey building directly adjacent to the
application site on the opposite side of Half Edge Lane. As discussed above, although the
height of the proposed buildings often exceeds the height of neighbouring buildings,
particularly in respect of the bungalow at 44 Half Edge Lane, however I consider the height
differential to be adequately offset by the space between buildings and the screening provided
by the dense line of mature, protected trees along the north, east and western boundaries.
Opportunities to further screen the proposed development will be taken at the reserved
matters stage when detailed landscaping proposals are considered, particularly in respect of
the bungalow at 44 Half Edge Lane.
Similarly, the visual impact of the mass and width of the larger apartment building is
effectively mitigated by the screening provided by the dense line of mature, protected trees
along the north, east and western boundaries, a deeply recessed third floor roof level and the
boundary wall on the Half Edge Lane, whilst the mass of proposed replacement Masonic Hall
building is similar to that of the larger Eccleshome building to the south. In addition, the
scale and mass of the building on the Half Edge Lane elevation is further softened by the
introduction of a deeply recessed glazed link at the main pedestrian entrance point that
effectively splits the building in two to mirror the characteristic plot widths of other properties
on Half Edge Lane.
Given the above, I consider the scale and mass of the proposed building to be acceptable and
in accordance with UDP Policies H1, DES1 and DES7 and Policy EP5 of the Ellesmere Park
SPD.
External Appearance and Materials
The proposed buildings are bespoke and have a distinctively modern design. Despite having
a contrasting architectural style to the mixture of Edwardian, 1930’s, 1960’s and 1970’s two
and three storey detached, semi-detached and terraced houses surrounding the site, I consider
the appearance of the proposed building to be a high quality, modern, yet discreet intervention
that would add visual and architectural interest to the street scene.
The apartment block fronting Half Edge Lane presents itself as two blocks widely separated
from one another by a deeply recessed, full height glass link designed to reflect the boundary
trees and sky when seen from Half Edge Lane. The retention of the brick front boundary wall
and mature boundary trees greatly softens the visual impact of the development helps ensure
it blends in to the streetscape. The skyline is fragmented by a deeply modelled and recessed
top floor.
Despite being a distinctively modern design, the detailing, elevational treatment and palette of
materials chosen make reference to the traditional Victorian vernacular that characterises the
area, in accordance with Policy EP6 of the Ellesmere Park SPD. The two dominant facing
materials are brick and artstone that are carried through to both buildings to ensure strong
architectural continuity. Both buildings share a similarly scaled stone box feature defining
principal windows in the case of the Hall and living room windows and balconies in the case
of the residential block. The artstone throughout the scheme is of a Portland Stone colour
with a sepia mortar whilst the facing brickwork is an antique Victorian red with anthracite
mortar. Above the heavy projecting cornice, the discrete, deeply recessed upper floor would
be clad in grey coloured panels that make reference to the predominance of natural slate
roofs, notable on the better quality buildings in Ellesmere Park. All window frames, doors
and balcony fronts would be dark grey, powder-coated steel and glazing would be generally
clear. Where glazing is required to be obscure, either for certain windows or terrace
screening, translucent glass blocks are proposed. The columns and projecting eaves are to be
pre-fabricated in GRP and coloured to match the artstone features. Externally, the roadway
would be finished in block paviors to match the general tone of the facing brickwork whilst
the pedestrian ramp giving access to the residential building on the Half Edge Lane frontage
would be a timber structure set informally within the swathe of boundary trees.
Subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions, I am satisfied the external appearance of
the proposed development would be modern yet high quality and sympathetic addition to the
area adding quality and value to the built environment in accordance with UDP Policies H1,
DES1 and DES 4 and Policies EP5 and EP6 of the Ellesmere Park SPD.
As well as specifying the proposed materials in the Design and Access and on plans, the
applicant has submitted samples of proposed materials for approval. Although broadly
satisfied, I remain of the opinion that in some instances, the colour of the proposed materials
should be revised to improve consistency with the materials that make an important
contribution to Ellesmere Park’s character, particularly in respect of the colour of the
proposed brick type and panels at third floor level. I therefore recommend that a condition be
attached to any consent requiring the submission and written approval of materials,
notwithstanding the approved plans.
I have a letter from the occupier of the bungalow at 44 Half Edge Lane objecting to the
featureless blank, side elevation of the residential building facing their property. Although
this elevation is blank to safeguard their privacy and prevent overlooking, I agree with their
assertion that the blank gable adversely affects their outlook and has a negative townscape
impact. I therefore recommend that a condition be attached to any consent requiring the
partial redesign of the gable to ‘break-up’ its’ mass and soften its visual impact by introducing
detail without compromising the privacy of the residents of 44 Half Edge Lane.
I also recommend that a condition be attached to any consent requiring the submission and
written approval of details of the rooftop ventilation shafts, recessed window openings, the
glazed-link on the Half Edge Lane frontage, balcony balustrades and railings, balcony privacy
screen walls and the undercroft car park roller shutter doors.
Amenity
UDP Policy H1 states that new housing development should provide a high quality residential
environment and an adequate level of amenity and be consistent with other UDP policies.
UDP 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.
UDP Policy EN17 states that development proposals that would be likely to cause or
contribute towards a significant increase in pollution to the air, water or soil, or by reason of
noise, odour, artificial light or vibration, will not be permitted unless they include mitigation
measures commensurate with the scale and impact of the development.
Privacy and Overlooking
The proposed development has been designed in full accordance with Council’s separation
distances. The dense line of mature, protected, boundary trees further mitigates the impact of
the development in privacy terms. In addition, balconies and verandas either face into the site
or face the trees on the northern boundary and have privacy screens. Private outdoor amenity
space is limited to terraces at ground floor level on the eastern elevation facing Preston
Avenue. Despite the objections received, I therefore have no objection to the application in
this regard.
Loss of Sunlight and Daylight
Given the position and orientation of the building in relation to neighbouring properties and
the presence of the dense line of mature protected trees along the boundary I am satisfied that
the proposed development would not result in an undue loss of daylight and sunlight entering
the habitable room windows of neighbouring properties. Despite the objections received, I
therefore have no objection to the application in this regard.
Light pollution
I have received an objection from the residents of 61 Preston Avenue on the grounds that due
to the layout of access roads, headlights from cars visiting the site would create light pollution
in their home. Having revisited the plans on receiving the objection I find no reason why that
would be the case given the distance and relationship between their property and the nearest
access road. I therefore consider the objection unsustainable. Details of external lighting will
be assessed in detail at the reserved matters stage when landscaping proposals are considered.
TV Reception
I have received objections on the grounds that the proposed development would unduly affect
TV reception received at neighbouring properties. Given the physical relationship between
the proposed development and neighbouring properties I consider it appropriate and necessary
to attach a condition to any consent requiring the submission, written approval and
implementation of an appropriate survey detailing what, if any, measures are required to
ensure TV Reception is not unduly affected in accordance with PPG8 – Telecommunications.
Impact of Construction Phase
Due to the proximity of residential properties, I consider it necessary to attach a condition
requiring the submission, written approval and implementation of a site operating scheme.
The Director of Environmental Services has requested that hours of construction works be
limited to 08:00 am to 18:00 pm Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays and it
is recommended that the condition be imposed to the effect.
Noise
I have received numerous objections regarding problems of noise nuisance particularly in
respect of the Masonic Hall itself.
The applicant submitted a noise assessment in support of the application. The Assessment
concludes that:
noise insulation of the building envelope is required;
a recommendation has been made for external noise criteria to be used for the control
of noise from the substation and external mechanical and electrical equipment, both
for the residential development and the Masonic Hall;
the increase in noise generated by road traffic entering and leaving the site would be
imperceptible, particularly given the majority of car parking would provided
underground.
The Director of Environmental Services has reviewed the assessment and has expressed
concern that noise from the new Masonic Hall may impact upon new and existing residents,
particularly during functions involving amplified music, and that other noise sources of
concern include plant and machinery and disturbance during the construction phase. In
response, a number of conditions to control noise nuisance are recommended.
In relation to noise from the Masonic Hall itself, the applicant indicated on the application
form that they are not seeking to increase existing, lawful hours of operation set out in the
terms of their licence. These are:
11:00 hrs to 23:50 hrs Mondays to Saturdays; and
12:00 hrs to 22:50 hrs Sundays.
The Director of Environmental Services is satisfied that residential amenity will not be
adversely affected by the proposed development subject to the imposition of conditions
limiting the replacement Hall’s hours of operation to the above and a requirement that a noise
mitigation strategy, addressing noise emanating from the Hall, be submitted and approved in
writing before development commences and thereafter implemented in full. It should be
noted that the acoustic insulation offered by the proposed replacement Hall together with its
undercroft parking facility are likely to lead to a significant reduction in the level of noise
generated on-site by the use.
In relation to noise from plant and machinery it is recommended a condition be imposed
requiring noise from fixed plant and machinery associated with both buildings be at least 5 dB
below the background level at the faēade of the nearest noise sensitive properties at any time.
In respect of road traffic noise, it recommended that a condition be attached to any consent
requiring acoustic glazing (minimum RW of 33dB) and ventilation systems (minimum DneW
of 31dB) be installed to all habitable room windows overlooking Half Edge Lane and
confirmed in a site completion report prior to first occupation.
