PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
APPLICATION No:
07/55097/FUL
APPLICANT:
Morrison Highway Maintenance (FAO G Tindall)
LOCATION:
Land On James Corbett Road Salford 5
PROPOSAL:
Formation of a highway maintenance depot to include a two
storey office building, messing facility and stores/security
building, erection of 15m high lighting columns together with
associated car parking and alterations to existing vehicular
access
WARD:
Weaste And Seedley
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a plot of land on the corner of Daniel Adamson Road and James
Corbett Road. Planning permission is sought for the formation of a highway maintenance depot to
include a two storey office building, messing facility and stores/security building, erection of 15m
high lighting columns together with associated car parking and alterations to existing vehicular
access. The work has commenced on site.
The site is located in a predominantly industrial area. There are residential properties
approximately 20m from the northern boundary of the application site. In the immediate vicinity
there are other industrial uses including a plant hire company to the west, a sewer company to the
south and a Calor Gas storage company to the east. An approximately 2.5m high wall enclose the
site. Vehicle access to the site is obtained from James Corbett Road. The sites existing use was
for storing and crushing and grading recycled aggregates.
This application would seek to improve the access to the site by the construction of new kerb
radii. The proposed office building is located in the northwest corner of the site and would have a
footprint of 20.7m x 12.1m and would be 6.6m in height. The office building would be a modular
unit, which is a composite panel construction finished externally in a mid grey plastisol-coated
steel. In front of the office building would be a messing facilities building which would
accommodate canteen, lockers and toilets. The messing building would have a footprint of 7.3m x
7.3m and would be 3.4m in height and would be of a modular construction. The security cabin
located to the north of the entrance would have a footprint of 7.5m by 3.2m and would be 3.4m in
height. This building again would be of modular construction. Parking would also be provided for
13 cars. The remainder of the site would provide space for associated facilities for the depot
including a messing facility and stores. The messing facilities and stores would be located around
the perimeter of the site. Each of the materials bays would have a footprint of 5.2m by 5.2m and
they would be 2.4m in height. They would be located along the western boundary of the site.
Along the southern boundary of the site there would be a fuel area, a series of sign racks which
would be 1.2m in height and several LPG stores which would be 2.1m by 1.1m, secured to a
concrete base. Along the eastern boundary there would be car parking spaces for lorries, plant
machinery and two containers that would be 6.1m x 2.4m, measuring 2.5m in height. These
1
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
would be painted in a grey to match the proposed office building. The proposed operating hours
are between 7am till 7pm Monday to Friday, 7am till 1pm on Saturday and closed on Sunday.
SITE HISTORY
There have been no previous planning applications on this site.
CONSULTATIONS
GMGU – No objections to the proposal.
HSE – does not advise on safety grounds against the granting of planning permission in this case.
PUBLICITY
British Fuels, James Corbett Road, Salford, M5 2DX,
37 Bute Street, Salford, M50 1DU,
41 Bute Street, Salford, M50 1DU,
39 Bute Street, Salford, M50 1DU,
17 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
19 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
21 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
23 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
25 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
27 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
29 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
31 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
33 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
35 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
37 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
39 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
41 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
43 Humber Street, Salford, M50 1EB,
24 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
26 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
28 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
30 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
32 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
34 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
36 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
38 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
40 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
42 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
44 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
46 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
48 Borough Road, Salford, M50 1DX,
Calor Gas Limited, Daniel Adamson Road, Salford, M50 1DS,
Davis And Moore, Bute Street, Salford, M50 1DU,
5 Bute Street, Salford, M50 1DU,
A Plant Hire, James Corbett Road, Salford, M50 1DE,
2
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received no representations to this planning application.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments
DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING GUIDANCE
Mediacity:uk & Quays Point Supplementary Planning Guidance adopted 17th January 2007
Design and Crime Supplementary Planning Document adopted 19th July 2006
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of the propose use
is acceptable in this location, the impact of the proposal on the neighbouring uses and street scene
and whether there would be sufficient car parking.
Principle
This site is not allocated in the Unitary Development Plan, but the site does falls within the area
covered by the Media City Planning Guidance.
Policy ST3 states that local employment opportunities will be secured by protecting and
increasing the attractiveness of existing employment purposes.
The application site is located within a predominantly industrial area. The sites existing use was
for storing and crushing and grading recycled aggregates. I am of the opinion that the proposed
highway depot would also be a use which would wholly appropriate in this industrial area.
The application falls within the boundary of the Mediacity:uk & Quays Point Supplementary
Planning Guidance. The guidance sets out the strategic vision for this area. Policy MC:UK 2
promotes a mix of leisure, tourism and media and creative industries in the wider mediacity:uk
area, in line with policies contained within the Salford UDP.
Although this proposed use does not fall within the categories promoted in the Mediacity:uk &
Quays Point Planning Guidance, the promoted uses are focused towards Quays Point. Given the
appliactions site’s distance from Quay point and that the overall guidance seeks to creates a place
for people to work. I consider that a highway depot on this site would create a place for people to
work without conflicting with the surrounding uses and would not be out of context with the
surrounding area. I am therefore of the opinion that the proposed highway depot would be
acceptable.
3
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
The proposed use would employ approximately 20 staff. It is therefore considered that this would
ensure that the redevelopment of the site would still be for employment purposes and this would
be in accordance with Policy E5 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan.
I am therefore satisfied that the principal of development on this site to be acceptable and in
accordance with E5 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and the mediacity:uk & Quays
Point Supplementary Planning Guidance.
Impact on Amenity
DES1 requires developments to respond to its physical context, respect the positive character of
the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards local identity and distinctiveness.
DES7 states that development will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level
of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not
be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or
users.
DES10 states that developments must be designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour, the
fear of crime which supports personal and property security.
As previously discussed the proposal is an industrial area, however there are residential properties
approximately 20m from the northern boundary of the site. This site has formally been used for
industrial purposes and there are other heavy industrial uses neighbouring the site to the west and
east of the application property. The proposed opening hours are considered to be acceptable. I
am therefore of the opinion that the proposed depot on this site would not result in an increased
unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents.
I am of the opinion that the proposed development would respect the context of the area. The
proposed office block and security office would be visible from the street scene as they project
above the existing boundary walls of the development. They are modest in design and
appearance, but I do not consider that they have an unacceptable impact on the street scene.
I am therefore of the opinion that the proposed development would be in accordance with DES1
and DES7 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan.
Car Parking
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.
This application proposes spaces for 13 cars. Approximately 20 staff would be employed at the
site. The site is in close proximity to Eccles New Road and the metro link system, I consider the
site to be accessible and the level of car parking proposed to be acceptable.
I have received comments that the proposed radii should be improved. These radii are outside the
redline therefore an informative has been attached to the permission informing the applicant.
4
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
I have also received comments that a separate pedestrian access to the site would be required. I
have attached a condition to the permission requiring that the details of this access is submitted
within 3 months of the date of any permission and implemented within 12 months.
The plans do not show how provision will be made for disabled persons nor do they illustrate
where the cycle stores would be located. I am however confident that car parking spaces for
disabled persons and cycle bays can be accommodated within the site. I have therefore attached a
condition requiring that adequate disable and cycle storage is provided within the site in
accordance with the Unitary Development Plan’s minimum standards.
Other Issues
An objection has been received which raised points of natural surveillance of the street scene.
There is an existing 2.5m high boundary wall around the application site.
DES10 states that developments must be designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour, the
fear of crime which supports personal and property security.
The Design and Crime SPD is aimed primarily at new development, however it is also of
relevance to existing developments and owners and occupiers are encouraged to introduce crime
prevention measures wherever appropriate and practical.
Policy DC16 of the Design and Crime SPD states that boundary treatments must be permeable to
increase natural surveillance.
A 2.5m high boundary wall currently bounds the site. The existing wall will remain unaltered in
this application and consequently the current level of street surveillance will not be altered as a
result of this application. Surveillance of the street will in fact be increased, as the two-storey
office building would have windows at first floor level in the northern elevation, which would
overlook Daniel Adamson Road, thus improving on the current situation. In addition I am of the
opinion that the boundary treatment will ensure that the storage of materials is screened from
view ensuring that the proposal would not have an adverse impact upon the visual amenity of the
area. I consider that this need outweighs the need for a permeable boundary treatment.
CONCLUSION
I am of the opinion that the introduction this proposed use in this location would not be out of
keeping with the context of the surrounding area. There are residential properties approximately
20m from the northern boundary of the application site, however I am of the opinion that these
properties would not experience a reduction in the level of amenity. The proposed office
buildings and associated works are not considered to have an unacceptable impact on the amenity
of the area. I therefore consider that the proposal is in accordance with ST3, E5, DES1, DES7,
A10 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan and Media City Planning Guidance and Design
and Crime Supplementary Planning Document. I therefore recommend the application be
approved.
5
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03
2. Within 6 months of the date of this permission, notwithstanding the details shown on the
approved plans a revised car-parking layout that provides disabled car parking spaces within
the curtilage of the site in accordance with the standards outlined in the Unitary Development
Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The car
park shall be laid out in accordance with the approved details prior to the development first
being brought in use and retained as such thereafter.
3. Within 6 months of the date of this permission full details of the location, design and
construction of the cycle stores shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. Such approved cycle stores shall be constructed in accordance with the
approved details prior to the development first being brought in use and retained as such
thereafter.
4. Within 6 months of the date of this permission full details of the proposed kerb radii shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The radii shall be
constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to the development first being
brought in use and retained as such thereafter.
5. Within 6 months of the date of this permission full details of a separate pedestrian access to
the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
separate pedestrian access shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details prior
to the development first being brought in use and retained as such thereafter.
6. Within 6 months of the date of this permission full details of the proposed lighting columns
and lux spread diagrams shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The proposed columns shall be erected in accordance with the approved details
prior to the development first being brought in use and retained as such thereafter.
7. There shall be no open storage on site except within the confines of the bays shown on
submitted plans and technical information - Loose Materials Storage Bays. Materials stored
within the bays shall not exceed the highest part of the bay.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000
2. Standard Reason R026B
3. Standard Reason R026B
4. Standard Reason R026B
6
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
5. In accordance with Policy A2 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan
6. Standard Reason R005B
7. Standard Reason R004B
APPLICATION No:
07/55208/FUL
APPLICANT:
Elite Homes (NW) Ltd
LOCATION:
Pendlebury Miners Welfare Institute Temple Drive Swinton
M27 4EB
PROPOSAL:
Erection of two/three/three and half storey buildings
comprising 26 residential units together with associated car
parking and construction of new and alteration to existing
vehicular and pedestrian accesses
WARD:
Swinton South
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to the former Miners Welfare Club which include a bowling green and
associated car park. The site is approximately 0.53ha in size and now derelict with only a small
hardstanding remaining.
