PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
APPLICATION No:
05/51629/FUL
APPLICANT:
Housing Market Renewal Team
LOCATION:
Alleyway To Rear Of 362-378 Lower Broughton Road Salford
M7 2HW
PROPOSAL:
Erection of 2.4m high gate
WARD:
Broughton
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application is for the erection of a 2.4m high lockable double alley gate to provide
residents’ only access and improved security. The gate would be located at the entrance of the
alleyway to the rear of 362-378 Lower Broughton Road, Salford. The width of the gates would
be 3.9m.
CONSULTATIONS
Peak and Northern Footpath Society – no comments received
Ramblers Association – no comments received
Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – no
comments received
Open Space Society – no comments received
Urban Regeneration Company – no objections
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 12th December 2005.
A press notice was published on 1st November 2005.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
362 - 380 Lower Broughton Road
Flat 1, 382 Lower Broughton Road
Flat 2, 382 Lower Broughton Road
2 - 6 Yew Street
REPRESENTATIONS
1
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
I have had two objections in response to the planning application publicity. The following issues
have been raised:
Concern with regard to the appearance and “unfinished” look of the road.
Query as to whether 380 Lower Broughton Road would receive keys for the gate
as the garage could have access in the future from this ginnel.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: None
Policy UR1 promotes Urban Renaissance.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
DEV1 - Development Criteria
DEV2 - Good Design
DEV4 - Design and Crime
T3 - Highways
T10 – Pedestrians
COMPOSITE WRITTEN STATEMENT TO SHOW PROPOSED PLAN MODIFICATIONS
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
ST8 – Environmental Quality
DES1 – Respecting Context
DES2 – Circulation and Movement
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 – Design and Crime
A2 – Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the impact the gate would have on the
streetscene and the residential amenity of neighbouring residents and the impact the proposed
gate would have upon crime and the fear of crime. The loss of existing public rights of way also
needs to be considered
Policies DEV1, DES1, DES7 and ST8 seek to protect amenity and to provide a high quality
environment. Policy DEV2 seeks to achieve high quality design and to secure an acceptable
appearance in development proposals. Policies DEV4 and DES11 seek for proposals to deter
2
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
crime in the interests of personal and property security without compromising on the appearance
of the development. Policy DES2 sets requirements for accessibility to, through and around sites
through the provision of safe and direct pedestrian routes. Policy DES2 also aims to minimise
potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users. Policy T10 safeguards the
needs of pedestrians, taking into account their safety and the presence of existing public rights of
way in the planning of new development. Policy A2 states that development that would result in
the loss of an existing public right of way will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated
that adequate levels of access for the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists will be maintained
through the site.
I consider that the design, siting, height and colour - being black RAL 9005 gilded in gold, of the
proposed gate are acceptable and accords with policies DEV1, DEV2, DES7 and A8. The
proposed height of the gate would respect the height of adjacent walls and the amenity of the
area as required by DES1. I have no highway objections and I am satisfied that the proposal
meets the criteria specified in policy DES2 with regard to safe, direct and convenient
accessibility to all users to and through the site whilst minimising potential conflicts between
road users on the site.
The local residents would be able to gain access through the alley gate, as they would be issued
with keys. As such I do not consider that the local residents would suffer any significant loss of
amenity. The proposal will not have an adverse impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users
of other developments. This complies with Policy DES7.
The gating of the alleyway would help deter crime by only allowing access to the residents of the
properties behind which the alleyway lies. This restricted access would assist crime prevention
by deterring vandalism, theft and other criminal activity, thereby helping to reduce the residents’
fear of crime.
It is considered that that the benefits of the proposal as outlined above outweigh the issue of the
loss of access to an existing public right of way. This is because the alleyway is not a
recreational route and the users of the alleyway are mainly local residents who would continue to
have access to the rear alleyway.
I am of the opinion that the loss of the existing public right of way is acceptable given the
proposed benefits of the scheme in relation to crime prevention.
There are other pedestrian and double vehicle gates in the vicinity of the same height and design
proposed. With regard to the first objection, I have contacted Groundwork who have confirmed
that the alleyway has now been resurfaced. I therefore consider that this has addressed the
concerns of the resident in relation to the appearance of the alley. In relation to the second
objection, there is an existing 2m panel wall to the boundary of the alleyway with no. 380 Lower
Broughton Road. There is access to the garage from Lower Broughton Road where there is a
2.5m wide gap between the side of the property and the boundary. A set of keys would therefore
3
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
not normally be issued, however Groundwork have confirmed that they can provide keys to the
occupants of 380 Lower Broughton Road if requested.
CONCLUSION
Overall, the proposed development would not have an adverse impact upon the street scene or
the residential amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents. The proposed development
would improve the quality of life currently enjoyed by residents in the surrounding area, as it
would contribute to the regeneration of the area by improving the environment and helping to
eliminate vandalism, theft and other criminal activity. The proposal is therefore in accordance
with policies DEV1 and DEV4 the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and policies DES1
and DES11 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan. I therefore recommend the
application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1.
The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning
with the date of this permission.
2.
The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until the appropriate order
for the closure or diversion of the public rights of way affected by the development has been
made.
3.
The gate shall be painted in the approved colour (RAL 9005 gilded in gold) within three
months of its erection, and maintained in such a condition thereafter.
(Reasons)
1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy DEV 1 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan.
3. To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DEV 1 of the City of Salford
Unitary Development Plan.
