PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
APPLICATION No:
06/52218/FUL
APPLICANT:
Cobe Consulting Ltd
LOCATION:
Stamford House 361 - 365 Chapel Street Salford M3 5JY
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing building and erection of a
seven/eight storey building comprising 58 apartments with
commercial space on ground and first floors, car parking
at basement level and associated works
WARD:
Ordsall
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to Stamford House, a distinctive three storey office block that
stands at the top of Oldfield Road at its junction with Chapel Street adjacent to a Listed war
memorial. The site is bounded by Chapel Street to the north, Wroe Street to the east,
Barrow Street to the south and the landscaped setting to the war memorial and Oldfield
Road to the west. The site lies outside but adjacent to two conservation areas – the
Adeplhi/Bexley Square Conservation Area on the opposite side of Chapel Street and the
Crescent Conservation Area on the opposite side of Oldfield Road.
The surrounding area contains a number of distinctive buildings with the former Salford
Royal Hospital directly to the north on the opposite side of Chapel Street and the award
winning Transport House directly to the east on the opposite side of Oldfield Road. The
Listed war memorial stands in front of the building.
The site is currently occupied by Stamford House which extends over approximately 50%
of the site area. The existing building has eight retail/commercial units at ground floor with
two floors of offices above. For some considerable time only one of the ground floor retail
units has been in operation.
It is proposed to demolish the existing building and replace it with a part seven/part eight
storey building comprising 58 apartments, 979sq.m of office floorspace at first floor level,
497sq.m of retail floorspace at ground floor and 32 car parking spaces at basement level.
There would be 21 one-bed apartments, 32 two-bed and 5 three-bed apartments.
To the Chapel Street and Oldfield Road frontages the building maintains the footprint of
the existing building but then fills the site to the Barrow Street and Wroe Street elevations.
Vehicular access would be provided from Wroe Street. Pedestrian access would be
provided from the front of the building facing the main road junction and also from Barrow
Street. Two retail units would be provided at ground floor and a small service yard
1
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
providing three parking spaces accessed from Wroe Street to the rear of the site. The first
floor would comprise a single open plan office unit. At second floor the building would
step out over the lower two floors in the same manner as the existing building. At second
floor there would be eleven apartments and a communal courtyard garden of 180sq.m. The
proposed building would provide a seventh floor level of accommodation to the main road
junction only.
The design of the building is contemporary and comprises a predominantly glazed frontage
to Chapel Street and Oldfield Road with three protruding brick panels of three and four
storeys and zinc cladding. To the rear the dominant material is brick.
The application has been amended significantly since it was first submitted when it
comprised a single floor of commercial accommodation and seventy five apartments.
The application includes a financial contribution towards the funding of ‘No Waiting At
Any Time’ restrictions being introduced on both sides of Islington Way, the north side of
Barrow Street and both sides of Park Street.
SITE HISTORY
An earlier application from the same applicant for 75 apartments was withdrawn in
December 2005 (05/51751/FUL)
CONSULTATIONS
Ramblers Association – No objections
Greater Manchester Archaeology Unit – No response received
The Open spaces society – No response received
Peak and Northern Footpaths Society – No response received
The Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – No response received.
Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – The site is very well served by public
transport with around 40 busses an hour passing the site and future residents would have
access to a choice of travel mode that should help reduce the amount of car travel otherwise
generated by this development.
Environment Agency – No objections
Director of Environmental Services – The site is located on an extremely busy intersection
and a significant proportion of noise will originate from the substantial traffic movements
nearby. This will have potential impacts on future occupiers with regard to noise and
2
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
ventilation. The application includes an acoustic report and conditions relating to its
recommendations are necessary. In terms of air quality the increase in traffic generated by
this proposal is not significant. It is recommended that a contaminated land condition is
attached.
Central Salford Urban Regeneration Company – previously had concerns regarding the
mix of uses and the design of the building of the submitted scheme. The URC has no
objection to the current proposal and now supports the proposed development
PUBLICITY
The application has been advertised by means of both site and press notices
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
All apartments in Transport House
All apartments in the former Salford Royal Hospital
St Phillips School, Barrow Street
The Angel Healthy Living Centre, St Philips Place
15 to 23 Oldfield Road
The Bell Tower, Chapel Street
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received two letters of representation / objection in response to the planning
application publicity. The following issues have been raised:Support for the application and for the introduction of parking restrictions on
Islington Way, Park Street and Barrow Street.
The building is too high
Overlooking of apartments in Transport House
Loss of outlook
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP3 – Quality in New Development
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: MX1/1 – Development in Mixed Use Areas (Chapel Street East)
Other policies: MX2 – Chapel Street Frontage
DES1 – Respecting Context
CH4 – Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building
A1 – Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
3
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of the
proposed development is acceptable; whether the design of the building is acceptable;
whether there would be an impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents; whether the
proposed level of car parking is acceptable and whether the proposed development
complies with the relevant policies of the Unitary Development Plan. I shall deal with each
of the issues in turn below.
Principle of the Development
Policy MX1/1 states that Chapel Street East will be developed as a vibrant mixed use area
with a broad range of uses. Appropriate uses include housing, offices and retail uses. In
determining whether a proposed mix of uses is appropriate, regard will be had to a number
of factors, including the positive impact of the development on the regeneration of the
wider area, the use on adjoining sites, the prominence of the location and the existing and
previous use of the site.
Policy MX2 requires development along Chapel Street to incorporate active uses at ground
floor level, including retail, food and drink and financial and professional services.
Policy H1 states that new housing development should contribute to the provision of a
balanced mix of dwellings within the local area and not contribute to an oversupply of any
particular type of residential accommodation.
The draft Supplementary Planning Document on Housing states that apartment schemes
are appropriate in this part of the city and calls for a minimum 10% three bed properties, a
maximum of 15% studios and that a total of 50% of all apartments should be of a minimum
of 57sq.m in floor area.
The existing building has been poorly used and mostly vacant for a number of years and
although distinctive is not a building of any particular architectural merit. The site is in a
highly accessible location in close proximity to the regional centre and the services and
facilities therein. The proposed development proposes a mix of uses with active uses at
ground floor level and would replace all the commercial floorspace that exists on the site.
The accommodation provided would be in accordance with the draft Housing SPD.
The principle of the redevelopment of the site is in accordance with both national planning
guidance and local planning policy. The proposed mix of uses is also in accordance with
both adopted and emerging local planning policy.
Design
4
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context and to respect the
character of the surrounding area. In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with
this policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing
buildings and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.
The architects for the scheme have sought to achieve a high quality of design and have
made several amendments to this design to improve the quality of the proposed building.
High quality materials are proposed that will compliment the mixed palette of materials
that is found in the immediate surrounding area. The City Council’s architectural
consultant, Peter Hunter has been involved in the design development and is satisfied with
the quality of the scheme. At seven and eight storeys in height the massing of the building
compliments that of Transport House that stands at six storeys. The height also
compliments that of the former Salford Royal Hospital. I do not therefore agree that the
building is too high.
I am satisfied that the design of the proposed building is of sufficiently high quality to merit
its prominent location.
Effect of the Development on Occupiers and Neighbours
Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a satisfactory
level of amenity and states that development that would have an unacceptable impact on
the amenity of the occupiers or users of other developments will not normally be permitted.
There are habitable properties on all four sides of the development: to the north, over 25m
away are the apartments in the former Salford Royal Hospital; to the east, separated by the
narrow Wroe Street, is the blank gable elevation of the Bell Tower public house; to the
south, across Barlow Street is the blank elevation of a terrace of commercial properties on
Oldfield Road, some of which having living accommodation at first floor level and beyond
which lies the Salvation Army hostel; and to the east, some 30m away at its closest, on the
opposite side of Oldfield Road, the newly constructed apartments in Transport House. The
only dwellings that face this development though are in Transport House and the former
Salford Royal Hospital. Given the city centre location I am satisfied that the window to
window distances are appropriate and what residents might normally expect in this type of
location. I do not therefore agree that there would be any significant loss of privacy or
overlooking of any neighbouring property. Similarly I do not agree that there is a
significant loss of outlook from Transport House that is a minimum of 30m away from this
development.
Car Parking
Policy A10, in line with central Government guidance, seeks maximum parking standards
for all developments and there is no requirement for a minimum level of parking.
The development provides 32 car parking spaces at basement level. The site lies on a
major bus corridor and there are excellent public transport links into the regional centre. In
5
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
addition the site lies within easy walking distance of the regional centre and I therefore
consider that there is sufficient car parking provided by the development.
One of the points raised by a local resident relates to existing car parking on surrounding
streets. The Transport Assessment submitted with the application states that the applicant
is prepared to fund ‘No Waiting At Any Time’ restrictions being introduced on both sides
of Islington Way, the north side of Barrow Street and both sides of Park Street. Such
restrictions could only be introduced following consultation with local residents and I
therefore propose that future funding should be provided only if restrictions are considered
to be warranted.
Other Issues
The proposed building would sit on the same building line as the existing building and I
therefore consider that in providing a building of far greater design quality that the existing
Stamford House, the setting of the Listed war memorial would be enhanced as a result of
this development.
In accordance with policy H8 of the UDP open space and children’s play space can be
accommodated off site through a financial contribution. This application proposes 158 bed
spaces, which equates to a commuted sum value of £85,320. In addition, in accordance
with the Chapel Street SPG, a contribution of £1000 per apartment would be generated by
the development for environmental improvements. It is envisaged that this sum would be
spent on environmental improvements to the surrounding area, investment in public
transport and potentially on the works to the highway outlined above.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The scheme has been substantially improved through pre-application discussions. In
accordance with the policy H8 and the Chapel Street SPG the applicant has agreed to make
a financial contribution towards the areas of spend outlined above. A total of £143,320
would be contributed in this regard. The applicant has also confirmed the use of
sustainable building techniques.
CONCLUSION
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of the
proposed development is acceptable; whether the design of the building is acceptable;
whether there would be an impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents; whether the
proposed level of car parking is acceptable and whether the proposed development
complies with the relevant policies of the Unitary Development Plan. In conclusion, I
consider that the principle of the redevelopment of the site for residential purposes is
acceptable and that the design of the building is of high quality. I have no objections on
highway grounds and am satisfied that the proposed development has no significant
detrimental impact on any neighbour or on any other interest of acknowledged importance.
I am of the opinion that the proposal complies with the relevant policies of the Adopted
UDP and that there are no material considerations that outweigh this finding. I therefore
recommend that the application be approved.
6
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that authority be given for the Strategic Director of Customer and
Support Services to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990.
Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03 Three year time limit
2. A noise assessment detailing the acoustic protection measures to be incorporated into
the final design of the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. Such assessment shall also detail mitigation measures to
demonstrate how the noise levels agreed within the report will be achieved when the
ventilation rates are increased (windows open - as for when summer cooling or rapid
ventilation is required). Any additional ventilation requirements to enable compliance
with the report shall be identified within the assessment. The approved acoustic
protection and additional ventilation measures shall be implemented prior to first
occupation of any dwelling and shall be retained thereafter.
3. The development shall not be commenced until samples of all facing materials to be
used for all external elevations and the roof have been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in
accordance with the approved details.
4. The parking spaces provided in accordance with the approved plans shall be used at all
times thereafter for the parking of vehicles in accordance with a scheme to be approved
by the Local Planning Authority in writing prior to the use of any unit in the
development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
5. The development shall not be commenced unless and until a secure by design scheme
has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such
scheme shall be capable of being accredited by Greater Manchester Police
Architectural Liaison Unit under the secure by design scheme. The approved scheme
shall be implemented in full prior to the first occupation of any dwelling unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
6. The development shall not be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing all the
following matters including; sustainable construction techniques; natural ventilation
techniques; sustainable urban drainage systems; techniques to reduce solar heat gain
and use of renewable energy sources; and all energy efficiency and sustainability
matters have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Prior to the first occupation of any dwelling the approved scheme shall be
7
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
installed and shall thereafter be retained and maintained unless otherwise agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority.
7. A scheme for the provision of recycling facilities shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented
prior to the occupation of any dwelling and shall be maintained thereafter unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
8. 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 street sweeping, permitted hours for construction
works, delivery of materials and delivery and collection of equipment and the provision
and use of on-site parking for contractors' and workpeople's vehicles and no
development or activities related or incidental thereto shall take place on the site in
contravention of such site operating statement unless otherwise agreed in writing by the
Local Planning Authority.
9. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the
undertaking of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4) (a-d) of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act, 1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning
Authority, and the Local Planning Authority has given its approval in writing. The
planning obligation will provide that a commuted sum as required by Policy H8 of the
City of Saford Unitary Development Plan and SPG7 Provision of Open Space and
Recreation Space Associated with New Residential Development, will be paid to the
Local Planning Authority for open space and recreation space purposes.
10. Standard Condition M08 Site Investigation - new
11. No external lighting shall be installed unless and until a scheme has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall
be implemented and thereafter in accordance with the approved details.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
3. Standard Reason R008B Development-Building in vicinity
4. Standard Reason R012B Parking only within curtilage
5. To ensure the design of the scheme discourages crime in accordance with Policy
DES10 of the City of Salford Adopted UDP.
8
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
6. In order to address recycling and sustainability issues in accordance with policy EN22
of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
7. In accordance with policy DEV1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
8. Standard Reason R005B Amenity - neighbours
9. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation
space for future occupiers in accordance with policies H6 and H11 of the City of
Salford Adopted UDP, Policy H8 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP and
SPG7 Provision of Open Space and Recreation Space Associated with New Residential
Development.
10. Standard Reason R028B Interests of public safety
11. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
APPLICATION No:
06/52923/FUL
APPLICANT:
Great Places Housing Group
LOCATION:
Land Formerly 25-47 Florence Street Eccles M30 7JN
PROPOSAL:
Erection of part single, part two storey building to provide
supported accommodation including eight self contained
flats together with associated car parking and alteration to
existing vehicular access and construction of new
vehicular access
WARD:
Winton
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The applicant seeks consent for the erection of a part single, part two-storey building to
provide supported accommodation including 8 no. 2 bedroom self contained flats together
with staff rooms and communal areas. A new vehicular access is proposed and 5 parking
spaces including 1 disabled space.
9
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
The proposal would be horseshoe shaped. The two-storey element fronting Florence
Street has a width of 27 metres, and the maximum depth would be 42 metres. The first 23
metres extending away from Florence Street would be two-storeys with the remaining 19
metres dropping to single storey. The rear element would be entirely single storey in
height. 851 square metres of amenity space is proposed. The north east and south west
boundary of the proposed development would be enclosed by a 2.1 metre brick wall, the
car park would be enclosed by a 1.2 metre brick wall and the south east and north west
boundary would be enclosed by a low level wall with railings above.
The purpose of the proposal is to vulnerable Salford women to be integrated back into their
own community. It is proposed that the site be staffed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week by a
core team of 6 members of staff.
The application proposes the closure of a public right of way and has been publicised
accordingly.
The site is currently vacant. A 3-storey block of flats was recently demolished on the site.
CONSULTATIONS
The Ramblers’ Association (Manchester and High Peak Area) does not oppose the
application.
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Officer – various comments received. A
‘secure entry system’ condition to be attached.
Assistant Director for Community Housing supports the application.
The Environment Agency has no objection in principle to the application.
The Strategic Director of Environmental Services recommends the attachment of a full
contamination condition.
Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – No comments received to date.
Open Spaces Society – No comments received to date.
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 6th July 2006 and 21st July 2006.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 – 24 Florence Street
1 – 22 Winifred Street
10
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
24, 21 Winifred Street
33, 35, 35A, 35B Athol Street
Petrol Station, 91 New Lane
93, 95, 99 New Lane
101 – 115 (odds) New Lane
Flat above, 115 New Lane
Flat, 115 New Lane
1 – 25 (odds) Owen Street
22 – 46 (evens) Atherton Street
REPRESENTATIONS
Four letters of objection have been received in response to the application, two of which are
from the same objector. These raise the following concerns:
The proposal would exacerbate the poor environmental conditions for residents in
the surrounding area.
Not a suitable area for more vulnerable residents.
Increase in traffic flow and volume through Florence Street.
Increase in heavy traffic resulting in noise and environmental pollution.
The building site would entice undesirable people.
Highway safety – the junction of Athol Street and South King Street has a blind 90
degree right hand turn.
Consideration should be given to amending the proposed access perhaps by
opening the end of Florence Street at New Lane and closing off Florence Street at
the end of the terraced houses.
Much better access would be achieved if the main entrance for the development
was on Owen Street.
The area appears to have become a dumping ground for some of Salford’s less
desirable residents.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: None.
Other policies:
DP3:
Quality in New Development
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None.
Other policies:
DES1: Respecting Context.
DES7: Amenity of Users and Occupiers.
DES10: Design and Crime.
EHC3: Provision and Improvement of Health and Community
Facilities.
A8:
Impact of Development on the Highway Network.
11
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
A10:
Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments.
EN12: Important Landscape Features.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The key issues to be considered in the determination of this application are; whether the
principle of development is acceptable, whether the design and appearance is acceptable,
whether the impact on trees is acceptable, whether the proposal would be detrimental to the
amenities of neighbouring occupiers; whether the proposal satisfactorily addresses issues
of parking and access and any other issues. I shall deal with each of these in turn.
Principle of development
EHC3 considers that planning permission will be granted for the provision of new health
and community facilities by public, private and voluntary agencies, provided that a number
of criteria are met relating to amenity, environmental quality, accessibility and traffic
congestion.
Consultation information for women only supported accommodation has been submitted in
support of the application. This details that ‘the proposal is to develop a scheme of 8 self
contained flats for women only. The scheme will help meet a gap in housing for vulnerable
Salford women who need extra support to live independently and who are currently forced
to live out of the area away from their family and friends. These women may have
experienced trauma during their life and may have low self-esteem and lack of confidence.
This scheme will provide a safe, secure and supportive environment for these women to
relearn basic life skills and progress at their own pace towards moving on to sustained
independent living within their own communities with family and friends.’
Given the above and the previous use of the site for residential purposes, the principle of
supported accommodation is acceptable.
Design and appearance
Policy DES10 relates to design and crime and considers that development will not be
permitted unless it is designed to encourage crime, anti-social behaviour and the fear of
crime, and support personal and property security. The scheme has been amended
following comments received from the Police Architectural Liaison Officer, including the
extension of the low wall boundary and railings to the Florence Street boundary to the main
entrance door to offer a measure of protection and the inclusion of high level windows in
the north east elevation to prevent an exposed gable wall to be misused for anti-social
behaviour.
12
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Policy DES1 considers 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.
The context of the surrounding area is characterised by two-storey terraced properties and
3-storey blocks of flats. The proposed building would be part single storey, part two-storey
and in this respect, respects the scale and massing of the surrounding area. A varied
materials palette is proposed including brickwork, predominantly in a colour sensitive to
the existing housing stock, and Staffordshire Slate Blue on the corner lift shaft providing a
focal feature. Other materials include timber cladding and render with a slate roof.
A condition would be attached to any planning consent requiring sample materials to be
submitted and approved prior to the commencement of development. I am satisfied that
this will ensure that the materials are of a sufficiently high quality.
Overall, I am of the opinion that the proposed development would have a positive impact
upon the visual amenity of the area as the building will add value and quality to the built
environment in accordance with Policy DES1.
Impact on trees
Policy EN12 relates to important landscape features and considers that where development
would have a detrimental impact on, or result in the loss of, any important landscape
feature will not be permitted. Supplementary Planning Document “Trees and
Development” states that in the case of replacement tree planting the Council will require,
wherever practicable, the replacement on the basis of at least two new trees for each tree
lost. Where replacement trees cannot be accommodated on site, contributions to off-site
planting will be sought.
The proposed development would result in the felling of 1 Sycamore, 3 Birch, 2 Acer and 3
Lombardy Poplar trees. A tree survey has been submitted in support of the application.
The condition of the Birch, Acer and Lombardy Poplar are moderate to poor and they
provide a low amenity value. The trees are not of good enough quality to warrant retention
either singularly or as a group. No objection is raised to the felling of these trees.
The Sycamore tree situated to the front of the site adjacent to Florence Street is merited
protection. The applicants have submitted justification for the felling of this tree including
that its type and position on the site make it difficult to implement a scheme which would
be of benefit to the area and it can be an anti-social tree due to the levels of sap produced
which is of particular significance given its location in proximity to the car park and main
entrance to the site. The applicants have indicated a willingness to provide replacement
trees in accordance with the Supplementary Planning Document.
Whilst the Sycamore tree is of high amenity value and a tree worthy of protection, it is
considered that on balance, given the importance of this housing scheme for the City of
13
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Salford and the benefits it would bring to the wider community, provided adequate
replacement trees are agreed, the loss of this Sycamore tree would be acceptable in this
instance. The Sycamore tree is highly visible within the Florence Street streetscene and
there is limited scope within the site for replacement trees to offer a similarly high amenity
value and subsequently, the provision of off-site replacement trees should be considered.
The exact species and location of the replacement trees requires careful consideration but
an area of Council owned open space exists to the south east of the site which could provide
a potential location for the provision of replacement trees.
It is recommended that a condition be attached to any planning consent requiring the
provision of ten heavy standard replacement trees. This is recommended on the basis that
the Birch, Acer and Lombardy Poplar trees be replaced on a basis of 1 for 1 and the
Sycamore tree be replaced on a basis of 2 for 1.
Amenity
Policy DES7 of the UDP considers that all new 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 of other developments.
The proposal would be sited at a distance of 3.3 metres from the side elevation with 23
Florence Street. The original proposal projected 4.7 metres beyond the rear wall of .23
Florence Street at two-storey level. 23 Florence Street has a first floor habitable room
window in the rear elevation and subsequently amended plans were sought and the first
floor element of the proposal has been reduced in depth and it is now proposed to project
2.0 metres beyond the rear wall of 23 Florence Street at first floor level. This is considered
acceptable.
The level of separation between the proposed south west, two-storey element of the
development and the existing three storey block of flats is approximately 17.0 metres. This
level of separation between the proposed development and the existing neighbouring block
of flats is sufficient, having regard to the wider community benefits of the scheme, the
limited reduction in the Council’s normal standards and the obscure angle between the
buildings. In terms of the impact towards the north east and south east, there are no
windows in the gable ends of 25 Owen Street or 46 Atherton Street and 21 and 24 Winifred
Street
I am satisfied that the application would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact
on the amenity of residents due to overlooking or loss of privacy. The application therefore
accords with Policy DES7.
Parking and access
14
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists
and motorcyclists in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards. It also states that
the maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded and parking facilities should
be provided in a manner consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate
standards of safety and security.