To the north east of the site is a playing field, St Augustine’s Church (a grade I listed building)
and St Augustine’s Conservation Area. To the east, south and west is residential with an
industrial unit (BASF formerly known as FEB) to the north.
There are a number of trees which line both sides of the boundaries of the site. At the entrance to
the site on Temple Drive, five poplars have been afforded the protection of a Tree Preservation
Order (No. 328).
Consent is sought for 26 residential units (10 apartments and 16 houses) together with associated
car parking and the construction of new and alterations to existing vehicular and pedestrian
accesses. The apartments would be located to the north of the site and would be three storey in
height. Three storey mews houses would be located to the south. Two storey accommodation
would be located to the east. The layout of the proposal would provide a new access off Temple
Drive with all the proposed dwellings facing inward to the access road. The design of the scheme
is of a traditional design.
7
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
A public footpath bounds the northern and southern boundaries from Temple Drive to High Bank
Road and Hospital Road.
Temple Drive would provide access to the site. Temple Drive is a cul-de-sac with the northern
end closed to vehicular traffic by bollards.
29 car parking spaces would be provided across the site.
SITE HISTORY
Planning permission was refused in February 2007 for a similar (albeit higher density scheme) by
the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel (06/53154/FUL). This particular scheme
sought consent for 42 residential units (31 apartments and 11 houses) together with associated car
parking and the construction of new and alterations to existing vehicular and pedestrian accesses.
The apartments proposed would have been located to the north of the site and would be three and
a half storey. Three storey mews houses would be located to the south. Two storey
accommodation would be located to the east. The layout of the proposal would provide a new
access off Temple Drive with all the proposed dwellings facing inward to the access road. The
design of the scheme was of a traditional design.
The reason for refusal states:
1. The proposed development would not provide an appropriate mix of residential
accommodation and would work against the provision of sustainable, mixed communities
contrary to policy H1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, The Council's
Housing Planning Guidance, Planning Policy Statement 1: Sustainable Development and
Planning Policy Statement 3 : Housing.
Planning permission was refused in May 2006 for a similar scheme under the Council’s scheme
of delegation (06/52456/FUL). That scheme sought consent for the erection of seven - three and
three and half storey blocks comprising 59 apartments together with associated car parking and
construction of new and alteration to existing vehicular and pedestrian accesses
The reasons for refusal state:
1. The proposed development would be detrimental to the visual amenity of the area as the
proposed access would require the removal of five trees which are subject of a tree
preservation order (TPO 328) contrary to Policy EN7 of the Adopted Unitary
Development Plan and Policy EN10 of the Draft Replacement UDP
2. The proposed development would by virtue of the high density and consequently the
insufficient level of usable private amenity space result in an unacceptable detrimental
impact on the living conditions of future residents. The overdevelopment of the site
would therefore be contrary to criterion 4 of Policy H1 and Policies ST11, DES7 and
DES1 of the Draft Replacement UDP
8
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
CONSULTATIONS
The Greater Manchester Geological Unit – No objection subject to the provision of a site
investigation condition and acoustic protection conditions. The acoustic conditions relate to no
openable windows with the front elevations of plots 1 – 4 and the none habitable windows within
the north gable of the apartment block, mechanical ventilation, and the construction of an acoustic
fence along the boundary of the public footpath to the north and side garden of plot 1.
United Utilities – No objection and provide the applicant with additional information regarding
the discharge of surface water.
Environment Agency – No objection in principle subject to the provision of a condition
regarding surface water regulation.
Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – They advise that “ The site is
reasonably well located in relation to public transport being just within walking distance of the
bus stops on Manchester Road and Bolton Road. Both these roads form part of the JETTS
Quality Bus Corridor network and as such will benefit from future public transport infrastructure
improvements. Both roads offer access to frequent bus services to a number of destinations
including Manchester, Bolton, Swinton and Leigh. 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.
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
can be achieved through measures such as the appropriate use of surfacing materials,
landscaping, lighting, signage and road crossings. Where possible these principles should also be
applied to the pedestrian routes between the site and the nearby bus stops on both Manchester
Road and Bolton Road.”
Police Architectural Liaison Advisor – “Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the
above application. This was the subject of a pre-planning consultation with this unit and as long
as it is built to Secured by Design standards I can see no problem with it.”
Sport England – No response to current application. However, previously they wished to object
to the proposed development, on the grounds that it would lead to the loss of an area of land
falling under the definition of a playing field.
The response then sets out what replacements should be sought should planning permission be
approved. I have summarised them below:
The cost of a comparable bowling facility. Sport England consider that a comparable
cost would be £80,000
An adequate level of provision of formal and informal open space
9
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
A contribution of £37,424 to mitigate the additional demand placed on built sport and
recreational facilities.
Ramblers Association – No objection.
Peak and Northern Footpaths Society – No response although their previous comments stated,
“If planning permission is granted, please include a condition that there must be no obstruction
of any public right of way. Should a temporary or permanent obstruction be unavoidable, then
no development should take place until a Diversion Order has been confirmed and the diversion
route, with satisfactory surface and adequate width and waymarking, is available for public use.”
The Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – No response
The Open Spaces Society – No Response
British Rail Board (Residuary) – No objection and offer further advice to the developer (with
regard to the Clifton Hall Tunnel also known locally as the Black Harry Tunnel)
PUBLICITY
The site has been advertised by both site and press notice.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 – 71 Temple Drive
265 Pendlebury Road
The Fountains, Swinton Hall Road
Victoria House, Swinton Hall Road
29 – 43 (odd) West Drive
1 – 23 North Drive
40 Goodwood Drive
4 Queens Close
22 East Drive
46 Ludlow Avenue
179, 181 and 183 Manchester Road, Pendlebury
651 Manchester Road, Worsley
Threshers, 258 Eccles Old Road
14 Stoneacre Court, Swinton
319 Walkden Road, Worsley
43 Moss Bank Road
20 Belmont Avenue, Clifton
12 Blantyre Road, Swinton
45 Riverhead, Houghton Green, Denton, Manchester
35 Repton Avenue, Droylesden, Manchester
19 Wedgwood Road, Clifton
24 Linksway, Swinton
28 Kestrel Avenue, Clifton
10
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 13 objection letters in response to the planning application publicity from 12
households. The following issues have been raised:Impact upon the Black Harry Tunnel
Access – parking problems and fire hazard
Passing points
Covenant on recreation land
Inappropriate mix
Contaminated land
Impact on St Augustine’s Church
Access to Swinton Hall Road – does not want damage to walls which featured in a Lowry
painting
Impact on trees has not been resolved
I have also received a concern from BSAF (formally known as FEB) regarding the pedestrian
access route which requires their land.
The following issues were reported to the panel previously (06/53154/FUL):
Increase in traffic congestion on Temple Drive
Increase in car parking problems on Temple Drive
Insufficient car parking for new development
Increase in possibility of highway accidents
Density to high
Poor design of scheme
Unimaginative layout
There is already a surplus of apartments in the area
Inadequate access for the large number of vehicles of future occupiers
Increase in noise
Impact on value of properties
The footpaths around the site provide access for criminals
Damage to Temple Drive road surface
Increase in pollution
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
11
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Highway Network, A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle
Parking in New Development, EN14 Pollution Control, DES7
Amenity of Users and Neighbours, CH1 Development Effecting the
Setting of a Listed Building, DEV5 Planning Conditions and
Obligations, DEV6 Incremental Development
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 planning permission was recently refused for a similar scheme on this site, 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 given the amendments to the scheme; whether there would be a detrimental
impact on residential amenity as a result of the amendments; whether the proposal would have
any impact upon highway safety as a result of the amendments; whether the impact upon the
setting of a listed building is acceptable as a result of the amendments; and whether the proposed
level of parking is acceptable as a result of the amendments and whether the proposal would
accord with the Council’s SPD on Planning Obligations, Green Space Strategy, Housing Planning
Guidance, SPD on Design and Crime. These issues will be discussed in turn below.
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 draft RSS has been through the examination in Public and that the Panel have recommended
that Salford's proposed housing provision figure should be 1600 dwellings per annum, significant
weight should be given to draft RSS in this regard. Whilst this is a significant increase from 530
per annum it is not considered necessary for this site to be developed purely in terms of the city
council meeting its housing requirement in draft RSS.
Policy ST11 states that sites for development will be brought forward in a sequential order. The
sequential order is defined below:
1
2
3
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
12
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
4
18th October 2007
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, within the red line boundary, has been previously developed and therefore
is considered as a brownfield site. The site is also in close proximity to Swinton Town Centre
and high frequency bus corridors on Manchester Road and Bolton Road.
Moreover, GMPTE consider “The site is reasonably well located in relation to public transport
being just within walking distance of the bus stops on Manchester Road and Bolton Road. Both
these roads form part of the JETTS Quality Bus Corridor network and as such will benefit from
future public transport infrastructure improvements. Both roads offer access to frequent bus
services to a number of destinations including Manchester, Bolton, Swinton and Leigh. 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”
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.
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 first refused scheme sought consent for 59 apartments at a density of 112 per hectare. The
following scheme considered by this panel sought consent for a mix of apartments and single
family dwellings and proposes 42 units of accommodation in total at a density of 79 dwellings per
hectare. The current scheme of 10 apartments and 16 single family dwellings would result in a
density of 45 dwellings per hectare.
The reason for refusal attached to the previous scheme states:
“The proposed development would not provide an appropriate mix of residential accommodation
and would work against the provision of sustainable, mixed communities contrary to policy H1 of
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan, The Council's Housing Planning Guidance,
Planning Policy Statement 1: Sustainable Development and Planning Policy Statement 3 :
Housing.”
Advice contained within Planning Policy Statement 3 for Housing seeks to secure appropriate
densities on previously developed land. Densities are proposed at between 30 and 50 dwellings
per hectare. As such, I consider that this scheme would provide an appropriate density of new
residential development.
I am satisfied that a density of 45 dwellings per hectare is appropriate for this location and is in
accordance with policy ST12.
13
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
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.
Policy HOU1 of the Housing Planning Guidance states that within West Salford the large
majority of dwellings within new developments should be in the form of houses rather than
apartments, in order to protect the existing character of the areas and reflects the generally lower
levels of accessibility compared to other parts of the city.
The scheme as proposed would provide a mix of apartments and family accommodation. The
mix of the proposal now comprises of 10 two bedroom apartments would be provided and 16
three and four bedroom houses. Criterion C of policy H1 goes on to state that in determining the
appropriate mix, one of the factors that should be taken into consideration is the mix of dwellings
in the surrounding area.
I consider that the mix identified above and having regard to the wider area and the improvements
on the previous scheme is sufficient to satisfy the Planning Guidance for Housing and policy H1
of the adopted UDP as it provides predominantly houses.
