APPLICATION No:	08/56076/FUL

APPLICANT:	Whisper Developments

LOCATION:	Employment Services Department Trafford Road Salford M5 3AD   

PROPOSAL:	Erection of two - three/five storey buildings with semi basement car parking comprising 55 apartments together with associated landscaping and construction of new vehicular and pedestrian accesses

WARD:	Ordsall

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

This application relates to the former Job Centre on Trafford Road.  The site covers an area of approximately 0.25hectare and is roughly square in shape.  It is bounded to the north by Crowther Avenue beyond which are terraced dwellings; to the east by an electricity substation and a small vacant site, beyond which are semi-detached dwellings; to the south by Jennings Avenue, beyond which are terraced dwellings and to the west by Trafford Road beyond which is an industrial estate, set back from the Trafford Road frontage and the five storey former Central Mission Hall.  The existing building is two stories with a pitched roof and sits at on the back of pavement.  As well as the former job centre the site includes grassed open space to the front of the building at the junction of Crowther Avenue and Trafford Road that is owned by the City Council.  The site lies just outside of the MX1 policy area.

Vehicular access to the site is from Crowther Avenue and the site is generally level.

The scale of buildings around the site varies from the single storey industrial units set at a lower level beyond Trafford Road to the two storey residential dwellings directly adjacent to the site to the larger former Central Mission Hall opposite.  Outline planning permission has been granted on the site of the industrial estate and the Central Mission Hall for a new secondary school.  The permission includes the retention of the Central Mission Hall which although not a listed building is Grade B on the local list of buildings of architectural interest. 

There is no dominant style of building in the vicinity of the site but there are few buildings that address Trafford Road in an appropriate manner with neighbouring dwellings having rear gardens and 1.8m high fences on the road frontage.

The site contains a number of small trees both along the Crowther Avenue frontage and within the open space to the front of the existing building at the junction of Trafford Road and Crowther Avenue.

The site lies within a five minute walk of the Metrolink and of facilities along Trafford Road. 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

It is proposed to demolish the existing building and erect a part three/part five storey building on the site providing a total of 55 apartments on the site.  Vehicular access to a half-basement car park is from Crowther Avenue.

The mix of apartments is as follows:-
	5 one-bed apartments 
  43 two-bed apartments
	7 three-bed apartments
All of the two and three bed apartments have a floor area well in excess of 57sq.m.

The proposed building would be on a similar footprint to the existing building.  At Jennings Avenue it would be on the same footprint and in line with the neighbouring electricity sub station and dwellings.  On Trafford Road the building line would be pulled in from the highway to allow a greater width of pavement to be provided and ease the existing pinch point on the pavement where the existing building is at its closest to the highway.  On the Crowther Avenue frontage the building would be set back ??m from the carriageway in line with neighbouring houses on this road frontage

All trees within the site would be removed and replaced with a line of eleven trees on the Crowther Avenue frontage the proposed building would have frontages to all three surrounding roads; Crowther Avenue, Trafford Road and Jennings Avenue and would have a central courtyard which would be accessed principally from the Crowther Road frontage.  Pedestrian access would also be provided on the Trafford Road frontage close to the junction with Jennings Avenue.  The proposed building would be principally three storeys in height with the only element rising to four and five storeys being that part on the Trafford Road frontage close to the Crowther Avenue junction.

Where the building turns the corner between Trafford Road and Jennings Avenue there would be no apartments, instead a single new tree would be planted in a courtyard within the building.

There would be a distance of 17m to the rear gardens of houses on Grain View which is opposite the site on Crowther Avenue and 15m from the closest house on Summerseat Close.

The design of the building is contemporary and the proposed materials would be render and timber with zinc cladding. 

Parking would be provided in a half basement and spaces would be provided for 55 cars, including five disabled spaces, for 2 motorbikes and for 55 bicycles.

The application has been amended significantly since it was first submitted.  These amendments have been driven by officer concerns by concerns of the local community and concerns of the Central Salford URC.  These amendments have resulted in a number of improvements to the scheme; 
•	the public realm has been reduced in size making is more manageable and less attractive as a casual gathering point;
•	the layout of the apartments has been adjusted so that there are no longer any apartments that have principal windows facing Trafford Road;
•	the overall design has been improved; 
•	apartment sizes have been increased; and
•	pedestrian access has been improved.

