PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
4 November 2010
APPLICATION No:
10/59280/FUL
APPLICANT:
Mr A Brunt (Chairman)
LOCATION:
Eccles R U F C, Gorton Street, Eccles, M30 7LZ,
PROPOSAL:
Erection of ground and first floor extensions and new balcony to
clubhouse.
WARD:
Winton
Description of Site and Surrounding Area
This site relates to Eccles Rugby Club which is situated off Gorton Street in Eccles. The rugby clubhouse is
situated to the south of the site and runs adjacent to a footpath which joins Gorton Street with Clandon Avenue
and the floodlit playing fields are to the north of the clubhouse. Car parking is provided to the west of the site in
two areas both accessed via Gorton Street. To the south and east of the application site are residential
dwellings to the north and west is open space.
The existing building on the site is part single part two storey and is constructed from brown brick with a mono
pitched roof.
In 1984 a new clubhouse was built. In 1991 a junior section was formed and in 1993 new changing rooms were
built with help from the Foundation for Sports and the Arts and also Sportsmatch. Due to the success of the
junior section and the emergence of the women’s team, the club was awarded a Lottery grant in 2002 for mixed
use changing facilities, increased training lighting and other various ancillary improvements. In 2003 the Club
extended and refurbished the Clubhouse in order to accommodate the teams. An all weather pitch was installed
in 2004 funded by the RFU and government.
Description of Proposal
Planning permission is sought for the erection of a ground and first floor extension to the existing clubhouse and
new balcony. The proposed ground floor extension would project 4.3m from the eastern gable of the clubhouse,
to 1m from the boundary. The extension would be 11.5m deep flush with the front and rear elevation of the
existing clubhouse. The proposed single storey extension would have a hipped roof and would tie into the
existing roof and would be 3m in height to the eaves and 5.2m in height to the ridge. The proposed first floor
extension would project 16.6m from the flank elevation of the existing first floor element and would be 9.6m
deep setting out to 11.8m deep. The first floor extension would have a pitched roof which would be 10.5m in
height at the ridge falling to 6.4m in height at the eaves. A balcony is proposed on the northern elevation of the
building at first floor level and would be 27.7m in length flush with the western elevation of the building and
would project 2.6m and would be supported by pillars.
The playing fields adjacent to the existing clubhouse are currently in use by the teams which already utilise the
rugby club. It is not proposed that there would be any intensification of use as a result of this development. The
extension is intended to only improve the existing facilities available on site. The new facilities include two new
en-suite changing rooms, a wheelchair lift, new staircase, showers, gym, seminar room, kitchen extension and a
new balcony. The increase in floorspace overall would be 283.3m2.
Site History
97/35906/FUL - Erection of extension to provide gymnasium and changing rooms, erection of ten floodlighting
columns & retention of 10m high chain-link fencing to rear of Clandon Avenue - Permitted
98/37541/ FUL - Erection of two storey extension to club house, surfacing existing overflow car park area and
creation of further overflow parking - Permitted
98942995
03/47512/FUL - Construction of synthetic turf training pitch together with associated ball retention fencing and
floodlighting – Permitted
Enforcement History
95/04452/DEVWPP - Metal scaffolding frame and net been erected to the rear of complainants property Closed
05/00233/DEVWPP - 6ft metal fence has been erected with metal prongs along the top (will prevent public use
of fields and looks unsightly) - Closed
Publicity
Site Notice: Article 8 site notice Date Displayed: 16 September 2010
Reason: Wider Publicity
Neighbour Notification
A site notice was displayed on 16th September 2010.
The following neighbours were notified of the application
15 – 23 (odd) and 36 Ampney Close
1 – 23 (odd) Clandon Avenue
88 and 95 Scoffield Road
39 – 41 (odd) Guilford Road
Representations
Two letters have been received in response to publicity. The issues raised are summarised below:
The club has grown too big for this residential area
Increasing activity would lead to noise problems and antisocial behaviour
Increase on on-street car parking which has a detrimental impact on highway safety
The existing clubhouse is unsightly and has a detrimental impact on the visual amenity
Question the need for the development
Plans are misleading
The extension would impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents
It has also been requested by Councillors Lancaster and Boshell that the application is heard by the Planning
and Transportation Regulatory Panel to ensure that the resident's objections in relation to overlooking and noise
are taken into account and also due to significant public interest in previous schemes on the site.