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 onsite 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
14
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
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.
The current scheme has reduced significantly in terms of the number of residential units proposed
from that of the original scheme. The Housing Planning Guidance requires that all residential
development over 25 units should include 20% affordable housing. No affordable housing units
are proposed in this instance.
The applicant has indicated that there is no need to provide affordable housing as it is not based
on a robust assessment in accordance with the latest advice from the DCLG on SHMAs. This is in
part true, given that the Housing Planning Guidance was adopted in December 2006, and the
latest guidance from government was only published August 2007. However, the affordable
needs calculation in the Housing Planning Guidance was based on advice in the December 2005
Housing Market Assessments - Draft Practice Guidance. There is little difference between the
draft Guidance and that recently published. The assessment though is considered to be
sufficiently robust and was produced in accordance with the advice in the draft guidance. It is a
material consideration in the determination of planning applications given the document has been
adopted by the city council for development control purposes and therefore has weight.
Since the adoption of the Housing Guidance the city council have commissioned Fordham
Associates to undertake a further needs assessment. Their work is based on an extensive survey
and face to face interviews, and shows that there is a need for 674 additional affordable units per
annum over the next five years. This is a need greater than that identified in the planning
guidance (for 603 units). This study will be published shortly and will feed into a City-region
wide SHMA.
The requirement in the Housing Planning Guidance is for 20% of units to be affordable on sites of
25 or more dwellings. This applies city wide although the Guidance recognises a lower proportion
may be appropriate where for example there is a very high level of affordable housing in the
immediate area (Policy HOU3). I disagree with the applicant therefore that "There is a mix of
housing in the vicinity of the site but, that includes a significant proportion of affordable housing
including a number of estates of ex-council housing. As such it is not considered that there is a
demonstrable need for affordable housing within the vicinity of the site".
I consider that affordable housing on this site would improve the mix of housing tenure within the
local area. The 2001 Census shows that in the Swinton South Ward 69.22% of dwellings are
owner occupied and 20.75% social rented; in the Swinton Community Committee Area 64.11%
are owner occupied and 25.69% social rented. Citywide the proportion of owner occupation
accommodation is 56.35% and social rented forms 31.41% of the stock. This clearly shows that
within this area of the city the mix of accommodation is skewed more towards owner occupation
as opposed to affordable accommodation. The provision of affordable units, in the form of social
rented units, would diversify the tenure profile and help to create a more sustainable community.
Notwithstanding that there is a clear and obvious need for affordable housing, despite the position
set out by the applicant, I consider that in this instance it may be acceptable for no affordable
housing to be provided. Policy HOU3 states that a lower proportion of affordable units may be
appropriate where "The scheme was substantially developed before the adoption of this
15
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Guidance". It is recognised that there have been two previous applications on this site refused
over the last couple of years, and I consider that this current proposal seeks to address those
previous reasons for refusal and an argument can be made to that the scheme has been
substantially developed before the adoption of the Guidance.
I am also mindful of the fact that the Committee Report into the previously refused application
06/53154/FUL contained the following paragraph;
"This current application was submitted in July 2006 and the previous refused scheme was
submitted in March of 2006. The Housing Planning Guidance was adopted by the Council in
December 2006. Therefore, it is a material planning consideration in the consideration of this
application. However, given that the previous refusal did not include a reason relating to the
provision of affordable housing I do not consider that affordable housing provision should be
secured in this instance having regard to the above. I am also mindful of the additional
contributions the developer has agreed to provide regarding the provision of a replacement
bowling green which will provide added value to the wider community".
I consider that it would be unreasonable to therefore now request affordable housing units on this
site. Therefore, whilst I disagree that there is no need for affordable housing on this site or in the
immediate location of the site I am mindful of the history to the site I consider that it can be
argued the scheme was substantially developed before the Guidance Note was adopted. It is
therefore appropriate to require no affordable accommodation.
Design and Crime
Policy DES10 development will not be permitted unless it is designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour and the fear of crime.
The Police Architectural Liaison Officer had raised some concerns regarding the previous layout.
However, the applicant has sought the advice of the Police ALO prior to the submission of the
latest scheme. As such the ALO has reported “This was the subject of a pre-planning
consultation with this unit and as long as it is built to Secured by Design standards I can see no
problem with it.”
I am of the opinion that the proposal is acceptable in design and crime terms and would therefore
satisfy the policies highlighted above and the Council’s adopted SPD for Crime.
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.
16
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Adopted 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 design of the scheme includes traditional house types. They would be constructed using
brick with concrete roof tiles. The windows are articulated with brick headers and cils. The roof
detail includes a number of small pike gables above bedroom windows. This detail is carried out
across the house types and apartments.
I consider that the design and proposed materials for the scheme is appropriate within this area.
The design of the proposal is similar to that previously submitted scheme. Given that the
previously decision did not include a reason for refusal relating to design, I do not consider that
the changes to the scheme are sufficient to warrant a different view in this instance.
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 proposal would maintain the Councils normal separation distances both internally and to
existing properties.
The GMGU have assessed the submitted noise assessment. The neighbouring industrial does
generate noise. The submitted acoustic report sets out mitigation measures. The GMGU have no
objection subject to conditions to secure noise reduction and mitigation measures. This is also in
accordance with the previous advice of the Director of Environmental Services. I have attached
conditions to ensure that the noise emanating from the neighbouring industrial use does not
detrimentally impact upon the amenity of future occupiers of the development.
As such, I am of the opinion the scheme accords with the policies highlighted above.
Effect on Listed Building Conservation Area
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.
To the north of the site is St Augustine’s Conservation Area. At the centre of the conservation
area is St Augustine’s Church, a grade I listed building. The closest part of built area of the site
would be 65m from St Augustine’s Church between which lies the industrial premises of BASF
and includes a number of silos in this area of the site.
Given the distance of the site from the listed building, the industrial use between and coupled
with the maximum height of the proposed development, it has previously been considered that the
proposed development preserves the setting of the neighbouring listed building character and
appearance of the Conservation Area nor was this considered a reason to refuse planning
permission previously by this panel.
17
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Since members considered the previous application a conservation area appraisal has been
produced for St Augustine’s Conservation Area and been through a public consultation exercise.
The appraisal may need to be revised to take into account the consultation responses before
formal adoption by the Council.
The purpose of a conservation area appraisal is to define what is important about the character
and appearance of the conservation area, and to identify its special characteristics. It is also a
vital tool to inform the active management of the area. It identifies the area’s special features and
changing needs through a process that includes researching its historic development and carrying
out a detailed townscape analysis and character assessment.
The appraisal highlights a number of issues relating to the Conservation Area and suggestions for
improvement and management. The details of which are discussed within the appraisal. I
consider of most relevant to this current planning application is the following paragraph of the
appraisal states “There is a need to examine the planning and conservation issues relating to the
conservation area and its possible development in the wider context of the sites adjacent to its
boundaries. An appropriate Development Plan for this part of Pendlebury would facilitate a
balanced assessment of the need for preservation and the potential for enhancement of the
conservation area, and the contribution that development within the conservation area and its
setting could make to these broad objectives.”
I agree that a review of land uses via a ‘development plan’ for this area, adjacent to the
boundaries of the conservation area closest to the entrance to St Augustine’s, could result in a
significant improvement to the enhancement and preservation of the St Augustine’s church and
conservation area.
Also of relevance is the critique within the appraisal (p.38) of the recent housebuilding to the west
of the conservation area. This concludes that the materials are in part inappropriate and that the
layout has not fulfilled the potential for informal surveillance over the currently vulnerable
churchyard. It states that:
"Informal surveillance has an important part to play in discouraging vandalism and other forms
of anti-social behaviour, and future applications for development adjacent to the conservation
area will be required to address this issue".
Section 10 goes on to set out the Council's expectations of developers:
"Future development proposals will need to take into account this appraisal document and
demonstrate a clear understanding of the special character of the conservation area.
Developers will need to show how their proposals respond to the special architectural and
historic interest of the area. Planning controls will be applied in accordance with the
Council’s policies to manage change within and adjacent to the conservation area, and to
protect and enhance its special qualities. Specialist advice from the Council’s conservation
and urban design officers will inform the Council’s assessment of planning applications and
wider management issues.
New development will be monitored to ensure that it is carried out in accordance with the
approved plans and any conditions attached to the grant of planning permission or listed
18
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
building consent. The Council’s enforcement powers will be implemented in respect of
unauthorised work.
High quality design and materials will be expected both within the conservation area and in
its setting. In some instances, the setting will be broadly defined in order to protect both
medium and long distance views of the church and the buildings of its precinct. New
development should actively look to integrate with these buildings in terms of layout, scale,
massing, height, materials and detailing. Informal surveillance has an important part to play
in discouraging vandalism and other forms of anti-social behaviour in the churchyard, and
future applications for development affecting the conservation area will be required to
address this issue."
It is appropriate, therefore, to consider policy DEV6 ‘Incremental Development’ in respect to the
likelihood of an emerging masterplan for the wider site. Policy DEV6 states that “on sites within
or immediately adjacent to an area identified for major development, planning permission will
not be granted for incremental development that would unacceptably hamper or reduce the
development options for that wider area”
The reasons justification concludes “In some circumstances, it may be appropriate for
development to be resisted until a masterplan has been produced for the wider site.” It is clear
that the current stage of the conservation area appraisal is a new material consideration in the
determination of this latest application. I am satisfied that the draft conservation area appraisal
does have weight in the determination of this application, albeit in my considered opinion, little at
this time.
Moreover, given that the conservation area appraisal is in draft form at present (and that it is this
document that has identified the need for a comprehensive review of land uses which bound St
Augustine’s Church) and that the larger neighbouring site is an employment site which is
currently in use (and has recently been invested in and extended), coupled with the green field
status of the land to the north, I do not consider that it could be reasonably argued at this time that
this proposal would represent incremental development.
In apportioning weight I am mindful of the previous decision of this panel in that the earlier
schemes would not detrimental effect the setting of the listed building
Planning Obligations
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.
Adopted Policy DEV5 provides the policy framework for the use of planning obligations and
obligations. The Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document sets out the planning
contributions required.
In accordance with the above policies, the applicant has agreed to make a contribution of
£131,386 plus a 2.5% administration fee towards public open space in the vicinity of the site;
19
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
improvements to the city’s public realm, heritage and infrastructure; the training of local residents
in construction skills; and the offsetting of greenhouse gas emissions. I have attached a condition
requiring such a contribution. This is broken down as follows:
Open Space
The development would result in a total of 105 bedspaces (75 from houses and 30 from smaller
apartments). This would generate an open space contribution equal to the provision and 20year
maintenance of:
1.
0.07665ha (766.5sq.m) of sports pitches
2.