SITE HISTORY

There is no planning history that is relevant to the application.
 
PUBLICITY

The application has been advertised by means of both site and press notices.

The following neighbour addresses have been notified of both the submitted and amended plans:

		Units on Broadway Industrial Estate, King William Street
		1 to 10 and 34 to 44 (incl) Summerseat Close
		2 to 12 Jennings Avenue
		1 to 7 (incl) Grain View
		1 to 21 and 2 to 10 Crowther Avenue
		2 to 8 Brandsby Gardens
		4 to 8 Trafford Road
		7 Broadway

REPRESENTATIONS

A  total of 7 letters have been received in response to the planning application publicity on both the submitted and amended schemes.   5 object to the application with 2 in support.  The following issues have been raised:-

•	The proposed development is not required or essential in this location – Salford already exceeds its target of new dwellings per annum.
•	The proposed development works against creating a stable, sustainable community by creating an insular, gated, ghettoised community.
•	The proposed layout of the public realm is careless and provides greater opportunity for crime and perceived anti-social behaviour than exists at present. (These comments relate to the submitted plans and the amendments address this point)
•	There are too many apartments in the area
•	Nice to see something happening with the site.  It is an eyesore at the moment and a magnet for youths causing trouble.
•	The proposed development will be good for neighbours. 
•	Increase in traffic and parking. 
•	Dust, noise and disturbance during demolition and construction.
•	The proposed development is too tall and too dense and fails to compliment buildings surrounding it.  It would be out of character with the surrounding area.
•	Loss of privacy and overlooking.
•	The proposed development fails to improve the environment of the locale: it is not a landmark building on a site that is not a landmark site.
•	The proposed development, if granted, will require the demolition of a high quality period building – both aesthetically and structurally – which is one of the last remaining Trafford Road landmark buildings.  Other employment service buildings in Ashton, Bury and Burnley have been successfully converted into alternative uses.  The building is distinctive and still has a lot to offer.
•	The materials proposed do not respect the surrounding vernacular architecture.
•	The proposed building would cause problems with regard to tv reception.
•	Insufficient car parking.
•	Having seen the revised plans still have no objection.  Salford Council should move quickly to approve this application so that the applicant can regenerate a very run down and vandalised corner of Ordsall before the market downturn forces them to delay or abandon redevelopment.
CONSULTATIONS

Urban Vision Environment – The site is subject to high noise levels and poor air quality.  A noise assessment has been submitted in support of the proposal that indicates that satisfactory internal noise levels within the standards of BS8233:1999 can be achieved through the use of mitigation measures.  A condition is also required regarding contaminated land.

United Utilities – No objections providing the site is drained on a separate system.  Advice is also provided. 

Ordsall Community Forum – has raised the issue of tv reception.

Central Salford Urban Regeneration Company - We note that this scheme has been revised following discussions with the architect team.  In our response to the initial application (letter dated 19 March 2008) the URC lodged a formal objection to this application, with our concerns relating principally to issues of amenity and design. We consider that the revisions made to the scheme have now fully addressed our concerns and on this basis we wish to express support for this application.

The site’s location on Trafford Road affords it a prominent position on this major gateway route within Central Salford. The site lies immediately to the east of Trafford Road within the Ordsall neighbourhood, and directly faces the location of the proposed Oasis Academy. The Ordsall neighbourhood area is identified as a priority within the URC’s Business Plan 2008/09, which identifies that new family housing choices will be supported by strategic investments in community services and infrastructure in line with the approved Ordsall Development Framework.
 
We support the principle of redevelopment of this site, given that the building is vacant and its existing format is unlikely to be attractive to the commercial market. In terms of the redevelopment of the site for non-employment purposes, we note that the site by nature of its small scale does not constitute an established employment area under the terms of Policy E5 of the UDP. In terms of the housing mix, we note that the City Council’s adopted Housing Planning Guidance could provide the policy basis for requiring development on this site to deliver a broader mix of dwelling types, given that it lies outside of the Regional Centre. Whilst we actively support the principle of delivering new family accommodation within the Ordsall neighbourhood, we do however recognise that the specific constraints of this site mean that its redevelopment for apartment units is likely to represent the most appropriate solution in this case. The constrained position of the site fronting Trafford Road, together with its location adjacent to a large electricity substation would undermine the ability of the site to accommodate family housing that was both viable and did not compromise residential amenity. Furthermore, we recognise that the site benefits from relatively strong accessibility in terms of public transport via bus routes and Metrolink, and that Trafford Road forms the boundary of the Regional Centre at this location thereby this application site could be considered within its immediate proximity. We are therefore satisfied that the redevelopment of this site for a residential apartment scheme would be appropriate in principle.

