WARD: Bucklow St.
Martins
H/OUT/68617
DEPARTURE: Yes
OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (INCLUDING
DETAILS OF ACCESS) FOR UP TO 550 RESIDENTIAL UNITS; ASSOCIATED
FOOTPATH, LANDSCAPING AND ECOLOGICAL WORKS
Land adjacent to Manchester Ship Canal, Partington
APPLICANT: Peel Holdings Ltd.
AGENT: Turley Associates
RECOMMENDATION: MINDED TO GRANT subject to referral to the Secretary of
State and subject to Section 106 Agreement
SITE
The application relates to a long, narrow area of land of approximately 15.9 hectares
in area, which runs alongside the Manchester Ship Canal on the western side of
Partington village.
To the north-west, the site borders onto the Ship Canal for its entire length. The canal
forms the boundary with the Salford City Council administrative area and the
opposite bank is largely occupied by existing industrial development at Cadishead
and the A57 main road, which runs along the canal bank. To the south-east, the site
fronts onto Lock Lane for roughly half its length and then borders onto the rear of
existing residential areas on Thirlmere Drive and Inglewood Close and the existing
caravan site off Hall Lane.
The land is currently vacant and undeveloped. There are some small areas of mature
trees, in particular, adjacent to Lock Lane at the south-west end of the site and
running through the centre of the site and to the rear of Thirlmere Drive. The
remainder of the land is generally somewhat overgrown with small self-set trees and
shrubs and bushes and long grass. There are informal footpaths running alongside
the canal, which link with Lock Lane in the centre of the site (where there is currently
a gated access) and with the existing public footpath network at the north-east and
south-west ends of the site.
There are some significant differences in ground levels, in particular, where the site
drops steeply from Lock Lane in some places and where it drops again to the
canalside. In between this, there is a flatter area of land where the majority of the
development is proposed.
PROPOSAL
The application proposes the erection of up to 550 residential units. The development
would comprise a mix of houses and apartments of between one and four storeys in
height.
The proposed development would include the construction of new road infrastructure
with two vehicular accesses onto Lock Lane and a pedestrian and cycle route onto
Hall Lane via Scroggins Lane.
The development would also include the laying out and landscaping of open space,
including a canalside promenade to be constructed along the waterfront.
The submitted layout plan shows the primary vehicle routes, which include the roads
from Lock Lane and a general distributor road that runs roughly south-west to the
north-east along the length of the development. For the majority of its length, this
road runs parallel with and close to the canalside. The layout plan also shows
pedestrian and cycle routes alongside the canalside and shows the pedestrian routes
linking with existing footpaths at the northern and southern ends of the site.
The submitted layout plan also shows the proposed incidental open space adjacent
to the canalside as well as the retention of existing trees and wooded areas at the
south-western end of the proposed development, adjacent to Lock Lane and running
through the centre of the development and to the rear of Thirlmere Drive.
The application is accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment, which
addresses issues of site selection and alternative sites, geology and soils, hydrology
and hydrogeology, air quality, noise, ecology, archaeology and heritage, landscape
and visual impacts, socio-economic issues and traffic and transportation.
The application is accompanied by a Design and Access Statement. This suggests
that the development would be carried out in three phases, Phase 1 being the
western end of the site, Phase 2 being the central area and Phase 3 being the
eastern end.
The application is also accompanied by a document entitled “Green Loop Proposals”,
This describes proposed improvements to the existing open space network around
Partington village, which would form part of the applicant’s package of suggested
Section 106 obligations. In addition, a further document, “Environmental
Improvements and Public Realm Regeneration Fund Proposal” has been submitted.
This document sets out a proposed package of public realm environmental
improvements to Manchester Road and a new public realm area in the village centre,
which would be funded by a Regeneration Fund generated by a set tariff levied on
each new house constructed on the application site.
Amended plans have been received showing alterations to the main vehicular access
into the site on Lock Lane to provide a mini roundabout junction. In addition, draft,
indicative plans have been submitted to demonstrate the potential for a drop-off area
/ off-street parking area to be provided for the Our Lady of Lourdes School opposite
the junction.
REVISED TRAFFORD UDP
The Revised Trafford UDP was formally adopted on 19 June 2006. This, together
with Regional Spatial Strategy for the North West (RPG13), now forms the
Development Plan for the Borough of Trafford.
PROPOSALS MAP NOTATION
Protected Linear Open Space
Wildlife Corridor
Area of Landscape Protection
Priority Regeneration Area
PRINCIPAL RELEVANT REVISED UDP POLICIES/ PROPOSALS
D1 – All New Development
D2 – Vehicle Parking
D3 – Residential Development
D13 – Energy Considerations in New Development
H1 – Land Release for Development
H2 – Location and Phasing of New Housing Development
H3 –Land Release for New Housing Development
H4 – Release of Other Land for Development
H8 – Affordable Housing
H11 – Priority Regeneration Area: Partington
A1 – Priority Regeneration Areas
T1 – Sustainable Integrated Transport Network
T2 – High Quality Integrated Public Transport Network
T3 – Pedestrian and Cycle route Network
T6 – Land Use in Relation to Transport and Movement
T8 – Improvements to the Highway Network
T9 – Private Funding of Development Related Highway and Public Transport
Schemes
T15 – Inland Waterways
T17 – Providing for Pedestrians, Cyclists and the Disabled
T18 – New Facilities for Cyclists
ENV10 – Wildlife Corridors
ENV15 – Community Forest
ENV16 – Tree Planting
ENV 17 – Areas of Landscape Protection
ENV29 – Canal Corridors
OSR3 – Standards for Informal Recreation and Children’s Play Space Provision
OSR5 – Protection of Open Space
OSR6 – Protected Linear Open Land
OSR9 – Open Space in New Housing Development
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
H/OUT/59083 – Erection of 37 dwellings with associated access roads and public
open space – Land at Lock Lane, Partington - Withdrawn – 20/05/2004
H/OUT/56356 – Erection of 37 dwellings with associated access roads and public
open space – Land at Lock Lane, Partington – Withdrawn – 13/06/2003
APPLICANT’S SUBMISSION
The applicant has submitted a Planning Statement and a Design and Access
Statement. The Planning Statement makes the following comments: The need for the development

Current market conditions mean that the redevelopment of the shopping
centre on its own is not a viable proposition. The applicant therefore states
that private funding of the shopping centre scheme can only be provided


through an enabling development, which should also be tangibly linked to the
regeneration of the area and assist in the creation of a sustainable
community.
The new general market housing will enable the delivery of a new shopping
centre through cross-subsidy as well as contributing to public realm
improvements and facilitating the provision of a recreational “green loop”
around the settlement. In addition, the new housing will assist in arresting the
current problem of population decline and will allow existing residents to stay
in the area and move up the property ladder.
There are no significant, vacant, previously developed sites or surplus
industrial sites available. The current application site is the most sustainable
and deliverable site and the only one that can enable the redevelopment of
the shopping centre.
The timing of the development



The applicant considers that the timescales of the Partington Area Action
Plan (PAAP) are so uncertain and so far away that awaiting its delivery is
neither necessary nor acceptable.
The applicant is also concerned about the potential rush of planning
applications once the higher housing land supply figures are proposed in the
revised Regional Spatial Strategy with development focusing on areas with
higher property values that are perceived to be a safer investment.
In addition, the applicant considers that the current uncertain economic
conditions and high interest rates mean that action needs to be taken
immediately to ensure that the window of opportunity for the regeneration of
the area is not missed.
The extent of Departure from the UDP


As the site is not allocated for residential development, the applicant accepts
that the proposed development is a Departure from the UDP. The applicant
accepts that the development would not fully comply with Proposal OSR6 –
Protected Linear Open Land - as this envisages that only small scale
development would be allowed within this area. However, the applicant
considers that the objectives of the policy can be met – including improving
access and environmental value.
The applicant considers that there will be no risk of harm to the wider UDP
strategy and that the proposed development is therefore not deemed to be a
significant departure from the Trafford UDP. In addition, the applicant
considers that the regeneration benefits of the proposed development would
outweigh this limited conflict with the Development Plan.
The Section 106 requirements


The applicant states that the proposed housing development will provide
funding to deliver a high quality redevelopment of the shopping centre, the
Green Loop proposals, the Public Realm improvements and additional bus
services. This package is designed to address the unique regeneration needs
of Partington and the applicant considers that this would deliver more
regeneration benefits than the Section 106 requirements that would normally
apply under the Revised Trafford UDP.
The applicant also considers that it is not appropriate to provide affordable
housing as part of the scheme or as a financial contribution for off-site
provision. The applicant considers that there is a need for 100% market
housing in order to provide a better balance of types and tenures of housing
and a more mixed community overall. This will also help to improve the
viability of local services.
Conclusion

The applicant considers that the proposals have strong backing from the local
community and that there is an evident need to progress the development
immediately. .
CONSULTATIONS
SP&D – Comments incorporated into Observations section of report.
LHA – The development is considered to be acceptable, subject to the amended
plans showing a revised junction layout at the main access off Lock Lane and subject
to the provision of an off-street drop off area and car park at the Our Lady of Lourdes
School. However, further access provision at the eastern end of the site should be
pursued at a location that reduces the number of trips generated by the development
that have to pass the school on Lock Lane.
Off site highway improvements/modelling
The trip generation detailed in the submitted Transport report appears to be broadly
acceptable and it is envisaged that the generated increase in traffic could be
accommodated on local roads with some improvements to the highway layout in the
vicinity of the site. Nevertheless, the LHA does have some concerns that the data
does not adequately take into account future growth in traffic generation. The total
development flows predicted from the development are 484 in the am peak and 456
in the pm peak.
The application proposes to make amendments to the junction of Manchester New
Road/Moss Lane and in effect increase its capacity. The proposals include revising
the layout of the junction to provide a solid central island and an over-run area to
improve deflection and vehicle paths. However, the LHA is concerned that the plans
provided for this junction indicates that zebra crossings will be installed on each arm
of the junctions and that these have not been incorporated into the traffic
assessments. The installation of zebra crossings on the approach to roundabouts
can cause issues with queuing vehicles on approaches to roundabouts and also can
make it difficult for some arms to exert precedence on the roundabout. It is also
noted that to provide the layout shown there will be the loss of some of the green
located between Manchester Road and Manchester New Road.
In addition, Manchester New Road currently houses a pelican crossing facility
between the junctions with Moss Lane and Central Road. The existence of this
crossing and the proposed zebra crossings means that there will not be a consistent
approach to the provision of crossing facilities within a short stretch of Manchester
New Road, this needs to be considered further by the LHA and applicant and any
highway amendments would need to be agreed and supervised by the LHA and
funded by the developer.
It should also be noted that the Carrington Transport study is currently underway to
identify opportunities to improve access to the Carrington and Partington areas in the
future and that conclusions from this study could lead to infrastructure improvements.
It is important that developments in the area including this site are considered in
respect of financial contributions to the improvements. It is the LHA’s view that the
applicant would need to make a full SPD1 contribution. The LHA would also want to
retain the flexibility to use the contributions for highway infrastructure improvements
and / or public transport improvements as they feel necessary.
Access Arrangements
It is proposed that the main access to the site on Lock Lane will be located slightly
west of the mid point of the site. This location is directly opposite the Our Lady of
Lourdes primary school and, therefore, the applicant proposes to install traffic
calming measures that include vertical calming and a mini roundabout at this junction
to help mitigate the highway concerns. The preliminary design layout has been
agreed but the detailed design will need to be subject to a Section 278 agreement. In
addition, the applicant is proposing the provision of an off-street car park for the
school. Nevertheless, the question of whether it is appropriate to use this access for
construction traffic should be considered further. It is also essential that the school
updates its Travel Plan to try to encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport.
A second access onto Lock Lane is proposed to be constructed at the western end of
the site. This will only be the access for a proportion of the dwellings on the site due
to a proposed road closure within the site which will normally allow access for
pedestrians and cyclists only with vehicular access in emergencies only. The
developer proposes to construct a new footway along the northern side of Lock Lane
to connect into the existing footway network.
Current Trafford guidelines state that a secondary access is necessary in residential
developments containing over 300 units and where cul-de-sac lengths exceed 250m.
These proposals are therefore contrary to the Councils guidelines in this respect.
Whilst the proposed emergency access enables the whole site to be accessed, it is
somewhat convoluted and accessing properties at the extreme east of the site could
be difficult in an emergency
The developer has highlighted the provision of a ‘green loop’ which is intended to
provide convenient access to a recreational route and an alternative to the road
network for pedestrians and cyclists. Although the provision of such a facility would
be welcomed in principle in this location, it must be noted that large areas of the loop
are under the ownership of Trafford Council, Partington Housing Association,
Broadoak School or unknown owners and therefore to retain such a feature would be
dependent on the future plans of other sites. In addition there are public right of way
issues that would need to be resolved through liaison with the Highways Section.
The developer proposes to upgrade Scroggins Lane to provide a high quality
pedestrian and cycle route to Hall Lane to provide access to the shops and bus
facilities. Where there is no objection to this in principle Scroggins Lane is only
adopted up to number 19 and the remainder of Scroggins Lane is unadopted. There
is limited provision of street lighting and the highway surfacing would benefit from
improvements. Therefore, any measures proposed for Scroggins Lane need to be
carefully considered and residents must be involved through a consultation process.
Travel Plan
As the development proposes over 80 residential units any approval should be
subject to the provision of a Travel Plan. A Travel Plan has been received but it is
considered that further amendments would be required in order for this to be
acceptable, including amendments to the targets for reducing car use and the
arrangements for annual monitoring. It is also noted that there are no public transport
incentives offered to residents, such as bus tickets as part of an induction travel
pack. It is considered that such tickets should be made available through a voucher
system with the duration being a minimum of one month.
Built Environment – No objections in principle, subject to satisfactory highway design
and layout being agreed. However, there are concerns regarding the number of units
being served (given that there are only two access points off Lock Lane) and
regarding the length of the cul-de-sac at the north-eastern end of the site.
Renewal and Environmental Protection – Accept the noise levels in the acoustic
report but have major concerns about subjective noise incidents and future noise
levels.
The submitted acoustic report recommends that, for a proportion of houses that face
the Ship Canal, standard thermal double glazed units (with trickle vents) would be
adequate to mitigate noise from mixed sources, such as traffic noise and general
industrial noise. This is based on householders keeping their windows closed. For
the remaining dwellings, no acoustic measures whatsoever have been suggested.
However, on a recent site visit, noise from industrial sources in Cadishead was
clearly audible. In particular, it is considered that impact noise, typically associated
with usage of mobile plant, could potentially generate noise levels which could cause
loss of amenity, noise nuisance and potential noise complaints. These events could
exceed World Health Organisation guidance levels.
In addition, any future increase in canal traffic (currently estimated at one movement
per day) could generate levels that exceed the BS8233 recommended level of 45
LAmax during the night time periods with windows open.
In view of the nature of the industrial noise observed during the site visit, it is
recommended that the applicant reconsiders the proposed mitigation measures with
a view to upgrading the protection afforded to future homeowners.
(A response to these comments has been received from the applicant’s consultants
and is referred to in the Observations section below).
Environment Agency – No objections in principle, subject to conditions as follows: 