It is also recommended that a condition be imposed limiting hours of construction (see
above).
Subject to the imposition of the conditions detailed above, I have no objection to the
application on noise grounds.
Contaminated Land
Policy EN16 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,
identifying the nature and extent of the contamination involved, the risk it poses to future
users/occupiers of the site, and the practical remedial measures proposed to deal with the
contamination.
Although the site is considered to be low risk in respect of contaminated land, the Director of
Environmental Services requires a minimum of a desktop study to be completed regarding
contamination in relation to this site. I therefore recommend that a condition be imposed
accordingly. I am satisfied that, subject to compliance with the condition, there would be no
unacceptable detrimental impact as a result of the existing ground conditions and I consider
that the application accords with the above policy.
Crime Prevention
UDP Policy DES10 states that development will not be permitted unless it is designed to
discourage crime, anti-social behaviour and the fear of crime. Further detailed policies and
guidance are provided in the adopted Design and Crime Supplementary Planning Document.
In accordance, with the Design and Crime SPD, the Greater Manchester Police Architectural
Liaison Officer (ALO) has reviewed the proposals and has raised no objection in principle but
wishes to see private garden areas fenced and gated to ensure visitors are kept to the entrance
fronts of the buildings. Issues relating to the provision of fences and gates within the site will
be revisited in detail at the reserved matters stage when detailed landscaping are submitted for
approval. The ALO’s comments have been relayed to the applicant. I have no objection to
the application on crime prevention grounds at this stage.
Access and Parking Provision
UDP Policy A1 – Transport Assessments and Travel Plans states that planning applications
for developments which would give rise to significant transport implications will not be
permitted unless they are accompanied by a transport assessment and, where appropriate, a
travel plan.
UDP Policy A2 – Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled requires development proposals to
make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, pedestrians and
cyclists through the protection and improvement of key routes.
UDP Policy A8 – Impact of Development on the Highway Network states that development
will not be permitted where it would compromise highway safety by virtue of traffic
generation and access.
UDP Policy A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle, and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
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.
UDP Policy DES2 – Circulation and Movement requires the design and layout of new
development to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and
cyclists to, through and around the site, enable pedestrians to navigate their way through an
area by providing appropriate views, vistas and transport links, enable safe, direct and
convenient access to public transport facilities and other local amenities and minimise
potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.
Vehicular and pedestrian access to both buildings would be via the existing access point on
Half Edge Lane only.
In accordance with UDP Policy A1 the applicant has submitted a Transport Assessment in
support of their application. The assessment concluded that:
the proposed development would not lead to any significant increase in 2 way traffic
flows along Half Edge Lane;
Half Edge Lane is currently operating well below its theoretical design capacity;
an analysis of the capacity of the site access with Half Edge Lane has identified no
foreseeable operational difficulties;
there is no history of any accidents associated with the existing site access;
proposed improvements to the site access involving the partial lowering of the
boundary wall on Half Edge Lane and the realignment of the kerb line reducing the
carriageway width will increase visibility and improve highway safety;
the site is in a sustainable location with excellent facilities nearby and numerous
frequent public transport links to surrounding employment areas; and
as such there can be no overriding highways reason for refusal on this site.
Given the above and despite objections received, I am satisfied that the proposals will not
give rise to any significant transport implications or be to the detriment of highway safety in
accordance with UDP Policies A1, A8 and DES2 subject to the imposition of a condition
requiring full details of the proposed alterations to the access on Half Edge Lane to be
submitted, approved in writing and implemented in full prior to first occupation.
As discussed above, undercroft car parking is proposed beneath the proposed buildings
allowing the provision of a total of 105 on site car parking spaces (41 for the residential
element, 57 for the replacement Masonic Hall and seven overflow/visitor car parking spaces,
above ground, on the western boundary). A total of 10 disabled parking bays would be
provided together with 9 secure motorcycle parking spaces and 17 secure cycle parking
spaces.
Car parking provision for residential developments is assessed on a case-by case basis.
Given the site is well served by public transport, the provision of 0.98 car parking spaces per
dwelling is considered adequate. Four disabled parking bays (9.8%), one secure bicycle
locker for every 4.2 units and seven motorcycle bays are provided in accordance with
minimum standards set out in UDP Policy A10.
UDP Policy A10 specifies maximum car parking standards in relation to the Masonic Hall at
one car parking space for every eight seats with a minimum of three disabled bays or 6% of
the total number of bays, one cycle bay for every 80 seats with a minimum of two spaces and
one motorcycle bay for every 320 seats with a minimum of two spaces. These standards
have been exceeded through the provision of one car parking for every six seats, six disabled
bays (equivalent to 10.34%), one cycle space for every 50 seats and two motorcycle spaces,
equivalent to one space per 176 seats). The replacement Masonic Hall contains a total of 351
seats and the application proposes 57 car parking spaces, 6 disabled bays, 7 cycle bays and 2
motorcycle bays.
The number of car parking spaces in relation to the Masonic Hall exceeds the maximum
standards set out in UDP Policy A10, however given the objections received in relation to the
adequacy of on site parking provision particularly when functions are held at the Hall, I
consider the additional provision proposed necessary in order to alleviate on-street parking
pressures.
In the supporting Planning Statement, the applicant has provided results of a number of
surveys carried out during 2006 to assess the level of demand for car parking during a number
of different events. The survey concluded that:
an average of 33 cars are parked on the site for Masonic related events;
an average of 24 cars are parked on the site during functions held in the day;
an average of 12 cars are parked at the Hall for weddings, parties and or ladies
evenings; and
the majority of people visiting the site for weddings, parties and/or ladies evenings
tend to arrive by taxi.
Nonetheless it is acknowledged that very occasionally, events held at the Hall do generate a
demand for parking that exceeds the level of proposed provision. Although the exception
rather than the norm, given the above, I therefore consider the increased level of parking
provided to serve the needs of replacement Hall to be justified in this case. I therefore have
no objection to the level of proposed parking provision.
As mentioned above, the existing car park is currently used as an overspill car park for Hope
Hospital. I have received an objection on the grounds that the proposed development will
lead to the loss of this facility. I do not consider this to be valid grounds for refusal given
such arrangements are a private matter between the owners of the site and the hospital.
Nonetheless, given the need to ensure sufficient parking provision is made for the future
residents and users of the Hall, I consider it necessary to attach a condition requiring the
parking provision proposed to be made available before the proposed buildings are first used
or occupied and thereafter remain available for the sole use of the future residents and users
of the Hall.
In respect of disabled access, both buildings have been designed to be accessible to all
without impediment. Changes in ground level have been addressed through the provision of
gently graded ramps. Generous disabled parking facilities have been provided in the
undercroft parking areas where lifts are provided serving all floors of both buildings.
Similarly, within both buildings, doorways and circulation areas are of sufficient width to
accommodate wheelchair users. Fully accessible WCs are provided on each floor of the
proposed Hall whilst all apartments are fully accessible to disabled people. 17 apartments
(40%) have been designed to be compatible with disabled person’s occupancy. I therefore
consider the development to be in full accordance with UDP Policies A2, A10 and DES2 in
this regard.
I have received a written comment from a local resident who has stated that the poor state of
the public footpath on Half Edge Lane makes access for people with disabilities difficult.
Given that the footpath is outside the application site and not in the ownership of the
applicant, it is considered unreasonable to require the applicant to address these problems.
Nonetheless, the proposed alterations to the public footpath at the access point on Half Edge
Lane, involving the widening the pavement may help alleviate these problems.
Open Space Provision
UDP Policy H1 requires new housing development to make adequate provision for open
space and be consistent with other UDP policies.
UDP Policy H8 states that planning permission will only be granted where adequate and
appropriate provision is made for formal and informal open space and its maintenance over a
twenty-year period. Such provision is required either as part of the development or through
an equivalent financial contribution to fund off-site provision. This policy refers to access to
recreational land and facilities standards set out in UDP Policy R2.
UDP Policy DEV5 states that development that would have an adverse impact on any
interests of acknowledged importance, or would result in a material increase in the need for
infrastructure, services, facilities and/or maintenance, will only be granted planning
permission subject to planning conditions or planning obligations that would ensure adequate
mitigation measures are put in place.
The Draft Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document requires major residential
developments of 10 dwellings or more to contribute towards the provision, improvement and
maintenance of open space and recreation facilities at a level of £540 per bedspace. This
figure is reduced where part of the requirements is made within the development site.
Ellesmere Park SPD Policy EP8 – Provision of Private Amenity Space states that apartment
developments should provide useable private communal gardens on the basis of 18 square
metres for the first two apartments, plus 5 square metres for each additional apartment.
As discussed above, a generous amount of outdoor private amenity space is proposed, far
exceeding the amount of required by Policy EP8 of the Ellesmere Park SPD. I therefore have
no objection to the amount of amenity space provided on site. Detailed landscaping proposals
will be considered at the reserved matters stage.
This application would generate a total of 122 bed spaces generating an open space
requirement equal to:
0.08906ha of high quality managed sports pitches;
0.0305ha of equipped children’s playspace; and
0.0488ha of amenity space and informal open space provision.