Our concerns with the initial submitted scheme were essentially twofold relating to issues of amenity and design. In relation to amenity, we had significant concerns that the alignment of the development at the pavement to Trafford Road would undermine the residential amenity of the units fronting Trafford Road to such an extent that it could compromise the future success of the entire development. Corroborating this, we noted within the accompanying Environmental Noise Assessment that the facades to Trafford Road would experience noise levels within Noise Exposure Category D for in excess of 72dB daytime noise level and in excess of 66dB at night, for which levels of noise disturbance national planning guidance in terms of PPG24 states that applications for residential development should normally be refused. Given that the scheme proposed a significant number of units which would have a single aspect to Trafford Road, we considered this unacceptable in terms of compromising residential amenity of future occupiers. In responding to these concerns, the design team have substantially redesigned the scheme so that there are now no single aspect units fronting Trafford Road. The revised scheme is designed around a central private courtyard space, with the block fronting Trafford Road now serving as a buffer to traffic related noise disturbance. Whilst the development is still aligned to pavement at Trafford Road, within the block fronting Trafford Road all units are now oriented to look into the internal courtyard space with the Trafford Road elevation representing the access and circulation space for the residential units. There are therefore no units with single aspect to Trafford Road, and we consider this redesign of the scheme represents a significant enhancement that fully addresses our previous concerns.

In relation to issues of design, we considered that this prominent site demanded a higher standard of design treatment than the initial scheme proposed. We commented that the proposal needed to better respond to its situation through creating prominence at its north western and south western corners through massing and design, as these would present the primary elevations as viewed from vehicular and pedestrian movement along Trafford Road. As part of this, we note that the scheme now incorporates the area of under-utilised space to the north west of the site. By incorporating this space into the development, the scheme now more effectively defines its north western corner and creates a greater sense of prominence of this key elevation. The design revisions have also introduced a tree court feature to the south western corner of the scheme, which creates a positive feature for this elevation which adds distinctiveness and visual interest. In addition, the design team have introduced detailed revisions to the elevational treatment which we consider represents an improvement to the initial scheme in terms of use of materials and detailing. 
 
In summary, we strongly welcome the significant revisions that the design team have made to this scheme. We consider that these fully address our initial concerns, and represent a significant enhancement to the scheme in both amenity and design terms. We therefore wish to express full support for this scheme which will involve the positive redevelopment of a vacant building, and its replacement with a well designed scheme that effectively responds to its setting on this prominent site within Central Salford.

Environment Agency – No objection in principle providing that a condition is attached regarding contamination.

Greater Manchester Architectural Liaison Unit – No comments providing that the points raised in the Crime Impact Statement are implemented.

PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK
 
DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY

REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY

DP1 Economy in the Use of Land and Buildings
DP3 Quality in New Development 

UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY

Site Specific: none
Other policies: 
ST1 Sustainable Urban Relationships
ST11 Location of New Development
DES1 Respecting Context
		DES2 Circulation and Movement
DES3 Design of Public Space
DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES9 Landscaping 
DES10 Design and Crime
H1 Provision of New Housing Development
H4 Affordable Housing 
H8 Open Space Provision Associated with New Housing Development 
A2 Cyclists Pedestrians and the Disabled
A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
EN16 Contaminated Land
EN17 Pollution Control
EN22 Resource Conservation 

DRAFT REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY

DP1 Regional Development Principles
RDF1 Main Development Locations
L4 Regional Housing Provision
MCR2	Regional Centre and Inner Areas of Manchester City Region

OTHER MATERIAL POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

There are a number of Supplementary Planning Documents and Planning Guidance that are also relevant to the development of the site.  These include Design and Crime SPD, Housing Planning Guidance, Planning Obligations SPD, Design SPD and Design and Sustainable Construction SPD all of which have been subject to public consultation.  The Planning Guidance is non-statutory and therefore is not included within the Council’s Local Development Framework, although it is set within the context of the UDP and emerging LDF.  It does set out guidelines that have been adopted by the City Council and to which regard should be had in the determination of planning applications.  National Planning Guidance in the form of PPG and PPS is also relevant.