0.042ha (420sq.m) of amenity/informal open space
3.
0.01875ha (187.5sq.m) of children's equipped play space
4.
0.012ha (120sq.m) of youth and adult facilities
The development site includes a large area of open space, which lies adjacent to the proposed
residential area. This open space is identified in the Greenspace Strategy as a proposed Local
Semi-Natural Greenspace site. While the Planning Design and Access statement makes reference
to this area and the Council's objective for it to accommodate wildlife habitats and increase
ecological interest, there is very little detail regarding any proposed improvements to this site.
However, as confirmed previously, it may be appropriate for this area to form the
amenity/informal open space element of the open space requirement. This would be the case
provided the site is managed for public access in perpetuity. The intention for this area to be
maintained through a management company is noted. A landscaping scheme and management
plan for this area should be submitted and agreed with the Planning Authority.
Due to the size of the development and the constraints on site, it is considered the remaining open
space elements should be provided as a financial contribution to be directed towards the
improvement of existing sites in the vicinity of the development. The financial contribution
breakdown for this development would be:
1. £12,810 for capital and maintenance of sports pitches (£122 X 105bedspaces)
2. £27,450 for capital and maintenance of children's equipped provision (£366 X
75bedspaces)
3. £12,780 for capital and maintenance of youth and adult facilities (£426 X 30bedspaces)
Therefore the total financial contribution expected from this development would be: £53,040.
The previous report to this panel suggested that this contribution could be directed to, included:
The proposed LEAP site at Sherwood Drive
Improvements to the playing fields immediately north of the amenity space; or
Victoria Park
I still consider that this would be an appropriate area to direct the obligation.
Remainder of the Obligation SPD
Further to the openspace requirements the obligations SPD sets out requirements for:
public realm (at £1,500 per dwelling = £39,000),
construction training (at £150 per dwelling = £3,900) and
climate change if the development isn't intending to reach at least Very Good Breeam
standard (at £200 per dwelling = £5,200).
20
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
All these added together and including the open space requirement would equal a total planning
obligations contribution of:
£101,140 plus 2.5% administration fee
(along with the agreed £80,000 compensation for the loss of the bowling green - which actually
would make a s106 of £181,140 plus admin fee).
At this stage I consider that it would be appropriate that the public realm, infrastructure and
heritage monies could be directly towards public footpath improvements adjacent to the site and
access improvements at the top of Temple Drive.
In conclusion, 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.
Loss of the Bowling Green
Whilst the former club building is agreed to be brownfield land, it continues to be a recreation site
due the former bowling green, protected by UDP Policy R1. PPG17 confirms that all recreation
uses should be considered before a site can be "surplus to requirements".
Bowling Greens are classified under 'Other Youth and Adult Facilities'. The Greenspace Strategy
Policy GS9 states that "a full range of adult and youth facilities should be available within each
Community Committee Area". A list of suggested 'adult and youth facilities' is provided. The
2001-2 audit of urban open space identified that the Swinton CCA only met 13-8% of the NPFA
standard for Youth and Adult sports facilities.
Policy GS13 in the Greenspace Strategy sets out the Council's approach to redundant and
replacement facilities. The 'brownfield' element of the site is not identified as a priority site to
meet the standards in the Greenspace Strategy.
A replacement bowling green has been estimated at £90,000. Sport England have costed a
replacement bowling green at £80,000. Given that Sport England are of the opinion that an
appropriate cost to replace a bowling green of £80,000, and given that the developer has agreed to
this figure, I am of the opinion that £80,000 to be an appropriate financial contribution to mitigate
the loss of this bowling green.
Car Parking and Access
Adopted 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.
In considering the previous application the Council’ consultant highway engineer offered no
objection to the scheme subject to further details of the access to the site and a condition requiring
emergency access to be provided.
As stated earlier the density of the scheme has been reduced. The comments from the Council’s
consultant highway engineer in response to the current scheme recommends the following
measures to mitigate the impact of the proposal on the highway network:
21
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
The proposed junction of Temple Drive and new access road to be designed and
constructed as per applicants drawing no. 80 03 ‘Access Detail’
Provision of passing places along Temple Drive
Provision of safe parking along the narrowest part of Temple Drive, this may involve
strengthening the existing grass verges with tarmac
Provision of a suitable emergency access
Provision of adequate emergency access
Considerate contractors
The current scheme has been designed as per the applicants previous drawing. I have attached a
condition requiring a scheme detailing a suitable emergency access. It is likely that the existing
bollard at the junction with Swinton Hall Road and Temple Drive would be replaced with a
telescopic bollard. This suggestion would be acceptable to the Fire Service. I have also attached
a considerate contractors condition. The site is in close proximity to Victoria Park and its
recently refurbished car park, as such, I do not consider it appropriate to refuse this scheme on the
basis that it does not include a car park for the neighbouring playing fields.
However, since the previous refusal the applicant has discussed with the Local Highway
Authority the possibility of utilising what would become the emergency access point at the
junction of Swinton Hall Road for construction purposes. The Councils highway consultant has
indicated that this would require a temporary closure order to safeguard pedestrian safety and that
this would be subject to a separate consultation and process with the residents of Temple Drive.
The previous scheme did not include any grounds for refusal on highway safety. However, given
that the scheme was considered inappropriate in principle the mitigation measures were not
considered in detail. Therefore, now that the amended scheme has overcome the in principle
concerns it is necessary to ensure that the detail is conditioned to ensure highway safety. With
regard to points 2 and 3 I have attached a condition requiring a scheme to be designed and
approved to ensure parking and passing provision along Temple Drive.
I am still of the opinion that the proposed access to the site would, with conditions, be acceptable
in highway terms, as such, I do not consider that the proposed access to constitute a reasonable
reason to refuse planning permission in this instance.
Trees
Policy EN10 states that development that would result in the unacceptable loss of trees will not be
permitted.
The site has been inspected by the Councils Consultant Arborist with regard to the execution and
construction of a footpath on the northern side of five protected Lombardy Poplar trees. The five
Lombardy Poplar trees are large, mature specimens all reaching a uniform height of
approximately 15m to 20m. They offer a significant amenity value to the local area and will help
to generate an impression of maturity to the new development.
The Arboricultural Method Statement, which was submitted by Trevor Bridge Associates in
September 2006 (Ref. No. DG/2827/MethodStatement)’ outlines the position and construction
method of protective fencing that should be erected in order to afford the correct level of
22
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
protection to the trees during the construction process. It also provides a specification for the
construction processes that should be employed when carrying out works within the Root
Protection Area. All of these fencing and construction processes are satisfactory and conform to
BS5837:2005.
The consultant arborist considers the methodology to be appropriate to safeguard the Lombardy
Poplars subject to a condition requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with the
advice and recommendations contained within the submitted Arboricultural Method Statement. I
have attached a condition to this end.
Moreover, the changes to the layout of the scheme have also resulted in the retention of a number
of additional trees within the site which offer screening to the neighbouring industrial premises.
The Council’s consultant arborist has re-visited the site and the submitted tree assessment. The
proposed layout would result in the removal of part of the existing footpath adjacent to the trees.
The Council highway engineers have advised on the suitability of the design of the proposed
access.
The arborist is of the opinion that the proposed highway works are unlikely to have any
significant impact upon the trees. However, to minimise any impact to the roots of the trees and
to safeguard the trees during construction of the proposal highway alterations, the arborist, has
recommended that an additional condition be attached which requires the method of construction
of the highway works to be agreed in writing.
With the inclusion of this additional condition I am satisfied that the trees which have the
protection of a preservation order would be safeguarded. As such, I am satisfied that the proposal
would accord with policy EN10 of the adopted UDP.
Other issues
The revised scheme which includes a revised acoustic boundary treatment to the rear of the
proposed car park. The position of the fence will retain footpath 4m in width at its narrowest
point.
I have no objections from the Councils Rights of Way Officer. Moreover, it has been pointed out
through wider consultation that the neighbouring public footpaths are becoming overgrown and
difficult to navigate. Should members be minded to approve the scheme, I consider that some, if
not all of the monies, secured by S106 as part of the ‘public realm, infrastructure and heritage’,
could be directed towards improving the public footpath particular the link from Temple Drive to
St Augustine’s.
The Black Harry Tunnel
Following the recent collapse of the tunnel on Barton Road I have consulted the owners of the
Clifton Hall Tunnel which is known locally as the Black Harry Tunnel. The tunnel is no longer in
use and has been infilled. The response of the British Rail Board (Residuary) is set out in full
below:
23
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
“This development lies over the line of Clifton Hall Tunnel and the site also includes construction
shaft No.4.
The tunnel has been infilled and I have few concerns about its stability although the possible
imposition of additional loads from buildings up to three and a half storeys high may well cause
some movement in the structure and surrounding ground. Accordingly I recommend that the
building foundations are arranged so as to avoid placing additional loads on the tunnel and also
that they are capable of accommodating some degree of differential ground movements. I also
recommend that the construction shaft is located and exposed at an early stage to ensure that
inappropriate construction is not completed on or around the shaft.
I have no concerns for construction traffic using Temple Drive provided it conforms to The Road
Vehicles (Construction and Uses) Regulations 1986 and amendments”.
The Councils highway engineer informs me that this legislation would not provide any further
restrictions than those currently covering vehicles using Temple Drive such as delivery vehicles,
HGV’s and refuse collections.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
In accordance with Policy H8, R2, DEV5 of the Adopted UDP and the adopted SPD for Planning
Obligations 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 £131,386 (plus a 2.5%
administration fee). This would contribute to the provision of open space in the vicinity.
Contribute towards the maintenance of the informal provision adjoining the development site.
In accordance with Policies R1 of the Adopted UDP and The Councils Greenspace Strategy, 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 £80,000. This would mitigate the loss of the
bowling green on site and would contribute to existing facilities in the vicinity.
Additional trees, other than those protected by preservation order would also be retained along the
northern boundary with the public footpath and neighbouring industrial units.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I am satisfied that the scheme accords with the policies of the development and
that subject to the following conditions and legal agreement the application should be approved. I
do not consider that there are any other material planning considerations which outweigh this
view.
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, improvement to public, infrastructure, heritage, construction training, sustainability
and replacement sports provision.
24
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03
2. Standard Condition D03Y
3. Standard Condition C01Y
4. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans unless otherwise
agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority:
80 02 RevB
80 03
DUN 02
RICH/02 Rev C
04/3456/SHER
TCON 12
SDF 00 04
SDF 00 13.1
SDF 00 26
SDF 00 16
SDF 00 09
SDF 00 01A
10BL PL
5. 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.
6. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme detailing the emergency access off
Temple Drive / Swinton Hall Road shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local
Planning Authority. The scheme shall include the method to control access and any markings
required to ensure that the access is kept clear from obstruction and a timetable for
implementation. The approved details shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed
timetable for implementation and shall be retained at all times thereafter.