The site would be accessed from Florence Street and five parking spaces are proposed
including 1 disabled space and provision for 4 bicycles. The parking would be provided at
a 90 degree angle to Florence Street. Parking arrangements of this type would usually
require a parking depth of 4.8 metres with 6.0 metres to the rear for adequate manoeuvring
space, totally 10.8 metres. A width of 10.0 metres is available and to allow for adequate
manoeuvring space, the width of each individual parking space has been increased from the
standard 2.4 metres to 2.6 metres.
In light of the nature of the proposed use, the Council’s maximum car parking standards to
encourage the use of more sustainable modes of transport, and the sites proximity within
reasonable walking distance of Worsley Road which is a major public transport route, I
consider the level of proposed car parking to be acceptable and in accordance with Policy
A10. The proposed areas and level of traffic generation are considered acceptable in terms
of the capacity of surrounding streets. I therefore have no objections to the application on
highway grounds.
In response to objectors concerns relating to construction traffic, it is recommended that a
site operating condition be attached to any planning consent requesting details in relation to
provision of permitted hours for construction works and delivery of materials and delivery
and collection of equipment
The development proposes to close a public right of way and I
have attached a condition requiring the relevant closure order
to be obtained prior to the commencement of development.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
Amended plans have been received, incorporating amendments suggested by the Police
Architectural Liaison Officer and reducing the depth of the proposal at first floor adjacent
to 23 Florence Street further. A tree survey has been submitted in support of the
application as has a consultation script for women only supported accommodation.
Parking provision has been increased by 1 space.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the proposed development would make efficient use of a previously
developed site within the urban area. Given the previous use of the site, the principle of
supported accommodation is acceptable. The scheme would have significant benefits for
the wider community and would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the
15
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
amenity of neighbouring residents. The design is such that the proposed building would
make a positive contribution to the surrounding area. Adequate replacement trees would
be provided to compensate for the felling of trees on site. The application accords with the
relevant policies of the UDP. I therefore recommend that the application be approved.
The residents occupying the flats at 49-71 Florence Street have not been notified of the
proposal directly by letter although a site notice has been displayed at the site.
Consultation letters have now been sent but the publicity period will not expire until 17
October 2006. It is recommended that if the Panel are minded to approve this application
that decision is delegated to the Chair plus one other member of the Panel unless objections
are received from local residents. If objections are received the application will be brought
back to the next meeting of the Panel on 19 October 2006 to allow the consideration of any
representations received during the publicity period.
RECOMMENDATION:
Delegate to the Chair and one other member of Panel unless
objections are received from local residents during the extended
publicity period.
1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning
with the date of this permission.
2. No development shall be started until samples of the facing materials to be used for the
walls and roof of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by
the Local Planning Authority.
3. Prior to the commencement of development the developer shall submit, for the
approval of the Local Planning Authority, a scheme to detail measures to ensure the
main entrance is operated on a secure entry system. Once approved the scheme shall be
implemented prior to the occupation of the supported accommodation hereby approved
in accordance with the approved scheme and the scheme shall be thereafter maintained.
4. 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
16
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
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.
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 and
delivery of materials and delivery and collection of equipment and no development or
activities related or incidental thereto shall take place on the site in contravention of
such site operating statement.
6. The development hereby approved shall not be commenced until the appropriate order
for the closure or diversion of the public right of way affected by the development has
been made.
7. During the first available planting season following the felling of the 1 Sycamore, 3
Birch, 2 Acer and 3 Lombardy Poplar trees hereby granted consent, they shall be
replaced by ten "heavy standard" trees in accordance with British Standard 3936:Part
1:1965 (Specification for Nursery Stock Part 1:Trees and Shrubs) and shall have a clear
stem height from the ground of 2.5m, a minimum overall height from the ground of
4.0m, a minimum circumference of stem at 1m from the ground of 12cm and the trees
shall be root balled. The species and location of the ten replacement trees shall be
agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the felling of the trees.
(Reasons)
1. Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990.
2. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the
City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
3. To safeguard the security of the area in accordance with policy DES10 of the City of
17
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Salford Unitary Development Plan.
4. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in
accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
5. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with
policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
6. In the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy A8 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan.
7. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the
City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
APPLICATION No:
06/53078/FUL
APPLICANT:
Peel Investments (North) Ltd
LOCATION:
Land On South Side Of Centenary Way Between Canal
Circle And Centenary Circle Eccles
PROPOSAL:
Erection of five-two storey office units (Class B1) totalling
3946 sq.m together with associated landscaping and car
parking
WARD:
Weaste And Seedley
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This rectangular site, measuring 395 metres by 85 metres, is on land to the south of
Centenary Way Eccles. Immediately to the south of the site is the Manchester Ship Canal
and beyond this the Trafford Park Industrial Estate. The Coronet flour mill sits to the east
of the site. To the north east is a site currently being development for B1c, B2 and B8 uses.
To the north, planning permission has recently been granted for the erection of a five and a
half storey office building comprising 10,085.7 square metres of office (B1) floorspace
over four floors. The site has a site area of approximately 0.93 hectares and is currently
vacant.
The land is generally flat, the land slopes down slightly from Centenary Way and again
towards the Manchester Ship Canal towards the south of the site.
18
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Planning permission is sought for the erection of five two-storey office units together with
associated landscaping and car parking. The proposal would provide a total of 3,946
square metres of office (B1) floorspace. The maximum height of the buildings would be
9.8m in height. 113 car parking spaces are proposed throughout the site, in addition to
cycling and motorcycle facilities. The site would be accessed centrally within the site via
an existing access from Centenary Way.
CONSULTATIONS
Trafford MBC – No objections. It is understood that the land is allocated for employment
development.
Environment Agency – No objection in principle, a condition relating to Japanese
knotweed is recommended.
Manchester Ship Canal Company – no comments received to date.
Central Salford Urban Regeneration Company – no comments received to date.
Strategic Director of Environmental Services recommends a full contamination condition.
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Unit – Advise that the site must be
securely fenced and gated.
Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – No objections but advise that the
applicant is asked to agree to fund the provision adequate pedestrian crossing facilities
across Centenary Way.
United Utilities – Objected to the original application as a raw sludge main runs through
the site and building is not permitted on the easement. The applicant has been notified of
these comments and amended plans altering the layout have been submitted.
PUBLICITY
A press notice was published on 20th July 2006.
Two site notices were displayed on 13th July 2006.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
Cornet Flour Mill, Centenary Way
Visage Imports Ltd, 29 Bury New Road
Akcross Chemicals, 1 Bentcliffe Way
Units A, B, 9a, 9b, 10, 11, 12, 13a, 13b, 14 West One Retail Park
19
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
McDonalds Restaurant, West One Retail Park
Easter Developments, 4 Grosvenor Place, London
REPRESENTATIONS
No letters of representation/objection have been received in response to the planning
application publicity.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP3: Quality in New Developments.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: E4/14: Sites for Employment Development.
Other policies:
DES1: Respecting Context.
DES6: Waterside Development.
DES7: Amenity of Neighbours and Users.
DES10: Design and Crime
DES11: Design Statements.
A1:
Transport Assessments and Travel Plans.
A10: Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments.
EN17: Pollution Control.
ST3: Employment Supply.
ST11: Location of New Development.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The key issues to be considered in the determination of this planning application are:
whether the principle of development is acceptable, whether the design and appearance is
acceptable and whether the proposal would have a detrimental impact on amenity and
access and parking.
Principle
PPS6 states that the sequential approach to site selection should be applied to all
development proposals for town centre uses on sites that are not in an existing centre or
allocated in an up-to-date development plan document.
The site is allocated in the recently adopted UDP under policy E4/14 for offices, light
industry, general industry, storage and distribution. This policy states that the site is
located on the banks of the Manchester Ship Canal, and has excellent access to Trafford
Park and the M602 Motorway, via Centenary Way.
20
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
All the sites considered within Policy E4 are considered to accord with the sequential
approach set out in Policy ST11 (Location of new development) and be in accordance with
Policy ST3 which relates to employment supply. I am therefore satisfied that the proposal
is acceptable in land use terms.
Design and appearance
Policy DES1 considers that development will be required to respond to its physical context,
respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated, and contribute towards
local identity and distinctiveness.
A varied material palette is proposed for each unit including brickwork with a metal roof
and a focal entrance point utilising tinted glass. A condition would be attached to any
planning consent requiring sample materials to be submitted and approved prior to the
commencement of development. I am satisfied that this will ensure that the materials are of
a sufficiently high quality.
Units A, B and C front Centenary Way and the entrance to these buildings provides an
attractive feature and focal point to Centenary Way, whilst Units D and E front the
Manchester Ship Canal. The design of each unit varies slightly whilst respecting the same
theme. Overall, I am of the opinion that the proposed development would have a positive
impact upon the visual amenity of the area as the buildings will add value and quality to the
built environment and are fitting for a prominently located site at the gateway to the City of
Salford from Trafford Park.
Policy DES10 seeks to encourage the inclusion of design measures which reduce criminal
activity. This is supplemented by Supplementary Planning Document ‘Design and Crime’
which provides detailed guidance on designing out crime for new developments. The
comments of the Police Architectural Liaison Officer advise that the site must be securely
fenced and gated. A condition requiring the submission of details of boundary treatments
would be attached to any planning consent.
Amenity
Policy DES7 states that development will not be permitted where it would have an
unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users of other developments.
I have not received any objections from the Strategic Director of Environmental Services
in relation to this proposal or any objections from nearby residents or units.
21
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
The proposal is some 150 metres to the south of the Weaste Quarry site where the Secretary
of State is currently considering an application for residential development. Other
surrounding uses are commercial in nature and I am therefore satisfied that the proposal
would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of neighbouring
occupiers of other developments.
Access and parking
Policy DES6 relates to waterside development and considers that all new development
adjacent to the Manchester Ship Canal will be required to facilitate pedestrian access to,
along and, where appropriate, across the waterway by the provision of: a safe, attractive
and overlooked waterside walkway, accessible to all and at all times of the day, where this
is compatible with the commercial role of the water way; pedestrian links between the
waterside walkway and other key pedestrian routes.
The scheme provides two pedestrian accesses to the existing canal walkway. The canal
walkway can be accessed from within the site, opposite the vehicular access and from
outside of the site towards the west reached via Centenary Way. It is therefore considered
that the proposal satisfies the requirements of policy DES6.
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. Appendix B states that a B1
use should provide 1 motorcycle space per 1,400 square metres and 1 bicycle space per 400
square metres. The proposed floorspace is 3,946 square metres and this equates to a need
for 3 motorcycle spaces and 10 bicycle spaces.
There would be 6 disabled spaces provided on site which is in line with the Council’s
standards. Maximum parking standards are 1 space per 35 sq m floorspace equating to a
maximum of 113 spaces and 113 are proposed. The proposal does not therefore exceed
maximum parking standards.
GMPTE have advised that the applicant be asked to agree to fund the provision of adequate
pedestrian crossing facilities across Centenary Way. It is considered reasonable to secure a
planning obligation for a pedestrian crossing facility across Centenary Way to provide safe
pedestrian access to the existing bus stop on the north side of Centenary Way. A
framework for a green travel plan has been submitted in support of the application. I have
recommended that a condition be attached requiring the applicant to provide a Green
Travel Plan, in order to promote the use of more sustainable modes of transport, in
accordance with Policy A1 and PPG13.
I am therefore satisfied that this will encourage the use of more sustainable modes of
transport in accordance with local and national policies.
22
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
Amendments have been made to the layout with units A, B and C turned to front Centenary
Way and alterations to the external design of all five units. The scheme has also been the
subject of pre-application discussions.
CONCLUSION
The proposed scheme would provide a suitable employment use in accordance with the
land use allocation in the UDP. The design is fitting for the prominent location of the
building. The proposal would not be detrimental to highway safety. The proposal would
not compromise the aims and objectives of the relevant policies contained within the
development plan and there are no other material planning considerations that would
justify a refusal of consent.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning
with the date of this permission.
2. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be
submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is
started. Such scheme shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls,
fences, boundary and surface treatment and shall be carried out within 12 months of the
commencement of development and thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of
the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting
shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
3. 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
23
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
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.
4. Within a period of three months of the occupation of the unit, the tenant/landlord shall
undertake a travel survey and this data will form part of a Travel Plan. Within a period
of 6 months from the first date of occupation of the building, a Travel Plan shall be
submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan
shall as a minimum include the broad areas of actions, objectives and timescales for
review and monitoring. Within twelve months of occupation of the building, a Travel
Plan shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority, which
shall include a review of targets, measures, staff survey data and a monitoring survey.
Annually from the occupation of the building, a Travel Plan shall be submitted for the
written approval of the Local Planning Authority for a period of 5 years and then at a
time agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
5. No development shall be started until full samples of the facing materials to be used for
the walls and roof of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be undertaken using the
approved materials.
6. No development shall be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing all the
following matters including; sustainable construction techniques; natural ventilation
techniques; sustainable urban drainage systems; techniques to reduce solar heat gain
and use of renewable energy sources; and all energy efficiency and sustainability
matters have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Prior to the occupation of the unit, the approved scheme shall be installed
and shall thereafter be retained and maintained.
7. The car parking and servicing area shall be laid out in accordance with drawing number
MH478-03 C prior to first occupation of the units hereby approved and shall be
available at all times the premises are in use.
8. No development shall be started until full details of the location, design and
construction of bicycle parking facilities have been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such approved bicycle parking facilities shall
thereafter be constructed and made available for use before the first occupation of the
24
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
building.
9. The two pedestrian links to the canal walkway shall be provided in accordance with
drawing number NH478-03 C prior to first occupation of the units hereby approved and
shall be maintained thereafter.
10. The development hereby permitted by this planning permission shall not commence
until a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act,
1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning Authority, and the Local
Planning Authority has given its approval in writing. The planning obligation will
provide that a commuted sum as required by policy A2 Cyclists, Pedestrians and the
Disabled will be paid to the Local Planning Authority for the provision of pedestrian
crossing facilities across Centenary Way.
(Reasons)
1. Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990.
2. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the
City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
3. Reason: In the interests of public safety in accordance with policy EN16 of the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan
4. In order to encourage the use of more sustainable modes of transport, in accordance
with Policy A1 of the UDP.
5. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the
City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
6. In the interests of sustainable development.
7. Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made for the parking of vehicles within
the curtilage of the site in accordance with policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary
Development Plan.
8. Standard Reason R012B Parking only within curtilage
9. In order to facilitate pedestrian access to the canal walkway in accordance with DES6
of the Unitary Development Plan.
10. To ensure the office development provides appropriate highway improvements in
accordance with Policy A2 of the adopted UDP.
25
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Note(s) for Applicant
1. Please refer to the attached letter from the Environment Agency dated 7th August 2006
relating to Japanese Knotwood.
2. The applicant is advised that this permission relates to the following plans submitted on
21st September 2006:
MH478-03 C
MH478-04 A
MH478-05 A
MH478-06 A
MH478-07 A
MH47808-A
MH478-09 A
MH47810-A
MH478-11 A
APPLICATION No:
06/53104/OUT
APPLICANT:
Stowell Spire Developments Ltd
LOCATION:
Stowell Spire Public House Howard Street Salford M5
2SA
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing public house and outline planning
application to include layout and access for two-three
storey buildings comprising 30 apartments
WARD:
Ordsall
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a plot of land 64m by 45m on the corner of Eccles New Road and
Howard Street. The Stowell Spire Public House currently occupies the site.
A mix of single storey and two storey residential properties occupy the land to the south
and east of the site. The land to the west is occupied by a two storey terrace of commercial
properties and the land to the north is occupied by a mixed of uses including a two storey
community centre and a four storey office block. To the north west of the site there are two
three-storey apartment blocks.
26
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
It is proposed to demolish the existing public house and erect two three storey apartment
blocks comprising of 30, 2 bed apartments. The proposed blocks would form an L shape,
which would run for 47m along Eccles Old and 25.5m along Howard Street. 30 car parking
spaces would be provided including 3 that would be suitable for use by disabled persons.
The parking area would be accessed off Howard Street. The applicant is seeking
permission for the layout and access to the site. The appearance, scale and landscaping
details have been reserved at this stage.
CONSULTATION
Strategic Director of Environmental Services – no objections to the principle of the
development but recommends conditions requiring a noise assessment and restrictions on
working hours
Environment Agency – No objections
United Utilities – No objections
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Officer – No objections but commented
that access should be available directly from the street.
PUBLICITY
A press notice was published on the 27th of July 2006.
A site notice was posted on the 3rd of August 2006.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
Flats 118 to 133 Redmire Court
Omega House, 1 Peel Cross Road
95 to 109 Eccles New Road
80 and 80A Eccles New Road
1, 34, 35, 39 and 40 Hawshaw Court
2 to 18 (even) Chambers field Court
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received two letters of representation / objection in response to the planning
application publicity. No concerns have been raised in connection with the proposed
development however occupants of the commercial units on the southern side of Eccles
New Road are requesting that the car parking area to the rear of 95 to 105 Eccles New Road
is cleared and tarmaced by the developer. This area lies outside the red line boundary and
27
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
therefore I am of the opinion that it would not be reasonable to seek improvements to this
area under this application.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: SD1 - The North West Metropolitan Area – Regional Poles and
Surrounding Areas
DP1 – Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 – Design and Crime
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments
ST11 - Location of New Development
H8 - Open Space Provision Within New Housing Development
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of the
proposed development is acceptable; whether there would be a detrimental impact on
residential amenity; whether the proposed level of parking is acceptable; and whether the
proposal complies with the relevant policies of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan. I
shall deal with each of these issues in turn.
Principle –
Policy DP1 seeks to ensure that development makes the most efficient use of land.
Policy H1 states that the Council will endeavour to ensure that the city’s housing stock is
able to meet the housing requirements of all groups within Salford.
Policy ST11 advocates a sequential approach to development with sites involving the reuse
and conversion of existing buildings been the preferred location of development, followed
by previously developed land with Greenfield sites last.
The Stowell Spire Public House currently occupies the site. The site is therefore previously
developed and consequently the proposals to redevelop the site are in accordance with
Policy ST11.
28
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
The site is located within a mixed use area with residential properties located to the south
and east of the site and therefore I do not have any principled objections to the use of the
land for residential purposes, particularly given that the development would contribute to
the mix of dwellings available in the area.
Amenity Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a satisfactory
level of amenity. Development that would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of
the occupiers or users of other developments will not normally be permitted.
The land to the north and west of the site is not used for residential purposes.
At their closest the proposed apartment blocks would be located 11m from the boundary
with the properties on Chambers Field Court, extending to 30m and therefore I am of the
opinion that the proposed layout would not have an adverse impact upon residents of
Chambers Field Court.
The properties on Hawkshaw Court, which have frontages onto Howard Street, would be
located over 35m from the proposed apartments and consequently the residential amenity
the occupants of these properties can reasonably expect to enjoy would not be adversely
affected by the proposed siting.
Policy DES7 also requires all new developments to provide potential users with a
satisfactory level of amenity.
Future occupants of the proposed dwellings would be provided with a reasonable amount
of useable amenity space as a lawned area of approx. 9m by 42m would be provided.
Access
Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists
and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s maximum standards.
In total 30 car parking spaces would be provided on site, including three that would be
suitable for use by disabled persons. The application site is well located in terms of public
transport and therefore I am satisfied that the proposed level of car parking is acceptable.
The proposed car parking and access would be laid out in such a way that I do not have any
objections to the proposed development on highway safety grounds.
Policy DES2 relates to circulation and movement and sets out a number of criteria, which
new developments must meet. These include ensuring that the development is fully
accessible to all people, ensuring that the movement of pedestrians and cyclists to, through
and around the site is maximised and ensuring that safe, direct and convenient access to
public transport facilities and other local amenities is provided. The applicant has indicated
29
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
on the proposed site layout plan that there would be pedestrian accesses off Eccles New
Road and Howard Street. I am of the opinion that this represents good design in accordance
with Policy DES2 as it allows for easy pedestrian access to and from the site and out onto
Eccles New Road along which a number of bus services can be found.
Open Space –
Policy H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and informal
open space within housing developments.
In accordance with the above policies, the applicant is aware that a contribution towards
the provision and maintenance of open space in the vicinity is required. I have attached a
condition requiring such a contribution. I am therefore satisfied that the application
therefore accords with Policy H8.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
In the north eastern corner of the site there is a planted area containing several mature trees
– 3 London Planes, a small alder and a multi stemmed willow. In the opinion of the
Council’s arborist and the consultant arborist who conducted the tree survey submitted
with the application the three London planes are healthy mature specimens that make a
positive contribution to the visual amenity of the area. We are currently in the process of
protecting these trees via a Tree Preservation Order. In order to allow these trees to be
retained the siting of the proposed apartment blocks has been revised and moved away
from the trees in order to ensure that the proposed development complies with the
Council’s SPD on trees.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I consider that the principle of the redevelopment of the site for residential
purposes is acceptable. I am of the opinion that the proposal complies with the relevant
policies of the Adopted UDP and there are no material considerations that outweigh this
finding. I therefore recommend that the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions and that the Strategic Director of Customer
and Support Services be given authority to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106
of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the provision of improved local open
space/play equipment.
Conditions
30
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
1. Standard Condition B01B reserved matters time limit
2. No development shall be started until full details of the following reserved matters have
been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority:
a) appearance; means the aspects of a building or place within the development which
determine the visual impression the building or place makes, including the external
built form of the development, its architecture, material, decoration, lighting, colour
and texture;
b) landscaping: in relation to a site or any part of a site for which outline planning
permission has been granted or, as the case may be, in respect of which an application
for such permission has been made, means the treatment of land (other than buildings)
for the purpose of enhancing or protecting the amenities of the site and the area in
which it is situated and includes screening by fences, walls or other means, the planting
of trees, hedges, shrubs or grass, the formation of banks, terraces or other earthworks,
the laying out or provisions of gardens, courts or squares, water features, sculpture, or
public art, and the provision of other amenity features;
c) scale, means the height, width and length of each building proposed within the
development in relation to its surroundings.
3. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a noise assessment
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This
assessment should follow PPG24 guidelines towards assessing the noise from Eccles
New Road and any other local noise sources that are deemed significant. The
assessment shall identify all noise attenuation measures and alternative means of
ventilation which may be determined appropriate to reduce the impact of noise on the
residential properties on site and achieve the requirements of BS8233 for internal noise
levels. Unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority, all
approved noise control and ventilation measures shall be implemented prior to first
occupation of any of the apartments hereby approved and thereafter retained
4. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the
undertaking of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4) (a-d) of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act, 1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning
Authority, and the Local Planning Authority has given its approval in writing. The
planning obligation will provide that a commuted sum as required by Policy H8 of the
Adopted, having regard to the standards set out in Policy R2 of the Adopted UDP and
Salford's Greenspace Strategy will be paid to the Local Planning Authority for open
space and recreation space purposes.