PLANNING APPRAISAL

The main planning issues relating to this application are whether the principle of the development is acceptable, whether the amount of development is appropriate, whether the scale, massing, design and appearance of the buildings is of sufficiently high quality in this prominent location, whether there is significant detrimental impact on neighbours and whether there is sufficient parking and open space provision.

Principle of the Development and Housing Mix
Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing, states that local planning authorities should ‘ensure that the proposed mix of housing on large strategic sites reflects the proportions of households that require market or affordable housing and achieve a mix of households as well as a mix of tenure and price’.  It also identifies one of the key characteristics of a mixed community as a variety of housing allowing for a mix of different households such as families with children, single person households and older people.

Policy DP3 of the adopted Regional Spatial Strategy encourages the ‘provision of an appropriate range of sizes and types of housing to meet the needs of all members of society’.

Policy H1 of the adopted UDP requires all new housing to ‘contribute towards the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area in terms of size, type, tenure and affordability’.  With regard to assessing whether a mix of dwellings on a site is appropriate the policy sets out a number of criteria including the size of the site, its physical characteristics, the mix of dwellings in the surrounding area, any special character of the area, accessibility of the site, any specific need for the accommodation identified and any other relevant housing, planning or regeneration strategies approved by the City Council.

Policy ST11 seeks to ensure that new development is located on the most sustainable sites within the City and that less sustainable sites are only brought forward when necessary.  The policy is based on the sequential approaches to development that are set out in national policy guidance and policy DP1 of Regional Planning Guidance for the North-West.

Housing Planning Guidance, adopted by the City Council in December 2006 does not form part of the statutory development plan but it is considered that it should be given substantial weight as it has been subject to a lengthy consultation process.

Policy HOU1 of the Housing Planning Guidance states that within this part of the city new developments should provide a broad mix of dwelling types.  Apartments should only be the predominant form of provision on sites in the most accessible locations.
 
Policy HOU2 states that where apartments are proposed, they should provide a broad mix of dwelling sizes, both in terms of the number of bedrooms and the net residential floorspace of the apartments.  One bedroom apartments should not predominate and a significant proportion of three bedroom apartments should be provided wherever practicable.  The Guidance goes on to state that the majority of new apartments should normally have two or three bedrooms with a floorspace of 57 square metres or above.

The site is previously developed land in an accessible location close to a range of local facilities.  The current use of the site is as offices but on this side of Trafford Road this site is surrounded by residential property.  It should not be forgotten though that residential development of the site would remove any prospect of the site being used more intensively for its existing industrial use.  The principle of the residential redevelopment of the site is therefore acceptable and in accordance with national government guidance regarding the best use of land. 

Although the application proposes apartments on this site that might have been contrary to policy HOU1 of the Housing Planning Guidance it is considered that the site’s relative proximity to the Metrolink makes this site particularly accessible.  It is then important to take account of policy H1 of the UDP which requires all new housing to contribute towards the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area in terms of size, type, tenure and affordability.  The policy allows factors such as the physical characteristics of the site and the mix of dwellings in the surrounding area to be taken into account.  The physical characteristics of the site as such that the site is a prominent one that is surrounded on three sides by roads, one of which is a main route in and out of Salford.  It is not considered appropriate to repeat previous mistakes that have resulted in dwellings turning their back on the Trafford Road frontage and parts of the road being fronted with rear garden fences.  It is considered that the prominent and distinctive building on the site deserves to be replaced with one that is of equal prominence, particularly given prominent former Central Mission Hall on the opposite side of Trafford Road.  While there are large numbers of new apartments within Salford Quays the immediate surrounding area is characterised by semi-detached and terraced housing.  It is considered therefore that given the above three reasons, and the good accessibility of the site, it is appropriate to provide a 100% apartment development on this site.  

