PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
APPLICATION No:
04/47827/COU
APPLICANT:
CCS (Skip Hire) Ltd
LOCATION:
Yard 2, The Oasis, Northbank Industrial Estate, Brinell Drive Irlam
PROPOSAL:
Change of use from open storage to skip hire business involving waste
transfer station
WARD:
Cadishead
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
Planning permission is sought for a change of use from open storage to a skip hire business at Yard 2 to the
rear of The Oasis building at Brinell Drive, Northbank Industrial Estate, Irlam. The proposal is to operate a
waste transfer station (WTS) for untreated domestic and commercial waste (not including food waste),
industrial waste and construction industry waste, involving 25000 tonnes of waste per year within the 851m
sq. area of the site. Yard 2 lies to the rear of an open storage site bound by palisade fencing, containing a
storage building called The Oasis. The proposal includes building and engineering operations to erect two
tipping bays, a bulk container, a site building and the storage of skips up to 3 metres in height along the
southwest side of Yard 2. An existing building accommodating a toilet would be maintained under the
proposal, which is sited in the southern corner of the site. The applicant has agreed as an amendment to the
proposal to accommodate unloading of the skips within a three walled roofed enclosure to be located within
the site, details of which are covered by attached conditions. A grab machine (excavator) is the only
proposed plant to be used on site. Adjacent uses are warehousing (TNT) to the northwest, Libra Chemicals
to the southwest, Manchester Investment Castings Ltd. to the northeast and City Site Mix to the south,
which is a concrete mixing and storage yard.
SITE HISTORY
(E/28013)
Use of part of scaffolding yard for concrete distribution at land on Brinell Drive, Irlam: Approved 1991
(E/28505)
Erection of an industrial unit (B2) together with associated car parking at plot 49 Brinell Drive, Irlam:
Approved 1991
A condition is attached to the planning permission for application (E/28505), which states that storage
heights shall not exceed the height of the boundary fence unless otherwise agreed in writing by the LPA.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – No objections. Recommend an enclosure to be provided for
unloading skips to assist in the containment of potential nuisance and there to be no burning on site.
1
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Northbank Management Company – No comments received
Environment Agency – No objections. Recommend an enclosure to be provided for unloading skips to
assist in the containment of potential nuisance.
Greater Manchester Geological Unit – Recommend an enclosure to be provided for unloading skips to
assist in the containment of potential nuisance.
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 9th March 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
TNT, Brinell Drive
Libra Chemicals, Brinell Drive
The Oasis, Brinell Drive
Manchester Investment Castings Limited, Brinell Drive
Omega Engineering Limited, 1 Omega Drive
City Site Mix, Martens Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 3 letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The following issues
have been raised: Nuisance from litter, dust and odour generation
Noise from seagulls and diggers etc.
Application unclear if it is for storing and sorting waste as well as the use of skips
Screening/planting should be provided between the site and the new bypass under construction
Conditions attached to any permission should be strictly enforced
Increased problems with pest control
Fire risk
Water/chemical run off
Out of character with the prestigious nature and use of Northbank Industrial Estate
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
MW11 Waste Recycling and Bulk Reduction
MW15 Development Control – Waste Criteria
DEV1 Development Criteria
T13 Car Parking
EN20 Pollution Control
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
W1 Waste Management
2
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
DES1 Respecting Context
DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours
A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
EN14 Pollution Control
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are:
o
o
o
o
Impact on visual amenity
Impact on pollution of the environment and associated nuisance to neighbouring occupiers
Impact on traffic considerations
Impact on drainage of the site
The relevant policies of the application are:
Policies MW11 and MW15 support proposals that recycle waste and conserve resources unless residential
amenity is unduly affected or the proposal would have an unacceptable impact on a recreation area. Policy
W1 supports the same principles and aims of the above policies. The proposal to operate a waste transfer
station in this location and to sort material to be recycled is supported in accordance with the above policies.
Policy EN20 of the Adopted UDP and policy EN14 of the Replacement Plan seek to prevent harm to the
environment that may be caused by development proposals. Policies T13 and A10 ensure the provision of
adequate vehicular facilities in developments. Policies DEV1 and DES1 set criteria to protect the amenity
of the area and policies DEV1 and DES7 seek to protect the amenity of neighbouring users and occupiers.
Impact on visual amenity
Yard 2 is bound by palisade fencing to the rear and mesh fencing to the sides and front of the site. The yard
to the front of the site is used for open storage, thus stored materials and the boundary and landscaping
treatment to Brinell Drive provide some screening to the north. The site is set back 75m from Brinell Drive.
The applicant proposes to erect 2.7m high palisade fencing with attached colour treated wooden panels
around the site that would be out of character with the area. An appropriate boundary treatment to screen
the site with tree planting along the rear (southeast) boundary of the site would be secured by attached
condition 2, I consider that the visual amenity of the locality and the Cadishead bypass would be maintained
by the proposal and the visual amenity of the site would be improved. The proposed enclosure for unloading
of the skips, is conditioned to control its appearance.
Impact on pollution of the environment and associated nuisance to neighbouring occupiers
No conditions restricting hours of use are attached because I consider it would be unreasonable given the
surrounding industrial occupiers have no conditions placed on their hours of use. The potential for nuisance
and pollution from noise, vibration, wind blown litter, dust, vermin, leachate, smoke and odour would be
controlled by conditions as attached below. Screening included in attached condition 2 would assist in
reducing wind blown litter to land outside the site. The proposed enclosure would help to reduce the impact
of the above types of nuisance to neighbouring occupiers and the associated sprinkler system would be
provided within and to the front elevation of the enclosure to damp down dust. These measures would help
to reduce nuisance and pollution to surrounding land, consistent with polices DEV1, EN20, MW11,
MW15, W1, DES7 and EN14.
3
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Impact on traffic considerations
The initial objections relating to traffic issues raised by the extra information submitted by the applicant in
the submitted Working Statement have now been addressed by a site meeting, held on 22nd June 2004. No
allocated car parking is shown in the submitted ‘site map’ plan contained within the working statement and
the size of the proposed turning circle would be insufficient for the vehicles, plant and equipment associated
with the proposed use. The applicant has stated that a shared turning area is available within the yard to the
front of the site, located outside Yard 2 and that the required allocated car parking space is available to the
rear of the Oasis building, also located outside Yard 2. The area labelled as a turning circle in the submitted
plan would be required for the loading and unloading of vehicles, thus condition 13 is attached. The wheel
washing facilities to be provided under attached condition 9 would have to be sited outside Yard 2 to enable
adequate space for the waste operations and vehicle movements within Yard 2. I consider that the land
within the yard to the front of the site that is shared by the applicant could be used to accommodate the
necessary wheel washing facilities. I consider that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the
vehicular requirements of neighbouring occupiers or Yard 2, consistent with policies T13, A10, DEV1,
MW11, MW15, W1 and DES7.
Impact on drainage of the site
Condition 2 would allow Yard 2 to be resurfaced to a standard suitable for the end use. Following the
submission of the Working Statement, the Environment Agency is satisfied with the proposed drainage
systems for the site, consistent with policies DEV1, MW11, MW15 and W1. Thus the initial drainage issues
raised by the GMGU have been addressed.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
Thus Conditions are attached to this permission to secure the appropriate development of the site, the
amenity of the area and the amenity of neighbouring occupiers.
CONCLUSION
The proposal would contribute to sustainable waste management advocated in policies MW11, MW15 and
W1, which seek to encourage higher recycling rates subject to the protection of the environment, the
amenity of neighbouring occupiers and the compatibility of the site with surrounding land uses. The
Environment Agency advises that the site would be capable of accommodating the quantities of waste
proposed.
The site is situated in an accessible location outside residential areas, thereby achieving minimal impact on
the local population and the environment. The proposal would employ four staff, bring a vacant site within
an industrial estate into beneficial use and is consistent with PPG10, being sited in an ideal location
consistent with polices MW11, MW15 and W1. I have no highway or drainage objections and recommend
approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
4
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. 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.
3. This permission shall relate to the amended plan received on 15th March 2004 which shows drainage
details of the site.
4. Within two months of the date of this permission, the developer shall submit a Dust Management Plan
for the written approval of the Director of Development Services. The Dust Management Plan shall
identify all areas of the site and site operations where dust may be generated and further identify control
methods to ensure that dust does not travel beyond the site boundary. Once in place, all identified
measures shall be implemented and maintained at all times. Should any equipment used to control dust
fail, the site shall cease all material handling operations immediately until the dust control equipment
has been repaired or replaced.
5. Prior to the erection of any building, the developer shall submit a site investigation report for the
approval of the Director of Development Services. The investigation shall address the nature, degree
and distribution of ground contamination on site and shall include an identification and assessment of
the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focusing
primarily on risks to human health and controlled waters. The investigation shall also address the
implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building
structures, on services and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including
ecological systems and property.
The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Director of Development Services prior
to the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works contained within the
approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to bringing any building into use.
Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be submitted to
the Director of Environmental Services for approval. The Site Completion Report shall validate that all
works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Director of
Development Services.
6. All equipment on site shall be maintained and serviced as indicated by the equipment manufacturers
recommendations. All equipment shall be given special attention to reducing extraneous noise from
squeaks or rattles. A log of all service, repair and maintenance records shall be kept available for
inspection by any representative of the City Council's Development Control Section or Environmental
Services Directorate at any reasonable time.
7. The use hereby permitted shall not be started until a scheme of sound attenuation to deal with the
internally and externally generated noise within the site has been submitted to and approved in writing
by the Director of Development Services. The scheme shall address the potential for any noise nuisance
to occur which may impact upon the amenity of neighbouring noise sensitive premises during the
operational phase of the proposal. The scheme shall identify fully all control measures which are
5
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
required to control the impact of the nuisance. All approved measures identified shall be implemented
and retained throughout the duration of any works during the construction phase. All approved
measures for the operational stage shall be retained and maintained thereafter. A verification report
shall be submitted for written approval to the Director of Development Services confirming that all
measures recommended by the noise report have been implemented in full prior to the first occupation
of the site. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved particulars prior to the
use first commencing.
8. The applicant shall contact Environmental Services Directorate providing at least 10 working days
notice before allowing any other Screening or Crushing Plant to be installed on site - either of a
temporary or permanent fixture. Any such equipment brought in on a temporary basis shall be shall be
accompanied by a copy of the relevant Authorisation or Permit issued by the Local Authority from
which the equipment normally resides. No such equipment shall be permitted to be operated without
written consent being provided from the Environmental Services Directorate.
9. Temporary wheel wash facilities shall be provided within three months of the date of this permission
and permanent wheel wash facilities shall be provided within twelve months of the date of this
permission in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services. Such facilities shall be used every time that a vehicle leaves the site.
10. This permission shall relate to the use of the site hereby approved for the importation, storage, sorting
and recycling of the materials identified in the submitted Working Statement dated 13th May 2004
only.
11. The height of all material stockpile areas and skips, storage bays and containers, subject of this
permission, shall not exceed 3 metres above the ground level of the site at any time.
12. The maximum tonnage of all material stockpile areas, subject of this permission, shall not exceed 2484
tonnes as measured over a period of 1 month at any time.
13. Prior to any part of the site first becoming operational, a car parking layout showing 4 car parking
spaces, 1 HGV parking space, equipment and plant parking space and a layout plan to show a vehicular
turning area shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development Services.
Such facilities shall be marked out and hardsurfaced prior to the first use hereby approved and made
available thereafter at all times the premises are in use.
14. There shall be no burning on the site at any time.
15. Litter within the site shall be contained within an appropriate storage container or enclosure and shall
be cleared by 20:00 hours every day that the use is operational.
16. Notwithstanding the submitted details, prior to first operation of the use hereby approved, a lighting
scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development Services. Such
scheme shall contain details of the colour and type of facing materials, height, design, appearance and
siting of the lighting columns and flood lights and the spread, times and intensity of illumination. Prior
to first operation of the use hereby approved such lighting shall be directed to prevent nuisance to
surrounding properties and such measures and lighting scheme once approved shall be implemented
and maintained thereafter whilst the use is operational.
6
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
17. Notwithstanding the submitted details, a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Director of Development Services prior to first operation of the use hereby approved to provide details
of a three walled roofed enclosure to be provided within the curtilage of the site to accommodate waste
handling operations and the storage of waste up to a volume of 828.00 cubic metres. Such scheme shall
include full details of the siting, design, appearance, colour and type of facing materials, dimensions
and height of the three walled roofed enclosure and associated internal and external sprinkler system
and cctv cameras to be provided as part of the aforementioned development. Such scheme once
approved in writing by the Director of Development Services shall be implemented and maintained
thereafter whilst the use hereby approved is operational.
18. Notwithstanding the submitted details, a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Director of Development Services prior to first operation of the use hereby approved to provide details
and plans of the siting, design, appearance, colour and type of facing materials, height, dimensions and
number of the tipping and storage bays, site building, bulk container and the existing toilet building
shown in the submitted plan contained within the submitted Working Statement dated 13th May 2004
and any associated cctv cameras. Such scheme once approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services shall be implemented and maintained thereafter whilst the use hereby approved
is operational.
19. The area labelled as a turning circle in the submitted site plan contained within the submitted Working
Statement dated 13th May 2004 shall be used for the loading and unloading of vehicles only and once
implemented such loading and unloading area(s) shall be maintained free of obstruction at all times the
use hereby permitted is operational.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R003 Sketch Layout/Details
4. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
5. Standard Reason R028A Public safety
6. To ensure that the amenities of nearby occupiers and the character of the locality are not adversely
affected by noise and nuisance in accordance with policy DEV1 of the City of Salford Unitary
Development Plan.
7. To ensure that the amenities of nearby occupiers and the character of the locality are not adversely
affected by noise and nuisance in accordance with policy DEV1 of the City of Salford Unitary
Development Plan.
8. To ensure that the amenities of nearby occupiers and the character of the locality are not adversely
affected by noise and nuisance in accordance with policy DEV1 of the City of Salford Unitary
Development Plan.
7
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
9. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
10. For the avoidance of doubt and to exercise control over the type of materials treated on the site in the
interests of general amenity and public safety in accordance with policies MW11 and MW15 of the City
of Salford Adopted Unitary Development Plan and policy W1 of the City of Salford Revised Deposit
Draft Replacement Unitary Development Plan.
11. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
12. For the avoidance of doubt and in accordance with policies MW11 and MW15 of the City of Salford
Adopted Unitary Development Plan and policy W1 of the City of Salford Revised Deposit Draft
Replacement Unitary Development Plan.
13. Standard Reason R012A Parking only within curtilage
14. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
15. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
16. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
17. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
18. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
19. Standard Reason R011A Parking, turning etc within curtilage
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
MW11 Waste Recycling and Bulk Reduction
MW15 Development Control - Waste Criteria
DEV1 Development Criteria
T13 Car Parking
EN20 Pollution Control
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
W1 Waste Management
DES1 Respecting Context
8
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours
A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
EN14 Pollution Control
2. The applicant is advised to contact United Utilities with regard to the yard drainage, which will require
alteration to ensure that run off is intercepted and discharged via an oil interceptor to the foul drainage
system and that a trade effluent consent will be required.
3. This application has been assessed on the basis of the submitted application including part 6 of the
application form.
4. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to
the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all
development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
APPLICATION No:
04/47881/FUL
APPLICANT:
Gleeson Homes North West
LOCATION:
Land At Lumns Lane And Agecroft Road Pendlebury Swinton
PROPOSAL:
Erection of 58 residential dwellings and 96 apartments with associated
car parking together with the creation of a new vehicular access and
alterations to an existing pedestrian access
WARD:
Pendlebury
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application site is currently disused and occupied only by trees and shrubs. The site is bounded by the
railway line to the west and Agecroft Road to the south, beyond which are residential properties. To the
north of the site is the area for the proposed Slack Brook Country Park and to the east is Lumns Lane,
beyond which is a playing field and an area of open land.
The proposed development comprises two phases. The 58 houses would be erected on Phase 1 and the 96
apartments on Phase 2. There would be a total of 130 car parking spaces for the proposed apartments. Each
of the proposed dwellings would have a minimum of one off-street car parking space, either through the
provision of a garage or a driveway. Vehicular access into the site would be achieved from Agecroft Road
and a service road would then provide access to each of the dwellings. Landscaping would be provided
along the boundaries of the site with Agecroft Road and Lumns Lane.
The application includes the provision of a footpath/cycle way through the site linking Agecroft Road to the
proposed Country Park. The footpath would be in the region of 10m wide. To the rear of the site is a wooded
area which would be retained and open to the public as an area of informal open space.
SITE HISTORY
In February 2004, a full planning application was submitted for the erection of 60 residential dwellings on
part of the application site, with associated car parking together with the creation of a new vehicular access
9
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
and alterations to an existing pedestrian access (ref: 04/47878/FUL). That application is yet to be
determined.
In February 2000, planning permission was granted for the erection of 56 dwellings with vehicular access
off Agecroft Road (ref: 99/39133/FUL).
In March 1998, planning permission was granted for the erection of 115 dwellings with vehicular access off
Lumns Lane (ref: 97/36458/FUL).
CONSULTATIONS
British Coal – no objections
Director of Environmental Services – recommends a condition requiring details of noise protection
measures
Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – advises that the site is poorly served by public
transport, but that the layout of the scheme does take account of pedestrian safety through the provision of
road humps and footpath links.
Greater Manchester Geological Unit – comments received relating to contamination and a number of
conditions have been recommended
Environment Agency – no objections but recommends a condition requiring the provision and
implementation of a surface water regulation system in order to reduce the risk of flooding
Greater Manchester Archaeological Unit – no objections
Police Architectural Liaison Officer – no comments received to date
Network Rail – no comments received to date
Open Spaces Society – no comments received to date
Ramblers Association – no comments received to date
Peak and Northern Footpath Society – no comments received to date
Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – no comments received to date
PUBLICITY
The proposal has been publicised by way of press and site notices.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
2 – 30 (E) Agecroft Road
1-6 Park Lane West
4 – 7 Frankby Close
10
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
3 – 38 (E) Pendlecroft Avenue
Biffa Waste
1 – 7 Lock Keepers Mews
1 – 7 Kilcoby Avenue
1 – 7 Bolbany Crescent
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received four letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity. I have also
received one letter in support of the application from the owner of part of the site. The following issues have
been raised:
Increase in traffic
Loss of trees
Additional access onto Agecroft Road
Overlooking
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: H9/16 – Sites for New Housing – Lumns Lane/Agecroft Road, Pendlebury (3.3ha)
EN5 – Nature Conservation
EN17 – Croal-Irwell Valley
EN23 – Croal-Irwell Valley
Other policies: H4 – Housing Allocation
DEV1 – Development Criteria
DEV2 – Good Design
T13 – Car Parking
T2 – Network of Major Roads of More Than Local Importance
T10 – Pedestrians
EN20 – Pollution Control
EN10 - Landscape
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: EN6 – Irwell Valley
EN7D – Wildlife Corridors
R4 – Key Recreation Areas
Other policies: DES1 – Respecting Context
H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
H8 – Open Space Provision Associated with New Housing Development
DEV7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
A1 – Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
A8 – Impact of Development on the Highway Network
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
A2 – Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
DES9 – Landscaping
EN13 – Contaminated Land
11
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
PLANNING APPRAISAL
I consider the main issues in the determination of this planning application to be: whether the principle of
the proposed development is acceptable; whether the proposal would provide adequate access into the
proposed Slack Brook Country Park; whether there would be an unacceptable detrimental impact on the
highway network as a result of the proposal; whether the applicants would make an appropriate
contribution to the provision of open space; whether issues of contamination have been taken into account;
whether the layout and design of the site is acceptable; and whether the proposal complies with the relevant
provisions of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP. I will deal with each in turn
below.