Submission and implementation of scheme to protect nearby watercourse
from building materials during construction;
Submission and implementation of a scheme for the conservation of the ditch
to the north-east of the site and the two ephemeral ponds to the south west;
Submission and implementation of details to establish a marginal strip of land
at least 6m wide between the proposed development (including residential
development, parking areas etc.) and the banktop of the Ship Canal and the
ponds and ditch to the north-east of the site;
Submission and implementation of phased planting scheme incorporating
native species;
Submission and implementation of method statement for the treatment and
disposal of Japanese Knotweed;
Submission and implementation of site investigation for contaminated land.
GM Ecology Unit – The application site is designated as a Wildlife Corridor in the
Trafford UDP and one of the principles of the development is to maintain a Wildlife
Corridor along the banks of the canal. However, the submitted drawings and Design
and Access Statement show only a very narrow corridor along the majority of the
canal, which appears to be non-existent in places. The ecological survey found the
corridor to be used by bats, which forage over the Wildlife Corridor rather than the
canal itself. It is therefore important that an adequate corridor is retained, which the
current design does not appear to include. The land also functions as open space
and, whilst mitigation is proposed, mostly off-site, it is important that these measures
can be delivered.
The ecological survey has identified a number of breeding birds occurring at the site.
It is therefore recommended that a condition should be attached that there should be
no clearance of vegetation or works to any trees and scrub during the main bird
breeding season.
The ecological survey found water voles in a ditch on the north-east boundary of the
site and, given that water voles and their habitat are protected by the Wildlife and
Countryside Act, a condition will be needed requiring the retention of the ditch and
the submission and implementation of a mitigation scheme. There is a colony of sand
martins along the Ship Canal. If repairs are required to the Ship Canal structure, a
condition should be attached requiring provision to be made for the sand martins to
continue to nest at the site. A condition should also be attached requiring a Method
Statement for the control of Japanese Knotweed and all other ecological mitigation
and compensation measures should be required by appropriate condition.
Partington Town Council – The vast majority of the community and the Town Council
have no objections to the proposed development in principle. The main concerns are
the proposed access points. The proposal would bring an increase in traffic onto
Lock Lane and, in particular, opposite a local primary school. It would also bring an
increase in traffic onto the main Manchester Road, which already suffers from an
ever-increasing volume of traffic.
The Town Council would like assurances that everything possible is being done to
lessen the impact of this. Possibilities discussed at the meeting were opening the
road at the side of Shell for emergencies, such as the recent flooding, and the
possibility of the traffic lights at the Isherwood Road / Flixton Road / Carrington Lane
junction being replaced by a roundabout.
In addition, the development will be bringing in a significant amount of money under
Section 106 and the Town Council would like assurances that the money will be ring
fenced for the Partington area. Indeed, the Town Council feel that they would be the
best custodians of this money as they are best placed to know exactly what the
people of Partington want and where the money should be spent.
A further comment has since been received from the Town Council, simply raising no
objections.
GM Police – No objections in principle to the use of the site for residential purposes.
The developer should consider the application of Secured by Design (SBD) principles
throughout the development. In general terms, SBD requires: 

Clear routes to be provided for different modes of traffic;
Movement safety to be maximised especially after dark;









All routes to be necessary and lead to destinations that people want to reach;
Multiple exit points to be provided from public spaces and along pedestrian
routes;
Consequences of the number and type of connections to be carefully
considered:
Good visibility, sightlines and casual surveillance to be provided;
Opportunities for surveillance from adjacent buildings to be maximised;
Fencing, landscaping and streetscape features to be designed to help
visibility;
Efforts to be made to eliminate “inactive” frontages and corners;
Lighting is a primary consideration and integral to the overall design;
Public spaces to be of high quality, to serve a purpose and to support an
appropriate level of legitimate activity.
Specifically, GM Police would like to see: 



A road between the promenade and the houses overlooking the canal;
Gardens backing onto other gardens;
In cartilage car parking rather than shared parking courts;
Further detail of the proposed footpath link from Scroggins Lane.
GMPTE – Has concerns regarding the Transport Assessment, as, in terms of public
transport measures, the only real commitment appears to be the provision of 3 bus
stops on Lock Lane. This is not adequate for a development of this scale, which is
not very accessible by public transport.
In terms of the suggested options, GMPTE make the following comments: 






The re-routing of service 247 would remove a longstanding service from other
residents and therefore cannot be supported.
Any proposals to provide security on evening services would need to be
funded through the developer contributions rather than by GMPTE.
Providing extra patronage cannot be described as a public transport measure
and there is no evidence that the additional patronage would allow a service
to become commercially viable.
The construction of roads cannot be described as a public transport measure.
The provision of the 3 bus stops on Lock Lane is welcomed as an integral
part of the application.
A Travel Plan is essential and a draft plan has now been received. The
provision of a voucher for a travel pass is to be welcomed but this should be
for a year rather than a month. GMPTE is now able to offer tailor-made Travel
Packs, which will be on sale to developers.
GMPTE is happy for the applicant to consult residents on the three bus
options but any preferred option would still need to be assessed by GMPTE
service planners to ensure that it fits with existing provision.
In overall terms, only one of the suggested public transport measures is a firm
proposal with the others either relying on other agencies for implementation or not
being public transport proposals at all. It is suggested that this section of the TA
should be revised in consultation with GMPTE so as to include realistic and
achievable measures, which can be financed by the developer through the Section
106 contributions.
GMPTE would like assurances that the level of developer contribution should be at
least equivalent to the amount required by SPD1 and that some of this funding is ring
fenced for public transport improvements, the details of which will be agreed at a
later date.
Parks and Countryside – No objections in principle, but make the following comments
in relation to the details of the proposals: Open Space and Recreation - Children's Play Space

The Green Loop improvements do not represent justification for non provision
of children's play space either on site or in the form of off site contributions but
could be seen as mitigating for the loss of protected linear open land/wildlife
corridor

Inadequate consideration of the full implications of the proposals in respect of
existing children's play space provision locally. Although assessment of open
space provision across Partington reveals sufficiency of open space against
Natural England's Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards (as used in the
council's Greenspace 2004 PPG17 linked study) and also against the NPFA 6
acre standard (underpinning the council's UDP and SPG on open
space/sport), these quantitative assessments disguise localised deficiencies,
particularly in terms of access to high quality children's play spaces.

The inclusion of large sites such as Cross Lane East playing fields (located
over 800m away from the proposed development) within this overall
assessment is also misleading.

On site provision of children's play spaces should be pursued - if this is not
possible, a number of sites in the vicinity are highlighted as OSR7(i) and (ii) priority sites for improvement of existing children's play spaces and sites for
provision of new children's play spaces.
Red Rose Forest

The proposals within the Green Loop document may remove the need for a
financial contribution, subject to assessment/viability of outline proposals
suggested by the Green Loop document in the context of the number of
homes proposed.
Green Loop Proposals

Route: the potential to follow a greener route upon exit from Cross Lane East
Playing Fields at Moss Lane should be investigated i.e. South of Russell
Road and Moss View Playing Fields/Allotment site

Ship Canal Bank - Coroner's Wood: The informal grass footpath across Oak
Rd recreation ground should be formalised and linked to the existing
children's play area in order to ensure inclusive access along the green loop
route, as this section may be impassable during periods of adverse weather.

Coroner's Wood: The proposed network of formal footpaths through an
ancient woodland site and SBI, is inappropriate. Preference should be given
to a simplified single route through the site, in conjunction with a programme
of improvements to restore the site's ancient woodland character and
indicator flora. This habitat is fragile, rather than 'robust' as claimed in the
proposals, and has suffered from overexposure and subsequent soil
compaction.

Redbrook, South of Broadoak School: Tree and wildflower planting have
already taken place in this area - any further planting will need to be subtle
and confined to specific areas. Further tree planting opportunities exist on the
adjacent council owned site to the south east.