Since the proposed development is relatively small (i.e. less than 200 bed spaces) and is
located in an area with a number of existing sites available for improvement such as
Ellesmere Park Playing Fields, a financial contribution to be directed to open space
improvements in the locality of the development is considered the most appropriate form of
provision. Contributions are calculated on the basis of £540 per bedspace for provision
detailed above and its maintenance over a 20-year period. This would result in an open space
financial contribution requirement of £64,260. However, the amount of private amenity space
proposed on-site meets the amenity space and informal open space provision element of the
requirement. This reduces the financial contribution required to £59,658.
The applicant has agreed, in writing, to meet this requirement. I therefore recommend that a
condition be attached to any consent to secure the agreed contribution. As such, I am
satisfied that the application complies with UDP Policies H8 and R2.
Trees & Landscaping
UDP Policy EN13 states that development that would result in the unacceptable loss or
damage to protected trees will not be permitted. Where the loss of trees is considered
acceptable, adequate replacement provision will be required.
Ellesmere Park SPD Policy EP10 – Trees and Landscaping states that existing mature trees
and landscaping should be retained where practicable and that new trees should be provided
directly behind boundary walls fronting the highway where there are existing gaps in
provision.
The Trees and Development Supplementary Planning Document contains further policies and
guidance in relation to tree protection that includes the requirement to replace trees that are
lost on a two for one basis. Policy TD3 of the document requires a separation distance of 3.6
metres between any part of a tree and principal habitable room windows.
UDP Policy DES9 states that developments will be required to incorporate appropriate hard
and soft landscaping provision. Where landscaping is required as part of a development, it
must be of a high quality, reflect and enhance the character of the area, not detract from safety
and security, form an integral part of the development, be easily maintained, respect adjacent
land uses and wherever possible make provision for the creation of new wildlife habitats.
This application is in outline, with landscaping made a reserved matter for detailed
consideration at a later date. Nonetheless the applicant has submitted a Tree Survey and an
indicative landscaping plan in support of the application.
The proposals require the removal of 14 trees. Many of the trees on site are protected by Tree
Preservation Order (TPO) 14, which consists of 5 groups (G1 to G5). These groups are
located around the boundaries of the site. Group 1 borders the northern and eastern
boundaries and includes 47 trees of varying species; Group 2 is located along the eastern
boundary and consists of 2 Sycamore trees; Group 5 is located along the western boundary
and consists of 11 trees of various broadleaved species. Groups 3 and 4 are not within the
boundary of the site and therefore remain unaffected by the proposal.
Six of the fourteen trees to be felled are covered by the TPO, and of those six, five are
considered to be in a poor condition. The Tree Survey has been reviewed by the Council’s
consultant arboriculturalist who considers the proposals acceptable. Detailed matters relating
to tree protection during construction, pruning works required to ensure minimum distances
between habitable rooms windows and trees on the northern boundary of the site are met and
the provision of replacement trees on a two-for-one basis will be considered in detail at the
reserved matters stage when detailed landscaping proposals are submitted.
I do not consider that objections received in respect of the proposed loss or potential damage
to trees and the associated loss of visual amenity can be sustained given landscaping
proposals will be considered at the reserved matters stage, whereupon the applicant will be
required to demonstrate how replacement trees have been sited to address any loss of
enclosure, screening or visual amenity and adequately protected during construction.
I therefore have no objection to the application in this regard on the basis that detailed
proposals will be considered at the reserved matters stage.
Ecology
UDP Policy E10 states that development that would be likely to have an adverse impact on
legally protected species will only be permitted where mitigation measures are put in place to
maintain the population level of the species at a favourable conservation status within its
natural range.
Further detailed policies and guidance are provided in the adopted Nature Conservation and
Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document, including Policy NCB1 – Maintaining and
Enhancing Biodiversity that states that development proposals should seek to maintain and
enhance biodiversity and the nature conservation interest of sites.
A Bat and Ecological Survey was submitted in support of the application that has been
reviewed by the Greater Manchester Ecological Unit (GMEU). They found that despite being
carried out by a suitably qualified surveyor, the bat survey was not comprehensive in scope
due the time of year the survey was carried out and the fact that the roof space and cellar were
not fully inspected. Nonetheless, the surveyor concluded, “there are a multitude of potential
roosting places for the pipistrelle bat associated with the exterior of the building… [and
that]…the likelihood of some use … [of the building]…is fairly high’. The survey also
highlighted that two bat species have been recorded in the area and on the development site
itself.
All species of bats and their roost sites are specially protected and on that basis GMEU have
recommended that further survey work for bats be required, and if found, appropriate
mitigation measures be agreed in writing before development commences and subsequently
implemented in full. In addition, as all nesting birds, their eggs and their young are legally
protected, GMEU recommended that any vegetation of tree removal required be carried out
outside the optimum bird-nesting season (March to July inclusive) unless nesting birds have
been shown to be absent. I agree with their findings and recommend that conditions be
imposed accordingly. Subject to the above I have no objection to the application on
ecological grounds.
Loss of Recreational Land
UDP Policy R1 states that the development of all existing recreation land or facilities will not
be permitted unless the development if for recreation purposes that would contribute to the
continued recreation use of the site, adequate replacement recreation provision is made in
alternative suitable location, it has been clearly demonstrated that the site is surplus to
recreational requirements and the development would facilitate the wider regeneration of the
local area or the development is ancillary to the principal use of the site.
UDP Policy DEV5 states that development that would have an adverse impact on any
interests of acknowledged importance, or would result in a material increase in the need for
infrastructure, services, facilities and/or maintenance, will only be granted planning
permission subject to planning conditions or planning obligations that would ensure adequate
mitigation measures are put in place.
Policy GS13 of Salford’s Greenspace Strategy Supplementary Planning Document states
where the benefits of development clearly outweigh the loss of a recreational facility, the
redevelopment of that facility will only be permitted where the development would make a
contribution to the provision or improvement of recreational facilities equivalent to the
facility that is to be lost.
As mentioned above, the proposals involve the loss of the bowling green at the southern end
of the site. Although the green is in private ownership, in a poor state of repair and has not
been used for sometime, its loss is nonetheless contrary to UDP Policy R1 and the provisions
of the Greenspace Strategy unless adequate replacement provision of an equivalent or better
quality is made elsewhere.
The cost of a replacement bowling green of an equivalent quality in an alternative location
has been estimated at £90,000. This will meet the cost of constructing a 900 square metre
bowling green, security fencing, surrounding paths, seats and bins. These funds could be
used to improve existing youth and adult facilities within the area (for example at Ellesmere
Park Playing Fields), to create a new facility (for example at Duke Drive/Monton Green or
Campbell Green Playing Fields), or to improve the associated facilities for the existing
bowling green in Eccles Recreation Ground.
The applicant has agreed, in writing, to meet this requirement by making a financial
contribution of £90,000 to offset the loss of the bowling green, in addition to the sum relating
to off-site open space provision (see above). I therefore recommend that a condition be
attached to any consent to secure the agreed contribution. As such, I am satisfied that the
application complies with UDP Policies R1 and Policy GS13 of Salford’s Greenspace
Strategy.
Sustainable Construction and Environmental Performance
UDP Policy ST14 requires all major development proposals to demonstrate how they will
minimise greenhouse gas emissions and their impact on the global environment.
RSS Policy ER13 requires local planning authorities to ensure that development minimises
energy use and positively encourage the use of energy efficient technologies and energy from
renewable sources in major new developments.
Draft RSS Policy DP1 requires development proposals and schemes to demonstrate excellent
design quality, sustainable construction and efficiency in resource use.
Draft RSS Policy EM16 requires local planning authorities to promote the implementation of
energy conservation measures and efficiency of design, layout, location and use of materials
and natural resources in new buildings and refurbishment schemes.
Draft RSS Policy EM17 requires plans and strategies to encourage the use of smaller scale
on-site renewable energy projects. All major development proposals and schemes for new
non-residential developments above a threshold of 1000 square metres and all new residential
developments comprising 10 or more units, should incorporate renewable energy production
to provide at least 10% of the development’s predicted energy requirements.
The applicant’s have confirmed that they are seeking to achieve a ‘very good’ BREEAM
rating (the comprehensive, industry standard, Building Research Establishment’s
Environmental Assessment Methodology). I am therefore satisfied that the above policy
requirements will ultimately be met and that an environmentally responsible, sustainable,
resource efficient building will be delivered. I recommended that a condition be imposed
accordingly to secure such a positive outcome.
Other Issues
I have received an objection in respect of the accuracy of the submitted plans in relation the
site’s boundary with 44 Half Edge Lane. Following receipt of the objection, the site location
plan was amended accordingly and the public consultation procedure restarted.