In this instance almost all of the apartments are over 57sq.m in size, exceeding the requirements of policy HOU2 of Housing Planning Guidance.  In terms of comparison between this scheme and other apartment schemes that have been considered by the Panel this scheme provides a high level of larger apartments.

The Quantum / Density of Development
As apartments are proposed on the site the density of development is higher than that of the immediate surrounding area.  It has been argued above that an apartment scheme is appropriate on the site and the site’s proximity to excellent public transport links and to other local facilities adds weight to the argument that a higher density of development is, in this particular instance acceptable and appropriate.

Layout, Design, Scale and Massing
Policy DES1 states that developments will be required to respond to their physical context, respect the positive character of the local area and contribute towards local identity and distinctiveness via a number of factors that include the scale and size of the building, its contribution in the street scene and the quality of the proposed materials.

DES2 states that the design and layout of new development will be required to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists through and around the site safely, be well related to public transport and local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

Policy DES3 states that where development includes the provision of, or works to, public space, that public space must be designed to:
i) Have a clear role and purpose, responding to established or proposed local economic, social, cultural and environmental needs;
ii) Reflect and enhance the character and identity of the area;
iii) Form an integral part of, and provide an appropriate setting for, surrounding developments;
iv) Be attractive, safe, uncluttered and appropriately lit;
v) Be of an appropriate scale;
vi) Connect to established pedestrian routes and other public spaces; and
vii) Minimise, and make provision for, maintenance requirements.

DES4 states that developments that adjoin a public space shall be designed to have a strong and positive relationship with that space by creating clearly defining public and private spaces, promoting natural surveillance and reduce the visual impact of car parking.

The firm of architects that have been responsible for the scheme have previously been responsible for the first building to win the Stirling Prize for Architecture with a building at Salford University.  Here they have sought to achieve a high quality of design that does not seek to mimic its surrounding but seeks to respect the qualities of the area and replace a locally distinctive building that has come to the end of its usefulness with a building that will be of equal and higher merit.

With regard to the layout of the development the building follows the footprint of the existing building on the site.  It is appropriate that it is built up to the back of pavement while at the same time respecting the building line of adjacent dwellings.  In addition the building has been set in by approximately 0.5m to allow for an increase in the width of the pavement on Trafford Road. 

With regard to the scale and massing of the development the majority of the building is three storey but with a small element rising to five storeys at the most prominent corner of the site.  It is considered that three storeys would be appropriate to the scale of surrounding development and that an increase in height is also appropriate on the most prominent corner of the site, particularly where this would relate to the height of former Central Mission Hall on the opposite side of Trafford Road. 

With regard to the design of the building this is unashamedly contemporary.  It is considered that the physical constraints of the site have meant that it has been important to achieve development that provides frontages to all three adjacent streets.  It is also considered desirable to replace a locally distinctive building with one that is at least of equal design merit.  In these circumstances an apartment building of contemporary, high quality design, as is now proposed following the amendments to the submitted scheme, is the most appropriate form of development on the site.

It is considered that the layout, design, scale and massing of the scheme is acceptable and appropriate and that the development accords with the design policies of the UDP.  I do not share the view that the layout, design, scale or massing of the buildings is unacceptable.

Effects of the development on neighbours 
Policy DES7 requires all new developments to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity. Development which would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users of other developments will not normally be permitted.

Objections have been received from neighbouring residents regarding the impact of the proposed development on their amenity, and in particular that there would be overlooking and loss of privacy.  At the nearest point, the direct habitable room window to habitable room window distance is at least 24m.  The minimum distance to neighbouring private rear gardens is at least 17m and the closest house is 15m away although it is the gable of this closest dwelling that faces the proposed development. from the closest neighbouring dwelling.
  
On balance, it is not considered that there will be any significant loss of privacy, or significant overlooking suffered by residents surrounding the site.  The height of the buildings are such that they would not be overdominant when viewed from any neighbouring property given the distances and circumstances described above.   Therefore, on balance, there are no objections to the application in respect of residential amenity.

Highways, Parking and Public Transport 
Policy A10, in line with Government guidance, seeks maximum parking standards for all developments. Within the emerging planning framework and in line with central government advice there is no policy requirement for a minimum level of parking.