The Principle of the Proposed Development
Adopted Policy H9/16 identifies the application site as a site for new housing, in accordance with Policy
H4. It states that outline planning permission for the development of the site for residential purposes was
granted in 1987. As the site lies on the edge of the proposed Slack Brook Country Park, the reasoned
justification states that pedestrian access into the Country Park should be provided as part of the housing
development.
Adopted Policy H4 states that the Council will ensure that housing land capable of accommodating 6,000
dwellings is available for development between 1986 and 2001.
Adopted Policy EN5 states that the Council will seek to improve the environment for nature through the
identification, protection, improvement and promotion of an integrated network of wildlife habitats and
corridors.
Adopted Policy EN17 states that the Council is committed to conserving and improving the Croal-Irwell
Valley as a significant environmental, wildlife and recreational resource.
Adopted Policy EN23 outlines a number of factors on which particular emphasis will be placed within the
Croal-Irwell Valley. These include the control of unsympathetic industrial development and the promotion
of high standards of design.
Draft Policy H1 states that new housing development should, inter alia, contribute to the provision of a
balanced mix of dwellings within the local area, provide a high quality residential environment and make
adequate provision for open space.
Draft Policy EN6 states that development within the Irwell Valley will not be permitted where it would be
contrary to a number of factors, including where it would reduce public accessibility of the valley, result in
the unacceptable loss of land of acknowledged recreational value or have an unacceptable impact on
important views into, through or within the valley.
Draft Policy EN7D states that development which would affect land which functions as a wildlife corridor
would not be permitted.
Draft Policy R4 states that planning permission will only be granted on land within, adjoining or directly
affecting a Key Recreation Area where it would be consistent with a number of objectives, including the
protection and enhancement of the existing and potential recreational use of the area, the protection and
12
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
improvement of the amenity of the area, the provision of public access for walking and cycling and the
provision of open land recreational uses.
The site is allocated for residential development in the Adopted UDP. In addition, part of the site benefits
from an extant permission for the erection of 56 dwellings. That extant permission is an important
consideration in the assessment of the acceptability of this application. That scheme is not of such a high
standard as that currently under consideration. Due to the siting of the dwellings, the scheme turns its back
on both Agecroft Road and Lumns Lane and does not make satisfactory provision for a footpath/cycle link
through the site between Agecroft Road and the Country Park, as required by Adopted Policy H9. The
application currently under consideration includes dwellings which front onto Agecroft Road, thereby
presenting a more frontage to the street. It also includes a footpath/cycle link, which will be discussed in
more detail in a subsequent section of this report.
I acknowledge that the site is located within the Croal-Irwell Valley and an area of search for wildlife
habitats and corridors in both the Adopted and Revised UDPs, and is also allocated for recreational
purposes in the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP under Policy R4. I do not however consider that
the development of the site for residential purposes would be contrary to the policies relating to the
Croal-Irwell Valley or wildlife corridors. Whilst the development of the site for residential purposes would
not be in strict accordance with Draft Policy R4, I am of the opinion that the weight to be attached to that
policy is less than that to be attached to the extant permission. I consider it preferable to allow the
development of the site in the manner currently proposed than that proposed by the extant permission,
which the applicants have confirmed would be implemented should permission not be granted for this
scheme.
I am therefore of the opinion that the proposal complies with Adopted Policy H9 and I am therefore
satisfied that the principle of the proposal is acceptable.
Link to the Country Park
Adopted Policy H9/16 states that as the site lies on the edge of the proposed Slack Brook Country Park, the
reasoned justification states that pedestrian access into the Country Park should be provided as part of the
housing development.
Adopted Policy T10 seeks to ensure that the needs of pedestrians throughout the city are given greater
attention by improving and developing pedestrian links between residential areas and recreational areas.
Draft Policy A2 states development proposals will be required to make adequate provision for safe and
convenient access by cyclists and pedestrians.
The application proposes the provision of a footpath/cycle link through the site from Agecroft Road to the
proposed Country Park. The path would be in the region of 10m in width and would include a pathway and
landscaping. It is located so as to maximise natural surveillance and reduce conflict between pedestrians
and vehicles travelling within the site, but without prejudicing the layout of the development. This element
of the application has been amended in order to improve pedestrian/cycle links to the Country Park, in
accordance with Adopted Policy H9/16. The Section 106 Agreement requires full details of this link,
including surface and boundary treatment, lighting and landscaping, to be submitted, approved and
implemented. It also requires this footpath to be retained and made available for use by members of the
public.
13
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
In light of the above, I am satisfied that the application accords with Adopted policies H9/16 and T10 and
Draft Policy A2 in this regard.
Impact on the Highway Network
Adopted Policy T13 states that the Council will ensure that adequate parking and servicing is provided to
meet the needs of new development, in accordance with the Council’s standards and that car parks are
designed to a high standard, with particular regard to access arrangements, surface materials, boundary
treatments and security measures.
Adopted Policy T2 states that the Council will safeguard the network of roads of more than local
importance, including the A6044 Agecroft Road. Proposals likely to have a materially harmful impact on
the network’s ability to accommodate appropriate traffic flows will only be permitted if they include
measures to deal with that impact.
Draft Policy A1 requires planning applications for developments which would give rise to significant
transport implications will not be permitted unless they are accompanied by a transport assessment and,
where appropriate, a travel plan.
Draft Policy A8 states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact
on highway safety and on the ability of the Strategic Route Network to accommodate appropriate traffic
flows. The A6044 Agecroft Road is identified as forming part of the Strategic Route Network.
Draft Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and
motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s maximum standards. It also states that the maximum car
parking standards should not be exceeded.
In accordance with Draft Policy A1, the applicants have submitted a Transport Assessment in support of the
application. I can confirm that I am satisfied that this proposal would not have an unacceptable detrimental
impact on the highway network by virtue of traffic generation. I also consider the proposed vehicular access
point into the site from Agecroft Road to be acceptable, particularly in light of the approval in 2000, which
also proposed access from Agecroft Road. I am therefore satisfied that the application accords with
Adopted Policy T2 and Draft Policy A8.
In terms of car parking within the site, it is proposed to provide 130 parking spaces for the 96 apartments. I
consider this level of parking to be acceptable. Off-street car parking for the proposed houses would be
provided either in the form of garages or driveways. I consider the proposed level of car parking to be
acceptable and I therefore consider that the application accords with Adopted Policy T13 and Draft Policy
A10.
Open Space
Policy H6 requires adequate provision of informal open space and children’s play within new housing
developments. This policy is linked to Policy H11 which sets out a sliding scale for such provision.
Policy H8 requires adequate and appropriate provision to be made for formal and informal open space
within housing developments.
14
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
In accordance with the above policies, the applicants have agreed to make a contribution towards open
space. This would be through a combination of on-site provision and the provision of a commuted sum
towards open space in the vicinity. The proposed footpath/cycle link and the wooded area to the rear of the
site would constitute the on-site informal open space provision. As with the footpath/cycle link, details of
the provision of footpaths and lighting within the wooded area are required by the Section 106 Agreement.
The applicants would make a financial contribution towards the provision of formal open space off-site, as
well as towards the maintenance of both the formal and informal open space. The level of contribution
required has been agreed by having regard to the contribution required as part of the extant permission,
where a maximum of £30,000 was agreed. I do however consider that the on-site provision and financial
contribution now agreed represents a fair and reasonable compromise and is in accordance with Adopted
policies H6 and H11 and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on open space.
Contamination and Landfill Gas
Adopted Policy EN20 states that the Council will support and encourage measures to reduce land
contamination and noise. It states that development such as housing will not normally be permitted where
existing pollution, including land contamination, is unacceptable unless it can be demonstrated that the
development includes sufficient improvement measures to reduce the nuisance to an acceptable level.
Draft Policy EN13 requires the submission of a site investigation report with planning applications for the
development of contaminated sites.
In accordance with Draft Policy EN13, the applicants submitted a site investigation report with the
application which has been considered by the GMGU. The site has been landfilled and is a gassing site. The
layout of the site has been influenced by the level of contamination and landfill gas. Phase 2 is more heavily
contaminated than Phase 1 and therefore comprises solely of apartments. Having received advice from the
GMGU, I have attached a number of conditions relating to landfill gas in order to ensure that the safety of
future residents is not compromised. The S106 agreement also makes requirements of the applicants in
respect of contamination. Given the previous permissions for residential development on the site, and in
light of the conditions attached and the contents of the S106 agreements, I am satisfied that this application
accords with Adopted Policy EN20 and Draft Policy EN13.
Layout and Design of the Proposal
Adopted Policy DEV1 outlines a number of criteria to which regard should be had in the determination of
planning applications. Of most relevance to this application are the location of the proposed development,
including its relationship to existing and proposed land uses, the size and density of the proposed
development and the visual appearance of the development.
Adopted Policy DEV2 states that planning permission will not normally be granted unless the Council is
satisfied with the quality of the design and the appearance of the development.
Adopted Policy EN10 states that the City Council will protect and enhance landscape quality through the
provision of improved standards of landscaping within all new developments.
Draft Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context and to respect the character
of the surrounding area. In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with this policy, regard will be
had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings and the quality and
appropriateness of proposed materials.
15
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Draft Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of
amenity. Development which would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users
of other developments will not normally be permitted.
Draft Policy DES9 states that landscaping should be of a high quality, reflect the character of the area and
the development, not detract from safety and security and form an integral part of the development.
Given the siting of the proposed dwellings and the distance between the application site and neighbouring
residential properties, I am satisfied that there would be no unacceptable loss of privacy or detrimental
impact on the amenity of existing residents as a result of this proposal. The siting of the dwellings ahs also
been amended in order to reduce any overlooking or loss of privacy within the site itself. I am of the opinion
that the application accords with Adopted Policy DEV1 and Draft Policy DES7.
I have attached a condition requiring samples of the materials of the proposed dwellings and apartments to
be submitted and approved. I am satisfied that this will ensure that the materials are of a suitably high
quality and in keeping with the surrounding area, in accordance with Adopted Policy DEV2 and Draft
Policy DES1.
As well as attaching conditions requiring details of landscaping to the footpath/cycle link and wooded area,
I have attached a condition requiring details of landscaping within the remainder of the site. I am satisfied
that this will ensure that the landscaping meets the criteria of Draft Policy DES9.
Other Issues
One objector is concerned regarding the loss of trees on the site. The previous applications also necessitated
the loss of the majority of the trees on the site and I had no objections to those applications in this regard.
The majority of the trees are self seeded and are not worthy of protection and I therefore have no objection
to their loss. I have attached a condition requiring the submission, approval and implementation of a
landscaping scheme for the site, which will include a number of replacement trees. I consider that a
well-designed landscaping scheme will enhance the area.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
Since the submission of the application, several amendments have been made to the scheme which have
resulted in improvements to the proposal. The footpath/cycle link has been enhanced to improve linkages to
Agecroft Road, in accordance with Policy H9. The layout of the site has been amended so as to reduce loss
of privacy and overlooking within the site. The applicants will also enter into a Section 106 Agreement to
secure public access along the footpath/cycle link and through the wooded area and contributions towards
the provision and maintenance of open space and in the area.
CONCLUSION
On balance, I am satisfied that the application is acceptable. This proposal would be a significant
improvement to the extant permission and would provide a satisfactory footpath/cycle link from Agecroft
Road to the proposed Country Park. It also proposed dwellings which face Agecroft Road and which would
therefore be a positive addition to the street scene. I am satisfied that the conditions will ensure that the
landscaping, materials, footpath/cycle link and wooded area would be of a suitably high standard and that
16
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
future residents would not be detrimentally affected by contamination. I therefore make the following
recommendation:
That Members are minded to grant planning permission subject to the conditions below once the legal
agreement has been signed:
o
that the Director of Corporate Services be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section
106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to: secure the payment of a contribution to the
provision of open space to the value of £154, 719; secure the submission of a scheme for the layout,
management and maintenance of both the wooded area and footpath/cycle link; secure the
implementation of such a scheme; to secure both areas are available to members of the public in
perpetuity; secure the establishment of a Management Committee for the site responsible for all
monitoring of landfill gas, maintenance of gas control measures and remedial action; and to secure
insurance bonding for the site to cover the cost of any remedial work;
o
that the applicant be informed that the City Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject
to the conditions stated below, on completion of such legal agreement;
o
that authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued, (subject to the
conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement,
o
that authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the S106
agreement within a reasonable period on the grounds that the proposals do not support the aim and
objectives of policies H6, H11, H9/16 of the City of Salford Adopted Unitary Development Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples of the materials for the
external elevations and roof of the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Director of Development Services. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials,
unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Director of Development Services.
3. Prior to the commencement of building works, the applicant shall submit for written approval to the
Director of Development Services a scheme detailing precise noise protection measures to allow all
habitable rooms to achieve the requirements of BS8233:1999. This assessment shall also identify
additional measures (if deemed necessary) to allow all habitable rooms either facing or with a direct
line of sight to Agecroft Road, Lumns Lane or the Railway line to achieve the requirements of
BS8233:1999 whilst allowing for the provision of summer cooling and rapid ventilation.
Once agreed by the Director of Development Services, all measures shall be incorporated and
maintained thereafter.
4. 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
17
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
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.
5. Standard Condition M01 Removal of Permitted Development Rights
6. No development approved by this permission shall commence until a scheme for the provision and
implementation of a surface water regulation system has been submitted to and approved in writing by
the Director of Development Services. The scheme shall be completed in accordance with the approved
details prior to first occupation of any of the dwellings hereby approved, unless agreed otherwise in
writing by the Director of Development Services.
7. No development shall be started until:
a) The site has been subjected to a detailed scheme for the investigation and recording of contamination
and its potential to pollute the water environment, and a report has been submitted to and approved by
the the Director of Development Services
b) Detailed proposals to prevent pollution of groundwater and surface waters in line with current best
practice for the contaminant monitoring protocols, remediation of such contamination and
confirmatory testing has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development
Services. These contamination proposals shall be carried out either before or during such development
as appropriate.
c) If further contamination is identified during development then the contamination proposals shall be
revised and the revisions submitted to and approved by the Director of Development Services
8. Before development is started detailed designs of the gas protection measures shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Director of Development Services. This shall include all details of the gas
control schemes for individual properties, details of the gas vent stacks, the method connection between
the stacks and the Geofin, the method of connection around service entries to the houses and the layout
of foundation down stands.
9. No development shall be started until detailed designs on the methods of sealing service trenches where
these pierce the gas barrier have been submitted to and approved by the Director of Development
Services.
10. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the means of vehicular access
from Agecroft Road has been constructed and laid out in accordance with the approved plans.
11. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a scheme showing the provision of
waste recycling facilities within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation of any of
the dwellings hereby approved, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Director of Development
Services.
12. Car parking within the site shall be laid out in accordance with the details shown on drawing no.
PEND-02-02 and shall be made available at all times
18
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
4. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
5. Reason: In order to protect occupiers from landfill gas
6. Reason: In order to reduce the risk of flooding
7. To prevent pollution and to assess the risks to the water environment
8. The site has been landfilled in the past and contains landfill gas and measures are required to prevent
this becoming a hazard to occupiers
9. The site has been landfilled in the past and contains landfill gas and measures are required to prevent
this becoming a hazard to occupiers.
10. Standard Reason R026A Interests of highway safety
11. Reason: In order to encourage waste recycling, in accordance with Policy MW11 of the Adopted City
of Salford Unitary Development Plan
12. Standard Reason R012A Parking only within curtilage
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the Applicant should
take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of their proposal. Developers must also
seek permission from the Coal Authority before undertaking any operation that involves entry into any
coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and adits and the implementation of site investigations
or other works. Property specific summary information on any past, current or proposed surface and
underground mining activity to affect the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The
Coal Authority Mining Reports Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk
2. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to
the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all
development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
3. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
19
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
H9/16 - Sites for New Housing - Lumns Lane/Agecroft Road, Pendlebury (3.3ha); EN5 - Nature
Conservation; EN17 - Croal-Irwell Valley; EN23 - Croal-Irwell Valley; H4 - Housing Allocation;
DEV1 - Development Criteria; DEV2 - Good Design; T13 - Car Parking; T2 - Network of Major Roads
of More Than Local Importance; T10 - Pedestrians; EN20 - Pollution Control; EN10 - Landscape
4. This development is subject to the planning obligation entered into by the applicant under Section 106
of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, prior to the granting of planning permission.
5. The applicant is advised that trickle vents may not be able to achieve adequate rapid cooling for rooms.
The Environmental Protection Team may be contacted for further advice on 0161 737 0551.
6. The applicant is advised that this permission relates to the amended plan received on 3rd August 2004
which shows the revised layout of the site and amendments to the footpath/cycle way
7. The applicant is advised to contact United Utilities regarding the adoption of sewers and the provision
of a foul sewer pumping station
8. The applicant is advised that this development will require the closure or diversion of a public right of
way.
APPLICATION No:
04/48381/COU
APPLICANT:
J C Gillespie Limited
LOCATION:
J C Gillespie Limited Sorby Road Irlam
PROPOSAL:
Change of use to end of life vehicle de-pollution and disposal centre
(scrap yard) including the erection of a detached building and
associated car parking and hardstanding for vehicle storage.
WARD:
Cadishead
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates a site located within the Northbank Industrial Estate which is currently used by the
applicant in association with civil engineering and plant hire. There are no permanent structures within the
existing yard, but there are a number of portacabins which are used as offices close to the eastern and
southern boundaries. There is currently only one access which is off Sorby Road and which is located in the
south-western corner of the site. The site is bound to the north by a railway line located on the top of an
embankment which is approximately 6m in height, and to the south by Sorby Road. On the opposite side of
Sorby Road are more industrial units. To the east and west are industrial sites which are both occupied by
Multisol Ltd. Multisol Ltd are distributors of solvents and oil products and a large proportion of the
products handled are considered as hazardous.
The proposal is to sub-divide the site into two parts. The southern part of the site would be retained for the
existing use and the northern part would be changed into an end of life vehicle de-pollution and disposal
centre (scrap yard). It is the northern part of the site which this application applies to. Access to the
northern part of the site would be via the existing access along the western boundary of the site. The plans
20
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
show a new access off Sorby Road to the southern part of the site, but this would have to be considered as
part of a separate application. The two sites would be separated by a 2.1m high fence, and there would be
an link between the sites via a 10m wide access gate which would form part of the 2.1m high dividing fence
and which would be located 12m from the existing access onto Sorby Road.
It is proposed to erect a detached portal frame building which would measure 12m X 18.3m adjacent to the
northern boundary, and set in 16m from the eastern boundary. The walls and roof of the building would be
constructed from cladding and its ridge height would be 8m. The area contained between the building and
the boundary to the east would be used for staff and visitor parking (10 Spaces + 2 disabled spaces). To the
west of, and adjacent to the building, would be five 2000litre storage vessels which would contain different
waste products, namely petrol, diesel, engine oil, coolant and brake fluid. Beyond these storage vessels
would be an open area used for the storage of vehicles associated with the on-site operations. The
de-pollution process would be carried out inside the purpose built building, and the de-polluted cars would
then be stored outside ready for loading for disposal off-site. All storage areas would be constructed on a
concreted impervious base with interceptor drains. The waste fluids would be disposed of via tanker
off-site.