I have received a written objection on the basis that the proposed development will exceed the
area’s drainage capacity. Both The Environment Agency and United Utilities were consulted
as part of the application and neither raised any objections. On that basis, I consider the
objection unsustainable.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The applicant has agreed to make financial contributions to offset the loss of the bowling
green on site and fund the provision of outdoor recreation space and facilities in the area
amounting to £149,658 in accordance with UDP Policies H8 and R1.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I am satisfied that the scheme accords with the policies of the Development
Plan and associated Supplementary Planning Documents. I do not consider that there are any
other material planning considerations that outweigh this finding. Subject to the imposition
of the following conditions, including the requirement to enter into a legal agreement, I
recommend that the application be approved accordingly.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve subject to the following conditions and that the Strategic Director of Customer and
Support Services be given authority 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
improvements to and maintenance of existing open space and replacement sports provision in
the local area to the value of £149,658 in accordance with Policies H8, R1 and R2 of the City
of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the provisions of Salford’s Greenspace Strategy.
The heads of terms of the agreement are as follows:
The provision of £59,658 for the provision of open space in the vicinity in accordance
with UDP Policies H8 and R2.
The provision of £90,000 for the provision of sports pitches in the vicinity in accordance
with UDP Policy R1 and Policy GS13 of Salford’s Greenspace Strategy.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of
three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun
not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters,
or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to
be approved.
2. No development shall be started until full details of the following reserved matters have
been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority:
- Landscaping.
3. Notwithstanding the approved plans, development shall not commence unless and until
samples of the materials to be used on all external elevations, including the roof, of the
development have been submitted and approved in writing by the local planning
authority. The development shall be constructed using only the approved materials unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
4. Notwithstanding the approved plans, the side elevation of the residential building facing
44 Half Edge Lane is not approved. Revised details of the external appearance of the side
elevation, and any related alterations to floor plans shall be submitted and approved in
writing by the local planning authority before the development of the residential building
commences. The residential building shall then be constructed in accordance with the
approved revised details.
The revised details shall address the lack of detail on the elevation and soften its visual
impact without compromising the privacy of the residents of 44 Half Edge Lane.
5. Notwithstanding the approved plans, development of the residential building shall not
commence until details of the following elements of the building have been submitted to
and approved in writing by the local planning authority:
- detailed drawings of the rooftop ventilation shafts;
- detailed elevations at 1:50 scale and sections at 1:20 scale of the window and door
openings;
- detailed elevations at 1:50 scale and sections at 1:20 scale of the glazed link on the north
elevation to Half Edge Lane;
- detailed elevations at 1:50 scale and sections at 1:20 scale of all balcony balustrades,
railings and privacy screen walls; and
- detailed elevations at 1:50 scale and sections at 1:20 scale of the car park roller shutter
doors.
The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
6. The applicant shall, with regard to television reception in the area, provide the local
planning authority with studies that:
a) Identify, before the development commences, the potential impact area in which
television reception is likely to be adversely affected by the development. The study shall
be carried out either by the Office of Communications (Ofcom), or by a body approved
by Ofcom and shall include an assessment of when in the construction process an impact
on television reception might occur.
b) Measure the existing television signal reception within the potential impact area
identified in (a) above before development commences. The work shall be undertaken
either by an aerial installer registered with the Confederation of Aerial Industries or by a
body approved by the Office of Communications, and shall include an assessment of the
survey results obtained.
c) Assess the impact of the development on television signal reception within the
potential impact area identified in (a) above within one month of the practical completion
of the development or before the development is first occupied, whichever is the sooner,
and at any other time during the construction of the development if requested in writing
by the local planning authority in response to identified television signal reception
problems within the potential impact area. The study shall identify such measures
necessary to maintain at least the pre-existing level and quality of signal reception
identified in the survey carried out in (b) above. The measures identified must be carried
out either before the building is first occupied or within one month of the study being
submitted to the local planning authority, whichever is the earlier.
7. No development authorised by this permission shall take place unless and until the local
planning authority has received and approved in writing a site operating statement in
relation to provision of delivery of materials, the delivery and collection of equipment,
provision and use of on-site parking for contractors' and workpeople's' vehicles, wheel
washing facilities and street sweeping and no development or activities related or
incidental thereto shall take place on the site in contravention of such site operating
statement.
8. The building works required to implement this development that are audible at the site
boundary shall only be carried out between the hours of: - 08:00 hrs to 18:00 hrs Mondays to Fridays; and
- 08:00 hrs to 13:00 hrs Saturdays; and
- not at all on Sundays and Bank Holidays.
9. Unless otherwise agreed in advance and in writing by the local planning authority, the use
of the replacement Masonic Hall hereby approved, shall be limited to the following hours:
- 09:00 hrs to 23:50 hrs Mondays to Saturdays; and
- 10:00 hrs to 22:50 hrs Sundays.
10. Before development commences, a noise mitigation scheme that specifies the provision to
be made for the control of noise emanating from the replacement Masonic Hall shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by local planning authority. The approved scheme
shall be implemented in full prior to the first use of the replacement Masonic Hall and any
measures implemented shall be maintained in full thereafter.
11. The rating level (LAeq) from all fixed plant and machinery associated with the
development, when operating simultaneously, shall be 5 dB below the background noise
level (L90) at all times when measured at the facade of the nearest noise sensitive
premises. Noise measurements and assessments shall be carried out according to
BS4142; 1997
12. The residential building hereby approved shall not be occupied unless and until the
developer has demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the local planning authority, that
glazing with a minimum RW of 33dB and ventilation systems with a minimum DneW of
31 dB have been installed to all habitable rooms overlooking Half Edge Lane.
13. Before development commences, a desk study shall be undertaken and agreed by the local
planning authority to investigate and produce an assessment of the risk of the potential for
on-site gas and contamination. If the desk study identifies potential contamination a
detailed site investigation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local
planning authority before development commences.
Any site 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
investigation, where appropriate, shall include a risk assessment and an options appraisal
including a remedial strategy.
The proposed risk assessment, including the sampling and analytical strategy shall be
approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the start of the site
investigation survey.
The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved report, including
its risk assessment, options appraisal and recommendations for implementation of the
remedial strategy.
Prior to discharge and first occupation or use of development hereby approved, a Site
Completion Report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in
writing. The Site Completion Report shall validate that all works undertaken on site in
respect to the relevant phase were completed in accordance with those agreed by the local
planning authority.
14. Notwithstanding the approved plans, development shall not commence until details of the
alterations to the pedestrian and vehicular access point on Half Edge Lane have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development
shall not be occupied until the works have been completed in accordance with the
approved details.
15. The parking indicated on the approved plans shall be surfaced, demarcated and made
available for use prior to first occupation or first use of the buildings hereby approved.
The car parking shall thereafter remain available at all times solely for use by the
residents and users of the replacement Hall.
16. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the
undertaking of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4) (a-d) of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act, 1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning
Authority, and the Local Planning Authority has given its approval in writing. The
planning obligation will provide that commuted sums as required by Policies H8 and R1
of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, having regard to the standards and
requirements set out in Policy R2 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and
Salford's Greenspace Strategy, will be paid to the Local Planning Authority for open
space and recreation space purposes.
17. Notwithstanding the findings of the Bat and Ecological Survey submitted, development
shall not commence until the existing building has been comprehensively surveyed for
evidence of use by bats and the results of this survey have been submitted to and
approved in writing by the local planning authority. If bats are found to inhabit the
building, no development shall commence until a scheme for the conservation of this
species has been agreed with the local planning authority.
18. No site clearance works shall take place during the bird nesting season (March to July
inclusive) unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
19. The development hereby approved shall acheive a post-construction Building Research
Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) rating, or equivalent, of
'very good' or 'excellent', unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning
authority. A post-construction review certificate shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the local planning authority before any of the buildings hereby approved are
first occupied, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason(s)
1. Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
2. Reason: The application is for outline permission only and these matters were reserved
by the applicant for subsequent approval.
3. Reason: To safeguard the amenity, appearance and character of the area in accordance
with Policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and Policy EP6 of the
Ellesmere Park Supplementary Planning Document.
4. Reason: To safeguard the amenity, appearance and character of the area in accordance
with Policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and Policy EP6 of the
Ellesmere Park Supplementary Planning Document.
5. Reason: To safeguard the amenity, appearance and character of the area in accordance
with Policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and Policy EP6 of the
Ellesmere Park Supplementary Planning Document.
6. Reason - To provide an indication of the area of television signal reception likely to be
affected by the development to provide a basis on which to assess the extent to which the
development during construction and once built, will affect television reception and to
ensure that the development at least maintains the existing level and quality of television
signal reception. This is in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance Note 8:
Telecommunications and Policy DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
7. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents and in the interests of
highway safety. This is in accordance with Policies DES7, A8 and EN17 of the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan.
8. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of local residents. This is in accordance with Policy
EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
9. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of local residents. This is in accordance with Policy
EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
10. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of local residents. This is in accordance with Policy
EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
11. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of local residents. This is in accordance with Policy
EN17 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
12. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in
accordance with Policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
13. Reason: In the interests of public safety in accordance with Policy EN16 of the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan
14. Reason: To ensure that satisfactory access is provided from the public highway to the
proposed development in the interests of highway safety. This is in accordance with
Policies DES2 and A8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
15. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the parking of vehicles within the
curtilage of the site in accordance with Policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary
Development Plan.