Consultations
Main Drainage - No objections subject to satisfactory drainage provision to SCC approval.
Highways - No objections
Urban Vision Environment - Recommend two conditions relating to noise. One of the conditions relates to noise
associated with car parking. No additional or alterations to existing car parking is proposed as part of this
application as such this condition is considered to be unnecessary.
Planning Policy Framework
Development Plan Policy
Unitary Development Plan - Policy DES8 - Alterations and Extensions
98942995
2
Unitary Development Plan - Policy A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network
Unitary Development Plan - Policy A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
Unitary Development Plan - Policy EHC3 - Provision, Improve of Health, Community
Other Material Considerations
Appraisal
Principle of Development
Policy EHC3 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that planning permission should be granted for
the improvement of health and community facilities where they would not have an unacceptable impact upon
residential amenity, affect environmental quality, be accessible to the community especially by foot, cycle and
public transport, not add to congestion, have the potential to act as a community focus, and be consistent with
other policies within teh Unitary Development Plan.
The proposed development would improve an existing community facility which is in an accessible location and
which is available for use by the community. The proposed development would not significantly increase activity
in the area, and intended to provide improved facilities for existing users and the community. There would be no
significant impact upon environmental quality as a result of the development, nor would there be any loss of
residential amenity as a result of the development. There would be no highway safety issues associated with
the development and it is considered that the level of car parking is sufficient to accommodate the activity on the
site.
Design
Policy DES1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments respond to their physical
context and respects the positive character of the local area.
DES8 states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations and 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.
It is considered that the proposed extensions would respect the general scale, massing and proportions of the
existing building. The windows in the proposal would be situated on the northern elevation of the building and as
such no windows are proposed in the elevation that would be visible from the public footpath to the south of the
site. Whilst this is not ideal in design terms, the existing building has no windows in this elevation and
introducing windows may impact on privacy. As such on balance it is considered that the elevational treatment
should not warrant the refusal of planning permission. The extensions would be carried out in materials to match
the existing building, which is considered to be acceptable, and a condition to this effect has been
recommended. With the imposition of this condition it is considered that the rear extension would not have an
unacceptable impact on the visual amenity of the street scene and accord with the above UDP saved policies.
Amenity
DES7 states that development will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in
terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would
have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users.
The proposed single storey extension would be situated, at its closest point 10m from the rear elevation of 1
Clandon Avenue. Along this boundary between this property and the application site is a hedgerow. It is
considered that this relationship is acceptable and the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the
amenity of occupiers of 1 Clandon Avenue.
To the south of the site are residential dwellings. 41 Guilford Road would face the single storey extension and
the extension would be 14m from the proposal, this distance is considered to be acceptable to ensure that the
development would not have an overbearing impact on the amenity of residents at 41 Guilford Road. The
closest dwelling to the first floor extension would be 36 Ampney Close, the gable of this property faces the
application site and this property lies south of the clubhouse as such the impact of the proposal on these
residents is considered not to be detrimental on the amenity these residents currently enjoy. 21 and 23 Ampney
rear elevations face the application site. The rear elevations of these properties would be 19m from the
98942995
3
proposed extension, it is considered that the proposal is sufficiently offset from these properties not to have an
overbearing impact on the amenity these residents currently enjoy.
The windows in the proposed extensions would overlook the playing fields and as such no windows would be
introduced on the windows that face residential dwellings. In light of this it is considered that the development
would not have an unacceptable impact on the privacy enjoyed by neighbouring residents.
Residents have raised concerns with regard to the social events and the noise this generates in the late
evening. It is appreciated that this is a concern of neighbouring residents however the proposed extension
would not create a larger function room within clubhouse and as such it is not considered that the proposed
extension would create additional noise, disturbance or anti social by intensifying the use.