Note(s) for Applicant
1. Easements may be required to protect utilities plant.
4
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
APPLICATION No:
05/51684/FUL
APPLICANT:
MaST LIFT Co
LOCATION:
Site Of 1/22 Cloverfield, 1/26 Fitchfield Walk, North Of Smith
Street And East Of Bolton Road Worsley M28 3TB
PROPOSAL:
Erection of a three storey building to provide a new primary
health and social care facility and library facilities together with
associated landscaping, car parking and alteration to existing
pedestrian access and construction of new vehicular access
WARD:
Walkden North
BACKGROUND
In July 2000 the government published the NHS plan, a ten year plan for modernising and
reforming of the NHS. It identified the urgent need to improve primary care premises in
England as a key constraint to the development of the services. The plan states that the priority
for investment will be those parts of the country where primary care facilities are most in need of
improvement.
The government has provided the NHS a vehicle for improving and developing primary and
community care facilities – NHS Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT). The local LIFT will
be a joint venture between the Department of Health, the local healthcare community and the
private sector; to develop and encourage a significant increase in investment in primary care and
community based facilities.
There are six Primary Care Trusts (PCT) in the area including Salford. Each of the PCT areas
have growing communities which will need more and better health and social care facilities for
the foreseeable future.
The initial focus of the NHS LIFT will be on investment in those parts of the country, such as
inner cities, where primary care services are in most need of expansion. The Manchester,
Salford and Trafford area has been identified as the first wave LIFT and this application has been
submitted in this respect.
All the planned LIFT buildings in Salford are designed to provide an integrated range of public
services in a welcoming and non-clinical environment, unlike traditional health centres. In
5
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
addition to accommodation for the Primary Care Trust, they will accommodate services provided
by the City Council, such as libraries and one-stop shops. The new buildings will also help
deliver the “SHIFT” project, reducing the number of visits to Hope Hospital by re-allocating
some specialist services to local centres.
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application relates to a site which was formerly the residential flats of Cloverfield Walk and
Fitchfield Walk, which have been demolished. The site includes a number of hard-surfaced
areas used for car parking. These appear to have been originally built for the benefit of residents
of the former flats but have been used, for many years, by staff and visitors to the town centre as
a whole; no part of the site has ever been formally designated or managed as public car parking
but the use, has in practice, been accepted.
Walkden Congregational Church bounds the site to the south, the residential dwellings of Emlyn
Street and Malvern Grove lie to the east and Ninian Gardens to the north whilst the Ellesmere
Shopping Centre is on the opposite side of Bolton Road to the west. Bolton Road is a divided
dualled road at this point.
The proposed building would contain core health services (GP practices, clinics etc), library,
flexible community space, specialist therapeutic and rehabilitation services, a pharmacy and a
cafe.
The proposed building would be three storeys high, fronting Bolton Road. The footprint of the
building would be 32 metres by 45 metres and the three storey elements of the building would be
13 metres in height. A plant room would be located on part of the roof, which would add a
further 2 metres to the height of the building. External elevations would be predominantly brick,
broken up with areas of render, glazing and cladding features
It is stated that 80 –100 staff will work at the building, including staff relocated from the library
and GP premises in Walkden and staff relocated from Hope Hospital. Opening hours are
described as 8:00 am to 10:00 pm, seven days a week.
On-site car parking and drop-off facilities, for 59 cars would be provided to the rear of the
building including 4 disabled spaces, adjacent to Malvern Grove. The site would be enclosed by
a 2.4 metre high fence. The car park access would be gated and locked when the building was
not in use.
Vehicular access to the car park would be via a new traffic light-controlled access off Bolton
Road. The existing pedestrian crossing would be relocated to with this junction. The bus stops
on Bolton Road will also be relocated to the north and south of the access.
6
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
A vehicular egress from the site will be created at the junction of Smith Street and Emlyn Grove.
This will allow very large vehicles that occasionally visit the building to exit in forward gear. It
is not intended that this will be used as a regular access for visiting customers or staff.
Smith Street itself will be pedestrianised, allowing occasional controlled access to the
Congregational Church. The main pedestrian entrance to the proposed building would be at the
junction of Bolton Road and Smith Street, allowing pedestrian access both from the shopping
centre and from the residential area to the east.
Entrances to some of the existing car parks are off Malvern Grove. These entrances are to be
closed and a new service strip is to be created along the eastern side of the highway, with
facilities to allow large vehicles to turn within the Grove. A new pavement will be constructed
on the site frontage to Emlyn Street.
A traffic assessment, arboricultural study and site investigation have been submitted in support
of the application.
The development requires the formal closure of the public rights of way across the car parks and
paths. A 900mm culvert that runs across the site from north to south would be diverted around
the eastern side of the proposed building.
As mentioned the site has already received planning permission for a Primary Health, Care and
Community Centre. The extant planning permission incorporated a job centre within the
building. In the time since the extant planning permission was granted the job centre element of
the proposal is no longer required. The building has therefore been redesigned to omit this
element. The main differences between the current planning permission and the development are:
the omission of the job centre has reduced the footprint of the building; there are ten less car
parking spaces on the current development; the height of the building has been increased by
0.5m; the current application includes a turning head on Smith Street for the convenience of the
visitors to the Congregational Church.
SITE HISTORY
03/45520/OUT - Outline application with all matters reserved for use of land for new primary
health and social care facility and ancillary accommodation. Approved 4th March 2003.
03/47426/FUL – Full application for erection of a three storey building to provide a new primary
health and social care facility to include a pharmacy, job centre and library facilities tog. with
associated. car parking, alt, to pedestrian access and consist of a new vehicular access.
Approved April 2004.
CONSULTATIONS
7
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
Strategic Director of Environmental Services – Contaminated land, noise and air quality
conditions should be attached to any approval.
Greater Manchester Police Architectural Liaison Unit – No objections.
Peak and Northern Footpaths Society – No comments received
Greater Manchester Pedestrians – No comments received
Ramblers Association – No objections.