16. Reason: To ensure the residential development provides adequate open space and
recreation space for future occupiers in accordance with policies H8 and R2 of the City
of Salford Unitary Development Plan and that the loss of the bowling green on the site is
adequately offset through the provision of adequate replacement facilities elsewhere in
the City in accordance with Policy R1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan
and Policy GS13 of Salford's Greenspace Strategy.
17. Reason: To protect bats and their roost sites that are protected species under the Wildlife
and Countryside Act 1981. This is in accordance with Policy EN10 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan 2004-2016.
18. Reason: To protect nesting birds and their nesting sites that are protected under the
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. This is in accordance with Policy EN10 of the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan 2004-2016.
19. Reason: In the interests of resource conservation and environmental sustainability. This
is in accordance with Policy ST14 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 20042016, Policy ER13 of the Regional Spatial Strategy and Policies DP1, EM16 and EM17
of the Draft Regional Spatial Strategy.
Note(s) for Applicant
1. For the avoidance of doubt, this permission relates to the following approved plans:
Existing Site Location, Layout and Site Dimensions (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-001/A)
Area Summary (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-008)
Site and Landscaping Plan (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-004)
Area Summary (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-016)
Hall Elevations (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-014)
Area Summary (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-015)
Masonic Hall Floor Plans (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-013)
Proposed & Existing Street Scenes (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-012)
Apartment Gable Elevations (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-011)
South and West Sectional Elevations (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-010)
North and East Apartment Elevations (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-009)
Third Floor/Roof Plans (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-007)
First and Second Floor Plans (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-006)
Lower/Ground Floor Plans (Drawing Ref: A04-25/P03-005)
APPLICATION No:
06/53710/FUL
APPLICANT:
Premier Land (Salford) Ltd
LOCATION:
Former Ford Mill Site Corner Of Ford Lane And
Greenwood Street Salford M6 6PE
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing buildings and erection of part six
and part eight storey building with basement car parking
to provide 119 apartments together with construction of
new vehicular and pedestrian accesses
WARD:
Irwell Riverside
OBSERVATIONS:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
In response to the additional information and additional publicity I have received
confirmation that representatives of St Thomas Church will be attending the panel meeting.
The additional comments on behalf of the church are provided below:
“I also confirm that the additional items of cladding samples and computer generated
three dimensional views of the proposed six and eight storey block do not in
anyway convince us of the appropriateness of this project.
Our views are supported by Mr Tim Hatton, The Historic Church Building Officer for
the Diocese of Manchester, and by The City of Salford's Conservation Officer, Mr Joe
Martin. The Revd mark Haworth is also meeting the Archdeacon of Manchester on
Tuesday next to fully discuss this matter and The Archdeacon may also wish to give his
view on the matter.
Since we feel that it is difficult to assess the true environmental impact on the
surrounding area from artists impressions, we respectfully request that the Members
should visit site.”
For clarification, I can confirm that the City Council’s Conservation Officer has no objection
to the proposal.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
At a meeting of the Panel held on 18th January 2007 consideration of this application was
DEFERRED for further negotiations and discussion regarding the design of the scheme.
I have met with the applicant’s agents regarding the concerns raised by the Panel with regard
to the design and external appearance of the building. Several options to enhance the design
of the building have been discussed. Those have included adding a two storey element which
would provide additional apartments to one end of the scheme to create more interest at roof
level; adding balconies to the main street elevation; and investigating whether there was
anything else that could be done to the roof to counteract the criticism of its being flat.
Whilst serious though these attempts have been, I do not consider that the options would
improve the design of each of the elevations and would appear to be later additions and not
part of a holistic design solution. I consider that such ‘additions’ would detract from the
setting of the listed buildings. The applicant has sought to demonstrate the key features of the
buildings design which may have been lost through the projection of 2 dimensional ‘flat’
elevations during the previous Panel meeting and to provide a further appraisal of the scheme.
The triangular site bounded by the railway line, Greenwood Street and Ford Lane sits between
two listed buildings; St Thomas’s Church and the Maypole public house adjoining which are
the recently refurbished Pendleton Co-operative society buildings. All three of these
buildings are Grade II listed and make strong architectural statements which are the product
of their material, massing, location as a group and the specific style itself derived from the
prevalent architectural fashions in early 19th century ecclesiastical and late 19th century public
house and retail design. The church is stone, built in a simple “Commissioners Gothic” style
whilst the Public house and Pendleton Cooperative society are both strongly detailed red brick
and terra cotta buildings of a far more eclectic style.
When responding to such a situation the designer has a number of choices:To create a building that blends in with its neighbours by faithfully copying
their form and detail, effectively “camouflaging” the new,
Creating a “pastiche” i.e. a building which recreates, in this case a late 19 th
Early 20th century form and detail of a building that may have stood in this
location or locality. Many current apartment blocks take this approach; or
Create a contemporary design, which respects its setting using modern
building materials and techniques just as their 19th century predecessors did
in their own time.
The first two options run the risk of producing a building which is a pale imitation of its
historic 19th century predecessors and which because of the constraints of building control
legislation leads to unacceptable visual compromises particularly in fenestration. The result
being a new building unsuccessfully aping the style of the past.
The applicant has provided a detailed section and sample materials in order to appreciate the
depth of the elevation and the how the materials respect the surrounding buildings.
“
I have also consulted the Councils consultant architect who has provided the applicant with
pre-application advice. He considers;
”
“
Bearing in mind the intended use of the development, housing and apartments, and
the strength and conflicting architectural styles of its immediate neighbours, the chosen
option of a more restrained modern expression for a building type reflecting a
growing contemporary lifestyle is a logical choice. Its scale and materials,
particularly the smooth red brick respect, those of many its neighbours and it will
provide a strong presence on Ford Lane without fighting visually with its neighbours.
Whilst not as rich as that of the adjoining buildings the elevations are modelled, the
strong vertical brick panels creating strong shadow lines to the curtain wall glazing.
The terraced balconies overlooking the Broughton Lane, Ford Lane Junction animates
the elevation whilst the addition of the two shorter 6th and 7th stories enlivens the
roofline. The roof terrace provides an opportunity for some personalization of this
space by planting. This is a modern building. The addition of false detail as a form of
decoration would detract from what is essentially a restrained solution to a specific
townscape situation.
At ground level the plinth, projecting out beyond the building face, acts as a solid
visual base for the building and a private access area for the accommodation facing
Ford Lane and Greenwood Street. Here the ground floor is undercut to create a small
private garden and entrance area that occupants will personalize bringing life to the
street edge.
The material board shows the intention to use good quality materials, a precise red
brick, a dark neutral glazing and metal panelling system and oiled timber rain-screen
cladding. The materials and colours combine well together and are visually
complimentary. The detailing should be precise and sharp which will produce an
engineered look to the building.
I believe the overall result is that the proposed development is a 21st century building
reflecting modern building technology, well designed, appropriate to its location, will
compliment the adjacent listed buildings without fighting for attention and detracting
from them and be a welcome addition the location.”
Therefore, whilst there have been no changes to the external appearance since members
previously considered the scheme, I do consider that the additional information boards,
sections and materials help articulate the scheme. The Councils consultant architect is also of
the opinion that the scheme is well designed and would compliment the adjacent listed
buildings. Moreover, I do not consider that “tweaks” to the design would provide significant
improvements beyond what is a good scheme.
Therefore, I still consider the scheme to be an appropriate solution within the constraints of
the site and within proximity to a number of listed buildings. I also consider that the scheme
fully accords with the adopted development plan.
My previous observations are set out below:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to the former Ford Mill, Ford Lane in Pendleton. Ford Lane bounds
the site to the south, Greenwood Street to the west and the Manchester to Wigan railway
cutting to the east.
The site is triangular in shape, 0.26 hectares in size and is currently occupied by a group of
buildings which are predominantly 2 storey red brick in appearance. To the rear of the site is
a 3 storey building of glass and corrugated steel adjacent to Greenwood Street.
The proposal seeks consent for the demolition of the existing buildings and the erection of
part six and part eight storey building with basement car parking to provide 119 apartments
together with construction of new vehicular and pedestrian accesses.
There is a change in levels across the site. The proposal utilises the change in levels in the
provision of car parking. At the corner of Ford Lane and Greenwood Street the proposal
would be at its highest, 8 storey. Ford Lane reduces in height to the west and the elevation
fronting Ford Lane also reduces in height to six storey (above road level) and includes the
vehicular access. The footprint of the proposal is ‘L’ shaped and the elevation fronting
Greenwood Street would be similar to that on Ford Lane with 8 storey at the corner stepping
down. The roof height of the lower element would be the same at the roof height of the six
storey element on Ford Lane. However, due the change in levels the height of the building at
the northern end of Greenwood Street would be 7 storey above road level.
Two vehicular access points would be provided to the scheme. One would be off Ford Lane
and the other would be off Greenwood Street. Residential accommodation would be provided
above each of the access points.
In total sixty nine car parking spaces would be provided off street within the court yard
formed by the ‘L’ shape of the proposed building. 36 spaces would be provided in an upper
level and would be accessed via the exiting on Ford Lane and 33 spaces would be provided in
an undercroft section accessed from a new entrance on Greenwood Street.
