PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL PART I SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 19 November 2009 APPLICATION No: 09/57433/FUL APPLICANT: Mr Abea Alsaid Alzeabi LOCATION: 283 -285 Liverpool Road, Eccles, M30 0QN, PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey rear extension, installation of a new window and door on the Vine St elevation, removal of two chimneys and retention of a door and access gate on the Vine St elevation WARD: Barton Background This application relates to an end terraced property located at 283 Liverpool Road in Eccles and the first floor of the adjoining property at 285 Liverpool Road. Until approximately one year ago the ground floor of 283 Liverpool Road was used a hot food takeaway with ancillary living accommodation above - this accommodation extended above the adjoining restaurant/takeaway at 285 Liverpool Road. The application property is currently undergoing extensive renovation in order to allow the ground floor of 283 Liverpool Road to be used as a hot food takeaway and a cafe, which share kitchen facilities, with an ancillary flat above. As part of the renovation, various internal works have been undertaken, resulting in the premises being virtually gutted. A series of external works have also been undertaken, mainly on the Vine Street elevation - a steel gate has also been installed and a new door has been installed in an existing opening. This application seeks consent to regularise the external works undertaken as well as seeking consent to erect a two storey rear extension and to insert a new door and window into existing openings on the Vine Street elevation. There have been numerous complaints about the work that has been undertaken with neighbours raising concerns over the quality of the work that has been undertaken, the structural stability of the building, the hours of working, the fact that development is being carried out without obtaining planning permission and building regulations consent and the fact that those at 285 and 287 Liverpool Road have has their rear access blocked by the installation of the gate. In order to address the concerns raised by neighbours the various departments of the Council including Environmental Services, Highways, Planning and Building Control have been involved as have the Health and Safety Executive and Greater Manchester Fire Service. Description of Site and Surrounding Area This application relates to an end terraced property located at 283 Liverpool Road in Eccles and the first floor of the adjoining property at 285 Liverpool Road. The premises are currently undergoing renovation, having last been used as a ground floor takeaway with ancillary living accommodation above. The application site is located within a mixed use area - there is an Indian restaurant/takeaway at 285 Liverpool Road (ground floor), a bedroom shop at 287 Liverpool Road, a Chinese takeaway at 289 Liverpool Road and two vacant retail units at 291 and 293 Liverpool Road. Travis Perkins, the building supplier, has a store located at 281 Liverpool Road and a terrace of two storey residential 1 units occupies the land opposite the site at 280 to 286 Liverpool Road. The land to the rear of the site is occupied by an industrial unit. Description of Proposal Planning permission is sought to retain an access gate and a door that have been installed on the Vine Street elevation. The new door has been installed in an existing opening. Consent is also sought for the erection of a two-storey rear extension, to raise and re-roof the existing two-storey outrigger and to insert a new door and window into existing openings on the Vine Street elevation. It is also proposed to remove two chimneys. The proposed two-storey extension would project 2.5m from the rear elevation of the property at 283 Liverpool Road, along which it would run for 3m. It would measure 6.4m in height at the eaves and 7.5m in height at the ridge with a pitched roof that would extend over the existing 6.4m high two-storey outrigger. With regard to the proposal to use the ground floor as a hot food takeaway and a café, it should be noted that permission is not required for the use of the ground floor as a hot food takeaway and a café, as the two uses share a kitchen and therefore the proposal is not resulting in the creation of a separate planning unit. Site History Application 01/42956/COU for the use of the ground floor of 283 Liverpool Road as a hot food takeaway was approved subject to conditions in October 2001. Publicity Site Notice: Article 8 site notice Date Displayed: 24 September 2009 Press Advert: Not Applicable Neighbour Notification The following neighbours have been notified of the application281, 285, 287 and 289 Liverpool Road 280, 282, 284 and 286 Liverpool Road 3 Eliza Ann Street 6-8 Vine Street Representations Four letters of objection have been received in response to this application including one that is signed by each of the occupants of the residential units at 280-286 Liverpool Road. In addition there has been a significant amount of email correspondence from the occupant of 235 Liverpool Road. 2 There are also three letters from occupiers of other properties on Liverpool Road stating, in passing, that they do not have any objections to the proposal. The following issues have been raised The works undertaken, including the creation of new openings on the Vine Street elevation and the installation of 3 roller shutters, has resulted in the building becoming structurally unsound and damage has been caused to 285 Liverpool Road. The works that have been undertaken have been carried out despite the HSE issuing an order banning further work on site Works are being undertaken at all hours of the day and night resulting in disturbance to neighbours The works that have been carried out have been done with obtaining planning permission or building regulations approval The gate that has been installed blocks the emergency access for those at 285 and 287 and as such it is a fire hazard. It also prevents those at 285 and 287 being able to take their rubbish out. A traffic sign has been removed from Vine Street making the traffic order invalid. Loss of light Loss of view The proposed extension will increase the number of people living in the flat and as such the proposal will result in an increased demand for parking which cannot be met due to the parking restrictions on Vine Street. The proposal will therefore have an adverse impact upon highway safety. Loss of view is not a material planning consideration. With regard to the comments made from one objector regarding the creation of new openings on the Vine Street elevation, the replacement of a rear window with a door to create rear access and the installation of 3 roller shutters the applicant has provided letters from the occupants of 287 Liverpool Road and 6-8 Vine Street which confirm that the openings on the Vine Street elevation were made 5-6 years ago by a previous owner. Letters have also been provided from the occupants of 280, 284, 286 and 287 Liverpool Road and 6-8 Vine Street that confirm the roller shutters have been in situ for 67years. In these circumstances these alterations benefit from deemed consent. Only the new door requires retrospective consent as this has been in place for less than 4 years. Other issues such as the structural stability of the property, the damage to neighbours properties, the removal of a traffic sign and the works being undertaken despite the HSE issuing an order banning further work on site are not planning issues, rather they are issues for Building Control, Traffic Management and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). All three parties have investigated the issues raised by neighbours and their findings are summarised below Building Control - A Building Regulations application for internal alterations, a new stair and a rear extension was submitted in February 2009. This was rejected but it is possible to build under a rejected building regulations notice provided that the work taking place does not contravene any regulations. Works have been ongoing and regular inspections have taken place. The work undertaken to date is acceptable from a building control perspective - structural calculations have been provided in support of the alterations and have been approved. The plywood structure at the rear is a temporary measure to 3 provide security while building work takes place. An inspection of 285 Liverpool Road did not shown any significant structural damage - this property appears to be structurally sound. It is between Mr Alzeabi and the owner of 285 Liverpool Road to agree on how to resolve any structural damage that has taken place through the party wall act or other legal means. Traffic Management - The sign that has been removed was a no waiting at any time sign. Under the Traffic Sign Regulations this sign is now redundant and would have had to be removed anyway. Consequently it is not proposed to take any action against Mr Alzeabi. HSE - A Prohibition Notice was served on the applicant, Mr Alzeabi, on the 15th April 2009, which prevented him from carrying out further construction work unless he is working under the direct supervision of a competent person. The HSE have visited the site on a number of occasions since the prohibition notice was served and they have advised that the only activities that have been carried out by Mr Alzeabi himself are minor works under the supervision of his main contractor - AMCO construction. Consequently they have no reason to believe that Mr Alzeabi is not working in accordance with the conditions of the contravention notice. Consultations Miller Goodall Environmental Services Limited - No objections. Head of Engineering and Highways - No objections. Urban Vision Environment - No objections. Main Drainage - No objections. Highways - No objections. Urban Vision Environment - No objections. Planning Policy Framework Development Plan Policy UDP DES1 - Respecting Context UDP DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours UDP DES8 - Alterations and Extensions UDP A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled UDP A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Park Appraisal Policy DES1 states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness. Policy DES8 states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area. 4 The proposed two-storey rear extension would project 2.5m from the rear elevation of 283 Liverpool Road along which it would run for 3m. It would measure 6.4m in height at the eaves and 7.5m in height at the ridge with a pitched roof that would extend over the existing 6.4m high two-storey outrigger. The extension is of a simple design that would respect the existing building and it would be constructed using matching materials in order to ensure it would not form an incongruous feature upon the building or in the locality. The windows and doors that would be inserted on the Vine Street elevation will match those in the existing building. Consequently, it is not considered that the introduction of the proposed extension, the raising and re-roofing of the existing outrigger or the introduction of new doors and windows on the Vine Street elevation would have an adverse impact upon the visual amenities of the area. Nor are there any objections to the removal of the two chimneys either as this work would not have an adverse impact upon the character or appearance of the building. Similarly, there are no visual amenity issues with the access gate that has been installed. Policy DES7 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. The property at 283-285 Liverpool Road is bounded on three sides by commercial uses. The closest residential properties are located at 280-286 Liverpool Road, opposite the application site. The proposals would not result in the unit coming any closer to the residential units at 280-286 Liverpool Road nor would it introduce overlooking where it did not exist previously. It is considered therefore that the proposal would not have an adverse impact upon the residential amenity the occupants of 280286 Liverpool Road can reasonably enjoy. With regard to the issues neighbours have raised over the hours of working, Environmental Protection have investigated activities at the application site in order to ascertain whether a statutory noise nuisance exists. This was done by installing noise monitoring equipment at 285 Liverpool Road on the 3/6/2009 for 7 days. Analysis of the recordings made did not indicate statutory nuisance had occurred. Following the installation of the equipment further complaints were received and complainants were provided with diary sheets asking for 7 days (normally 14) details of alleged nuisance, to support installation of the noise equipment, however none of these were returned and consequently the case was closed. With regard to car parking UDP Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s maximum standards. The proposed extension would result in a 7.5sqm increase in floorspace. The extension would incorporate a staircase and it would also provide a small storage area for the takeaway/cafe and the ancillary residential flat. The extension would not facilitate an increase in the active commercial floorspace nor would it allow the number of bedrooms in the ancillary flat to be increased and in fact the proposal would see the number of bedrooms in the flat being reduced from three to two. Consequently taking into account the opening hours of the takeaway/cafe - 8am till midnight - and the reduced number of bedrooms that will be provided in the ancillary flat, it is not considered that the proposal would result in a significant increase in the demand for car parking. In these circumstances it is not considered that the proposal would have an adverse impact upon highway safety. 