5. The finished floor levels shall be 300mm above adjacent road level unless otherwise
agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
31
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
6. 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 trees root protection area (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 the 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.
7. No development shall be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing all the
following matters including; sustainable construction techniques; natural ventilation
techniques; sustainable urban drainage systems; techniques to reduce solar heat gain
and use of renewable energy sources; and all energy efficiency and sustainability
matters have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Prior to the occupation of the unit, the approved scheme shall be installed
and shall thereafter be retained and maintained.
8. No development shall be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing recycling of
waste from the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented and thereafter
retained prior to the first occupation of the commercial and residential units hereby
approved
9. No development shall be started until full details of the location, design and
construction of 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.
10. No development shall be started until full details of the location, design and
construction of the cycle 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.
11. Prior to the first occupation of the apartment buildings hereby permitted the 30 car
parking spaces shown in the approved plan shall be provided within the curtilage of the
site. The spaces shall be made available at all times whilst the premises are in use.
12. Prior to the first occupation of the apartments hereby permitted, the new vehicular
access to the development, as shown on the approved plans, shall be provided.
13. No external lighting shall be installed unless and until a scheme has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall
be implemented and thereafter in accordance with the approved details.
32
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R002 Reserved Matters
2. Standard Reason R002 Reserved Matters
3. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
4. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation
space for future occupiers in accordance with policies H8 and R2 of the Adopted UDP
5. To reduce the risk of flooding.
6. To protect trees in accordance with policy EN 12 of the City of Salford Unitary
Development Plan and the Councils SPD on trees.
7. In the interests of sustainable development.
8. In order to provide recycling facilities in accordance with policy DEV1 and EN20 of
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
9. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
10. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
11. Standard Reason R026B Interests of highway safety
12. Standard Reason R026B Interests of highway safety
13. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
Note(s) for Applicant
1. This permission relates to drawing 2672.02 Rev B.
APPLICATION No:
06/53193/FUL
APPLICANT:
M Causey
LOCATION:
91 Barton Lane Eccles M30 0EY
PROPOSAL:
Erection of ten two and a half storey dwellings together
33
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
with associated car parking
WARD:
Barton
In between this item being considered at the Planning and Transportation Panel on the 21st
of September and the decision being issued by the Local Planning Authority a number of
issues relating to traffic flow, highway safety and parking have been raised by residents.
These issues were not debated at the Panel meeting on the 21st of September and it is
considered that they are issues that need to be bought to the attention on Members.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a plot of land (47.5m by 22.5m) at the junction of Barton Lane
and Boardman Street. The site is currently occupied by an two portal frame sheds, a lower
shed L shaped shed measuring 39m by 23m by 5m and a taller one towards the Boardman
Street boundary which measures 35m by 17m by 7.5m and two, two storey portacabins.
The site is currently used as a portacabin manufacturing and refurbishment factory within
Use Class B2.
Apart from a vacant site to the north east the site is bounded on all sides by residential
properties.
This application is for the demolition of the existing buildings and the erection of ten, three
bedroomed residential properties in two identical terraces which front onto Boardman
Street. Both terraces would run for 22.5m along Boardman Street and they would be 5.3m
in height at the eaves and 8.7m m in height at the ridge. A second storey of living
accommodation would be provided in the roof space, facilitated via the use of front
dormers. Each dwelling would have one off road car parking space.
SITE HISTORY
In December 2000 outline planning permission was granted for the use of the land for
residential purposes (ref 00/41594/OUT).
In September 2001 planning permission was granted for the erection of 10 dwellings
together with associated parking (ref 01/42846/FUL)
CONSULTATIONS
34
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Strategic Director Of Environmental Services – no objections subject to the attachment of
conditions.
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Officer – no objections but would like to
see same defensible space created at the left hand side gable and the rear alleyways to be
gated.
PUBLICITY
A press notice has been published.
A site notice was posted on the 11th of August 2006.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
102 to 128 (even) Barton Lane
85, 89a, 89b, 121 Barton Lane
2 and 4 Garden Street
2 to 16 (even) Boardman Street
1a,1 and 3 Boardman Street
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received no letters of representation / objection in response to the planning
application publicity.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 – Design and Crime
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments
ST11 - Location of New Development
H8 - Open Space Provision Within New Housing Development
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of the
proposed development is acceptable; whether the design of the proposed building is
acceptable; whether there would be a detrimental impact on residential amenity; whether
the proposed level of parking is acceptable; and whether the proposal complies with the
35
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
relevant policies of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan. I shall deal with each of these
issues in turn.
Principle –
Policy DP1 seeks to ensure that development makes the most efficient use of land.
Policy H1 states that the Council will endeavour to ensure that the city’s housing stock is
able to meet the housing requirements of all groups within Salford.
Policy ST11 advocates a sequential approach to development with sites involving the reuse
and conversion of existing buildings been the preferred location of development, followed
by previously developed land with Greenfield sites last.
The site is currently occupied by a B2 industrial use. The site is therefore previously
developed and consequently the proposals to redevelop the site are in accordance with
Policy ST11.
The use of the site as a portable building manufacturing and repair place does not sit
comfortably within this predominantly residential area as the site is unsightly in
appearance and as a result it significantly detracts from the visual amenity of the area.
Consequently I do not have any principled objections to the loss of the industrial use.
With regards to the development of the site for residential purposes the site is located
within a predominantly residential area and therefore I do not have any objections to the
redevelopment of the site for residential purposes, particularly given that the development
contribute to the mix of dwellings available in the area. The principle of residential
development has been previously accepted with the recent planning permissions.
Design –
Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical
context and to respect the character of the surrounding area.
In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with this
policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the
relationship to existing buildings and the quality and
appropriateness of proposed materials.
The proposed housing is designed in the form of two identical terraces, which front onto
Boardman Street. A ginnel separates the two terraces and allows access to the rear gardens.
Each terrace would run for 22.5m along Boardman Street. Both terraces would be 5.3m in
height at the eaves and 8.7m m in height at the ridge. A second storey of living
accommodation would be provided in the roof space, facilitated via the use of front
dormers.
36
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
The proposed building respects the existing building line and
it is well designed so it incorporates a number of the local
architectural features. I have attached a condition requiring
the submission of samples of materials to be submitted and
approved prior to the commencement of development and I am
satisfied that this will ensure that they will be of a suitably
high quality and in keeping with the surrounding area as well
as ensuring that the proposed building makes a positive
contribution to the character of the area.
Amenity Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential
users with a satisfactory level of amenity. Development that
would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers
or users of other developments will not normally be permitted.
The residential amenity, the occupants of 1 Boardman Street currently enjoy, would not be
unacceptably adversely affected by the proposed development, as they do not have any
habitable room windows in the gable end of their property.
The residential amenity of the occupants of the properties opposite the site on Barton Lane
would not experience a reduction in the residential amenity they can reasonably expect to
enjoy as there would be approximately 17m between the habitable room windows in the
front elevation of these properties and the two storey blank gable end of the proposed
terraces.
There would be facing habitable room window-to-window distances of 20.5m between the
proposed dwellings and those opposite at 2 to 16 Boardman Street, the same as previously
considered acceptable under extant permission 01/42846/FUL. There would be 21.5m
separation between the proposed front dormer and 2 to 16 Boardman Street. I am of the
opinion that this level of separation is sufficient to ensure that the occupants of the
properties opposite on Boardman street do not experience a reduction in the privacy should
the proposal receive favourable consideration.
The site to the north east of the site is currently vacant. There would be 8m from ground
and first floor habitable room windows in the rear elevation of the proposed properties and
the site boundary. This relationship was deemed to be acceptable under extant permission
01/42846/FUL. Since the grant of the extant permission guidelines have altered slightly
and it is now standard practice not to allow first floor habitable room windows within
10.5m of a site boundary with a neighbour in order that the 21m separation required
between facing habitable rooms is shared between the two sites and current development
does not sterilise neighbouring sites. However in this instance, even without the extant
permission, I am of the opinion that a shortfall in separation is acceptable given the positive
impact that the proposed development would have on the visual amenity of the area and the
37
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
residential amenity enjoyed by neighbouring residents and the fact that this level of
separation is sufficient to ensure that the neighbouring site is not significantly overlooked
or overshadowed.
Future occupants of each of the proposed dwellings would be provided with a private rear
garden 6m by 4.5m.
Car Parking Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for
disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance
with the Council’s maximum standards.
One parking space would be provided for each of the proposed dwellings. The application
site is well located in terms of public transport and therefore I am satisfied that the
proposed level of car parking is acceptable. The proposed car parking and access would be
laid out in such a way that I do not have any objections to the proposed development on
highway safety grounds as I do not consider that there would be any long term issues with
the increased vehicular traffic flow to and in the vicinity of the site.
Open Space –
Policy H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and informal
open space within housing developments.
In accordance with the above policies, the applicant is aware that a £21,600 contribution
towards the provision and maintenance of open space in the vicinity is required. I have
attached a condition requiring such a contribution. I am therefore satisfied that the
application therefore accords with Policy H8.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I consider that the principle of the
redevelopment of the site for residential purposes is
acceptable. I am of the opinion that the proposal complies with
the relevant policies of both the Adopted UDP and there are no
material considerations that outweigh this finding. I therefore
recommend that the application be approved
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that authority be given for the Strategic Director of Customer and
Support Services to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990.
38
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03 Three year time limit
2. No development shall be started until samples of the facing materials to be used for the
walls and roof of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by
the Local Planning Authority.
3. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be
submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is
started. Such scheme shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls,
fences, boundary and surface treatment and shall be carried out within 6 months of the
commencement of development and thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of
the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting
shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
4. No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a preliminary
risk assessment on the potential for on site contamination has been undertaken and
agreed by the Local Planning Authority. If the preliminary risk assessment identifies
potential contamination a detailed intrusive site investigation then prior to the
commencement of development, the developer shall submit a site investigation report
for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the
nature, degree and distribution of contamination and ground gases on the site and its
implications on the risk to human health and controlled water receptors as defined
under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA. The investigation shall also
address the health and safety of the site workers, also nearby persons, building
structures and services, landscaping schemes, final users on the site and the
environmental pollution in ground water. The sampling and analytical strategy shall be
approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the start of the survey, and
recommendations and remedial works contained within the approved report shall be
implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the site. A site completion report
including details of post remediation ground conditions for the site shall be completed
and submitted to the Local Planning Authority prior to occupation of the site.
5. Prior to the commencement of the development an assessment of noise likely to affect
the application site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. This assessment should follow PPG24 guidelines towards assessing the
noise from the surrounding road network including Barton Road and any other noise
sources which are deemed significant on site. The assessment shall identify all noise
attenuation measures and alternative methods of ventilation to reduce the impact of
noise on the residential properties on site and achieve the requirements of BS8233 for
internal noise levels. The approved measures shall be implemented in full prior to the
first occupation of any of the apartments hereby approved and retained thereafter.
39
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
6. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the
undertaking of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4) (a-d) of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act, 1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning
Authority, and the Local Planning Authority has given its approval in writing. The
planning obligation will provide that a commuted sum as required by policy H8 of the
City of Salford Adopted UDP and the Draft Salford Greenspace Strategy 2006 will be
paid to the Local Planning Authority for open space and recreation space purposes.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
3. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
4. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
5. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
6. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation
space for future occupiers in accordance with policy H8 of the City of Salford Adopted
UDP
APPLICATION No:
06/53239/OUT
APPLICANT:
BFD Property Development Ltd
LOCATION:
British Legion Chadwick Road Eccles M30 0WU
PROPOSAL:
Outline planning application for the development of land
for residential purposes to include layout and access for 48
apartments together with associated car parking
WARD:
Eccles
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a site previously occupied by the Royal British Legion Club,
which was recently demolished following a fire. A detached dwelling and a disused
40
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
bowling green, previously used in association with the club, currently occupy part of the
site.
The land to the north and south of the site is occupied by residential properties. Offices
occupy the land immediately to the west and the land to the east is a mix of residential and
industrial properties.
The footprint of the proposed apartments would follow the existing footprint of the Club
and dwelling house. The proposed block would form an L shape, which would run for
45.5m along Chadwick road and 47m along Devonshire Road. The applicant states that 3
1-bed apartment, 41 2-bed apartments, 4 3-bed apartments and a two-bedroom house
would be provided within the block. 29 car parking spaces would be provided. The
applicant is seeking permission for the layout and access to the site. The appearance, scale
and landscaping details have been reserved for future consideration.
SITE HISTORY
A previous application for the demolition of existing building and erection of a part 3
storey part 4 storey block to provide 32 apartments together with new vehicular access and
associated car parking and landscaping was withdrawn in January 2005 (Ref
04/49139/FUL).
In April 2006 outline planning permission was granted for the demolition of the existing
buildings and the siting of and access to 37 apartments (ref 05/51923/OUT).
In July 2006 an application for the demolition of the existing buildings and outline
permission for the siting of and access to 50 apartments was withdrawn (Ref
06/52740/OUT). This application was withdrawn as insufficient information had been
provided in order to determine whether the proposed level of car parking was sufficient and
the level of amenity space proposed for future residents was deemed to be insufficient.
CONSULTATIONS
Stategic Director of Environmental Services – no objections to the principle of the
development but recommends conditions requiring site investigations and a noise
assessment
Environment Agency – No objections
United Utilities – No objections
Railtrack – No objections
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Officer – No objections subject to a
condition requiring a lighting scheme
41
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
PUBLICITY
A press notice was posted on the 17th of August 2006.
A site notice was displayed on 11th of August 2006.
Press Notice
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
70 to 86 (even) Chadwick Road
Units 1 to 4, Delta Works, Chadwick Road
13 to 19 (odd) Gladstone Road
20 to 32 (even) Gladstone Road
25 to 35 (odd) Devonshire Road
20 to 32 (even) Devonshire Road
1, 2 and 3 A, B and C Hampden Grove
35, 39, 41,43 and 45 Chadwick Road
60 to 68 (even) Chadwick Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received one letter of objection in response to the planning application publicity.
The following issues have been raised:Increased traffic and associated parking problems
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: SD1 - The North West Metropolitan Area – Regional Poles and
Surrounding Areas
DP1 – Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments
ST11 - Location of New Development
H8 - Open Space Provision Within New Housing Development
42
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of the
proposed development is acceptable; whether there would be a detrimental impact on
residential amenity; whether the proposed level of parking is acceptable; and whether the
proposal complies with the relevant policies of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan. I
shall deal with each of these issues in turn.
Principle –
Policy DP1 seeks to ensure that development makes the most efficient use of land.
Policy H1 states that the Council will endeavour to ensure that the city’s housing stock is
able to meet the housing requirements of all groups within Salford.
Policy ST11 advocates a sequential approach to development with sites involving the reuse
and conversion of existing buildings been the preferred location of development, followed
by previously developed land with Greenfield sites last.
Policy R1 states that the development of land used for recreational purposes will not be
permitted unless it has been clearly demonstrated that the site is surplus to requirements or
adequate replacement provision, of equivalent or better accessibility, community benefit
and management is made elsewhere within the City.
Until recently the site was occupied by the Royal British Legion Club and associated
Bowling Green. The club was closed in January 2006, with the bowling green last being
used in the summer of 2005. Part of the site is also occupied by a residential property. The
site, including the bowling green, is therefore previously developed and therefore its
development is in accordance with Policy ST11.
Despite the demolition of the club following a recent fire the bowling green still remains on
site. I do not have any objections to the principle of residential development in this location
as the surrounding area is predominantly residential, subject to the justification of the loss
of an existing recreational facility and/or an agreement to it replacement being reached.
In order to satisfy Policy R1 the applicant has submitted a supporting statement that
justifies the loss of the recreational facility. The statement describes how there are 9 active
bowling greens within the Eccles Community Committee area. There are no current
standards on the number of bowling greens that should be provided however the applicant
uses figures from the former Sports Council published in 1968 to work out how many
bowling greens should be provided within the Eccles Community Committee area to serve
the population. These figures state that 1 bowling green should be provided for every 6000
people. There are 34,599 people in the Community Committee area and therefore
according to these figures 6 bowling greens should be provided. The applicant therefore
concludes that the Bowling Green on site is surplus to requirements. I agree with this
43
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
assertion. The statement goes on to describe how the site is unusable for any other type of
recreational activity due to its size and location in a predominantly residential area. I also
agree with this statement. I am therefore satisfied that subject to a £90,000 contribution
towards recreational facilities in the vicinity of the site that the proposal complies with
Policy R1.
Amenity
Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a satisfactory
level of amenity. Development that would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of
the occupiers or users of other developments will not normally be permitted.
The land to the west of the site is not used for residential purposes.
The proposed building would be located 1m from the boundary with 2a Hampden Grove.
Despite this I do not have any objections to this relationship, as proposed apartment block
would run along the same line and occupy the same footprint as the existing dwelling house
at 38 Devonshire Road.
The residential amenity of the other occupants of the properties at the rear of the site, on
Hampden Grove, would not be adversely affected by the proposal, as the proposed building
would be located 34.2m from the rear boundary with these properties.
I am therefore of the opinion that the proposed siting would not have an adverse impact
upon neighbouring residents.
Policy DES7 also requires all new developments to provide potential users with a
satisfactory level of amenity.
Future occupants of the proposed dwellings would be provided with a reasonable amount
of useable amenity space as a lawned area of approx.13.5m by 31.5m would be provided.
Access
Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists
and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s maximum standards.
In total 29 car parking spaces would be provided on site. This equates to 60% car parking
provision. In order to justify this level of parking the applicant has submitted a
sustainability appraisal with the application. This appraisal notes that the site is located
within close proximity to Eccles Town Centre, Eccles Transport Interchange, two primary
schools, a doctors and a dentist, all of which are located within 750metres of the site. It also
identifies the wide range of bus services that are available from Liverpool Road, which is
located 200m from the site. In addition, the report draws attention to the fact that Eccles is,
44
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
according to the 2001 census, an area of low car ownership within which 39% of
households do not own a car as compared to 27% for the UK as a whole.
In light of the Council’s maximum car parking standards and the need to encourage the use
of more sustainable modes of transport, the site’s relative proximity to the metrolink,
Eccles Bus Station and various community services, in combination with the low car
ownership exhibited by home owners in Eccles, I would consider the proposed level of
parking to be acceptable and in accordance with Policy A10. I therefore have no objections
to the application on highway grounds.
Open Space –
Policy H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and informal
open space within housing developments.
In accordance with the above policies, the applicant is aware that a contribution towards
the provision and maintenance of open space in the vicinity is required. I have attached a
condition requiring such a contribution. I am therefore satisfied that the application
therefore accords with Policy H8.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I consider that the principle of the redevelopment of the site for residential
purpose is acceptable. I am of the opinion that the proposal complies with the relevant
policies of the Adopted UDP and there are no material considerations that outweigh this
finding. I therefore recommend that the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions and that the Strategic Director of Customer
and Support Services be given authority to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106
of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the provision of improved local open
space/play equipment and a contribution of £90,000 towards local recreational facilities.
Conditions
1. Standard Condition B01B reserved matters time limit
2. No development shall be started until full details of the following reserved matters have
been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority:
a) appearance; means the aspects of a building or place within the development
which determine the visual impression the building or place makes, including the
external built form of the development, its architecture, material, decoration, lighting,
45
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
colour and texture;
b) landscaping: in relation to a site or any part of a site for which outline planning
permission has been granted or, as the case may be, in respect of which an application
for such permission has been made, means the treatment of land (other than buildings)
for the purpose of enhancing or protecting the amenities of the site and the area in
which it is situated and includes screening by fences, walls or other means, the planting
of trees, hedges, shrubs or grass, the formation of banks, terraces or other earthworks,
the laying out or provisions of gardens, courts or squares, water features, sculpture, or
public art, and the provision of other amenity features;
c) scale, means the height, width and length of each building proposed within the
development in relation to its surroundings.
3. Standard Condition M05 Site investigation
4. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a noise assessment
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This
assessment should follow PPG24 guidelines towards assessing the noise from the
surrounding road network, the railway and any other local noise sources that are
deemed significant. The assessment shall identify all noise attenuation measures and
alternative means of ventilation which may be determined appropriate to reduce the
impact of noise on the residential properties on site and achieve the requirements of
BS8233 for internal noise levels. Unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local
Planning Authority, all approved noise control and ventilation measures shall be
implemented prior to first occupation of any of the apartments hereby approved and
thereafter retained
5. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the
undertaking of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4) (a-d) of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act, 1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning
Authority, and the Local Planning Authority has given its approval in writing. The
planning obligation will provide that a commuted sum as required by Policy H8 of the
Adopted, having regard to the standards set out in Policy R2 of the Adopted UDP and
Salford's Greenspace Strategy will be paid to the Local Planning Authority for open
space and recreation space purposes.
6. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the
undertaking of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4)(a-d) of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act, 1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning
Authority, and the Local Planning Authority has given its approval in writing. The
planning obligation will provide that a commuted sum of £90,000 as required to satisfy
Policy R1 of the Adopted UDP will be paid to the Local Planning Authority.
46
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
7. No development shall be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing all the
following matters including; sustainable construction techniques; natural ventilation
techniques; sustainable urban drainage systems; techniques to reduce solar heat gain
and use of renewable energy sources; and all energy efficiency and sustainability
matters have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Prior to the occupation of the unit, the approved scheme shall be installed
and shall thereafter be retained and maintained
8. No development shall be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing recycling of
waste from the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented and thereafter
retained prior to the first occupation of the commercial and residential units hereby
approved.
9. No development shall be started until full details of the location, design and
construction of 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.
10. No development shall be started until full details of the location, design and
construction of the cycle 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.
11. Prior to the first occupation of the apartment buildings hereby permitted the 29 car
parking spaces shown in the approved plan shall be provided within the curtilage of the
site. The spaces shall be made available at all times whilst the premises are in use.
12. Prior to the first occupation of the apartments hereby permitted, the new vehicular
access to the development, as shown on the approved plans, shall be provided
13. No external lighting shall be installed unless and until a scheme has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall
be implemented and thereafter in accordance with the approved details.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R001 Section 92
2. Standard Reason R002 Reserved Matters
3. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
47
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
4. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
5. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation
space for future occupiers in accordance with policies H8 and R2 of the Adopted UDP
6. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate compensation for the loss
of a recreational facility in accordance with policy R1 of the Adopted UDP.