Open Spaces Society – No comments received
GMPTE – No objections
PUBLICITY
A site notice and press notice have been displayed and published.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1 – 11 (o), 2 – 16 (e) Malvern Grove
30 – 34 (e) Alfred street
1 – 52 Ninian Gardens
1 – 61 (o) Bolton road
Walkden Congregational Church, Bolton road
1 – 17 (o), 2 – 6 (e) Emlyn Street
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received six letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The
following issues have been raised:A lack of alternative short term parking
Will result in parking on neighbouring streets
Extended opening hours will result in noise and disturbance
Noise an disturbance during construction
Access to church
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
None
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
8
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: T13 – Car Parking
SC9 – Health Care Facilities
DEV1 – Development Criteria
DEV2 – Good Design
SC1 – Provision of Social and Community facilities
SC2 – Provision of Social and Community facilities by Private and Voluntary
Agencies
EN20 – Pollution Control
T2 – Network of Major Roads of More Than Local Importance
EN10 - Landscape
COMPOSITE WRITTEN STATEMENT TO SHOW PROPOSED PLAN MODIFICATIONS
Site specific policies: EHC6 – Sites for the Provision of Health Facilities
Other policies: A10 – provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
EHC1 – Provision and Improvement to Health and Community Facilities
DES1 – respecting Context
A2 – Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
DES9 – Landscaping
EN13 – Contaminated Land
DES11 – Design and Crime
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
A8 – Impact of Development on Highway Network
:
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of the proposed
development is acceptable; whether the proposal would provide adequate access into the site;
impact of the proposal on the existing traffic network; 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 UDP and Composite
Written Statement to Show proposed Plan Modifications. I will deal with each in turn below
Principle of Development
The principle of the use of this site has been established by the granting of outline and full
planning permission, and by policy EHC6 of the draft replacement UDP, which allocates the site
for such uses. The proposal would provide new primary health and social care facilities and is
therefore in broad accordance with adopted policies SC1, SC2 and SC9 which are all seeking to
improve, maintain and support provision of social and community facilities within the city.
PPG13 also states that new intermediate health facilities should, where possible, be located in
town, district or local centres where they will be highly accessible by non car modes of transport
9
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
and where the facilities can reinforce the range of services provided by these centres. Given the
previous approvals and the policy support for the proposal, I consider the principle of the
development to be acceptable.
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 A575 Bolton 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 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 A575 Bolton 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.
The submitted traffic assessment estimates that the development would generate a demand for an
additional 59 parking spaces. I consider this estimate and the size of the proposed on-site car
park to be reasonable, taking into account the site’s town centre location, accessibility by non car
modes of transport and availability of other car parks around the town centre.
Many of the objections relate to the loss of the informal car parking on the site which is used by
existing town centre users. The applicants have submitted surveys taken of cars parking on the
site and the number of spaces available in other town centre car parks. Their studies show that,
at the busiest period, a total of 62 cars were occupying the site. They calculate that 1060 spaces
are available at the Ellesmere Shopping Centre, fitness centre and bingo hall. A survey in
December 2003 showed that, even in the busy pre-Christmas period, there were over 200 free
spaces available. An additional survey in April 2005 indicates a minimum of 490 and a
maximum of 618 spaces available throughout the day.
The submitted surveys appear robust and I am satisfied that there is adequate alternative
provision in the area to cater for displaced parking. It is true that the alternative car parks are
less convenient, particularly for staff and customers of the shops fronting Bolton Road, but I do
not consider that this warrants refusal of the application. Moreover, although the Council has
10
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
tolerated use of the site for car parking for many years, I consider that it is not an appropriate use
of this site, given that access is via a residential area.
I consider it unlikely that the proposed development will result in a significant increase in onstreet parking in neighbouring residential streets. If this were to happen, it may cause loss of
amenity to residents, but could be addressed by appropriate measures including a residents-only
parking scheme. This matter would have to be dealt with separately.
In terms of car parking within the site, it is proposed to provide 59 parking spaces. This would be
10 less than that approved on the previous application, however, the job centre element of the
building has been omitted. I consider the reduction in car parking to be acceptable and that the
total proposed accords with Adopted Policy T13 and Draft Policy A10.
There are no objections from the footpath societies with regards to the removal of the Public
Rights of Way across the site and their closure was considered in the approval of the outline
application.
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 have submitted a site investigation report
with the application. This has been considered by the Director of Environmental Services who
has recommend that further work is required with regards to the submitted report. A condition is
attached to ensure additional investigations take place. 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.
11
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
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.
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.
I consider that the proposed building is of attractive design that will enhance the character of the
town centre. The proposal has a similar footprint to the building which has already had
permission and would adequately protect the amenity of neighbouring residents, who would also
benefit from the removal of traffic accessing the existing informal car park.
I consider the height of the building to be appropriate in relation to its surroundings and am of
the opinion that the use of high quality materials would ensure that the building would be a
positive addition to the area. I have attached a condition requiring samples of the materials of
the proposed building to be submitted and approved prior to the commencement of the
development. I therefore consider that the proposal complies with the provisions of the above
policies.
I have attached a condition requiring details of landscaping within the site. I am satisfied that this
will ensure that the landscaping meets the criteria of Draft Policy DES9.
Other Issues
The proposed building and provision of car parking would result in the loss of most of the 21
trees on this site. However these are generally poor specimens, suffering from a variety of
problems resulting in a relatively short life expectancy. Some 16 new trees are to be planted
within the car park. A group of trees at the northern end of the site is to be retained; these are not
particularly good specimens and they may be damaged during construction. I am recommending
imposition of a condition to ensure that any of these trees that are damaged be replaced.
The applicant has submitted plans in relation to the proposed culvert diversion. Further site
investigations are required prior to the plans for the diversion are agreed. A condition has been
attached to ensure further investigations to ensure that the proposed culvert diversion is
acceptable.