SITE HISTORY
In 1986, planning permission was granted for the erection of a workshop and office together with associated
car parking, storage yard and new vehicular and pedestrian accesses in connection with a civil engineering
and plant hire business.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – no comments received
Greater Manchester Geological Unit – no objections, recommendations made.
Environment Agency – No objection, recommendations made.
Northbank Management Company – no comments received.
Network Rail – no comments received.
County Fire Officer – no comments received
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 21st June 2004 and again with an amended description on 2nd September
2004.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
Multisol Ltd, Sorby Road.
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 2 letters of representation in response to the planning application publicity but no objections
have been raised. However, the adjacent company (Multisol Ltd) have stated that their operations involves
the handling of hazardous/flamable substances and have raised concern over the possibility of new
operations which may result in a fire hazard.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
21
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
DEV1 – Development Criteria
DEV2 – Good Design
DEV4 – Design and Crime
EC3 – Re-use of Sites and Premises
T13 – Car parking
MW11 – Waste Recycling and Bulk Reduction
MW15 – Development Control Criteria - Waste
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
DES1 – Respecting Context
E5 – Development Within Established Employment Areas
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments.
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 – Design and Crime
W1 – Waste Management.
ST11 – Location of New Development
ST16 – Sustainable Waste Management
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the principle of the development at the site, the
impact of the development on the adjacent occupiers, and the design of the proposal.
Principle of development
The proposal is in accordance with Policies EC3 and E5 which both support the re-use of existing
employment sites. Furthermore, the development would see the re-use of brownfield land thus complying
with criteria 2 of Policy ST11 which seeks to prioritise the development of such land over land which has
not been previously developed (greenfield land). Given that the neighbouring uses are industrial, I am
satisfied that the proposal respects the character of the immediate surrounding area and would not affect its
future vitality.
Impact of the development on the adjoining neighbours
Policy DEV1 states that the City Council will have regard to a number of factors in determining planning
applications including the relationship to the road network, the likely scale and type of traffic generation,
the arrangements for servicing and access to the proposed development and the potential level of pollution
including noise, nuisance and vibration. This is reiterated in Policy DES1. Policy DES7 states that
development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the
occupiers or users of other developments. Policy MW11 supports the development of waste recycling
facilities. Policy MW15 sets out a number of criteria which should be considered in the determination of
any new application for waste facilities including the impact of development on water resources and traffic
generation. It also states that planning permission will not normally be granted for proposals that do not
include satisfactory provision for screening of the site whilst the site is being used for waste disposal.
Policy W1 reiterates this and states that planning permission will be granted unless a development
22
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
involving waste management would have an unacceptable impact on health. Policy ST16 seeks to promote
the most sustainable options for waste management.
With regard to Multisol Ltd’s concerns the applicant has confirmed in writing that the day-to-day
operations would not involve any welding, burning or other hot works on site, and if such works have to be
carried out outside the building, they will adhere to the relevant health and safety regulations. The
Environment Agency, the Director of Environmental Services and the County Fire Officer have all been
consulted and have not objected to the proposal on safety grounds.
With regard to pollution, the developer is required to comply with the requirements of the End of Life
Vehicles (ELV) Directive, which passed into European law in 2000. An informative has been attached to
make the developer aware of this Directive. It is proposed that all storage areas will be situated on a
concreted impervious base with interceptor drains to prevent pollution of the water table. This has been
conditioned.
The potential for noise and other forms of pollution would be greatly reduced by the fact that the majority of
the operations would take place inside the purpose built building. I have received no objections from the
Director of Environmental Services with regards to pollution.
The applicant has indicated that 10 HGVs and 20 other vehicles would visit the site in an average day. This
level of traffic is not likely to have a significant impact on the local highway network in terms of congestion
and safety. I have no objections on highway grounds.
Design
Policy DEV2 states that the Council will not normally grant planning permission for new development
unless it is satisfied with the quality of design and the appearance of the development. Policy DES1 states
that development will be required to respond to its physical context. Policies DEV4 and DES11 seek to
encourage the inclusion of design measures which reduce criminal activity.
The proposed building would be comparable in design to surrounding industrial units and in my view is
acceptable.
Policies T13 and A10 seek to achieve appropriate provision of parking for new developments. Planning
Policy Guidance Note 13 – Transport and Policy A10 seek to encourage the use of more sustainable forms
of travel such as public transport, cycling and car sharing. Therefore, one of the measures encouraged is
maximum levels of parking. I am satisfied with the level and provision of parking proposed.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
o The boundaries between the existing yard and the proposed vehicle de-pollution centre have been
altered and formally defined with a fence to improve site safety and prevent conflicts with vehicles
using each of the sites.
o The parking layout has been amended and disabled parking has been incorporated to make the
development more accessible and practical.
CONCLUSION
The main planning issues relating to this application are the principle of the development at the site, the
impact of the development on the adjacent occupiers, and the design of the proposal. I am satisfied that the
principle of development is acceptable and that it would not have an adverse impact on the amenity of
23
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
neighbouring occupiers, in particular Multisol Ltd. The design of the proposal is in keeping with the
surrounding area and is therefore acceptable. I therefore recommend approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. No development shall be started until samples of the facing materials to be used for the walls and roof
of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development
Services.
3. Notwithstanding the details of the plans, details of the fencing to be erected around the yard shall be
submitted to and agreed in writing by the Director of Development Services prior to the
commencement of development.
4. No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a desk study has been
undertaken and agreed in writing by the Director of Development Services to investigate and produce
an assessment of the risk of the potential for on-site contamination. If the desk study identifies potential
contamination a detailed site investigationshould be carried out to establish the degree and nature of the
contamination and its potential to pollute the environment or cause harm to human health. If
remediation measures are necessary they will be implemented in accordance with the assessment.
5. All storage areas shall be constructed on impervious concrete bases with interceptor drains.
6. No vehicles, other materials or goods associated with the operations of the use hereby approved shall be
stored or deposited in the open at a height exceeding 3m, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the
Director of Development Services.
7. The de-pollution of all vehicles shall take place within the building hereby approved, and any leakage
of fluids from the vehicles or parts of the vehicles shall be drained from the vehicle and stored in the
containers hereby approved. The draining of the fluid shall be undertaken on an impermeable surface
provided with a sealed drainage system.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DEV 1 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan.
4. To ensure a safe form of development that poses no unacceptable risk of pollution in accordance with
Policy W1 of the Replacement Draft Unitary Development Plan.
5. Development that poses no unacceptable risk of pollution in accordance with Policy DEV1 of the
24
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
adopted City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
6. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
7. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
DEV1 - Development Criteria
DEV2 - Good Design
DEV4 - Design and Crime
EC3 - Re-use of Sites and Premises
T13 - Car parking
MW11 - Waste Recycling and Bulk Reduction
MW15 - Development Control Criteria - Waste
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
DES1 - Respecting Context
E5 - Development Within Established Employment Areas
A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments.
DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 - Design and Crime
W1 - Waste Management.
ST11 - Location of New Development
ST16 - Sustainable Waste Management
2. This approval relates to the amended plans that were received on 19th July 2004 and which show an
amended site outline and additional information.
3. Please be aware that a separate planning application must be submitted for the new access proposed
onto Sorby Road shown on the plans which is outside the red line area/application site.
4. Operational matters concerning this waste management facility will be discussed at the waste disposal
licensing stage within the framework of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
APPLICATION No:
04/48454/FUL
25
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
APPLICANT:
BBS Developments
LOCATION:
Site Of The Former United Reform Church Weaste Road Salford 5
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing church and the erection of a four storey block
comprising 17 apartments with associated car parking and landscaping
(Resubmission of planning application 03/47216/FUL)
WARD:
Weaste And Seedley
At the meeting of the Panel held on the 19th August 2004 consideration of this application was DEFERRED
FOR AN INSPECTION BY THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL.
My previous observations are set out below:DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to the former site of the United Reformed Church which has recently been
demolished. The site is triangular in shape and is located at the junction of Weaste Lane and Weaste Road
which is where Tootal Road and Liverpool Street meet. The site is open to long views from Tootal Road,
Liverpool Street and Weaste Lane. Surrounding uses are mainly two/three storey residential houses whilst
All Souls Church is on the opposite side of Liverpool Street. The site is enclosed at present by a dwarf wall
and railings with vehicular access from Weaste Road. The boundary of the site fronting Weaste Road is also
protected by temporary security fencing which prevents access to the site for reasons of safety.
Planning permission is sought for the erection of an apartment block containing seventeen one and two
bedroom apartments. The building wraps around the corner of the site, with the four-storey element
forming a strong visual feature at the junction. Going south down both Weaste Road and Weaste Lane the
building drops in height to three storeys, providing a mass which reflects the ridge height of the existing
dwellings which border the site. The palette of materials that would be used includes brickwork to match
local vernacular, white render and silver faced cladding board.
Vehicular access is proposed in a similar position to the existing vehicular access on Weaste Road with 14
off road parking spaces including two disabled spaces. Provision for three secure cycle lock-ups is also
proposed. The proposed building has a modern design that curves around Weaste Road and Weaste Lane
with some amenity space between two wings. The main frontage of the proposed building would not extend
beyond the existing building line on Weaste Road. A design statement has been submitted with the
application.
SITE HISTORY
In 2004 an application for the erection of 17 apartments similar to the current application was withdrawn
(03/47216/FUL).
CONSULTATIONS
26
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
British Coal – No objection
Environment Agency – No objection
Director of Environmental Services – No objection, recommendations received
Architectural Liaison Officer – no comments received
PUBLICITY
A press notice was published on 1st July 2004.
A site notice was displayed on 30th June 2004.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
4-10 (e) Park Bank, Liverpool Street
30-34 (e) & 37-63(o) Weaste Road
1-11 (o) Calvert Street
250-274 (e) Weaste Lane
2 and 4 Tootal Road
4 Lords Lane
619 Liverpool Street
All Saints Presbytery, 622 Liverpool Street
37 Meadowgate Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 2 letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity. One of the letters is
from a local resident and is signed by 15 people. The following issues have been raised:o
o
o
o
There is insufficient parking proposed which will result in parking problems on Weaste
Lane.
The proposed materials would not be compatible with the terraced houses in the area.
The height of the proposal may affect the television reception for local residents.
Disruption will occur during the construction phase.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
H7/2 Housing Area Improvement and Renewal – Private Sector
H1 Meeting Housing Needs
H6 & H611 Open Space Provision
DEV1 Development Criteria
DEV2 Good Design
DEV4 Design and Crime
T13 Car Parking
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: ST11 Location of New Development
ST12 Development Density
27
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
H1 Provision of New Housing Development
H8 Open Space Provision Associated With New Housing Development
DES1 Respecting Context
DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 Design and Crime
A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the design and scale of the proposal and its impact
on the amenity of neighbouring residents/businesses, and the amenity provisions for future occupants.
Principle of development
Policy H7/2 explains that the City Council will promote the improvement of the existing housing stock in
the area and the environment. This proposal is in line with the aims of this policy and will make a positive
contribution to the mix of housing types in this area. Furthermore, the development would see the re-use of
brownfield land thus complying with criteria 2 of Policy ST11 and the guidance contained within Planning
Policy Guidance Note 3 – Housing (PPG3), which seeks to prioritise the development of such land over
land which has not been previously developed (greenfield land). Policy ST12 seeks to encourage
appropriate high density development in areas which are close to key public transport Routes. PPG3
stipulates a minimum density of 30 dwellings per hectare. The proposal represents development that would
have a density of 170 dwellings per hectare. Given that the site is inn close proximity to the metrolink and
major bus routes, I am satisfied that the density of the development is appropriate.
Design and scale of the proposal and the impact on neighbouring residents / businesses.
Both H1 policies seek to increase the amount of housing within the City with the revised alterations to the
UDP requiring a minimum density of 30 units per hectare. Policies DEV1, DEV2, DES1 and DES7 require
development to respect its context regarding height, scale, mass, materials and also privacy and
sunlight/daylight of surrounding properties.
In terms of the proposed replacement building it would comply with the general themes of both H1 policies.
The proposal would bring a new mix of housing to the area that is predominantly low-rise. With regard to
the objectors concerns over the design and the choice of materials for the development, I am not opposed to
the idea of such a modern building in this area, indeed such a building may help to achieve the objectives of
Policy H7/2 and help the regeneration of the area. The flat roof design of the building helps reduce it’s scale
and massing and the height of the building would be similar to the ridge-height of the houses on the
opposite side of Weaste Road. Furthermore, the building makes the most of this triangular site by creating
a focal point at the junction of Weaste Road and Weaste Lane which turns the corner. The brick elements
proposed, which forms the majority of the building, would match the materials of the houses in the
immediate area, and the white render and silver cladding contribute to the modern design and
distinctiveness of the proposal, which would add interest to the street-scene. Therefore, I am satisfied that
the building would respect the local context. Given that the building would not be notably higher than the
surrounding properties, I do not anticipate television receptions being affected. Furthermore, the proposed
building would be comparable to the United Reform Church which was demolished only recently.
Council Guidance stipulates minimum separation distances from habitable room windows in order to
provide future occupants and neighbouring residents with sufficient levels of amenity. From the proposed
habitable room windows of the Weaste Lane elevation to the habitable room windows of 10 Park Bank
there is a distance of between 16m and 20m. Similarly, from the habitable room windows of the Weaste
28
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Road elevation to the habitable room windows of houses on the opposite side of Weaste Road there is a
distance of 18m. In both cases the Council recommends a minimum distance of 21m.
With regard to the relationship to 10 Park Bank, however, the proposal would be set at an angle to this
property and so the habitable room windows would not be directly facing. Therefore, I am satisfied that this
relationship is acceptable. With regard to the houses on the opposite side of Weaste Road, the proposal
would exceed the existing distances between properties immediately to the south of the site on Weaste
Road. The distance between these existing properties to the south is approximately 17.5m. Although the
proposal would be four storeys at the junction (with the majority of this elevation being only three-storey),
its height would be similar to that of the houses on the opposite side of Weaste Road. Where the building
drops to three storeys to the south, the height of the building would be similar to the ridge height of the
houses closest on both Weaste Road and Weaste Lane. I am therefore satisfied that the building would not
be at odds with the massing of the street scene.
The application site is somewhat constrained in shape and it would be very difficult to achieve a suitable
residential scheme which would achieve greater separation distances. As detailed later, the applicant has
already amended the scheme to increase the separation distance to the houses on the opposite side of
Weaste Road. Given the significant regeneration benefits that this proposal would bring to the area, I am
satisfied with the separation distances proposed.
Policies T13 and A10 seek to achieve appropriate provision of parking for new developments. Planning
Policy Guidance Note 13 – Transport and Policy A10 seek to encourage the use of more sustainable forms
of travel such as public transport, cycling and car sharing. Therefore, one of the measures encouraged is
maximum levels of parking. The site is close to the Metrolink and bus routes and so I consider the proposed
parking provision to be acceptable and in accordance with national and local policy.
The final objection raised relates to disturbances during the construction phase of the development.
Although I recognise that disruption may take place it would only be for a relatively short period of time.
Given the regeneration benefits that would result from the proposal I consider the short-term disturbances
to be acceptable.
Amenity provisions for future occupants
Policies H6 & H11 and also H8 require appropriate formal and informal open space within developments.
Policies DEV4 and DES11 require development to be designed to minimise the risk of crime.
The proposal includes an area of communal amenity space which would be contained within an inner
courtyard and which would be bound to the south by the in-curtilage parking proposed. This triangular area
(approx 100m2) would provide sufficient usable amenity space in my opinion for future occupants in
accordance with Policies H6, H11 and H8. Supplementary Planning Guidance relating to the provision of
open space and recreation space associated with new residential development requires financial
contributions to be made for proposals which exceed 49 bedspaces. This proposal is for 49 bedspaces only
and thus no section 106 agreement to secure a financial contribution is required. The scheme proposes a
boundary treatment 1.8m in height which would provide a secure site boundary. The design details of the
boundary treatment would be agreed at a later stage if approval were granted. Supplementary Planning
Guidance – Designing Out Crime encourages natural surveillance for new developments (i.e. windows
overlooking parking areas and courtyards in order to discourage criminal activity). The proposal would
provide sufficient levels of natural surveillance for the central courtyard and parking area in my view, and
so I consider the proposal to be in accordance with Policies DEV4 and DES11.
29
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The elevation of the building facing Weaste Road was set back significantly to provide a landscaped
zone 3m in depth to improve the amenity of the area, and also to increase the separation distance to the
houses on the opposite side of the road in order to prevent any serious loss of amenity for those
residents.
Disabled parking and provision for cycle lock-ups were incorporated into the development to achieve
the goals of Policies T13 and A10.
CONCLUSION
The main issues in the determination of this proposal are the suitability of residential development on this
site, the design and scale of the proposal and its impact on the amenity of neighbouring
residents/businesses, and the amenity provisions for future occupants. Policy H7/2 supports residential
development on this site, especially flats which would contribute to the mix of dwellings in the area.
Although the separation distances to surrounding residential properties is not in accordance with Council
guidance, I am satisfied that sufficient levels of amenity will be provided for neighbouring occupiers and
for future occupiers of the development. Furthermore, the regeneration of this site, with what is a
well-designed modern building, would make a significant contribution to the amenity of the neighbourhood
and may encourage further regeneration of the wider surrounding area. I therefore recommend approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. No development shall be started until samples of the facing materials to be used for the walls of the
development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development Services.
3. 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.
4. The developer shall undertake an assessment to determine the external noise levels that the residents
will be subject to (daytime and night). The developer shall detail what steps are to be taken to mitigate
the disturbance from the above. The assessment shall have due regard to the Department of the
Environment Guidance PPG24 - Planning and Noise. The building envelope shall be capable of
attenuating the external noise to BS 8233 (sound insulation and noise reduction for buildings - Code of
practice) and World Health Organisation recommendations for a reasonable standard for living rooms /
sleeping accommodation. The assessment and mitigation measures shall be submitted and approved in
writing by the Director of Development Services prior to the commencement of development and any
mitigation measures are to be implemented in full prior to occupation of any unit. Prior to discharge of
this condition, a Completion Report shall be submitted to the LPA for approval. The Completion
Report shall validate that all works undertaken on site are completed in accordance with those agreed
by the LPA.
30
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
5. Prior to the commencement of development a revised parking layout which makes provision for the
vehicular access gates onto Weaste Road to be set back at least 2.5m from the back of the footpath shall
be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development Services. The agreed parking
layout shall be marked out and hardsurfaced and made available prior to first occupation of any of the
flats and shall be made available thereafter for the parking of residents and visitors cars.
6. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the means of access from Weaste
Road has been constructed and laid out according to the details submitted.
7. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a scheme showing the provision of
waste recycling facilities within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation of any of
the apartments hereby approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Director of Development
Services.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
5. Standard Reason R015A Safety-users of highway
6. Standard Reason R015A Safety-users of highway
7. Reason: In order to encourage waste recycling, in accordance with Policy MW11 of the Adopted City
of Salford Unitary Development Plan
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The degree and type of remediation that took place over the areas where former buildings were
demolished prior to levelling is not known. A variety of materials may have been used for backfilling
cellars and voids at the time of demolition, and hence it cannot be discounted that potentially
contaminated materials could have been brought onto the site for this purpose. Once works commence,
should site operatives discover any adverse ground conditions and suspect it to be contaminated, then
they should report this to the site manager. Works in that location should cease and the problem area
should be roped off until representative soil samples are sent for analysis and the results assessed by a
City of Salford Environmental Health Officer, who can advise on the appropriate action.
2. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
Adopted UDP:
31
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
DEV1 Development Criteria
DEV4 - Design and Crime
H1 - Meeting Housing Needs
T13 - Parking
Revised Deposit Draft UDP:
DES1 - Respecting Context
DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 - Design and Crime
H1 - Provision of New Housing Development
3. Please note this approval relates to the amended plans that were re-issued on 26th July 2004 and which
show alterations to the elevation facing Weaste Road and alterations to the parking layout.
APPLICATION No:
04/48536/FUL
APPLICANT:
Northern Estates (Manchester) Ltd
LOCATION:
400-402 Lower Broughton Road Salford 7
PROPOSAL:
Conversion of existing premises into 10 flats and erection of new
building on adjacent land to form 10 flats
WARD:
Broughton
At the meeting of the Panel held on the 19th August 2004 consideration of this application was DEFERRED
FOR AN INSPECTION BY THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL.
My previous observations are set out below:-
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application relates to two vacant dwellings, 400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road, and the land to the
south, between 400 Lower Broughton Road and 1 The Priory. The site adjacent to 400 Lower Broughton
Road is currently vacant and occupied only by shrubs and a number of self seeded trees. It is generally
overgrown and in a poor condition, having been vacant for a number of years.
400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road would be converted into ten one-bedroomed flats. The proposed new
building would accommodate three two-bedroomed flats and seven one-bedroomed flats. The proposed
new building would be located a minimum of 6m from the back of the footpath and would have a 14.6m
frontage to Lower Broughton Road. It would be 8m from the rear elevation of 1 The Priory and 6m from the
alley to the rear of the site. The proposed new building would be part four/part three storeys, excluding the
basement, with the lower element closest to 1 The Priory.
Car parking for the residents of the proposed flats would be provided to the rear of the properties, accessed
from an alley off The Priory. A total of ten spaces would be provided. The site is located within the Cliff
Conservation Area.
32
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
SITE HISTORY
In January 2004, an application was submitted for the conversion of 400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road
into ten flats and the erection of a new building on adjacent land to form eleven flats (ref: 04/47652/COU).
That application was withdrawn in March 2004 as a result of my concerns regarding the design and siting of
the proposed building.
In August 1991, planning permission was granted for the erection of a three storey building comprising ten
flats together with associated landscaping, car parking and construction of a new vehicular crossing on land
adjacent to 400 Lower Broughton Road (ref: E/28442)
In March 1991, planning permission was granted for the conversion of 400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road
into eight self contained flats (ref: E/27657)
In May 1984, planning permission was granted for the conversion of 400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road
into eight self contained flats (ref: E/16726)
CONSULTATIONS
The Director of Environmental Services – no objections
Environment Agency – no objections
The Cliff Residents’ Association – objects to the application. The Resident’s Association has no confidence
that the current owner would develop the site
Police Architectural Liaison Officer – no comments received to date
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 8th July 2004
A press notice was published on 1st July 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
404 – 410 (E), 417, 421 – 429 (O), 447 Lower Broughton Road
1 – 7 (O) Priory Avenue
1 – 3 (O), 4 – 6 (E) The Priory
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received sixteen letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity, four of which
are from the same objector. The following issues have been raised:
The area needs more family homes
There is an oversupply of flats in the area
The proposal would not be in keeping with the character of the Conservation Area
33
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
There would be insufficient car parking
The proposal would result in a loss of privacy
The proposal would result in the removal of what is currently a ‘green site’
The proposal would result in overdevelopment of the site
It is unlikely that the proposed development would take place
The proposed development is contrary to Policy H5 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP
There would be an increase in noise and disturbance
Entrances into the proposed apartments from the rear is unacceptable
There would be insufficient amenity space within the site
The proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the character of the remaining dwellings in
the terrace, which should be listed
The proposed development would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety
The proposed development would result in the felling of a number of trees
400 & 402 Lower Broughton Road are home to bats
There would be insufficient room for refuse storage
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: H1 – Meeting Housing Needs
H5 – Dwellings Sub-Divided into Self-Contained Flats or in Multiple Occupancy
EN11 – Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas
EN13 – Works to Listed Buildings and Buildings within Conservation Areas
DEV1 – Development Criteria
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: CH5/5 – Works Within Conservation Areas (The Cliff)
Other policies: H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
H5 – Provision of Residential Accommodation Within Existing Buildings
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
PLANNING APPRAISAL
I consider the main planning issues relating to this application to be as follows: whether the principle of the
proposed development is acceptable; whether there would be a detrimental impact on the character of the
Cliff Conservation Area; whether the access and parking arrangements are satisfactory; whether the loss of
trees within the site would be acceptable; and whether the proposed development complies with the
provisions of the relevant policies of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs.
These will be discussed below.
The Principle of the Proposed Development
Policy H1 of the Adopted UDP states that the Council will endeavour to ensure that the city’s housing stock
is able to meet the housing requirements of all groups within Salford by promoting a number of measures,
including the release of land to accommodate new house building.
34
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Draft Policy H1 states that new housing development should contribute to the provision of a balanced mix
of dwellings within the local area and not lead to an oversupply of any particular type of residential
accommodation.
Adopted Policy H5 states that proposals for the sub-division of dwellings into self-contained flats will only
be permitted where a number of criteria can be satisfied, namely where the proposal would not have an
unacceptably adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring residential properties or on the character of
the surrounding area by reason of noise and disturbance, loss of privacy, the siting, design and appearance
of any external alterations or extensions, the cumulative effect of the concentration of such uses or parking
and servicing requirements, where adequate amenity/open space is provided, where the property is of a
larger type, where there would be no impact on amenity or highway safety as a result of traffic generation
and finally where satisfactory provision is made for access, parking and servicing.
Draft Policy H5 updates Adopted Policy H5 and also states that such proposals will only be permitted
where there would not be a detrimental impact on the regeneration of the local area.
Adopted Policy DEV1 outlines a number of criteria to which regard should be had in the determination of
planning applications. Of most relevance to this application are the location of the proposed development,
including its relationship to existing and proposed land uses, the size and density of the proposed
development, the relationship to the road and public transport networks, the likely scale of traffic
generation, the visual appearance of the development and landscaping and open space provision.
Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity.
Development which would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users of other
developments will not normally be permitted.
Given that there have been a number of other permissions for the conversion 400 and 402 Lower Broughton
Road into flats and the erection of a building on the adjacent site to accommodate flats, I consider that the
principle of this proposal has already been accepted. However, given that these permissions were granted
prior to the Adoption of the UDP, I consider it important to assess the proposal against the each of the
criteria of policy H5 of both the Adopted and Revised UDPs. The application proposes additional
residential accommodation within an existing residential area, the principle of which I consider to be
acceptable, particularly given that both 400 and 402 Lower Broughton Road were originally dwellings.
Given the proposed use and the number of units, I do not consider that this application would result in an
unacceptable level of noise or disturbance. I do not consider that such concerns warrant refusal of the
application.
As part of the refurbishment of the existing properties, the original windows would be reinstated. The only
new windows proposed would be within the roof and to the basement. I do not consider that the installation
of these additional windows would result in a loss of privacy to neighbouring residents. The proposed new
building would be in excess of 21m from No. 417 on the opposite side of Lower Broughton Road. 3 The
Priory is not directly to the rear of the proposed new building and I am therefore satisfied that there would
not be an unacceptable level of overlooking. On the above basis, I am of the opinion that the proposal would
not result in an unacceptable loss of privacy and I have no objections to the application in this regard. I am
satisfied that the application also accords with Adopted Policy DEV1 and Draft Policy DES7.
The siting, design and appearance of the proposal, particularly in the context of the site’s location within a
Conservation Area will be discussed in more detail below. With regard to the cumulative effect of the
concentration of such uses, whilst I acknowledge local residents’ concerns regarding the loss of family
35
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
accommodation and the increase in one-bedroomed flats in the area, I am of the opinion that such concerns
do not warrant refusal of the application. A large number of properties in this area are occupied by families
and are not one-bedroomed flats. This scheme also proposes three two-bedroomed flats and I consider it
reasonable to assume that these could be occupied by families. I also consider it important that a range of
types and tenures of residential accommodation are provided and I consider that this proposal would
contribute to this.
The application proposes a total of ten car parking spaces (50% provision). In view the guidance contained
within Planning Policy Guidance Note 13, which emphasises the need to reduce reliance on the private car
and encourage the use of alternative modes of transport, and in light of the Council’s maximum car parking
standards, I do not consider it reasonable to require the applicant to provide any more car parking than they
wish to provide. There are no parking restrictions on this section of Lower Broughton Road. Given that the
majority of the apartments would have only one bedroom and in view of the site’s location in relatively
close proximity to Bury New Road and the public transport links, I do not consider it necessary to require
one car parking space per apartment.
Amenity space would be provided in the form of the front garden area to Nos. 400 and 402 and the area to
the front of the proposed building. The amount of amenity space provided within the site has been
determined by the location of the proposed new building. I am of the opinion that the size and siting of the
proposed new building would be in keeping with the character and appearance of the conservation area. I
consider that to require the applicant to provide more amenity space within the site would be to the
detriment of the Conservation Area and would result in an inferior scheme to that currently proposed. I am
of the opinion that the need to ensure that the proposal enhances the character and appearance of the
conservation area to be of more importance than the provision of amenity space in this instance. I do not,
however, consider that the proposal constitutes overdevelopment of this site. I consider that, in light of the
above and given that the majority of the apartments proposed would be one bedroomed, it would be
unnecessary and unreasonable to require the provision of additional amenity space within the site. I
therefore have no objections to the application in this regard. As required by Adopted Policy H5, the
properties in question are relatively large and I consider them to be appropriate for this type of conversion.
As stated above, I consider the level of car parking proposed to be sufficient. The proposed car parking area
would be accessed from an alley off The Priory, which is not a main thoroughfare. I do not consider that this
proposal would have a detrimental impact on highway safety and I therefore have no objections to the
proposal in this regard.
Finally, in terms of regeneration, I am of the opinion that this proposal would result in improvements to
what are currently vacant and unattractive properties and a neglected and overgrown piece of land. I
consider this to be an important consideration, particularly in relation to the site’s location within a
conservation area. I do not therefore consider that the regeneration of the local area would be detrimentally
affected.
In light of the above, I consider that this application broadly complies with the relevant provisions of Policy
H5 of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs.
Impact on the Cliff Conservation Area
Adopted Policy EN11 states that in considering planning applications for development in conservation
areas, the Council will consider the extent to which the proposal is consistent with the desirability of
36
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
preserving or enhancing the conservation area. The Council will have the need to encourage high standards
of development which are in keeping with the character of the area.
Adopted Policy EN13 states that in considering proposals to alter buildings within conservation areas, the
Council will have regard to a number of criteria, including the importance and condition of the building.
Draft Policy CH5 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP states that development within
conservation areas will only be permitted where it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of
the area. Regard will be had to whether the proposal is of a high standard of design and retains or improves
features which contribute to the character or appearance of the conservation area.
The proposed new building includes a number of features present within the original buildings. These
include the bay windows, brick arches above the windows and doors, dentils below the fascia boards and
string courses. The use of such architectural features ensures that the proposed building would be in
keeping with adjacent buildings. As with the neighbouring properties, the proposed building would have a
vertical emphasis. The height to both the eaves and the ridge of the proposed building would be similar to
that of 400 Lower Broughton Road. The siting of the proposed building would respect the established
building line of the existing terraced properties. In light of the above, I am satisfied that the siting and
design of the proposed building would be satisfactory and in keeping with the character and appearance of
the conservation area. The proposed development would result in the refurbishment of two vacant, derelict
and unattractive properties and the development of a vacant and overgrown piece of land. In view of this, an
in light of the above, I am of the opinion that the proposed development would enhance the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area and that the proposal complies with the above policies.
There are a number of other issues which have been raised by objectors which I will deal with in turn.
Firstly, it has been alleged that the existing properties are home to bats. As a result of this claim, the
applicant commissioned a bat survey. The survey found that, as the properties have no floors, ceilings or
other internal features, the interiors of the buildings are unsuitable to be used for roosting bats. There is the
possibility that the south facing gable weather boarding may be used by a maternity colony of bats in the
summer. The survey recommends that an additional survey be undertaken prior to the commencement of
the development in order to confirm that, as far as possible, bats are absent from the premises. I am
therefore satisfied that the applicant has undertaken all necessary steps in this regard and do not consider
that concerns relating to bats warrant refusal of the application.
One of the objectors has suggested that the row of terraced properties within which Nos. 400 & 402 are
situated should be listed. Whilst the buildings possess some architectural detailing, a number have been
significantly extended and altered, both internally and externally. I am therefore of the opinion that they are
not worthy of listing.
Concerns have also been raised regarding the loss of trees as a result of this proposal. I can confirm that the
Council’s arboricultural officer has visited the site and is of the opinion that none of the trees are worthy of
protection. Although there are a large number of trees on the site, the majority are self seeded. It is however
recommended that the three largest trees within the site should be replaced in accordance with Council
policy. I have therefore attached a condition requiring the provision of a minimum of six trees within the
site. Subject to the above, I have no objections to the application in this regard.
Finally, a number of objectors have expressed concerns relating to the lack of room within the site for refuse
storage. I am however of the opinion that there would be sufficient space to the rear of the site to
37
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
accommodate a number of the larger type of refuse storage facilities, rather than individual wheelie bins for
each of the flats. I am satisfied that such concerns could be addressed. I have attached a condition requiring
the submission, approval and implementation of a scheme for refuse storage.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The scheme has been amended from that proposed by the previous application. The height of the section of
the building closest to 1 The Priory has been reduced in order to lessen the impact on that property.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I am of the opinion that the proposed development would result in the refurbishment of two
properties which have been derelict for a considerable length of time, as well as the development of a vacant
and unattractive site which currently detracts from the character and appearance of the area. I consider that
the proposal would enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area. I am satisfied that the
application accords with the relevant provisions of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft
Replacement UDPs. I therefore recommend approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of one year beginning with the date of this
permission.
2. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Director of Development Services before development is started. The
scheme shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences and boundary and
surface treatment. As part of the scheme, a minimum of six trees shall be provided within the site, the
species and location of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services prior to the commencement of development. The approved scheme 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.
3. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples of the materials for the
external elevations and roof of the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Director of Development Services. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials,
unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Director of Development Services.
4. Standard Condition F03X Surfacing
5. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a scheme for cycle and refuse storage
within the curtilage of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation of any of
the apartments hereby approved and shall be available at all times the premises is in use.
6. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a scheme showing the provision of
38
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
waste recycling facilities within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services. The approved scheme shall be implements prior to first occupation of any of the
apartments hereby approved, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Director of Development
Services.
(Reasons)
1. Reason: So as not to prejudcie the future redevelopment of the site
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R013A Use of parking areas
5. Reason: In order to encourage the use of more sustainable transport modes, in accordance with Policy
A10 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary Development Plan and in order to ensure
sufficient provision for refuse storage, in accordance with Policy DEV1 of the Adopted Unitary
Development Plan
6. Reason: In order to encourage waste recycling, in accordance with Policy MW11 of the Adopted City
of Salford Unitary Development Plan
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the Applicant should
take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of their proposal. Developers must also
seek permission from the Coal Authority before undertaking any operation that involves entry into any
coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and adits and the implementation of site investigations
or other works. Property specific summary information on any past, current or proposed surface and
underground mining activity to affect the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The
Coal Authority Mining Reports Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk
2. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to
the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all
development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
3. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
H1 - Meeting Housing Needs; H5 - Dwellings Sub-Divided into Self-Contained Flats or in Multiple
Occupancy; EN11 - Protection and Enhancement of Conservation Areas; EN13 - Works to Listed
Buildings and Buildings within Conservation Areas; DEV1 - Development Criteria
4. The applicant is advised to undertake an additional bat survey prior to the commencement of the
39
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
development, in accordance with the advice provided in the applicant's bat survey dated 3rd March
2004.
APPLICATION No:
04/48558/COU
APPLICANT:
Mr And Mrs Atkins
LOCATION:
5 Barton Road Worsley
PROPOSAL:
Change of use from residential dwelling to holistic and beauty therapy
salon
WARD:
Worsley
Background
This application was withdrawn from consideration at the Planning and Transportation Panel of 5th August
2004 in order to further investigate objection letters received.
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The proposal is for a change of use at 5 Barton Road Worsley. The application site involves the ‘Old Nick’,
which is a grade II listed building. It is located on the main road with off road parking facilities. The site is
within the Worsley Village Conservation Area. The proposal would not involve any external alterations to
the building. Internally the only operation would involve the removal of the modern kitchen sink and
associated units. The proposed use of the building would be for a Holistic Beauty Therapy Salon.
CONSULTATIONS
Worsley Civic Trust: Objection received relating to noise disturbance and an error in the plans submitted.
Worsley Village Community Association: Objection received relating to development within the Worsley
Conservation area, loss of control should this business fail, cleaning noises after 8pm, impact on street
scene.
Director of Environmental Services: Has noted potential noise disturbance from laundry and staff room and
late evening working at 7.00 and 8.00 pm.
PUBLICITY
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1, 1A to 7A Barton Road
10 to 16 Barton Road
9 to 11 Kenwood Lane
REPRESENTATIONS
40
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
I have received 12 letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application publicity. The
following issues have been raised: Overlooking
Impact upon neighbours amenity with reference to noise created by the proposal.
Future Advertising
Affecting Listed Building and the character of the area and the street scene
Noise generated internally by the business operation
Set a precedent for further changes of use from residential properties
The proposal conflicts with UDP policies relating to housing, school, retail, safety and tourism
Incorrect internal floor plans
Over development of area. Including new flats to be built in the immediate area.
Change of use and the extension of business premise
Increase in traffic and associated car parking problems
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: DEV1 – Development Criteria, EN12 – Protection and Enhancement of Listed Buildings.
EN13 - Works to Listed Buildings and Buildings within Conservation Areas.
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: CH2 – Works to a Listed Building, CH4 – Development affecting the setting of a Listed
Building, CH5 – Works within Conservation Areas, DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the effect that the change of use may have on the
amenity of neighbouring residents with particular reference to noise disturbance generated by the internal
operations of the proposal. Increases in car parking relating to users of the proposal. The impact on the
character and appearance of the Conservation Area and listed building are also material considerations.
DEV1 and DES7 state that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact
upon the amenity of neighbours. The site relates to a Grade II Listed Building located within a Conservation
Area, which is covered under policy EN12 and EN13 of the Adopted UDP. CH2 of the Revised Deposit
Draft Replacement Plan recognises the need to allow change of use to Listed Buildings when it is not
practical to continue original use, or where the new use would secure the long-term future of the building.
Policy CH4 of the Revised UDP states that all development must be appropriately designed and not have an
unacceptable harm to the setting of a Listed Building. Policy CH5 states that development within a
Conservation Area must retain or improve features that contribute to the character or the appearance of a
Conservation Area.