Partington Wharfside: Access from the canalside/Manchester Rd should be
restricted to a route around the periphery of the site in order to allow the
proposed nature reserve to flourish.
Public Realm - canalside promenade/tree planting/highway tree planting and
street furniture

Management of the public realm fund needs to be detailed in a S106
agreement, as does a commuted sum to cover future maintenance of new
trees/landscape features on council land (and any land which is proposed for
adoption by the council)
Rambler’s Association – It is noted that the application documents and, in particular,
the “Green Loop” proposals refer to the existing footpaths and bridleways and it is
encouraging that these have been taken into account. The developer should be
made aware that amongst these paths, there are four Definitive Rights of Way and it
is expected that the line of these paths would be retained and that there would be no
changes except maintenance in keeping with their current Definitive Path status.
Currently, there is a natural surface on these paths, although in places there is
encroaching vegetation and adjacent fly-tipping. These paths are Bridleway Partington 6, RUPP – Partington 3, FP - Partington 4 and RUPP – Partington 5.
GM Archaeological Unit – No objections subject to condition. An archaeological deskbased assessment has been prepared. The report considers that the greatest
potential for undisturbed archaeological deposits around Partington lies in the fringes
to the village, including the narrow strip of land between Lock Lane and the Ship
Canal. The report considers there may be a potential for prehistoric evidence to
survive as the area contains two sections of the former course of the River Mersey
that were infilled during the construction of the Ship Canal. In addition, there may be
buried remains relating to the canal lock and relating to a small settlement, which is
shown on a map dating from the nineteenth century but for which no surface
evidence is now visible. The County Archaeologist therefore recommends a condition
that no development should commence until the applicant has secured a programme
of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation approved
by the Planning Authority.
United Utilities – No objections provided the site is drained to a separate system with
only foul drainage connected into the foul sewer. Surface water should discharge to
the watercourse / soakaway / surface water sewer and may require the consent of
the Environment Agency. If surface water is allowed to be discharged to the public
sewerage system, the flow may need to be attenuated to a maximum discharge rate
set by UU. Public sewers cross the site and an access strip of at least 3m either side
will be required for maintenance. This should be taken into account in the final site
layout.
Warburton Parish Council – No objections to this proposal in principle but raise
concerns that a decision on this application would prejudice the planning process
being undertaken by Trafford Council in respect of the Partington Area Action Plan
and Local Development Framework and undermine the credibility of the plan making
process.
Dunham Massey Parish Council – No objections in principle but concerned about the
possible impact of traffic off Carrington Lane onto Dunham Road through to the A56.
Salford City Council – No objections.
Manchester Ship Canal Company – No objections but the developer will need to
consult the Company concerning all works affecting the Ship Canal bank.
REPRESENTATIONS
Eighteen letters of objection received, making the following comments: Principle of Development
1. The application proposals do not genuinely benefit Partington and the
“housing for shopping centre bribe” is offensive and is not acceptable.
2. It is also not true that this is the only option for Partington. The Shell / Burford
plans were more beneficial for the town.
3. The Council has broken the rules by failing to compulsory purchase the
rundown housing and shopping centre.
4. The applicant’s claim that it owns all the land along the Ship Canal is
disputed. The land has remained neglected for fifty years so the community of
Partington claims it
5. The flood plain cannot be built on. This area has protected Partington from
canal flooding and should be retained for this purpose.
6. There should be a referendum on these issues within Partington.
7. Three years ago the Unitary Development Plan report highlighted the
problems in Partington and the urgent need for action, yet the Council and
Peel have neglected the area during that time.
8. The Council always approves Peel’s plans but has rejected other beneficial
plans for the area.
9. Exceptional circumstances have not been demonstrated to justify this
development.
10. Planning permission was previously granted for about 23 to 27 houses on
Lock Lane on the condition that the shopping centre was redeveloped. It is
now suggested that 550 houses are needed to address the same situation.
11. The development proposes too many houses either for this site or for
Partington as a whole.
12. There are other available residential sites in Partington.
Access and traffic generation
1. It would be ridiculous to allow the development of 550 houses with access
onto Lock Lane rather than directly onto Manchester Road. The road was not
designed for the amount of traffic that this development will bring.
2. Many cars already come through Partington from Warrington and further a
field in order to avoid the motorway and residential development in Lymm has
already increased the traffic generation. The proposed development will
further increase traffic generation and affect road safety on Manchester Road.
Manchester Road is already too narrow. It already sometimes takes more
than 25 minutes to travel three miles to the traffic lights in Carrington. There
have been previous complaints about the sequence of lights at this junction
and the Council has stated that it is investigating ways to resolve this issue. It
is quite obvious that the road cannot cope with the existing traffic load and
this development will only make things worse.
3. The people of Partington are already extremely vulnerable when emergency
services are required as these have to come from Sale or Urmston and
negotiate heavy traffic. It takes 20-30 minutes for them to arrive through no
fault of their own and they do not need further delays caused by more traffic,
which may result in someone dying unnecessarily. Are there any plans to give
Partington its own emergency services?
4. Putting a road across the Ship Canal near Carrington Power Station would
only alleviate some traffic but will not relieve the congestion experienced up to
that point and will not stop the closure of the road when there is an accident /
flood / other incident as happened on 21st and 22nd January 2008. On another
occasions, the road had to be closed due to a crashed bus. Partington has
only one main route in and out. There is no short diversion and this creates
total congestion. In previous times the road through Shell used to be opened
in such circumstances but this is no longer the case and a diversion of 5-10
miles is now required.
5. The traffic survey was carried out on one day in July. However, the traffic
generation can vary significantly from day to day. At that particular time, most
colleges and some schools would be closed, making a big difference in the
amount of traffic.
6. There is a primary school opposite the access onto Lock Lane and the
development will therefore affect the safety of the children. Has this area
been observed between 8.30 and 9.15 in the morning and 15.00 and 15.45 in
the afternoon? At these times, the road is already extremely congested due to
school traffic and this would be an accident waiting to happen and would
increase congestion.
7. The junction of Manchester Road and Lock Lane is already a bottleneck at
peak times and the development is going to make it even more difficult for
people to get to work.
8. The development will fail to regenerate Partington if it does not include the
provision of an access road directly to Manchester Road.
9. Peel have disassociated themselves from the health and safety aspects of
very heavy traffic in residential areas. It is incomprehensible how they have
got to this position without including a new access road within the proposals.
10. The plans do not provide transport solutions and should include a bridge over
the Ship Canal. There are no new roads to cope with the increased traffic
from the new commuters.
11. How will construction traffic access the site? It would be unacceptable for
construction traffic to use the access opposite the primary school.
12. If no adequate access solution can be provided, then the number of dwellings
should be considerably reduced.
13. Lock Lane is like a racetrack and the development will make this worse.
14. Any minor incident on Lock Lane will totally gridlock the whole area,
especially as it is proposed to narrow the road.
15. If public transport is improved, where will the buses go? Lock Lane cannot
accommodate buses as well as additional traffic.
16. The provision of a road access opposite Forest Gardens would be
unacceptable.
17. The development proposes the use of Scroggins Lane as a pedestrian
access. However, residents of Scroggins Lane have previously been told that
the road is unadopted and is therefore their responsibility. If the road is
adopted, what level of upgrading and lighting is proposed? If street lighting is
proposed, how will this take account of the proximity of adjacent properties?
How would the works be carried out without closing off access to the existing
properties?
18. Partington is very poorly served by public transport. The direct bus 252 has
been lost and replaced by a service which travels by a very long and
convoluted route to reach Sale.
19. There is no promise of any improvements in public transport. The buses
currently stop at 7.00pm. Such a large development would benefit from a
major transport initiative such as the extension of Metrolink. The huge amount
of profits that Peel will make from the development should pay for such a
scheme.
Lack of Supporting Infrastructure
1. Where are the school places to cope with this development? The Council has
closed three schools in the area – Orton Brook, Millbank and Moss View.
2. The infrastructure in Partington will find it hard to cope with the influx of new
residents – dentist’s and doctor’s surgeries are already overstretched and
schools have been closed.
3. The people of Partington do not need the added pressures on traffic and
schools in an area that has a lot of history. There are other areas with more
space that could accommodate this type of development.
Lack of Local Employment
1. The Canalside plans do not provide jobs, although Partington has lost many
jobs.
2. Would outsiders want to buy houses in Partington with its employment,
transport and shopping problems?
3. Where will all the new residents be employed?
Loss of open space, wildlife etc.
1. The development will result in the loss of wildlife and an area of peace and
tranquillity that is used for recreational purposes by local people. The land is
used by children for informal play and by dog walkers as there is no where
else on this side of Partington to take a leisurely walk.
2. Sightings of rare birds have occurred at this site on many occasions.
3. The area was landscaped about 15 to 20 years ago and there were new plots
for trees and shrubs to grow, which have established very well and help to
block the noise from the through road on the opposite side of the canal at
Cadishead.
4. When nearby residents bought their houses, they were told that the land to
the rear was a wildlife conservation area. The site is designated as Wildlife
Corridor and Protected Linear Open Land.
5. It is understood that there is a Tree Preservation Order on at least part of the
land.
6. Nearby residents currently have open views to the rear, which will be lost as a
result of the development and the location will no longer be “semi-rural”.
7. There was a previous Council application to fully landscape the land with
walkways and social amenities, which at the moment is partially in place.
There is currently a “meadow” / area of open space within the centre of the
application site, opposite Our Lady of Lourdes school. The area is currently
well used by dog walkers and this will be lost as part of the proposals. There
are no plans for any decent sized public open space or children’s play area
within the development. The existing flat and open space in the middle of the
site should be designated as a small park providing a play area, dog area and
seating not only for existing residents but also for the occupiers of the
proposed development. People need facilities within close walking distance of
their homes, especially the elderly and disabled. There is only one park with
these facilities, on the opposite side of Manchester Road, and this is too far
away to use on a regular basis.
8. The development will have a harmful impact on the visual amenity of the area
with the loss of trees, grasslands and open spaces.
Residential Amenity
1. The development will cause noise and disturbance to existing residents.
2. The building of new roads in Irlam, which is quite a distance away, has
created noise and disturbance. What measures are proposed to reduce noise
pollution caused by the application proposals?
3. The proposed dwellings would overlook existing houses and bungalows and
would have an overbearing impact on them.
4. The development will result in a reduction in the value of adjacent properties.
Will the developer or the Council compensate householders for this loss in
value?
5. The lengthy construction period will cause noise and disturbance and
vibration to nearby residents.
6. Will residents be offered any compensation for the disturbance caused by
construction work and the devaluation of their properties?
Design and Visual Amenity
1. The type of housing to be built would be out of character with the existing
housing alongside the canal at present as there will be three storey houses,
which would be obtrusive and would overlook existing properties.
2. As the application does not include details of the design of the buildings, how
do we know that they will be in keeping with the character of the area? The
height of some of the buildings would be out of character with the surrounding
area.
Other Issues
1. Would the housing be affordable?
2. The canal side is slowly breaking away over the years.
3. The increased population and traffic would cause litter problems on existing
roads.
4. The development would increase the air pollution around the village. Surveys
have shown that the air quality is already poor and that the village has a
higher cancer rate than other areas.
5. There are already drainage problems at the rear of properties on Thirlmere
Road due to the variation in ground levels and the natural water levels and
run off points. The additional dwellings are likely to create an even bigger
drainage problem with more water running off into gardens. Has this been
taken into consideration and what plans have been made to compensate for
changes to the layout of the land?
Five letters received raising no objections to the residential development in principle
generally but raising a number of concerns about the details of the scheme, as
follows: 1. Has any thought been given to what the impact of an additional 550 dwellings
will be on the local infrastructure?
2. The traffic around Partington is horrendous, particularly at peak times. If the
A6144 Manchester Road is not widened and is used by an additional 550 plus
cars on a daily basis, the situation will be drastically worsened. The Council
should consider building a bypass between Common Lane and Isherwood
Road to cope with the additional traffic.
3. If planning permission is granted, there will be a need for more doctor’s
surgeries as the existing two surgeries are already overstretched with
appointments needing to be booked two to three weeks in advance.
4. The new development is likely to result in a loss of privacy to the occupiers of
existing dwellings and additional traffic noise, which may affect the value of
existing properties. In order to squeeze 550 dwellings onto the application
site, the developer will have to build apartments rather than houses, which
are likely to overlook existing properties.
5. The lack of a major access road is a key concern. What surveys have been
carried out in relation to potential traffic generation?
6. There are two schools on Lock Lane, one of which is directly opposite the
proposed access. Lock Lane is constantly used for parking by school staff
and residents, causing some difficulty and delay to other road users. There
are also over forty elderly person’s dwellings on this road. In addition, there
are heavy vehicles going to and from the water treatment plant several times
daily. The Post Office, shop and takeaway at The Green also attract a large
amount of traffic.
7. The access of Lock Lane with Manchester Old Road and the A6144 is very
busy and it is almost impossible to turn onto the main road at peak times.
8. Peel Holdings are reputed to have carried out a traffic survey but local
residents have not been interviewed or made aware that such a survey was
taking place.
9. The council should give assurances that they have done a traffic survey and
declare what the results were.
10. Will the footpath at the rear of Scroggins Lane be improved? Residents on
Inglewood Close currently suffer problems of people climbing over boundary
fences to gain access to Inglewood Close from this land instead of using the
footpath that leads out onto Scroggins Lane. The proposed development is
likely to significantly worsen this problem, leading to a loss of privacy to
existing residents and anti-social behaviour.
11. If the land at the rear of Inglewood Close is not going to be built on, can it be
fenced off with tall, picket-type fencing on its two open sides? Can the area
be landscaped and planted with trees? This would improve privacy for
residents on Inglewood Close and would be in keeping with the wooded area
adjacent to Thirlmere Road as well as providing a potential nature area.
12. The application plans show a foul pumping main that traverses one of the
existing gardens and is intended to connect the development to an existing
sewer on Inglewood Close. If work has to be carried out within a private
garden, who will pay for the restoration of this area / reinstatement of fencing
etc.? What consultation will take place with the owner? What will be the
duration of any disruption and the scale of the works?
13. 550 dwellings would be excessive for the land available on the development
site.
One letter of support has been received from planning consultants representing the
owners of part of the application site.
OBSERVATIONS
PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT
1.
The application site is Greenfield land and is allocated on the Unitary
Development Plan Proposals Map as Protected Linear Open Land, a
Wildlife Corridor and an Area of Landscape Protection as well as being
located within the Partington and Carrington Priority Regeneration Area.
Protected Linear Open Land
2.
Proposal OSR6 of the Revised UDP relates to Protected Linear Open
Land. The policy states that such areas “will be safeguarded as mainly
undeveloped areas of open land in public and private ownership….The
Council will aim to improve the recreational, townscape and environmental
value of these areas and to develop public access into and through them.
Built development on an appropriate (normally small) scale may be
acceptable if it contributes towards these aims and does not compromise
the functions described above.” The applicant accepts that the
development does not comply with this policy and would therefore
represent a Departure from the Development Plan in this respect. As the
development proposes more than 150 houses, it would therefore need to
be referred to the Secretary of State, under the Town and Country
Planning (Development Plans and Consultation) (Departures) Directions
1999. It is, nevertheless, considered that the loss of the Protected Linear
Open Land is significantly mitigated by the provision of usable recreational
space at the Canalside Promenade and also within the proposed Green
Loop. Currently, Partington has a surplus provision of open space per
resident, although it is recognised that this is of variable quality and use
value. It is therefore considered that the loss of this site, which is currently
restricted in terms of access and function, will have limited impact on the
overall quality of open space available to the residents of Partington.
Housing Land Supply
3.
The proposal would normally fall to be considered against the provisions
of the adopted SPG, ‘Controlling the Supply of Land Made Available for
New Housing Development’. The Proposed Changes to the RSS
published by the Secretary of State in March 2008 must now, however,
carry significant weight in the determination of planning applications to
the extent that they must take precedence both over the policies of the
adopted Regional Spatial Strategy (RPG13) and the housing policies of
the Revised Trafford UDP and the adopted SPG.
4.
With regard to new housing provision the Proposed Changes to RSS
Policy L4 significantly raise the annual average requirement figure for the
Borough from a gross (including clearance replacement) figure of 310
dwellings a year to a gross figure of 618. Additionally, this requirement is
expressly described as a minimum figure. In relation to this new target
requirement, therefore, the Council can no longer demonstrate that it has
a ten year supply of land committed for new housing development across
the Borough. The October 2007 commitments total of 3,764 amounts to a
6.1 year supply of development land, whilst the provision of the proposed
residential development would result in approximately one additional year
of housing supply in the Borough. The Council can therefore no longer
apply the provisions of the SPG, ‘Controlling the Supply of Land Made
Available for New Housing Development’, which explicitly states that the
implementation trigger for the SPG is, ‘when the number of new houses
granted planning permission for development exceeds ten times the
combined demographic need and clearance replacement requirements of
RPG13’.
5.
The relevant policies that can now be applied to this proposal are the
Proposed RSS Policies MCR1 and MCR3, alongside the provisions of the
Revised UDP Policies A1 and H11, which identify Partington as a Priority
Regeneration Area. Proposed RSS Policies MCR1 and MCR3 make
clear that new housing development proposals in sustainable locations
well served by public transport should be allowed where they support
local regeneration strategies and / or meet identified local needs. Policy
MCR3 refers to the need to allow “residential development to support
regeneration strategies and to meet identified local needs (particularly for
affordable housing) in sustainable locations, which are well served by
public transport.” Proposal H11 identifies regeneration priorities for
Partington including improving the quality of the area’s housing stock,
improving the quality, safety and appearance of the local environment,
improving the quality, appearance and safety of the local shopping
facilities, improving the quality and diversity of recreational facilities,
promoting the re-use and redevelopment of unused, under-used or
derelict land and improving public transport links.
6.
The proposed development is within the Partington Priority Regeneration
Area and, if properly linked to the provision of the proposed shopping
centre and the other proposed regeneration initiatives (“Green Loop”,
public realm and public transport improvements), would clearly support
the regeneration strategy for the area. It is also considered that the
redevelopment of the shopping centre and the construction of a large
scale housing development would contribute towards re-establishing
Partington as a sustainable location. It is therefore considered that the
proposed development complies with the revised development plan
policy framework which is now applicable and is therefore acceptable in
those terms.
Greenfield Development
7.
Planning Policy Statement 3, Housing, paragraph 36, states that “The
priority for development should be previously developed land, in
particular vacant and derelict sites and buildings.” Under this guidance,
the Planning Authority has an obligation to monitor its Greenfield /
Brownfield trajectory and the development of such a large Greenfield site
clearly has the potential to affect the overall balance of Greenfield /
Brown field development in the Borough. The trend for development on
previously developed land during 2002/08 is 84%. Of the current total
commitments (3,764) there are 518 units or 14% proposed on Greenfield
land. Although the current proposals would increase the percentage of
committed developments on Greenfield land, it is known that future
planning applications on Brown field land will balance this target.
8.
Policy H2 of the Revised Unitary Development Plan indicates that, as a
first priority, previously developed land and buildings will be developed in
locations that are well related to services and accessible by public
transport. The site is not previously developed land and it is recognised
that, in general terms, Partington is not in a particularly accessible
location in terms of the Borough as a whole. However, the site is
relatively close to the centre of the village (about 850m from the main
vehicular access on Lock Lane and about 620m from the pedestrian
access on Scroggins Lane). In fact, it could be considered that all
development within Partington is relatively sustainable in that it would be
within walking distance of all local facilities, including the proposed
shopping centre. In addition, the development would help to support
existing services and would therefore assist in creating a more
sustainable community.
9.
The applicant has stated that it has considered alternative sites and that
there is no previously developed site available within Partington of the
size required to support the regeneration of the shopping centre. An
assessment of alternative sites has been submitted as part of the
Environmental Impact Assessment. This concludes that only the
application site is capable of safeguarding the retail function of the
shopping centre. The assessment states that previously developed land
opportunities within the settlement are very limited and that those that are
available would not provide sufficient units to generate the cross-subsidy
needed to fund the shopping centre proposals. Some of the previously
developed sites are located further from the built up area of the
settlement and / or outside the Priority Regeneration Area and / or within
areas constrained by Health and Safety Executive designations in
respect of hazardous substances consents etc. In terms of Greenfield
sites within the existing built up area, the majority are either formal or
informal public open space.
10.
There is a large area of land designated as Protected Open Land
immediately to the south of the village and within the Priority
Regeneration Area. Policy C8 of the Revised UDP confirms that this may
be considered for future housing development after the UDP period. The
assessment states that this land could potentially accommodate about
4000 residential units. However, the assessment states that this is a high
quality landscape and that development in this location would effectively
extend the built up area of the Manchester conurbation further into the
Cheshire Plain. The assessment concludes that such a development
would raise strategic policy issues of more than local importance and
would mean a significant overprovision of Greenfield land, contrary to the
targets in the Regional Spatial Strategy. The assessment also concludes
that this site would not be well connected to the existing urban area and
would require significant new infrastructure and public transport
improvements. In any case, the applicant’s assessment concludes that
the development of this land could not deliver the key regeneration
benefit of providing the redevelopment of the shopping centre. In
contrast, the assessment states that the current application site has
closer links with the built up area and is of a lower landscape quality. The
applicant’s conclusion is that there are no significant previously
developed sites available for development and that the application site is
the most sustainable major Greenfield site and the only site that can
deliver the shopping centre.
11.
It is accepted that the availability of Brownfield land for development on
the scale proposed in Partington is limited. There are small sites within
the built up area, some of which have been granted planning permission.
However, there are no previously developed sites, which, either on their
own or cumulatively, are available for a housing development of this size.
It is accepted that, within the Partington Priority Regeneration Area, this
is the most sustainable site of a size that is capable of delivering the
wider regeneration objectives. In this context, it is also considered that it
would not be appropriate to consider sites outside the Partington area,
particularly as these would not assist in other regeneration objectives that
are discussed below i.e. providing a greater quantity of higher quality
private housing and therefore a wider mix of housing within the overall
settlement and increasing spending power and thus supporting the future
viability of the shopping centre.
Wildlife Corridor
12.
The application site also includes land designated as a Wildlife Corridor
in the Revised UDP. Whilst the applicant considers that the proposed
development would comply with Proposal ENV10, as a result of the
retention of open space along the canalside promenade, the GM Ecology
Unit considers that a wider corridor should be retained, particularly for the
benefit of bats, which forage over open land adjacent to the Ship Canal. It
is therefore considered that the proposed development does not fully
comply with Proposal ENV10. However, it is considered that the
regeneration benefits of the proposed scheme would be so beneficial to
as to outweigh any detrimental impact in this respect. This matter is
discussed in further detail in the section below on Ecological
Considerations.
Landscape Considerations
13.
The site is also within an Area of Landscape Protection in the Revised
UDP. Proposal ENV17 states that the Council will protect, promote and
enhance the distinctive landscape character and quality of the area.
Where development is considered to be acceptable in principle, the
Council will consider the appropriateness of design, materials,
landscaping and the impact on the surrounding area and on features of
importance to wildlife. The submitted Environmental Impact Assessment
includes a section on Landscape and visual impact. This suggests that
(prior to mitigation), there would potentially be a slight to moderate
adverse impact on landscape character as a result of the loss of the
current open landscape, the removal of trees and the changes to the
existing landscape setting of Partington and Cadishead. However, the
overall conclusion is that the wider, long-term impacts would be slightly
beneficial as a result of the provision of the Green Loop proposals. It is
suggested that this, together with on-site mitigation in the form of tree
retention, new planting and careful consideration of the design of the site
frontage, would compensate for the change in the character of the
application site.
Proposed Mix of House Types, Size and Tenure
14.
It is recognised that the development proposes an adequate mix in terms
of type and size of units, with houses and apartments ranging from one to
four bedrooms in size. It is, nevertheless, considered that the lack of
inclusion of any affordable housing within such a large development runs
counter to some of the advice in national Planning Policy Statement 3
(PPS3), Housing, and to Proposal H8 of the Revised Trafford UDP.
15.
PPS3, paragraph 24, states that “Local Planning Authorities should
ensure that the proposed mix of housing on large strategic sites reflects
the proportion of households that require market or affordable housing
and achieves a mix of households as well as a mix of tenure and price.”
Proposal H8 of the Revised UDP states that the Council will seek to
negotiate an element of low cost housing on all urban sites of over 1
hectare in size or of 25 or more dwellings.
16.
It should, however, be noted that the Partington Strategic Development
Framework (2003), (which was commissioned by the Council),
emphasised the need to provide a greater quantity of higher quality
private housing to attract and retain an economically active population in
order to create a more sustainable future for the village. Section 7 of the
document states that “there is a need for the area to provide a greater
amount of higher quality private housing to attract and retain the
economically active. This is important in bringing more population into the
area, which will sustain local business, support the viability of local
services such as schools, libraries, public transport and, if the new
development is properly integrated, will create a more balanced and
vibrant community.”
17.
The applicant states that, within Partington, the housing stock is skewed
towards social rented, (32.8%) and the private stock itself is dominated
by ex-Council housing purchased under Right to Buy. Whilst not
necessarily of poor quality, much of this housing is unattractive to higher
value earners. In addition, the applicant states that only 6% of the
population of Partington live in detached houses.
18.
It is therefore accepted that there is a need to provide a wider choice of
housing tenure and type in Partington as a whole, which is currently
dominated by social rented housing. PPS3, paragraph 38 does refer to
“the need to develop mixed, sustainable communities across the wider
local authority area as well as at neighbourhood level”. There is clearly a
need for affordable housing in Partington, which is demonstrated by the
fact that the Housing Corporation has recently provided funding for
various affordable and specialist housing schemes in Partington and
would not have done so if there was no need for this type of
accommodation. In particular, there is a need for low-cost home
ownership schemes that would offer opportunities for local people to get
on the housing ladder.
19.
However, it is recognised that there are also other regeneration needs in
Partington – in particular, the need for the redevelopment of the shopping
centre and the need for higher quality private housing to encourage
higher earners to stay within / join the community. The latter is important
in terms of ensuring a more mixed community across Partington as a
whole in accordance with the guidance in PPS3. It is also recognised that
it is vital in order to ensure the future viability of the shopping centre and,
in fact, to attract quality retailers to invest in the centre on the basis that
there will be a continued and expanding level of expenditure in Partington
in the future. It is recognised that the inclusion of affordable housing
within the scheme may reduce the overall spending power available and
may therefore mean that the shopping centre is less attractive to quality
retailers and, in particular, the potential anchor tenants.
20.
The applicant states that the provision of the retail centre is the major
planning obligation of the proposals, in place of affordable housing, and
that this is currently a higher priority regeneration objective in the
Partington context. It is therefore concluded that, although the
development would not comply with Proposal H8 of the Revised UDP,
there are exceptional circumstances in this case that would justify not
requiring the provision of affordable housing as part of the proposed
development.
Conclusion
21.
In conclusion, in respect of housing land supply, it is considered that the
development would accord with local regeneration strategy as set out in
Proposal H11 - Priority Regeneration Area: Partington and would
therefore comply with Policies L4, MCR1 and MCR3 of the draft Revised
Regional Spatial Strategy, and Proposal H3 of the Revised UDP. It is
considered that the proposed development would be contrary to Policy
OSR6 of the Revised UDP in respect of Protected Linear Open Land,
although the provision of the canalside promenade and Green Loop
would provide some degree of mitigation and compensation. It is also
considered that the proposed development would be contrary to Policy
H8 in respect of affordable housing and would not fully comply with
Proposal ENV10 in respect of the Wildlife Corridor. Nevertheless, it is
considered that the potential regeneration benefits of the proposal as
“enabling development”, which would support the redevelopment of the
shopping centre, are of such paramount importance to the local
regeneration strategy for Partington as to represent exceptional
circumstances that would justify the Planning Authority’s support for the
proposals as a Departure from the Development Plan.
DESIGN AND VISUAL AMENITY
Development Principles
22.
The application is accompanied by a document entitled “Development
Principles: Canalside”, which sets out a number of fixed development
principles and includes plans showing the areas to be allocated to open
space and built development and the primary access routes through the
development. The fixed development principles (with which any reserved
matters application would have to comply) include the following: 
to retain existing trees of high landscape value;