SITE HISTORY
01/42254/OUT - Outline planning application for the development of land for residential
purposes – Approved June 2001
04/48282/OUT - Renewal of outline planning permission 01/42254/FUL for the development
of land for residential development – Approved January 2006
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – No objection in principle subject the inclusion of a
condition requiring a site investigation and conditions to safeguard future occupants from
noise and vibration.
United Utilities – No objection in principle subject to approval of drainage connections
Environment Agency – No response
Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – “ As stated in the design and
access statement, the site is well located in relation to public transport being within walking
distance of the bus stops on Broughton Road and Broad Street that offer frequent services to
destinations including Manchester, Bolton, Leigh, Wigan and Oldham. Nearby Salford
Crescent rail station provides services to Manchester Victoria and Wigan. Future residents
of the proposed development would therefore have access to a choice of travel mode which
should help to reduce the amount of car travel otherwise generated by this development.
Furthermore, the use of this site for high density residential development is supported as it
maximises the benefits of the site’s good public transport accessibility.
In order to maximise the benefits of the site’s location in relation to the public transport
facilities, it should be ensured that the pedestrian environment is designed to be as safe and
convenient as possible so as not to discourage people from accessing the site on foot / by
public transport. This should apply between the site and the nearby public transport
facilities, in particular the bus stop on Broad Street situated on the opposite side of the
carriageway south east of the site and can be achieved through measures such as the
appropriate use of surfacing materials, landscaping, lighting, signage and road crossings.
It is important to influence people’s travel patterns at the beginning of occupation and
therefore, although the site is accessible by public transport, GMPTE would expect a
Residential Travel Plan to accompany this application to help encourage future occupants to
use sustainable modes of travel.”
Police Architectural Liaison Advisor – “No objection given the intention to apply for
secured by design certification”
Urban Regeneration Company – No objection
Ramblers Association – No objection
Peak and Northern Footpaths Society – No response
The Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – No response
The Open Spaces Society – No response
Network Rail – No objection in principle. Recommends the following:
that advice is sought with regard to the impact of the noise from the railway on future
occupiers
The applicant provide a suitable trespass proof fence adjacent to the railway
Where the parking spaces or vehicle manoeuvring areas are proposed adjacent to the
boundary of the railway, an Armco or similar barrier must be provided
Provide advice regarding drainage
Any external lighting should not impact upon the use of the railway
Consideration should be given to future maintenance requirements
A method statement should be provided for works within 10m of the railway
Requirement that during the construction period all mechanical plant should be
carried out in a ‘fail safe’ mannor
Charlestown and Kersal New Deal for Communities – “New Deal for Communities are
generally supportive of the redevelopment of this strategic site, however, they raise some
concern with the proposed applications on a number of aspects and request that these issues
are given due consideration during the determination process.
The initial concern relates to the proposed bland and unimaginative design and how that will
sit between 3 listed buildings. The scale and massing proposed is excessive and will detract
from its historic surroundings. The stark new red brick, aluminium and timber may appear
alien amongst the existing limestone and sandstone buildings.
They note that there are only 11 three bed apartments proposed in this scheme. This suggests
that family accommodation is not a priority for the developer. New Deal for Communities
are committed to providing a wide range of family housing in different tenures and would
hope to see this reflected in a revised scheme.
Within Policy HOU5of the now adopted Housing Planning Guidance it states that this
development would have to provide 20% affordable dwellings. This does not appear to be
reflected in the application.
There are a total of 69 car parking spaces proposed within the scheme. Is this sufficient to
serve 119 apartments in this area?
Finally they query whether any consideration been given to any s.106 allocation.
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 13th November 2006
A press notice was displayed in the Advertiser on 16th November 2006
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
Apartments 1 – 13 (con), The Maypole, 9 Broughton Road
Apartments 1 – 50 (con), The Gateway, 11 - 21 Broughton Road
Boxmax, Castle Works, Bazaar Street
Newbury House, Greenwood Street
3 Cobden Street, Sovereign House, 5 Cobden Street
The Unicorn, 10 Broughton Road
22 Broughton Road
Church Inn, Ford Lane
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 3 letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The
following issues have been raised:Insufficient car parking
Would result in on street car parking
Impact upon St Thomas Church (listed building)
Redevelopment consultation with New Deal have been for low rise redevelopment
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
SD1 - The North West Metropolitan Area
DP1 – Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
DES1 Respecting Context, DES2 Circulation and Movement, H1
Provision of New Housing Development, H2 Managing the
Supply of Housing, H8 Open Space Provision Within New
Housing Developments, ST11 Location of New Development,
A1 Transport Assessments and Travel Plans, A8 Impact of
Development on the Highway Network, A10 Provision of Car,
Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Development, E5
Development Within Established Employment Areas, EN14
Pollution Control, EN22 Resource Conservation, DES5 Tall
Building, DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours, CH1
Development Effecting the Setting of a Listed Building
DRAFT SUBMITTED REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP1
–
L4
MCR2 -
Regional Development Principles
Regional Housing Provision
Regional Centre and Inner Areas of Manchester City Region
PLANNING APPRAISAL
Given that outline planning consent has been granted for the principle of residential
development, I consider that the main planning issues relating to this application are: whether
the principle of the proposed development is acceptable at the density proposed, whether the
design, layout and mix of the proposal is acceptable; whether there would be a detrimental
impact on residential amenity; whether the proposal would have any impact upon highway
safety; whether the proposal impact upon the setting of a listed building; and whether the
proposed level of parking is acceptable. I shall deal with each of these issues in turn.
Loss of Employment Land
Strategic Policy ST3 seeks to ensure the supply of a good range of local employment
opportunities.
Adopted policy E5 allows for a number of exceptions to this presumption against the loss of
employment land. This issue was considered in the extant outline permission for residential
purposes. In granting planning permission it was considered that the loss of this site for
employment purposes would not result in a material shortfall across the City.
Given that the site benefits from outline planning consent for residential purposes, I do not
consider that the loss of employment provision should be reconsidered by the panel.
The 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.
National planning policy guidance is also relevant. PPS3: Housing highlights the need to
develop previously developed brownfield sites and where appropriate higher densities should
be considered in accessible locations.
The release of draft RSS in January 2006, proposes to significantly increase the housing
requirement in Salford with over a threefold increase in the annual requirement from 530 to
1600 units per annum. Whilst the provision of housing is relevant in the consideration of this
scheme, it should be noted that little weight can be afforded to draft RSS at this time.
Policy ST11 states that sites for development will be brought forward in a sequential order.
The sequential order is defined below:
1
2
3
4
The re use and conversion of existing buildings
Previously-developed land in locations that:
(i) are, or as part of any development would be made to be, well-served by a
choice of means of transport; and
(ii) are well related to housing, employment, services and infrastructure
Previously-developed land in other locations, provided that adequate levels of
accessibility and infrastructure provision could be provided
Green field locations
(i) are, or as part of any development would be made to be, well-served by a
choice of means of transport; and
(ii) are well related to housing, employment, services and infrastructure
It is clear that the site has been previously developed and has the benefit of outline planning
consent for residential purposes and is in a location well served by a choice of transport which
I discuss further below. This clearly establishes the principle of this scheme. As such I
consider that this site to be defined as criteria 2(i) in the sequential order and therefore
accords with Policy ST11 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan.
I do not consider that circumstances have changed to warrant a different view on the principle
of residential development on this site. However, the outline consent did not approve a
density on this site and it is, therefore, appropriate to consider the proposed density.
Density
Policy ST12 states that development within the regional centre, town centres, and close to key
public transport routes and interchanges will be required to achieve a high density appropriate
to the location and context.
The Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive have been consulted on this
application and have not raised any objection. The response from GMPTE highlights the
accessibility of the site.
Given that this site is located within the regional centre and having regard to the existing
public transport infrastructure, as outlined above, I am satisfied that the density is appropriate
for this location.
Housing Mix
Policy H1 states that new housing development should contribute to the provision of a
balanced mix of dwellings within the local area. Criterion 1, of this policy states that all new
housing development will be required to contribute towards the provision of a balanced mix
of dwellings within the local area in terms of size, type, tenure and affordability.
”
“
Policy H2 of the adopted UDP is also relevant to the consideration of the scale of the
proposal. Whilst seeking to ensure that an adequate supply of new housing is provided across
the city in accordance with that set out in RSS, this policy seeks to restrict housing
development in areas where there is evidence of an
unacceptable actual or potential
oversupply of housing . At the current time there is no clear evidence of an oversupply of
housing in this area. It is also important to take into consideration evidence from all levels
(national, regional and local), which suggests that household growth is likely to continue and
that in acknowledgement of this, the draft RSS is proposing to significantly increase annual
housing provision for Salford. However, at present I consider that some weight, albeit little,
should be afforded to the draft RSS.
The residential accommodation proposed in this scheme would comprise of the following
apartment mix:
12 studio apartments (10.1% in total)
33 one bedroom apartments (27.7% in total)
63 two bedroom apartments (52.9% of the total)
11 three bedroom apartments (9.2% of the total)
Planning Guidance for Housing has now been adopted by the Council (20th December 2006)
and replaced the draft Housing Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). The thrust of this
guidance is to ensure a balanced mix in accordance with policy H1 of the UDP. Whilst the
guidance is less prescriptive than the draft SPD in terms of specifying an amount of any one
type of accommodation, it does seek to provide an appropriate mix. The guidance has been
adopted by the City Council and is therefore a material consideration.