7. In the interests of sustainable development.
8. In order to provide recycling facilities in accordance with policy DEV1 and EN20 of
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
9. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
10. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
11. Standard Reason R026B Interests of highway safety
12. Standard Reason R026B Interests of highway safety
13. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
Note(s) for Applicant
1. All disused access points shall be made good at the developers expense.
2. Any basement drainage must be pumped
3. This permission shall relate to drawing 06 Amendment D, drawing 07 amendment B
and drawing 08 amendment B which were recieved on the 15th of September 2006.
APPLICATION No:
06/53267/FUL
APPLICANT:
Elite Homes (NW) Ltd
LOCATION:
Former Bridgewater Mill Junction Of Atkin Street And
Sandwich Street And Vacant Land Adjacent To 20-24
Sandwich Street Worsley M28 3DG
48
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
PROPOSAL:
Erection of one three storey comprising of 12 apartments
with associated car parking andalteration to vehicular
access
(Amendment to planning permission
05/50209/FUL)
WARD:
Walkden South
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application site is currently vacant. The site is on the corner of Sandwich Road and
Atkin Street. The site is surrounded by mainly residential properties and on the opposite
side of Atkin Street is a commercial use.
Planning permission has already been granted for the erection of three three-storey blocks
of apartments with associated parking and vehicular access (05/50209/FUL). The current
application seeks to amend the height of the roof of one of the blocks of apartments.
SITE HISTORY
In May 2005 planning permission was granted for the erection of three three-storey
buildings comprising 48 apartments together with associated car parking and alteration to
vehicular access. (05/50209/FUL)
CONSULTATIONS
Environment Agency – No objection
United Utilities – No Objection
Strategic Director of Environmental Services – no objections but recommends a condition
requiring a site investigation.
Police Architectural Liaison Officer – no objections.
PUBLICITY
A site notice and press notice have been displayed.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
Rear of 49 – 51, 41, 49, 51, 55 – 71 (odds) 63a Manchester Road
2 – 12 (evens) Collyhurst Avenue
13A – 21 (odds) Chilham Road
1/3 and Chemical services Atkin Street
49
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
12 – 26 (evens) Walkden Road
20-34 (evens), 1A, Windermenere House, flats 1 –12 Windermere House Sandwich
Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received one letter of representation in response to the planning application
publicity. The following issues have been raised: An error occurred within the press notice
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: SD1 - The North West Metropolitan Area – Regional Poles and
Surrounding Areas
DP1 – Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DES1 – Respecting Context
H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments
ST11 – Location of New Development
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of the
proposed development is acceptable; whether the design of the proposed building is
acceptable; whether there would be a detrimental impact on residential amenity; whether
the proposed level of parking is acceptable; and whether the proposal complies with the
relevant policies of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan. I shall deal with each of these
issues in turn.
Policy SD1 of the Regional Spatial Strategy states that development should be focused
within the North-West Metropolitan Area, which includes Salford. The development
would see the re-use of brownfield land thus complying with criteria 1b of Policy ST11 and
the guidance contained within Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 – Housing (PPG3), which
seeks to prioritise the development of such land over land that has not been previously
developed (greenfield land).
50
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Adopted Policy H1 states that new housing development should, inter alia, contribute to
the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area, provide a high quality
residential environment and make adequate provision for open space.
The site has extant permissions for the erection of 48 apartments. The current application
seeks to amend one block of twelve apartments of the previous planning application. I am
therefore of the opinion that the proposal complies with the policies above and I am
therefore satisfied that the principle of the proposal is acceptable.
Design
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.
The proposal is three storeys in height. The proposed block would be situated on the Atkin
Street frontage adjacent to a pair of two-storey semi detached dwellings. The height of the
building as approved with the previous planning permission was 10.6m. The proposal
before the panel today increases the height to 11m. There are terraced properties on
Manchester Road of a similar height. The Block would have a hipped roof and two bay
features on either side with the entrance in the middle. I have attached a condition
requiring samples of the materials of the proposed building to be submitted and approved
prior to the commencement of the development. I am satisfied that this will ensure that the
proposed building would be in keeping with the surrounding area, in accordance with
Adopted Policy DES1.
Amenity
Adopted 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.
Adopted Policy DES9 states that landscaping should be of a high quality, reflect the
character of the area and the development, not detract from safety and security and form an
integral part of the development.
The proposed block is situated adjacent to 3 Atkin Street and would contain 12 apartments.
The proposed block would be within a 45-degree angle drawn from the rear corner of 3
Atkin Street. I would therefore not consider it to have an overbearing impact on the
neighbouring occupiers. The habitable room windows would be located on the front and
rear elevations. The proposal would be more than 50m from the properties on Manchester
Road. The habitable room windows would not directly overlook properties on Atkin Street
or Walkden Road but there would be some overlooking of gardens as currently exists. The
51
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
existing properties are at right angles to each other therefore they currently overlook each
other. I do not therefore consider that the proposal would have an unacceptable impact on
the privacy of properties on either street.
Amenity space would be located along the western boundary
I would not consider the proposal to have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the
privacy or outlook of the occupiers of neighbouring dwellings or the future occupants of
the proposal in accordance with Adopted Policy DES 7.
I have attached a condition requiring details of landscaping within the site. I am satisfied
that this will ensure that the landscaping meets the criteria of Adopted Policy DES9.
Car Parking
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.
There would be a total of 12 car parking spaces provided for this block. There would also
be cycle spaces provided. In light of the Council’s maximum car parking standards and the
need to encourage the use of more sustainable modes of transport, the site’s relatively close
proximity to Walkden Train Station and very close proximity to Manchester Road, which
is a main road with various bus routes. I would consider the proposed level of parking to
be acceptable and in accordance with Adopted Policy A10. I therefore have no objections
to the application on highway grounds.
Open Space
Adopted Policy H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and
informal open space within housing developments.
The applicant has agreed to make a contribution towards the provision of open space in the
area, in accordance with the above policy. The existing Section 106 agreement would be
amended to reflect the current application. This is in accordance with Adopted policy H8
and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on open space.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The applicants will enter into a Section 106 Agreement to secure contributions towards the
provision and maintenance of open space and in the area.
Other Issues
52
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
A letter has been received from a neighbouring occupier informing that the previous
application was advertised in the local press. The current application has now been
advertised.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I consider that the principle of the redevelopment of the site for residential
purpose is acceptable and that the proposal would result in helping to meet an under-supply
with a specific type of housing. I am of the opinion that the proposal complies with the
relevant policies of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and there are no material
considerations, which outweigh this finding. I therefore recommend that the application be
approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions 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.
Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03 Three year time limit
2. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site
investigation report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The
investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination
and ground gases on site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk
to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA,
focusing primarily on risks to human health and controlled waters. The investigation
shall also address the implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site
workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services and landscaping schemes
and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems and property.
The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning
Authority prior to the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and
remedial works contained within the approved report shall be implemented by the
developer prior to occupation of the site.
Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall
be submitted to the Director of Development Services for approval. The Site
Completion Report shall validate that all works undertaken on site were completed in
accordance with those agreed by the Local Planning Authority
53
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
3. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the finished floor
levels of the properties hereby approved shall be a minimum of 300mm above the
adjacent road level.
4. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, details and samples
of the materials for the external elevations and roof of the buildings shall be submitted
to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be
carried out using the approved materials, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the
Local Planning Authority.
5. Unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the car parking
area shall be laid out and completed in accordance with Drawing No. 72 02 - prior to
first occupation of any of the residential unit.
6. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the
undertaking of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4) (a-d) of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act, 1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning
Authority, and the Local Planning Authority has given its approval in writing. The
planning obligation will provide that a commuted sum as required by Policy H8 of the
Adopted, having regard to the standards set out in Policy R2 of the Adopted UDP and
Salford's Greenspace Strategy will be paid to the Local Planning Authority for open
space and recreation space purposes.
7. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be
submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is
started. Such scheme shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls,
fences, boundary and surface treatment and shall be carried out within 12 months of the
commencement of development and thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of
the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting
shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
8. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, full details of the
location and design of cycle storage, bin storage and recycling facilities within the site
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such
approved cycle and bin stores and recycling facilities shall be constructed in
accordance with the approved details and shall be made available for use prior to the
first occupation of any unit and retained thereafter.
9. No development shall commence until an external lighting scheme has been submitted
to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme
shall be implemented in full prior to the occupation of any dwelling.
10. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the means of
vehicular access from Atkin Street have been constructed and laid out in accordance
54
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
with the approved plans.
11. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme and structural report for the
retention of the wall running along the eastern boundary shall be submitted and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be
implemented in full prior to first occupation.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
3. In order to reduce the risk of flooding.
4. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
5. Standard Reason R012B Parking only within curtilage
6. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation
space for future occupiers in accordance with policies H8 and R2 of the Adopted UDP.
7. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
8. In order to encourage the use of more sustainable transport modes and in order to
encourage waste recycling, in accordance with Policy A10 of the Adopted UDP.
9. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
10. Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A 8 of the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan.
11. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be
satisfied prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the
conditions precedent renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and
appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
2. Construction works shall not be permitted outside the following hours:
Monday to Friday 08:00 to 18:00
55
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
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.
3. For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land
Condition, the applicant/developer is advised to contact the Pollution Control Section
of the Environment Directorate (Tel: (0161) 737 0551
4. Please note the permission relates to the following plans
Drawing No
72 02
72 ASBK1
72 ASBK
Rev
01
01A
APPLICATION No:
06/53264/COU
APPLICANT:
D Deignan
LOCATION:
184 Walkden Road Worsley M28 7FQ
PROPOSAL:
Change of use from single family dwelling to offices and
erection of ramp to front of property
WARD:
Walkden South
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The site is a corner property in a row of dwellings on Walkden Road, opposite Salford
College, Worsley Campus and there are other educational facilities in the vicinity. The site
is located approximately 120 metres from the shops further north along Walkden Road.
The applicant proposes a change of use from residential to office use as a tour operator
specialising in travel for disabled people. The proposal incorporates three parking spaces
within the existing boundary of the property. An amended plan was submitted to reduce the
amount of parking spaces within the site from four to three in order to accommodate a
space for disabled drivers.
SITE HISTORY
56
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
In 1997 an application for a two storey side extension was approved (ref: 97/37429/HH).
PUBLICITY
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
186 to 196 Walkden Road, Worsley
1 to 3 Parkside Avenue, Worsley
CONSULTATION
Strategic Director of Environmental Services – no objection
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received seven letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity.
The following issues have been raised:Increase in volumes of traffic
Proximity of off road parking to a pedestrian crossing
Commercial use unsuitable in a residential area
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site Specific – none
Other – EC8 – Town Centres, Retail, Office and Leisure development
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DES2 Circulation and Movement
DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours
A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments
E6 Tourism Development
EN17 Pollution Control
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are:
Whether the principle of the change of use is acceptable; whether there would be an
unacceptable detrimental impact on the highway network, and whether there would be an
unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents
57
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Policy DES2 states that new development should ensure that new development is fully
accessible to the disabled; maximise pedestrian movement around the site; enable safe
links to public transport and minimise potential conflict between various road users.
Policy DES7 states that all new development should provide a satisfactory level of amenity
to users and neighbours.
Policy E6 states that Tourism Development is acceptable providing that the development is
made accessible by a choice of transport and will be accessible to the disabled.
Policy A10 states that developments should make adequate provision for parking for
disabled drivers in accordance with minimum standards set out in the Unitary
Development Plan.
Policy EN17 states that development which would result in a significant increase in
pollution, including noise, should not be permitted unless the impacts can be mitigated
against.
Principle
The proposed use is as an office for a Tour Operator which specialises in holidays for
disabled people. The change of use relates to an office space of 113.5 square metres. The
business is currently based in Astley, and, because of the specialism, does not rely on
passing trade for business. Business is mostly conducted by telephone or via the internet.
There would be no material changes to the building other than a ramp, which would consist
of block paving which would raise the gradient of the paving to meet the existing step.
Although the remainder of the properties beside 184 Walkden Road are dwellings, Salford
Collage Campus is located across from the proposal, which generates a lot of pedestrian
and vehicular activity. The change of use would not significantly increase pedestrian or
vehicular activity in the area, and is therefore acceptable in principle. The proposal
complies with policies E6 and A10.
Residential Amenity
Existing uses in the area are residential and educational. The hours of use of the proposed
office would be 9am – 5pm Monday to Friday and 10am – 1pm Saturday. The business is
currently conducted from home and receives around two visitors per month. Due to the
growth of the business the owner is looking for suitable office accommodation. The
applicant has advised that he would expect up to six customer visits a month. The Strategic
Director of Environmental Services has no objections to the application on the basis of
noise or disturbance from the business use. The Salford College campus faces the property,
and the facility draws large volumes of pedestrian and vehicular traffic. As the property is
located on a busy road, it is unlikely that the proposed business would significantly
increase the amount of disturbance. I am of the opinion that the addition of an office use in
58
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
this location would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact upon residential amenity.
Therefore the development would comply with policies DES7 and EN17.
Highway Network
The applicant has advised that three staff would be based at the proposed office. Two staff
parking spaces would be provided, and one disabled parking space for visitors. The
applicant has stated that he would expect between two and six customer visits per month.
Walkden Road is also served by bus services and a train station, and therefore I am satisfied
that the location of the proposal enables a choice of travel options for staff and visitors. As
Walkden Road already generates a high volume of pedestrian and vehicular traffic, the
proposal is not likely to result in a significant increase in traffic or pedestrian volumes.
Therefore I am satisfied that the proposed change of use is acceptable and complies with
policies DES2 and E6 of the Unitary Development Plan.
Other Issues
Objections have been raised regarding the safety of parking spaces being accessed over the
pavement within close proximity to a pedestrian crossing. The drive is currently accessed
from the road over a dropped pavement. The intensification of use to three potential
vehicles is not beyond that which might be generated by a private residence, and therefore,
is not considered to create a significant increase in vehicular movement. Therefore the use
of parking spaces within the grounds is not considered to create an unacceptable impact.
CONCLUSION
It is my opinion that the proposed change of use would not have an unacceptable
detrimental impact on residential amenity; would not significantly increase the pedestrian
or vehicular traffic along Walkden Road; and that the intensification proposed by the
change of use would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact upon the safety of
pedestrians or drivers. Therefore the proposal is considered to comply with policies DES2,
DES7, A10, E6 and EN17 of the City of Salford’s Unitary Development Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning
with the date of this permission.
2. Before the development hereby permitted is brought into use not less than 3 car parking
spaces shall be provided within the curtilage of the site to the satisfaction of the Local
Planning Authority and such spaces shall be made available at all times the premises
59
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
are in use.
(Reasons)
1. Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990.
2. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the
City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The plans hereby approved refer to amended plans submitted on 13th September 2006
detailing parking spaces and a paved ramp.
APPLICATION No:
06/53281/REM
APPLICANT:
Countryside Properties UK Ltd
LOCATION:
Land Bounded By Camp Street, Great Clowes Street,
Alban Street, Moss Street, Lord Street, Duke Street And
Clarence Street, Salford 7
PROPOSAL:
Details of the siting, design, external appearance, means of
access and landscaping in relation to the erection of 121
houses and 311 apartments (in four blocks - a 5 storey
apartment building and 2 and 3 storey houses known as
Block A, 2, 2.5 and 3 storey houses with 3 and 4 storey
apartments known as Blocks B&C, 2, 2.5 and 3 storey
houses with 4 storey apartments known as Block D
60
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
together with mixed use development in a nine and half
storey building known as Block F comprising residential
development and a mix of community uses (D1), business
(B1), retail (A1 A2), cafes and restaurants and public
houses (A3,A4 _ A5) and car parking), creation of two
sports pitches, public spaces, car parking and ancillary
uses together with associated highway and other works
WARD:
Broughton
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application relates to the first phase of the redevelopment of part of Lower Broughton.
The site is dominated by the former Lowry High School and its grounds and playing fields.
The school buildings have recently been demolished. The school’s playing fields have not
been used for a number of years, and are now in a poor condition, overgrown and have been
the subject of fly tipping and vandalism. It also includes the site of former terraced
properties on Muriel Street and Lucy Street, which were demolished approximately two
years ago. The only two buildings within the application site are The Broughtons nursing
home, at the junction of Moss Street and Great Clowes Street and GA Nicholas Electrical
Wholesalers, at the junction of Great Clowes Street and Broughton Lane. The application
site also includes Broughton Lane, which at present is a closed road currently acting as a
footway across the site from Great Clowes Street to Camp Street.
To the north of the application site boundary is Fit City Broughton, a council-run recreation
centre, cleared land and a small number of properties, including a small shop, close to the
junction of Camp Street and Great Clowes Street. To the east, beyond Great Clowes Street,
is the Cambridge Industrial Area and a number of residential properties.
To the south of the site is Clarence Street, beyond which is an area of public open space at
Grosvenor Square and a number of residential properties on Grosvenor Gardens. To the
west, the area is predominantly residential.
The applicants, Countryside Properties, have formed a development partnership with the
Council and have developed an agreement which establishes a framework under which the
redevelopment of the wider Lower Broughton area will be planned, phased and
implemented. Lower Broughton has been identified as an area in need of regeneration due
its declining population, high levels of unemployment, poor health and low levels of
educational attainment. The partnership has identified a vision for Lower Broughton,
which is ‘to regenerate Lower Broughton and create a successful, sustainable
neighbourhood which is safe, healthy, economically active and above all, a place where
people will choose to live.’ The partnership has developed a number of objectives in order
to meet this aim, which include: addressing the decreasing population; providing high
quality housing; providing local facilities; providing new school and leisure and health care
facilities (if possible); developing a sense of community; developing a landscaping and
61
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
ecology strategy; remediating contaminated land; and, where possible, retaining and
re-using community buildings and providing non-car alternatives to improve transport to
and from the site.
The proposal would involve the construction of four blocks – Block A, Block B and C,
Block D and Block F.
Block A
Block A would front Great Clowes Street and would accommodate 89 apartments and five
houses. The apartment building would be 7m from the back of the footpath, set behind a
row of new trees. The building would be three storeys in height adjacent to the existing
Broughtons nursing home, rising to four and finally five storeys at the corner with
Broughton Lane. There would be two entrances into the building – one from Great Clowes
Street and one from Broughton Lane. There would be a brick wall with steel railings above
along the street frontages. Three of the five houses within Block A would be two storeys.
The remaining two houses would be three storeys in height. The houses would front a
newly created road between Alban Street and The Broughtons. The five houses and the
L-shaped Block A would form a courtyard, accessed of Alban Street, which would
accommodate car parking. A further area of car parking would be provided to the north of
the five houses.
Block B & C
Block B and C would be bounded by Moss Street, Alban Street, Broughton Lane and Duke
Street. It would accommodate 31 apartments, at the four corners of the block, and 67
houses. The apartment buildings would be three and four storeys in height, with the houses
being 2, 2.5 and 3 storeys. There would be two vehicular access points into the block, from
Moss Street and Broughton Lane. These would lead into a courtyard area, which would
contain eleven of the houses, car parking and an area of open space..
Block D
Block D would be triangular in shape and would be bounded by Duke Street, Camp Street
and Broughton Lane. It would accommodate 49 houses and 39 apartments. As with Block
B and C, the apartment buildings would be located at the corners of the block and would be
three and four storeys in height, and the houses would be 2, 2.5 and 3 storeys. There would
be one vehicular access point into the block, from Broughton Lane. Within the courtyard
there would be parking and open space.
Block F
Finally Block F would be located to the south of Broughton Lane and to the north of Lord
Street. It would accommodate 152 apartments with commercial units at ground floor level
and car parking. Block F would comprise two stepped towers which would run north/south.
62
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
The towers would be a maximum of nine storeys in height, dropping to four storeys in
height to front Broughton Lane. Access into the car parking area of Block F would be from
Lord Street, with the entrance to the apartments provided within the Broughton Lane
elevation.
In addition to the construction of the four blocks described above, the proposal also
includes the re-opening of Broughton Lane, between Great Clowes Street and Camp Street
and the relocation of the existing car parking at Fit City to a site off Carter Street, which
was cleared of housing approximately two years ago. A total of 57 spaces would be
provided within that site.
SITE HISTORY
In June 2006, outline planning permission was granted for the demolition, conversion and
redevelopment of 22.7 hectares of land and buildings to provide mixed use development
comprising residential (C3), school, community uses (D1), assembly and leisure (D2),
business (B1), retail (A1/A2), cafes, restaurants and public houses (A3,A4,A5), car
parking, public spaces and ancillary uses together with associated highways and other
works on land bounded by Camp Street, Great Clowes Street, Lower Broughton Road,
Cumberland Street and Harrison Street, Salford 7 (ref: 06/52316/OUT).
CONSULTATIONS
The Strategic Director of Environmental Services – comments received in respect of air
quality, contamination, noise and vibration and fume extraction. The Strategic Director is
satisfied that the information submitted in respect of air quality is acceptable and has no
objections to the proposal on air quality grounds. He also has no objections in relation to
contamination, noise and vibration or fume extraction but recommends that conditions be
attached requiring the submission of additional details.
Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – comments received. The GMPTE
confirms that the site is well located in relation to public transport being within walking
distance of a number of bus stops. The GMPTE has also commented that it would prefer for
the bus stop and shelter on Great Clowes Street to be retained in their current location.
Finally, the GMPTE has advised that a travel plan should have been submitted with the
application
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Officer – objects to the proposal, and
makes the following comments.
The ALO supports the principle of the development, but expresses concern that the
redevelopment of Lower Broughton over the next ten years should recognise the
problems that have been experienced in the past and ensure the detail of the scheme
incorporates robust measures to minimise crime and disorder. The ALO recommends
63
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
that the Council attaches a condition requiring the proposal to meet the Secured By
Design accreditation.
The ALO is concerned that the configuration of the various blocks would generate
crime and would therefore be unsustainable.
Block A incorporates a controlled gated compound which is considered to be too great
to expect residents to control authorised movement in and out of the private space. The
ALO is of the opinion that gated communities can only reasonably expect to succeed
in this environment at half the density of Block A.
The density of blocks B and C and Block D is considered incapable of securing an
adequate level of control by maintaining a secure gated community. The logistics of
maintaining such control are not considered sustainable in such large developments
and would allow unauthorised, miscreant and anti-social activists to enter the private
courts and impair the life styles of the residents. The ALO is concerned that both
people and property would be at risk.