5 Policy A2 of the UDP states: "Development that would result in the diversion or extinguishment of an existing public right of way will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that adequate levels of access for the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists will be maintained to, around and where appropriate, through the site". The gate that has been installed on the Vine Street elevation does not affect any public rights of way. It has, however, been erected at the end of a passage proving rear access to the properties at 283, 285 and 287 Liverpool Road. At the request of a Greater Manchester Fire Officer, the gate has been fitted with a lock, which allows it to be opened and closed from Vine Street and within the alleyway. Occupants of the properties at 285 and 287 have been provided with a key to the gate in order to allow access and have confirmed in writing that this is the case. Having regard to the open nature of the alleyway the fire officer has confirmed that he is happy with the gate from a fire safety perspective. Conclusions It is considered that proposed two-storey rear extension, the alterations to the roof and the works to the Vine Street elevation comply with the relevant policies of the Adopted UDP and there are no material considerations to outweigh this. It is therefore recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions. Recommendation Approve 1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 2. The facing materials to be used for the external elevations of the development shall be the same type, colour and texture as those of the existing building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 6 APPLICATION No: 09/58238/CLUD APPLICANT: Mr Robert Purvis LOCATION: Creamline Dairies, Weymouth Road, Eccles, M30 8WL, PROPOSAL: Application for a lawful development certificate in relation to condition 4 (operating hours) of planning application 96/35092/FUL WARD: Winton Description of Site and Surrounding Area The site to which the application relates stands at the end of Weymouth Road in Eccles and is occupied by Creamline Dairies. The application site is formed from two separate parcels of land, which is to the north and south of Weymouth Road. To the end of the road, there are a number of light industrial units, however along the majority of the length of Weymouth Road at its access with Gee Lane are semi detached dwellings. The site currently accommodates the offices and ancillary refrigeration space associated with the working of the dairy. The site is bounded to the north by the M602 motorway. Description of Proposal The application before members for consideration is for a Certificate of Lawfulness with respect to the hours of processing within the site. As can be seen from the planning history section below, and as Members will recall, there has been a number of planning permissions on the site in recent years, the most recent to be considered being 09/57654/CLUD (considered on 15.10.2009) which is currently subject to an appeal against nondetermination to be determined by the Planning Inspectorate on behalf of the Secretary of State. Members were minded to approve this certificate in part on the basis of hours of processing but not in relation to hours of deliveries based on the evidence submitted by three employees of the Dairy in the form of sworn declarations. Due to the appeal being lodged with the Planning Inspectorate members were unable to make a decision on the certificate and were only ‘minded’ to approve this part of the application. This application has now been submitted to allow members to formally grant the certificate on the basis of the previous resolution and arguments put forward by the applicant in terms of processing. This will allow this part of the appeal to be omitted from consideration by the Inspector, and for only the evidence submitted in relation to deliveries being considered at the Inquiry. What Is A Certificate Of Lawfulness And What Matters Can Be Taken Into Account As has been previously set out for the benefit of the panel, a certificate of lawfulness is a certificate, granted under section 191 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (“TCPA”), that establishes that a use, operational development or breach of condition is lawful. 7 A breach of condition is lawful where the breach of condition has become immune from enforcement action. A breach of condition will become immune from enforcement where (i) the breach does not constitute a breach of an enforcement notice then in force (Members should note that no enforcement notice has been issued in the present case), and (ii) the breach of condition has been continuous for 10 years, and (iii) the breach of condition continues to the date of the application. When dealing with a certificate of lawful use or development members cannot take into account the planning merits of a case. A decision on such a matter must be taken as a matter of law, on the basis of information available at the time of decision. When reaching their decision, Members should have regard to paragraph 8.15 of Circular 10/97 (“the Circular”). In summary, that paragraph states that the burden of proof is on the Applicant to show, on the balance of probabilities, that the breach of planning control is immune from enforcement. Therefore, the Applicant must show, on the balance of probabilities, that the breach of condition has been continuous for 10 years, and that the breach continues at the date of the application. Circular 10/97 goes on to say that 'If the Local Planning Authority have no evidence of their own, or from others, to contradict or otherwise make the appellant's version of events less than probable, there is no good reason to refuse the application, provided (emphasis added) the applicant's evidence alone is sufficiently precise and unambiguous (emphasis added) to justify the grant of a certificate "on the balance of probability".' The Circular also confirms that neither the identity of the Applicant (except to the extent that he or she may or may not be able personally to confirm the accuracy of any claim being made about the history of a parcel of land), nor the planning merits of the activity being carried on, are relevant to the consideration of the purely legal issues which are involved in determining an application. Thus, from the above is clear in that there are 2 no. matters to consider:1. 2. Is the evidence submitted by the applicants sufficiently precise and unambiguous to demonstrate on the balance of probability that the breach has occurred continuously for at least a 10-year period and continues to the date of the application? Is there evidence available to the Council that contradicts the Applicant’s version of events or otherwise make the appellant’s version of events less than probable such that the Applicant has not demonstrated, on the balance of probability, that the breaches of condition are lawful? The applicant claims, in line with the previous certificate application that the site has operated between the hours of 6am to 7pm Monday to Friday and 6am to 6pm on Saturdays and 9am to 6pm on Sundays and Bank Holidays including Christmas, Boxing and New Years Day. Condition 6 of application 96/35092/FUL states that 'The processing of milk shall only take place between the hours of 7am to 7pm on Mondays to Fridays and between 9am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays' 8 The applicant is seeking to demonstrate that they have operated in breach of the above conditions such that a Certificate is granted for processing to allow the following additional hours: (i) (ii) (iii) 6am – 7am Mondays to Fridays 6am – 9am Saturdays and Bank Holidays (excluding Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Years Day) 6pm – 7pm Saturdays and Bank Holidays (excluding Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Years Day) (for the avoidance of doubt the applicant is seeking to demonstrate that they have operated in terms of processing 1 hour before the times in the condition Monday to Friday, and 3 hours before and 1 hour after the times in the condition on Saturdays and Bank Holidays excluding Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Years Day). Site History In 1996, planning permission was granted for the erection of two buildings to house milk filling, processing & distribution together with new vehicular access & associated car parking and traffic calming measures (96/35092/FUL) This application was approved with conditions. This application sought to rationalise the northern parcel of land to create a total of 57 car parking spaces, 35 of which would for milk floats and the remainder of which were for staff parking. The main office, workshop and large refrigeration unit were to be retained and continue to be utilised. One storage building was demolished. The existing access was improved and gated under this application. The majority of the works under this application took place on the southern parcel of land belonging to the dairy. These works included the erection of a milk filling, processing and distribution plant where raw milk would arrive in tankers, be processed and then be distributed as bottled milk. The building is L-shaped and sited against the entire eastern, southern and part western boundaries of the site. The part of the building on the southern boundary houses a production compressor, boiler plant, two raw milk silos, water silo, tanker reception area, milk processing area and bottling hall. Offices and a finished milk gallery also formed part of this application. The easterly edge of the site houses a large fridge with associated compressor room and a produce store. Following this grant of planning permission a further application was received in 2000 (00/40581/FUL) for the erection of a single storey extension to the existing offices on the southern parcel of land. This application was approved and implemented. Later in 2000 another application was received for the siting of two linked portable office buildings (00/41314/FUL). This was permitted with no restriction on operations/deliveries. In 2008 an application was received by the City Council, for the erection of two light industrial units and a tunnel under Weymouth Road, linking the two parts of the site. The application was subsequently amended omitting the tunnel and one of the units. The proposal involved the demolition of the industrial unit to the western part of the northern parcel of land and the erection of a refrigeration unit to store milk once it has been processed. The building was designed to allow tankers to reverse up to and be loaded directly from five large loading bays. 9 This application was approved with a condition relating to operations on site, which stated: Except for access, the operation of the site, including loading and unloading shall only take place between the hours of 7am to 7pm Monday to Friday and 9am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays. Members may recall that the reason for attaching this condition was due to neighbours experiencing disturbance from lorries and their refrigeration units whilst waiting on Weymouth Road for the site to open. This condition was designed to allow entry to the site to remove lorries from the highway but to still restrict processing and loading/unloading. It was considered that this would reduce the impact upon residents in terms of noise disturbance. This application was approved by members on the 22nd January 2009, but has to date, never been implemented. 09/57654/CLUD - Application for a lawful development certificate in relation to condition 4 (operating hours) and condition 6 (milk processing) of planning application 96/35092/FUL Split decision, members minded to authorise certificate in relation to processing but not for deliveries. There are a number of other applications, which relate to this site, namely: E13261 – Erection of building to house electricity terminal (Approved December 1981) E18274 – Erection of building for use as a milk store (Approved March 1985) ENFORCEMENT HISTORY Complaint: Reference: Date: Outcome: occurred Possible breach of condition in relation to hours of operation. 