to create a canalside promenade, usable by pedestrians and
cyclists, extending the whole length of the site and connecting to
existing footpaths;
to provide two vehicular accesses to Lock Lane;
to create a new, high quality, residential community, which
maximises the benefits of the canal setting with a minimum of 350
units (about 30 dwellings per hectare) and a maximum of 550 units
(about 45 dwellings per hectare);
to provide a mix of one and two bedroom flats and two, three and
four bedroom houses of between one and four storeys in height, to
a maximum height of 15m.
Design and Access Statement
23.
The application is also accompanied by a Design and Access Statement.
The Statement includes a layout plan showing areas of high, medium and
low density/massing/height. The plan generally shows four high density
nodes spaced out along the canal frontage with low density development
between this, along the canal frontage, and medium density development
to the rear of this, adjacent to the existing residential areas.
24.
The Design and Access Statement says that a primary aim of the scheme
is to create a layout that responds positively to the Ship Canal and
creates a canal side walkway that has interest and variety along its
length. The Statement says that “the canalside promenade will be split
into two zones. To the east of the ferry site, buildings would be arranged
in a relatively formal manner, whilst, to the west, the layout would be
looser and less formal. Generally, the buildings would face over the canal
to exploit views, provide surveillance and create a strong edge to the
development. The Statement says that “Height and massing should
always step down to create an “organic” flowing skyline in this edge-oftown setting rather than an abrupt, engineered skyline more appropriate
to a very urban location”.
25.
It is proposed that the area of oak wood at the rear of Thirlmere Road
would be retained with public access through it. The area of trees at the
western edge of the site would also be retained. The Statement also
suggests that additional small areas of incidental open space may be
provided close to the canalside promenade, with those towards the
south-western end of the site being softer and greener in character than
those to the north-east and that “At the water’s edge, naturalistic plant
communities will be established in certain areas to enhance the wildlife
value of the scheme”.
26.
In terms of detailed design and materials, the Design and Access
Statement states that detailed Design Codes are to be prepared in
advance of the reserved matters applications. The Statement also says
that, in order for the scheme to exhibit an appropriate sense of place,
traditional materials in keeping with the area will form the basis of the
development. These may include red brick, sandstone, render, slate or
similar roofing materials together with some more contemporary
materials.
27.
The Design and Access Statement identifies a series of nine different
character zones across the site in order to ensure a level of consistency
but also to create a sense of place in different areas of the site. In terms of
the overall character of the site, some of the most important of these
include Zone 1 – the entrance areas close to the accesses off Lock Lane
– and Zones 2, 5 and 6 – the higher density nodes along the canal
frontage. The entrance areas in Zone 1 would be of medium density,
largely two storey detached and semi-detached properties, in a formal
arrangement with a consistent height and rhythm. The houses would have
large front gardens and formal tree planting to the front would create an
avenue of trees along the main road. In Zones 2, 5 and 6, the buildings
should create a strong feature at the western end of the site. The
buildings would be mainly three and four storeys with some two and a half
storey units. At the western end, the building form is intended to be
reminiscent of a large country house overlooking parkland with informal
tree planting to link with the adjacent open space. In the centre of the site,
the Old Ferry site would be a key landmark area within the scheme,
creating an important public open space adjacent to the canal. Building
scale and form at this point is intended to be reminiscent of canalside
wharf buildings. The apartment block at the eastern end of the site would
acknowledge the dominance of the viaduct and provide a “book end” to
the site.
Assessment of Design Principles
28.
It is considered that the proposal to treat the site as several distinct
character areas is appropriate in principle. The idea of the southern
section of the development having a more rural interface with the canal,
with softer landscaping and a natural water’s edge, and the northern
section having a more urban character to the water’s edge has the
potential to give a distinct character to this element of the development
and the green loop. In order to assist in defining the character, it is
considered that it would be helpful if the canalside promenade was
implemented as a single project early in the development process and it
is therefore suggested that a specific condition should be attached
requiring the details and phasing of this element of the scheme. It is also
important that the edges of the development provide an appropriate
interface to surrounding development and uses. The relationship of the
north-eastern end of the development with the adjacent public footpath is
one such area that will need to be considered carefully at reserved
matters stage. For example, it would not be appropriate for this boundary
to be formed by a row of high fences at the rear of private garden areas.
29.
With regards to the height of development, the proposed four storey
element of the scheme would be an exception rather than the norm. It is
likely that this height of development would be restricted to the position of
the four apartment buildings shown on the indicative layout. In any case,
it is proposed that a condition should be attached restricting the four
storey development to land adjacent to the canalside. Although the
remaining areas of the site are likely to include significant elements of
three storey development, it is considered that this is acceptable in
principle, given the low lying nature of much of the site in relation to the
nearby residential areas on Lock Lane. The proposed development will,
nevertheless, need to be considered very carefully at reserved matters
stage to ensure a natural contouring of the proposed rooflines. It is also
considered likely that, at Reserved Matters stage, any development
adjacent to existing residential properties on Lock Lane, Thirlmere Road
etc. would be restricted to two storey in height.
30.
In overall terms, it is considered that the Design and Access Statement is
of a relatively high quality and sets out some important principles of
design, which, if adhered to in the subsequent Reserved Matters
applications, would ensure that the development has a distinct character
and sense of place. Therefore, with the notable exception of the access
arrangements and connectivity to adjacent residential areas and the
village centre, and of open space provision (which are dealt with below),
it is considered that the proposals are appropriate in design terms.
OPEN SPACE
Open Space Provision
31.
Planning Policy Statement 3, Housing, paragraph 17 states that
“Particularly where family housing is proposed, it will be important to
ensure that the needs of children are taken into account and that there is
good provision of recreational areas, including private gardens, play
areas and informal play space.” The submitted layout plan does not
include any play space provision and the application as submitted did not
propose any financial contribution towards open space and, in this form,
the development would be clearly contrary to the above guidance and
Policies OSR3 and OSR9 of the Revised UDP. Whilst there are
significant areas of open space within the settlement of Partington as a
whole, much of this is a considerable distance from the application site,
and this is a particular problem in relation to children’s play space as it
cannot be expected that young children should have to walk to play areas
that are situated ten or fifteen minutes walk away on the other side of
busy roads. Furthermore, although there is sufficient overall quantity of
open space within Partington, the general quality is poor with many areas
in need of significant upgrading. However, the applicant has now agreed
to provide at least two small play spaces within the application site. Whilst
this would not be equivalent to the level of provision that would normally
be required for a development of this size, it does help to make the
development more acceptable. It is therefore considered that, whilst the
development would not fully comply with Policies OSR3 and OSR9 of the
Revised UDP, the considerable regeneration benefits of the overall
development package does justify some compromise in this respect. It is
considered that the details and implementation of the proposed play
areas can be controlled by condition.
32.
In terms of other types of open space, although the layout proposes the
retention of the canalside promenade and a programme of improvements
to the existing open space network round Partington referred to as the
Green Loop Proposals (see below), there would clearly be a loss of some
informal recreation space on the development site as a whole and
particularly the flat, grassed area of amenity space in the centre of the
existing site. The applicant was requested to consider incorporating the
latter area within the proposed layout as a central area of public open
space but considered that this was not feasible in terms of the overall
viability of the scheme. The applicant also considers that the payment of
a financial contribution towards off-site public open space provision would
be very difficult in this case, given the need to fund the redevelopment of
the shopping centre and the alternative package of Section 106
requirements that has been proposed (see below). The proposed
development would not, therefore, fully comply with Proposals OSR3 and
OSR9 of the Revised UDP although the proposed provision of two play
spaces and the proposed canalside promenade and green loop
proposals would mitigate the impact of this to some extent.
Green Loop Proposals
33.
The application submission includes a document entitled “Green Loop
Proposals”. This document describes the facilitation of a new recreational
and ecological “Green Loop” around Partington Village. The document
states that the proposals will protect and enhance existing landscape and
ecological assets, provide managed and accessible open space and a
network of paths, which encourage recreational access to the open space
and to the wider landscape setting of the village. The intention would be
to create a circular route with an overall length of 6.2km as well as
improved paths into the settlement and towards Warburton with a total
length of 1.8km.
34.
The suggested improvements would relate to the following sites: 1. The Canalside development – the current application site – owned by
Peel
2. The canal bank from Lock Lane to the Red Brook to the south-west of
the current application site – owned by Peel
3. The land immediately to the north of the railway viaduct – this is
proposed as a habitat creation area in connection with the Partington
Wharfside industrial development (H/OUT/64409) – owned by Peel
4. Existing public footpaths to the north of the current application site
5. Land adjacent to the Red Brook - owned by Partington Housing
Association
6. Land to the south of Broadoak School and owned by the school
7. Open space at Oak Road / Coroner’s Wood – owned by Trafford
Council
8. Open space at Cross Lane East – owned by Trafford Council
35.
The document suggests that the “Green Loop” would contribute
significantly to the open space requirements of the Canalside
development. The specific improvements would comprise 3km of
improved / new footpaths, 0.5 hectare of tree and shrub planting, 1.8
hectares of enrichment of trees, 1.2km of hedges, 3.3 hectares of
wildflower meadow and 1.35km of fencing.
36.
It is recognised that, in general terms, these proposals have the potential
to significantly enhance the existing open space network around the
village and would thereby be of recreational value to residents of
Partington. However, they provide a specific type of open space
enhancement and do not necessarily compensate for the deficiencies in
terms of formal open space and play space provision.
ECOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
37.
The application site is designated as a Wildlife Corridor in the Trafford
UDP and one of the stated principles of the development is to maintain a
Wildlife Corridor along the banks of the canal. However, the GM Ecology
Unit states that the submitted drawings show only a very narrow corridor
along the majority of the canal, which appears to be non-existent in
places. The Ecology Unit states that the ecological survey found the
corridor to be used by bats, which forage over the Wildlife Corridor rather
than the canal itself and that it is therefore important that an adequate
corridor is retained, which the current design does not appear to include.
38.
The ecological survey also found water voles in a ditch on the north-east
boundary of the site and the Ecology Unit states that a condition will be
needed requiring the retention of the ditch and the submission and
implementation of a mitigation scheme. In addition, there is a colony of
sand martins along the Ship Canal. The Ecology Unit states that, if
repairs are required to the Ship Canal structure, a condition should be
attached requiring provision to be made for the sand martins to continue
to nest at the site. The applicant accepts the requirement for the retention
of the ditch and a scheme to mitigate the impact of the development on
water voles. In respect of sand martins, the applicant considers that it
may not be possible to provide for the retention of the birds on site but
also suggests a condition to mitigate / compensate for the impact of the
development on this species.
39.
The Environment Agency has raised no objections to the proposed
development in principle, subject to conditions, including the submission
of a scheme for the conservation of the ditch at the north-east end of the
site and two ephemeral ponds to the south-west. In addition, the Agency
considers that there is a requirement for the retention of a marginal strip
of land of at least 6m in width between the proposed development and
the banktop of the Ship Canal and between the development and the
ponds and ditch. The applicant has stated that it may not be able to
comply with the two suggested conditions referred to above. The
applicant’s consultants state that it was originally envisaged that a seminatural habitat corridor would be retained along the Ship Canal
specifically to conserve the wildlife corridor. However, a survey of the
bank and the adjacent canal base by canal engineers determined that, at
the north-eastern end of the site in particular, the bank is unstable and
subject to slippage such that it would not support the weight of the
proposed development. They state that it will therefore be necessary to
provide a substantially reinforced margin along the unstable sections.
40.
The consultants state that, further to the south-west, the survey showed
the bank to be more stable and, in this section, it will be possible to
provide a more natural corridor, including much of the existing vegetation.
The consultants state that, in this area, the corridor will actually be wider
than 6m, providing some compensation for the loss of the reinforced
lengths upstream. However, the necessity for this reinforcement has, in
turn, allowed the creation of an embankment feature, providing users of
the canalside with a variety of different views and experiences of the
waterway. They state that, within the reinforced stretches, a variety of
means, such as gabion nets will be used to encourage aquatic and
bankside vegetation below the embankment.
41.
In respect of the ponds, the applicant’s consultants state that these are
surrounded by trees and bushes so have steadily infilled with leaf litter
and soil run-off and are now generally dry for most of the year. They state
that they are also heavily shaded and have no aquatic vegetation and
therefore no longer function as wetland areas. There is therefore no
proposal to retain these areas within the development. The consultants
state that new wetlands, in the form of damp scrapes, will be created
within the proposed Green Loop, close to Red Brook, to mitigate this loss.
42.
The comments of the Environment Agency are awaited on these issues
and this matter will be addressed further in the Additional Information
Report.
ACCESSIBILITY, TRAFFIC GENERATION AND HIGHWAY SAFETY
43.
The application proposes two vehicular accesses into the site from Lock
Lane, one close to the south-western end of the site and one closer to the
centre of the site, opposite Our Lady of Lourdes Primary School. The
central access would carry the majority of traffic generated by the
proposed development as this access is located 800m from the eastern
boundary of the application site and there is no other vehicular access
further to the east. The Design and Access Statement suggests that
access to the western third of the site from the central access road would
be restricted to pedestrians and cyclists only. It is considered that this
would assist in reducing the proportion of traffic using the central access
point to some extent, but it would also lead to longer car journeys for
some residents in this part of the site.
44.
The Design and Access Statement says that pedestrian routes would link
with existing footpaths to the north-east and south-west of the site. A
pedestrian / cycle route would also run through Scroggins Lane to
provide more direct access to the village centre. In addition, in order to
ensure adequate emergency access should the primary roads be blocked
for any reason, the canalside promenade will be designed to allow use by
emergency vehicles.
Traffic Generation
45.
The LHA considers that the analysis of trip generation detailed in the
submitted Transport Assessment appears to be broadly acceptable and it
is envisaged that the generated increase in traffic could be
accommodated on local roads with some improvements to the highway
layout in the vicinity of the site. Nevertheless, the LHA does have some
concerns that the data does not adequately take into account the
potential for growth in traffic generation in future years.
Connectivity
46.
The national government guidance, Manual for Streets, paragraph 4.2.3,
states that “Street networks should, in general, be connected. Connected
or “permeable” networks encourage walking and cycling, and make
places easier to navigate through. They also lead to a more even spread
of motor traffic throughout the area and so avoid the need for distributor
roads with no frontage development.” Paragraph 4.2.5 states that “the
area…needs to be properly connected with adjacent street networks. A
development with poor links to the surrounding area creates an enclave
which encourages movement to and from it by car rather than by other
modes.” Paragraph 4.2.6 states that “Residential areas adjacent to each
other should be well connected.”
47.
The proposed layout does not perform very well against the above
guidance as there are only two vehicular accesses into and out of the
site, both of which exit onto Lock Lane. Furthermore, it is likely that the
easternmost access would carry the vast majority of the traffic, being the
closest to most areas of the development. It is recognised that the long,
narrow shape of the site and the fact that it borders onto the Ship Canal
are major constraints that make it difficult to achieve a high level of
connectivity. It would, nevertheless, have been preferable if a further
vehicular access could have been identified and provided towards the
northern end of the site.
Location of Vehicular Accesses onto Lock Lane
48.
The proposed main vehicular access opposite Our Lady of Lourdes
School is considered to less than ideal. The applicant was therefore
requested to submit an Assessment of Vehicular Access Options. This
states that the position of the central, principal access has been
determined by the position on an existing, private right of way to the
canalside that has been protected. There is also a land drain on this
alignment. The applicant has also stated that a number of options have
been considered in order to provide a secondary or emergency access at
the eastern end of the site. These include: 