The piazza deck-entrance to the apartments (over the car park and retail units) is
considered to be hidden from street surveillance and would therefore limit reasonable
and natural security through minimum observance of the entrances to the dwellings.
The front doors to all apartment blocks and houses should be clearly observed from
street level.
The ALO therefore recommends that the application be refused.
Environment Agency – comments received. The Environment Agency has no objections to
the proposal and confirms that, provided that the measures in the applicants’ Flood Risk
Assessment relating to flood warning arrangements are implemented, it is satisfied that the
residual risks associated with flooding will be minimised. The Environment Agency has
recommended that native, and preferably locally provenanced, plant stock be used to help
achieve the applicants’ wildlife objectives. The Agency has confirmed that it will comment
on the site investigations once they are completed and recommends the applicants follow
the code of practice in relation to the removal of Japanese Knotweed from the site.
Central Salford Urban Regeneration Company – no objections
Peak and Northern Footpath Society – no comments received to date
Ramblers Association – no objections
Open Spaces Society – no comments received to date
Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – no comments received to date
PUBLICITY
The application has been advertised in the press and on site.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
64
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
78 Great Clowes Street
Flat 1, Sahal Court, Great Clowes Street
Camponia Gardens
21 Ascension Road, Salford
Grosvenor Nursery, Grosvenor Square
Service Station, Broughton Lane
102 Great Clowes Street
Church Of The Nazarene, Great Clowes Street
1 Kent Street
Victoria House, 122 Great Clowes Street
Sahal Court, 78A Great Clowes Street
Matrons Flat, Sahal Court, Great Clowes Street
Ascension Vicarage, Ascension Road
1-20 Trafalgar Grove
1-15 Southampton Close
7-27 (O) Portsmouth Close
1-31 (O) Moss Street
1-46 Longbow Court
1 Joynson Avenue
140 –180 (E) Great Clowes Street
1-17 (O) Gosport Square
16-18 Earl Street
2-20 (E) Countess Grove
2 Coburg Avenue, Salford, M7 1GD,
93-107 (O) Clarence Street
54-96, 152-156 Camp Street
Roman Court, 37-51, 64, 65 Camponia Gardens
15-21 (O) Athenian Gardens
2-44 (E), The Rectory, Church Of Ascension, Ascension Road
The Broughtons Nursing Home, Great Clowes Street
1-36 Roman Court, Camponia Gardens
Salford Scout Council, Great Clowes Street
Grosvenor Centre, Clarence Street
121 Broughton Lane
Thirlmere House, Grosvenor Square
1A Kent Street
Community Centre, Great Clowes Street
120A, Great Clowes St
BH Three Ltd, 86 Princess Street, Manchester
50 Lord Street
REPRESENTATIONS
65
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
I have received letters from the residents of fourteen properties on Ascension Road
objecting to the proposals. All the letters are identical, but have been signed by different
residents. The following issues have been raised:
Parking will not be accessible for the elderly or disabled near to their own propeties
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DP1: Economy in the Use of Land and Building
DP2: Enhancing the Quality of Life
DP3: Quality in New Development
DP4: Promoting Sustainable Economic Growth and Competitiveness and
Social Inclusion
SD1: The North West Metropolitan Area Regional Poles and Surrounding
Areas
EC8: Town Centres – Retail, Leisure and Office Development
UR1: Urban Renaissance
UR2: Inclusive Social Infrastructure
UR3: Promoting Social Inclusion through Urban accessibility
UR4: Setting Targets for the Recycling of Land and Buildings
UR6: Existing Housing Stock and Housing Renewal
UR9: Affordable Housing
UR10: Greenery, Urban Greenspace and the Public Realm
ER3: Built Heritage
ER5: Biodiversity and Nature Conservation
ER7: Water Resources
ER8: Development and Flood Risk
EQ2: Air Quality
EQ3: Water Quality
T9: Demand Management
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: MX4: Site for Mixed-Use Development
Other policies: ST1: Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods
ST2: Housing Supply
ST3: Employment Supply
ST5: Transport Networks
ST6: Major Trip Generating Development
ST7: Mixed-Use Development
ST8: Environmental Quality
ST9: Retail, Leisure, Social and Community Provision
ST10: Recreation Provision
ST11: Location of New Development
66
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
ST12: Development Density
DES1: Respecting Context
DES2: Circulation and Movement
DES3: Design of Public Space
DES4: Relationship of Development with Public Space
DES9: Landscaping
DES10: Design and Crime
DES11: Design Statement
H1: Provision of New Housing Development
H2: Managing the Supply of Housing
H3: Housing Improvement
H4: Affordable Housing
H8: Open Space Provision Associated with New Housing Development
S2: Retail and Leisure Development Outside Town Centres, and
Neighbourhood Centres
S4: Amusement Centre and Food and Drink Uses
EHC2: Re-Use of Existing Health and Community Facilities
A1: Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
A2: Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
A5: Buses
A8: Impact of Development on the Highway Network
A10: Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments
EN10: Protection of Species
EN14: Derelict, Underused and Neglected Land
EN16: Contaminated Land
EN17: Pollution Control
EN18: Protection of Water Resources
EN19: Flood Risk and Surface Water
EN20: River Irwell Flood Control
EN22: Resource Conservation
EN23: Environmental Improvement Corridors
CH5: Archaeology and Ancient Monuments
R1: Protection of Recreational Land and Facilities
R2: Provision of Recreational Land and Facilities
DEV5: Planning Conditions and Obligations
DEV6: Incremental Development
SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
The Salford City Council Supplementary Planning Document, Lower Broughton Design
Code Adopted 18th January 2006 (SPD) provides contains policies that will particularly
inform the development of detailed layouts and designs:
LBDC 1: Design statements
67
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
LBDC 2: Character of the area
LPDC 3: Views
LBDC 7: Movement
LBDC 8: Open space and adjoining development
LBDC 9: Flood risk
LBDC 10: Density of development
LBDC 11: Housing
LBDC 12: Retail and community uses
LBDC 14: Public art
The Council has also recently adopted its Greenspace Strategy
SPD, which provides a comprehensive spatial strategy for the
protection and enhancement of green space resource throughout
the city. It sets local standards for the provision of green
space in the city, highlights deficiency areas within the city,
identifies key sites for provision and improvements to informal
recreation and recommends where access improvements should be
carried out to, and between, open space sites. Other
Supplementary Planning Documents which are of relevance to the
determination of this application include Design and Crime,
Trees and Development, Planning Obligations and Nature
Conservation and Biodiversity.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The principle of the proposed development has already been established through the
granting of outline planning permission. The main planning issues relating to this
application are therefore: whether the proposed mix of units is acceptable; whether the size
of the dwellings proposed is acceptable; whether there would be sufficient affordable
housing; whether the proposed level of open space is acceptable; whether the design of the
proposed buildings and the hard and soft landscaping is acceptable; whether the proposal
would be acceptable in terms of resource conservation; whether the proposal is acceptable
in relation to biodiversity and trees; whether there would be an unacceptable impact on
flood risk; whether there would be an unacceptable impact on residential amenity; and
whether there would be an unacceptable impact on the highway network. I shall deal with
each of the above issues in turn below.
Housing Mix
Planning Policy Guidance Note 3: Housing states that local planning authorities should
‘provide wider housing opportunity and choice and a better mix in the size, type and
location of housing than is currently available’, create more sustainable patterns of
development by building in ways which exploit and deliver accessibility by public
transport ... and local services’ (paragraph 2), and ‘provide everyone with the opportunity
of a decent home’ (paragraph 1). It advises that local planning authorities should
68
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
‘encourage the development of mixed and inclusive communities’, and ensure that ‘new
housing developments help to secure a better social mix by avoiding the creation of large
areas of housing of similar characteristics’ (paragraph 10).
Policy DP3 of the Regional Spatial Strategy for the North West (RSS) requires local
authorities to encourage the provision of an appropriate range of sizes and types of housing
to meet the needs of all members of society. Paragraph 2.6 of the RSS states that it will be
necessary to ensure that there is a stock of attractive and better-quality housing available,
including attractive affordable housing, to encourage the development of diverse and
socially inclusive communities. By creating a choice of housing types the land use
planning system can help to increase the supply of both social and low cost market
housing, aid social inclusion and create more balanced communities (paragraph 5.40).
The Central Salford sub-area is identified in the UDP Spatial Framework (paragraph 3.2)
as being the focus for major regeneration and investment activity within the city, and a
large element of the area is within the Manchester Salford Housing Market Renewal
Pathfinder boundary. The UDP seeks to develop Central Salford as one of the most popular
and attractive places to live within the inner areas of Greater Manchester, with an emphasis
on high quality housing (paragraph 3.5).
Policy H1 of the UDP requires that all new housing developments contribute towards the
provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area in terms of size, type, tenure
and affordability (criterion 1). It sets out eight factors that will help to inform whether the
proposed mix and density of dwellings is considered to be appropriate and acceptable.
These are:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
The size of the development;
The physical characteristics of the site;
The mix of dwellings in the surrounding area;
Any special character of the surrounding area that is worthy of
retention;
The accessibility of the site, and its location in relation to jobs and facilities;
Any specific need for, or oversupply of, residential accommodation that has
been identified;
The strategy and proposals of the Housing Market Renewal Initiative; and
Any other relevant housing, planning or regeneration strategies approved
by the city council.
The reasoned justification to Policy H1 (paragraph 7.4) states that it is ‘vital that housing
development supports the creation and protection of sustainable and balanced communities
…. [and it] should contribute to the mix of housing types’. Therefore, it is important that
new developments provide a significant proportion of houses in order to ensure that a
balanced mix of dwellings comes forward in accordance with criterion 1 of UDP Policy
H1, and avoid an oversupply of one particular type of residential accommodation.
69
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
One of the aims of the UDP is ‘to meet the city's housing needs’ (Aim 1, paragraph 2.4),
and it emphasises the need to ‘secure improvements in the quality and range of housing, as
well as the volume, with a particular emphasis on providing the type of accommodation
….that will attract families to live in Salford’.
The outline application proposed a maximum of 1,500 residential dwellings, with a
maximum of 900 apartments and 600 houses. This application is within these parameters,
proposing a total of 432 units, 121 (28%) of which would be houses and 311 (72%) of
which would be apartments. It can therefore be seen that the first phase of the
redevelopment of Lower Broughton is skewed towards the provision of apartments.
Within the ward of Broughton the existing housing stock is characterised by a greater
concentration of flats and terraced dwellings and a lower proportion of detached and semi
detached dwellings than the city, regional and national averages (2001 Census).
Lower Broughton has easy access to the facilities and opportunities of the Regional Centre
and therefore has great potential to attract many of the Regional Centre's residents when
they seek to move to more ‘suburban’ accommodation as their housing needs change,
whilst still enabling them to maintain a ‘city centre’ lifestyle. The Scheme Update for the
Manchester Salford Housing Market Renewal (HMR) Pathfinder, published in October
2005, identifies the provision of family housing as being a key element of improving the
choice and quality of housing within the HMR area (Table 5.1).
In order to create a better balance of dwellings in the local area, in accordance with UDP
Policy H1, I consider that the proposed scheme should ideally include a greater proportion
of detached/semi detached dwellings, and conversely fewer apartments. However, in
justification of their proposed dwelling mix the applicants have set out the following
reasons for why achieving a higher proportion of houses would not be appropriate:
The design context requires a scale of building that could not be achieved in the form
of housing;
The site is an appropriate location for a tall building;
The site is highly accessible and is suitable for a high density development;
Relocating existing properties requires cross subsidy from the private housing, and
given the constraints on the site this can only be achieved through high density
development;
The proposals form part of a wider comprehensive regeneration proposal which will
include a significant amount of family housing as part of the overall mix;
The need (and opportunity) to provide landmark buildings on key junctions within
the site,
The density of development would decrease to a point where critical mass (in terms
of population) required to create a sustainable community would not exist;
In terms of land use area a significant proportion of the site is dedicated to family
housing;
70
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
The proportion of houses to apartments is skewed by the inclusion of the 9 and a half
storey Block F; and
Some 22 of the units to be relocated into Phase 1 are currently flats, and the
Development Agreement requires similar properties to be re-provided.
Having duly considered the applicants’ justification for their preferred dwelling mix (i.e.
72% apartments and 28% houses), I agree that there are valid reasons why it would not be
not be appropriate to achieve a higher proportion of houses within this phase of the
redevelopment.
It is important to note that the split in land area between houses and apartments would be
approximately 70/30 in favour of the former. The proportion of houses to apartments is
skewed by the inclusion of Block F within this phase, which includes 152 apartments over
ground floor commercial units. Block F accounts for 49% of the total number apartments to
be provided in this phase. If Block F were to be replaced with houses then it is likely that
the majority of units across this phase would be houses. However, I do not consider that it
would be appropriate for Block F to be developed as houses, as I consider that the
applicants’ proposal is the most suitable design solution, and can act as a centrepiece for
the wider redevelopment of Lower Broughton.
In their Supporting Planning Statement (paragraph 6.14) the applicants state that ‘The vast
majority of the site, in terms of land area is given over to housing. It is considered that the
percentage of houses in later phases is likely to increase to result in a situation close to that
envisaged by the outline application’. Additionally ‘It is not intended that this phase will be
typical of all future phases of the development. The inclusion of apartments will help to
create a new housing market in Lower Broughton … this will be absolutely essential if the
redevelopment of the wider area is to build momentum and significant steps to be made to
create a desirable and sustainable community in the heart of Salford’ (paragraph 6.11). It is
clear therefore that overall it is the applicants’ intention that future phases will have a much
better mix in terms of the type of units, and that this site forms part of a wider
comprehensive redevelopment that as a whole will deliver a broad range of dwelling types.
Taking all of the above factors into account, I am satisfied that, in this particular instance,
the mix of dwelling types in acceptable.
Dwelling Size
Criterion 1 of UDP Policy H1 requires new housing development to contribute towards the
provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area in terms of size.
Across this phase of redevelopment, the applicants are proposing the following mix in
terms of dwelling size:
Apartments
1 Bed = 92 (21.3%)
2 Bed = 219 (50.7%)
71
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Houses
2 Bed = 24 (5.6%)
3 Bed = 46 (10.7%)
4 Bed = 51 (11.9%)
Total
1 Bed = 92 (21.3%)
2 Bed = 243 (56.3%)
3 Bed = 46 (10.7%)
4 Bed = 51 (11.8%)
Paragraph 6.18 of the applicants’ Planning Supporting Statement states that only 28% of
the dwellings are greater than 57m2. (57m2 is considered to be of a sufficient size to
accommodate two bedrooms capable of accommodating three people together with a
flexible living area).
In seeking to justify the mix currently proposed in terms of dwelling size, the applicants
consider it important that, before trying to establish a new market for family housing (i.e.
dwellings with three or more bedrooms), the support infrastructure and facilities, such as
schools, are properly provided. If not, the applicants claim that the early phases of the
redevelopment of Lower Broughton are unlikely to be a success. They also assert that later
phases will be much more properly able to accommodate family housing. The applicants
also claim that they have undertaken extensive market research, which has not identified
any demand for three bedroomed apartments. They have also confirmed that the
incorporation of additional three and four bedroomed houses is not possible within this
phase due to the constraints of the agreement between the Council and the applicants,
which requires the number of open market houses provided to match the number of
affordable houses. The number of affordable houses to be provided within this phase is
governed by the number of existing residents who need to be re-housed. The applicants
state that this cannot be changed at this stage in the process.
Although I consider that the inclusion of more three and four bedroomed dwellings would
be desirable within this phase of the proposal, I acknowledge that this phase of the
redevelopment in particular is governed by the need to re-house existing residents in
affordable accommodation and to provide other facilities, services and infrastructure to
ensure that the remainder of the redevelopment will be a success. The applicants are fully
aware of the Council’s draft SPD on housing and of the Council’s aspirations for a larger
amount of family accommodation in certain parts of the city. They are also aware that they
will need to provide a greater proportion of larger dwellings within later phases of the
redevelopment. Therefore, taking all of the above factors into account, I consider that in
this instance, the size of the proposed dwellings is acceptable.
Affordable Housing
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.
72
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
There is a need citywide for affordable housing, with an Affordable Needs Assessment
showing that there is a need for 600 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 Registered Social Landlord (RSL) stock.
A pre-requisite of the Development Agreement is an obligation for Countryside Properties
UK Ltd to provide or procure the construction of sufficient affordable rented units and
intermediate units to replace such existing homes. Contour Housing Group are the lead
RSL in Lower Broughton and Countryside will build affordable units to be owned and
managed by Contour.
321 of the dwellings would be private (74%) and 111 would be affordable housing (26%).
The affordable units would be a mixture of social rented and intermediate units, and the
social rented units would be entirely devoted to re-housing identified tenants. I consider
this to be appropriate, given that Broughton already has the highest proportion of social
rented units (54%) of any ward in the city and the ward with the second lowest proportion
of owner occupied dwellings.
All 111 of the proposed affordable dwellings would be provided to meet the needs of those
residents within the area who are being relocated. The applicants are not providing any
further affordable accommodation within this phase. However, as discussed above, there is
already a high percentage of affordable accommodation within Lower Broughton, and a
relatively low percentage of owner occupied properties. I therefore consider that requiring
the applicants to provide further affordable accommodation would not contribute to the
creation of an appropriately balanced and sustainable community, and consider that the
applicants have provided sufficient affordable units to comply with the thrust of Policy H4.
The applicants also state that all housing has been designed to be ‘tenure blind’ (ie. that it
should not be possible to tell from the outside whether the properties are affordable or
private) and I am satisfied with their proposals in this regard.
The Provision of Open Space
Policy H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and informal
open space within housing developments. The amount of open space to be provided shall
meet the identified need deriving from the development. It shall be calculated having
regard to the aim of achieving the standards of Policy R2 and by reference to the approach
set out in Supplementary Planning Documents. The open space will be provided either as
part of the development or through an equivalent financial contribution on a standard cost
per bed space for both capital and maintenance.
Policy R2 outlines the targets for the provision of formal sports facilities and children’s
play areas.
73
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Policy LBDC 8 states that all open space in the area should be
designed as part of an integrated network of an appropriate
quality and quantity to meet the needs of existing and future
residents. New development should help to address the problems
of existing open spaces that are poorly configured, neglected,
contribute little to the urban scene and attract anti-social
behaviour. Wherever possible, new open space should be located
and designed so as to be capable of providing water storage
capacity in the event of a flood incident.
The dwellings proposed for this phase of the redevelopment of Lower Broughton
development would result in a total of 1,352 bedspaces. It is accepted that there have been
a total of 88 existing bedspaces within the area covered by the planning application, which
have been removed as part of the regeneration improvements, and should therefore be
taken into account when calculating the net increase of population to the area as a result of
the development. This results in a projected net increase in bedspaces of 1,264.
Based on this, the open space requirement in accordance with UDP Policy H8/R2 and the
draft Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document would be equal to:
0.9227ha of high quality managed sports pitches
0.316ha equipped children’s playspace/other youth and adult facilities
0.5056ha amenity space and informal open space
Over the four phases of development identified as part of the outline planning permission,
it is accepted that there may need to be a ‘balancing act’ for the provision of open space.
However, the standards for open space provision must be met, and the cumulative
provision across the phases will be monitored, with shortfalls being identified as future
reserved matters applications are submitted.
i. Sports Pitch Provision
This application includes the provision of on-site temporary (the applicants suggest
approximately five years) sports pitches, comprising one full sized adult rugby pitch
(marked out also for use as two junior football pitches, when not in use for rugby) and one
junior football pitch. Changing facilities would be provided at Fit City. These pitches
would be temporary to compensate for the loss of existing open space as part of this phase
of the redevelopment and would remain until the permanent area of open space is provided
on land north of Clarence Street as part of a later phase of the redevelopment.
The total area of the temporary sports pitches site would be 3.63ha, with over 1ha (1.071ha)
being laid out as pitches. This sufficiently meets the requirements for sports pitch provision
within Phase 1, albeit on a temporary basis. The applicants have confirmed that the
temporary sports pitches would be used by Salford City Reds, who will use their
community development officers and Salford Community Leisure to engage the
74
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
community. Salford City Reds would also be responsible for the maintenance of the open
space. The applicants do no propose to light the temporary sports pitches. The applicants
intend to ensure that the pitches would be level and correctly lined for use. They believe
that the existing drainage is adequate for use for formal sports use. However, I have
attached a condition requiring that, if it is found that the pitches would not be suitable for
use for formal sports, they be improved to an agreed standard. I am satisfied that this will
ensure that they can be used for formal sports purposes.
Prior to the development of these temporary pitches as part of a later phase, replacement
provision is proposed to be provided on land to the north of Clarence Street, as detailed in
the outline planning application. Additional provision required through further increases in
bedspaces from later phases would have to be provided off-site through a financial
contribution to improve existing priority pitches in the local area.
Given the level of sports pitches provided within this site, I am satisfied that this element of
the proposal complies with the above policies.
ii Equipped Children’s Playspace/ Other Youth and Adult Facilities
It is not proposed to provide any children’s playspace within this phase of the proposed
redevelopment. Since the site covered by this application, is within the catchment for
Albert Park as a LEAP and NEAP, it is accepted that it is not necessary to require the
applicant to provide any such facilities within the site. However, the increase in population
will create a substantial additional demand on the existing facilities. A financial
contribution equal to the open space requirement to meet the increased demands will
therefore be required.
In accordance with the draft Planning Obligations SPD, a contribution of £366 per
bedspace for the provision and maintenance of children’s equipped playspace and other
youth and adult facilities (£243 capital and £123 maintenance) is required. For this
development the total financial contribution required would be £462,624. The applicants
have agreed to contribute this amount, which will be secured through an amendment to the
existing agreement between the Council and the applicants. I am therefore satisfied that the
proposal complies with policies H8, R2 and the Draft Planning Obligations SPD.
iii. Amenity/Informal Open Space
The informal and amenity spaces provided by the development fall into three separate
categories: communal/semi-private amenity space within gated areas of housing provision;
pedestrian walkways/civic amenity space; and the informal open space provided around
the pitches, in the temporary open space area.
In considering the proposal’s compliance with Policy H8 of the UDP, regard should be had
to the Greenspace Strategy Supplementary Planning Document. Policy GS15 confirms
75
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
that, in determining the appropriate level of public amenity open space that should be
provided by a development, regard will be had to:
the proposed on-site provision of private amenity space (for example, gardens,
communal spaces, roof terraces);
the scale, quality and accessibility of existing public amenity open space;
the availability of other greenspaces such as parks and semi-natural greenspaces;
the density of the urban form and the potential contribution that additional amenity
spaces could make to the attractiveness of the area; and
the NPFA standard for informal children’s playspace of 0.4-0.5ha per 1000
population.