The parking levels are in accordance with policy in this highly accessible location close to the metrolink and it is considered that the parking levels proposed are acceptable and a greater level of provision over 100% would be contrary to both good practice and government advice. In terms of highway safety there are no objections to the submitted scheme.

Loss of Trees
The site contains ?? comparatively small trees principally grouped around the open space at the junction of Crowther Avenue and Trafford Road.  These would be replaced with a line of trees on the Crowther Road frontage.  These will be an improvement to both the street scene and the contribution that trees make on the site.

Sustainable Construction 
Policy EN22 of the deposit draft UDP explains planning permission will not be granted if the development will have an unacceptable impact on the conservation of non-renewable resources. 

The applicant has reviewed the new Sustainable Design and Construction SPD, which aims to ensure that all new major development consider the need to adapt to Climate Change and address the Governments new initiatives, such as the Code for Sustainable Homes. The Code awards certificates for different levels of compliance and will soon be mandatory (through the Building Regulations) so as to ensure that by 2016 all new homes are carbon neutral. The applicant has demonstrated all of the criteria relating to the Code have been considered and will be met through a number of measures that include the following:
•	the development will be designed to meet current requirements under Part L of the Building Regulations as a minimum;
•	each apartment will be individually metered for electricity and water consumption;
•	lighting systems will have fittings that can only hold low energy fluorescent bulbs;
•	all white goods supplied by the developer will be A-rated or better under the EU labelling scheme;
•	higher than standard provision has been made for secure cycle storage to encourage use;
•	the development has been designed to optimise penetration of daylight and natural ventilation;

Affordable Housing
Policy H4 requires that in areas where there is a demonstrable lack of affordable housing to meet local needs, developers will be required, by negotiation with the Council, to provide affordable housing of appropriate types.

Policy HOU3 of the Councils Housing Planning Guidance requires that on all residential sites over 1 hectare, irrespective of the number of dwellings, or in housing developments of 25 or more dwellings, 20% of the dwellings should be in the form of affordable dwellings.

As stated above the applicant has agreed to meet the requirements of policies H4 and HOU3.

Open Space Provision
The development provides private amenity space within the courtyard.  In accordance with policy H8 of the UDP, the Supplementary Planning Document on Housing and the Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document open space and children’s play space can be accommodated off site through a financial contribution and the applicant has agreed to meet the requirements of this policy. 

Type of contribution	Financial Contribution	Cost	
Open space provision	£598 per bedspace (3 bed apartments)

£658 per bedspace (apartments with 2 bedrooms or less)	£598 x 28 =
£16,744

£658 x 139 =
£91,462	
Public realm, Infrastructure and heritage	£1500 per dwelling	£1500 x 55 =
£82,500	
Construction training	£150 per dwelling	£150 x 55 =
£8,250
	
Climate change	£200 per dwelling	£200 x 55 =
£11,000	
Sub total	£209,956	
Plus 2.5% administration fee	£5,249	
Total	£215,205	

The applicant has confirmed that the above figures are acceptable.

Crime
Policy DES10 states that developments must be designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour, the fear of crime which supports personal and property security.

The police architectural liaison unit has no objections to the proposed development 

Objections Raised by Neighbours

i) Development is too tall, too dense and not in character.
The reasons why the proposed development is not considered either too tall or too dense are outlined above.  It is accepted that the proposed building would not share the same character as the neighbouring dwellings but there is no single defining characteristic of buildings on Trafford Road and there are good reasons why it is appropriate so replace the existing distinctive building with one that is equally distinctive.

ii) This development is not required and Salford has already exceeded its target of new dwellings per annum

iii) The development creates an insular, gated, ghettoised community.
That the development is grouped around a central courtyard is a product of the physical characteristics of the site which have appropriately meant that the scheme addresses its three street frontages.  That there is a main access to the development which is secure pays appropriate regard to security and the Design and Crime SPD.  It is not considered that the proposed development can fairly or objectively be described as insular, gated or ghettoised. 

iv) The layout of the public realm is careless and provides greater opportunity for crime and anti-social behaviour. 
These comments were agreed with and the amended plans have addressed this point by bringing the incidental open space in front of the existing job centre within the developable area of this proposed development.  This has now resulted in the creation of a wide pavement setting to the Crowther Road frontage which would be planted with 11 trees that would enhance the public realm on the street frontage.