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. No development shall be started until full details of the location, design and construction of
25
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
bin stores have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Such approved bin stores shall thereafter be constructed and made available for use before the
development is brought into use.
9. The construction of the development hereby approved shall incorporate the implications and
recommendations of the Arboricultural Method Statement supplied by Trevor Bridge
Associates in September 2006 (Ref. No. DG/2827/MethodStatement) which accompanied the
application
10. No development shall be started until all the trees within (or overhanging) the site, with the
exception of those trees clearly shown to be felled on the submitted plan, have been
surrounded by substantial fences which shall extend to the extreme circumference of the
spread of the branches of the trees (or such positions as may be agreed in writing by the Local
Planning Authority). Such fences shall be erected in accordance with a specification to be
submitted to and approved in writing by Local Planning Authority and shall remain until all
development is completed and no work, including any form of drainage or storage of
materials, earth or topsoil shall take place within the perimeter of such fencing.
11. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme detailing the provision of passing
places and parking provision along Temple Drive shall be submitted for the written approval
of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include the method to ensure that the
passing places and parking provision are kept clear from obstruction and a timetable for
implementation. The approved details shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed
timetable for implementation and shall be retained at all times thereafter.
12. 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.
13. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme detailing the construction method for
the highway access works shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning
Authority. The scheme shall include details of the arboricultural methods and practices to
26
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
minimise impact upon the root systems of the adjacent protected poplar trees. The scheme
shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.
14. Prior to the commencement of development full details of the boundary wall to the north of
the protected poplar trees and along the common boundary with BSAF (FEB) and shall be
submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The wall shall be
constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to first occupation of any dwelling.
15. Prior to first occupation the windows to all rooms facing north on plots 1-6 shall be nonopenable with a minimum sound reduction index of Rw = 32 dB and shall be retained
thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
16. Prior to first occupation the rooms facing north on plots 1-6 shall have acoustically attenuated
mechanical ventilation with a minimum sound reduction index of Rw = 32 dB and shall be
retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
17. Prior to first occupation the windows to all rooms facing north on plots 17-26 shall be nonopenable with a minimum sound reduction index of Rw = 24 dB and shall be retained
thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
18. Prior to first occupation all rooms facing north on plots 17-26 shall have acoustically
attenuated mechanical ventilation with a minimum sound reduction index of Rw = 24 dB and
shall be retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
19. Prior to first occupation of plot 1 a scheme detailing an acoustic barrier of at least 2m in
height and a surface density of 10kg/m3 shall be erected along the northern and western
boundaries of the rear garden of plot 1. The construction of plot 1 shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved scheme prior to first occupation and shall be retained thereafter
unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
20. Prior to first occupation of any dwelling hereby approved an acoustic barrier of at least 2.5m
in height and a surface density of at least 10kg/m3 shall be erected along the northern
boundary of the site as depicted in Figure 1 of the Hepworth Acoustics report No 3847.6V1
dated September 2007 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
21. 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 H1, H8, R2 and DEV5 of the City
of Salford Unitary Development Plan and the policies contained within the Planning
Obligations SPD, will be paid to the Local Planning Authority for improvements to and
maintenance of existing open space provision and public realm, infrastructure and heritage
and training programmes for local construction workers.
27
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000
2. Standard Reason R004B
3. Standard Reason R004B
4. Standard Reason R019
5. Standard Reason R004B
6. In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A 8 of the City of Salford Unitary
Development Plan.
7. Standard Reason R024B
8. Standard Reason R024B
9. Standard Reason R036B
10. Standard Reason R036B
11. Standard Reason R026B
12. Standard Reason R028B
13. Standard Reason R036B
14. Standard Reason R004B
15. Standard Reason R024B
16. Standard Reason R024B
17. Standard Reason R024B
18. Standard Reason R024B
19. Standard Reason R024B
20. Standard Reason R024B
21. To ensure that the development hereby approved is successful and sustainable and that it
meets the need for new and improved facilities and infrastructure it generates. This is in
accordance with Policy DEV5 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 2004-2016.
28
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
APPLICATION No:
07/55252/REM
APPLICANT:
M2A Developments LLP
LOCATION:
Land On South Side Of Holyoake Road Walkden Worsley
PROPOSAL:
Reserved Matters Application for the appearance, landscaping
layout and scale for 151 dwellings and associated
environmental improvements pursuant to outline consent
04/49784
WARD:
Walkden South
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a broadly rectangular area of land on the south side of Holyoake Road
in Walkden. The application site is bounded to the north by Holyoake Road and beyond which are
residential properties; to the east the site is bounded by two storey residential properties and to the
south by the Southport – Manchester railway line. To the west of the site are more residential
properties, some with commercial uses at ground floor level. The site is currently occupied by a
trading estate, with several units vacant and contains a range of industrial uses. The site is
currently accessed via Holyoake Road and Mullineux Street that is unadopted.
The application site benefits from outline planning permission (04/49784/OUT) for residential
development together with alterations to existing vehicle access. This extant consent was subject
to conditions including one requiring a s106 agreement in relation to the provision of Open
Space.
The application seeks consent for landscaping, layout and scale for 151 dwellings. The
application also proposes areas of public openspace and environmental improvements. The
individual aspects of the scheme will be discussed in further detail below.
SITE HISTORY
04/49784/OUT – An outline application for residential development together with alteration to
existing vehicular access was granted consent on 3rd March 2005.
CONSULTATIONS
Greater Manchester Architectural Liaison Unit – no comments received to date
United Utilities – no comments received to date
29
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Environment Agency – request that a drainage strategy for the site is provided to show where the
surface water is to be directed to and that the rate of run-off would be no more than the existing
site generates.
Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – no comments received to date
Design and Heritage Team (Salford City Council) – acknowledge that the site is a difficult site to
develop and has benefited from extensive pre-application discussions. Consider that the density
and massing of the site is appropriate given its good location in relation to shops and services and
the massing of the flats opposite the site. Conclude that the design of the site offers a bespoke
answer to the limited opportunities that the site has to offer including ensuring an appropriate and
strong frontage along Holyoake Road, all properties having frontages on to the street and in some
cases dual frontages and accommodating the changes in levels with front and rear entrances,
which is considered to be a positive approach to using the topography of the site in a beneficial
way. Minor concerns were raised by the Design and Heritage team regarding individual house
types, these have subsequently been addressed by the applicant. The team consider that the site
offers bespoke modern living within a constrained boundary, the properties are outward looking
and offer the chance to provide a more social neighbourhood which is considered to be important
with modern patterns of work and recreation.
Friends of Walkden Station – wish to see part of the development site set aside for carparking for
the railway station.
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 29th August 2007
A press notice was displayed in the Advertiser on the 30th August 2007
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
58-108 Walkden Road
Coniston House, Holyoake Road
Walkden Railway Station
Options House, Holyoake Road
Rothwell Robinson Ltd, Holyoake Road
Flat 1 – 21 Rydal House, Holyoake Road
Flat 1- 18 Coniston House, Holyoake Road
1-8 Old Oake Close
27-41 Holyoake Road (odds)
50-62 Holyoake Road (evens)
1-9 Holly Avenue (odds)
2-10 Chilham Road (evens)
1-10 Blantyre Avenue
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 12 letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity and one
petition with 81 signatures. The following issues have been raised:Public facilities are overstretched
A large amount of woodland/ wasteland would be destroyed
30
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Lack of carparking
Height of the proposed dwellings
Overlooking from balconies
Materials of the proposed dwellings
Flat roofs to the property
Problems for emergency parking to the avenues
Loss of mature trees
Design of the proposed development
Problems with drainage
Proposed dwellings are not suitable for middle aged families, the elderly or the infirm
Public Transport not sufficient
Removal of the bollards
Development would contain social housing
Lack of areas for the existing children of Walkden to play
In addition one letter of support has also been received.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP2 Enhancing the Quality of Life
DP3 Quality in New Development
DP4 Promoting Sustainable Economic Growth and Competitiveness and Social Inclusion
UR1 Urban Renaissance
UR3 Promoting Social Inclusion through Urban Accessibility and Mobility
UR10 Greenery, Urban Greenspace and the Public Realm
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
ST1 Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods
ST5 Transport Networks
ST6 Major Trip Generating Development
ST8 Environmental Quality
ST12 Development Density
ST14 Global Environment
DES1 Respecting Context
DES2 Circulation and Movement
DES3 Design of Public Space
DES4 Relationship of Development to Public Space
DES9 Landscaping
DES10 Design and Crime
H1 Provision of New Housing Development
A1 Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
A2 Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
A8 Impact of Development on the Highway Network
PLANNING APPRAISAL
31
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
The application relates to a site, which already has the benefit of outline planning consent for
residential development with approved access points from Holyoake Road and Mullineux Street.
The original outline consent has established that the principle of residential is acceptable on the
site and therefore it is considered that the main issues relating to this application are: are the mix
and density of the proposed dwellings, the layout of the proposed site, the design of the proposed
dwellings and the impact on the street scene and surrounding area, the impact of the proposed
number of dwellings on the highway network and carparking and the sustainability of the site.
General
Policy UR1 of the adopted RSS relates to the sustainable regeneration of the region’s urban areas
and states that local authorities should promote urban renaissance by reviving local economies,
reviving communities, encouraging leadership and joint working practices, co-ordinating
resources and tackling low demand for housing and poor physical conditions.
Policy DP4 of the adopted RSS requires new development to promote sustainable economic
growth competitiveness and social inclusion this is supported by policy DP2 which requires the
enhancement of economic, social and environmental ‘capital’: the sources of the benefits received
from the economy, the environment and society.
At a local level policy ST1 of the adopted UDP states that new development will be required to
contribute towards the creation and maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods.
The application site proposes a high quality residential development with a range and mix of
dwellings and significant environmental improvements. It is considered that the location and
layout of the site will contribute to the existing neighbourhood and the development of more
sustainable neighbourhoods.
Principle of Residential and mix of dwellings
Although the principle of residential development has already been established, consideration
needs to be given as to what is an appropriate mix and density of units on the site.
Policy ST12 relates to development density and 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.
Policy H1 of the adopted UDP relates to the provision of new housing development and states
that new housing development will be required to contribute towards the provision of a balanced
mix of dwellings within the local area, be built at an appropriate density, provide a high quality
residential environment, make adequate provision for openspace and where necessary make an
adequate contribution to local infrastructure and be consistent with other policies and proposals of
the UDP.