It is considered that the provision of the three areas of communal private amenity space can
be taken into account when considering the informal/amenity open space contribution.
This is because they would provide this function for a significant number of residents and
three of the four blocks proposed by this application are provided for in this manner (Block
A being the exception).
The applicants’ Landscape Design Statement states that the margins of the area
incorporating the sports pitches would comprise semi-wild meadow to encourage
biodiversity and create wildlife habitats. In addition a number of existing trees would be
retained in this area. The applicants have confirmed that extensive areas of open land
around the pitches would be provided and managed to provide spectator space. Much of
this additional land can be considered to provide a dual purpose of informal/amenity open
space. This area would amount to 2.6 hectares.
In conclusion, I am satisfied that there would be sufficient informal/amenity space within
the application site.
Design
Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context, respect the
positive character of the area and contribute towards local identity and distinctiveness. In
assessing the extent to which developments comply with this policy, regard will be had to a
number of factors, including the character, scale and pattern of streets and building plots,
the relationship to existing buildings, the impact on and quality of views and vistas, the
scale of the proposed development and the quality of the materials.
Policy DES2 relates to circulation and movement and sets out a number of criteria which
new developments must meet. These include ensuring that the development is fully
accessible to all people, ensuring that the movement of pedestrians and cyclists to, through
and around the site is maximised and ensuring that safe, direct and convenient access to
public transport facilities and other local amenities is provided.
76
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Policy DES3 states that, where developments include the provision of public space, it must
be designed to have a clear role and purpose, reflect and enhance the character and identity
of the area, be an integral part of surrounding developments, be attractive, safe, uncluttered
and appropriately lit, be of an appropriate scale, connect to established pedestrian routes
and minimise and make provision for maintenance requirements.
Policy DES4 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, visual interest and activity, distinguish between public,
private and communal spaces and minimise the visual impact of car parking.
Policy DES9 states that developments will be required to incorporate appropriate hard and
soft landscaping provision. Where landscaping is required as part of a development, it must
be of a high quality, reflect and enhance the character of the area, not detract from safety
and security, form an integral part of the development, be easily maintained, respect
adjacent land uses and wherever possible make provision for the creation of new wildlife
habitats.
Policy DES10 states that development will not be permitted unless it is designed to
discourage crime, anti-social behaviour and the fear of crime.
Policy DES11 requires applicants for all major developments to demonstrate how the
development takes account of the need for good design. As a minimum, this should contain
a written statement explaining the design principles and how these are reflected in the
development’s layout, density, scale, visual appearance and landscaping, the relationship
of the development to its site and the wider context and how the development would meet
the Council’s design objectives.
Policy LBDC 2 states that the design of new development should
respond to the emerging character of the “character area” within
which it is located, as identified in the SPD, and should
contribute to the character of Lower Broughton as a whole.
Policy LBDC 3 states that design must respond to existing and potential views within
Lower Broughton.
Policy UR10 of RSS seeks to ensure that strategies are in place for the design,
management, maintenance and enhancement of public realm and urban greenspace. It
outlines a number of priorities, including enhancing the setting of residential
neighbourhoods, increasing the overall stock of urban trees and improving accessibility
and community safety.
In accordance with Policy DES11, and in accordance with condition 28 of the outline
planning permission, the applicants have submitted a design statement and a landscape
design statement. These outline the design principles, detailed layout and scale, visual
77
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
appearance, design appraisal and the quality of the public realm. The statements assert that
the aim of this phase of the redevelopment is to create strong urban streets, reinforced by
the use of simple architectural language composed from a small number of materials. The
concept is a contemporary interpretation of a Georgian town house street and the elevations
comprise a simple pattern of large vertical windows. Entrances would be located on street
frontages and corners would be built up and include changes to materials and form. The
statements continue to confirm that the proposals aim to create legible blocks and street
based layout in a variety of densities, where public and private space are clearly
distinguished. Whilst each block would be self-contained with parking within the block
boundaries, each block would relate to its street frontage and neighbouring blocks with
continuity of scale, materials and form.
The applicants state that this initial phase of the redevelopment has been designed to reflect
the preferences of the existing residents who will be re-housed, for example, their desire for
large windows, brick, timber, small front gardens, large rear gardens and secure parking. It
is envisaged that the proposed development would set a new urban character in Lower
Broughton and that this first phase will establish a new urban quality and character for the
area.
The applicants have not submitted samples of the materials to be used for the buildings
within the site. The drawings submitted do however indicate that the buildings would be
constructed using a combination of reconstituted stone, zinc cladding and buff and pink
coloured bricks, with concrete roof tiles. The applicants state that the materials to be used
would add texture, colour and pattern and would be durable. The submission of samples of
materials is controlled by Condition 3 of the outline planning permission, and the
applicants will therefore submit samples of the materials at a later date. I am however
confident that this will ensure that the materials to be used would be of a high quality
capable of creating an appropriate character for the area, as the applicants envisage.
In relation to the comments made by the ALO, the applicants have confirmed that they
have held a number of meetings with Greater Manchester Police regarding both the outline
and the reserved matters application. These have included discussions with the Divisional
Commander and other representatives directly involved in the delivery of security in
Lower Broughton. Although they have not provided any documentation from these
meetings, they have stated that the representatives they have met from Greater Manchester
Police have no objections to the scheme. The applicants state that the police will have a site
compound within the construction site, for which a planning application will be submitted
in the next few weeks. In support of their proposals and in response to the comments from
the ALO, the applicants states that the houses and apartments proposed would conform to
the requirements of Secure by Design, but it is the layouts of the blocks which are being
questioned by the ALO. The applicants have provided additional information in support of
the scheme. They claim that the blocks have been designed with security as a key feature,
and that by enclosing the car parking and landscaped areas, access and egress would be
restricted to a minimum, whilst maintaining active street frontages. The courtyard
arrangement within the blocks was chose by the applicants for a number of reasons,
78
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
including improved appearance through the need for fewer gates which may be vulnerable
to damage and improved security through the use of gated entrances, nearby parking and
clear surveillance. A management company would be appointed to manage the security
arrangements for each of the areas to ensure that they remain safe and secure areas for
residents and their vehicles. In relation to the security of specific blocks, the applicants
state that the internal corridors within Block A would be broken down into areas in order to
satisfy the emergency fire requirements. This would minimise the overall lengths of
corridor runs. The applicants assert that the level of security being provided to the
apartment blocks would restrict the number of access points to each to a minimum. They
claim that, due to the nature of Great Clowes Street, the provision of additional entrances to
Block A would create ‘hiding places’ and should therefore be avoided, with the main
entrance being in a highly visible and overlooked corner position.
Whilst I understand the concerns raised by the ALO regarding the security of each of the
block, the applicants have provided additional information in support of their proposals, as
discussed above. On balance, given that the applicants have made as many changes to the
scheme as they feel necessary, and given that this is the first phase in the overall
redevelopment of Lower Broughton, I have no objections to the proposal in relation to
design and crime.
Overall, I am satisfied that this application would significantly enhance the area, creating a
high quality environment for future residents.
Resource Conservation
Policy ST14 requires developments to minimise their impacts on the global environment.
Policy EN22 states that applications 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 local and global environments, has been minimised as far as
practicable, and where full consideration has been given to the use of realistic renewable
energy options, and such measures have been incorporated into the development where
practicable.
Condition 35 attached to the outline planning permission also relates to resource
conservation, and requires an applications for the approval of reserved matters for any
phase of the development to be accompanied by full details demonstrating that the
development has sought to reduce the impact on the supply of non-renewable resources
and that full consideration has been given to the use of realistic renewable energy options
and incorporated where practicable.
The applicants have confirmed that the proposals for this phase of the redevelopment
would not be able to provide for renewable energy and low carbon technologies. They state
that this is largely due to the nature of the proposals, particularly given the costs of
providing infrastructure and open space. The applicants have not provided viability
79
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
schedules regarding the provision of renewable energy and low carbon technologies, as
they claim that the scheme is too large and complex. They have however confirmed that
they are committed to delivering a sustainable development and ultimately a sustainable
community and that a feasibility study of low carbon technologies and renewable energy
will be undertaken for the later phases of the redevelopment. The applicants have
confirmed that they will focus on energy conservation through efficient building design
and will aim to achieve an EcoHomes rating of ‘very good’ for each dwelling. The
applicants have stated that all the houses within this site would almost certainly make ‘very
good’. They are however unsure about Block F, where they may be penalised as it is on a
greenfield site and not close to community facilities, even though such facilities are
proposed to be accommodated within the block itself.
I do not consider that the imposition of a condition requiring the applicants to meet the
EcoHomes ‘very good’ rating would meet the tests of Circular 11/95 on conditions. I have
however attached a condition requiring the applicants to seek to achieve this rating.
Therefore, although it would be preferable for the applicants to do more in relation to
resource conservation, I consider that the aforementioned condition and their commitment
to do further work on this matter in later phases of the redevelopment are sufficient in this
instance.
Biodiversity and Trees
Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, requires local
planning authorities to not only protect biodiversity but also, wherever possible, to actively
enhance it. Particular advice is provided in respect of networks of natural habitats, which
are recognised as valuable resources which should be maintained to avoid fragmentation
and subsequent isolation of natural habitats, as well as biodiversity within developments,
where local planning authorities should encourage and maximise opportunities for building
in beneficial biodiversity features as part of good design.
Policy NBC1 of the Council’s Nature Conservation and Biodiversity SPD states that
development proposals should seek to maintain and enhance biodiversity and the nature
conservation interest of sites. Where possible and practicable, they should incorporate new
wildlife habitat, landscaping and built features that attract wildlife.
None of the trees within the site are protected by Tree Preservation Order. In accordance
with the Council’s SPD on trees and Condition 27 of the outline permission, the applicants
have submitted a tree survey. The information submitted by the applicants indicates that a
total of 191 trees would be felled as a result of the proposals, whilst 110 existing trees
would be retained. As part of these proposals, a total of 409 trees would be planted within
the site. This exceeds the Council’s normal requirement for the planting of two
replacement trees for each one felled. Of the trees to be felled, the applicants’ arboricultural
consultant states that the existing vegetation largely consists of neglected mixed species
groups, many of which are overgrown. It is correct that, although some of the trees within
the site offer some contribution to the amenity of the area and are more established, the
80
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
majority are self-seeded and in a generally poor and overgrown condition. Given the
regenerative benefits of the proposal, and in light of the number of trees proposed to be
planted as part of the scheme, I do not have any objections to the felling of the trees.
The applicants have confirmed that they have selected the trees to be planted (including
Maple, Lime and Hornbeam) based on their shape, size and colour, the ground conditions,
climatic conditions, light availability, orientation and position against the development.
The trees to be planted within the site are predominantly street trees and therefore need to
be suitable for hard surfaces close to buildings. Of the new trees, the applicants have
confirmed that only 40% would be true native species, but that none would be alien exotics.
In relation to the proposed hedges however, 78% would be native. I am satisfied that the
applicants have incorporated sufficient native species into the proposed scheme, having
regard to the need to provide trees which would be suitable to such a built-up area.
Flood Risk
Policy EN19. It requires applications for developments which are considered likely to be at
risk of flooding, or to increase the risk of flooding elsewhere materially, to be accompanied
by a formal flood risk assessment, which should, where appropriate, identify the mitigation
or other measures to be incorporated in to the development to reduce the risk of flooding to
an acceptable level.
Policy ER8 of RSS states that, in considering individual planning proposals, local planning
authorities should apply the precautionary principle and make use of the Indicative Flood
Plain Maps to develop the information necessary to apply the sequential approach to flood
risk outlined in PPG25.
Planning Policy Guidance Note 25: Development and Flood Risk, outlines the
Government’s policy of reducing the risks to people and the developed and natural
environment from flooding. It therefore looks to local planning authorities to ensure that
flood risk is properly taken into account in the planning of developments to reduce the risk
of flooding and the damage which flooding causes. The Government has recently been out
to consultation on Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk, which is
intended to replace PPG25. The consultation sought views on a new Flooding Direction
and changes to the GDPO to make the Environment Agency a statutory consultee for
certain types of development.
Policy LBDC 9 requires planning applications for development in Lower Broughton to be
accompanied by a flood risk assessment and provides detailed advice on its design.
Condition 34 attached to the outline planning permission requires the submission of a
number of items, including:
1. a flood risk assessment;
2. layout and cross section plans indicating the proposed ground levels of open space and
basement for flood storage to allow the filling of the compensatory flood storage area;
81
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
3. details of mitigation measures to protect basements from groundwater flooding;
4. details of how ponded water would be drained from the open space area;
5. Plans to show the location of the routes for emergency access and egress, all of which are
above the 1:100 flood event level and consistent with the Council's Emergency Plan;
6. Details of groundwater monitoring data relating to the basement design and finished
floor levels of the open space;
7. plans indicating emergency escape infrastructure from basements, including vehicle
ramps and pedestrian staircases; and
8. details of the storage of surface water runoff within the site;
The site lies within the 1 in 1000 year floodplain of the River Irwell, with the southern end
of the site lying within the 1 in 100 year floodplain. The new buildings within this proposal
would all lie outside the 1 in 100 year floodplain, as it is only the proposed temporary open
space which would be within the 1 in 100 year floodplain. Therefore, the flood risk
assessment (FRA) submitted with the application assesses the residual risk simulated to a 1
in 1000 year flood event. The FRA demonstrates that finished floor levels for blocks A, B
and C, D and F would be either above the 1 in 1000 year flood level or would be no more
than 600mm below it. This is considered to be satisfactory.
In relation to items 2.-8 above, the applicants have provided a cross section of the proposed
area of temporary open space, but have not provided cross sections of basements as none
are proposed within this phase of the redevelopment. Similarly, the applicants have not
provided details of mitigation measures to protect basements from groundwater flooding,
as no basements are proposed. In relation to item 4., the intention of this condition was to
relate to the lowering of ground levels and the potential for water accumulation. The
applicants are not proposing to lower any ground levels, and would not therefore increase
the risk of ponding. In response to item 5., the applicants have submitted a plan indicating
the location of the emergency access and egress routes, which is considered to be
acceptable. In relation to item 6., the applicants have not provided this information as they
do not consider it necessary as ground levels would not be lowered. Item 7. relates to
basements, and, as discussed above, basements are not proposed and this information is not
therefore necessary. Finally, in relation to surface water runoff, the applicants have
confirmed that all surface water sewers would be connected to the existing separate surface
water sewer network and would discharge into the River Irwell. The EA does not require
any surface water attenuation and the work undertaken by the applicants has shown that
there would be no sewer flooding as a result of this phase of the redevelopment, and, as a
result, no surface water storage would be required.
In relation to drainage, the strategy for the area was devised by Urban Vision, the
applicants and their advisors, the Environment Agency and United Utilities and this is
therefore considered to be satisfactory.
Residential Amenity
82
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Policy DES7 requires all new development 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.
Across the majority of the site, there would be in excess of 21m between facing residential
properties. In some areas however, such as within Block B and C, there would be in the
region of 20m between some of the properties. This would only affect six properties,
which, given the scale of the development, is only a very small proportion of the total
number of dwellings proposed. Given that the distance between these properties would be
only slightly less than the 21m normally allowed, I have no objections. I am satisfied that,
given the distances between the proposed properties, and in view of the benefits of the
scheme to the area and the existing residents who would be re-housed, I am satisfied that
there would be no unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of future residents of the
proposed development by virtue of overlooking or loss of privacy and that the application
complies with the above policy.
Traffic Generation and Highway Issues
Policy A1 requires planning applications for developments which would give rise to
significant transport implications will not be permitted unless they are accompanied by a
transport assessment and, where appropriate, a travel plan.
Policy A2 requires development proposals to make adequate provision for safe and
convenient access by the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists through the protection and
improvement of key routes.
Policy A5 states that development of bus corridors will be permitted where they are
consistent with regeneration objectives and policies in the UDP.
Policy A8 states that development will not be permitted where it would compromise
highway safety by virtue of traffic generation and access.
Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists
and motorcyclists, in accordance with the council’s maximum standards. It also states that
the maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded.
Policy T9 of RSS relates to demand management. It also covers the issue of car parking
standards and states that standards should be more restrictive in urban areas to reflect local
characteristics, such as higher levels of public transport and higher development density.
Policy LBDC 7 states that development should facilitate the
improvement of connections between the different parts of Lower
Broughton and to surrounding areas, and help promote walking and
cycling.
83
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Planning Policy Guidance Note 13: Transport, outlines the need to promote more
sustainable transport choices, promote accessibility to jobs, shopping and leisure facilities
and services by public transport, walking and cycling and reducing the need to travel,
especially by car. It sets out maximum car parking standards which will assist in the
promotion off sustainable transport choices. The guidance highlights the importance of
walking and cycling as substitutes for short car trips. It also sets out the requirements for
travel plans to help in the delivery of sustainable transport objectives, including reductions
in car usage, reduced traffic speeds and more environmentally friendly delivery services.
The transportation aspects of this application were fully addressed in the transport
assessment submitted with the outline planning application for the wider site. The
proposals for this phase of the redevelopment of the wider area have altered slightly from
the outline proposals as they incorporate the relocation of the existing car parking spaces at
Fit City to a site to the east of the existing building. Although this is not considered to
constitute a significant change from the outline proposals, the applicants have submitted a
brief highways assessment with this application which assesses the implications of this
change in terms of highway safety. The applicants’ highways consultants assert that the
traffic impacts arising from the proposed development would be immaterial and where
there would be material impacts, the existing local highway network is considered capable
of accommodating the proposals. The number of spaces to be provided within the
replacement car park for Fit City would be the same as the existing number. This is not
therefore expected to have any unacceptable traffic implications. They also state that the
proposals would deliver significant transportation benefits to the area through the
implementation of permanent improvements to the physical infrastructure, for example
through improving pedestrian facilities along key desire lines, particularly those which
connect through to nearby public transport services.
In relation to the overall proposals for this first phase of development, the basic layout of
the highway network surrounding the development plots is as previously agreed between
Urban Vision and the applicants. These roads would be adopted by the City Council, with
the courtyard and parking areas within the blocks remaining unadopted. The majority of
the adopted roads within the site would comprise textured granite aggregate setts, with
conservation paving for the footpaths. The northern and southern sections of Duke Street
(at the junction with Camp Street to the north and Broughton Lane to Lord Street to the
south) would be pedestrianised, with conservation paving, feature lighting and feature
paving made from blue resin bound recycled glass.
Across this site, car parking is provided in a variety of ways, namely within courtyards,
within individual residential curtilages and on street. Within Block A, a total of 95 spaces
(including five disabled) would be provided within two courtyards to serve the 94
apartments and houses. Within Blocks B and C, a total of 108 spaces (including five
disabled) would be provided to serve the 98 apartments and houses. Within Block D, a total
of 109 (including four disabled) spaces would be provided to serve 88 apartments and
houses. In addition, some of the houses within Block D have garages. Finally, a total of 152
84
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
parking spaces (including seven disabled) would be provided within Block F to serve the
152 apartments within that block. In addition, 23 spaces, including two disabled, would be
provided at street level adjacent to Block F for visitors to the commercial units. Each of the
blocks would also have facilities for the storage of bicycles. I am satisfied that the number
of car parking spaces proposed accords with the Council’s maximum car parking
standards.
In view of the findings of the highways assessment and given the level of car parking
proposed, I am satisfied that the proposals would not result in an unacceptable detrimental
impact on highway safety and consider that the application complies with the above
policies.
Other Issues
Travel Plans
In relation to the comments made by the GMPTE, the applicants have noted the issue
regarding the retention of the bus shelter and bus stop in their current location. In respect of
the travel plan, it should be noted that the GMPTE was consulted on the outline planning
application and did not request a condition be attached to the permission requiring the
submission of travel plans with all reserved matters applications. It was however
considered reasonable and necessary to attach a condition to the outline permission
requiring the submission of a travel plan with the reserved matters application for the
school building, the site of which is not included within this phase of the proposed
redevelopment. It would therefore not be reasonable to require the applicants to submit a
travel plan with this reserved matters application. Moreover, given the site’s location in
close proximity to public transport links and the limited number of car parking spaces
proposed, I am satisfied that future residents of, and visitors to, the site will be encouraged
to use public transport.
Density
The outline planning permission envisaged a maximum of 1,500 dwellings across the
whole of the site. Given that the site covered by the outline permission covers an area of
22.7 hectares, the average density across the site would be 66 dwellings per hectare. The
density of this first phase of development would be 47 dwellings per hectare. However, if
the area of the temporary open space is omitted, the density would be 77 dwellings per
hectare. I am satisfied that this density is appropriate given the need to attract residents to
the area and in view of the site’s location close to public transport links.
Air Quality
Condition 10 of the outline permission required the submission of an air quality assessment
with each application for the approval of reserved matters. In accordance with this
condition, the applicants have submitted an air quality assessment. The Strategic Director
85
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
has considered the assessment and is satisfied that it contains all the information required
by the condition and has no objections to the proposal on air quality grounds.
iv) Contamination
The applicants have submitted some small-scale assessments of various sites within this
area. However, the Strategic Director of Environmental Services is concerned that the full
contaminated land assessment has not been carried out and that further work will therefore
be required. This is however controlled by Condition 11 of the outline planning permission
and there is therefore no need to attach any further conditions to this permission.
v) Noise
In accordance with Condition 12 of the outline permission, the applicants have submitted
noise assessments which consider the situation in respect of traffic noise and the impact on
future residents. The Strategic Director of Environmental Services has recommended that a
condition be attached requiring the submission of details of the glazing to be used, and for
such a scheme to be approved and implemented. The Strategic Director has also requested
a condition requiring details of ventilation, as well as a condition requiring the submission
of an assessment relating to noise generated from the commercial uses within the site. I am
satisfied that, subject to compliance with these conditions, there would be no unacceptable
detrimental impact on the amenity of future residents of the proposed development.
vi) Fume Extraction
As part of this application, it is proposed to provide shops, restaurants, cafes, drinking
establishments and take-aways. In response to Condition 16 of the outline planning
permission, the applicants have submitted a scheme detailing the fume extraction system
that would be used. This is considered to be acceptable.
vii) Issues Raised by the Objectors
The objectors to the application have raised the issue of parking, particularly for disabled
and elderly people, not being available near to their properties. I can confirm that the
applicants are aware of this issue and have been in discussions with residents. Although the
allocation of car parking spaces has not been finalised yet, the applicants are confident that
this matter can be resolved through further discussions. This is however an issue between
the applicants and the future residents of the development, and, given that I am satisfied
that there would be sufficient car parking, including provision for disabled people, across
the site, I have no objections to the application in this regard.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
This application, as with the outline application, is the result of ongoing discussions with
the applicants and their advisors. Through these discussions, improvements to the design
86
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
and landscaping have been secured. This is an ongoing process which will continue for the
remaining phases of the redevelopment of the area.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I am satisfied that the proposed development would, as part of the wider
proposals for the regeneration of this part of Lower Broughton, have significant benefits,
including the creation of a sustainable community, the re-use of existing infrastructure,
improvements to accessibility and increased economic activity. I am satisfied that the
proposal would comply with the thrust of national, regional and local planning policy and I
therefore recommend that the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Prior to the removal of the existing car parking spaces to the front of the dwellings at 76
- 96 Countess Grove, a scheme detailing the provision of alternative parking facilities
for these properties, or a statement confirming that such provision is no longer
necessary, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Should alternative provision be necessary, the approved scheme shall be
implemented prior to the removal of the aforementioned existing parking spaces and
shall be retained at all times the properties at 76 - 96 Countess Grove are in use.