”
“
…
The site is located within the Central Salford zone as defined within the Planning Guidance
for Housing. The guidance states
new developments should provide a broad mix of
dwelling types. Apartments should only be the predominant form of provision on sites in the
most accessible locations within Central Salford
The advice from GMPTE confirms that is site is accessible by a choice of means of transport.
Moreover, the site is also within walking distance of Salford Shopping City.
The average floor area for the apartments would be as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
studio apartments (12) 34 sq m
one bedroom apartments (33) 45 sq m
two bedroom apartments (63) 66 sq m
three bed apartment (11) 84 sq m
Whilst the floor areas highlighted above are averages, only the 1 bed room and studios would
be less than 57 sq m. A total of 62.1% of the overall provision would be greater than 57sq m
in floor area.
The scheme, exceeds 50% accommodation at 57sq m or greater and would provide a range of
apartments within the scheme. Therefore, I consider that the mix identified above and having
regard to the wider area is sufficient to satisfy the Planning Guidance for Housing (Central
Salford zone) and policy H1 of the adopted UDP.
Affordable Housing
Policy H4 requires that in areas where there is a demonstrable lack of affordable housing to
meet local needs, developers will be required, by negotiation with the Council, to provide
affordable housing of appropriate types.
Policy HOU3 of the Councils Housing Planning Guidance requires that on all residential sites
over 1 hectare, irrespective of the number of dwellings, or in housing developments of 25 or
more dwellings, 20% of the dwellings should be in the form of affordable dwellings.
Policy HOU4 of the Councils Housing Planning Guidance provides advice on the types of
affordable housing.
Policy HOU5 of the Housing Planning Guidance proposes that affordable housing provided
on-site should be integrated into the rest of the development, and visible differences between
tenures of provision should be minimised, as far as practicable.
As stated above Policy H4 of the UDP requires developers to provide an element of affordable
housing where there is a lack of affordable housing to meet local needs. There is a need
citywide for affordable housing, with an Affordable Needs Assessment showing the need for
around 600 affordable units per annum, over the period 2006-16. Amongst other things, this
need is a result of rising house prices to household incomes, an increase in those on the
Housing Register, the Right to Buy scheme, and a decrease in the vacant local authority and
RSL stock.
Housing Planning Guidance clarifies policy H4 of the UDP. It states that an element of
affordable housing should be provided on-sites over 25 dwellings or 1 ha, and that as the
starting point 20% of the total units should normally be affordable. Although the site already
has outline planning permission and there was no requirement for affordable housing at that
time, it is necessary to consider all relevant material changes since that application including
the Housing Planning Guidance.
The Housing Planning Guidance acknowledges that a reduced proportion of affordable
housing or lower commuted sum may be appropriate where the development may otherwise
become unviable. Paragraph 5.9 of the guidance states “ In such circumstances, the evidence
provided by the developer should include a financial statement that has been professionally
certified. This will be treated on a confidential basis, where appropriate”
The applicants have confirmed that they do not intend to provide affordable housing as part of
their proposals for this site and have provided a supplementary document to support their
view that affordable housing should not be required in this instance. I have summarised the
main elements of the report below:
There are a very high level of affordable housing in the immediate area
There are low house prices in the immediate area compared to average incomes
The financial impact of the provision of affordable housing, combined with other
planning obligations, as set out in Salford City Council’s Draft Planning
Obligations SPD, would affect scheme viability, and;
The scheme was substantially developed before the adoption of the Housing
Planning Guidance
”
“
Of particular relevance is the final bullet point of policy HOU3 ‘Quantity of Affordable
Homes’, where it discusses when a lower proportion of affordable housing, or a lower
proportion of commuted sum may be appropriate. The bullet point states The scheme was
substantially developed before the adoption of this Guidance
In this particular case, pre application discussion were held with the developer prior to August
2006, which improved the external form of the development. The design of the scheme was
nearing completion at this time and a requirement for affordable housing was not required at
that time having regard to the extant outline permission and given that the policy document
had not been adopted. I also consider that the amendments made to the scheme have resulted
in an exemplar design between two listed buildings. Given that substantial discussions and
changes to the scheme were undertaken prior to the adoption of the guidance and given that
the application was submitted prior to this date, I do not consider it appropriate to secure
affordable housing provision as part of this scheme.
Turning to the remaining points, the submitted report also includes a financial appraisal for
the scheme. It concludes that the developers margin would be less that the 15% industry
standard without the inclusion of even 12 affordable units (20% of half of the numbers
proposed). The report also provides details of the average house price in Salford being less
than the national average and that substantial levels of high quality affordable housing are
already being delivered in Central Salford through the Manchester Salford Housing Market
Renewal Programme.
Design, Scale and Massing
Adopted 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 DES2 requires the design and layout of new development to be fully accessible to all
people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists to, through and around the site,
enable pedestrians to navigate their way through an area by providing appropriate views,
vistas and transport links, enable safe, direct and convenient access to public transport
facilities and other local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians,
cyclists and other road users.
Policy DES5 states that tall buildings will be permitted where they meet a number of criteria.
Those criteria include that the scale of the development is appropriate to its context and
location; that the location is highly accessible to public transport, walking and cycling; that
the building would relate positively to and interact well with the adjacent public realm; that
the building would be of the highest quality design; that the building would make a positive
addition to the skyline and would not detract from important views and that there would be no
unacceptable impact on the setting of a listed building or on the character or appearance of a
conservation area.
Policy DES11 requires applicants for major developments to demonstrate that the proposal
takes account of the need for good design. In accordance with the requirements of this policy
a written statement has been submitted which explains the design concepts and how these are
reflected in the development’s layout, scale and visual appearance, the relationship to the site
and its wider context and how the proposal meets the Council’s design objectives and
policies.
The tallest component of the building addresses the corner of Ford Lane and Greenwood
Street and will compliment the tower of St Thomas’s Church as a focal point without
competing with the church.
The scheme is of a contemporary design adjacent to a mix of nineteenth century buildings.
The design philosophy, outlined in the submitted supporting information, is to use a similar
palette of materials that will ensure that a new scheme will complement rather than compete
with the neighbouring buildings, particularly St Thomas’ Church. The building would be
constructed in red brick and stone, whilst the upper two of the 8 storey tower will have a
timber clad and aluminium finish. The roof will be flat with some overhang, which has
enabled the construction of the two seventh floor terraced areas of the roof of the 6 storey
wings.
A stone plinth wraps round the building rising up as the building moves from 3 to 5
In respect of materials, the buildings adjacent to the application site are primarily constructed
in red brick with stone or terracotta dressing, with the exception of the Church, which is stone
built. The proposed palette of materials comprises red brick, stone, timber cladding and
aluminium, which is compatible with the palette of the existing buildings. However, the
quality of these materials would be crucial to the successful integration of the building into its
context.
The architects for the scheme have sought to achieve a high quality of design. It is consider
that a high quality design has been achieved and that this development is of a high quality in
accordance with the adopted policies of the development plan highlighted above. I consider
that the proposal represents am exemplar design.
Therefore, subject to the inclusion of a condition requiring samples of materials to be
approved prior to the commencement of development, I am satisfied that the proposed design
and materials are acceptable.
Effects of the development on residential 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 layout of the proposal is in the form of an ‘L’ shape. Therefore, internally the scheme
does not provide for any facing windows. Externally there are no main habitable windows
contained within the gable of both the northern and eastern elevations. These elevations are
closest to the neighbouring railway. The southern and western elevations, which provide the
main aspect externally, front the neighbouring church yard and industrial area respectfully.
The applicant has provided a full noise assessment. The report concludes that future
occupiers of the scheme would not be unduly affected by surrounding noise. The Director of
Environmental Services has assessed the submitted report and raises no objection subject to
the provision of conditions safeguard against noise and vibration. Clearly the principle of a
residential scheme on this site has been established through the granting of outline consent.
Therefore, subject to conditions in relation to the above, I consider that the scheme would not
have a detrimental impact upon residential amenity.
Effect on Listed Buildings
Policy CH2 states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would
have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building.
The scale of the development, whilst larger than the existing buildings on site, is comparable
with the scale of adjacent buildings. The relationship between the proposed development and
St Thomas’ Church is of particular interest, as the Church should remain the dominant
building in key views of the area.
From the junction of Ford Lane and Broughton Road and from Greenwood Street, where the
land slopes away from the application site, the proposed development would appear
comparable in scale to the Church, however, in all other views, such as further down
Broughton Road and from the roundabout and A6, St Thomas’ Church is by far the most
dominant building within these views because of its position on the highest ground in the
immediate area. It is considered that the proposed development would not compete with the
Church in these important views and, as such, the proposed scale is acceptable.
Moreover, the materials proposed are discussed earlier in this report. I am also satisfied that
the materials proposed are acceptable in this location adjacent to a listed building.
Therefore, I consider that the application accords with policy CH2 as outlined above.