AMENITY OF NEIGHBOURS
With regard to the proposed change of use, the new use would not generate excess noise and disturbance as
the business is by appointment only and would only have room for a maximum of four customers at any one
time. In relation to car parking, the site has off street facilities for three cars. It is not envisaged that there
41
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
will be any significant harm to the neighbours at 3 Barton Road from noise generated from the arrival and
departure of a limited number of customers. There are business premises located within 10m from the
application site so to relocate a business to 5 Barton Road would not significantly increase the volume of
traffic in the locality. Due to the limited number of customers the business will receive at any one time it is
not envisaged that car parking will be an issue. I do not consider the introduction of one washing machine
and one tumble dryer will result in a loss of amenity to the neighbouring residents. The Director of
Environmental Health has noted that there may be noise disturbance generated from the use of washing
machines this however must be kept in context as to run one of each of these machines during the hours of
10am and finishing at mostly 6 and 7pm and once at 8pm should not result in any undue loss of amenity to
neighbouring residents. It is my opinion that the proposal does accord with DEV1 of the Adopted UDP and
DES7 of the Revised Plan. The plans submitted showing the internal, layout of the proposal give a
sufficient representation of where the common boundary with 3 Barton Road is and also where
approximately the laundry room will be located as such I cannot consider the objection of incorrect floor
plans as relevant to this application. The proposal fully accords with CH4 of the Revised Plan as it does not
involve any building work and will result in the enhancement of the Listed Building as a whole. As such it
is clear that the amenity of the neighbouring residents will be enhanced by the improvement to 5 Barton
Road, which will improve the overall appearance of both the properties of 5, and 3 Barton Road. It is not
envisaged that the proposal will result in any loss of privacy or over looking to neighbouring residents. As
stated no building work is to be undertaken which means there will be no extra windows inserted as such it
cannot be considered that the neighbouring residents to the rear at 1 and 1A Barton Road will suffer any loss
of privacy.
Protection of a Listed Building
There are no proposed external alterations. The applicants have given their intent to demolish the front
garden wall and replace it with a feature more in keeping with the original property. This is not part of this
application and will require future listed building consent. In my opinion the building will be improved by
the removal of the modern kitchen units as this will reveal the original features of the cells within the site
that have previously been covered, this is supported by Policy CH5 of the Revised UDP. The proposed use
accords with Policy EH12 as the policy encourages new uses for such buildings. It has been identified that
the building has been vacant for over twelve months. Therefore the preservation and enhancement of the
site complies fully with the criteria of both EH12 and CH2.
Future Advertising
The application is not for the display of adverts to the proposed site. The approval of the scheme does not
imply that adverts will be permitted. If a future separate application were applied for the display of an
advert relating to the business it would have to be considered separately on its on merits. Due to the site
being within a Conservation Area and a Listed Building any advert applied for would have to be in keeping
with the existing environment and would only be approved should it not result in adverse harm to the site
and area. The applicant has stated that advert consent may be applied for in the future and that any advert
would be in the style of the Listed Building.
Conflict with UDP
Objections have been received relating to the loss of a dwelling house in Worsley and that as such the loss
would also affect the local schools and tourism of the area and this would also be contrary to the UDP
Policy relating to retailing and have subsequent security issues. I do not consider that the loss of one
dwelling house would result in a serious detrimental impact to the strategic housing aims of the Council.
The change of use of one vacant property to a business use will not result in any adverse harm being caused
to the local education system and that the housing needs of Salford and Worsley in particular will not be
damaged by this change of use. The fact that business premises are in the immediate location of the
42
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
proposed site does not result in a conflict with UDP Policy for retailing rather I consider that the proposal
will result in an improvement to the site and enhance the immediate surroundings. Due to the close location
of business premises to the proposal site it is not envisaged that there will be any further increase of security
risks, particularly as the business will be adjoined by a residential property so there will almost always be a
human presence in the building, which may act as a deterrent.
Over Development of Area
I do not consider the area to be characterised as that of over developed. In this instance as stated no building
works will be undertaken. The development of five apartments to be built in close proximity to the
application site is not considered to be of relevance to the proposal. The proposal will not involve excess
use of the site. Customer numbers will be limited at any one time. The area is afforded extra protection
under the Conservation Area Policy of the UDP and the building is protected under its status as a Listed
Building. The area is characterised as residential but there are businesses located within the area. Barton
Road is a main road and so it is not consider relevant that the proposal will result in increased noise above
the noise already generated by Barton Road itself. I do not consider this application to be one of setting a
precedent for changes of use from residential properties to commercial ventures as the proposal accords
with the relevant UDP Policies and as such is not contrary to Policy.
CONCLUSION
The main issues relating to this application has been with regard to the amenity of neighbours and
preservation of the listed Building. I am satisfied that the proposal would not injure the amenity of
neighbouring residents and by attaching conditions to restrict the noise generated from the operation of the
business I consider that the amenity enjoyed by those residents would not be effected any more than by that
of a typical family house. The objections I have received do not conflict with the relevant policy concerning
this application. It is considered that the proposed use of this unit will enhance and preserve the character of
the area and be to the benefit of securing the long-term future of the Listed Building.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the Applicant should
take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of their proposal. Developers must also
seek permission from the Coal Authority before undertaking any operation that involves entry into any
coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and adits and the implementation of site investigations
or other works. Property specific summary information on any past, current or proposed surface and
underground mining activity to affect the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The
43
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Coal Authority Mining Reports Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk
2. The development hereby approved is in accordance with the policies as laid out in the Adopted UDP
and the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan. There are no other material considerations that out
way this finding:
EH12- Protection and Enhancement of Listed Buildings
EH13- Works to Listed Buildings and Buildings within Conservation Areas
DEV1- Development Criteria
DES7-Amenity of Users and Neighbours
CH2-Works to Listed Buildings
3. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to
the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all
development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
APPLICATION No:
04/48569/FUL
APPLICANT:
Lanes For Drains Limited
LOCATION:
Lanes For Drains Lansdowne Road Monton Eccles
PROPOSAL:
Erection of one factory unit together with ancilliary offices and
associated car parking and hardstanding, alterations to existing
vehicular access and landscaping
WARD:
Eccles
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a vacant industrial site that is accessed from Lansdowne Road. The entrance and
the northern section of Lansdowne Road is residential in character, but the southern section of Lansdowne
Road is characterised by industrial uses. The residential area and the small industrial area are separated by
the M602 which runs over Lansdowne Road. Photographic evidence suggests the site has been clear /
vacant since at least 1997, but recent site visits suggest that the applicant uses a small area of the land to
park vehicles on associated with the Lanes for Drains business. The site covers 0.37 hectares and, although
visible from the M602, is not visible from any residential properties.
The proposal is to erect one factory unit (761 m2) together with ancillary offices (332m2) and associated car
parking, landscaping and alterations to the existing vehicular access. The building would measure 59m X
15.7m and would be 6.5m in height. The walls of the building would be constructed of a mix of brick and
steel sheeting, and the roof would be steel sheeting. Galvanised palisade fencing 2.4m in height would be
erected around the perimeter of the site.
44
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Lanes for Drains currently occupy another site a short distance away on the opposite side of Lansdowne
Road within the industrial area. The existing premises would be retained for operational use. The new
building would be dedicated to the ‘Re-line’ part of the business which involves the rolling out of material
which is then treated with fibreglass resin and taken off-site. The resin would be stored within the proposed
building. At present, this process is carried out in the open. The applicant has indicated that the process
needs to be carried out in a controlled environment, as the resin needs to be of a certain temperature and if
the weather is too hot or too cold it hampers production on site. The hours of operation would be 7am to
7pm Monday to Saturday.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Health – no objection, recommendations made.
Highways Agency – no objection.
Environment Agency – no comments received.
PUBLICITY
A press notice was published on 15th July 2004.
A site notice was displayed on 21st June 2004.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
2-84 (even), 1-45 (odd), David Matter, Bergen Transport, Lansdowne Road
Elliot Loo-Hire and Unit 16 Nasmyth Business Centre, Green Lane
86-104 (even) Stanier Avenue
175 and 177 Monton Road
1-17 (odd) and 2-24 (even) Belmont Street
1-22 Dalton Street
1-23 (odd) Carlton Street
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 21 letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The following
issues have been raised:The proposal would result in additional traffic and HGVs travelling along Lansdowne
Road which is inappropriate given it is a residential street. This increase in traffic would
affect the amenity of the residents due to an increase in vibrations, noise, dust and dirt
particularly at unsociable times. The increased traffic would damage the road surface, lead
to traffic congestion and would result in a road safety hazard.
The proposal would have a negative impact on local property values.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
EC12/7 – Sites for Business and Hi-tech uses.
EC3 – Re-use of Sites and Premises
T13 – Car Parking
DEV1 – Development Criteria
45
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
DEV2 – Good Design
DEV4 – Design and Crime
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
E3/10 – Sites for employment development.
E5 – Development within established Employment Areas.
A1 – Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
A8 – Impact of Development on the Highway Network
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments.
DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 – Design and Crime
ST11 – Location of New Development
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the principle of the development at the site, the
impact of the proposal on the residents living on Lansdowne Road, in particular the impact of traffic using
Lansdowne Road, and the design of the building.
Principle of development
Policies EC12/7 and Policy E3/10 both support the development of the site for employment uses. Policy
EC3 and E5 which relate to the re-use of existing employment sites also support the principle of the
proposed development. Furthermore, the development would see the re-use of brownfield land thus
complying with criteria 2 of Policy ST11 which seeks to prioritise the development of such land over land
which has not been previously developed (greenfield land). Given that the neighbouring uses are industrial,
I am satisfied that the proposal respects the character of the immediate surrounding area.
Impact of development on residents living on or near to Lansdowne Road.
Policy DEV1 states that the City Council will have regard to a number of factors in determining planning
applications including the relationship to the road network, the likely scale and type of traffic generation,
the arrangements for servicing and access to the proposed development and the potential level of pollution
including noise, nuisance and vibration. This is reiterated in Policy DES1. Policy DES7 states that
development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the
occupiers or users of other developments. Policy A8 states that development will not be permitted where it
would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety by virtue of traffic generation and access. As
detailed above, this site is allocated under Policy E3/10 of the replacement Unitary Development Plan. This
policy states that potential problems of loss of residential amenity caused by traffic generation might place
limits on the nature and scale of employment development, unless an alternative access to Green Lane is
provided through the business Park.
The main concerns raised by residents are the impacts of additional traffic generated by the proposal, which
would use Lansdowne Road. The applicant has indicated on the application that 10 HGVs and 20 other
vehicles would visit the site in a normal working day. Following further discussions with the applicant,
46
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
additional information and evidence of deliveries was submitted to clarify the level of additional traffic
generation that would result from the proposal.
The applicant has explained that the deliveries of raw materials to their existing site (and the loads leaving
the site) are mainly part loads (that is, the current volume of business does not merit full load deliveries on
all occasions). The proposal represents the relocation and expansion of the ‘Re-line’ element of their
current operations which are carried out on their existing site. The additional business that would be
generated as a result of the relocation and expansion onto the subject site would result in more full loads
arriving at and leaving the site as opposed to more HGVs arriving at and leaving the site. Therefore, it is
unlikely that the proposal would result in a material increase in HGVs travelling along Lansdowne Road.
The incoming delivery records of the company show an average of 4 delivery vehicles per week over the
period April-June 2004. With regard to the number of additional employees, the applicant has indicated
that approximately 6 new jobs would be created at the site resulting in minimal additional traffic from
employees.
In 1999 this Panel refused an application for a waste transfer station in close proximity to the site currently
under consideration on the grounds of general disturbance. The proposal was subsequently allowed
following an appeal. It was estimated that the waste transfer station would generate an additional 10 HGVs
each day. The Inspector held that this level of traffic generation (approximately one movement per hour)
would not have a significant impact on the amenity of residents living on Lansdowne Road in respect of
noise and disturbance. Prior to the grant of this planning permission a traffic count study was carried out on
Lansdowne Road (July 2002), and a second study was carried out in June of this year to assess the impact of
the waste transfer station on the traffic travelling along Lansdowne Road. The two sets of data show that
the number of HGV journeys has increased from an average of 7 per day to 30 per day, with all other types
of traffic remaining at a similar level. This data has been placed on file. However, as explained in the
previous paragraph, the proposal currently under consideration is not expected to increase the level of
HGV’s using Lansdowne Road.
With the information provided, I consider that the proposal would generate only a small amount of
additional traffic, and as a consequence I feel the amenity of residents living on or near to Lansdowne Road
would not be significantly affected from noise or disturbance from these vehicular movements. A condition
has been attached restricting the hours of operation in order to minimise disturbances during unsociable
hours.
The site is within an industrial area which is separated from the housing on Lansdowne Road by the M602.
Given that the site is not visible from any residential properties, I do not consider the proposal would have a
detrimental impact on the residents in terms of visual amenity, noise or odour. The impact of the proposal
on local property values is speculative and is not a material planning consideration.
Design
Policy DEV2 states that the Council will not normally grant planning permission for new development
unless it is satisfied with the quality of design and the appearance of the development. Policy DES1 states
that development will be required to respond to its physical context. Policies DEV4 and DES11 seek to
encourage the inclusion of design measures which reduce criminal activity.
The proposed building would be comparable in design to surrounding industrial units and in my view is
acceptable. The building would be set back from Lansdowne Road by 3m to allow for some landscaping.
Given that Lansdowne Road is for access only, I consider the proposed landscaped area to be adequate. The
proposed perimeter fencing is similar to other fencing types in the immediate vicinity and so I consider this
47
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
element of the proposal to be acceptable. Furthermore, the fencing would improve security for the site in
accordance with Policies DEV4 and DES11.
Policies T13 and A10 seek to achieve appropriate provision of parking for new developments. Planning
Policy Guidance Note 13 – Transport and Policy A10 seek to encourage the use of more sustainable forms
of travel such as public transport, cycling and car sharing. Therefore, one of the measures encouraged is
maximum levels of parking. Given the size of the proposed development a maximum of 18 car parking
spaces and a minimum of 2 disable parking spaces, 2 motorcycle spaces and 2 secure bicycle lock-ups
should be provided on site. This provision has been conditioned.
In addition, Policy A1 requires large developments to be accompanied by a Travel Plan as a measure to
encourage more sustainable forms of travel. The applicant has agreed to the principle of a Travel Plan and
a condition has been attached.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The parking provision has been amended to provide for disabled, cycle and motorcycle parking.
Furthermore, the principle of a Travel Plan has been agreed with the applicant.
Further fencing details have been submitted by the applicant for the avoidance of any doubt in
terms of the design.
CONCLUSION
The main considerations in the determination of this application are the principle of the development at the
site, the impact of the proposal on the residents living on or near to Lansdowne Road and the proposed
design. I am satisfied that the use would be in keeping with the surrounding area and the site allocations for
both the adopted and replacement Unitary Development Plans. Given the likely level of traffic generation
and given that the M602 separates the residential element of Lansdowne Road from the industrial element,
I do not consider that the proposal would result in a serious loss of amenity for residents living on or near to
Lansdowne Road. The design is acceptable in this location. I am of the opinion that the proposal is in
accordance with the policies mentioned above and hence recommend approval for the application.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. No development shall be started until samples of the facing materials to be used for the walls and roof
of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development
Services.
3. 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.
4. The use hereby permitted shall NOT be operated on Sundays and Bank Holidays and shall ONLY be
48
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
operated between the hours of 7:00 and 19:00 Monday to Saturday inclusive.
5. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation report
for the approval of the Director of Development Services. The investigation shall address the nature,
degree and distribution of ground contamination on site and shall include an identification and
assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA,
focusing primarily on risks to human health and controlled waters. The investigation shall also address
the implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied
building structures, on services and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors
including ecological systems and property.
The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Director of Development Services prior
to the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works contained within the
approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the site.
Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be submitted to
the Local Planning Authority for approval. The Site Completion Report shall validate that all works
undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the LPA.
6. Notwithstanding the plans submitted, a revised parking layout shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Director of Development Services prior to the commencement of development. The
revised parking layout shall include a maximum of 18 parking spaces and a minimum of 2 parking
spaces for disabled people, 2 motorcycle spaces and provision for at least 2 secure cycle lock-ups. The
agreed layout shall be set out and made available for the parking of employees and visitors prior to the
commencement of the use and shall remain available at all times.
7. Prior to the commencement of development a Travel Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Director of Development Services. The approved Travel Plan shall be implemented within 1
month of first occupation and continued thereafter.
8. Standard Condition J01F No Open Storage
9. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the means of access from
Lansdowne Road have been constructed and laid out according to the details submitted.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
5. To ensure a safe form of development that poses no unacceptable risk of pollution.
49
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
6. Standard Reason R012A Parking only within curtilage
7. In the interests of moving towards sustainability, reducing environmental pollution and promoting
energy conservation in accordance with Policy A1 of the Revised Replacement Draft City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan .
8. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
9. Standard Reason R015A Safety-users of highway
Note(s) for Applicant
1. For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land Condition, the
applicant/developer is advised to contact the Pollution Control Section of the Directorate of
Environmental Services (Tel: (0161) 793 2046).
2. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
EC12/7 - Sites for Business and Hi-tech uses.
EC3 - Re-use of Sites and Premises
T13 - Car Parking
DEV1 - Development Criteria
DEV2 - Good Design
DEV4 - Design and Crime
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
E3/10 - Sites for employment development.
E5 - Development within established Employment Areas.
A1 - Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
A8 - Impact of Development on the Highway Network
A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments.
DES1 - Respecting Context
DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 - Design and Crime
ST11 - Location of New Development
3. Please note that, other than that agreed as part of this proposal, the laying out of additional parking
would require the submission of a new application.
4. With regard to the Travel Plan please contact Steven Glazebrook for further information and to discuss
50
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
the scope of the Travel Plan. He can be contacted on 0161 793 3847.
APPLICATION No:
04/48655/FUL
APPLICANT:
Mr And Mrs Shatwell
LOCATION:
Land To The Rear Of 4 Delamere Avenue Salford 6
PROPOSAL:
Erection of one detached dwelling with detached double garage
together with creation of new vehicular access
WARD:
Claremont
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to land to the north of 4 Delamere Avenue and to the east of 5/7 Daisy Bank
Avenue, Swinton. The land currently forms part of the garden area of 4 Delamere Avenue. The surrounding
area is predominantly residential in character. The site is bounded to the north by Daisy Bank Avenue, and
a 1m fence and 1m bush above (2m total) protects the boundary. To the west are the gardens of 5 and 7
Daisy Bank Avenue, with St John’s Primary School to the south-west. Within the grounds of the school
there is a large lime tree which is approximately 5m from the common boundary. Along the common
boundary with 5/7 Daisy Bank Avenue is a 1.8m fence. Beyond Daisy Bank Avenue is the East Lancashire
Road. To the south, the site is bounded by the gardens of 4, 6 and 8 Delamere Avenue. A 2.2m solid brick
wall runs along this common boundary.
It is proposed to construct one detached dwelling with a new vehicular access from Daisy Bank Avenue.
The proposal also includes the erection of a detached garage. The rear elevation of the dwelling would face
the rear of 5/7 Daisy Bank Ave. The separation distance between these properties would be 21m. There
would be a separation distance of approx 24m to the rear of 8 Delamere Avenue and 19m to the ground
floor lounge of 6 Delamere Avenue.