The existing hours are not proposed to be changed, and will remain 8am to 11pm Monday to Saturday and 8am
to 10.30pm on Sundays and Bank Holidays. It is not proposed that there would be any increase in the number
of functions taking place at the club
Urban Vision Environment have advised that there may be some disturbance to neighbours but that this can be
controlled by imposing two conditions, one being that a scheme for the erection of noise mitigation measures
should be submitted, and another controlling the level of noise above background levels.
Subject to these conditions and in light of the above the proposal is considered to comply with UDP saved policy
DES7 and EN17.
Highways and Car Parking
Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in
accordance with the Council’s maximum standards. It also states that the maximum car parking standards
should not be exceeded.
The proposed extensions would not result in the loss of car parking provision for the rugby club and as such the
proposal would comply with policy A10. There would be no significant additional demand or visitors, the works
would encompass the refurbishment of the existing facilities for existing users.
Other Issues
With regard to the letters of objection received from neighbouring residents, issues regarding design, residential
amenity, car parking and issues regarding noise and disturbance have been assessed in the planning appraisal.
Residents have raised concerns with regard to the need of the development and are also of the opinion that the
club has grown too big for the residential area. In response to this point it is considered that whilst the club
house is increasing in size the facilities that would be provided would be ancillary many of the patrons to the
club would visit when fixtures are on and the facilities provided would not increase the potential to house more
fixtures.
Conclusions/Summary
The proposal would not compromise the aims and objectives of the relevant policies contained within the
adopted Unitary Development Plan and there are no material planning considerations that would justify a refusal
of permission. It is accordingly recommended that the application be approved.
Recommendation
Approve
98942995
4
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.
The facing materials to be used for the walls and roof 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.
3.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans
Elevations - 07A Proposed Site Layout Plan 00RevA Ground floor layout - 05.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.
4.
The rating level (LAeq,T) from any new items of fixed plant and machinery associated with the
development, when operating simultaneously, shall not exceed the background noise level (LA90,T) by
more than -5dB at any time when measured at the nearest noise sensitive premises. Noise
measurements and assessments shall be carried out according to BS4142: 1997. For the purposes of
assessment, ‘T’ refers to any 1 hour period between 07.00hrs and 23.00hrs. Between 23.00hrs and
07.00hrs, ‘T’ refers to any 5 minute period.
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the
City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
98942995
5
APPLICATION No:
10/59378/HH
APPLICANT:
Mr L Lampin
LOCATION:
150 Leicester Road, Salford, M7 4GA
PROPOSAL:
Alterations to the roof from hip to gable, raising of the ridge and
construction of a rear dormer
WARD:
Kersal
Description of Site and Surrounding Area
This application relates to a semi detached dwelling on Leicester Road, Salford 7. The area is predominantly
residential in nature with a mix of house types. The property has a large garden area to the rear, beyond which
is Park Avenue. The property has an existing part single/part two storey rear extension which would be retained.
There are a number of trees to the rear of the site, however they would not be affected by the proposed
development and as such a tree survey is not required. The adjoining property, 148 Leicester Road has an
existing single storey rear extension which is set in away from the common boundary as well as a single storey
succah adjacent to the common boundary with the application site. The adjacent property has an existing single
storey rear element which is set in away from the common boundary as well as an existing single storey
detached garage to the side/rear of the property which runs flush with the common boundary with the
application site.
Description of Proposal
Permission is sought for alterations to the roof of the main dwelling from a hip to a gable along with the raising
of the ridge height and construction of a rear dormer.
The hip to gable alteration would square off the roof of the existing dwelling. It is proposed to raise the ridge by
0.35m increasing the highest point of the dwelling to 7.8m.
The proposed rear dormer would be set in 0.7m from the side gable of the dwelling. It would be 7.1m in width
and would be approximately 2.3m in height with a flat roof. It would be L shaped and would be sited within the
roof of the main dwelling and the roof of the existing two storey rear extension.
Internally the proposed development would accommodate a lounge, bedroom, bathroom, two store rooms and a
landing for use by the applicant’s disabled son.
The applicants have submitted a letter in support of the application outlining the personal circumstances of their
son.
Neighbour Notification
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 and 2 Castlefield Avenue
123, 125, 158 and 152 Leicester Road
3 and 4 Eskrigge Close
6 and 8 Park Avenue
Representations
None received to date
Councillor Connor has requested that this application be determined by the Planning and Transportation
Regulatory Panel due to the personal circumstances of the applicants.