Design and Crime
Policy DES10 and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) on Design and
Crime seeks to ensure that development is designed to discourage crime, anti-social behaviour
and the fear of crime, and support personal and property security. Crime and Disorder is a
material planning consideration.
”
“
The Police Architectural Liaison advisor has considered the proposals. The response states
Having looked at the drawings I note the applicant’s intention of applying for Secured by
Design certification and I can see no problem with the proposals.
As such I consider that the proposal complies with the adopted development plan in respect of
designing out crime.
Car Parking and Access
Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists
and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards. It also states that the
maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded.
The applicant’s agent has provided a Transport Assessment (TA) in accordance with policy
A1 of the adopted UDP.
Vehicular access into the site will be provided via the existing entrance on Ford Lane and via
a new access point on Greenwood Street. The sloping topography of the site enables the
provision of sixty nine car parking spaces in a naturally ventilated split-level car park. Thirty
Six spaces would be provided in an upper level and would be accessed via the exiting on Ford
Lane and thirty three spaces would be provided in an undercroft section accessed from a new
entrance on Greenwood Street. Access to the car park would be controlled by a series of
secure electronic gates.
Pedestrian access to the three bed dual aspect apartments would be directly via street level
entrances on Ford Lane and Greenwood Street, whilst pedestrian access to the upper storeys
of the development will be via a level access at the focal corner point of the proposal.
As stated earlier, the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive has no objection to
the proposal.
Given the site’s location in relation to existing community, public transport and other local
facilities, I consider that 69 car parking spaces to be an appropriate level for this part of the
City.
Given the likely time period to construct the proposal I have attached a condition requiring
the submission of a site operating statement. This will require information to be provided and
agreed on:
provision of permitted hours for construction works
delivery of materials and delivery and collection of equipment
provision and use of on-site parking for contractors' and workpeople's vehicles
wheelwashing facilities
street sweeping
I have also attached a condition requiring the provision of cycle stores for the apartments.
Subject to the above conditions I have no highway objections and I am satisfied that the
proposal accords with the requirements of the policies highlighted.
Open Space Provision
Adopted Policy H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and
informal open space within housing developments.
Adopted policy R2 states that planning permission will be granted for recreational
development provided it would satisfy a number of criteria.
This application is for 119 dwellings - therefore the open space requirements set out in UDP
Policies H8/R2 are applicable. The proposed development would generate 311bedspaces
(11no. 3bed, 63no. 2bed, 33no. 1 bed, & 12no. studios). This would require open space
provision, and its 20 year maintenance, equivalent to:
0.227ha formal sports provision
0.07775ha of children's equipped/youth and adult provision
0.1244ha amenity/informal open space provision
The site size is 0.26ha - therefore it is not expected this requirement to be met by on-site
provision. Instead a financial contribution equivalent to the capital and maintenance cost of
the above open space, to be directed towards improvements to open space provision in the
locality of the development is considered appropriate in this case.
The total financial contribution required from this development, to meet the requirements of
UDP Policies H8/R2, would be £139,950 (311bedspaces X £450).
The site is located in an area of the city which has limited access to existing sites, due to
transport infrastructure (main roads and railway lines). However, some suggested sites which
may be suitable for the contribution to be directed to, include:
Gloucester Place (Brunswick Park) - the application site is within the catchment of
this proposed LEAP
Clarendon Park - the application site is within the catchment of this existing
Neighbourhood Park and NEAP
Brindle Heath Playing Fields
Peel Park
Land at Duchy Road (Brindle Heath Lagoons) - UDP R6/12 new/improved recreation
land site.
As such, I am satisfied that this contribution complies with Adopted Policy H8 and R2 of the
adopted plan subject to the provision of an appropriate S106 agreement to secure this level of
contribution.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
In accordance with Policy H8 of the Adopted UDP, the applicant has agreed to enter into an
agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the payment of
a total of £139,950. This would contribute to the provision of open space in the vicinity.
The design, scale and massing of the proposal has been improved through negotiation with
Urban Visions officers.
CONCLUSION
I am satisfied that the amended design is of a high quality and that the application would not
have any significant detrimental effect upon the amenity of neighbouring residents or on the
surrounding area in general. I am satisfied that the proposed development would continue to
act as a catalyst for future successful development in this area and that it would signify the
City Council’s intent to accept a high quality development. I am also satisfied that the level
of on site parking is acceptable. I am satisfied that the application complies with policies of
the development plan as a whole.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03 Three year time limit
2. No development shall be commenced unless and until a site investigation report (the
Report) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of ground
contamination and ground gases on site and shall include an identification and assessment
of the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA,
focusing primarily on risks to human health and controlled waters. The investigation
shall also address the implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site
workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services and landscaping schemes
and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems and property. The
investigation shall where appropriate include a risk assessment and an options appraisal
including the remedial strategy.
The proposed risk assessment, including the sampling and analytical strategy shall be
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the start of the site
investigation survey.
The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Report including
its risk assessment, options appraisal and recommendations for implementation of the
remedial strategy.
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 were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Local
Planning Authority.
3. Prior to the commencement of the development, the applicant shall submit to the Local
Planning Authority in writing an assessment of vibration levels expected at the
development due to the passage of freight trains. This assessment shall identify the likely
impact of such freight movements including the times such freight movements occur and
shall further propose, where necessary, appropriate mitigation measures to protect the
development from the effects of such vibration. Once agreed in writing, all agreed
vibration mitigation measures shall be implemented fully in the construction of the
building.
4. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted
to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is started. Such
scheme shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary
and surface treatment and shall be carried out within 12 months of the commencement of
development and thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning
Authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced to the
satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
5. No development shall commence until an external lighting scheme for the apartments has
been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such scheme
as is approved shall be implemented in full prior to the occupation of any dwelling.
6. Standard Condition J04X Bin Stores
7. No development shall commence until a scheme of recycling facilities for the apartments
contained within the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. 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 hereby approved, samples and details of
the materials for the external elevations of the development shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out
using the approved materials, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
9. Standard Condition F03X Surfacing
10. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the
undertaking of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4) (a-d) of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act, 1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning
Authority, and the Local Planning Authority has given its approval in writing. The
planning obligation will provide that a commuted sum as required by Policy H8 of the
Adopted, having regard to the standards set out in Policy R2 of the Adopted UDP and
Salford's Greenspace Strategy will be paid to the Local Planning Authority for open space
and recreation space purposes.
11. No development authorised by this permission shall take place unless and until the local
planning authority has received and approved in writing a site operating statement in
relation to provision of permitted hours for construction works, delivery of materials and
delivery and collection of equipment, provision and use of on-site parking for contractors'
and workpeople's vehicles, wheelwashing facilities, street sweeping and no development
or activities related or incidental thereto shall take place on the site in contravention of
such site operating statement.
12. No development authorised by this permission shall take place unless and until the local
planning authority has received and approved in writing an assessment of the noise
impact from the passage of freight trains. This assessment shall identify the likely impact
of such freight movements including the times at which such freight movements occur
and shall identify, where necessary, appropriate additional mitigation measures to protect
the development form the effects of such noise. Once agreed in writing, all acoustic
protection measures shall be implemented fully into the construction of the building prior
to first occupation.
13. Prior to the commencement of the development, the applicant shall submit to the local
planning authority, in writing, a scheme detailing acoustic protection measures for each
faēade of the building to protect future occupants from the effects of external noise from
both road and rail traffic. The scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed
details in full prior to the first occupation of the building and shall be maintained
thereafter.
14. No development authorised by this permission shall take place unless and until the local
planning authority has received and approved in writing a scheme detailing security
measures. The scheme should include secure by design principles. Once agreed in
writing, all security measures shall be implemented prior to first occupation.
15. This permission shall relate to the amended plan received on 15th January 2007; which
shows a revised apartment type of the 3-bed duplex apartment immediately adjacent to
the vehicular entrance on Ford Lane
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R028B Interests of public safety
3. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
4. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
5. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
6. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
7. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
8. Standard Reason R008B Development-Building in vicinity
9. Standard Reason R013B Use of parking areas
10. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation
space for future occupiers in accordance with policies H8 and R2 of the Adopted UDP.
11. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
12. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
13. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
14. To ensure design and crime principles in accordance with policy DES 10 of the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan.
15. Standard Reason R019 Avoidance of Doubt
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be
satisfied prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions
precedent renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may
be taken by the Council.
2. The applicants attention is drawn to the advice provided by United Utilities regarding
drainage
3. 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. Not withstanding the requirements of the conditions attached above the applicants
attention is drawn to the advice and requirements of Network Railway
5. The applicant is advise that any disused access points / footway crossings are to be made
good at the developers expense
6. In addition to the requirements of condition 13, the scheme shall consider both glazing
and ventilation specifications ensuring that the internal noise levels can comply with the
requirements of BS8233:1999. Details shall include the glazing specifications and also
the associated sound reduction index of proposed glazing. Facades facing the Railway
Line or Ford Lane shall be detailed separately including details of alternative acoustic
ventilation methods to minimise the need to open windows to achieve summer cooling or
rapid ventilation.
.