The dwelling would be constructed of brick and would have a tiled roof and the main footprint would
measure 8m X 9m. A small porch area would be erected to the front (2.7m X 1m) and a conservatory is
proposed at the rear (3m X 3.7m). The main aspects would be on the front and rear elevations of the
building. The detached garage would be located approximately 7m to the east of the dwelling and would
measure 9.5m X 8.5m. The garage would also be constructed of brick and would have a tiled roof.
SITE HISTORY
In 2003, planning permission was refused for outline planning permission for the erection of a pair of
semi-detached dwellings and the construction of a new vehicular access onto Daisy Bank Avenue. (ref:
03/45711/OUT). An appeal was made against the refusal but the appeal was dismissed in October 2003.
The reason for refusal was:
“The proposed development would, by virtue of its size and siting, constitute over development of the site
and would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of future residents of the proposed dwellings. The
proposal would therefore be contrary to Policy DEV1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.”
51
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
In 1992, planning permission was granted for the continued use of the site as a garden area and erection of
boundary fencing/gates and construction of new vehicular access onto Daisy Bank Avenue (ref: E/28804).
CONSULTATIONS
British Coal – no comments received.
Director of Environmental Services – no objection, advice given.
Highways Agency – no objection
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 12th July 2004.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
5, 7 and St John’s School Daisy Bank Avenue
4B, 6A, 6-12 (even) Delamere Avenue
REPRESENTATIONS
A request has been made by Councillor Cook for this application to be considered by the Panel. I have
received 4 letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application publicity. The
following issues have been raised:A number of years ago permission was refused for the erection of garages and a vehicular access.
When the land was purchased from the Council, it was on the condition that no building works
would take place because it would be detrimental to the area.
The proposal would add to the problem of traffic and highway safety in the area. The objector
points out that the road is heavily used by school children associated with St John’s.
Loss of light
Loss of privacy
Loss of view.
Detrimental impact on local property values.
The objector questions whether the 2.2m high solid brick wall to the rear of the houses on Delamere
Avenue which once formed part of the Salford/Swinton boundary will be affected by the proposal.
There is no need for more residential properties in the area.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DEV1 – Development Criteria
DEV2 – Good Design
H1 – Meeting Housing Needs
T13 – Car Parking
EN7 – Conservation of Trees and Woodlands
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
52
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the principle of residential development, the impact
of the development on the amenity of the area and neighbouring residents and the amenity provisions for
future occupants, and the impact of the development on a large lime tree in the grounds of St Johns School.
Principle of residential development
Policies H1 of the adopted and replacement Unitary Development plans seek to ensure that the City’s
housing stock is able to meet the requirements of all groups within Salford by providing a wide range of
accommodation. Paragraph 5.18 of PPG13 states: ‘the Government is committed to maximising the re-use
of previously-developed land and the conversion of existing buildings to promote regeneration and
minimise the amount of greenfield land being taken for development’. This approach is reiterated in PPG3
with regard to Housing. This site falls under the definition of previously developed land, as set out in
Annex C of PPG3. Given that the character of the area is predominantly residential and the site is classed as
previously developed land, I am satisfied that the principle of residential development is acceptable.
A number of objectors claim that the Council has previously refused an application for the construction of
garages and fencing on the site on the basis that the land is to be retained for garden use only. I have
investigated the history of the site and there have not been any previous applications for such development.
Some of the objectors have stated that when the land was sold by the Council, it was on the condition that no
building works would take place because it would be detrimental to the area. I have viewed the deeds of the
land following its sale and a covenant was attached which states:
“Not to use any building erected on land for any purpose which would be deemed to be a public nuisance or
private nuisance or carry out any offensive trade or business therefore.”
This covenant does not restrict any future development of the land and so the application should be
considered on its merits.
Impact of the development on the amenity of the area and neighbouring residents and the amenity
provisions for future occupants
Policy DEV1 requires development to respect its local context and states that regard must be given to a
number of factors including the likely scale of traffic generation and the impact of development on sunlight
and privacy. Policy DEV2 seeks to encourage high standards of design. Policy DES7 states that
development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the
occupiers of other developments.
Council guidance stipulates minimum separation distances that should be maintained in order to prevent
any serious loss of light / prevent overbearing development. The separation distances that would be
maintained are in accordance with this guidance and so I am satisfied that the proposal would not have a
53
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
serious detrimental impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers in terms of light/overbearing. Loss of
view, a concern raised by some of the objectors, is not a material planning consideration. Although there
are two small windows on the gable elevation facing 6/8 Delamere Avenue, I have imposed a condition for
them to be fitted with obscure glazing to prevent any loss of privacy for neighbouring residents.
The design of the dwelling is of an acceptable standard and would not have a detrimental impact on the
amenity of the area. I am of the view, therefore, that the development is in accordance with Policy DEV2.
Policy T13 seeks to ensure that adequate and appropriate car parking is provided where necessary. This is
reiterated in Policy A10. The proposal would provide off street parking for any future occupiers.
Furthermore, it is unlikely that the erection one detached dwelling would result in a significant increase in
traffic in the area, and hence the proposal would not have a significant impact on traffic congestion. I have
no objection on highway safety grounds.
With regard to the objectors concern about the impact of the development on the 2.2m high boundary wall,
the plans clearly show that this wall would not be affected by the development.
The impact of development on local property values is not a material planning consideration and market
forces inform the need for new housing development.
Policy DES7 states that all new development will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory
level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. The location of all
habitable room windows would be on either the front or rear elevations providing aspects that are in
accordance with Council Guidance. I am satisfied, therefore, that future occupants will be provided with
sufficient levels of amenity in terms of light.
With regard to the previous application (03/45711/OUT) that was refused and subsequently dismissed at
appeal, the Inspector had regard to the layout of the proposed site and in particular the orientation of the pair
of semi-detached properties which had their front elevations facing Daisy Bank Avenue. He acknowledged
that the pair of semi-detached houses would be designed with an unusually narrow space at the front of the
houses and limitations at the rear, contrary to the established layouts further along Daisy Bank Avenue. He
was of the opinion that the site would be cramped and the proposal would not provide adequate open space.
He concluded that the proposal would unacceptably harm the living conditions of future residents of the
houses. In this case the detached dwelling would have its gable elevation facing Daisy Bank Avenue, with
the garden space to the east and west of the building. However, I am of the view that although these gardens
provide adequate provision of usable amenity space, the site is still very cramped, with the front corner of
the proposed dwelling only 0.9m (increasing to 3m at the rear) from the back of the footpath on Daisy Bank
Avenue. This narrow distance falls significantly short of the established standards of site layout along
Daisy Bank Avenue, which include much larger gaps between a property and the highway. I am of the
view, therefore, that the proposal is cramped and would have a detrimental impact on the character of Daisy
Bank Avenue.
Impact on the lime tree in the grounds of St John’s School
Policy EN7 seeks to protect the City’s treescape. The Director of Environmental Services has been
consulted and is of the view that the roots of the tree will not be directly affected by the proposal, but states
that regular pruning would be required to prevent the branches of the tree coming into contact with the
proposed building.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
54
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
The previous application (03/45711/OUT) for a pair of semi-detached properties on this site was refused
because insufficient amenity would have been provided for future occupants. Following that refusal the
scheme has been reduced in size to the proposal which is currently under consideration which, as detailed
above, would provide future occupants with a satisfactory level of amenity.
CONCLUSION
As detailed earlier in this report, the main planning issues relating to this application are the principle of
residential development, the impact of the development on the amenity of the area and neighbouring
residents and the amenity provisions for future occupants, and the impact of the development on a large
lime tree in the grounds of St Johns School. I am satisfied that the principle of development is acceptable
and would provide future occupants with a sufficient level of amenity without compromising the amenity
enjoyed by neighbouring residents. I am satisfied that the tree in the grounds of St John’s School will not be
significantly affected. However, I am of the opinion that the site layout is cramped and, given the proximity
to Daisy Bank Avenue, the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the character of the area.
RECOMMENDATION:
Refuse For the following Reasons:
(Reasons)
1. The proposed development would be cramped and out of character with the surrounding area because
of it's siting and design contrary to Policy DEV1 of the adopted City of Salford Unitary Development
Plan.
APPLICATION No:
04/48691/FUL
APPLICANT:
Dappa Homes
LOCATION:
Former Salvation Meeting Hall Liverpool Road Cadishead
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing buildings and erection of 3 three-bedroomed
houses and 6 two-bedroomed apartments together with creation of new
vehicular access (Resubmission of previous application 04/47606/FUL)
WARD:
Cadishead
55
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Members will recall that this item was considered at the meeting of the Panel on 19 th August 2004. The
application was deferred to seek amended plans showing the correct north point (it currently points south
and not north) and to accurately plot the position and orientation of 1 Fir Street (the occupier disputed the
position shown on the plan).
Amended plans have now been received which correctly show the north point and accurately indicate the
position of the dwelling at 1 Fir Street. The proposed apartment building has been set back a further 1.4
metres from the boundary with the garden to 1 Fir Street – there would therefore be a distance of 5.2 metres
between the building and the garden fence (previously 3.8 metres). There would be a distance of 13.15
metres between the corner of the apartment building and the corner of the dwelling at 1 Fir Street.
Concern has also been raised by the resident of 1 Fir Street that the description given to the existing building
in the planning appraisal part of this report as a ‘part single storey, part two-storey’ building is misleading.
For clarity, the front elevation (facing Liverpool Road) and the rear elevation are single storey and the main
body of the building is two storey (there are windows at ground floor and first floor level). The existing
building is, however, relatively squat, the ridge height being 5.7 metres. The eaves height of the proposed
apartment building is 5.7 metres and the ridge height is a maximum of 9.2 metres.
My previous observations are set out below:
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to the site of the Salvation Army meeting hall on Liverpool Road. The proposal is to
demolish the existing hall and garage at the site and to erect three three-bedroom houses, fronting School
Lane and six two-bed apartments fronting Liverpool Road.
The dwellings would be 2.5 storey, with dormers at the rear and would be set back 9 metres from School
Lane, continuing the building line of the adjacent semi-detached dwellings. Three parking spaces would be
provided to the front which would be accessed directly from School Lane. Private gardens would be
provided to the rear.
The two-storey apartment building would be set back between 1 metre and 1.2 metres from Liverpool Road.
The footprint of the building would be a maximum of 15.2 metres in width by 18.6 metres. The rear element
of the building would be set in at each side and would be 9.6 metres in width. A car park comprising six
parking spaces would be provided to the rear, with vehicular access from School Lane. Private amenity
space and a bin store would be provided at the rear
The site is located within the Lower Cadishead key local centre. To the rear of the site, the surrounding area
is predominantly residential.
SITE HISTORY
04/47616/FUL – Demolition of existing buildings and erection of 3 three-bedroomed houses and 6
two-bedroomed apartments together with creation of new vehicular access. Application withdrawn.
CONSULTATIONS
56
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Environment Agency – No objection in principle.
Director of Environmental Services – A search of contaminated land and landfill gas maps indicates that
there are no problems with the redevelopment of this site for housing and that no special measures are likely
to be required in the construction of the properties from a contamination or gas perspective. The only area
of concern is from noise from the adjacent A57 Liverpool Road. This road is considered to be very busy and
as such, high levels of noise from passing traffic are likely to occur. Whilst, the new Cadishead Way bypass
will reduce the level of noise significantly on this stretch of road, it is not yet completed so some form of
noise attenuation is likely to be required for the properties built at this location, a noise condition is
therefore recommended
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 6th July 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1, 5, 7, 9 Fir Street
10, 12 School Lane
176 – 180 (e), 182, 184, 169 – 179 (o), 179a Liverpool Road
1st Floor Flats 175, 177 and 179a Liverpool Road
Flats 1 – 4 184 Liverpool Road (& 16 Chapel Lane, Warrington)
29 – 33 Primary Close
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 7 letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application publicity. I
have also received an 18 name petition. The following issues have been raised:School Lane is a cul-de-sac, use of it as vehicular access would be detrimental to the residents living on
School Lane. The street is already at capacity for vehicles due to local businesses using the street for
parking. If each property were to have 2 cars, it would force another 9 cars to find parking on the street
due to there not being adequate parking within the new development, not taking into account visitors to
the proposed development.
Increased traffic and congestion would be detrimental to residents safety and result in increased noise
Apartments would not be in keeping with the other properties in the area
Loss of privacy for residents at 10 School Lane and 1 and 5 Fir Street
Loss of light to dwellings at 10 School Lane and 1 and 5 Fir Street and loss of sunlight to garden areas
The proposed apartments will be significantly higher than existing buildings and will lead to loss of
light and overbearing on residents of 1 and 5 Fir Street
Position of apartments is north and not south as stated on the plan – this will block out light to existing
buildings
There is currently a turning point at the front of 16 School Lane and there have been collisions with the
front fence due to the amount of traffic using the street
At peak times, cars double park on School Lane, causing residents problems accessing their driveways
Current parking problem makes emergency vehicular access impossible
Plans show obscure windows – what is to stop future residents changing these to clear?
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
57
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
16th September 2004
None.
DEV1 – Development Criteria
DEV2 – Good Design
S3 – Key Local Centres
EN15 – Environmental Improvement Corridors
T13 – Car Parking
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
EN18 - Environmental Improvement Corridors
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
EHC2 – Reuse of Existing Health and Community Facilities
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the suitability of this site for residential
development and the loss of the community use; the siting and massing of the development and its impact
on neighbouring residents; the design of the development and its appearance in the streetscene; the level of
traffic generation and car parking provision and the level of amenity space provision within the proposed
development.
Principle of Residential Development
With regards to the principle of the proposed development, the site is located within a key local centre and
to the rear of the site is a residential area. With regards to the suitability of the site for housing I consider the
proposal satisfies adopted UDP policy H1 in providing brownfield land for housing use. In terms of
emerging policies of the revised deposit draft replacement plan ST11 and H1 seek housing development to
be located on previously developed land at an appropriate density for the site. I consider the density of
development proposed on this formerly developed site is appropriate. With reference to policy S3 of the
adopted UDP, I do not consider that the redevelopment of the site for residential purposes would have any
significant impact on the viability of the Lower Cadishead Key Local Centre, however, given that the
property is currently used as a community facility consideration must be given to Draft UDP policy EHC2.
To be in accordance with this policy the applicant must demonstrate that there is a lack of demand for the
existing use of the building or that alternative provision has been made. The applicant has submitted
supporting information in respect of this policy. This states that the facility was last used at the end of 2003
and that the Hall had to be closed due to the falling numbers of congregation.
Siting of Development and Impact on Neighbours
Policies DEV1, DES1 and DES7 require consideration to be given to residential amenity and to provide
well designed development that fits in with the character of the area. I have received objections regarding
loss of privacy and loss of light to the dwellings at 1 and 5 Fir Street and 10 School Lane. For facing
two-storey developments, the City Council normally requires a minimum distance of 21 metres between
habitable room windows (i.e. lounge, bedroom, dining room etc) and at least 13 metres between a habitable
room and non-principle room window or gable. The closest habitable room windows of the proposed
dwellings would be situated 21.5 metres from 5 Fir Street, I do not therefore consider that there would be
58
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
any loss of privacy or light to this property. There would be a minimum separation distance of 22.4 metres
from the proposed dormer windows in the rear roofspace.
With regards to the proposed apartments, the building would be sited closer to Liverpool Road than the
existing building. The existing building, which is part single storey, part two-storey is located directly to the
rear of 1 Fir Street. The windows that are proposed on the side elevation of the apartments, facing the rear
yard of 180 Liverpool Road and 1 Fir Street, would be obscure glazed. I do not therefore consider that there
would be any loss of privacy. A condition is recommended to ensure that the obscure glazing is maintained.
With regards to light, whilst the proposed building would be higher than the existing building and would be
located 3.8 metres from the side boundary, it would not be positioned directly to the rear of the garden or
dwelling at 1 Fir Street and as such, I do not consider that there would be any loss of light. Furthermore, I
consider that the removal of the existing building which is positioned directly to the rear of this dwelling
and at closer proximity would allow an increased level of light.
There would be a distance of 4.4 metres from the proposed houses and a window at the side of 10 School
Lane at ground floor, this is, however, a bathroom window and as such I consider this relationship to be
satisfactory. The proposed dwellings would face the side of 33 Primary Close, at a distance of 18 metres.
There is a window to the side of this dwelling, which appears to be a habitable room, but there is also a
window to this room at the front of the property. Furthermore, a 1.8m high timber fence is positioned on the
School Lane boundary which partially obscures this side window. I do not therefore consider that the siting
of the proposed dwellings would have any detrimental effect on the amenity of the residents of 33 Primary
Close.
The apartment building would be positioned 1 metre from the side of 184 Liverpool Road. There was
previously a habitable room window at first floor level in this side elevation, but this has recently been
bricked up following an agreement between the owners and the applicant. I am satisfied that there be no
detrimental impact on the amenity of any future residents of the flats at 184 Liverpool Road.
There would be a distance of approximately 15 metres between the habitable room windows to the
Liverpool Road elevation of the apartments and the properties on the opposite side of Liverpool Road. 173
Liverpool Road is a dwelling and 175, 177 and 179a Liverpool Road are A1 shops with vacant flats above.
This represents a significant shortfall in the 21 metre separation distance normally required by the City
Council between habitable room windows, however, consideration must be given to the existing building
line on Liverpool Road. The existing Hall has been set back from Liverpool Road and the design and siting
is poor and out of context with the character of the area. I consider that the benefits of the proposed
development, in this position, to the streetscene would allow for a relaxation of the normal distances.
Furthermore, the existing buildings on either side of the application site have a similar relationship to the
properties on the opposite side of Liverpool Road.
I do not consider that the proposed development would result in any loss of light or privacy to surrounding
residents.
Design and Appearance of the Proposed Development
Policies DEV1, DEV2 and DES1 seek to encourage the enhancement of the environment through good
design whilst policies EN15 and EN18 require the development to make a positive contribution to the
Environmental Improvement Corridor’s environment and appearance. The applicant has submitted a
streetscene plan to illustrate the context of the apartments in relation to the adjacent buildings. I consider
that the proposed design is of a high standard and reflects and complements the character of the surrounding
area. Whilst the apartment building would be approximately 0.5 metre higher than the adjacent buildings on
59
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Liverpool Road, it would be set back approximately 1 metre and such would not appear out of context. I am
satisfied that the design and external appearance of the proposed houses is acceptable and would be in
keeping with the character of the area.
Traffic Generation and Car Parking Provision
Policy T13 requires developments to have adequate and appropriate car parking and servicing and identifies
minimum parking standards. Within the revised deposit draft UDP there are no standards for car parking for
dwellings and the emphasis is on maximum parking standards, in line with national (PPG3 and PPG13) and
regional planning guidance (RPG13) and the desire to have less reliance on travel by private car. A number
of objections have been raised by residents in relation to the increased volume of traffic which would use
School Lane and the level of parking identified. With regards to car parking, 100% provision has been
identified for the development. Given that the proposed development is situated on Liverpool Road, a main
bus route and is within the key local centre and therefore close to local services, I consider that 100% car
parking is acceptable. With regards to concerns raised in relation to an increase in traffic, I do not consider
that an additional nine dwellings would result in any significant or unacceptable level of traffic generation,
in particular in consideration of the previous community use of the site and the level of traffic that would be
associated with such a use. With regards to concerns about double parking, the introduction of the three
private driveways and the formal vehicular access point to the apartments, will discourage on street parking
on this particular section of School Lane. I have no parking or highway objections to the proposals.