In considering whether the housing mix on site is appropriate regard has been had to adopted
housing planning guidance. This area of the city is considered to be West Salford for the purposes
of the guidance, which identifies the area as being predominantly low-rise suburban development
32
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
under pressure from high-density apartment developments. Paragraph 4.6 of the guidance states
that as a result of the need to protect this character then higher density should be directed to the
most accessible locations and secure a balanced mix of dwellings, typically requiring at least 8090% of dwellings on individual sites to be in the form of houses and not apartments.
Policy HOU1 of the housing planning guidance states that within the West Salford area the large
majority of dwellings within new developments should be in the form of houses rather than
apartments in order to protect the existing character of the area and reflect the generally lower
levels of accessibility compared to other areas of the city. The policy goes on to state that
alternative approaches on individual sites may be permitted where it can be clearly demonstrated
by the applicant that there are specific circumstances that justify this, particularly having regard to
criteria A-H of policy H1.
The application seeks approval for 151 units comprising of 84 dwellings and 68 apartments
representing a 55% to 45% split in housing type
The applicant has submitted a supporting planning policy statement in accompaniment with the
application. Within this statement they have submitted extensive information in justification of
the above housing mix. The justification submitted includes:
Site Sustainability - the applicants states that the site is situated in a location, which is highly
accessible, by a range of transport modes, in particular Walkden Railway Station which is directly
adjacent to the site. In addition they consider that the sustainability credentials of the site are a
key benefit arising out of the scheme with the buildings and outdoor spaces on the site being
designed to incorporate many features to encourage a sustainable lifestyle including an eco-park
and a specialist recycling facility.
High Quality Urban Design- the applicants state that providing a high quality urban form is
central to the scheme. They state that the range and mix of units within the scheme is part of an
ethos for creating an inclusive community. They consider that the range of dwellings that include
1 bedroom apartments to 4 bedroom detached dwellings would provide the greatest choice and
diversity to prospective dwellers. All dwellings on the site are of a bespoke design to suit the
specific characteristics and features of the site.
Criteria A-H of policy H1 provides further guidance in regards to determining whether the mix
and density of the site is acceptable.
Criteria A relates to the size of the development, the application site is 1.8 hectares in size. It is
considered that the size of the development site would enable a range of dwelling types to be
incorporated onto the site.
Criteria B relates to the physical characteristics of the site, the topography of the site is such that
the road level is higher than the remainder of the site, as such an innovative and bespoke design
solution is required to deal with this.
Criteria C relates to the mix of housing in the surrounding area, the application site is situated
within a residential area, characterised by a range of dwelling types. Opposite the site are
apartments and to the east of the site are two storey semi-detached dwellings.
33
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Criteria E relates to the accessibility of the site and its location in relation to jobs and facilities.
The application site is situated within walking distance of Walkden Town Centre, which contains
a range of shops and facilities, in addition the site is located close to Walkden Railway Station
and has good accessibility to bus routes. The proposed development site can therefore be
considered to be located in an accessible location and as such a higher density and greater mix of
units should be encouraged.
Criteria F of the policy states that regard will be had to any specific need that has been identified
in the area. As previously discussed the site is identified as being located within West Salford
where houses should predominate. Policy HOU2 of the guidance states that the majority of new
houses in the borough should have 3 bedrooms.
The proposed development would contain 84 dwellings, to be comprised of the following
No. Bedrooms
2
3
4
Qty of Units
14
45
25
Qty %
16.6
53.6
29.7
As the table above indicates the majority of houses within the site are at least 3 bedrooms or
more, with 29.7% of dwellings being 4 bedrooms. It is considered that the range of dwellings
provided on site is a good reflection of the size of units required within the area.
Policy HOU2 also provides guidance on the mix of apartments appropriate on a site, by stating
that smaller units should not predominate and a significant number of three bedroom units should
be provided wherever practicable. The breakdown of the apartment mix is as follows:
No. Bedrooms
1
2
Qty of Units
18
50
Qty %
26.5
73.5
The above apartments mix accords with policy HOU2 in that the 1-bedroom dwellings do not
predominate, however no 3-bedroom apartments are being proposed on the site. I am satisfied
that when the site is considered as a whole and number of bedrooms considered, that there are
sufficient 3 and 4 bedroom units to negate the need to provide 3 bedroom apartments on the site.
Paragraph 4.31 of the housing planning guidance also puts forward a requirement for new
apartments to be at least 57 sq m or above. The two bedroom apartments proposed on the site are
58 sq m in size, I am therefore satisfied that the units across the site are of an appropriate size.
It is not considered that criteria G or H are applicable to this site as they relate to the existence of
a HMR initiative or other regeneration strategy.
In regards to density the site is 1.8 hectares in size with 151 dwellings proposed, generating a
density of 84 dwellings per hectare. PPS3 advocates higher densities in the most accessible areas.
Given the sites close location to Walkden Town Centre and good public transport links, it is
considered that this is a site suitable for a higher density. It is considered that the density of 84
dwellings per hectare is appropriate in this location and that the mix of dwellings across the
34
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
whole of the site is appropriate and meets the aims of policy H1 of providing a balanced mix of
housing within the local area.
Although not a requirement of the outline planning consent the applicant proposes to provide a
minimum of 25% affordable housing across the site in the form of shared ownership provided by
an RSL. The applicants have agreed to accept a condition in this regard, however the applicants
wish that the type of affordable housing and level of affordable housing to be agreed prior to
determination. The wording of condition is still being agreed and the final wording will be
reported prior to panel.
Layout
Policy DES2 relates to the design and layout of new development and states that new
development will be required to ensure that the development is fully accessible to all people
including the disabled and others with limited or impaired mobility, maximise the movement of
pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site through the provision of safe and direct
routes, enable pedestrians to orientate themselves and navigate their way through the area by
providing appropriate views and vistas, enable safe, direct and convenient access to public
transport facilities and other local amenities such as retail and community facilities and minimise
the potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.
The layout of the site has been designed so as to address the changing topography of the site.
Family homes front directly onto the Holyoake Road Elevation to reflect the scale of the existing
properties in the area. The site mainly comprises of 2 storey dwellings with some larger 3 storey
houses and 4/5 storey apartments spread through out the site. The change in height of the
dwellings and the apartments are designed so as to create some visual interest in the street scene.
To the east of the site are some lower residential properties designed to reflect the massing of the
existing properties on Old Oake Close.
The apartment blocks have been orientated so that they run north to south, breaking the frontage
along Holyoake Road. This offers reduced massing to the railway and allows for some visual
permeability through the site.
Areas of openspace are interspersed throughout the site, including a community green area to the
eastern end of the site and a proposed ecology walkway is located along the southern boundary.
The arrangement of dwellings and units around the site have been designed so as to encourage
natural surveillance wherever possible by utilising habitable room windows in gable ends where
necessary.
The arrangement of the street level is to create shared surfaces to reduce the dominance of the
motorcar throughout the site. The result will also naturally slow traffic down through its design
which is an approach promoted in the recently published Manual for Streets (Department of
Transport 2007)
Although concerns have been raised by local residents in regards to the massing of the properties
on Holyoake road, I am satisfied that the layout of the site addresses the issues of topography on
the site, reduces the dominance of motorcars and that the bespoke dwelling types provide a range
of visual interests allowing pedestrians and cyclists to orientate themselves within the
development.
35
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Design
Policy DP3 of the adopted RSS required new development to demonstrate good design quality
and respect for its setting. It promotes innovative design to create high-quality living, especially
in housing terms which incorporates more efficient use of energy and materials, more ecofriendly and adaptable buildings, sustainable drainage systems, community safety and designing
out of crime and appropriate parking provision and best practice in the application of highway
standards.
Policy DES1 of the adopted UDP states that development will be required to respond to its
physical context, respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and
contribute towards local identify and distinctiveness.
In assessing the extent to which any development complies with this policy it states that regard
will be had to the impact and relation to the existing landscape, the character scale and pattern of
streets and building plots, the relationship to existing buildings and other features that contribute
to townscape quality, the impact on and quality of views and vistas, the scale of the proposed
development in relationship to its surroundings, the potential impact of the proposed development
on the redevelopment of an adjacent site, the desirability of protecting an existing building line,
the streets vertical and horizontal rhythms, the quality and durability of proposed materials and
their appropriateness and the functional compatibility with adjoining land uses.
The design of the individual units within the site have been configured in such a way so as to
specifically address issues of topography and to provide a variety of choice in units. There are 10
individual site specific house types that are proposed on the site, a summary of each house type is
set out below:
House Type A – House type A comprises of 4 terraced houses located on the southwestern
boundary of the site. The properties are two bedroom units that are two storeys in height with
their own self-contained garden areas. The elevations of the properties would be a mixture of
composite metal cladding and render. Car parking to the properties would be in the form of
driveway carparking, at 1 space per dwelling. The end terrace with a gable to the proposed eco
park would contain additional habitable room windows.
House Type B – House type B comprises of 7 terraced houses located on the western edge of the
site. The properties are three bedroom units that are two storeys in height with their own selfcontained garden areas. The elevations of the properties would be a mixture of composite metal
cladding and render. Car parking to the front of the properties would be in the form of driveway
parking, at 1 spaces per dwelling.
House Type C – House type comprise of 7 terraced houses located on the northern boundary of
the site facing Holyoake Road. The proposed houses are 4 bedrooms and are 3 storey in height
facing Holyoake Road increasing to 4 storeys to the rear facing the internal area of the
development. This takes account of the change in levels on the site. The elevations of the
buildings would be a mixture of composite metal cladding and render. The amenity areas to the
property comprises of an area of semi-private hard standing providing access to the garage area
and a large private roof terrace at the top level of the property.
36
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
House Type D – House Type D comprises of 2 rows of 7 terraced houses located on the northern
boundary of the site. The proposed houses are 3 bedrooms and are two storey in height to the
elevation with Holyoake Road and three storeys in height facing towards the internal area of the
development. The elevations of the building would be a mixture composite metal cladding and
render. The amenity areas for the properties comprise of an area of semi-private amenity space to
the rear of the properties with contemporary screening separating the dwellings. Carparking for
the dwelling are in the form of on street car parking bays allocated at 1 space per dwelling.
House Type E – House type E provides one of the more unusual forms of houses on the site. It is
proposed that the houses would be back-to-back type houses, in two rows of 7 houses. The
proposed houses are 4 bedrooms. The elevations of the building would be a mixture of composite
metal cladding and render. Since the proposed houses are back to back there are no windows in
the rear elevation, as a result light is provided to the internal rooms by a large internal terrace.
Amenity space to the dwellings are in the form of a large roof terrace at the 4 th floor, an internal
terrace and semi –private amenity space to the front of the property. Car parking is provided in
the form of a garage at ground floor level, there is additional hardstanding to the front of the
properties.