12
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
With regards to the proposed hours of use, the previous planning permission proposed hours of
8am to 8pm seven days a week. The hours of use were not restricted. The application before
you for determination is for 8am until 10pm seven days a week. The proposal is located within a
busy town centre. Existing uses within the vicinity are open beyond the hours being applied for.
I would not consider the proposed hours of use to have an unacceptable detrimental impact on
the occupiers of adjacent properties. I would consider the extended hours to be a benefit to the
community as a whole, to ensure access to services throughout the week.
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The applicants have had extensive pre-application discussions and the proposed building is
smaller than previously applied for.
CONCLUSION
On balance, I am satisfied that the application is acceptable. This proposal would be an
amendment to the extant permission and would be of considerable benefit to the residents of
Salford and the principle of the use is acceptable in this location in accordance with national and
local policy. I therefore recommend that this application be approved. The off site works need to
be covered by an agreement under Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03 Three year time limit
2. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples of the materials
for the external elevations and roof of the building shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved
materials, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
3. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is started. Such scheme
shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary and
surface treatment and shall be carried out within 12 months of the commencement of
development and thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning
Authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced to the
satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
4. Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site
investigation report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation shall
13
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
address the nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on site
and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under
the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focusing primarily on risks to human health
and controlled waters. The investigation shall also address the implications of ground
conditions on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures,
on services and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including
ecological systems and property.
The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior
to the start of the site investigation survey. Recommendations and remedial works contained
within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the
site.
Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be
submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The Site Completion Report shall
validate that all works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by
the Local Planning Authority.
5. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the Arboricultural
Implication Study (ACS Consulting dated November 2005 ref 778/DR.04 02) and shall
include the erection of protective fencing in accordance with the stated specification prior to
the commencement of development on the site. Should the trees identified by group No 21 be
damaged during construction or die or become diseased within five years, they shall be
replaced in accordance with details previously agreed in writing by the LOcal Planning
Authority during the first available planting season.
6. Prior to first occupation the associated off site highway works shall be completed in
accordance with the transport Statement (Faber Maunsell- dated December 2005 and
Drawing No. WA-B_MB_00_00_DR_A22000 REV P8) including the new junction at
Bolton Road, traffic signals, relocated bus stops and various works to Smith Street, Emlyn
Street and Malvern Grove.
7. Within a period of 6 months from the first date of occupation a Travel Plan shall be
submitted for the written approval of the LOcal Planning Authority. The Travel Plan shall as
a minimum include the broad areas for development review and monitoring outlined in the
submitted Transport Statement by Faber Maunsell dated December 2005. As part of the
ongoing monitoring the applicant shall monitor staff and visitor parking within timescales
agreed by the Local Plannig Authority. In the event that staff and visitor parking occurs over
an agreed monitoring period in the adjacent residential side streets the applicant shall submit
a scheme and its implementation for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority to
mitigate this occurrence.
8. The vehicle access to Smith Street/Harriet Street as shown on drawing no WAB_MB_00_00_DR_A_22000 Rev P8 shall ONLY be used for heavy goods vehicles leaving
14
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
the site.
9. Prior to the commencement of development, full details of the proposed diversion of the
900mm diameter culverted watercourse that crosses the site shall be submitted to and agreed
in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All diversion works must be carried out in
accordance with the agreed particulars prior to commencement of development.
10. The finished ground floor levels of the building must be 300mm above the level of the
adjacent roads
11. No development shall be started until full details of the location, design and construction of
bicycle parking facilities have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. Such approved bicycle parking facilities shall thereafter be constructed
and made available for use before the first occupation of the building.
12. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme for the provision of surface water
drainage works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The approved scheme shall then be implemented prior to the first occupation of
any of the units hereby approved.
13. The rating level of noise emitted from the site from any plant or equipment shall not exceed
the background noise level by 5dbLAeq at any time. The noise measurement shall be
measured / determined at the nearest residential property. The measurement and assessment
shall be made according to BS 4142: 1997 "Rating Industrial Noise Affecting Mixed
Residential and Industrial Areas"
14. Prior to the commencement of the development, an air quality assessment of the existing and
future air quality for years 2010, 2020 and the opening year with and without the
development hereby approved for Nitrogen Dioxide and particulate matter less than 10
microns shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
assessment shall identify the worst case exposure, changes in pollution concentration to
residents of the approved development and shall identify any changes in pollution levels
where public exposure occurs as a result. The predicted levels shall be compared with the
relevant Air Quality Objectives set in the Air Quality Regulations 2000 and amendments
thereof. The assessment shall detail mitigation measures required to address the air quality
issues identified. The approved mitigation measures shall be implemented prior to first
occupation and retained thereafter.
15. No development shall commence unless and until the necessary consents have been obtained
for the closure of the rights of way.
Reasons:
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
15
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
2. Standard Reason R008A Development-Buildings in vicinity
3. Standard Reason R004A Safeguard the amenity of the area
4. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
5. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
6. In the interests of highway safety and to provide an acceptable pedestrian environment
7. To ensure the travel patterns of staff are modified to promote the use of alternatives means of
travel to and from the site having regard to PPG 13 Transport and Policy A1 of the City of
Salford Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan 2003-2016.
8. In the interests of highway safety and residential amenity having regard to policy DEV1 and
T13 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan
9. To mitigate any possibility of flooding occurring upstream in accordance with Policy DEV11
of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan
10. To ensure that the ground floor of the property is not flooded.
11. To ensure that adequate provision is made for the parking of bicycles within the curtilage of
the site in accordance with policy DEV1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
12. To reduce the risk of flooding by ensuring the provision of satisfactory means of surface
water disposal.
13. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
14. Standard Reason R005A Amenity-neighbours
15. To ensure the appropriate procedures are carried out and to safeguard existing rights of way
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
16
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
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 following measures should be included in the Travel Plan: Survey of existing staff to
ascertain travel patterns prior to occupation; survey of patients, visitors, staff, deliveries, and
contractors within 3 months of first occupation; audit of transport facilities before first
occupation to inform staff before new travel patterns are formed; appointment of a travel plan
coordinator before first occupation
3. Proposals in relation to the existing public sewers in Smith Street, Emlyn Street, Harriet
Street and Malvern Grove (including diversions, connections and discharges) are to be
approved by United Utilities prior to commencement of development.
4. This development is subject to the applicant entering into an agreement under Section 278 of
the Highways Act 1980 for the off site highway works
5. The development is to be drained on a separate system with storage on the surface water,
allowing a maximum discharge to the culverted watercourse of 15 litres/second.
6. The Planning Permission relates to the following plans:
Drawing No.
REV
WA-B_MB_00_00_DR_A_22000
P8
WA-B_MB_00_00_DR_A_20600
P6
WA-B_MB_00_00_DR_A_20400
P4
WA-B_MB_00_00_DR_A_20030
P6
WA-B_MB_00_00_DR_A_20020
P6
WA-B_MB_00_00_DR_A_21010
P5
WA-B_MB_00_NN_DR_A_50520
P5
WA-B_MB_00_01_DR_A_20010
P6
WA-B_MB_00_00_DR_A_20000
P6
WA-B_MB_00_NN_DR_A_20510
P6
WA-B_MB_00_NN_DR_A_20500
P6
17
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
18
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
APPLICATION No:
05/51548/DEEM3
APPLICANT:
Childrens Services Directorate
LOCATION:
St Charles RC Primary School Moorside Road Swinton M27
9PD
PROPOSAL:
Erection of a single storey modular building to form a new
childrens centre together with play area, associated landscaping,
car parking and erection of boundary fencing and covered play
area.
WARD:
Swinton North
BACKGROUND
The proposed development is funded by Sure Start. Sure Start is a Government programme
which aims to achieve better outcomes for children, parents and communities by: increasing the
availability of childcare for all children; improving health and emotional development for young
children; supporting parents as parents and in their aspirations towards employment.
Children’s Centres are a significant delivery arm in achieving the five outcomes for children and
young people as set out in the Government’s paper `Every Child Matters'. The Government
would like to see a Children’s Centre in every community and nationally, under the SureStart
Programme, are hoping to have 2500 Children’s Centres by 2008.
In Salford within the first phase of Children’s Centre Development it is proposed to have nine
Centres by late next year and the SureStart unit expect to have developed a further six in the
second phase commencing from April 2006.
SureStart national guidance states that the ideal Centre should be on or close to a Primary School.
The selection of a school site also promotes and supports 'extended school' provisions and allows
further developments on the Government’s ideas for accessible community school sites. The
choice of St Charles RC Primary School site fits with these criteria for the ideal model.
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application relates to land currently within the grounds of St Charles RC Primary School.
To the north of the application site are residential properties, to the south is the existing school,
to the west is St Charles Church and to the east is the school playing field.
19
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
”
“
The proposal is for the erection of a single storey modular building and covered play area, to
provide a children’s centre. The proposal would be L shaped with a height of 3.5m. The
boundary fencing would be 2.5m high barbican fencing. The covered play area would be
situated to the rear of the building and would be 4m in height. The proposal would include 19
car parking spaces of which one would be for disabled parking. The building would be powder
coated.
CONSULTATIONS
Strategic Director Of Environmental Services – No objections but recommends a contaminated
land condition
Police Architectural Liaison Officer – recommends a number of amendments to improve security
Sport England – Has responded on a non statutory basis and objects to the application on the
grounds that the loss of playing field would limit the extent to which identified needs could be
met on the site
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 10th November 2005
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
94 – 100 (evens) Shelley Road
230 – 248, 252 – 258 (evens) 237 – 269 (odds) Moorside Road
84 – 87 Blantyre Street
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received no letters in relation to the planning application.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP1 - Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings
SD1 - The North West Metropolitan Area – Regional Poles and Surrounding Areas
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: DEV1 - Development Criteria,
DEV2 Good Design,
T13 Car Parking,
20
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
SC4 Improvement and Replacement of Schools
COMPOSITE WRITTEN STATEMENT TO SHOW PROPOSED PLAN MODIFICATIONS
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
A10 – Provision of Car; and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
DES1 – Respecting Context
EHC1 – Provision and Improvement to Health and Community Facilities
ST11 – Location of New Development
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are: whether the principle of the proposed
development is acceptable, whether the proposal would provide adequate access into the site;
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 UDP. I will deal with
each in turn below
Principle of Development
“
Policy SD1 of the Regional Spatial Strategy states that development should be focused within the
North-West Metropolitan Area, which includes Salford. Policy DP1 of the Regional Spatial
Strategy seeks to ensure that existing buildings and brownfield land is developed before
greenfield land. Draft Policy ST11 re-iterates these policies. Previously developed land is
defined within Annex C of PPG3 as land that which is or was occupied by a permanent
structure The definition covers the curtilage and is defined as the area of land attached to the
building. The proposal would be located within the curtilage of an existing school. Therefore
the application site would be considered to be brownfield land, thus complying with criteria 1b
of Policy ST11 and the guidance contained within Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 – Housing
(PPG3), which seeks to prioritise the development of such land over land that has not been
previously developed (greenfield land). I am satisfied that the principle of development is
acceptable.