v) Too many apartments in the area
The good reasons why it is considered that apartments are appropriate on this site have been described above.

vii) Increase in traffic and parking / insufficient parking
Parking is provided at 100% and in addition 100% secure cycle storage has been provided.  The development also lies within close walking distance of the metrolink and therefore it is not expected that there would be any significant detrimental effect on traffic and parking in the local area.  It would be inappropriate to provide additional parking given the location and government policy.

viii) Dust, noise and disturbance during demolition and construction.
While there may be some temporary problems during demolition and construction these will not be significant and are controlled to a significant extent by condition.

ix)  Loss of privacy and overlooking.
Given the distances involved, as described above, it is not considered that there would be any significant detrimental overlooking or loss of privacy.

x)	The proposed development does not improve the local environment: it is not a landmark building or a landmark site.
The existing building is becoming increasingly derelict and, as another local resident has stated, is a target for vandalism.  The existing building does not appear on the local list of buildings of merit but it is considered that both the building and the site have distinction that should be marked in an appropriate manner.  It is considered that the proposed development would improve the local environment.

xi)  Loss of existing high quality building.
As stated above the building is not on the local list of buildings of merit and there are other buildings on Trafford Road such as the Dock Office and the former Central Mission Hall that are either listed buildings or are on the local list.  The building has been vacant for some time and the Employment Service has failed to find any purchasers who have wanted to retain and use the existing building.  While it is accepted that former job centres in other locations have been successfully used for alternative uses the particular circumstances of these other examples may be very different to the situation with this particular building.

xii) The proposed materials do not respect the surrounding vernacular architecture. 
It is not considered that Trafford Road has any particular predominant building material.  It is accepted that the materials used on the closest buildings are brick but I do not consider that the use of different materials is unacceptable.  There is concern that render is not a particularly suitable material for a main traffic route but the architects for the scheme are confident that the high quality through render that is proposed and the correct detailing will ensure that the true colour of the render is retained.  

xiii)  Problems with tv reception
A condition has been attached to ensure that loss of tv reception is not a problem for neighbours

VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT	

In accordance with policy DEV5 of the Adopted UDP and the adopted SPD for Planning Obligations the applicant has agreed to enter into an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to contribute the sum of £215,205.  This would contribute towards public open space in the vicinity of the site; improvements to the city’s public realm, heritage and infrastructure; the training of local residents in construction skills; and the offsetting of greenhouse gas emissions.  A condition requiring such a contribution has been attached.  Additionally affordable housing is being provided in accordance with policy H4 of the UDP and HOU3 of Housing Planning Guidance.  Improvements have been achieved during pre-application discussions and during the application process. 

CONCLUSION

The amended design is of the necessary high quality required and is considered to be more than satisfactory. It is considered that the application would not have any significant detrimental effect upon the amenity of neighbouring residents or on the surrounding area in general. Furthermore the layout, scale, massing and design of the development proposed are appropriate and acceptable on this site.  The development of this existing vacant and increasingly run down building will ensure the enhancement of the character and appearance of the adjacent area and of the wider surrounding area in. The level of on site parking is acceptable and the application complies with policies of the development plan as a whole. 

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Subject to the following Conditions and that the Strategic Director of Customer and Support Services be given authority to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the provision of improved local open space/play equipment, improvement to public open space, infrastructure, heritage, construction training and sustainability.

Conditions

1.	The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.

2.	 The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme, which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before development is started.  Such scheme shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary and surface treatment and shall be carried out within 12 months of the commencement of development.  Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be with the same species within twelve months.

3.	Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples and details of the materials for the external elevations of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

4.	 Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a travel plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such a plan shall provide details of the objectives, targets and measures to promote and facilitate public transport use, walking, cycling and practices/facilities to reduce the need to travel and to reduce car use. It shall also provide details of its management, monitoring and review mechanisms, travel plan coordination, and the provision of travel information and marketing. The initiatives contained within the approved plan shall be implemented and shall be in place prior to the first occupation of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5.	Prior to the commencement of the development, a Preliminary Risk Assessment report, including a conceptual model and a site walk over, to assess the potential risk of land contamination, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  Should a potential risk be identified then: 
	I.	A Site Investigation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of land contamination on site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors focusing primarily on risks to human health and the wider environment; and  
	
	II.	The details of any proposed Remedial Works shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  Such Remedial Works shall be incorporated into the development during the course of construction and completed prior to occupation of the development; and
	
	III.	A Verification Report shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.  The Verification Report shall validate that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the LPA.