03/00147/BRCOND May 2003 No action was taken although it was unclear whether a breach of planning control had Complaint: highway Reference: Date: Outcome: occurred Possible breach of condition in relation to hours of operation and/or cars parking on 03/00324/BRCOND September 2003 No action was taken although it was unclear whether a breach of planning control had Complaint: Conveyor belt overhanging the highway, outside of boundary. Reference: 03/00361/DEVWPP Date: September 2003 Outcome: Site visit confirmed the conveyor belt was within the curtilage and not overhanging the highway. No action taken. Appraisal In support of the application, as with the previous application, the applicant has provided evidence in the form of three sworn declarations from existing employees who have worked at the company for 10 over ten years. That evidence is from a Mr A Coxon, the Production Manager (Statement A), and Mr R Purvis the Joint Managing Director (Statement B) and Mr D J Salter the Transport Manager (Statement C). Notwithstanding the lack of contrary evidence from third parties which is one element that the Local Planning Authority must consider members must still be satisfied that the evidence which is available i.e. the three sworn statements from staff of Creamline Dairies is sufficiently precise and unambiguous to demonstrate on the balance of probability that the breach has occurred continuously for at least a 10 year period and continues to the date of the application. In this regard the report will hereby set out the submitted evidence with respect to condition 4, and identifies areas of concern with respect to whether such evidence is sufficiently precise and unambiguous. It must be noted that the evidence and recommendations set out below are identical to those considered by Panel on the 15.10.2009 Processing The evidence submitted in terms of processing is set out below, taking each declaration in turn, it is important to note that processing may involve several different elements, such as for example pasteurisation and bottling process. The original condition 4 of the 1996 permission fails to identify the full process to which the condition refers, but in any event a reasonable judgement can be taken. For the avoidance of doubt comments in the brackets are statements which form part of the professional officers assessment of the submitted evidence. Statement A: (Coxon) Original and revised statement Since October 1998 processing has begun no later than 6am Monday to Saturdays with no change on account of Bank Holidays except Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Years Day (It is noted that no reference is made to Sundays). No processing has taken place on Christmas, Boxing and New Years Day The latest that processing would start was 6am It is noted that no reference is made to processing taking place between 6pm – 7pm on Saturdays or bank holidays. Statement B: (Purvis) States staff were picking and loading from 5am onwards (It is noted that there is ambiguity as to whether picking and loading is part of the processing referred to in the condition) Drawing on the evidence of Messrs Coxon and Salter, it is stated that the processing of milk has been commencing no later than 6am Monday to Saturday each week since October 1998 (It is noted that no reference is made to Sundays, or processing taking place between 6pm – 7pm on Saturdays or bank holidays) Statement C (Salter) From October 1998 until 2003 vehicles were regularly going out fully loaded for bulk dispatch of bottled milk to customers from 6am every day Monday to Saturday with no exception on Bank Holidays except for Christmas and New Years Day when there were no deliveries. (It is 11 noted that whilst bottling is referred to it is not known when it was bottled, not necessarily that morning, and therefore nor precise and unambiguous). On the basis of the three statements it remains the view that the processing of milk has occurred from 6.00am Mondays to Saturdays and Bank Holidays (except for Christmas Day, Boxing Day, and New Years Day) continuously from 1998. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary for what is essentially an ‘internal’ operation within the buildings on site, and in being mindful that significant weight must be attached to a statutory declaration, it is considered that on the balance of probabilities with the evidence available, that processing has been undertaken in breach of the condition for a continuous ten-year period, and that there should be no objection to the certificate in this regard. However, the available evidence is not clear and unambiguous with respect to evening operations i.e. after 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays. Moreover no reference is made to Sunday working, such that it is in breach of the original condition. Conclusions/Summary Having regard to the above and the previous resolution of the Panel, it is recommended in full accordance with the previous resolution that the certificate be granted to allow the processing of milk shall hereby only take place on the site edged red on the attached plan between the hours of 6.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. Monday to Friday, including Bank Holidays but except Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Year’s Day, and 6.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. on Saturdays and 9.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. on Sundays.’ Recommendation Authorise 1. The processing of milk shall only take place on the site edged red on the attached plan between the hours of 6.am to 7.00pm Monday to Friday (including Bank Holidays but excluding Christmas, Boxing and New Years Day) and 6 am to 6pm on Saturdays and 9am to 6pm on Sundays. 12 APPLICATION No: 09/58239/FUL APPLICANT: Mr Robert Purvis LOCATION: Creamline Dairies, Weymouth Road, Eccles, M30 8WL, PROPOSAL: Variation of Condition 6 to allow deliveries between the hours of 7am and 7pm on any day (planning permission 96/35092/FUL) WARD: Winton Description of Site and Surrounding Area The site to which the application relates stands at the end of Weymouth Road in Eccles and is occupied by Creamline Dairies. The application site is formed from two separate parcels of land, which are to the north and south of Weymouth Road. To the end of the road, there are a number of light industrial units, however along the majority of the length of Weymouth Road at from its access with Gee Lane are semi detached dwellings. The site currently accommodates the offices and ancillary refrigeration space associated with the working of the dairy. The site is bounded to the north by the M602 motorway. Description of Proposal The application before members is for the variation of condition 6 of planning application 96/35092/FUL which states: ‘deliveries of raw milk and bulk dispatch of bottled milk shall only occur between the hours of 7.30am and 7pm on any day’ The applicant requires the condition to be varied to allow deliveries of raw milk and bulk dispatch of bottled milk between the hours of 7am and 7pm on any day, thus enabling them to take deliveries 30 minutes earlier than the existing planning permission allows. Site History In 1996, planning permission was granted for the erection of two buildings to house milk filling, processing & distribution together with new vehicular access & associated car parking and traffic calming measures (96/35092/FUL) This application was approved with conditions. This application sought to rationalise the northern parcel of land to create a total of 57 car parking spaces, 35 of which would for milk floats and the remainder of which were for staff parking. The main office, workshop and large refrigeration unit were to be retained and continue to be utilised. One storage building was demolished. The existing access was improved and gated under this application. The majority of the works under this application took place on the southern parcel of land belonging to the dairy. These works included the erection of a milk filling, processing and distribution plant where 13 raw milk would arrive in tankers, be processed and then be distributed as bottled milk. The building is L-shaped and sited against the entire eastern, southern and part western boundaries of the site. The part of the building on the southern boundary houses a production compressor, boiler plant, two raw milk silos, water silo, tanker reception area, milk processing area and bottling hall. Offices and a finished milk gallery also formed part of this application. The easterly edge of the site houses a large fridge with associated compressor room and a produce store. Following this grant of planning permission a further application was received in 2000 (00/40581/FUL) for the erection of a single storey extension to the existing offices on the southern parcel of land. This application was approved and implemented. Later in 2000 another application was received for the siting of two linked portable office buildings (00/41314/FUL). This was permitted with no restriction on operations/deliveries. In 2008 an application was received by the City Council, for the erection of two light industrial units and a tunnel under Weymouth Road, linking the two parts of the site. The application was subsequently amended omitting the tunnel and one of the units. The proposal involved the demolition of the industrial unit to the western part of the northern parcel of land and the erection of a refrigeration unit to store milk once it has been processed. The building was designed to allow tankers to reverse up to and be loaded directly from five large loading bays. This application was approved with a condition relating to operations on site which stated: Except for access, the operation of the site, including loading and unloading shall only take place between the hours of 7am to 7pm Monday to Friday and 9am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays. Members may recall that the reason for attaching this condition was due to neighbours experiencing disturbance from lorries and their refrigeration units whilst waiting on Weymouth Road for the site to open. This condition was designed to allow entry to the site to remove lorries from the highway but to still restrict processing and loading/unloading. It was considered that this would reduce the impact upon residents in terms of noise disturbance. This application was approved by members on the 22nd January 2009, but has to date, never been implemented. There are a number of other applications, which relate to this site, namely: E13261 – Erection of building to house electricity terminal (Approved December 1981) E18274 – Erection of building for use as a milk store (Approved March 1985) Publicity Site Notice: Not Applicable Press Advert: Not Applicable 14 Neighbour Notification Neighbours were notified on the 6th November 2009. The following neighbours were notified: 2,30,46,48,50,52,55,57,59, 61 Weymouth Road Antonelli Brothers Limited, 54 Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8FB, T S Hattersley And Son Limited, 63 Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8TH, Bridgewater Metals, Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8BT, APR Windows, Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8BT, BKW, Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8SH, Ace Scaffolding, Bridgewater Park, Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8NW, Unit 1-3 Bridgewater Park, Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8NN, 9-15 Lulworth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8WP, 34 _ 24 Lulworth Road Representations No letters of representation have been received to date Consultations The Chief Executive - Economic Development - No comments to date. Highways - No objections. Planning Policy Framework Development Plan Policy UDP DES1 - Respecting Context UDP A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled UDP DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours UDP A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network Appraisal Members will recall an application for the erection of one light industrial unit on the northern parcel of land at Creamline Dairies (Ref: 08/55964/FUL) was approved on the 22nd January 2009. This permission has not been implemented but remains extant. This application was approved subject to conditions, one of which was as follows: ‘Except for access, the operation of the site, including loading and unloading shall only take place between the hours of 7am to 7pm Mondays to Fridays and between 9am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays’. Members will recall that the main issue associated with this site is the disturbance caused to nearby local residents from vehicles traveling along Weymouth Road and waiting outside the site until such a time as it opens and from engines and refrigeration units labouring outside their houses in the early hours of the morning. 15 The applicant now requires a variation of the condition to allow deliveries to and from the site on any day from 7am to 7pm. As the condition from permission 08/55964/FUL allows deliveries on weekdays between the hours of 7am to 7pm it is considered that permitting this through this variation of condition would have no additional impact than that which could occur should the 2008 permission be implemented. The variation of condition however, would permit deliveries to and from the site one hour later on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays than the 2008 permission but only 30 minutes earlier and no later than they can at present under the 1996 permission, under which the site operates at present. Members will recall that at a recent meeting of the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel, they were minded to authorise a certificate for processing operations on the site between the hours of 6am to 7pm on most days. It is considered that permitting deliveries to enter the site earlier in the morning would not have any significant impact upon the amenities of neighbours, because at present lorries are still arriving at the site, but due to the restrictions imposed by condition 4 of application 96/35092/FUL which states: ‘Deliveries of raw milk and bulk dispatch of bottled milk shall only occur between the hours of 7.30am and 7pm on any day’. Under this condition they are unable to enter the site and as such remain on the highway causing disturbance to neighbours as a result of labouring engines/refrigeration units. This issue was addressed through the careful wording of condition 10 of planning permission 08/55964/FUL, which states: 'Except for access, the operation of the site, including loading and unloading shall only take place between the hours of 7am to 7pm Monday to Friday and between 9am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays' This condition was intended to remove the issue of vehicles waiting on Weymouth Road and causing disturbance to local residents, and although the permission has not been implemented to date, should the development be commenced, then vehicles could lawfully enter the site from 7am onwards in any case, providing a fall back position. For these reasons it is considered that by allowing delivery vehicles to enter the site earlier than is possible at present, the impact upon residents in relation to the amount of noise and disturbance experienced would in fact be reduced. Conclusions/Summary It is in being mindful that the City Council has previously accepted deliveries from 7am and vehicles entering the site (albeit this permission is extant but not implemented), it is recommended that a variation of condition 6 of application 96/35092/FUL is permitted to allow deliveries of raw milk and bulk dispatch of bottled milk between the hours of 7am to 7pm on any day. Therefore the recommendation to members is that a variation of condition 6 of application 96/35092/FUL is permitted to allow deliveries of raw milk and bulk dispatch of bottled milk between the hours of 7am to 7pm on any day. 16 Recommendation Approve 1. Deliveries of raw milk and bulk dispatch bottled milk shall not take place except from between the hours of 7am to 7pm on any day. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 2. The processing of milk shall only take place between the hours of 7am to 7pm on Mondays to Friday and between 9am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 3. The rating level of noise emitted from the application site shall not exceed 45dBL Aeq (5 minutes) between the hours stated in condition 2 and 40dBL Aeq (5 minutes) at any other time as measured at the nearest residential property. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 4. The parking spaces shown on the approved plan(s) shall always remain available at all times in connection with the use of the premises to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A 8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. Notes to Applicant 1. 2. This permission shall relate to the amended plan received on the 14th June 1996 which shows enclosure of spare bottle store The applicant is made aware that condition 2 of this permission has been superceded by 09/58238/CLUD 17 APPLICATION No: 09/58128/FUL APPLICANT: Turris Ltd LOCATION: The Lime Kilns, Stablefold, Worsley, M28 2EA, , PROPOSAL: Variation of condition 3 (Landscaping) and 13 (Viewing Platform) of planning permission 00/41647/FUL WARD: Worsley Description of Site and Surrounding Area The application site relates to an area of land partly within and partly adjacent to the Worsley Village Conservation Area. The site is bounded to the north by the Bridgewater Canal and towpath, to the south and east by the Barton Arms public house and residential properties on Stablefold, to the west by Worsley Brook and the Granary Office buildings. The development site has already been built out in line with the plans approved under planning permission 00/41647/FUL Site History In May 2002 the site was granted planning permission subject to conditions for the erection of 14 flats in two four storey blocks, together with the formation of a new vehicular access, laying out of the car parking and associated open space. The site has recently been the subject of planning enforcement action, which has resulted in the submission of this application. A summary of the relevant enforcement action is detailed below: Section 215 Notice A complaint was received regarding the untidy state of the Lime Kilns area which appeared to have been being used use for the storage of site waste and an area of land which was intended to be used as car parking but was being used for the storage of two shipping containers. A formal s215 notice was served on the landowners of the site that required the shipping containers to be removed and the area of the Lime Kilns to be cleared and maintained in a tidy state. This notice was not complied with by the landowners and as a result the Council sought a formal prosecution on this matter. Following an initial hearing in court a provisional date for trial was agreed for 1st December 2009. In the interim period before this date Council Officers met with the landowners to discuss the specific works required to be undertaken to comply with this notice. Since this meeting the Lime Kilns have been cleared to a satisfactory standard and the shipping containers have also been removed. It is for this reason that the Council has now ceased prosecution for the non-compliance of the s215 notice. The landowners are aware of their requirement to maintain these areas of land in a tidy state and if for 18 any reason the site were to become untidy again then the Council is able to continue with enforcement action. Breach of Condition Notice The breach of condition notice was the result of an investigation into the site rather than as a direct result of a neighbour complaint. The notice related to the non-compliance of 3 pre-commencement conditions relating to landscaping, car parking and the installation of a viewing platform at the site. Again, this notice was not complied with by the landowners and as a result the Council sought a formal prosecution on this matter. Following an initial hearing in court a provisional date for trial was agreed for 1st December 2009. Background This application has been submitted in order to try and identify the remaining issues in complying with the planning conditions on the original consent. The wording of the original conditions and the need for additional archaeological work to be undertaken prior to complying with the conditions in respect of landscaping and the viewing platform is not reflected in the original wording. It is considered by the applicant that the splitting up of the landscaping consent to allow for the implementation of a landscaping scheme around the wider site whilst an archaeological survey is undertaken on the Lime Kilns will ensure the most expedient resolution of the breach of the landscaping condition. In addition the applicants consider that condition 13 of the original consent, which required details of a viewing platform and information boards to be provided prior to the commencement of development needs to be revisited. Description of Proposal This application seeks to vary conditions 3 and 13 of planning consent 00/41647/FUL, which are as follows: Condition 3 (original) The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme, which shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Development Services before development is started. Such scheme shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary and surface treatment and shall be carried out within 12 months of the commencement of development and thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services. Condition 3 (proposed by applicant) The site, excluding the Lime Kilns, shown highlighted yellow on drawing no. 2072.01 rev K(i) shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme submitted to and approved by the Director of Development Services. The landscape scheme to be submitted to the Director for approval within one calendar month of the planning permission hereby granted. The scheme to 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 directors approval of the scheme. Thereafter, the landscaping shall be maintained to 19 the satisfaction of the local planning authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services. The applicants have also submitted a proposed landscaping scheme for the wider site in accompaniment to this application. Additional Landscaping Condition (proposed by applicant) A landscaping scheme for the area of the Lime Kilns shown highlighted yellow on drawing no. 2072.01 rev Ki shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services within one calendar month of the Director's approval of the archaeological survey submitted as required by condition no. 13. The scheme to 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 Director's approval of the scheme. Thereafter, the landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services. Condition 13 (original) A public viewing platform for the lime kiln which shall be accessible and available for public use at all times, shall be provided within the site together with an information board. Full details of the platform, its siting and access to it, and full details of the information board shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development Services prior to the commencement of development. The platform shall be implemented and available for use before the occupation of the first dwelling hereby approved. Condition 13 (proposed by applicant) Information boards shall be provided adjacent to Barton Road and Bridgwater Canal Tow Path, following removal of the soil form the Lime Kilns and after and archaeological survey has been submitted to the Director of Development Services for approval. The soil removal and archaeological survey to have been carried out and submitted to the Director within 12 months of the planning permission hereby granted. The design for the information board to be submitted for approval by the Director within six months of the approval of the archaeological survey. The information boards to be erected within six months of the Director’s approval of their design. Thereafter the boards to be maintained to the satisfaction of the local planning authority and if damaged or destroyed shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services. Publicity Site Notice: Article 8 site notice Site Notice: Con. Area site notice Date Displayed: 9 November 2009 Press Advert: Salford Advertiser Date Published: 12 November 2009 Reason: Article 8 Standard Press Notice 20 Neighbour Notification 1 - 11 The Granery, 50 Barton Road 1-15 The Lime Kilns 43-53, 59-69 (odds) Barton Road 2-6 (evens) Stablefold Worsley Methodist Church 5,6, 8, 11 Parkstone Lane 21,54 Farm Lane 6 Heathfield 1,14, 28 Ryecroft The Dock House 4, 5 Lowerbrook Lane 35 The Crescent 16 Edenfield 3 The Moorings 15 Lime Grove 18 Greenarce 35 Drywood Avenue 5 Edenfield 19 Shearbrook Lane Representations The earliest decision date for this application is not until 30th November. As a result of the on going enforcement action on the site against the breach of conditions for landscaping and the viewing platform there is a provisional trial date for the non compliance of the breach of condition notice scheduled for the 1st of December. Currently proceedings for this trial have been adjourned until the 24th November where all parties will meet to discuss the case. The reason this application is before the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel in advance of the expiration of the consultation period on this site is to ensure the Council has a resolution on this application in time for the case meeting on 24th November. Whilst the date for the press notice and site notice are yet to expire on the site all nearby residents were consulted on 13th October with a deadline response date of 3rd November, just one letter has been received in response to this consultation with comments as follows: the site is an important historic site which should have visitor access. Consultations English Heritage - No comments received to date. Design For Security - No comments received to date. Main Drainage - No comments received to date. Highways - No comments received to date. Urban Vision Environment - No comments to make. 21 Worsley Civic Trust and Amenity Society - No comments received to date. Worsley Village Community Association - No comments received to date. Manchester Ship Canal Company - No comments received to date. Environment Agency - No objections. Planning Policy Framework Development Plan Policy UDP DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours UDP CH3 - Works Within Conservation Areas UDP CH5 - Archaeology and Ancient Monuments Appraisal It is considered that the main issue for consideration with this application is the implication that the variation of these conditions would have on the residential amenity of the area, the impact on the historic setting of the site and the historic importance of the Lime Kilns and timescales in which the conditions would be complied with. Policy DES9 states that development will be required to incorporate appropriate hard and soft landscaping provision where appropriate. Policy CH3 states that development in conservation areas will only be permitted where it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation area. Policy CH5 states that where planning permission is granted for development that will effect known or suspected remains of local archaeological value, planning conditions will be imposed to secure the recording and evaluation of the remains, if appropriate, their excavation and preservation and/ or its setting. Landscaping (Condition 3) This application seeks to split the existing condition 3 for the landscaping of the site into two parts. The splitting of this condition would enable the wider site to be fully landscaped in advance of the works to the Lime Kilns being undertaken. As part of this application a landscaping scheme which will include the formal planting of beds around the wider site and the treatment of communal areas within site has been submitted and is considered to be acceptable in principle. It is therefore proposed to vary condition 3 as follows: The site, excluding the Lime Kilns, shown highlighted yellow on drawing no. 2072.01 Rev K(i) shall be treated in accordance with the approved landscaping scheme in full as detailed on drawing submitted on the 12th October 2009 at the next available planting season following the date of this decision. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced with the same species within twelve months. 