2. 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.
3. The car parking spaces and cycle storage facilities for each block shall be laid out in
accordance with drawing number PP (9) 21 Revision B (or any subsequent approved
amendments) prior to first occupation of any of the units within each respective block
hereby approved, and shall be available at all times the dwellings are in use.
4. The emergency access routes shown on the drawing entitled 'Lower Broughton
Regeneration, Salford, Phase 1 Reserved Matters Area Flood Escape Routes' dated
18th September 2006 prepared by Scott Wilson shall be provided in full prior to the
commencement of Phase 2, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
5. Prior to construction within this site commencing, and unless otherwise agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority, all trees shown to be retained on the drawing
entitled 'Removal and Retained Tree Plan' dated July 2006 prepared by Ainsley
Gommon shall be fenced around the Root Protection Area or the extent of the canopy,
87
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
whichever is greatest, to prevent the storage of materials, lighting of fires or
excavations, erection of site accommodation, deposition of waste due to tipping or
leakage, ground compaction by traffic or any other actions likely to affect the health of
the tree. Details of the fencing to be used shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority prior to it being erected.
The approved fencing shall be properly maintained by the applicants during
construction to provide adequate protection.
The site shall be inspected frequently by the applicants' arboricultural advisors during
works to ensure that trees are not being damaged.
6. Notwithstanding the details shown on the drawing entitled 'Temporary Parking by Fit
City' dated September 2006 by Ainsley Gommon, a scheme showing the provision of a
minimum of three spaces for use by disabled drivers within the replacement car park
for Fit City shall be submitted to and approved in writing within three months of the
date of this permission. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the loss of
the existing car parking facilities and shall be retained at all times Fit City is in use,
unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
7. Within three months of the commencement of the development hereby approved, a
scheme providing full details of fencing and gates to the replacement Fit City car park,
as shown on the drawing entitled 'Temporary Parking by Fit City' dated September
2006 by Ainsley Gommon, including colour, type, height and exact location, shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved
scheme shall be implemented prior to the car park being brought into use and shall be
retained at all times the site is in use for car parking.
8. Within three months of the date of this permission, details of the area of informal open
space to be provided within the area of temporary open space shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall outline the total
area of such informal open space and the informal open space shall be laid out in
accordance with such details within six months of the date of this permission.
9. Within six months of the date of this permission, details of all glazing requirements for
different facades of all residential buildings within the site shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The glazing requirements shall
be clearly stated in terms of Glass/Air/Glass specification and by the minimum sound
attenuation performance for the glass. Such information shall include details for each
of the elevations and should follow the general indications provided within the 'Lower
Broughton Redevelopment Noise Assessment - Phase 1 Reserved Matters' prepared by
Scott Wilson. The approved measures shall be implemented prior to first occupation of
the respective units and shall be retained thereafter.
Prior to the first occupation of any of the residential units covered by this condition, the
88
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
applicant shall submit verification reports confirming that all of the ventilation
measures have been installed in accordance with the approved details.
11. Should the temporary sports pitches within the site be found to be unsuitable for use, a
programme of works detailing how they shall be brought up to a standard to be
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The pitches shall then be
improved in accordance with the approved programme prior to the next available
planting season.
12. No development approved by this permission shall commence unless and until the
Development Agreement between the applicant and Salford City Council has been
amended to require the applicant to provide £462,624 towards the provision of
children's equipped play space and other youth and adult open space and recreation
facilities, and the amended Development Agreement has been signed by both parties
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R026B Interests of highway safety
2. Reason: To ensure the development accords with policy EN22 of the Unitary
Development Plan.
3. Standard Reason R026B Interests of highway safety
4. Reason: In order to reduce the risk of flooding in accordance with policies EN19 and
EN20 of the Unitary Development Plan and policy 9 of the Salford City Council
Supplementary Planning Document, Lower Broughton Design Code
5. Reason: To safeguard protected trees on the site and to ensure that adequate provision
is made for their protection whilst the development is carried out, in accordance with
EN13 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
6. Reason: In order to ensure adequate parking provision for disabled drivers, in
accordance with Policy A10 of the Unitary Development Plan.
7. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
8. Reason: In order to ensure adequate open space provision, in accordance with Policies
H8 and R2 of the Unitary Development Plan.
9. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
10. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
89
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
11. Reason: In order to ensure adequate open space provision, in accordance with Policies
H8 and R2 of the Unitary Development Plan.
12. Reason: In order to ensure adequate open space provision, in accordance with Policies
H8 and R2 of the Unitary Development Plan.
Note(s) for Applicant
1. Temporary Parking by Fit City: 1095/LS.DS.060
Railings: (91) 01
Flood Escape Routes: Phase 1/FER
Landscape Layout General Arrangement :1095/LS.GA.001
Landscape Layout General Arrangement colour :1095/LS.GA.001C
Removal and Retained Tree Plan: 095/LS.GA.010C
Adopted Areas and Public Rights of Way: 1095/LS.GA.011C
Duke Street Detail Sheet: 1095/LS.DS.020
Duke Street Detail Sheet colour: 1095/LS.DS.020 C
Market Place Detail Sheet: 1095/LS.DS.021
Market Place Detail Sheet colour: 1095/LS.DS.021 C
Alban Street Detail Sheet: 1095/LS.DS.023
Alban Street Detail Sheet colour: 1095/LS.DS.023 C
Broughton Lane Detail Sheet: 1095/LS.DS.024
Broughton Lane Detail Sheet colour: 1095/LS.DS.024 C
Block D Courtyard Detail Sheet: 1095/LS.DS.050
Block D Courtyard Detail Sheet colour: 1095/LS.DS.050 C
Block B/C Courtyard Detail Sheet: 1095/LS.DS.051
Block B/C Courtyard Detail Sheet colour: 1095/LS.DS.051 C
Block A Courtyard Detail Sheet: 1095/LS.DS.052 Rev A
Block A Courtyard Detail Sheet colour: 1095/LS.DS.052 C
Block F Courtyard Detailed Sheet: 1095/LS.DS.053 Rev A
Block F Courtyard Detailed Sheet colour: 1095/LS.DS.053 C
Cross Sections - Sheet 1: 1095/LS.SS.020
Cross Sections - Sheet 1 colour: 1095/LS.SS.020 C
Longitudinal Sections - Sheet 1: 1095/LS.SS.025
Longitudinal Sections - Sheet 1 colour: 1095/LS.SS.025 C
Longitudinal Sections - Sheet 2: 1095/LS.SS.026
Longitudinal Sections - Sheet 2 colour: 1095/LS.SS.026 C
Section/ Elevation A-A -fencing detail: 1095/LS.SS.027 Rev A
Section/ Elevation A-A -fencing detail: 1095/LS.SS.027C
Elevation for kissing gate - Block B/C: 1095/LS.SS.028
Site Plan: 3725 PP (9-) 02 rev C
Phase 1 Site Plan:3725 PP (9-) 21 rev B
Roof Plan: 3725 PP (9-) 22 rev C
Phase 1 Elevation Broughton Lane: 3725 PP (9-) 51 rev B
90
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Phase 1 Elevations: 3725 PP (9-) 52 rev A
Phase 1 Sectional Elevations: 3725 PP (9-) 53 rev B
Great Clowes St and Alban St Elevations: 3725 PP (9-) 54 rev C
Phase 1 Elevations: 3725 PP (9-) 55 rev A
Phase 1 Sectional Elevations
3725 PP (9-) 56 rev A
Phase 1 Block A Ground floor plan: 3725 PP A (2-) 01 rev B
Phase 1 Block A Upper floor plan: 3725 PP A (2-) 02
Block A Section: 3725 PP A (2-) 21 rev B
Block A Elevations: 3725 PP A (2-) 31 rev C
Block A Elevations: 3725 PP A (2-) 32 rev C
Blocks B&C Private Dwelling Type: 1155
3725 PP BC (2-) 01 rev B
Blocks B&C Private Dwelling Type: 1074
3725 PP BC (2-) 02 rev B
Blocks B&C Private Dwelling Type: 1000
3725 PP BC (2-) 03
Blocks B&C Affordable Dwelling Type 2B4P: 3725 PP BC (2-) 04 rev A
Blocks B&C Affordable Dwelling Type 3B5P: 3725 PP BC (2-) 05 rev A
Blocks B&C Affordable Dwelling Type 4B6P: 3725 PP BC (2-) 06
Blocks B&C 2st 2B4P: 3725 PP BC (2-) 08 rev B
Blocks B&C Private Dwelling Type 979: 3725 PP BC (2-) 09 rev A
Blocks B&C Flat Block 82 - 87: 3725 PP BC (2-) 11 rev B
Blocks B&C Flat Block 19-30: 3725 PP BC (2-) 12 rev B
Blocks B&C Flat Block 44-50: 3725 PP BC (2-) 13 rev B
Blocks B&C Flat Block 65-70: 3725 PP BC (2-) 14 rev B
Blocks B&C Flat Block 19-30 Elevations: 3725 PP BC (2-) 15 rev A
Blocks B&C Site Plan: 3725 PP BC (9-) 21 rev B
Block D Flat Block Plans 76-88: 3725 PP D (2-) 15 rev B
Block D Flat Block Elevations: 3725 PP D (2-) 16 rev B
Block D Flat Block 15-27 Plans: 3725 PP D (2-) 17 rev B
Block D Flat Block D15-27 Elevations: 3725 PP D (2-) 18 rev B
Block D Flat Block D41-53 Plans
Block D Flat Block D41-53 Plans: 3725 PP D (2-) 19 rev B
Block D Flat Block D41-53 Elevations: 3725 PP D (2-) 20 rev B
Block D Site Plan: 3725 PP D (9-) 21 rev A
Phase 1 Block F Ground Floor Plan: 3725 PP F (2-) 01 rev C
Phase 1 Block F Mezzanine and First Floor Plan: 3725 PP F (2-) 02 rev A
Phase 1 Block F Level 2 (Piazza), 3, 4 & 5: 3725 PP F (2-) 03 rev E
Phase 1 Block F Level 6&7: 3725 PP F (2-) 05 rev B
Phase 1 Block F Level 8: 3725 PP F (2-) 06 rev B
Sectional Elevations C-C: 3725 PP F (2-) 09 rev C
Phase 1 Block F Broughton Lane Elevation: 3725 PP F (2-) 32 rev E
Phase 1 Block F Duke Street Elevation: 3725 PP F (2-) 33 rev H
Phase 1 Block F South (rear) Elevation: 3725 PP F (2-) 34 rev D
Phase 1 Block F East Elevation: 3725 PP F (2-) 35 rev E
91
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
APPLICATION No:
06/53285/FUL
APPLICANT:
M Michael
LOCATION:
212 Great Clowes Street Salford M7 2ZS
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing building and erection of a four
storey building comprising 12 apartments together with
bin/cycle store, associated car parking and construction of
new vehicular access
WARD:
Broughton
BACKGROUND
The planning application site forms part of a larger site that was granted planning
permission in February 2005 for selected demolition, conversion of two listed buildings to
form 14 apartments, erection of four four-storey blocks comprising 43 apartments, 31
three-storey terraced dwellings, associated parking and new vehicular access.
(04/49631/FUL)
The application site in particular has extant permission for the erection of one four storey
block comprising twelve apartments, part of a block of four terraces and five car parking
spaces.
The application has been re-submitted by the owner of the land who was not the previous
applicant.
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application site currently has a vacant residential property upon it and fronts Great
Clowes Street. To the north, the land is currently being developed as described above. The
south-east of the site is a vacant Grade II Listed Building and to the east of the site are
existing residential properties.
The current application proposes the erection of one four storey block comprising twelve
apartments. There would be 12 car parking spaces including one disabled space and the
construction of a new vehicular access from Cornet Street to the rear.
SITE HISTORY
Planning permission was granted in February 2005 for selected demolition, conversion of
two listed buildings to form 14 apartments, erection of four four-storey blocks comprising
92
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
43 apartments, 31 three-storey terraced dwellings, associated parking and new vehicular
access. (04/49631/FUL)
CONSULTATIONS
Strategic Director of Environmental Services – no comments to date, previous comments
taken into consideration
Police Architectural Liaison Officer – objects to the application on crime and design issues
United Utilities – no comments received to date, previous comments taken into
consideration
Environment Agency – no comments to date, previous comments taken into consideration
Urban Regeneration Company – no comments received to date
PUBLICITY
A site notice and press notice have been published.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
10 – 28 (evens) Pentlands Avenue
208-210, 214 and 218 Great Clowes Street
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received one letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity.
The following issues have been raised:Clarification of privacy distances
Further details of bin storage design
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
H8 – Open Space Provision Associated With New Housing Developments
CH2 – Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building
DES1 – Respecting Context
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Development
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
93
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
DES13 – Design Statements
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of the
redevelopment of the site for residential purposes is acceptable; whether the design of the
proposed new building is acceptable and whether there would be an impact on the
character, appearance or setting of the listed buildings; whether there would be an impact
on the amenity of existing or future residents; whether adequate provision would be made
for open space; whether the proposed level of car parking is sufficient and whether the
development accords with the relevant policies of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan.
I shall deal with each in turn below.
Principle of the Development
Adopted Policy H1 states that new housing development should contribute to the provision
of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area.
There is an existing vacant residential unit upon the site. The site is located in close
proximity to public transport and a range of local services and facilities. The application
proposes a mix of four one bedroom apartments and eight two bedroomed apartments in
accordance with Adopted Policy H1. The proposal would result in significant
improvements to what is currently an unattractive and underused brownfield site adjacent
to a development site and a Grade II Listed Building. I am of the opinion that
redevelopment of the site for residential purposes is acceptable and I therefore have no
objections to the application in this regard.
Design and Listed Buildings
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.
Adopted Policy DES11 requires applicants for major developments to demonstrate that the
proposal takes account of the need for good design. A written statement should be
submitted which explains the design concepts and how these are reflected in the
development’s layout, scale and visual appearance, the relationship to the site and its wider
context and how the proposal meets the Council’s design objectives and policies.
Adopted Policy CH2 states that planning permission will not be granted for development
which would have an unacceptable impact on the setting of any listed building.
94
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
The Council’s Conservation Officer has been consulted on this application in respect of its
impact on the setting, character and appearance of the adjacent listed building, no
objections have been raised. The proposal is of a similar design to the extant permission on
the site. It is recommended that conditions are attached regarding materials.
The proposal is of a similar height, scale and design to that previously permitted, part of
which has been constructed on the adjacent site. I have attached a condition requiring the
submission of samples of materials prior to the commencement of the development and am
satisfied that this will ensure that the materials will be appropriate and that the scheme will
be in keeping with the character and appearance of the listed building. The applicants have
submitted a design statement which outlines the rationale behind the scheme and provides
and explanation of the design principles, in accordance with Adopted Policy DES11. I am
of the opinion that the proposed development would be a positive addition to the area and
that the design of the proposed buildings is acceptable. I am of the opinion that the
proposed scheme would enhance the setting of the listed building. I therefore have no
objections to the application on design or conservation grounds in accordance with the
above policies.
Impact on Amenity
Adopted Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a
satisfactory level of amenity. Development which would have an unacceptable impact on
the amenity of the occupiers or users of other developments will not normally be permitted.
The proposal would be in excess of 30m to the existing properties to the east. It would be
an adequate distance from the partly constructed properties to the north west of the site.
The proposed habitable room windows would be located similarly to the approved
application on the east, south and west elevations. The proposed windows on the west
elevation would be within 5m of the side boundary, which would normally be unacceptable
due to the limited outlook of the future occupiers. However, on balance, I am of the
opinion that the benefits of the scheme namely the redevelopment of a derelict and
unattractive site adjacent to a development site and a Grade II Listed Building, outweigh
that fact that one apartment on the ground floor would have a limited outlook. I consider
that the redevelopment of the site in the manner proposed would be a significant
improvement on the current situation. I do not consider that the slight reduction in outlook
distances would result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of either
existing or future residents or that this warrants the refusal of the application.
Open Space
Adopted Policy H8 requires adequate provision for the capital and twenty-year
maintenance of formal and informal open space, having regard to the aim of achieving the
standards of Policy R2, for all new housing developments. This open space should be
95
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
provided either as part of the development or through an equivalent financial contribution
based on a standard cost per bedspace for both capital and maintenance.
The open space contribution required by Policy H8 is based on standards c) - e) of Policy
R2, and are calculated through 1 bedspace equaling 1 person. This development would
result in 118bedspaces. The Open Space requirement for this development would equal:
0.08614ha quality sports pitch provision
0.0295ha children's equipped/other youth and adult facilities
0.0472ha informal/amenity open space.
Due to the site size and location, it is appropriate for this open space contribution to be
provided in the form of a financial contribution to be directed towards the most appropriate
open space recreation improvements in the vicinity of the development. The total financial
contribution equal to the above open space requirements would be £17, 280. The applicant
has agreed to this amount and I have attached a condition requiring such a contribution. I
am therefore satisfied that the application accords with the above policies.
Impact on the Highway Network
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 terms of car parking within the site, it is proposed to provide 12 parking spaces 1 of
which would be for disabled parking. I consider the proposed level of car parking to be
acceptable and accords with Adopted Policy A10.
The access to the site is proposed from Cornet Street, which has recently been the subject
of a highway closure. The applicant would need to negotiate with the owner of the bottom
section of Cornet Street access arrangements. This is a private matter between two land
owners and should therefore not preclude the granting of planning permission.
Other Issues
A neighbouring occupier has requested clarification regarding the design of the proposed
bin store. Details of the specific design have not been submitted with the application. I
have attached a condition requesting details and design of the proposed bin storage prior to
commencement of development.
The Police Architectural Liaison Officer has objected to the proposed application on crime
and design issues. In particular reference is made to the entrance being located on the side
and position of the access to area currently under development. As mentioned the
application site has an extant permission for a very similar scheme. The approved scheme
has a side entrance door and vehicular access to the adjacent partly developed site. Given
96
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
the extant permission and the redevelopment of the site in the manner proposed would be a
significant improvement on the current situation I would not consider the crime and design
issues would warrant the refusal of the application.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I consider that the principle of the redevelopment of the site for residential
purpose is acceptable and the design is acceptable given the site’s close proximity to a
listed building. I am of the opinion that the proposal complies with the relevant policies of
the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and there are no material considerations, which
outweigh this finding. I therefore recommend that the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions 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.
Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03 Three year time limit
2. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples of the
materials for the external elevations and roof of the building shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out
using the approved materials, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
3. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site
investigation report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The
investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination
and ground gases on site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk
to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA,
focusing primarily on risks to human health and controlled waters. The investigation
shall also address the implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site
workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services and landscaping schemes
and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems and property.
The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning
Authority prior to the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and
remedial works contained within the approved report shall be implemented by the
developer prior to occupation of the site.
97
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall
be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The Site Completion
Report shall validate that all works undertaken on site were completed in accordance
with those agreed by the Local Planning Authority.
4. Unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the car park shall
be laid out in accordance with Drawing No. 3311/2.00 prior to first occupation of any
of the residential units hereby approved.
5. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the
undertaking of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4) (a-d) of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act, 1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning
Authority, and the Local Planning Authority has given its approval in writing. The
planning obligation will provide that a commuted sum as required by Policy H8 of the
Adopted, having regard to the standards set out in Policy R2 of the Adopted UDP and
Salford's Greenspace Strategy will be paid to the Local Planning Authority for open
space and recreation space purposes.
6. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, full details of the
location and design of cycle storage, bin storage and recycling facilities within the site
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such
approved cycle and bin stores and recycling facilities shall be constructed in
accordance with the approved details and shall be made available for use prior to the
first occupation of any unit and retained thereafter.
7. No development shall commence until an external lighting scheme has been submitted
to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme
shall be implemented in full prior to the occupation of any dwelling.
8. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the means of
vehicular access from Cornet Street have been constructed and laid out in accordance
with the submitted plan Drawing No. 331/2.00.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
3. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
4. Standard Reason R012B Parking only within curtilage
5. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation
98
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
space for future occupiers in accordance with policies H8 and R2 of the Adopted UDP.
6. In order to encourage the use of more sustainable transport modes and in order to
encourage waste recycling, in accordance with Policy A10 of the Adopted UDP.
7. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
8. In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A 8 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan.
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be
satisfied prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the
conditions precedent renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and
appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
2. For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land
Condition, the applicant/developer is advised to contact the Pollution Control Section
of the Environment Directorate (Tel: (0161) 737 0551
3. For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land
Condition, the applicant/developer is advised to contact the Pollution Control Section
of the Environment Directorate (Tel: (0161) 737 0551
4. Please note the permission relates to the following plans
Drawing No
3311/2.00
3311/2.03
3311/2.04 A
3311/2.05 A
3311/2.06 A
3311/2.07
3311/2.08
3311/2.09
5. The applicants attention drawn to the attached letter from Barton Aerodrome.
APPLICATION No:
06/53288/FUL
APPLICANT:
Taylor Woodrow Developments Ltd
99
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
LOCATION:
Land Lumns Lane And Agecroft Road Pendlebury
Swinton
PROPOSAL:
Re-positioning of one - block of nine apartments
(Amendment to planning permission 05/51472/FUL)
WARD:
Pendlebury
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application site is currently being developed in accordance with two previous planning
permissions that have been granted on the site 04/47881/FUL and 05/51472/FUL. The
original application was for the erection of 58 dwellings and 96 apartments. The site has
changed owners and the previous application relates to amendments of the 96 apartments.