Level of Amenity Space
With regards to the provision of private amenity space, 130m2 of private amenity space has been identified
for the apartments, whilst the proposed houses would have private rear gardens of approximately 40m2
each. I therefore consider that a satisfactory level of amenity space has been identified for the proposed
houses and apartments. Bin storage has been identified for the apartments, which would be located to the
rear of the building.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
A previous planning application for a similar development was withdrawn (04/47616/FUL) following
officer concerns. The value added to the development through pre-application discussions can be
summarised as:
Significant improvements in the design, external appearance and siting of the proposed apartments
Amendments to the internal layout and bricking up of the first floor side window to 184 Liverpool
Road, to ensure no loss of privacy or light to residents
Amended car park layout in line with required standards
CONCLUSION
I consider the site to be suitable for residential development and that the density and mass of development is
compatible to the size of the site and the street scene. I consider the buildings are well designed and will
contribute positively to the character of the area. The siting of the apartment building and houses allows for
an adequate level of amenity space to be provided. I do not consider that there would be any significant
increase in traffic generation and consider that an appropriate parking level of is proposed. I consider that
the scheme complies with policies of the adopted and emerging UDP and will make a positive contribution
to the area.
60
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. No development shall be started until samples of the facing materials to be used for the walls and roofs
of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of Development
Services.
3. 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 6 months of the commencement of development and thereafter shall be
maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five
years of planting shall be replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services.
4. Prior to the first occupation of the apartments hereby approved the windows to the side elevations of the
building shall be obscure glazed and shall be maintained as such thereafter.
5. Before the first occupation of the apartment building hereby permitted is brought into use not less than
6 car parking spaces shall be provided within the curtilage of the site to the satisfaction of the Director
of Development Services and such spaces shall be made available at all times the premises are in use.
6. Standard Condition J04X Bin Stores
7. Prior to the commencement of any building works on site, the applicant shall submit for written
approval an assessment of noise likely to affect the application site. This assessment should follow
PPG24 guidelines towards assessing the noise from the surrounding road network specifically
Liverpool Road, and but also any other noise sources which are deemed significant on the site. The
assessment shall identify any and all noise attenuation measures which may be determined appropriate
to achieve compliance with the requirements of PPG24 and BS8233:1999 and to reduce the impact of
noise on the residential properties on site. The assessment should also take account of the requirements
to provide summer cooling and rapid ventilation within the properties. It may be necessary to
incorporate acoustically shielded mechanical ventilation into the scheme to allow ventilation without
compromising the acoustic protection offered by the glazing. Once agreed, all identified noise control
measures shall be implemented and thereafter retained.
8. Before the first occupation of the three houses hereby permitted not less than 3 car parking spaces shall
be provided within the curtilage of the site to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services
and such spaces shall be made available at all times the premises are in use.
9. Before the first occupation of the apartments and houses hereby permitted, the formation of the new
vehicular access to the development, as shown on the approved plans, shall be provided to the
satisfaction of the Director of Development Services and such spaces shall be made available at all
times the premises are in use.
(Reasons)
61
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
5. Standard Reason R011A Parking, turning etc within curtilage
6. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
7. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
8. Standard Reason R011A Parking, turning etc within curtilage
9. Standard Reason R011A Parking, turning etc within curtilage
Note(s) for Applicant
1. Sewer connections will require approval - please contact United Utilities. Floor levels must be at the
same level of above adjacent properties.
2. The Environmental Services Directorate can be contacted on 0161 737 0551 for further discussions
concerning the assessment of noise and subsequent mitigation measures at this site.
3. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to
the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all
development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
4. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
DEV1 - Development Criteria
DEV2 - Good Design
S3 - Key Local Centres
EN15 - Environmental Improvement Corridors
T13 - Car Parking
APPLICATION No:
04/48706/COU
62
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
APPLICANT:
H Warmsley
LOCATION:
5 Trafalgar Road Salford 6
PROPOSAL:
Change of use from single family dwelling to two self contained flats
WARD:
Weaste And Seedley
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a two storey semi-detached property located within a residential area. To the rear
of and adjacent to the application site are residential properties. Approximately 150m to the north-east is
the Eccles Old Road Key Local Centre.
The proposal is to convert the residential dwelling into two self-contained flats. No external alterations are
proposed and access to both of the flats would be through the front entrance via a common entrance hall.
The ground floor of the building would accommodate one of the flats and the first floor of the building
would accommodate the second flat. The ground floor flat also has access to the basement of the building.
No in-curtilage parking is proposed. A total of approximately 110m2 of private amenity space would be
provided to the front and rear of the property.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – No objection.
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 12th July 2004.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1, 3, 6-11 and 12-20 (even) Trafalgar Road
16-20 (even) Devonshire Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received 6 letters of representation / objection in response to the planning application publicity. The
following issues have been raised:The internal walls of the building are very thin and the proposal would introduce a living room
adjacent to the adjoining neighbour’s bedroom resulting in noise nuisance. The objector states that
the walls and roof of the building should be sound proofed.
If the flats were rented privately, then the area would benefit from such residents. However, if the
flats are for the lower-end rental market for students or DSS people, then the proposal would have
an adverse affect on local property prices and quality of life.
The shared drive is not appropriate as it is only the width of one car.
The proposal would result in problems of parking and general congestion.
The basement flat is not appropriate and represents over-development of the site.
63
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
The garden area may be neglected if the application is approved. The object asks if a condition can
be imposed to prevent this.
There is no need for more flats in the area and there is a shortage of large family homes.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
H1 – Meeting Housing Needs
H5 – Dwellings sub-Divided into Self-Contained Flats or in
Multiple Occupation.
T13 – Car Parking
DEV1 – Development Criteria
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
H5 – Provision of Residential Accommodation Within Existing
Buildings.
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
Developments.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the principle of converting the residential dwelling
into two self-contained flats, the impact of the development on the amenity of neighbouring residents and
the amenity provisions for future occupants.
Principle of converting the residential dwelling into self contained flats
Policy H1 seeks to ensure that the City’s housing stock is able to meet the requirements of all groups within
Salford by providing a wide range of accommodation. The majority of properties in the immediate vicinity
are large family dwellings. The sub-division of this property into two self-contained flats would therefore
contribute to a greater mix of dwellings without compromising the residential character of the area. I am
therefore of the opinion that the principle of the development is acceptable and would not result in a
shortage of large family dwellings.
Impact of the development on the amenity of neighbouring residents
Policy DEV1 requires development to respect its local context and states that regard must be given to a
number of factors including the likely scale of traffic generation and the impact of development on sunlight
and privacy. Policy DES7 states that development will not be permitted where it would have an
unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers of other developments. Both Policies H5 state that the
subdivision of a building into self contained flats will only be permitted where the proposal would not have
an unacceptable impact on the on the amenity of neighbouring residents. They both stipulate that regard
must be given to noise and disturbance and the cumulative effects of the concentration of such uses. Policy
T13 seeks to ensure that adequate and appropriate car parking is provided where necessary. This is
reiterated in Policy A10.
All habitable room windows proposed for the development would be in either the front or rear elevations, as
is with the existing property. Therefore, I am satisfied that the proposal would not lead to a loss of privacy
64
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
for neighbouring residents. Given that no external alterations/extensions would be made, the development
would not have any impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents in terms of sunlight/overshadowing.
There appears to be limited on-street parking available, the subdivision of the property into two flats is not
likely to have a significant impact on traffic in the area, especially given that the property would not be
extended in any way. Furthermore, 5 Trafalgar Road is in close proximity to Eccles Old Road which is well
served by public transport. The proposal originally included the use of the existing shared access (with 3
Trafalgar Road) for parking, but this was deleted from the proposal because it did not meet the City
Council’s Standards. I am satisfied that the proposal would not result in a significant increase in traffic in
the area and do not object to the proposal on highway grounds.
With regard to the impact of the development on noise, and the objector’s view that the walls of the property
are too thin, this is a matter that would be dealt with under Building Regulations during the construction
phase if approval were granted. The Director of Environmental Services has been consulted and has no
objection to the proposal.
The second objection raised which relates to the future tenants of the property and the impact of
development on local property prices is not a material planning consideration. It is not for the planning
authority to regulate who the future occupiers of the flats should be although I can confirm that the
development is proposed by the private sector.
One of the objectors is of the view that the sub-division of the property into three units represents
over-development of the site. Although the original proposal was to sub-divide the property into three
units, negotiation with the applicant resulted in the proposal being reduced from three to two units. The
third unit would have been located in the basement of the building, which would not have provided future
occupants with a sufficient level of amenity. Given that the proposal has been amended, I am satisfied that
the scheme does not represent over-development of the site.
Concern has been raised that the garden area may be neglected and a request has been made for a condition
to be attached to ensure the up-keep of the garden. This issue is speculative and is not a material
consideration in the determination of this application. I do not feel it is necessary or reasonable for a
condition to be attached.
Amenity provisions for future occupants
Both Policies H5 state that applications for the sub-division of dwellings are appropriate only where
adequate provision of private amenity space is provided. Policy DES7 states that all new development will
be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight,
daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. The location of all habitable room windows would be on either the
front or rear elevations providing aspects that are in accordance with Council Guidance. I am satisfied,
therefore, that future occupants will be provided with sufficient levels of amenity in terms of light. The
semi-detached property is large enough to provide adequate space for future occupants. To the front and
rear of the property are private gardens that would be available for the use of future occupants. I am of the
view that these gardens provide adequate provision of usable amenity space in accordance with Policies H5.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The original proposal was for the subdivision of the property into three self-contained flats, with the third
flat located within the basement of the building. Following negotiation with the applicant it was agreed that
insufficient amenity would be provided for future occupants in terms of light and aspects and so the
65
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
proposal was reduced from three to two units, with no habitable rooms being proposed in the basement of
the building. Furthermore, the applicant wished to use an existing access for the parking of vehicles. This
element was also deleted because the access fell short of Council standards and would have resulted in a
detrimental impact on highway safety.
CONCLUSION
As detailed earlier, the main planning issues relating to this application are the principle of converting the
residential dwelling into two self-contained flats, the impact of the development on the amenity of
neighbouring residents and the amenity provisions for future occupants. I am satisfied that the principle of
development is acceptable and would provide future occupants with a sufficient level of amenity without
compromising the amenity enjoyed by neighbouring residents. I therefore, recommend the application for
approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. The bathroom windows of the first floor flat located in the gable elevation shall be fitted with obscure
glazing and shall be maintained as such thereafter.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
H1 - Meeting Housing Needs
H5 - Dwellings sub-Divided into Self-Contained Flats or in
Multiple Occupation.
T13 - Car Parking
DEV1 - Development Criteria
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
H5 - Provision of Residential Accommodation Within Existing
Buildings.
A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New
66
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Developments.
2. This approval relates to the amended plans which were received on 4th August 2004 and which show
only two self contained flats within the building.
APPLICATION No:
04/48803/FUL
APPLICANT:
Nuttall Construction Limited
LOCATION:
110 Harriet Street Walkden Worsley
PROPOSAL:
Demolition of existing works and erection of one three storey block
comprising 18 apartments together with creation of new vehicular
access and associated car parking
WARD:
Walkden North
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The site is currently occupied by a single storey print shop and associated car parking. The print shop has
recently been vacated as the former occupiers have found alternative accommodation on the Oakhill
Trading Estate.
To the north of the site is Walkden Cricket Club and the associated club house and pavilion. To the east is a
grassed area beyond which are garages. To the south, beyond an alley, is a row of two storey terraced
dwellings fronting Cecil Street. To the west, on the opposite side of Harriet Street, are two storey terraced
dwellings, beyond which are a number of single storey properties. There are a number of trees on the site,
predominantly located along the southern boundary and towards the western boundary adjacent to the
existing car parking area.
It is proposed to demolish the existing building and erect a three storey building comprising eighteen
apartments. A total of eighteen car parking spaces would be provided within the site. Access would remain
as existing. The proposed building would be sited 8.8m from the western boundary, a minimum of 1m from
the northern boundary and 11.6m from the southern boundary. It would be 7.9m to the eaves and 10.7m to
the ridge. The proposed building would be 57.6m in length and would have a 7.4m frontage to Harriet
Street. The plans have been amended from those originally submitted in order to address my concerns
relating to the design Harriet Street elevation. That elevation has been amended and now includes a window
at each of the three levels.
SITE HISTORY
In January 2004, outline planning permission was granted for the siting and means of access of two 3 storey
buildings comprising 20 apartments together with associated car parking and means of access (ref:
03/47227/OUT).
In May 2003, an outline application was submitted for the siting and means of access of two 3 storey
buildings comprising 20 apartments together with associated car parking and means of access. That
67
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
application was withdrawn in June 2003 as the applicant had not supplied sufficient information to enable
the application to be assessed (ref: 03/46115/OUT).
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – no comments received to date
Police Architectural Liaison Officer (ALO) – no comments received to date
United Utilities – no comments received to date
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 30th July 2004
A press notice was published on 5th August 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1-29 (O) Cecil Street
113-119 (O), 100-108 (E), Walkden Cricket Club, Harriett Street
12, 12A, 12B Queens Close
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received three letter of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The following
issues have been raised:
Loss of privacy
Overlooking
Increase in traffic
There would be car lights shining into the properties on Cecil Street
Increase in noise and disturbance
The existing trees would be felled
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DEV1 – Development Criteria
DEV2 – Good Design
H1 – Meeting Housing Needs
T13 – Car Parking
EN7 – Conservation of Trees and Woodland
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DES1 – Respecting Context
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
68
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
PLANNING APPRAISAL
I consider the main planning issues in the determination of this application to be as follows: whether the
principle of the proposed development is acceptable; whether there would be an impact on the amenity of
existing or future residents as a result of this proposal; whether the design of the proposed building is
acceptable; whether the proposed level of car parking is sufficient; whether the loss of the existing trees is
acceptable; and whether the proposed development accords with the provisions of the relevant policies of
both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs. Each of these issues will be discussed in
turn below:
The Principle of the Development
Policy H1 of the Adopted UDP states that the Council will endeavour to ensure that the city’s housing stock
is able to meet the housing requirements of all groups within Salford by promoting a number of measures,
including the release of land to accommodate new house building.
Policy H1 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP states that new housing development should
contribute to the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area.
I am of the opinion that, in light of the recent outline permission for the construction of two buildings on the
site to accommodate apartments, the principle of the redevelopment of the application site for housing has
already been accepted. Whilst the site was previously used for commercial purposes, it is located within a
predominantly residential area and I therefore consider residential use to be acceptable and compatible with
surrounding land uses. The site is also located in close proximity to Walkden Town Centre and the services
and facilities therein. The redevelopment of this site would result in the removal of vacant premises which
do not make a positive contribution to the street scene or the amenity of the area generally. I consider that
this proposal complies with the above policies and I therefore have no objections to the application in this
regard.
Impact on Amenity
Adopted Policy DEV1 outlines a number of criteria to which regard should be had in the determination of
planning applications. Of most relevance to this application are the location of the proposed development,
including its relationship to existing and proposed land uses, the size and density of the proposed
development.
Draft Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of
amenity. Development which would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users
of other developments will not normally be permitted.
The proposed building would be sited a minimum of 23m from the rears of the residential properties on
Cecil Street. Given this distance, I do not consider that a three storey building in this location would have an
unacceptable overbearing impact on adjoining residents. This distance is also sufficient to ensure that there
would be no detrimental impact as a result of overlooking or loss of privacy of existing or future residents.
The western elevation of the building would be 17.5m from the properties on the opposite side of Harriet
69
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Street. Given that there are no main habitable room windows on the western elevation of the proposed
building, I also consider this distance to be acceptable.
I am therefore satisfied that the application would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the
amenity of existing or future residents and I consider that the application accords with Adopted Policy
DEV1 and Draft Policy DES7.
Design
Adopted Policy DEV2 states that planning permission will not normally be granted unless the Council is
satisfied with the quality of the design and the appearance of the development.
Draft Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context and to respect the character
of the surrounding area. In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with this policy, regard will be
had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings and the quality and
appropriateness of proposed materials.
The proposed building would be three storeys in height. Although the majority of other buildings in the
immediate vicinity are two storeys, I am of the opinion that a three storey development on this site is
acceptable. A range of building heights in an area can add interest and variety to the street scene. The
application has been amended from that originally submitted in order to address my concerns relating to the
Harriet Street elevation and the appearance of the building in the street scene. The changes to the Harriet
Street elevation involve the inclusion of windows to each of the three storeys of the proposed building. The
proposed bin/cycle store, which was originally sited between the proposed building and Harriet Street, has
also been relocated in order to improve the appearance of the building. These amendments will ensure that
the proposed building would make a positive contribution to the street scene and that the Harriet Street
elevation would not appear as a blank gable wall. I have attached a condition requiring samples of materials
to be submitted and approved prior to the commencement of the development in order to ensure that they
are of a suitably high quality. Subject to compliance with this condition, I am satisfied that the design of the
proposed building is acceptable. I consider that the proposal complies with Adopted Policy DEV2 and Draft
Policy DES1.
Car Parking
Policy T13 requires adequate and appropriate car parking provision to meet the needs of new development.
Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and
motorcyclists, provide safe and secure parking and not exceed the Council’s maximum car parking
standards.
It is proposed to provide eighteen car parking spaces within the site, including two which could be used for
disabled people. It is also proposed to provide cycle storage areas within the site for future residents. In light
of the maximum car parking standards advocated by Government guidance and included in the Draft UDP,
and in light of the site’s proximity to Walkden Town Centre, I consider the proposed level of car parking to
be acceptable. I consider that the proposal complies with Draft Policy A10.
Trees
70
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Policy EN7 outlines the Council’s support for the retention of trees.
The site has been visited by the Council’s arboricultural officer, who is of the opinion that none of the trees
within the site are worthy of protection. The majority of the existing trees are self seeded and, due to their
location along the southern boundary of the site, have little amenity value as there are only limited views of
them from the highway. I therefore have no objections to the removal of these trees. I have however
attached a condition requiring the submission, approval and subsequent implementation of a landscaping
scheme.
VALUE ADDED TO THE DEVELOPMENT
The scheme has been amended from that originally submitted in order to address my concerns relating to
design and impact on the street scene. The changes proposed would ensure that the proposed development
would be a positive addition to the street scene.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I consider that the principle of residential development on the site is acceptable. It is a
previously developed site in a residential area in close proximity to Walkden Town Centre and the facilities
therein. I am of the opinion that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the amenity of existing
or future residents and consider the design of the proposed building to be acceptable. The application
accords with the relevant policies of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs. I
therefore recommend approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
2. 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.
3. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples of the materials for the
external elevations and roof of the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Director of Development Services. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials,
unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Director of Development Services.
4. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a scheme showing the provision of
waste recycling facilities within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Director of
Development Services. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation of any of
the apartments hereby approved, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Director of Development
Services.
71
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
5. The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the means of vehicular access
from Harriet Street has been constructed and laid out in accordance with the approved plans.
6. The car parking spaces shown on drawing no. 3083/2.00 (A) shall be provided prior to first occupation
of any of the apartments hereby approved and shall be made available at all times the premises are in
use
7. The cycle storage areas shown on drawing no. 3083/2.00 (A) shall be provided prior to first occupation
of any of the apartments hereby approved and shall be made available at all times the premises are in
use
8. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation report
for the approval of the Director of Development Services. The investigation shall address the nature,
degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on the site and shall include an
identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act
1990, Part IIA.