22 This application seeks to address the delay in the landscaping of the site to date. The Lime Kilns area is of significant archaeological and local interest and has the potential to become a designated ancient monument. However in order to establish the exact level of archaeological interest the site may hold an archaeological survey has to be undertaken. The result of this survey will determine how the Lime Kilns are to be treated, could involve excavating the Kilns, landscaping the area or recreating the original Lime Kilns on the site. Since the site has the potential to become a designated ancient monument the outcome of this survey is critical in determining the future of the Lime Kilns. The archaeological survey has not been undertaken to date and as such it is not possible to agree the future works required to the Lime Kilns. The applicant has suggested the addition of a condition to require an archaeological survey to be submitted within 12 months and a scheme detailing the landscaping of the Lime Kilns to be submitted within 1 month of the approval of the archaeological survey with the landscaping scheme to be carried out in full within 12 months. Having considered the proposed variation it is proposed to change the timescales identified within the condition to ensure the expediency of compliance with the condition. It is therefore proposed that the wording of the condition requiring works to the Lime Kilns to be as follows: Within 6 months of the date of this permission an archaeological survey shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The survey shall include detailed measures for the restoration and landscaping of the Lime Kilns area identified in yellow on drawing no. 2072.01 Rev K(i) and a full timescale for implementation. The approved measures shall be implemented in full within the approved timescale and maintained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. It is considered that the varying of the condition as above would ensure that the archaeological importance of the Lime Kilns is fully explored and the site is remediated fully with an appropriate landscaping scheme, as was the intention of the original condition. Information Boards (Condition 13) The original consent required the provision of a public viewing platform at the site. This application seeks to vary this condition to require information boards to be provided in two locations, Barton Road and on the Bridgewater Canal Tow Path. There are some practical difficulties with implementing the original condition 13; firstly the condition required the location of the platform and information boards to be approved prior to the commencement of development on the site. However the positioning of such a platform and the information can only be determined once the notes of the archaeological survey are known. The envisaged location of the viewing platform was intended to be from Barton Road in the same location as a painting of the original Lime Kilns undertaken by Nattes. During a recent site meeting it was clear that the narrow paths and steep embankments on the Barton Road side of the Kilns make it difficult to provide a viewing platform within this area without detrimentally affecting the character and appearance of the area and Lime Kilns. As such it is proposed to vary the requirement for a viewing platform in favour of two information boards. It is therefore proposed to vary the wording of condition 13 as follows: The detailed design of Information boards to be provided adjacent to Barton Road and the Bridgewater Canal Tow Path shall be submitted to and approved in writing within 6 months of 23 approval of the archaeological survey required by condition 2. The approved boards shall be erected within 6 months of the approval of their design and shall be maintained thereafter. If the boards are damaged or destroyed they shall be replaced in full within a timescale agreed and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Value Added This application has been submitted following discussions between planning enforcement officers and the applicants to ensure the expedient resolution of the recent enforcement action. Conclusions It is considered that the current appearance of the site is now tidy due to the recent compliance with the s215 notice. However, whilst the site itself is in an acceptable appearance the landscaping of the site needs to be undertaken as expediently as possible. It is considered that the landscaping scheme proposed to the wider site is acceptable in principle and as a result of this verification would be implemented within the next planting season, considerably improving the character of the site on the wider area. The condition requiring an archaeological survey to be submitted within 6 months would ensure that the momentum, which has been achieved through recent discussions and enforcement, notices is not lost and that the future of an important historic asset to the city is secured as soon as possible. Finally it is considered acceptable that two information boards would be provided on Barton Road and on the canal towpath, which would highlight the importance of the Lime Kilns to local residents and visitors to the area. Recommendation Approve 1. The site, excluding the Lime Kilns, shown highlighted yellow on drawing no. 2072.01 Rev K(i) shall be treated in accordance with the approved landscaping scheme in full as detailed on drawing submitted on the 12th October 2009 at the next available planting season following the date of this decision. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced with the same species within twelve months. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 2. Within 6 months of the date of this permission an archaeological survey shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The survey shall include detailed measures for the restoration and landscaping of the Lime Kilns area identified in yellow on drawing no. 2072.01 Rev K(i) and a full timescale for implementation. The approved measures shall be implemented in full within the approved timescale and maintained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 24 3. This permission shall relate to the following amended plans received on 2 April 2002: drawing number 2072 01 Rev K - Site Layout drawing number 2072 17 Rev A - Blocks 3,4, and 5 North and South Elevations drawing number 2072 18 Rev A - Block 3 East and Block 5 West Elevations drawing number 2072 07 Rev E - Floor plans for Blocks 3, 4 and 5 and the following plan received on 28 February 2002: drawing number 2072 02 Rev G - Blocks 1,2 Plans and Elevations For the avoidance of doubt 4. The site investigation across the site shall address the nature, degree and distribution of contamination and underground gases on 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, nearby persons, building structures and services, landscaping schemes, final users of the site and the environmental pollution in ground water. The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the LPA prior to the start of the survey and recommendations and remedial works contained within the improved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the site. Reason: In the interests of public safety in accordance with policy EN16 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 5. No trees which are the subject of a Tree Preservation Order (other than those clearly shown to be so affected on the submitted plan) and including those trees on the top of the lime kiln identified as T1232, T1233, T1234 and T1235 on the tree proposals plan, drawing number 2072 19, shall be topped, lopped or cut down unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect trees which are the subject of a Tree Preservation Order in accordance with policy EN 10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 6. The mound area of the lime kiln as shown on drawing number 2072 01 Rev K and received on 2 April 2002, shall be maintained and retained as amenity space for residents at all time, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. To safeguard the amenity of the future residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 7. The 14 car parking spaces and 4 visitor spaces as shown on drawing number 2072 01 Rev K, received on 2 April 2002, shall be retained and maintained at all times. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 25 8. The four car parking spaces G34, G35, G36 and G37 as shown on drawing number 2072 01 Rev K and received on 2 April 2002 shall be made available for use by the occupiers of the Granary offices and be retained at all times. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 9. The detailed design of Information boards to be provided adjacent to Barton Road and the Bridgewater Canal Tow Path shall be submitted to and approved in writing within 6 months of approval of the archaeological survey required by condition 2. The approved boards shall be erected within 6 months of the approval of their design and shall be maintained thereafter. If the boards are damaged or destroyed they shall be replaced in full within a timescale agreed and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 26 APPLICATION No: 09/58120/HH APPLICANT: Hartwell Investments LOCATION: 6 And 8 Leicester Avenue, Salford, M7 4HA, PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing single storey side and rear elements at number six and erection of a part single/part two storey/part 3 storey side/rear extension to number 6 and single storey rear extensions to numbers 6 and 8 WARD: Kersal Description of Site and Surrounding Area This application relates to a pair of semi-detached dwellings on Leicester Avenue, Salford 7, a predominantly residential area. Number 6 Leicester Avenue has an existing single storey rear extension, single storey side porch and detached garage to the side/rear of the property along the common boundary with 4 Leicester Avenue. This would be demolished in order to accommodate the proposed development. The adjoining property, 8 Leicester Avenue has an existing single storey side/rear extension and a two-storey rear extension, which are to be retained. The adjacent properties to the south west, 2 and 4 Leicester Avenue, have part single/part two storey extensions to the rear. The application properties have large rear gardens, beyond which is a car park on George Street North. There are also a number of mature trees in the rear garden of the site, but these would not be affected by the proposed development and a tree survey is not required. Boundary treatment along the common boundary with 4 Leicester Avenue consists of a 1m high wire mesh fencing. Along the common boundary to the north west with 10 Leicester Avenue is a dwarf wall and fencing approximately 2m in height. Description of Proposal Permission is sought for the demolition of the existing single storey side and rear elements at number 6 and erection of a part single/part two storey/part 3 storey side/rear extension to number 6 and single storey rear extensions to numbers 6 and 8. Details of the existing elements at number 6 which are to be demolished are as follows: Demolition of existing single storey side element This element is set back approximately 3.8m from the main front elevation of the existing dwelling. It is 0.6m in width and 2.3m in depth and approximately 2.8m in height at its highest point with a sloping roof. Internally it accommodates a porch. Demolition of existing single storey rear element This element is set in approximately 0.1m from the side gable of the dwelling. It projects approximately 4.4m beyond the main rear elevation, is approximately 3.1m in width and 3.4m in height with a pitched roof. Internally it accommodates a conservatory. 27 It is also proposed to demolish the existing detached garage but this does not require planning permission and as such will not be considered as part of this application. Details of the proposed extensions are as follows: Part single/part two-storey/part 3-storey side/rear extension to number 6 Leicester Avenue This element would be flush with the main front elevation of the existing dwelling. It would project approximately 1.9m beyond the side gable before extending back approximately 7.7m. It would then project a further 0.3m to the side and a further 3.3m back before finally stepping a further 0.6m to the side and 6.3m back. It would wrap around the main rear elevation of number 6 and would have a maximum width of approximately 6.5m. The first 5.8m would be two storey and would be the same height as the existing dwelling (approximately 7.4m) with a hipped roof. The next 9.7m would be three storey and would be approximately 8.6m in height at its highest point and would incorporate a hipped roof. The last 1.8m would be single storey and would be approximately 3.5m in height at its highest point with a sloping roof. Internally this element would accommodate a study, WC, cloakroom, extended kitchen, utility room and breakfast room at ground floor level and two extended bedrooms, an en suite, a utility room and a bathroom at first floor level and two bedrooms and a WC at second floor level. Single storey rear extensions to numbers 6 and 8 Leicester Avenue The proposed single storey rear extensions would be set in approximately 3.7m from the two-storey gable elevation of number 8. They would project approximately 5.3m beyond the main rear elevations of both properties and would be approximately 7.7m in width becoming flush with the side of the proposed three-storey side/rear element at number 6. The single storey rear extensions would each accommodate a succah and would be approximately 3.5m in height with a flat roof. Site History 8 Leicester Avenue: 96/35342/HH - Erection of single storey side extension to provide bedroom hall and shower room. Permitted 09/07/1996 07/55301/HH - Erection of single storey extension to front and single storey rear extension. Withdrawn 17.10.2007 6 Leicester Avenue has no previous planning history. Publicity Site Notice: Not Applicable Press Advert: Not Applicable 28 Neighbour Notification The following neighbour addresses were notified: - Flats 1-8, 16 Leicester Avenue - Flats 1-8, 14 Leicester Avenue - Apartments 1-5, 10 Leicester Avenue - Hurstleigh Hotel, 10 Leicester Avenue - Flats 1-12, Glover Court, Leicester Avenue - 8 and 9 Eskrigge Close - 6, 