Design, Traffic and Amenity
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. As mentioned the
proposal is located within the grounds of a school. The adjacent sites consist of a church and
school playground with residential properties facing. The residential properties would be in
21
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
excess of 20m from the proposal. I would not consider the proposal to have a detrimental
impact on the occupiers of existing properties and therefore consider the proposal to be in
accordance with the above policy.
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 proposal would be a powder
coated single storey modular building. The proposal would not be in keeping with the materials
of the surrounding properties. However, the proposal is situated to the rear of a school is low
rise and is for community use. I do not consider it necessary for the materials of the proposed
building to match those of the surrounding properties, particularly given its location within the
site. I consider the proposed benefits of the proposed building would outweigh the concerns I
have in relation to the design of the building and the impact on the street scene. I have attached a
condition requesting samples of materials.
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. 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. The application includes 19 car parking spaces one of which
would be for disabled use. The minimum requirement for disabled parking is three. I have
therefore attached a condition requesting a minimum of three disabled car parking spaces within
the site. There are no maximum car parking standards for this use class. I would therefore
consider the level of car parking to be adequate for the nature of the proposed use and have no
objections on highway safety grounds.
Other Issues
The Director of Environmental Services has recommended a condition relating to ground
contamination, which I have attached.
Sport England has been consulted on the application, although it should be noted the proposal is
not upon land formally defined as a playing field. Sport England has objected on the basis that
the proposed development would reduce the size of the existing playing area. Having discussed
the proposal with Sport England, it has been agreed that the area is not formally defined as a
playing field. I do not therefore have any objections to a building on this site. Sport England
cannot however withdraw their letter. The proposed children’s centre would be funded by
Surestart and would provide facilities for the local community. I would therefore consider the
proposal to be acceptable and outweigh the loss of the grassed area in question.
22
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT
The Police Architectural Liaison Officer has been consulted on the application and has
recommended a number of amendments to the scheme all of which have been addressed by the
applicant. The amendments include the re-location of the proposed building away from the
boundary and into the site.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion the proposal is for the benefit of the local community, the design of the proposal
would be acceptable. I am of the opinion that the proposal complies with the relevant policies of
both the Adopted and Revised Deposit Draft Replacement UDPs and there are no material
considerations which outweigh this finding. I therefore recommend that the application be
approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03 Three year time limit
2. Unless otherwise agreed in writing prior to the commencement of development, the
developer shall submit a site investigation report for the approval of the Local Planning
Authority. The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of
contamination and ground gases on the site and its implications on the risk to human health
and controlled water receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part
IIA. The investigation shall also address the health and safety of the site workers, also nearby
persons, building structures and services, landscaping schemes, final users on the site and the
environmental pollution in ground water. The sampling and analytical strategy shall be
approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the start of the survey, and
recommendations and remedial works contained within the approved report shall be
implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the site. A site completion report
including details of post remediation ground conditions for the site shall be completed and
submitted to the Local Planning Authority prior to occupation of the site.
3. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the finished floor levels
of the building hereby approved shall be a minimum of 300mm above the adjacent road level.
4. Notwithstanding the details of the car parking layout on drawing E10726/03 D the proposal
shall include a minimum of 3 disabled parking bays, which shall be made available prior to
first use of the building hereby approved.
23
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
5. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority within two months of commencement of
development. Such scheme shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls,
fences, boundary and surface treatment and shall be carried out within 12 months of the
commencement of development and thereafter shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the
Local Planning Authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be
replaced to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
6. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples of the materials
for the external elevations and roof of the building shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved
materials, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority
7. Within three months of the commencement of the building hereby approved, the boundary
fencing hereby approved shall be treated in a colour which is to be agreed in writing prior to
the commencement of the development by the Local Planning Authority.
Reasons:
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R024A Amenity of future residents
3. To reduce the risk of flooding.
4. To ensure an adequate provision of disabled parking bays in accordance with DEV1, T13 of
the Adopted UDP and policy DES2 and A10 of the Deposit Draft UDP.
5. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
6. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
7. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
Note(s) for Applicant
1. All sewer connections shall be to United Utilities approval.
2. Please note the permission relates to the following plans
Drawing No.
E10726/02
E10726/03
Revision
A
D
24
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
E10726/01
A
APPLICATION No:
05/51583/DEEM3
APPLICANT:
Housing Services Directorate
LOCATION:
5-27 Sumner Road, 2-24 Glenfyne Road, 44-54 Acresfield Road
And 2-12 Penelope Road Salford M6 7RE
PROPOSAL:
Erection of double gates
WARD:
Claremont
BACKGROUND
At the meeting of the Panel held on 5th January 2006 consideration of this application was
deferred to allow the applicant to amend the scheme to address concerns raised by one of the
neighbouring residents in relation to the installation of the gates on the gable end of their
property. The applicant has since amended the proposal to exclude gates to the rear and side of 125 Duffield Road, 2-20 Alresford Road, 34-36 Acresfield Road and 26-36 Penelope Road. I have
not received any further objections since writing my report.
I therefore consider the application is acceptable and should be approved. My previous
observations are as follows:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application is for the erection of 2.2m high lockable double alley gates to provide residents
only access and improved security. The gates would be located at the entrances of the alleyways
to the rear or sides of 1-25 Duffield Road, 2-20 Alresford Road, 5-27 Sumner Road, 2-24
Glenfyne Road, 34,36, 44-54 Acresfield Road and 2-12, 26-36 Penelope Road. The width of the
gates would be adjusted to fit.
CONSULTATIONS
1. Peak and Northern Footpath Society – no comments received to date
2. Ramblers Association – no objections to date
3. Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – no comments received to date
25
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
4. Open Space Society – no comments received
PUBLICITY
A site notice was displayed on 30th November 2005.
A press notice was published on 1st December 2005.