The whole site is bounded by the railway line to the west and Agecroft Road to the south,
beyond which are residential properties. To the north of the site is the area for the proposed
Slack Brook Country Park and to the east is Lumns Lane.
The current application proposes the re-siting of one block of nine apartments. There
would be 11 car parking spaces associated with this block, one of which would be for
disabled use. Vehicular access into the site would be from Agecroft Road.
The apartments would be surrounded by apartments to the east and dwellings to the south
of the site. To the north would be the proposed Slack Brook Country Park. A number of
dwellings surrounding the apartments have already been constructed.
SITE HISTORY
In December 2005 planning permission was granted for the erection of seven - three storey
buildings comprising 96 apartments together with associated landscaping, car parking and
construction of new vehicular access (ref: 05/51472/FUL)
In March 2005 planning permission was granted for the erection of 58 dwellings and 96
apartments with associated car parking together with the creation of a new vehicular access
of Agecroft Road. The application also includes the provision of a footpath / cycle way
through the site linking Agecroft Road to the proposed country park (ref: 04/47881/FUL).
In February 2004, a full planning application was submitted for the erection of 60
residential dwellings on part of the application site, with associated car parking together
with the creation of a new vehicular access and alterations to an existing pedestrian access,
the application was withdrawn. (ref: 04/47878/FUL)
100
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
In February 2000, planning permission was granted for the erection of 56 dwellings with
vehicular access off Agecroft Road (ref: 99/39133/FUL)
In March 1998, planning permission was granted for the erection of 115 dwellings with
vehicular access off Lumns Lane (ref: 97/36458/FUL)
CONSULTATIONS
Strategic Director of Environmental Services – no comments received to date but original
comments taken into consideration relating to noise and contaminated land.
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 24th August
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
2 – 30 (evens) Agecroft Road
1 – 6 Park Lane West
4 – 7 Frankby Close
2 – 38 (evens) Pendlecroft Avenue
Biffa Waste
1 – 7 Lock Keepers Mews
1 – 7 (odds) Kilcoby Avenue
1 – 7 Bolbury Crescent
Biffa Waste
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received no letters of representation / objection in response to the planning
application publicity.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: EN6 – Irwell Valley
EN7D – Wildlife Corridors
R4 – Key Recreation Areas
Other policies: DES1 – Respecting Context
H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
H8 – Open Space Provision Associated with New Housing Development
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
A8 – Impact of Development on the Highway Network
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments
101
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
A2 – Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
DES9 – Landscaping
EN13 – Contaminated Land
DES11 – Design and Crime
PLANNING APPRAISAL
I consider the main issues in the determination of this planning application to be: whether
the principle of the proposed development is acceptable, whether the proposal would
provide adequate access into the site; whether the applicant would make an appropriate
contribution to the provision of open space; whether issues of contamination have been
taken into account, whether the layout and design of the site is acceptable; and whether the
proposal complies with the relevant provisions of the Adopted UDP. I will deal with each
in turn below
The Principle of the Proposed Development
Adopted Policy H1 states that new housing development should, inter alia, contribute to
the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area, provide a high quality
residential environment and make adequate provision for open space.
Adopted Policy EN5 states that development within the Irwell Valley will not be permitted
where it would be contrary to a number of factors, including where it would reduce public
accessibility of the valley, result in the unacceptable loss of land of acknowledged
recreational value or have an unacceptable impact on important views into, through or
within the valley.
Adopted Policy R4 states that planning permission will only be granted on land within,
adjoining or directly affecting a Key Recreation Area where it would be consistent with a
number of objectives, including the protection and enhancement of the existing and
potential recreational use of the area, the protection and improvement of the amenity of the
area, the provision of public access for walking and cycling and the provision of open land
recreational uses.
The site is located within the Croal-Irwell Valley and an area of search for wildlife habitats
and corridors in the Adopted UDP, and is also allocated for recreational purposes in the
Adopted UDP under Policy R4.
The site has extant permissions for the erection of 58 dwellings and 96 apartments
including the provision of a footpath / cycle way through the site linking Agecroft Road to
the proposed country park. The current application seeks to amend one block of nine
apartments of the previous planning application. The current application would be linked
to the extant permission by amending the existing Section 106 Legal Agreement, to include
the proposal set before the Panel. The amended Section 106 would ensure the provisions
of the footpath / cycle way agreed by the extant permission. I am therefore of the opinion
102
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
that the proposal complies with the policies above and I am therefore satisfied that the
principle of the proposal is acceptable.
Impact on the Highway Network
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 terms of car parking within the site, it is proposed to provide 11 parking spaces 2 of
which would be for disabled parking. This would be the same as that approved in relation
to this block of apartments I consider the proposed level of car parking to be acceptable and
accords with Adopted Policy A10.
Open Space
Policy H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and informal
open space within housing developments.
In accordance with the above policies, the applicants have agreed to make a contribution
towards open space. This would be through a combination of on-site provision and the
provision of a commuted sum towards open space in the vicinity. The proposed
footpath/cycle link and the wooded area to the rear of the site would constitute the on-site
informal open space provision. The existing Section 106 agreement would be amended to
reflect the current application. This is in accordance with Adopted policy H8 and the
Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on open space.
Layout and Design of the Proposal
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.
Adopted 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.
Adopted Policy DES9 states that landscaping should be of a high quality, reflect the
character of the area and the development, not detract from safety and security and form an
integral part of the development.
Given the siting of the proposed apartments and the distance between the application site
and neighbouring residential properties, I am satisfied that there would be no unacceptable
103
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
loss of privacy or detrimental impact on the amenity of existing residents as a result of this
proposal. The proposed apartments would be positioned a further 2m to the east from the
previously approve block. The apartments would be an adequate distance to the proposed
dwellings that would surround the current application site. I am of the opinion that the
application accords with Adopted DES7.
I have attached a condition requiring samples of materials I am satisfied that this will
ensure a suitably high quality and in keeping with the surrounding area, in accordance with
Adopted Policies DEV2 and DES1.
I have attached a condition requiring details of landscaping within the site. I am satisfied
that this will ensure that the landscaping meets the criteria of Adopted Policy DES9 .
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The applicants will enter into a Section 106 Agreement to secure public access along the
footpath/cycle link and through the wooded area and contributions towards the provision
and maintenance of open space and in the area.
CONCLUSION
On balance, I am satisfied that the application is acceptable. This proposal would be an
amendment to the extant permission and would provide a satisfactory footpath/cycle link
from Agecroft Road to the proposed Country Park. I am satisfied that the conditions will
ensure that the landscaping, materials, footpath/cycle link and wooded area would be of a
suitably high standard and that future residents would not be detrimentally affected by
contamination. I therefore make the following recommendation:
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.
Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03 Three year time limit
2. Prior to the commencement of building works, the applicant shall submit for written
approval to the Local Planning Authority a scheme detailing precise noise protection
measures to allow all habitable rooms to achieve the requirements of BS8233:1999.
This assessment shall also identify additional measures to allow all habitable rooms
either facing or with a direct line of sight to Agecroft Road, Lumns Lane or the Railway
104
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
line to achieve the requirements of BS8233:1999 whilst allowing for the provision of
summer cooling and rapid ventilation. Once agreed by the Local Planning Authority,
all measures shall be incorporated prior to first occupation of any of the apartments and
maintained thereafter.
3. Prior to commencement of development a scheme including full details of walls, fences
and boundary treatment shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning
Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented within 12 months of
commencement of development and shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local
Planning Authority.
4. Prior to first occupation the surface water regulation system shall be completed in
accordance with details submitted on Drawing No. 2214-E030 P2.
5. No development shall be started until:
a) The site has been subjected to a detailed scheme for the investigation and
recording of all contamination, including soil/ground contamination and its potential to
be harmful to human health and to pollute the water environment, and a report has been
submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority
b) Detailed proposals to protect future occupiers and to prevent pollution of
groundwater and surface waters in line with current best practice for the contaminant
monitoring protocols, remediation of such contamination and confirmatory testing has
been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These
contamination proposals shall be carried out either before or during such development
as appropriate.
c) If further contamination is identified during development then the contamination
proposals shall be revised and the revisions submitted to and approved by the Local
Planning Authority
6. Prior to the commencement of development a detailed designs of the gas protection
measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. This shall include all details of the gas control schemes for the site and
individual properties, details of the gas vent stacks, the method of connection between
the stacks and the Geofin, the method of connection around service entries to the
houses and the layout of foundation down stands.
7. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the means of
vehicular access from Agecroft Road has been constructed and laid out in accordance
with the approved plans.
8. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, full details of the
location and design of bin storage and recycling facilities within the site shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such approved
cycle and bin stores and recycling facilities shall be constructed in accordance with the
105
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
approved details and shall be made available for use prior to the first occupation of any
unit and retained thereafter.
9. Car parking within the site shall be laid out in accordance with the details shown on
drawing no. 12138/PSP/01-S and shall be made available at all times
10. The development permitted by this planning permission shall not be started by the
undertaking of a material operation as defined in Section 56(4) (a-d) of the Town and
Country Planning Act, 1990 until a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act, 1990 has been made and lodged with the Local Planning
Authority, and the Local Planning Authority has given its approval in writing. The
planning obligation will provide that a commuted sum as required by Policy H8 of the
Adopted, having regard to the standards set out in Policy R2 of the Adopted UDP and
Salford's Greenspace Strategy will be paid to the Local Planning Authority for open
space and recreation space purposes.
11. Prior to first occupation the cycle storage shall be constructed and available for use in
accordance with the submitted plan Drawing No TAYW/Cycle Rev B
12. Within 12 months of commencement of development the site shall be treated in
accordance with the landscape scheme as detailed on the submitted plan Drawing No.
2766.01 Rev A and shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning
Authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced to
the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
13. The development hereby approved shall be constructed in accordance with the
materials as detailed on the submitted Drawing No. 2138/PPSP/01H unless otherwise
agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
3. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
4. In order to reduce the risk of flooding
5. Standard Reason R024B Amenity of future residents
6. The site has been landfilled in the past and contains landfill gas and measures are
required to prevent this becoming a hazard to occupiers
7. Standard Reason R026B Interests of highway safety
106
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
8. In order to encourage the use of more sustainable transport modes and in order to
encourage waste recycling, in accordance with Policy A10 of the Adopted Unitary
Development Plan.
9. Standard Reason R012B Parking only within curtilage
10. To ensure the residential development provides appropriate open space and recreation
space for future occupiers in accordance with policies H8 and R2 of the Adopted UDP.
11. In order to encourage the use of more sustainable transport modes, in accordance with
Policy A10 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan.
12. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
13. Standard Reason R004B Amenity - area
Note(s) for Applicant
1. For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land
Condition, the applicant/developer is advised to contact the Pollution Control Section
of the Environment Directorate (Tel: (0161) 737 0551
2. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be
satisfied prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the
conditions precedent renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and
appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
3. The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the
Applicant should take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of
their proposal. Developers must also seek permission from the Coal Authority before
undertaking any operation that involves entry into any coal or mines of coal, including
coal mine shafts and adits and the implementation of site investigations or other works.
Property specific summary information on any past, current or proposed surface and
underground mining activity to affect the development can be obtained from the Coal
Authority. The Coal Authority Mining Reports Service can be contacted on 0845 762
6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk
APPLICATION No:
06/53390/HH
APPLICANT:
Mr And Mrs J Cohen
107
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
LOCATION:
13 Stanley Road Salford M7 4EG
PROPOSAL:
Erection of two storey side extension and construction of
dormer extension in roof space at rear of dwelling
(re-submission of planning application 06/53006/HH)
WARD:
Kersal
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
The application was deferred at the panel meeting on 21 September 2006 due to personal
circumstances of the applicant. Therefore the application is being reported to the 5 October
2006 panel meeting.
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The property has a single storey rear extension situated along the common boundary with
15 Stanley Road.
The proposal is for the erection of a two storey side extension and construction of dormer
extension in the roof space at rear of dwelling. The two storey side extension would
accommodate a hallway, utility and kitchen on the ground level and two bedrooms, laundry
and bathroom on the first floor. The dormers will accommodate 2 bedrooms and a WC.
The two storey side extension would be situated along the common boundary with 11
Stanley Road. It would project 4.3m from the side of the property and extend 14.5m
towards the rear of the property and would be 3.0m wide at the rear. Two Velux windows
would be installed in the front roof of the proposed side extension.
The proposed rear dormer would be situated approximately 0.5 from the common
boundary with 15 Stanley Road and would project 2.3m from the roof of property. It would
measure 7.5m in width and 1.8m in height with a flat roof.
SITE HISTORY
A previous application 06/53006/HH was submitted in June 2006 for erection of two
storey side extension, and construction of dormer extension in roof space at rear of
dwelling. This was refused 16th August 2006 on the grounds that the two storey side
extension, by virtue of its siting and size would have an unacceptable overbearing and
overshadowing impact on the neighbouring residents living at 11 Stanley Road. The
108
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
application was contrary to policy DES7 of the Adopted UDP and policy HE4 of the
Council’s Supplementary Planning Document on House Extensions.
PUBLICITY
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
6,8,10,11 and 15 Stanley Road, Salford
12 and Hanover Gardens, Salford
REPRESENTATIONS
The application is being reported to Panel, as Councillor Connor believes that this
extension is necessary for this family and the council has a duty of wellbeing to
communities. No objections have been received from neighbouring properties.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES8 – Alterations and Extensions
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issue relating to this application is whether the proposal would
seriously injure the amenity of existing residential properties.
Policy DES1 of the Adopted UDP 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 the character of streets, impact on views,
scale and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.
Policy DES7 of the Adopted UDP states that development will not be permitted where it
would have an adverse impact upon the occupiers or users of other developments in the
vicinity or an unacceptable impact on the character and appearance of the street scene.
Policy DES8 of the Adopted UDP states that permission to extend, or alter an existing
building will only be permitted if it respects the general scale, character and proportions of
the existing building and compliments the surrounding area.
The Council’s Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) House Extensions was adopted
on the 19th July 2006. It provides additional guidance on the factors to be considered and
standards maintained when determining householder applications.
109
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
Policy HE10 of the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document on House Extensions
states that planning permission will not be normally be granted for the erection of dormers
and alterations to the roof unless their impact on the street scene can be significantly
reduced through appropriate design and sitting. The proposed dormers would be set in from
the eaves and lower than the ridge of the roof. The habitable room windows of the dormer
would not be visible from the street scene and would not project any closer to the property
at the rear than the existing rear habitable room window. I consider it would not affect the
character of the street scene or generate any unacceptable detrimental overlooking impact
to the neighbouring residents.
Policy HE8 of the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document on House Extensions
states that planning permission would not normally be granted for a two storey side
extension that lies within 1m of the side boundary of the dwelling unless the first floor
element is set back a minimum of 2.0m from the front main wall of the house. The first
floor element of the proposed two-storey side extension would be within 1m of the
common boundary with the adjacent dwelling 11 Stanley Road. It would be set back 2.0m
from the front wall of the property this is in accordance with policy HE8.
Policy HE1 of the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document on House Extensions
states that planning permission will not normally be granted for extensions that do not
maintain a minimum distance of 21m between facing principal windows of habitable
rooms and a minimum distance of 10.5m between the principal window of any habitable
room of the proposed extension and the common boundary with the facing property. The
habitable room windows of the proposed two-storey side extension are located at the front
and rear elevations. The distance between the proposed habitable room windows at the rear
and 14 Hanover Gardens would only be 15m. I consider the separation distance is
acceptable, as the proposed extension would not project any closer to the rear than the
existing habitable room windows in property. The 2.5m high wooden panels situated on the
rear common boundary would screen the ground floor habitable room window in the rear
elevation. There would be more than 21m between the front of the proposed extension and
the property opposite at 8 Stanley Road; this is in accordance with policy HE1. I consider
the proposal would not have any unacceptable detrimental overlooking impact to the
surrounding residents.
However, the proposed extension would generate unacceptable overbearing and
overshadowing impact to the residents at 11 Stanley Road. The adjacent property 11
Stanley Road contains a principal habitable room window on the first floor and second
floor in the side elevation at the gable of the property.
Policy HE3 of the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document on House Extensions
states that planning permission will not normally be granted for a two storey or first floor
extension that does not maintain a minimum distance of 13m between a blank gable end
wall and principal habitable room windows. The side elevation of the adjacent dwelling 11
Stanley Road contain two principal habitable room windows, these would face the blank
110
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
gable of the proposed two-storey extension. The current relationship between the principal
habitable room windows in the gable of 11 Stanley Road and the application property is
approximately 6m. This separation distance is contrary policy HE3, which requires a
distance of 13m. However, those houses were built well before the introduction of the SPD
on House Extensions. The proposed two-storey side extension would reduce this distance
to 3.0m between the proposed side extension and the two habitable room windows at 11
Stanley Road. Although the existing relationship is contrary to policy HE3 I consider that
the proposed extension would have an overbearing impact and result in a lost of light on the
neighbouring residents at 11 Stanley Road. The proposal would be unacceptable due to its
size and massing, and have a detrimental affect on the amenity of neighbouring residents.
The application is a resubmission of a previously refused application. The applications are
identical. The resubmission has failed to address the issues raised by the first application,
which regard to size and massing would have an overbearing and overshadowing impact
on the amenity of the neighbouring residents.
CONCLUSION
The proposal fails to comply with policy HE4 of the Council’s Supplementary Planning
Document on House Extensions and policy DES7 of the Adopted UDP. I consider the size
and siting of the proposed extension would have an unacceptable overbearing and
overshadowing impact on neighbouring residents residing at 11 Stanley Road. The
resubmission has failed to overcome the previous reasons for refusal therefore the outcome
remains the same. I therefore recommend that the application be refused.
RECOMMENDATION:
Refuse For the following Reasons:
1. The two storey side extension, by virtue of its size and siting, would have an
unacceptable overbearing and overshadowing impact on the neighbouring residents
living at 11 Stanley Road, contrary to Policy DES7 of the Salford Unitary Development
Plan, and HE4 of Supplementary Planning Document - House Extensions.
APPLICATION No:
06/53429/TEL56
APPLICANT:
T-Mobile (UK) Lte
LOCATION:
Pavement At Junction Of Kiwi Street And Churchill Way
Salford 6
111
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
PROPOSAL:
Prior Notification for the installation of a telegraph pole
style monopole to accommodate three antennas with GRP
shroud (overall height 12m) with associated radio
equipment housing and ancillary development
WARD:
Langworthy
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application would be situated at the back of a public footpath on Churchill Way, at its
junction with Kiwi Street. To the rear of the footpath is a small area of open space. The
area is predominantly residential in nature.
The proposal seeks to erect a 12m telegraph style monopole to accommodate three
antennas with GRP shroud, two equipment cabinets and ancillary development. The
associated cabinets would measure approximately 0.5m wide, 0.6m deep, 1.2m high and
0.9m wide, 0.6m deep and 1.2m high.
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 8th September 2006.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
Flats 1 – 8 Clementine Court
Flats 1, 11-16, 21-26, 31-36, 41-46, 51-56, 61-66, 71-76, 81-86, 91-96, 101-106,
111-116, 121-126, 131-136, 141-146, 151-156, 161-166 Cherry Tree Court
Cherry Tree Court, Kiwi Street
2 Churchill Way
1 – 11 (odds) Coconut Grove
Northern Counties Housing Association, Cherry Tree Court, 1 Kiwi Street
Dentist Surgery, Churchill Way
REPRESENTATIONS
An objection has been received from Councillor Warmisham stating that the proposal does
not fit in with the long term plans for the area.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
DEV1 – Telecommunications.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
112
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
The main planning issues relating to this application are the need for the installation, any
health issues resulting from the installation and the visual impact of the installation on the
amenity of the area.
Policy DEV1 of the UDP states that proposals for telecommunications development will
only be permitted where a number of criteria are met, the proposal should not have an
unacceptable impact on visual or residential amenity, the operator should demonstrate
compliance with all relevant ICNIRP standards, there is a need for the development, the
rationale for site selection has been outlined and where pre-application discussions have
taken place.
The applicant has provided coverage plots that demonstrate what the existing coverage is
in the area. This information shows that there is a gap in the existing level of third
generation coverage for the area, and therefore the applicant has demonstrated that there is
a need for the proposed installation.
In accordance with Policy DEV1, the applicants have submitted a declaration which shows
that the proposed equipment complies with ICNIRP public exposure guidelines. I am
therefore satisfied that sufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that there
should be no adverse health implications as a result of this proposal.
The applicants have demonstrated that a number of other sites have been investigated in the
surrounding area, but were either not feasible as they would not provide adequate coverage
or permission to locate there was refused. These include:
Site sharing existing H3G pole on Liverpool Street and O2 pole on Fitzwarren Court,
Rosehill Close.
Existing structures at Peach Tree Court, Apple Tree Court, Cherry Tree Court, Lilac
Court, Plum Tree Court, The Winston Public House, Job Centre Churchill Way and
NHS Health centre, Churchill Way.
Potential locations – Liverpool Street Sports Ground, Liverpool Street Streetworks,
‘Fit City’, Liverpool Street and Streetworks Installations, Churchill Way.
I consider that in visual terms this proposal is acceptable. It is proposed that the equipment
housing be painted dark green (RAL 6009), this would be reinforced through the
attachment of a condition. The monopole would be 12m in height and would have the
appearance of a wooden telegraph pole. The proposal would be situated at the back of the
public footpath. There are street lights in the vicinity measuring approximately 12m in
height. The proposal would be 35m from the closest residential property. The imitation
telegraph pole would be viewed in conjunction with a number of lighting columns in the
vicinity and given the proposed design I would not consider the proposal to be an obtrusive
feature in the street scene and therefore, it would not, in my opinion, have an adverse
impact upon the amenity of the area.
113
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
CONCLUSION
The main planning issues relating to this application are the need for the installation, any
health issues resulting from the installation and the visual impact of the installation on the
amenity of the area. The applicant has submitted a declaration, which shows that the
proposed equipment complies with ICNIRP public exposure guidelines and so I have no
objection on health grounds. I am satisfied that there is a need for an installation in this
area and that the development proposed would not have a detrimental impact on the
amenity of the area. The proposal therefore complies with DEV1 of the adopted UDP. I
therefore recommend that the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning
with the date of this permission.
2. The equipment housing shall be painted with the approved colour (Dark Green RAL
6009) within 3 months of its erection, and maintained thereafter.
3. No development shall be started until a sample of the material to be used for the
monopole has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority, the development shall only be constructed using the approved material.
(Reasons)
1. Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990.
2. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the
City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
3. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the
City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
114
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
115
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 5th October 2006
116