8, 123, 14 and 16 Leicester Avenue Councillor Wilson has requested that the application be determined by the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel as the applicants consider that the development is acceptable. Representations One letter of support has been received from the occupiers of 4 Leicester Avenue. Planning Policy Framework Development Plan Policy UDP DES1 - Respecting Context UDP DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours UDP DES8 - Alterations and Extensions UDP A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network Other Material Considerations SPD SPD1 - House Extensions Appraisal It is considered the main issues for consideration with this application are the impact of the proposed extension on highway safety, the amenity of the surrounding and future residents, and the impact of the proposed development on the character of the area. The main policies of relevance are DES1, DES7, DES8 and A8 of the City of Salford adopted UDP and the House Extensions SPD. Design UDP Policy DES1 states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness. UDP Policy DES8 states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area. 29 Policy HE8 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will 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 2m from the front main wall of the property or the ground and first floor elements are set back a minimum of 1m from the front main wall of the property. The proposed side extension would be flush with the main front elevation of the existing dwelling and would be set in 1m from the common boundary with 4 Leicester Avenue. It is, therefore, considered that the proposal would not result in a potential to create a terracing effect in accordance with policy HE8. The proposed side/rear element of the proposed development would be visible from the street. The rear elements would also be visible from the car park and George Street North to the rear of the site. Leicester Avenue is a small straight road, which comprises 12 residential dwellings. To the front of the site, on the opposite side of the road are residential bungalows and beyond this is Leicester Road. Whilst the flat roof design of the proposed single storey rear extensions at both properties is not ideal, these extensions are relatively small scale and would provide a succah to each of the properties. The application properties are two storey residential dwellings. Whilst the frontage of the proposed development would maintain the two-storey design the three-storey side/rear element would project above the line of the existing dwelling and would appear as an incongruous feature, which would detract from the character and appearance of 6 Leicester Avenue, the application site as a whole and the wider residential area. The three-storey element of the proposal is considered to be out of character with the existing property and does not respect the general scale, character or design of the dwelling. It is significant in scale and does not appear subordinate to the main dwelling. It is considered, therefore, that the proposed development would not respect the general rhythm and proportions of the main dwelling and as a result would significantly harm the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and would result in an incongruous feature in the street scene which would not respect the character and appearance of the area contrary to policies DES1 and DES8 of the UDP. Amenity UDP Policy DES7 states that alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. It states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other developments. Policy HE1 of the House Extensions SPD states 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 if applicable. Policy HE2 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for extensions that introduce windows or open aspects close to and directly overlooking the gardens of 30 neighbouring dwellings. The term 'close to' refers to 5m, however this can be overcome with obscure glazing, except to principle habitable room windows. The front elevation of the proposed side/rear extension at number 6 would introduce a bedroom window at first floor level. The distance maintained to the front boundary would be approximately 12m with the facing properties to the front being approximately 29m away. The rear elevation of the proposed side/rear extension at number 6 would also introduce bedroom windows at ground, first and second floor level. The distance maintained to the rear boundary would be between approximately 48m and 49m, beyond this is a car park. The proposed single storey rear extensions at both properties would introduce no habitable room windows The side elevation of the proposed side/rear extension at number 6 would introduce non habitable room windows at ground, first and second floor level between 1m and 1.4m from the common boundary with 4 Leicester Avenue. In order to protect the privacy of the occupiers of number 4, the agent has agreed to obscure glaze these windows and a condition could be attached to ensure this. The other side elevations of the proposed development would introduce no windows. It is considered, therefore, that the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable loss of privacy to the occupiers of surrounding properties in accordance with policies HE1 and HE2. Policy HE4 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for a single storey extension that does not maintain a minimum distance of 9m between its blank gable end wall and facing ground floor principal windows of habitable rooms of neighbouring dwellings. This distance applies to extensions and windows at the same level. There are no windows in the side elevation of 4 Leicester Avenue. 10 Leicester Avenue is currently vacant but it does have windows in its side elevation, which may serve habitable rooms. These windows are set at an angle to the side gable of the proposed single storey rear extension at number 8 and would maintain a distance of approximately 11m, which is in accordance with policy HE4. Policy HE5 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for single storey rear extensions that project beyond a 45 degree line taken from either the mid point of a principal ground floor window of a habitable room or a point 3m along the common boundary from the rear elevation of adjoining or adjacent dwellings. The proposed single storey rear extensions would project approximately 5.3m beyond the main rear elevations of both dwellings. If these were built individually, it is considered that each of the proposed extensions would have an unacceptable detrimental impact in terms of loss of light and would be overbearing to the occupiers of the adjoining property. If built concurrently however, the extensions would not impact on the amenity of the occupiers of the adjoining property and would be in accordance with policy HE5. A condition could be attached to ensure the extensions were built concurrently. The single storey element of the proposed side/rear extension at number 6 would not project beyond a 45-degree line taken from a point 3m along the common boundary form the rear elevation of 4 Leicester Avenue. 31 The proposed single storey rear extensions would not project beyond the rear elevations of numbers 4 and 10 Leicester Avenue and would not be visible from within their rear elevations Policy HE7 of the House Extensions SPD states that in the absence of an extension along the common boundary of the adjoining dwelling planning permission will normally be granted for a two storey/first floor extension provided its projection is equal too or less than its distance from the nearest common boundary. The principles of this policy have been used to assess the impact of the proposed three-storey side/rear element on the occupiers of the adjoining and adjacent properties. The proposed three-storey side/rear element at number 6 would not project beyond the rear of the proposed single storey rear extension at number 8. Number 8 Leicester Avenue has a first floor bedroom window adjacent to the common boundary with number 6 Leicester Avenue. The three storey element of the proposed development at number 6 would project approximately 5.3m beyond the main rear elevation of 8 Leicester Avenue and would maintain a distance of between approximately 4m and 2.8m from the common boundary. The adjacent property, 4 Leicester Avenue has an existing part single/part two-storey side/rear extension. The three-storey element of the proposed extension would not project beyond the rear of the single storey extension. Number 4 has a bedroom window at first floor level adjacent to the common boundary with the application site. The proposed three-storey side/rear extension would project approximately 2.5m beyond the two-storey rear extension at number 4 and would maintain a distance of approximately 1.6m from its side elevation. It is considered, therefore, that the proposed development would result in an unacceptable loss of light and would be overbearing to the occupiers of numbers 4 and 8 Leicester Avenue contrary to the principles of policy HE7 and DES7. Highway Safety UDP Policy A8 states development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety. Policy HE11 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for extensions that do not maintain a hard standing of 4.8m in length and 2.4m in width to accommodate at least one car clear of the highway unless there would be no unacceptable impact on highway safety and the free flow of traffic. Where possible the width should be 3.6m. The proposed development would maintain a hard standing area to the front of each of the dwellings in excess of 4.8m in length by 2.4m in width. It is considered, therefore, that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety, in accordance with Policies A8 and HE11. Other Issues Paragraph 14.1 of the House Extensions SPD states, "personal circumstances, such as a disability, or the specific requirements of minority groups may make it difficult to provide the necessary facilities within the standards set out within this document. The council may interpret these standards flexibly in 32 such circumstances, but proposals that significantly deviate from them are still unlikely to be appropriate. Consideration of personal circumstances will be assessed on a case-by-case basis." The applicant has submitted a design and access statement in support of their application and a letter, which outlines personal circumstances. The design and access statement states: 'The properties are both occupied by families of faith and both neighbours have agreed to construct a Sukkah for their religious beliefs. The Sukkah is a room that is used for celebrating over a period of seven days and nights, where all meals are taken, and the room is regarded as the home. The roof of the Sukkah is made so as to be able to be opened to the sky. In addition to the Sukkah, the owners of No. 6 Leicester Avenue have recognised the need to provide more living accommodation for their growing family. There are presently eight children living at home, and as the children grow up and leave home, it is a strong part of the Jewish faith and family life for the children to return home with their own family and stay for a period of time. The need for additional bedroom space is now of paramount importance.” The supporting letter states: 'We are a large family of 10 members in the household ranging from a 1 year old to a 14 year old. The children are split up into 3 small bedrooms, to an extent that one of the children actually sleeps on a mattress spread out on the floor. As the children grow up, the lack of privacy is clearly affecting their maturity. Furthermore, my elderly mother of 75 who has sadly lost her husband recently is moving into our home so that we could tend to her needs and to give her the re-assurance of a warm home and loving care, thereby preventing her from being a burden on the state. As a family of faith and religion, we have been residents in the Salford M7 area for over 15 years, and enjoying the freedom and respect of the Salford community. We are restricted to the Broughton Park area of Salford where we have all the facilities, whether to the religious education of the children or to the local grocery stores that specifically caters for our community etc. To move to a larger accommodation out of the Broughton Park area is not an option. It is with these points in mind that the need for additional living and bedroom space is now of paramount necessity and importance.' The dwelling at number 6 currently has a lounge, kitchen, dining room and conservatory at ground floor level and four bedrooms, a store, utility room and bathroom at first floor level. If approved and implemented the proposed development would see the change of the existing dining room to a study and the introduction of a utility room, cloakroom, WC, succah and breakfast room at ground floor level. At first floor would accommodate two extended bedrooms (bedrooms 2 and 3 as indicated on the submitted plans) and the relocation of bedroom 4, bathroom and utility room. Two new bedrooms would also be introduced at second floor level. It is considered that the proposed development would result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and surrounding area contrary to policies DES1 33 and DES8 of the UDP and would also result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of the occupiers of surrounding properties contrary to policy DES7 of the UDP and the principles of policy HE7 of the House Extensions SPD. It is considered that the needs of the applicants do not outweigh the harm, which would be caused by the proposed development. During a meeting on site with the applicants, their agent and Mr Koppenhein a number of properties were brought to the case officer’s attention which had similar extensions to that proposed under this application. Details of these are listed below: 95 Leicester Road - flush with front elevation and site boundary 07/54645/HH - Erection of a two storey side extension a single storey rear extension, front porch, flat roof dormer at rear, pitched roof dormer to the front of the dwelling, and raising the ridge of the roof by 0.33m. This application was recommended for refusal by the case officer for the following reasons: The proposed raising of the roof ridgeline would be contrary to Policies DES1 and DES8 of the Adopted UDP, and Policy HE10 of the House Extensions SPD, as it would detract from the appearance of existing buildings (in particular 95/97 Leicester Road) and the surrounding area, damaging visual amenity and the character of the area. The proposed windows at ground and first floor facing the gable elevation of 93 Leicester Road, and the proposed patio doors facing the gardens of 93 and 97 Leicester Road, would result in the loss of privacy for neighbouring residents, contrary to Policy DES7 of the UDP and Policy HE2 of the House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document. The proposed extension would create a terracing effect which would have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the street scene, contrary to UDP Polices DES1 and DES8, and policy HE8 of the House Extensions SPD. The decision was overturned at panel and the application was approved. 