House Types F – House type F provides an alternative to the standard house type and is similar in
principle to the ‘upside down’ houses under construction in Langworthy. House type F are 2
bedroom properties located in the central area of the site and would be two storeys in height. The
elevations of the building would be a mixture of composite metal cladding and render. The
amenity space for the properties is in the form of hardstanding to the front of the property and a
roof terrace at first floor level. Carparking for the property would be to the rear underneath the
proposed terrace area.
House Type G – House type G is similar in style and form to house type F, but comprising of an
extra storey and three bedrooms. The elevations of the building would be a mixture of composite
metal cladding and render. The amenity space for the buildings are in the form of hard standing to
the front of the property and a roof terrace at first floor level. Car parking for the property would
be to the rear of the property underneath the proposed terrace area.
House Type H – House type H comprises of 8 detached properties on the northern boundary of
the site facing the western end of Holyoake Road. The houses would have 4 bedrooms and are
three storeys to the front elevation and four storeys facing the internals of the site. The elevations
of the building would be mixture of composite metal cladding and render. Amenity space is
provided in the form of a semi-private garden area to the rear of the property. Car parking is
provided in the form of a garage at ground floor level accessed via the street with an element of
hard standing beyond that.
House Type J - House type J comprises of 5 detached properties on the eastern boundary of the
site. The houses are 3 storey in height and are four bedrooms. The elevations of the building
would be a mixture of composite metal cladding and render. Amenity space to the dwellings
would be in the form of private amenity space to the rear of the property. Car parking is provided
in the form of a garage at ground floor level.
House Type K – House type K comprises of 4 detached properties on the southern boundary of
the site. The houses are 3 storey in height and contain 4 bedrooms. The elevations of the building
would be a mixture of composite metal cladding and render. Amenity space is provided in the
37
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
form of private amenity space to the rear of the property. Car parking is provided in the form of a
garage at ground floor level.
In addition to the above mentioned house types two apartment blocks are proposed within the
centre of the site. The proposed apartment blocks are 4 storeys in height to the elevation with
Holyoake road but are 5 storeys in height away from Holyoake Road. The proposed apartment
blocks are set at right angles to Holyoake Road. Entrances to the apartment blocks are via the
under croft car park or via the central court yard/ amenity area at the centre of the two apartment
blocks. There are no entrances on the elevations of Holyoake road, although the large windows
along this elevation provide visual interest to the street scene.
The proposed apartment blocks are contemporary in style similar to the varying house types
around the site. The proposed materials for the elevations are render, metal composite and brick.
It is considered that the proposed dwellings and apartment blocks on the site have been designed
to a high standard. Although not replicating the style of the buildings in the surrounding streets
the contemporary high quality design of the buildings, will serve to enhance the character of the
area and act as a design standard in the surrounding area.
Highways
Policy ST6 states that development that would generate major travel demand will only be
permitted in locations that are currently or will as a result of the development be well served by a
choice of means of transport.
Policy A1 relates to transport assessments and travel plans and states that planning applications
for developments that are likely to give rise to significant transport implications will not be
permitted unless they are accompanied by a transport assessment and where appropriate a travel
plan.
Policy A8 relates to the impact of the development on the highway network and states that
development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on highway
safety or cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of high, wide, long or heavy vehicles
along abnormal load routes.
Although the principle of residential development has been established and access to the site was
considered as part of the outline consent. The applicants have submitted at Transport Assessment
by Boreham Consulting Engineering Ltd undertaken in August 2007. The purpose of the
submitted report is to consider the detailed highways and transportation matters associated with
the site.
The Approved access to the site is via the existing unadopted Mullineux Street at the western end
of the site, which was conditioned to be improved as part of the outline consent and an additional
access taken from Holyoake Road. Although not forming part of the condition of the outline
consent it has been agreed subsequently with Urban Vision’s highway department that the access
via Mullineux street should provide an access to 45 houses only, with through access being
restricted to emergency vehicles only.
38
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Access to the site via Holyoake Road will be for 100 vehicles only, with a further 8 properties
being accessed off the western end of Holyoake Road. Restriction between the Holyoake Road
entrance and the Mullineux Street entrance will be via controlled bollards, that would allow for
emergency vehicle access. There would be not restrictions on pedestrian movement across the
site.
The indicative layout for the outline planning consent indicated that 141 units could be
accommodated on the site. The submitted transport assessment includes an analysis against the
proposed generated trip levels and those submitted in the outline transport assessment produced
by Saville Bird and Axon. The result of these trip levels concluded that insignificant increases are
expected on the transport network as a result of the detailed proposals, however these increases
are considered to be negligible as they are less than the daily variance.
I am satisfied that the proposed development would not give rise to unacceptable levels of traffic
on the local road network. I am satisfied that the bollards proposed will ensure that the
appropriate level of traffic is distributed through the appropriate entrance.
Concerns have been raised by some local residents that the driveways serving house type H on
the western part of Holyoake Road would present a problem for the access of emergency vehicles
to the nearby avenues. Given that there would in affect be two carparking spaces per dwelling
provided for each of the 8 dwellings there should be no need for additional carparking on
Holyoake Road. In any case it is considered that even with vehicles parked on Holyoake Road
sufficient access would be retained for emergency and other vehicles.
An additional concern has been raised by a neighbour regarding the opening up of Holyoake road,
where it is currently cut off. Following consultation with Urban Vision Highways Department I
can confirm that there is no intention at present of reopening this length of Holyoake Road.
Accessibility and Mobility
Policy UR3 of the adopted RSS requires a high priority to be given to development and
improvement of accessible infrastructure and services, in the interests of sustainable development
and maximising mobility for people who may not have access to a car.
Policy ST5 of the adopted UDP relates to transport networks and states that they will be
maintained and improved by a combination of measures including requiring development
proposals to make adequate provision for the needs of the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists and
wherever appropriate maximise the use of public transport.
The submitted transport assessment details the sites accessibility in relation to shops and services
and to public transport. In particular it identifies Walkden Town Centre as being within walking
distance (800m) as well as a range of other employment and community facilities. The statement
also highlights the proximity of the traffic free national cycle route 55 which is located 400m
from the site, linking the site with an extensive cycle network.
In regards to public transport, the transport statement identifies 13 bus routes that run within
400m within the site. The frequency of these bus route range from 6-1 bus an hour and link the
site with Bolton, Manchester, Farnworth, Walkden and Trafford Park. In addition to the nearby
bus services, the site is situated within 200m of Walkden train station which has a train every
15m during peak periods.
39
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
The application proposes a car parking ration of 100%, distributing 151 car parking spaces
throughout the site. It is considered that in this clearly accessible location this is an appropriate
provision.
Policy A2 states that development proposals will be required to make adequate provision for safe
and convenient access by the disabled, other people with limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians
and cyclists.
Policy A10 states that development will be required to make provision for disabled drivers,
cyclists and motorcyclists in accordance with the minimum standards set out in appendix B, not
exceed the maximum car parking standards set out in appendix C of the UDP and provide
carparking in a manner consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards of
safety and security
As part of the 151 car parking spaces to be provided on the site it is proposed that 5% of the
spaces will be disabled parking. It is considered that this provision is acceptable. In addition to
the carparking provided on site provision for cycle storage is made for each individual unit, the
location of cycle storage varies from specific store areas within the apartment blocks, store units
within certain house types or within the private garden areas of individual dwellings.
Pedestrian access throughout the site is unrestricted, the general ethos of the site is to give priority
to pedestrians and reduce the dominance of vehicles within the site creating an informal home
zone. This has been achieved by footpaths being contructed from the same paving as the carriage
ways, raised platforms at junction points, providing community squares that link through the site
with the aim to reduce traffic at sensitive areas, such as near the informal LAPs and entrances to
the eco park.
I am satisfied that adequate provision has been made for the movement of pedestrians, cyclists,
the disabled or those with limited or impaired mobility.
Landscaping and Public Realm
Policy UR3 of the adopted RSS requires local authorities to identify the urban areas in need of
more greenspace, and in response develop appropriate strategies for the design, management,
maintenance and enhancement of the public realm and urban greenspace.
Policy ST8 of the adopted UDP relates to environmental quality and states that development will
be required to contribute towards enhanced standards of environmental quality through the
achievement of high standards of design, amenity, safety and environmental maintenance and
management.
Policy DES3 of the UDP requires that where a development includes the provision of public
openspace it must be designed to have a clear role and purpose, reflect and enhance the character
of the area, form an integral part of and provide an appropriate setting for surrounding
developments, be attractive safe, uncluttered and appropriately lit, be of an appropriate scale,
connect to established pedestrian routes and other public spaces and minimise and make provision
for maintenance requirements.
40
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Policy DES4 of the UDP requires development adjoining public space to have a strong and
positive relationship with that space, in particular buildings should clearly define the spaces
around them, provide natural surveillance, clearly distinguish between public, private and
communal spaces and ensure that the visual impact of the car is minimised.
Policy DES8 relates to landscaping and states that development will be required to incorporate
hard and soft landscaping where appropriate. Where landscaping is required it must be of a high
quality in terms of design and materials, reflect and enhance the character of the area and the
design of the development, be sited and designed so as no to detract from the safety and security
of the area, be designed to complement or form and integral part of the development, be easily
maintained and have provision made for its maintenance, respect adjacent land users, buildings
and other structures and wherever possible make provision for the creation new wildlife habitats.
Policy EN12 relates to important landscape features and states that if the removal of an important
landscape feature is permitted as part of a development, a replacement of at least the equivalent
size and quality, or other appropriate compensation will be required either within the site or
elsewhere within the area.
Several objections have been received in regards to the application and the loss of mature trees on
the site. The application has been accompanied by a tree survey undertaken by TPM Landscape.
The tree survey was undertaken in accordance with BS 5837: 2005 Trees in relation to
construction which categorises trees into three retention codes. These retention categories include
Category A which relates to trees of high quality and value, Category B which relates to trees of
moderate quality and value and Category C which relate to those trees of low quality and value.
The existing trees on the site are located predominantly along the eastern edge of the site in an
area of wasteland next the existing industrial buildings. The majority of these trees fall within the
category C retention code. There are a number of trees located along the northern boundary of the
site along Holyoake Road, again most of these trees fall within category C. To the south of the
site along the railway line are a number of self seeded trees of limited value. In total there are
around 30 trees existing on site.
The proposed development would see the removal of the existing trees on site in favour of more
formal planting arranged throughout the site. At present the submitted landscaping plan includes
approximately 139 replacement trees on the site, to be located in a variety of measures including
within the street scape, a formal orchid and the proposed linear ecology park.
Although the loss of all the mature trees on the site is regrettable, the likely amenity and
birodiversity value of the replacement trees, far outweighs the amenity value gained at present
from the existing trees. The landscaping information submitted is not finalised and therefore the
number of replacement trees can not as yet be formally counted, therefore it is recommended that
a condition be attached requiring the loss of the existing trees to be replaced at a ratio of at least 2
to 1.