98942995
6
Planning Policy Framework
Development Plan Policy
Unitary Development Plan - Policy DES1 - Respecting Context
Unitary Development Plan - Policy DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
Unitary Development Plan - Policy DES8 - Alterations and Extensions
Other Material Considerations
Supplementary Planning Document - House Extension
Appraisal
The main issues for consideration in relation to this proposal are the impact of the proposed development on the
amenity of the surrounding residents, and the impact of the proposed development on the character of the area.
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.
Policy HE10 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for the
erection of dormers on the roof plane facing an adopted highway, on a hipped side roof plane, or those that
wrap around two or more different slopes unless they can be designed in a way which does not have an
unacceptable impact on the street scene. In order to be considered acceptable, dormers will normally need to
be: sited below the ridge line of the dwelling, set well back from the eaves line, set well in from the eaves line
and not built of any external walls. The principles of this policy can also be applied to dormer extensions that do
not front a highway.
The proposed development would be visible within the street scene of Leicester Road. The proposed
development would also be visible from Park Avenue, which is to the rear of the site, although views from Park
Avenue would be limited due to the large rear garden of the application site and the mature trees to the rear.
The permitted development regulations allow the alteration of the roof of a dwelling from a hip to a gable without
the need for planning permission. As such the proposed hip to gable alteration could be built under permitted
development if it did not involve the raising of the ridge height. The design of the proposed rear dormer,
although large in scale with a flat roof is considered to be acceptable given its location to the rear of the property
and that there are a number of existing dormers in the surrounding area of a similar size and design.
It is proposed to raise the ridge height of the dwelling by 0.35m. The remainder of the proposed development,
namely the hip to gable alteration and the rear dormer rely on the proposed raising of the ridge height, with the
rear dormer being sited approximately 0.15m below the proposed new ridge line and the hip to gable alteration
also following the line of the new ridge height.
The application property forms half of a pair of semi detached dwellings, both of which currently have hipped
roofs as do the adjacent pairs of semi detached dwellings. To the front of the application site, on the opposite
side of Leicester Road are semi detached dwellings of differing sizes and design. The application properties
form part of a uniform row of semi detached dwellings which are all of the same design and appearance. It is
considered, therefore, that the increase in ridge height to only one of the pair of dwellings, along with the hip to
gable alteration and the rear dormer, would result in an incongruous feature which would not respect the
general rhythm, proportions and appearance of the pair of semi detached dwellings and that of the wider
surrounding area, along the east side of Leicester Road.
98942995
7
The submitted plans indicate that the existing chimney at the site would hide the increase in ridge height,
however this would only be the case from a very limited number of points. The increase would be clearly visible
from within the street scene of Leicester Road.
It is considered, therefore, that the proposed roof alterations and raising of the ridge height would not respect
the rhythm, proportions and appearance of the existing pair of semi detached dwellings and would result in an
unacceptable detrimental impact on the street scene of Leicester Road contrary to policies DES1, DES8 of the
UPD.
Paragraph 4.1 of the House extensions SPD states that 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 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.
This is also supported by the recently adopted Personal Circumstances Guidance Note which details that
personal circumstances should be submitted at the outset with the application. The note also outlines what
details are required to enable personal circumstances to be given weight.
In support of the application the applicants have submitted a letter outlining their personal circumstances. The
letter states they have a 20 year old disabled son who suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome. They state that the
proposed development would allow him to start learning independent living skills and have his own space whilst
at the same time he would be near enough for his parents to supervise and guide him. In addition they consider
that this would benefit the whole family as his disturbing behaviours and mannerisms takes a toll on them all.
Whilst it is acknowledged that the applicants and their family would benefit from additional space only very
limited information has been provided in relation to their personal circumstances. No letter from an adequately
qualified person has been provided. Given the lack of information submitted, the personal circumstances of the
applicant can only be given very limited weight and do not outweigh detrimental impacts of the proposed
development in terms of its impact on the rhythm, proportions and appearance of the pair of semi detached
dwellings and that of the wider surrounding area along the east side of Leicester Road. Additional information
has been requested from the agent, however this has not been forthcoming.