4 Merry Bower Road - flush with front elevation and set in only approximately 0.6m from side boundary 99/40024/HH - Erection of two storey side and single storey rear extension. Permitted 19.11.1999 This application was determined prior to the adoption of the current House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document. 3 Eskrigge Close - three storey extension to two storey dwelling 04/48338/HH - Erection of part single and part three storey rear extension. Permitted 20.07.2004 This application was determined prior to the adoption of the current House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document. Conclusions/Summary It is considered that the proposal would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact on highway safety. However it is considered that the proposed development at number 6 Leicester Avenue would result in unacceptable loss of light and would be overbearing to the occupiers of numbers 4 and 8 34 Leicester Avenue contrary to policy DES7 of the UDP and the principles of policy HE7 of the House Extensions SPD. It is not considered that the proposed development would result in an unacceptable impact to the occupiers of other surrounding properties It is also considered that the proposed development would be an incongruous feature in the street scene and would not respect the general rhythm and proportions of the existing dwelling. As a result it would harm the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and surrounding area contrary to policies DES1 and DES8 of the UDP. Recommendation Refuse 1. The proposed development would result in a loss of light and would be overbearing to the occupiers of 4 and 8 Leicester Avenue contrary to Policy DES7 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and the principles of Policy HE7 of the House Extension Supplementary Planning Document. 2. By reason of its size, siting, design and appearance the proposed three storey side/rear element of the development would result in an incongruous feature in the street scene and would not respect the character and appearance of the existing dwelling contrary to policies DES1 and DES8 of the Unitary Development Plan. Notes to Applicant 1. Please note this refusal relates to drawing numbers 01 Revision A, 06 Revision D and 07. 35 APPLICATION No: 09/58131/FUL APPLICANT: Mr William Leeson LOCATION: Plot 3, Linnyshaw Trading Estate, Moss Lane, Worsley, M28 3LY, , PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey bulk handling building WARD: Walkden North Description of Site and Surrounding Area The site to which the application relates stands within the northern part of the Linnyshaw Trading Estate off Moss Lane in Worsley. The application relates to Plot 2 of Unit 1 of the Linnyshaw Trading Estate. The site is currently used as a waste transfer station following approval of application 01/43281/COU in June 2002. The site is currently used for the transfer, crushing and screening of inert waste and storage The Trading Estate itself is accessed via Moss Lane, which runs along its southern boundary. Along the southern side of Moss Lane are residential properties. To the south of Moss Lane is an extensive housing estate. To the north there is a garage, which is used for the repair of vehicles. This garage building was approved under 02/44179/FUL. To the north of this is Linnyshaw Moss, which is a designated wildlife corridor and is of greenbelt allocation within the Adopted Unitary Development Plan. The trading estate itself is segregated to the north by a linear formation of mature trees running along the existing strategic recreation route. To the east of the site is the Blackleach Country Park, which is a site of Biological Importance, a Key Recreation Area and also a Wildlife Corridor. Access to the site is currently taken from Moss Lane and then from an internal private service road with turning head adjacent to the site. The site currently accommodates a crusher and screener and there is open storage of materials stacked in piles on the site. There is an existing building within the very northern part of the site but this does not form part of this application. Description of Proposal The proposal involves the erection of a building with a floor area of 864m2, with an eaves height of 10 metres and an overall ridge height of 11.8m. It is proposed that the front of the building (west facing) is largely open to provide access for tipper lorries and the equipment, which is currently used, for separation of the waste, which is entering the site. The proposed building would be a used as a bulk handing building, within which waste for recycling would be sorted. 36 The building, which is proposed, would be 10 metres to the eaves and 11.8 metres to the ridge. The access to the site is not proposed to be altered. The upper walls of the building are to be constructed of box profile metal cladding. The applicant has not stated a colour for the cladding. At the lower level there is a concrete push wall to a height of 3m. No alterations to any landscaping or boundary treatments are proposed as part of this development. Site History 98/38714/FUL Change of use of part of approved industrial site to open storage of contractors plant etc. - APPROVED 7.1.1999 00/40943/COU - Change of use from B8 storage to industrial use (B2) with associated operation of plant for the crushing and screening of demolition and excavation material soil and hardcore. Formation of access road (re-submission of 00/40500/COU) (Temporary permission - lapsed on 28.10.2008) - APPROVED 19.10.2000 01/43281/COU - Use of site as a waste transfer station, crushing and screening of inert wastes and ancillary storage - APPROVED 20.6.2002 For the avoidance of doubt, Plots 1 and 2 are currently operating under 01/43281/COU There is currently an outstanding enforcement issue regarding the hours at which the screener and crusher can be operate and the hours of entry of vehicles into the site. These restrictions were placed on the site through application 01/43281/FUL. In relation to vehicle movements planning permission 01/43281/FUL states that vehicles shall only enter and leave the site between the hours of 7.30am and 6pm Monday to Friday with no movements at weekends or on bank holidays. With regard to the operation of the crusher planning approval 01/43281/FUL stated that the crusher can only be operated between the hours of 8am and 6pm Monday to Friday with no working at weekends or on bank holidays. Publicity Site Notice: Not Applicable Press Advert: Not Applicable Neighbour Notification Neighbours were notified on the 8th October 2009 Earliest Decision Date: 30th October 2009 The following neighbours were notified: 6,5,4 Fernside Grove, Worsley 4A Fernside Grove, Worsley 3 Fernside Grove, Worsley 3A Fernside Grove, Worsley 37 2 Fernside Grove, Worsley 46-56 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 46 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 31 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 44 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 44A Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 43 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 42 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 42A Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 41 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 40 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 39 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 38 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 37 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 36 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 35 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 35A Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 34 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 33 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 33A Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 32 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley 58 Sportside Avenue, Worsley 56 Sportside Avenue, Worsley 54 Sportside Avenue, Worsley 52 Sportside Avenue, Worsley 50 Sportside Avenue, Worsley 48 Sportside Avenue, Worsley 46 Sportside Avenue, Worsley 21 Springside Avenue, Worsley 23 Springside Avenue, Worsley 10 Springside Close, Worsley 9 Springside Close, Worsley 8 Springside Close, Worsley 7 Springside Close, Worsley 6 Springside Close, Worsley 6A Springside Close, Worsley 5 Springside Close, Worsley 5A Springside Close, Worsley 4 Springside Close, Worsley 3 Springside Close, Worsley 2 Springside Close, Worsley 1 Springside Close, Worsley 39 Springside Avenue, Worsley 37 Springside Avenue, Worsley 35 Springside Avenue, Worsley 33 Springside Avenue, Worsley 31 Springside Avenue, Worsley 29 Springside Avenue, Worsley 38 27 Springside Avenue, Worsley 25 Springside Avenue, Worsley 6 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 6A Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 5 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley Unit 3 And 4, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street Kane House Unit 15, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Moss Lane W Leeson, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street, Worsley Unit 5, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street, Worsley Unit 7, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street, Worsley T J Murphy Limited And Ubu Environmental, Moss Lane F Parks Construction, Moss Lane, Worsley Unit 6, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street, Worsley Vehicle Rescue Service, Moss Lane, Worsley RTK Grab Hire, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street, Worsley 4 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 22 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 4A Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 3 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 2 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 2A Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 1 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 20 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 19 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 18 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 17 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 16 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 15 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 14 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 13 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 12 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 11 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 10 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 9 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 8 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 7 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 6 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 5 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 4 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 3 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 2 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 1 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley 47 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 45 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 43 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 41 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 39 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 37 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 39 35 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 33 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 32 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 31 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 30 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 29 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 28 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 27 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 26 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 25 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 24 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 23 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 21 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 20 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 17 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 