The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Director of Development Services prior
to the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works contained within the
approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to the occupation of the site.
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Reason: In order to encourage waste recycling, in accordance with Policy MW11 of the Adopted City
of Salford Unitary Development Plan
5. Standard Reason R026A Interests of highway safety
6. Standard Reason R012A Parking only within curtilage
7. Reason: In order to encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport in accordance with Policy A10
of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary Development Plan
8. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
72
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
DEV1 - Development Criteria; DEV2 - Good Design; H1 - Meeting Housing Needs; T13 - Car Parking;
EN7 - Conservation of Trees and Woodland
2. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to
the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all
development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
3. The applicant is advised to contact the Council's Highways Maintenance Section regarding making
good the disused vehicular access point into the site
4. The applicant is advised that, once the commencement of the building works occurs, care should be
taken to note any adverse conditions found in the sub soil layers. Any adverse conditions found should
be reported to Environmental Health as soon as is practicable for advice. Environmental Health can be
contacted on 0161 925 1125 for further advice on this matter.
5. The applicant is advised that any external lighting provided in the scheme should be erected and
directed so as to avoid nuisance to residential accommodation in close proximity. Guidance can be
obtained from the Institute of Lighting Engineers which relates to these matters (Guidance Notes for the
Reduction of Light Pollution). It is recommended that the lighting be designed to provide a standard
maintained illumination (LUX) of between 5 and 20 LUX with the lower level being the preferable one.
APPLICATION No:
04/48924/OUT
APPLICANT:
Mr D Barlow
LOCATION:
Land Adjacent To 21 Briarfield Road Worsley
PROPOSAL:
Outline application for the means of access for one detached dwelling
WARD:
Worsley
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application is in outline with approval sought only for the principle of the erection of a dwelling on the
site and the means of access. All other matters are reserved for consideration at a later stage. The site is
located at the head of a cul-de-sac in a residential area. Access into the site would be achieved from
Briarfield Road, adjacent to the existing access to No. 21. This new access point has already been created by
virtue of a recently approved application for a single storey detached dwelling on the same site.
SITE HISTORY
In December 2003, a planning application for the erection of a single storey dwelling and garage on land
adjacent to 21 Briarfield Road was approved (ref: 03/47180/FUL).
73
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
In October 2003, a planning application for the erection of a single storey dwelling and garage on land
adjacent to 21 Briarfield Road was withdrawn as a result of my concerns (ref: 03/46863/FUL).
CONSULTATIONS
The Director of Environmental Services – no comments received to date
Worsley Civic Trust – no comments received to date
PUBLICITY
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
2, 4, 5 Brereton Drive
420 – 430 (E) Walkden Road
1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13 – 19 (O), 23, 14 – 24 (E) Briarfield Road
4 Roe Green
14 Chalfont Drive
153 Worsley Road
145 Greenleach Lane
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received one letter of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The following
issues have been raised:
The application forms state that permission is sought for a two storey dwelling
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DEV1 – Development Criteria
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DES1 – Respecting Context
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are as follows: whether the principle of the proposed
development is acceptable; whether the proposed vehicular access point is acceptable; and whether the
application accords with the relevant provisions of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft
Replacement UDPs. I will deal with each in turn below.
Policy DEV1 sets out a number of criteria against which applications for planning permission are assessed.
Of most relevance to this application are the location and nature of the proposed development including its
relationship to existing and proposed land uses, the layout and relationship of existing and proposed
74
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
buildings, the effect on sunlight, daylight and privacy for neighbouring properties and the visual appearance
of the development.
Policy DES1 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDP requires developments to respond to their
physical context. In assessing the extent to which this has been achieved, regard will be paid to a number of
factors, including the relationship to existing buildings and the scale of the proposed development in
relation to its surroundings.
In light of the previous approval of an application for the erection of a detached single storey dwelling on
the site, I am satisfied that the principle of residential development on the site has already been established.
The site is located within a residential area and I therefore consider the principle of the proposed use to be
consistent with its surroundings, in accordance with Policies DEV1 and DES1. I consider the principle of
the proposal to be acceptable and I therefore have no objections to the application in this regard.
The recently approved application proposed a vehicular access in the same location as that proposed by this
application. This access has already been constructed and I therefore have no objections to the application
on highway grounds.
Turning to other issues, the objector is concerned that the application forms describe the development as
‘erection of a two storey dwelling’. Upon submission of the application, the applicant confirmed that this
was an error and wished to seek approval for a detached dwelling, rather than a two storey dwelling. The
description of the development was therefore amended accordingly and residents were notified of the
correct description.
In conclusion, I am satisfied that the principle of a dwelling with vehicular access in the location proposed
is acceptable and accords with the relevant polices of both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft
Replacement UDPs. I therefore recommend approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A02 Outline
2. No development shall be started until full details of the following reserved matters have been submitted
to and approved by the Local Planning Authority:
-
the layout of the site, including the disposition of buildings and roads and provision for
parking and servicing;
-
plans and elevations showing the design of all buildings and other structures;
-
the colour and type of facing materials to be used for all external walls and roofs;
-
a landscape scheme for the site which shall include details of trees and shrubs to be planted, any
existing trees to be retained, or felled indicating the spread of the branches and trunk positions,
walls, fences, boundary and surface treatment.
75
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R001 Section 92
2. Standard Reason R002 Reserved Matters
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the Applicant should
take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of their proposal. Developers must also
seek permission from the Coal Authority before undertaking any operation that involves entry into any
coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and adits and the implementation of site investigations
or other works. Property specific summary information on any past, current or proposed surface and
underground mining activity to affect the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The
Coal Authority Mining Reports Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk
2. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to
the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all
development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
3. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
DEV1 - Development Criteria
76
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
APPLICATION No:
04/48479/DEEM3
APPLICANT:
STASH
LOCATION:
Speedy House Cheltenham Street Salford 6
PROPOSAL:
Sub-division of existing unit and change of use from offices/storage and
manufacture of fabrics to educational, training and rehabilitation
centre for former drug dependant people plus ancillary office space
WARD:
Irwell Riverside
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
Members will recall that at the meeting held on 19th August 2004 this item was deferred for further
information to be provided. I have consulted the Crime and Disorder Team with regard the application who
have not raised any objection to the proposal, nor does the Lead Member for Crime and Disorder. I have
also consulted the Crime Reduction Advisor for GMP who is coordinating a response, I will inform
members of their recommendations prior to panel.
The applicant has provided detailed information in response to issues raised at the last meeting regarding
site selection and use of the building. I have enclosed their information below:Background
Structured Day Programmes for substance users have existed in the UK (and beyond) for several years now.
Due to the success of such initiatives, more day programmes have been rolled out throughout the country in
line with the National Drug Strategy.
Many such day programmes run in conjunction with the Criminal Justice System as they provide
meaningful alternatives to crime and can be utilised as a cost effective community sentencing option.
Aims of STASH Inclusion
To provide a range of educational, recreational and employment focused activities for stable and
recovering ex-drug users in Salford
To work in partnership with the probation service (already located in Pendleton) to provide
meaningful activities for clients who have been sentenced to complete a 20 hour per week Drug
Treatment and Testing Order (DTTO)
To assist clients in moving into education, volunteering, training and employment and provide
on-going support to prevent relapse
To develop women centred activities, e.g. parenting classes, health & beauty, assertiveness and
self-defence, etc and make these accessible by providing child care facilities
To provide a range of one-to-one and group support for clients who are committed to positively
addressing their past substance use problems and enable them to make valuable contributions to
their families, community and the wider society
To build clients’ self-esteem and confidence through assertiveness training; life skills; health and
fitness; and the development of effective coping strategies
Through the above, STASH Inclusion aims to reduce clients’ drug use and associated crime,
thereby benefiting their families and community
77
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
Activities to be made available at STASH Inclusion
STASH Inclusion has visited a number of other structured day programmes throughout the North of
England in order to identify models of good practice and to find out about the type of activities and
resources that have proved to be both popular and effective. We have also consulted with clients who
already access drug treatment and support services to find out what type of programme would best meet
their needs. As a result of this, the following activities have been identified and tutors found to deliver
these:
Information technology (including working towards qualifications)
English and Maths (including working towards qualifications)
Music and DJ skills
Art and pottery
Life skills (e.g. budgeting, coping skills, assertiveness, parenting, job and interview skills, social
skills, etc)
Sport and fitness (an exercise referral officer has been seconded from Salford City Council and is
able to offer gym inductions, canoeing, rock climbing, nutrition information, etc)
Women only activities and groups (STASH employs a women’s development officer who is able to
co-ordinate appropriate activities to meet the specific needs of female drug users, including those
with children)
Group work (including relapse prevention; recovery support; managing change; assertiveness, etc)
One-to-one support (each client would be allocated a key worker with whom they would meet on a
regular basis to review their care plan and to meet individual support needs)
Vocational training (e.g. health & beauty, car mechanics, office skills, etc)
Photography and film studies
Reasons for STASH Inclusion’s Location Choice
When seeking appropriate premises for this new service, STASH Inclusion took a number of factors into
consideration, namely:
Accessibility: as many of our clients do not have their own transport, it is essential that we choose
an area that is easily accessible by public transport. In this respect, Pendleton adequately meets our
needs.
Geography: Salford covers a wide area, so it was imperative that we identify a central location that
enables all potential service users to have an equal chance of attending the programme. Again,
Pendleton fits the bill.
Premises: due to the diverse range of activities to be offered through the programme, it is essential
that we find a venue that is large enough to accommodate group work; one-to-one counselling;
art/pottery classes; salon; music group; catering; training and resource centre and offices. The
premises identified on Gloucester Street meet these requirements fully.
Partnership agencies: because STASH Inclusion work in partnership with Salford Probation
Service to deliver Drug Treatment and Testing Orders, it would be ideal for our premises to be
within walking distance of the Probation Office. Again the Gloucester Street premises meet this
need due to its close proximity to Redwood Street and means that it would be possible for Probation
Officers to bring new clients over to the programme to introduce them in person to the STASH
Inclusion team – this increases up-take of service and helps to ensure that DTTO clients are more
likely to succeed in completing their community sentence. We also work in partnership with, e.g.
Pendleton College, to deliver educational sessions (information technology, creative writing, life
skills, etc) and this location would enable college tutors to participate in this programme.
78
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
What STASH Inclusion is not
It is not a drop-in
It is not a needle exchange
It is not a methadone prescribing service
It is not a shooting gallery
It is not for people who are chaotic drug users
How STASH aims to provide a safe service
All clients are assessed before accessing the programme – this includes an assessment of risk.
Anyone who is assessed as being a risk to other service users or members of the community would
not be accepted onto the programme. All clients’ motivation to address their substance use and
make positive life changes is also assessed.
All clients must sign an agreement form specifying the programme’s expectations of their
behaviour – this includes no violence; no drug using or dealing; no disrespectful behaviour, etc.
Anyone found to be breaking this agreement would be asked to leave the programme and staff
would retain the right to call the police in exceptional circumstances.
There is an appropriate staff to client ratio, with supervision and support available throughout the
programme’s opening hours.
The programme is open during week days (there is no intention to run evening or weekend
sessions) with a full timetable of activities to keep clients interested and occupied
The team is aware that community members may have concerns about the arrival of a service for drug users
in their locality. However, as the aims of the programme are to work with stable, motivated service users
and there is a timetable of activities specifically designed to provide an alternative to drug use and crime,
the programme will, in fact, be working to reduce crime and increase safety in the area.
The day programme team is made up of experienced drug workers, some of whom also have experience on
working specifically in structured day care. For example, one team member was involved in setting up a
similar programme in Yorkshire and met with community members to discuss their concerns before the
programme opened. During the three years that she subsequently worked in this service, there was only one
complaint from the community and, as it transpired, this isolated incident was not directly connected to the
service. Indeed, the local councillor commented about the positive contribution that the programme
continues to make to the community.
STASH Inclusion aims to make a similarly positive contribution to the community of Pendleton by not only
benefiting the well-being and potential of individual clients but also enabling them to ‘give something
back’ to their own communities throughout Salford.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a vacant warehouse and seeks consent to change the use of the ground floor (450
square metres) for use as an educational, training and rehabilitation centre.
The warehouse is a former three storey Victorian mill building and located within the Charlestown and
Lower Kersal New Deal for Communities area. Adjoining the site and to the north, on Cheltenham Street,
are a mixture light industrial, warehousing and manufacturing uses. Mona Street to the west has been
79
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
closed and does not provide any access to Cheltenham Street. A Council controlled car park is located off
Mona Street although it does not form part of this application, the applicant could negogiate to use this car
park in the future. A public car park is located to the west of the Council controlled car park. The main
access to the building is also located off Mona Street. The site is also in close proximity to Salford
Shopping Centre and accessible by public transport.
The proposal would deliver education, training, groups and vocational guidance to people who have
suffered from substance problems. The training and groups offered are likely to include accredited courses
in areas such as literacy and numeracy, arts, hair and beauty, music, ITC, drama, outdoor activities,
woodwork and mechanics. There will be five staff based at the premises, running groups and classes of
between six and twenty.
The proposed hours of operation are 9:00 until 17:00 Monday to Friday.
SITE HISTORY
In 2002, planning permission was approved for the change of use of the second floor of the warehouse to a
community arts facility to extend the existing first floor facility (01/43278/COU). This use no longer
operates.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – no objections
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 23 July 2004
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 – 5 (o) Cheltenham Street
Speedy House, Cheltenham Street
36 Broughton Road (Frederick Road)
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received two representations in response to the planning application publicity. The first letter states
that they had not been formally notified of the application. Our records show that a letter had been sent to
the address. However, in response to the letter a site notice was displayed at the site. The letter objecting to
the proposal outlines the following issues:Bring undesirables into the area
Proposal would add to crime problems
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
EC14/3 Improvement Proposals
EC3 Re-Use of Sites and Premises, SC1 Provision of Social and Community
Facilities
80
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies:
Other policies:
None
E5 Development within Established Employment Areas, EHC1 Provision and
Improvement of Health and Community Facilities
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the proposed development would result in
a material shortfall in employment land and whether the proposal complies with the relevant policies of
both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs. These issues will be discussed in turn
below.
The wider area including this site is allocated in the Adopted UDP under allocation EC14/3 Improvement
Proposals. The site as a whole is unallocated within the Revised Deposit Draft UDP.
Adopted policy EC3 states that where existing industrial and non-retail commercial sites and/or premises
become vacant, the city council will seek to re-use or redevelop them for similar or related uses, unless the
premises could be used for other purposes without an unacceptable shortfall in supply.
This approach is continued in the Revised Deposit Draft UDP policy E5, Development within Established
Employment Areas, which states that planning permission will only be granted for the reuse or
redevelopment of sites or buildings within an established employment area for non employment uses
where, inter alia, 1) the development would not compromise the operating conditions of other remaining
employment uses and 2) the developer can demonstrate that there is no current or likely future demand for
the site/building.
The building currently benefits from an extant planning consent for use of the building as
community/educational facility. During consideration of that application it was not considered that the loss
of the building as an employment generating use would have an unacceptable shortfall in supply. I am of
the opinion that circumstances have not changed in the intervening period such that a similar
community/educational use would adversely impact upon the supply of employment land.
Policy SC1 Provision of Social and Community Facilities, seeks to maintain and improve the quality and
distribution of social and community facilities and will promote greater awareness of these facilities,
particularly within the Investment Priority Area. The site is within the Investment Priority Area.
Policy EHC1 of the draft replacement plan is similar to policy SC1 in this instance.
I have no highway objection and I am of the opinion that the public car park and close proximity of public
transport is acceptable. I consider that the scheme would comply with Policy SC1 and EHC1.
Turning to the remaining issue. The main thrust of the letter of objection is the perception that the scheme
will generate undesirable people to the area and that they would have a direct impact upon levels of crime.
I am of the opinion that the use of the premises accords with both adopted and forthcoming development
plan policies as highlighted above. The type of users of the premises are not a material planning
consideration.
81
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
CONCLUSION
I consider that this application accords with the development plans policies and that there are no other
material considerations which outweigh this view.
I recommend therefore that for the following reasons the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A01 Five year time limit
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the policies and proposals in
the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations,
including Supplementary Planning Guidance. There are no other material planning considerations that
outweigh this finding:
DEV1 - Development Criteria
EC3 - Re-Use of Sites and Premises
SC1 - Provision of Social and Community Facilities
82
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
APPLICATION No:
04/48840/ART10
APPLICANT:
UK Coal Mining Ltd
LOCATION:
Land At Cutacre Tip Salford Road Bolton (Article 10)
PROPOSAL:
Erection of industrial buildings (classes B1, B2 _ B8) without complying
with condition 1 on application 49527/96 (which required the
submission of reserved matters by 31/7/2004)
WARD:
DESCRIPTION OF SITE
This application relates to the Cutacre site located to the west of Little Hulton. This application relates to
land only within Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council that borders Salford City Council.
BACKGROUND
In 1996, RJB Mining (UK) Ltd applied for planning permission to Salford City Council, Wigan
Metropolitan Borough Council and Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council for open cast coal mining,
recovery of coal by washing methods, and the reclamation of the Cutacre Tip and Wharton Hall Colliery
Spoil Tip for a mixture of amenity (ecology), agriculture, and woodland. The application also included
proposed industrial development (light industry, general industry and storage and distribution) solely
within Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council. The reference for the application being 96/35341/FUL.
The application was allowed following a Public Local Inquiry which was initially opened in 1998 and then
re-opened in 2000. The Secretary of State made his decision in 2001 and the applications to the three
Councils were granted subject to a number of conditions. The Secretary of States decision included granting
in outline approval for industrial development (light industry, general industry and storage and distribution)
solely within Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council subject to conditions including a standard time limit
condition.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL
The application is a formal consultation by Bolton MBC in respect of an application by UK Coal Mining
Ltd to amend the time limit condition attached to the above mentioned outline approval for industrial
development solely within Bolton MBC. The applicant is applying to extend the time period for the
submission of reserved matters for the erection of industrial buildings (light industry, general industry and
storage and distribution).
The condition attached to the outline approval states:
“Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of 3 years
beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than whichever is
the later of the following dates.
83
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION
16th September 2004
The expiration of 5 years from the date of this permission; or
The expiration of 2 years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of
approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.”
The applicant seeks to extend the time period for submission of reserved matters by a further three years.
SITE HISTORY
In 2001, planning permission was approved at appeal for industrial development solely within Bolton MBC
(Salford City Council reference: 96/35341/FUL). That same appeal decision approved open cast coal
mining, restoration of coal tip and landscaping within Salford, as stated within the background section
above.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application relate to the impact of the development on Salford City
Council and whether there are any changes in policies of this Council or at national level that would conflict
with the renewal of this permission. The appeal decision was made in the lifespan of the current Adopted
UDP. Within the revised deposit draft UDP policy MX3/2 seeks open land and employment uses on land
within Salford that is adjacent to the application site. I do not consider that local planning policies or indeed
national policies have changed materially since the appeal decision and have no objections to the renewal of
time to apply for reserved matters.
CONCLUSION
I consider the application is not contrary to policies contained within the Adopted or Revised Deposit Draft
UDP’s and that the renewal of the time period by a further three years would not have a detrimental impact
upon Salford City Council. I raise no objection.
RECOMMENDATION:
No Objections
84