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
1, 9 and 2-24 Glenfyne Road
2, 20 and 5-27 Sumner Road
2-12, 14, 24 and 26-36 Penelope Road
34-36 and 44-54 Acresfield Road
2-22 Alresford Road
1-25 Duffield Road
2 Duffield Road
26-30 Duffield Road
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received two letters of objection in response to the planning application publicity. The
following issues have been raised:
Creation
of
Restricts vehicle access to the rear of properties
Need for gates
Maintenance of alleyways
Property prices
Cost cutting
Positioned directly adjacent to front window
Eyesore
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: None
Policy UR1 promotes Urban Renaissance.
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
DEV1 - Development Criteria
DEV2 - Good Design
26
noise
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
DEV4 - Design and Crime
T3 - Highways
T10 - Pedestrians
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
DES1 – Respecting Context
DES2 – Circulation and Movement
DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES11 – Design and Crime
A2 – Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
INSPECTOR’S REPORT
DES1 – Slight modifications recommended but no alteration to the policy stance.
DES2 – Slight modifications recommended but no alteration to the policy stance.
DES7 – No modifications recommended.
DES11 – No modifications recommended.
A2 – No modifications recommended.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the impact the gates would have on the
streetscene and the residential amenity of neighbouring residents and the impact the proposed
gates would have upon crime and the fear of crime. The loss of existing public rights of way also
needs to be considered
Policies DEV1, DES1, DES7 and ST8 seek to protect amenity and to provide a high quality
environment. Policy DEV2 seeks to achieve high quality design and to secure an acceptable
appearance in development proposals. Policies DEV4 and DES11 seek for proposals to deter
crime in the interests of personal and property security without compromising on the appearance
of the development. DES2 sets requirements for accessibility to, through and around sites
through the provision of safe and direct pedestrian routes. DES2 also aims to minimise potential
conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users. Policy T10 safeguards the needs of
pedestrians, taking into account their safety and the presence of existing public rights of way in
the planning of new development. Policy A2 states that development that would result in the loss
of an existing public right of way will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that
adequate levels of access for the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists will be maintained through the
site.
I consider that the design, siting, height and colour - being black powder coated, of the proposed
gates are acceptable and accord with DEV1, DEV2, DES7 and A8. The proposed variation in the
27
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
height of the gates respects the height of adjacent walls and the amenity of the area as required
by DES1. I have no highway objections and I am satisfied that the proposal meets the criteria
specified in policy DES2 with regard to safe, direct and convenient accessibility to all users to
and through the site whilst minimising potential conflicts between road users on the site.
The local residents would be able to gain access through the alley gates, as they would be issued
with keys. As such I do not consider that the local residents will suffer any significant loss of
amenity. The proposal will not have an adverse impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users
of other developments. This complies with Policy DES7 of the Revised Deposit Draft
Replacement Plan.
The gating of the alleyways would help deter crime by only allowing access to the residents of
the properties behind which the alleyways lie. This restricted access would assist crime
prevention by deterring vandalism, theft and other criminal activity, thereby helping to reduce
the residents’ fear of crime.
I am of the opinion that the proposed gates will assist in crime prevention in the area and will
help to reduce residents’ fear of crime in accordance with policies DEV4 and DES11. Therefore
the development would contribute to an improved quality of life and would improve the
pedestrian environment for existing and future local residents, consistent with policies DEV1,
DES7, T3, T10, ST8 and A2.
It is considered that that the benefits of the proposal as outlined above outweigh the issue of the
loss of access to an existing public right of way. This is because the alleyways are not
recreational routes and the users of the alleyways are mainly local residents who would continue
to have access to the rear alleyways when they are no longer public rights of way.
I believe that the loss of existing public rights of way is acceptable given the proposed
improvements in crime prevention.
In connection with the objections received, I do not consider that any noise created would be
significant. The proposal would still allow vehicular access to the rear of the properties.
Following a closure order, the residents would become the legal owners of the gates and
alleyways and would therefore become responsible for them. This has a number of practical
implications including their maintenance. The scheme proposed does not relate to the property at
no. 21 Alresford Road, the occupiers of which have objected to the proposal. As such, I do not
consider that the occupants of no. 21 Alresford Road will suffer any significant loss of amenity.
The impact of the proposal on property prices is not a planning consideration.
The local residents will be able to gain access through the alley gates, as they will be issued with
keys. As such I do not consider that the local residents will suffer any significant loss of amenity.
The proposal will not have an adverse impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users of other
developments. This complies with Policy DES7 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan.
28
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
CONCLUSION
Overall, the proposed development would not have an adverse impact upon the street scene or
the residential amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents. In fact the proposed
development would improve the quality of life currently enjoyed by residents in the surrounding
area, as it would contribute to the regeneration of the area by improving the environment and
eliminating vandalism, theft and other criminal activity. The proposal is therefore in accordance
with policies DEV1 and DEV4 the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and policies DES1
and DES11 of the Revised Deposit Draft Replacement Plan. I therefore recommend the
application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with
the date of this permission.
2. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until the appropriate order for
the closure or diversion of the public rights of way affected by the development has been made.
3. The gates hereby approved shall be powder coated black (RAL 9005) prior to its installation.
Reasons:
1. Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning
Act 1990.
2. Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy DEV 1 of the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan.
3. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DEV 1 of the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan.
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be
satisfied prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions
precedent renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be
taken by the Council.