In addition to the replacement tree planting proposed on site there are a number of specific public
realm and landscaping features proposed as part of this development. These are set out in futher
detail below:
41
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Amenity Gardens with Local Area for Play – one area would be provided along the south
boundary and would mark the beginning of the linear eco park, the other area would be located in
the north eastern corner of the site. Both contain a small local area of play and an orchid. The
local area of play would provide seating for parents and a safe defined area for young children.
Informal play equipment provided could include wooden animals, stepping stones and springers.
This area would also house one of several recycling points to be located around the site, It is
proposed a small Orchid containing a selection of fruit trees would be made accessible to
residents.
Linear Eco Park – the eco park is intended to provide an alternative pedestrian route through the
area and offer recreational and educational opportunities. It is proposed that the eco park would
contain a coloured path to mark the route through the park that could be picked up from various
points of the development, incorporate features within the park to create a sense of space, use
native tree and shrub planting to encourage biodiversity, contain information about the ground
water storage tanks and provide the location for various recycling points.
Private Amenity Space- as well as private amenity areas being provided within individual houses
and gardens, some communal private amenity space is to be provided between the two apartment
blocks. Access to the private amenty space will be controlled by gated access, but can be accessed
by both the occupiers of the apartments and the houses. Access to the raised courtyard area would
be via internal or external lifts. It is proposed that the central space between the apartment blocks
would include large feature trees at ground level, which would cut through the decking level.
Large steel planters containing hedging or planting will define the areas outside individual
apartments and although a sense of ownership of these areas would be encouraged it is intended
that these areas would remain accessible by the community. The area would be interspersed by
grass areas with the provision of barbeque facilties to encourage the promotion of community
events.
A key concept to the landscaping of the entire scheme is to create a sense of community
throughout the site. This can be seen in the design of individual houses where amenity areas to
the front or rear of properties (although many properties are dual aspect) are semi private with
contempory hedging and fencing being proposed. Specifically it is intended that back gardens that
face into the development are to be low 900mm post and wire trellis system with climbing plants.
This is intended to soften the development, identify areas and ensure that an active aspect is
maintained. It is intended that the management of such treatments would be by a central
management company to ensure they mature and maintain part of the development. Front gardens
would have an open aspect incorporating similar materials to incorporate the houses into the
overall street scene.
It is considered that the landscaping proposed as part of the development would create a
contemporary living area and would help to create active frontages wherever possible. Despite a
full s106 contribution for public open space being provided by the developer as a result of the
outline consent, a significant area of the site remains as good quality public open space which
would be available not only to the people living within the site, but the nearby residents. I am
satisfied that the proposed public realm and landscaping provision is in accordance with policies
DES8 and EN12. In addition I consider the location of two small areas of play on the site, would
help to address the concerns raised by local residents that there are not enough play facilities
within the area.
42
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
Crime
Policy DES10 states that development will not be permitted unless it is designed to discourage
crime, antisocial behaviour and the fear of crime, and support personal and property security.
The design of the proposed scheme is as result of consultation with the Greater Manchester Police
Architectural Liaison Unit. Specific measures have been incorporated into the scheme as a result;
these include the erection of a 2m high gabion wall along the boundary with the railway
embankment and the restriction of access to the amenity area between the apartment blocks.
In addition the layout of units around the site and the internal layout of individual layouts have
been designed to provide a high level of passive surveillance across the site, this has been
increased by the introduction of further habitable room windows on the gable elevations on end
properties. This is particularly important in the surveillance of open space throughout the site.
Due to the unconventional layout of some of the house types there are several instances where
bedroom windows would be located on the ground floor, where such instances occur, specific
landscaping techniques have been employed to deter crime. This also applies for the areas of semi
private space to the front and rear of dwellings, although no completely enclosed as per a
traditional garden, the areas would be clearly defined to create a sense of defensible space.
I am satisfied that the layout of the proposed development has been designed in such a way as to
discourage crime and antisocial behaviour .
Amenity
Policy DES7 relates to the amenity of users and neighbours and states that all new development,
alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a
satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout.
Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of
the occupiers or users of other developments.
The layout of the proposed development gives rise to some unconvential relationships between
properties. In regards to the distances between habitable room windows from existing properties
and the proposed development there would bee approximately 19m between dwellings, although
the majority of windows do not overlook directly. Internally the distances between habitable
rooms vary from 16m to 20m. Although some of these distances fall short of the standard usually
applied, the overall concept of this development and the use of semi-private amenity spaces
would clearly promote a sense of overlooking and reduced privacy within the development. I do
not consider that the amenity distances to habitable room windows achieved through this
development would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of future users of the development.
The other main area for concern in regards to amenity are the relationships between the amenity
space associated with the dwellings and other users of the development’s own amenity space. I
consider that when buying a property within this development, people would be buying into the
concept of shared spaces, especially when it comes to amenity, they would also be aware of the
types of dwellings surrounding them. Wherever possible the design of the individual units
incorporate measures to ensure that no one dwellings amenity is severely compromised by any
43
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
aspect of the development, this includes planting outside sensitive habitable rooms at ground
floor level and separating individual balconies and terraces.
Neighbours living on Chilham Road and Blantyre Avenue have raised objections regarding
potential overlooking from the detached H type houses on the northwestern corner of the site. The
proposed dwellings would overlook the gable ends of two properties at a distance of 20m, the
garden areas of these areas would be located approximately 15m from the proposed dwellings.
The proposed H type properties have a small julliette style balcony at third floor level, which is
the main cause of concern for residents. The applicants have amended the house type H to address
these concerns.
Environment and Sustainability
Policy ST14 states that major development proposals will be required to demonstrate how they
will minimise greenhouse gas emissions.
Policy EN22 states that development proposals for more than 100 dwellings will only be
permitted where it can be demonstrated that the impact on the conservation of non-renewable
resources and on the global environments has been minimised as far as is practicable and that full
consideration has been given to the use of realistic renewable energy options and such options
have been incorporated into the development where possible.
The applicants have submitted a sustainability statement in accompaniment to the application.
This statement details how principles relating to sustainability were considered when choosing
the site and how specific measures have been incorporated into the masterplanning and layout of
the site to increase the sites sustainability, these include:
Land Uses - the scheme has been designed sensitively to neighbouring land uses ensuring that
no existing properties are inappropriately overlooked or suffer loss of light. Green infrastructure
has been integrated into the masterplan to provide appropriate benefits including leisure and play,
surface water attenuation, visual enhancement, biodiversity and climate change adaptation.
Sustainable Urban Drainage – is considered to be intergral to the proposed scheme. The
surfacing for roads and footpaths would be block paving laid on a sand bed incorporating a
100mm thick geo grid as a key part of the sub base. This would avoid the need for a hard core
base. This method of construction would facilitate movement of water and gasses through the soil
and would take the pressure of local storm drains,
Movement and Access- the development has been designed so as to ensure the maximum
permeability for pedestrians and cyclists, whilst aiming to include a range of measures to reduce
and manage the use of private cars. Such features would include, being located close to a range of
public transport facilities, incorporating shared surface points, the inclusion of charging points for
electric cars, providing well lit safe footpaths, inclusion of safe cycle storage and the inclusion of
high speed internet connections to all units.
Building Orientation – the layout of the scheme has been designed to ensure that over-shadowing
of buildings from adjacent properties is avoided wherever possible, thereby maximising the
opportunities for solar gain where possible.
44
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
In addition to specific measures incorporated into the layout of the proposed scheme it is
proposed to encourage future occupiers of the development to persue a more sustainable lifestyle.
Features proposed include encouragement of the recycling facilties to be located throughout the
site, by including waste and recycling units in all facilities with a regular collection and
information packs for owners.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
This application is the result of lengthy pre application discussions between planning and
highway officers, the applicants and the Councils heritage and design team. The layout has been
amended several times and issues of amenity have been addressed.
CONCLUSION
It is considered that the proposed development provides a high quality well designed scheme
which meets the priciples and aims of both national and local planning policy. The development
is located within an accessible location and incorporates a wide range of measures to increase the
sustainability credentials of the site. A carefully considered landscaping stategy, provides
certainty that benefit of the proposed landscaping, eco park and orchids on the site to the wider
community outweigh the retention of the existing trees. The development also proposes a wide
range of houses and apartment sizes ensuring that there is an appropriate mix of units within the
area. In addition the proposal would provide 25% affordable housing units in the form of shared
ownership which would help address the need for intermediate affordable housing in this area.
I therefore recommend that the proposed development be approved subject to the following
conditions.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development is started. Such
scheme shall include full details of replacement trees to be provided at a replacement ratio of
at least 2 for 1 as well as 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. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall
be replaced with the same species within twelve months
2. Standard Condition D03Y
3. No development shall take place until details of details outlining how the applicants will seek
to achieve EcoHomes 'very good' ratings have been submitted to and approved in writing by
the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the
approved details.
4. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority no more than 151 car
parking spaces, to include a minimum of 8 spaces for disabled drivers, shall be provided
45
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
within the site. Suchspaces shall be retained and kept available for use thereafter.
5. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, full details of the location
and design of cycle, refuse and recycling storage areas within the site shall be submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such storage areas shall be
constructed in accordance with the approved details and shall be made available for use prior
to the first occupation of the development hereby approved.
6. Standard Condition M01
7. No development shall be started until full details of the colour and type of materials and
equipment to be used for the local areas of play as indicated on the submitted landscape
strategy, drwaing no. 742.03 B have been 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. The proposed local areas of
play shall be made available within 6 months of the first occupation of the site and shall be
made available for use thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
8. No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a scheme for the
provision of surface water drainage works has been approved by the Local Planning
Authority. The scheme shall be competed in accordance with the approved plans.
9. No development shall commence until a scheme for the provision of external lighting has
been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such scheme
shall include full details of the locations, design, luminance levels, light spillage and hours of
use of, and columns for, all external lighting within the site and the approved scheme shall be
implemented in full prior to the occupation of development.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R004B
2. Standard Reason R004B
3. Reason: To ensure the development accords with policy EN22 of the Unitary Development
Plan.
4. Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A 8 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan.
5. Standard Reason R005B
6. Standard Reason R004B
7. Standard Reason R005B
8. To reduce the increased risk of flooding by ensuring the provision of a satisfactory means of
46
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
18th October 2007
surface water disposal.
9. Standard Reason R004B
Note(s) for Applicant
1. Construction works shall not be permitted outside the following hours:
Monday to Friday 08:00 to 18:00
Saturdays
08:00 to 13:00
Construction works shall not be permitted on Sundays or Bank or Public Holidays
Access and egress for delivery vehicles shall be restricted to the working hours indicated
above.
47
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
48
18th October 2007
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
49
18th October 2007