The caravan site – this land is not available to the applicant;
Scroggins Lane – This route is too narrow with a severe bend;
River Lane – This option would require further land acquisition
and the land is not available to purchase;
Inglewood Close – This could only be connected by the
purchase of existing dwellings, which are not available for sale;
Thirlmere Road - This is a loop road, which is not suitable to
carry additional traffic. The option could only be achived by the
purchase of existing dwellings, which are not available for sale.
Land east of embankment – There is an arch in the railway
embankment that could be used by vehicles but there is
currently no public highway to connect to on the eastern side
of the railway. Whilst it is understood that development is
proposed on this land, there is no certainty that this will be
provided.
The applicant’s report concludes that the proposed access arrangements
are the only available and deliverable option and that the proposed loop
road and emergency access role of the promenade are an acceptable
solution for the site.
49.
Given the above, the LHA has stated that, subject to the amended plans
showing a mini-roundabout junction and traffic calming at the main
access and subject to the provision of an off-street drop off area and car
park for the school, the proposed access arrangements would be
acceptable.
50.
The applicant has suggested that a parking / drop-off area could be
provided for the school either within the school grounds or, if this is not
practicable, within the development site itself. The applicant has
submitted draft layouts of these two options. Option 1, within the school
grounds, shows the provision of 26 parking spaces to the east of the
existing school buildings and close to the boundary with residential
properties on Lock Lane. Option 2, on the current application site, shows
the provision of 22 spaces, immediately to the west of the central access
into the site. The applicant has also submitted a copy of an e-mail from
the headteacher of the School, which states that his opinion is that the
plans for car parking “will go a long way to alleviate any problems”.
However, the e-mail confirms that the proposals would have to have to go
through further internal consideration procedures before the school would
be in a position to give its formal approval.
51.
It is recognised that either of the two options would require a separate
planning application. Nevertheless, it is considered that, in principle, a
“grampian” style condition could be imposed that requires that no
development shall commence on the application site unless and until
such a facility has been provided. It is considered that this would reduce
the detrimental impact of the development on highway safety, although
the LHA has raised concerns that Option 2, being on the opposite side of
the road, would do little to discourage parents from dropping off on Lock
Lane.
52.
Amended plans have also been submitted showing alterations to the
main vehicular access to form a mini roundabout junction and showing
traffic calming on Lock Lane on either side of the junction. It is considered
that the roundabout layout would be beneficial in that it would afford an
equal priority for those vehicles exiting and entering the development site
and those already on Lock Lane. In addition, it would also discourage
parking around the junction by providing a more constrained road layout
at this point. The LHA has also stated that there is a possibility that traffic
regulation orders could be put in place to set up a 20mph zone around
the junction. In addition, a guard rail would be required at the school
entrance and the laybys to the east of the entrance would need to be
removed to deter parents from dropping off in this location. The
applicant’s consultants also state that the section of highway outside the
school would be constructed as a raised plateau and the carriageway
would be narrowed to reduce traffic speeds and deter on-street parking.
Bollards could also be erected to ensure that vehicles do not encroach
onto the pavement. The consultants also state that the school will be
encouraged to produce a Travel Plan, which would coincide with the
construction of the car park and should also reduce the demand for
parking.
53.
In addition to the issue of the position of the central access, the length of
road being served off this single access point is also an issue. Current
Trafford guidelines state that a secondary access is necessary in
residential developments containing over 300 units and where cul-de-sac
lengths exceed 250m. These proposals are therefore contrary to the
Councils guidelines in this respect. Whilst the proposed emergency
access enables the whole site to be accessed, the LHA has concluded
that this is somewhat convoluted and that accessing properties at the
extreme east of the site could be difficult in an emergency. The LHA has
therefore urged the applicant to pursue a further access point at the
western end of the site.
Amendments to Road Layout at Manchester Road and Manchester New Road
54.
The application proposes to make amendments to the junction of
Manchester New Road/Moss Lane and in effect increase its capacity.
The proposals include revising the layout of the junction to provide a solid
central island and an over-run area to improve deflection and vehicle
paths. The LHA has some concerns about the design and position of
pedestrian crossings around this junction and this is currently the subject
of further discussions. It is also noted that, in order to provide the
proposed highway layout, there would be the loss of some of the existing
green space located between Manchester Road and Manchester New
Road.
Carrington Transport Study and Developer Contributions
55.
The proposed development will result in significant additional traffic on
the A6144 Manchester Road, where it is already recognised that capacity
problems exist in relation to the Carrington Lane / Isherwood Road /
Flixton Road junction. It should be noted that the Carrington Transport
Study is currently underway to identify opportunities to improve access to
the Carrington and Partington areas in the future and that conclusions
from this study could lead to future infrastructure improvements. A
development of this nature and scale would normally be required to
provide a financial contribution towards local highway improvements
under the terms of the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document,
“Developer Contributions towards Highway and Public Transport
Improvements”, and it is likely that such a contribution would be put
towards the improvements identified in the Transport Study. However, in
this case, the applicant has put forward an alternative package of section
106 requirements, which includes the provision of the shopping centre
redevelopment proposed in application H/OUT/68618. In this context, the
applicant considers that, should a highway infrastructure contribution be
sought, this would raise viability concerns about the overall development
package. This issue is discussed further in the section on Section 106
Requirements below.
Pedestrian and Cycle Route
56.
The creation of a third route at the northern end of the site for cyclists and
pedestrians would ameliorate the general lack of connectivity of the site
to some extent. However, this route would need to be very carefully
designed to ensure an adequate level of surveillance and security.
Paragraph 4.2.4 states that “Pedestrians and cyclists should generally be
accommodated on streets rather than routes segregated from motor
traffic. Being seen by drivers, residents and other users affords a greater
sense of security. However, short pedestrian and cycle only links are
generally acceptable if designed well. Regardless of length, all such
routes in built up areas, away from the carriage way, should be barrierfree and overlooked by buildings.”
57.
The section of the proposed pedestrian and cycle route between the
boundary of the development site and the adopted highway at Scroggins
Lane is approximately 150m long and is not within the applicant’s
ownership or control. The applicant states that it has the right to pass and
re-pass along this route and therefore has the right to carry out some
improvement works including the re-surfacing of the footpath and the
cutting back of vegetation. However, it is not clear that it has the right to
carry out more fundamental improvements, including the provision of
street lighting. The footpath runs between high fences at the rear of
existing houses and there is no direct visibility from end to end. GM
Police have stated that movement safety should be maximised,
especially after dark, and that further detail is needed of this specific
footpath link. This route is the key pedestrian and cycle link in and out of
the north-eastern part of the site, providing the most direct route for
between a third and a half of the site (the only other connection being the
link to the existing public footpath at the north-east end of the
development site, adjacent to the viaduct).
58.
It is therefore considered to be of fundamental importance that the route
is upgraded to a satisfactory standard, as it is considered that, without
lighting the path would not be safe for use, and indeed is unlikely to be
used by the majority of the population during the hours of darkness. As
the site is already poorly connected to surrounding areas and the village
centre, it is considered that this would not be an acceptable situation. It is
therefore considered that, if planning permission is granted, a condition
would need to be attached to ensure that no development commences in
this area of the site unless and until the pedestrian and cycle link is
upgraded to an appropriate standard.
RESIDENTIAL AMENITY
Relationships between existing and proposed dwellings
59.
The Design and Access Statement says that “Where the site backs onto
existing properties, new units will be limited to two storeys in height to
preserve privacy in existing gardens / rear elevations”. The detailed
relationship of the proposed dwellings to existing residential properties
would need to be considered at the reserved matters stage.
Nevertheless, it is considered likely that any development immediately
adjacent to existing residential properties is likely to be restricted to a
maximum of two storeys in height.
Noise
60.
The Council’s Environmental Protection Section states that it accepts the
noise levels put forward in the applicant’s acoustic report but has major
concerns about subjective noise incidents and future noise levels. The
applicant’s acoustic report recommends that some houses facing the
Ship Canal would need noise mitigation measures due to potential
industrial and traffic noise from Cadishead. However, the Environmental
Protection Section has raised concerns that sudden impact noise from
the industrial estate could cause noise nuisance and generate complaints
and could possibly exceed World Health Organisation guidance levels
and has also raised concerns about the potential for noise from Ship
Canal traffic should that use expand in the future. The Environmental
Protection Section therefore recommended that, in view of the nature of
the industrial noise (the potential for sudden impact noise - in particular,
in connection with mobile plant), the applicant should reconsider the
proposed mitigation measures with a view to upgrading the protection
offered to future occupiers.
61.
The applicant’s consultants have since submitted a response to these
comments. This states that the site has been classified as falling within
Noise Exposure Categories (NEC) A and B as set out in Planning Policy
Guidance Note 24, Planning and Noise. For (NEC) A, they state that the
guidance says that “noise need not be considered as a determining factor
in granting planning permission”. For (NEC) B, the guidance states that
“Noise should be taken into account when determining planning
applications and, where appropriate, conditions imposed to ensure an
adequate level of protection against noise”. For the proposed dwellings
falling within (NEC) B, the consultants state that the noise in question
relates to the moving of scrap metal and that this use operates during
daytime hours only (8.00am to 5.30pm). Given this situation, the
consultants consider that the noise mitigation measures would provide
“reasonable” internal noise levels on all parts of the site. In addition, the
houses closest to the site frontage would screen those further to the rear
and the existing houses on Lock Lane from the ambient noise levels.
With regards to the potential impact from Ship Canal traffic, the frequency
of large ships passing during the night is currently likely to be one per day
on average. Even if this frequency were to be doubled in the future, the
consultants consider that this would not cause a serious noise impact.
The consultants therefore conclude that further mitigation measures are
not necessary.
FLOOD RISK AND DRAINAGE
62.
The Design and Access Statement says that “The site is not within a
Flood Protection area. The proximity of the Ship Canal means the site
can be drained towards this so the probability of flooding is virtually nil.
Surface water drainage will be discharged into the Ship Canal. This puts
no additional pressure onto existing surface water drains or sewers and is
effectively a Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDS) solution. The
Environment Agency has raised no objections to the development in
principle and states that the submitted Flood Risk Assessment is
acceptable.
SECTION 106 OBLIGATIONS
63.
The proposed development would normally generate a requirement for
on site provision of or off-site financial contributions towards affordable
housing and public open space as well as financial contributions towards
highway infrastructure improvements, public transport improvements and
Red Rose Forest off-site tree planting. However, the applicant has clearly
promoted the scheme on the basis that it would deliver the shopping
centre redevelopment, a regeneration fund targeted at improving the
public realm along the A6144 and the “Green Loop” recreational route,
which are priorities in addressing the regeneration needs of Partington.
The applicant has submitted a confidential financial appraisal of the
development proposals, demonstrating that the provision of the shopping
centre would not be viable if the standard package of Section 106
obligations were required. Instead, an alternative package of Section 106
requirements is proposed, including the provision of the shopping centre
at an early stage in the residential development, the implementation of
the Green Loop proposals referred to above, the implementation of public
realm improvements to Manchester Road and an area of the village
centre and the provision of public transport improvements to at least the
equivalent value of the financial contribution that would normally be
required under the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document,
“Developer Contributions to Highway and Public Transport Schemes”.
64.
The proposed public realm improvements to Manchester Road and the
village centre are set out in a submitted document entitled “Environmental
Improvements and Public Realm Regeneration Fund Proposal”. This
document proposes the creation of a Regeneration Fund, which would be
generated by a tariff levied on each new house constructed on the
application site, which is proposed to be managed jointly by the Council,
the applicant and other appropriate organisations such as the Town
Council. This would help to fund environmental improvements to the
appearance of Manchester Road and a new public realm improvement
area in the village centre. It is suggested that the proposed improvements
generated by the development would equate to approximately £1,000 per
dwelling (generating an overall figure of up to £550,000).
65.
With regards to the affordable housing requirements, it is recognised that
there is a clear need for affordable housing in Partington. However, there
is also an urgent need for a greater quantity of higher quality private
housing in Partington in order to provide a greater mix of tenure across
the whole settlement. In addition, it is recognised that there is a need to
encourage a greater number of higher earning residents into the area in
order to ensure adequate spending power to secure the long term future
of the shopping centre.
66.
It is accepted that there is an argument that the proposals within the
Green Loop document could remove the need for a financial contribution
towards off-site tree planting. With regards to open space provision, it is
suggested that a condition should be attached requiring on-site provision
of at least two play areas, which would at least go some way towards
addressing this issue. With regards to the question of the highway
infrastructure contribution, it must be recognised that the development
would lead to a significant additional impact in terms of traffic flows on
Manchester Road without providing any contribution towards a long-term
transport solution.
67.
Nevertheless, in overall terms, it is considered that there are exceptional
circumstances that justify not requiring the normal package of Section
106 requirements in terms of the need to fund the redevelopment of the
shopping centre. It is accepted that the regeneration needs of Partington
do justify a different approach, which will allow the maximum available
funding to be invested in the shopping centre. It is also considered that
the combined elements of the proposed regeneration package may act
as stimulus for future investment in the area, attract economically active
residents to the area and create uplift in the local economy. It should be
noted that the development and regeneration package would be
beneficial in terms of most of the objectives of Proposal H11 – Priority
Regeneration Area: Partington - of the Revised UDP. The development
would assist in terms of improving the quality of the housing stock,
improving the quality, safety and appearance of the local environment,
improving the quality, safety and appearance of the local shopping centre
and recreational facilities, improving the quality and diversity of
recreational and other facilities available to the community, promoting the
re-use and redevelopment of under used or derelict land and buildings for
residential and community use and promoting improvements to public
transport. It is therefore recommended that the alternative package of
contributions should be accepted. These will need to be secured through
a Section 106 Agreement.
CONCLUSION
68.
In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed development would
support the local regeneration strategy as set out in Proposal H11 Priority Regeneration Area: Partington - and would comply with Policies
L4, MCR1 and MCR3 of the draft revised Regional Spatial Strategy for
the North West (RPG13). It is also considered that the proposal would not
be contrary to Policy H2 of the UDP or advice in PPS3 in relation to the
prioritisation of previously developed land in accessible locations as it is
accepted that, at least within Partington, there are no other previously
developed sites of a similar size in a sustainable location. It is recognised
that the development would be contrary to Policies OSR6 in relation to
loss of Protected Linear Open Land, although this impact would be
mitigated to some extent by the implementation of the proposed
canalside promenade and Green Loop proposals. It is also accepted that
the development would not fully comply with Policy ENV10 in relation to
loss of the Wildlife Corridor and Policies OSR3 and OSR9 in relation to
provision / upgrading of public open space either within the development
or off-site. Whilst the development would also not comply with Policy H8
in respect of provision of affordable housing (either within the
development or off-site) nor with the requirements of the Council’s
Supplementary Planning Document, “Developer Contributions towards
Highway Infrastructure and Public Transport Contributions”, it is
recognised that there are other regeneration priorities within Partington
including the provision of the shopping centre and the provision of a
greater quantity of higher quality private housing, which represent
overriding priorities in this case..
69.
In overall terms, it is considered that the potential regeneration benefits of
the proposal as “enabling development”, which would support the
redevelopment of the shopping centre, are of such paramount importance
to the future of Partington as to represent exceptional circumstances that
would justify the Planning Authority’s support for the proposals as a
Departure from the Development Plan. In particular, the proposals
(including the proposed shopping centre development and Section 106
package) would help to achieve social and economic regeneration of one
of the most deprived areas of the Borough, would help to reverse the
current population decline and introduce a new economically active
population – thereby underpinning local services, would help to diversify
the housing stock of the village as a whole, would provide new shopping
and community facilities and help to stem the current leakage of retail
expenditure outside Partington and would help to improve the overall
image and appearance of the village.
70.
It is therefore recommended that planning permission should be granted,
subject to referral to the Secretary of State and subject to a Section 106
Agreement requiring the development of Phase 1 of the shopping centre
(as shown in application H/OUT/68618) prior to the substantial
completion of more than a specific number of houses (to be agreed prior
to Committee) and requiring the implementation of the proposed package
of Green Loop and Public Realm improvements and of public transport
improvements.
RECOMMENDATION: MINDED TO GRANT, subject to referral to the
Secretary of State and subject to
That the application will propose a satisfactory development for the site upon
completion of an appropriate legal agreement and such legal agreement be entered
into to secure: 