29
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
APPLICATION No:
05/51913/DEEM3
APPLICANT:
Burglary Reduction Unit
LOCATION:
Alleyway To Rear Of 329-371 Great Cheetham Street East And
Alleyways To Rear Of 32-82 Leicester Road, Bristol Street,
Heaton Street, Symon Street, Gainsborough Street,Norton Street,
Kimberley St And 89-99 Devonshire St., Salford M7 4BP
PROPOSAL:
Erection of 2.4m high maximum gates, meshes and fencing to
secure alleyways
WARD:
Broughton
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
This application is for the erection of 2.4m high maximum fencing, meshes and lockable single
and double gates to provide residents only access and improved security. The proposed gates,
meshes and fencing would be located at the alleyways to the rear or sides of 329-371 Great
Cheetham Street East and Alleyway to rear of 32-82 Leicester Road, Bristol Street, Heaton Street,
Symon Street, Gainsborough Street, Norton Street, Kimberley Street and 89-99 Devonshire
Street, Salford 7.
The application has been submitted at the request by the Burglary Reuction Unit in order to
provide increased security for the residents of Great Cheetham Street East Leicester Road,
Bristol Street, Heaton Street, Symon Street, Gainsborough Street, Norton Street, Kimberley
Street and Devonshire Street, who have the burglary rate of 68 burglaries per thousand
households. Almost twice the average for Salford and more than 3.5 times the national average.
CONSULTATIONS
1. Peak and Northern Footpath Society – no objections.
2. Ramblers Association – The Manchester and High Peak Area branch of the Ramblers
Association are objecting to the closure of the alleyways as they are Public Rights of
Way.
3. Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – no objections.
4. Open Space Society – no objections
PUBLICITY
A press notice was published in the Salford Advertiser on 22.12.2005.
30
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
A site notice was displayed on 06.01.2006
The following neighbour addresses were notified:
329-371 Great Cheetham Street East
32-82 Leicester Road
13-51 Bristol Street
1-53 (Odd) Heaton Street
14-52(Even) Heaton Street
2-54 Symon Street
1-51 (Odd) Symon Street
2-52 (Even) Gainsborough Street,
1-47 (Even) Gainsborough Street
2-46 Norton Street
1-25 (Odd) Kimberley Street
2-18 (Even) Kimberley Street
87-99 Devonshire Street
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received no letters of representation in response to the planning application publicity.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies: None
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
DEV1 - Development Criteria
DEV4 - Design and Crime
T10 - Pedestrians
REVISED DEPOSIT DRAFT REPLACEMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: None
Other policies:
DES1 – Respecting Context
DES11 – Design and Crime
31
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
A2 – Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main planning issues relating to this application are the impact the proposed fencing, meshes
and gates on the street scene and the amenity of neighbouring residents and the impact the
proposed closures would have upon crime, the fear of crime and public accessibility. The loss of
existing public rights of way also needs to be considered.
Policies DEV1 and DES1 identify a number of issues that should be taken into account when
determining planning applications. these include the visual appearance of the development and
its relationship to its surroundings. Policy DEV2 seeks to achieve high quality design and to
secure an acceptable appearance in development proposals. With respect to DEV1, DEV2 and
DES 1, I am of the opinion that the that the design, siting, height and colour - being black
powder coated, of the proposed fencing, meshes and gates would be in keeping with the scale,
height and character of the other boundary treatments and therefore would not form visually
obtrusive features for the surrounding area nor the local residents would suffer any significant
loss of amenity.
Policy T10 and DES 2 take into account the safety and the accessibility of existing public rights
of way in the planning of new development. Policy A2 also states that development that would
result in the loss of an existing public right of way will only be permitted where it can be
demonstrated that adequate levels of access for the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists will be
maintained through the site.
Despite the objection to the scheme by the Ramblers Association, I am satisfied that the
proposed alley gates are not going to result in any significant loss of permeability through the
area as pedestrian and cyclist would be able to use other routes which are equally safe, secure
and convenient. The local residents will also be able to gain access through the alley gates, as
they will be issued with the relevant keys. As such I am satisfied that the proposal meets the
criteria in policy T10, DES 2 and A2. The proposal would still preserve high level of
accessibility and safety to all users.
Policies DEV4 and DES11 seeks for proposals to deter crime in the interests of personal and
property security without compromising on the appearance of the development. Crime and fear
of crime is a particular problem in this area with 68 burglaries per thousand households, well
above the average for Salford and more than 3.5 times the national average. I am of the opinion
that the proposed fencing, meshes and gates will assist in crime prevention in the area by only
allowing neighbouring residents access to the alleyways lie. This will help to reduce resident’s
fear of crime in accordance with policy DEV4 and DES11.
I believe that the loss of existing public rights of way is acceptable given the proposed
improvements in crime prevention. I consider that the benefits of the proposal as outlined above
outweigh the access issue because the alleys are not recreational routes and the users of the alleys
32
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
are mainly local residents who would continue to have access to the rear alleyways when they
are no longer public rights of way.
CONCLUSION
Overall, the proposed development would not have an adverse impact upon the street scene or
the residential amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents. In fact the proposed
development would contribute to an improved quality of life, improve the pedestrian
environment, eliminating vandalism, theft and other criminal activity for existing and future local
residents. The proposal is therefore in accordance with policies DEV1 and DEV4 the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan and policies DES1 and DES11 of the Revised Deposit Draft
Replacement Plan. I therefore recommend the application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03 Three year time limit
2. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until the appropriate order for
the closure or diversion of the public rights of way affected by the development has been
made.
3. The gates and fencing shall be painted in the approved colour (Black 41-228) within 3
months of their erection, and maintained in such a condition thereafter.
4. The proposed meshes shall be painted in the approved colour (Black RAL 9005) within 3
months of their erection, and maintained in such a condition thereafter.
Reasons:
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R026A Interests of highway safety
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
Note(s) for Applicant
33
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
1. The applicant is advised that a formal easement will be required with Utilities for the
closures hereby approved.
34
PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 2nd February 2006
35