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 user of other development.
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). In the case of ground floor windows it may be
possible to reduce this distance where adequate screening is provided.
The proposed development would introduce habitable room windows in its rear elevation. The distance
maintained to the rear boundary of the site would be approximately 40m. Beyond this is the road with the
properties to the rear being approximately 50m away at their closest point in accordance with policy HE1.
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 neighbouring dwellings.
The reasoned justification to this policy considers the term ‘close to’ refers to 5m, however this can be
overcome with obscure glazing, except to principal habitable room windows.
The side elevation of the proposed dormer extension would introduce a bathroom window approximately 3.6m
from the common boundary with 152 Leicester Road. The submitted plans do not indicate that this window
would be obscure glazed. However given that this window would serve a bathroom it is likely that it would be
obscure glazed. In addition the window would only face the blank side gable of 152 Leicester Road and its
98942995
8
driveway. It is considered, therefore, that a condition requiring the obscure glazing of this window is not
necessary.
There are no habitable room windows in the side gable of 152 Leicester Road or in the side of the existing
single storey rear extension at 148 Leicester Road.
Policy HE7 of the House Extensions SPD states in the absence of an extension along the common boundary to
the adjoining dwelling planning permission will normally be granted for a two storey/first floor rear extension
provided its projection is equal too or less than its distance from the nearest common boundary. The principle of
this policy can be applied to adjacent properties.
The proposed rear dormer would be sited in the roof space of the main dwelling and the existing two storey rear
element at the application property.
The adjoining property, 148 Leicester Road has an existing single storey rear extension along the common
boundary with the application site. The proposed rear dormer would not project beyond the single storey rear
extension at number 148. In order to assess the impact of the proposed rear dormer on the first floor windows in
the main rear elevation of 148 Leicester Road the principles of policy HE7 can be applied. Part of the proposed
dormer would project approximately 2.4m beyond the main rear elevation of 148 Leicester Road, however it
would be set in approximately 4m from the common boundary in accordance with the principles of policy HE7.
The adjacent property, 152 Leicester Road has a single storey rear extension, however it is set in away from the
common boundary with the application site. The main rear elevation of 152 Leicester Road has no ground floor
windows adjacent to the common boundary with the application site (the ground floor windows are on the
opposite side of the single storey extension adjacent to the common boundary with 152 Leicester Road). It also
has no first floor habitable room windows adjacent to the common boundary, with the closest windows being
obscure glazed. The proposed rear dormer would project approximately 3.2m beyond the main rear elevation of
152 Leicester Road and would be set in approximately 7m from its side gable.
It is considered therefore that the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable loss of light or be
overbearing to the occupiers of surrounding properties.
The proposed development would accommodate habitable rooms, namely a lounge and a bedroom. The
bedroom would be served by a large window in the rear elevation of the dormer and as such would provide its
users with an adequate level of light and outlook. The lounge would be served by three velux windows, however
no outlook would be provided to this room. Given that there are a number of other usable living areas within the
property and taking into account the personal circumstances of the applicants its is considered that the
proposed development would provide its users with an adequate level of amenity in accordance with policy
DES7.
Conclusions/Summary
It is considered that the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the
occupiers of the application property and surrounding properties. However it is considered that the proposed
roof alterations and raising of the ridge height would not respect the character and appearance of the existing
pair of semi detached dwellings and would result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the street scene
contrary to policies DES1, DES8 of the UPD. The personal circumstances of the applicants have been
considered and it is considered that they do not outweigh the detrimental impacts of the proposed development
in terms of its impact on the character and appearance of the pair of semi detached dwellings and that of the
wider surrounding area. The application is therefore recommended for refusal.
Recommendation
Refuse
1.
The proposed roof alterations and raising of the roof height would not respect the rhythm, proportions and
appearance of the existing pair of semi detached dwellings and would result in a discordant and
98942995
9
incongruous feature detrimental to the appearance of this pair of semi detached houses and the street
scene (Leicester Road) contrary to policies DES1 and DES8 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan.
Notes to Applicant
1.
98942995
Please note this refusal relates to drawing numbers 330/001, 330/002 and 330/003
10