the development and substantial completion of Phase 1 of the
proposed shopping centre development ( as shown on the submitted
layout plan for application H/OUT/68618) prior to the substantial
completion of more than a specific number of houses (to be agreed
prior to Committee) on the development site;
the implementation of the Green Loop improvements listed in the
submitted “Green Loop Proposals” document (including any
amendments subsequently approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority) and in accordance with a detailed specification and
programme / timetable to be submitted to and approved in writing by
the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of
development; future maintenance of the open space network (and/ or
a commuted sum for maintenance) in accordance with details to be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority
prior to the commencement of development;
the payment of a financial contribution of at least £1,000 per
residential unit towards Public Realm improvements within Partington.
The payments are to be phased throughout the development in
proportion to the number of houses constructed and to be paid prior to
the commencement of each phase. The arrangements for the setting
up of a partnership of relevant organisations to administer the fund
and details of the timescales, types of works and the improvement
areas shall be agreed in writing by the LPA prior to the
commencement of development;
the payment of a transport improvements financial contribution to a
value at least equivalent to £321,722.50 prior to the substantial
completion of more than 150 residential units to be used for the
implementation of a public transport improvements scheme / works to
be decided in consultation with the public.
(B) That upon satisfactory completion of the above legal agreement, planning
permission be granted subject to the following conditions: 1. Application for approval of reserved matters must be made no later than the
expiration of (time period to be agreed prior to Committee) beginning with the
date of this permission. The development must be begun no later than two
years from the approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on
different dates, the final approval of the last such matters approved.
2. Submission of reserved matters (layout, scale, external appearance and
landscaping) for each phase of development. The approved landscaping for
each phase of the development shall be implemented within 12 months of the
first occupation of any of the dwellings within that phase of the development.
Any trees or shrubs planted in accordance with this condition that are
removed, uprooted, destroyed, die or become severely damaged or seriously
diseased within 5 years of planting shall be replaced within the next planting
season by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally
planted, unless approved otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
3. Development to be carried out in accordance with amended plans received
on 25th April 2008 in respect of main vehicular access to site. Prior to the
occupation of the first dwelling, the formation of vehicular accesses and all
off-site highway works on Lock Lane and Manchester Road (including traffic
calming, erection of pedestrian barriers, removal of existing layby on Lock
Lane) to be implemented in full accordance with approved plans, unless
agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority
4. The residential development to be limited to a maximum total number of 550
dwellings.
5. All reserved matters shall comply with the Development Principles listed in
the submitted document “Development Principles: Canalside”, unless
otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The reserved
matters shall also comply with the density guidance set out in the Design and
Access Statement (DAS) (date, author etc.), unless otherwise approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. All four storey development shall be
located adjacent to the Manchester Ship Canal, unless agreed otherwise in
writing by the Local Planning Authority.
6. All reserved matters shall be in accordance with the commitment to design
quality set out in the Design and Access Statement (DAS) (date, author etc.),
unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Each
reserved matters application shall include a detailed Design and Access
Statement and a detailed site masterplan for that phase of the development,
demonstrating compliance with the Outline Design and Access Statement
(DAS) (date, author etc.).
7. Each application for reserved matters approval shall be accompanied by a
phasing plan and statement setting out the anticipated timescales for
implementation and how each individual phase of development fits into the
overall development.
8. Full details of the layout, appearance, design and landscaping of the entire
length of the canalside promenade (including the creation of ecological areas
and details of hard landscaping and street furniture including railings, lighting,
seating and paving and surfacing of terraces, footpaths and cycleways and
details of terracing / retaining walls adjacent to canal) shall be submitted in
the first application for Reserved Matters approval. This shall include a
programme for the implementation of the promenade and any arrangements
for a temporary route during the construction period. Prior to the
commencement of each phase of development, full details and an
implementation programme / timetable for the section of promenade fronting
that phase of development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by
the Local Planning Authority. The promenade shall then be implemented in
accordance with the approved details and timetable, unless agreed otherwise
in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or shrubs planted in
accordance with this condition that are removed, uprooted, destroyed, die or
become severely damaged or seriously diseased within 5 years of planting
shall be replaced within the next planting season by trees or shrubs of similar
size and species to those originally planted, unless approved otherwise in
writing by the Local Planning Authority.
9. Prior to the commencement of each phase of development, samples of all
facing materials to be used for the walls, roofs, windows and doors of the
buildings within that phase of development shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be
carried out in full accordance with the approved details, unless agreed
otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
10. All Reserved Matters applications shall be accompanied by plans showing
existing and proposed ground levels and proposed finished floor levels within
the relevant phase of development and the ground levels of land immediately
adjoining that phase of development (both within and external to the
application site). The development shall be implemented in accordance with
the approved levels details unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local
Planning Authority.
11. Prior to the commencement of each phase of development, a scheme for the
management and maintenance in perpetuity of all land falling outside private
residential curtilages and outside the control of the Local Highway Authority in
that phase of development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by
the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented and
maintained thereafter in accordance with these approved details, unless
agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
12. Structural landscaping scheme for estate roads and pedestrian and cycle
routes within or providing access to each phase of development (including a
timetable for implementation) to be submitted prior to the commencement of
that phase of development and implemented in full accordance with the
approved details, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Any trees or shrubs planted in accordance with this condition that
are removed, uprooted, destroyed, die or become severely damaged or
seriously diseased within 5 years of planting shall be replaced within the next
planting season by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those
originally required to be planted, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the
Local Planning Authority.
13. Prior to the commencement of development within each phase of the
development site, a scheme for the disposal of foul and surface waters within
that phase of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall take account of the
potential to use Sustainable Urban Drainage techniques and shall be
constructed and completed during the course of the development in
accordance with the approved details.
14. Submission and implementation of Interim and Final Travel Plans.
15. No clearance of vegetation or works to any trees, vegetation and scrub shall
be carried out during the main bird breeding season (March to September
inclusive) and prior to any site works or vegetation clearance, a range of bird
boxes shall be provided on site, in accordance with details that shall
previously have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority.
16. Reserved matters application to show retention and conservation of ditch with
green buffer zone on north-eastern boundary of site.
17. Prior to commencement of development, a scheme to mitigate the effects of
the development on water voles shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include the retention of the
ditch at the foot of the railway embankment and appropriate treatment of the
area between the ditch and the development in order to safeguard the
ecological interest of the ditch. The development and the approved measures
shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details, unless agreed
otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
18. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme to mitigate the effects
of the development on sand martins (taking into account sand martin ecology)
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Thereafter, the development and the approved works shall be implemented in
accordance with the approved scheme, unless agreed otherwise in writing by
the Local Planning Authority.
19. Prior to the commencement of each phase of development, a scheme for the
provision of bat boxes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development and the approved
works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme, unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
20. Submission and implementation of scheme to protect nearby watercourse
from building materials during construction.
21. Submission and implementation of site investigation report and remediation
statement for contaminated land (in respect of each phase of development).
22. Prior to the commencement of development within each phase of the
development site, details of wheel washing facilities and / or other means of
limiting the deposition of soil and other debris on surrounding roads and / or
details of a method for street cleaning, shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved measures shall be
implemented for the duration of the construction work on that phase of the
development site unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
23. Prior to the commencement of development within each phase of the
development, the mitigation and management proposals required by the
Environmental Statement, in respect of that phase of the development, shall
be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in full accordance with the
approved details, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. These details shall include:  Environmental Management Plan, including Surface Water
Management Plan, Waste Management Plan and Landscape
Masterplan;