16 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 15 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 14 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 13 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 12 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 11 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 10 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 9 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 8 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 8A Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 7 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley 1 Fernside Grove, Worsley 30, 29,27 ,25 ,23,23A,21, 21A,19, 19A, 17, 17A, 15,15A, 13, 13A Representations 40 letter of objection have been received. The issues raised are summarised as: Existing issues regarding work outside of the permitted hours on the trading estate Hours should be restricted Noise and Disturbance from traffic The use should not be allowed to expand due to the impact upon residents amenities Dust pollution Consultations Urban Vision Environment - There are no sensitive uses in proximity to the proposal and the erection of a building on the site will provide an improvement to any noise or dust that is being created therefore no further comments in relation to noise and air quality. No comments in relation to contaminated land.. 40 Main Drainage - No objections. Any vehicle cleaning/maintenence areas must drain to foul sewer via oil interceptors. Maximum discharge to Whittle Brook is 10L/s. Highways - No comments received to date. Design For Security - No comments received to date. Environment Agency - No objections following submission of additional information, but have requested conditions relating to suspended solid materials and surface water drainage.. Planning Policy Framework Development Plan Policy RSS DP1 - Spatial Principles UDP EN18 - Protection of Water Courses UDP EN19 - Flood Risk and Surface Water UDP R4 - Key Recreational Areas UDP A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network UDP DES1 - Respecting Context UDP DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours UDP DES9 - Landscaping UDP E5 - Develop. in Established Employment Areas UDP A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled UDP EN12 - Important Landscape Features UDP EN9 - Wildlife Corridors Other Material Considerations SPD SPD11 - Sustainable Design Construction Appraisal The development involves the erection of one building, which is to be used for the bulk handling of material in association with the use of the site as a waste transfer station. The site is currently used as a waste transfer facility with some vehicle repairs taking place on the adjoining northern area (known as plot 3). This application refers to part of the entire planning unit, but there is no extant permission for the use of the latter part of the site as a waste transfer station. It is considered that the main issues associated with the development are whether the principle of development on this site is appropriate, whether the building would have any significant impact upon the visual amenity of the area in general, whether the building would have any specific impact upon the special landscape character of the surrounding area, whether there would be any unacceptable impact upon water resources, whether there would be any loss of residential amenity as a result of the development and whether the development would lead to an unacceptable impact upon highway safety or on street car parking. Each of these issues will be addressed in turn. Principle of Development Policy DP1 of the Adopted Regional Spatial Strategy aims to promote sustainable communities and economic development, make the best use of existing resources and infrastructure, manage travel 41 demand, marry opportunity and need, promote environmental quality, mainstream rural issues, reduce emissions and adapt to climate change. The site to which the application relates is within an established employment area and as such Policy E5 applies. Policy E5 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan states that within established employment areas planning permission should be granted for: the modernisation and refurbishment of existing building, the redevelopment of land for employment purposes; improvements to access, circulation, parking and servicing; the environmental improvement of an area and improvements to personal and property security. It is considered that the site and the wider Trading Estate is currently an ‘established employment use’ and is brownfield being previously developed land. The erection of the proposed building would assist in the improvements to the site, in that it would constitute an upgrading of facilities that would allow for the bulk storage of materials to be enclosed, thereby reducing the amount of open storage on the site. It is considered that this would also improve the environmental quality of the area by reducing the likelihood of noise and dust pollution. Visual Amenity and Landscape Character Policy DES1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments respond to the positive physical characteristics of that area, and do not lead to a loss of visual amenity or cause harm to the appearance of that area. The proposed building is located centrally within the site on the area known by the applicant as plot 2 (one of the three plots located there). The site is surrounded on three sides (east, south and west) by other buildings within the trading estate and to the north by a disused railway and a linear feature of mature trees. The proposed building is proposed to be 10 metres to the eaves and 11.8 metres to the ridge but given the existing backdrop of buildings, it is considered that the building would not appear overly intrusive. The landscape buffer to the northern boundary provides screening for pedestrians walking along the footpath and from Linnyshaw Moss. It is considered that although this is a large industrial building, its design is appropriate within the area and to the general use of the site and would be unlikely to have a significant impact upon the visual amenity of the area and would be in accordance with Policy Des1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan. Policy EN9 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires development which would affect any land that functions as a wildlife corridor will not be permitted where it would impair the movement of fauna and flora. The proposal site is bounded to the north and west by a wildlife corridor but given that the development is wholly contained within an existing site and does not bound the designated wildlife corridor directly it is considered unlikely that it would have any significant impact upon any fauna or flora or the movement thereof. For this reason it is considered that the development would not be contrary to Policy EN9 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan. 42 Impact upon Water Resources Policy EN18 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments should not be permitted where they would have an unacceptable impact upon surface or ground water in terms of quality, level or flow. Policy EN19 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments should not be permitted where they would be subject to an unacceptable risk of flooding; materially increase the risk of flooding elsewhere; or result in an unacceptable maintenance liability for the City Council or other Agency in terms of dealing with flooding. The Environment Agency originally commented that there was insufficient information submitted with regards to contaminated land and also flooding. The applicant has since submitted the outstanding information and the Environment Agency has now lifted their objection subject to two conditions being attached relating to surface water drainage/run off, and surface water solids being attached. These conditions have been attached to the recommendation. Further informatives have been attached relating to oil interceptors and discharge into Whittle Brook. It is considered that the development would be in accordance with Policies EN18 and EN19 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan subject to these conditions being complied with. Impact upon Residential Amenity Policy DES7 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments provide an adequate level of amenity for users of developments and occupiers of other nearby uses. The proposed building is to be located within the curtilage of an existing unit and would be surrounded by buildings to three sides. It would be in excess of 150 metres from the nearest residential property, and other units occupy the space between the development site and these dwellings. The assessment is that the proposed building would not appear prominently when viewed from these houses and the impact upon the outlook of these residents would be minimal. The proposed building is intended to accommodate activity, which already occur on site and would create a barrier to noise, which may currently affect the amenities of residents. The building will have one open wall but this would be west facing and there are no residential properties to the west of the site. It is considered that the development would be likely to reduce the amount of noise emanating from the site which might currently affect the amenities of nearby residential occupiers. Neighbours have raised issues in relation to noise and have recognised that the proposals may go some way to alleviate the problems associated with the site, but have requested that the hours of operation are restricted. In practical terms it is possible to restrict only the hours of use of the building and movements in to and out of the site. The permissions previously granted for the site allowed working allowed operations to take place between the hours of 7.30am and 6pm Monday to Friday with no working on Saturdays, Sundays or Bank Holidays. It is appropriate that a condition be applied to reflect this. Highway Implications Policy A8 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments should not be permitted where they would have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety or the ability of the 43 strategic route network to accommodate appropriate traffic flows by virtue of traffic generation, access, parking, servicing arrangements or cause an unacceptable restriction to movement of high, wide, long or heavy vehicles along abnormal load routes. The proposed development would not increase the intensity of use of the site nor would it be likely to lead to a significant increase in the number of vehicles entering or leaving the site. The area where the proposed building is to be located is currently used for storage of materials which are being processed. This building is to be used to accommodate those materials and in effect the use of the land will not change. There would be no loss of car parking as a result of the development and as such it is not considered that the development would lead to an increase in on street car parking outside of the site. For these reasons it is considered that the development would neither have any significant effect upon the strategic route network or impact upon access, servicing or parking and as such would be in accordance with policy A8 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan. Conclusions/Summary It is considered that the housing of the stored materials within the proposed building would constitute an environmental improvement, an improvement to residential and visual amenity and would have no significant impact upon the character of the area. Subject to compliance with appropriate conditions no water resources would be significantly affected and the development would be unlikely to have any significant impact upon any important landscape character. There would be no significant impact upon highway safety nor would the development lead to a significant increase in on street car parking. Whilst neighbour objections are acknowledged, it is considered that the development would be in accordance with all of the relevant policies within the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and taking into account all other material considerations it is considered acceptable. The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions. Recommendation Approve 1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples and details of the materials for the walls and roof of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 44 3. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such a time as a scheme to drain surface water run-off has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained in accordance with the timing/phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing by the Local Planning Authority. To prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage of/disposal of surface water from the site in accordance with Policy EN19 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan. 4. The development hereby approved shall not be commenced until such a time as a scheme to treat and remove suspended solids from surface water run off during construction works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. In order to protect the downstream reservoirs which are sensitive fisheries in accordance with Policy EN18 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan 5. The building hereby approved shall only be used between the hours of 7.30am and 6pm Monday to Friday and shall not be open for business on Saturdays, Sundays or Bank Holidays. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. Notes to Applicant 1. 2. Maximum discharge to Whittle Brook is 10L/s Any vehicle cleaning/maintenance areas must drain to foul sewer via oil interceptors. 45