Noise Management Plan;
Pollution Control Plan;
Method Statement for the treatment and disposal of Japanese
Knotweed.
24. Prior to the commencement of development within each phase of
development, the following plans and details in respect of that phase of the
development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority:  details of any proposed topping or lopping of any tree within the areas
shown for tree retention on the approved plans;
 details of any proposed alterations to existing ground levels, and of
the position of any proposed excavation within the crown spread of
any tree within the areas shown for tree retention on the approved
plans or of any tree on land adjacent to the site; and
 details of the specification and position of protective fencing (and any
other measures to be taken) for the protection of any tree within the
areas shown for tree retention on the approved plans from damage
before or during the course of development.
Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the
approved details and there shall be no removal of existing trees within the
areas of trees and woodland shown to be retained on the approved plans,
unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
25.Prior to the commencement of each phase of development, a programme of
archaeological work in respect of that phase of the development, shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority,
providing for: the implementation and methodology of an archaeological watching brief
during the removal of topsoil and overburden; and
the procedure for the excavation and recording of features or remains that are
identified during the watching brief.
The approved details shall be implemented in full during the development
process on that phase of the development, unless agreed otherwise in writing
by the Local Planning Authority.
26.Prior to the commencement of each phase of development, details of the
access for construction vehicles in respect of that phase of the development
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Thereafter, the construction works shall be carried out in accordance with the
approved details unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
27. Prior to the first occupation of any dwelling house within each phase of the
development, the approved access from Lock Lane for that phase of the
development (as shown on drawing number xxxx) shall be constructed in full
accordance with the approved plans. The approved vehicular access shall be
retained at all times thereafter unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local
Planning Authority.
28. Prior to the commencement of each phase of the development, a scheme for
the surfacing of defined footpaths and access points within that phase of the
development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. Prior to the first occupation of any dwelling house within
that phase of the development, the scheme shall be implemented in full
accordance with the approved details, unless agreed otherwise in writing by
the Local Planning Authority.
29.Prior to the commencement of each phase of the development, a scheme for
providing pedestrian and cycle connectivity to the wider area in respect of that
phase of development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. Prior to the occupation of any dwelling within each
phase of the development, the approved works in respect of that phase of the
development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details
and retained thereafter.
30.No development shall commence within Phases 2 or 3 of the development
(as defined by the Phasing Plan in the Design and Access Statement), until
details of a scheme to upgrade the footpath between the boundary of the
development site and Scroggins Lane to form a pedestrian and cycle route
have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The scheme shall be implemented and the pedestrian and cycle
route shall be provided in full accordance with the approved details and to the
approved timetable, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The route shall be retained thereafter for pedestrian and cycle use
thereafter, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
31.Prior to the commencement of any development, details of the location and
design of at least two on site children’s play areas shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the LPA. The approved play areas shall be included in
the Reserved Matters application relating to those areas of the development
and shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable that shall have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA prior to the commencement
of development in that phase of the development site.
32.Prior to the commencement of each phase of development, a strategy to
maximise the use of local employment in the implementation of that phase of
development (including a timetable for the proposed measures) shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
approved local employment strategy shall be implemented in accordance with
these details unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
33.No development shall commence on any part of application site, unless and
until a drop off area / off-street parking area has been constructed and made
available for the Our Lady of Lourdes School in full accordance with details
that shall previously have been submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority.
34.The reserved matters application for the relevant phase of development shall
include details of measures to restrict the movement of vehicular traffic
between the western end of the site and the central vehicular access as
shown on the plan on page 28 of the Design and Access Statement. The
measures shall be implemented in full accordance with the approved scheme
prior to the occupation of the first dwelling in that phase of development or to
a timetable that shall previously have been agreed in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The approved measures shall be retained in situ
thereafter, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
SD
#
)
#
No rth b a n k I n d u s tri a l P a rk
No rth b a n k I n d u s tri a l P a rk
)
)
)
)
)
#
)
)
)
))
)
)
#
#
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
r
ste
he
nc
Ma
)
ip
Sh
l
na
Ca
)
)
CADI SHE AD
#
)
)
#
)
#
)
)
)
)
)
))
))
)))
)))
hip
rS
ste
he
nc
Ma
l
na
Ca
)
))
))
))
)
)
hip
rS
ste
he
nc
Ma
)
l
na
Ca
))))
)
Ch e m i c a l W o rk s
)
#
ter
es
nch
Ma
ip
Sh
l
na
Ca
)
#
)
)
Pa rti n g to n
Ch e m i c a l W o rk s
)
))
)
#
)
#
r
ste
he
nc
Ma
ip
Sh
)
l
na
Ca
)
)
)
)
#
)
)
)
)
#
)
)
)
)
)
Se wa g e W o rk s
)
)
)
)
)
Broadoak County
Comprehensive School
)
)
))
)
#
LOCATION PLAN FOR APPLICATION No: - H/OUT/68617
Scale 1:8000 for identification purposes only.
Chief Planning Officer
PO Box 96, Waterside House, Sale Waterside, Tatton Road, Sale M33 7ZF
Top of this page points North
)