6.	No part of the development shall be first occupied unless and until its associated car, cycle and motorcycle parking provision has been completed and made available for use. Such provision shall be retained and kept available for use thereafter. 

7.	No development shall be commenced unless and until a lighting scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented and thereafter retained prior to the first occupation of the development.

(Reasons)

1.	 Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.	To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 

3.	 To ensure the development fits in with the existing buildings in the vicinity in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

4.	 To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

5.	In the interests of public safety in accordance with policy EN16 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 

6.	To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 

7.	To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 

Note(s) for Applicant

1.	If, during any works on site, contamination is suspected or found, or contamination is caused, the LPA shall be notified immediately.  Where required, a suitable risk assessment shall be carried out and/or any remedial action shall be carried out in accordance to an agreed process and within agreed timescales in agreement with the LPA.

APPLICATION No:	08/56334/OUT

APPLICANT:	Harrow Estates

LOCATION:	Former Clariant Works Hayes Road Cadishead M44 5BU   

PROPOSAL:	Outline planning application for the erection of 42 apartments and resiting of 8 dwelling houses approved under application 05/51272/OUT)

WARD:	Cadishead

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND THE SURROUNDING AREA

The site is 0.60 hectares, of vacant land, which formed part of the former Clariant site. The application site is bounded by this larger vacant site, which has outline planning permission for 350 dwellings (ref. 05/51272/OUT), to the west and east and by Hayes Road to the southwest. Cadishead Way (A57) and Manchester Ship Canal lie to the southeast of the application site. The site and surrounding area are generally flat, however, the former railway is elevated above the adjoining vacant site, some 180m away.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL

The applicant seeks outline approval for the erection of 42 apartments and eight dwelling houses, which were included in the site that has planning permission (ref. 05/51272/OUT). Approval is being sought for access and layout as part of this application. Appearance, landscaping and scale are reserved for future consideration.

It is proposed that three apartment buildings front onto the Cadishead Way (A57) and Manchester Ship Canal and the fourth apartment block fronts onto the curve of the junction with Hayes Road. They are all two-bedroom apartments. The dwellings are all detached dwellings and a mix of three and four bedroom properties.

Access to this part of the site is via two cul-de-sacs, which were approved under the extant outline application in 2005. However, the more westerly cul-de-sac has been extended into this newly acquired site.

The application has been submitted with a planning statement, a design and access statement, a transport assessment and a noise assessment. The planning statement provides details of the planning policy, and the rationale behind the site layout. 

The transport assessment considers the traffic impact of the additional units on the local highway network. It also looks at the public transport networks and concludes that the additional 42 units along with the outline scheme approved do not have an adverse impact on the local highway network. 

The noise assessment details the noise levels measured from various locations within the site. A 2.0 metre high acoustic fence has already been erected around the frontage of the site, and the noise readings have taken this into consideration. The accompanying noise report recommends that acoustic glazing be provided above the ground floor. 

The site remediation has been carried out over several years, and is near completion. There is still some monitoring required, which was part of the planning permission for site remediation to facilitate residential development ref. 04/49520/FUL, which was approved in April 2005. This site is included in the remediation scheme.

SITE HISTORY

There are a number of extant permissions relating to this site:

03/46638/OUT- Outline planning permission (with all matters reserved) for residential development consisting of 288 residential units-APPROVED

04/48340/FUL- Planning permission was granted to extend the time limit for application ref. 03/46638/OUT-APPROVED

04/49520/FUL- Proposal for the site remediation to facilitate the residential development-APPROVED

PUBLICITY

A press notice was displayed on 1 May 2008.

REPRESENTATIONS

The following neighbour addresses were notified:

1 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
2 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
3 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
4 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
5 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
6 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
7 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
8 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
8A Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
9 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
10 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
11 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
13 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
15 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
17 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
19 Green Lane, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XF
3 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
4 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
5 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
6 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
8 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
7A Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
10 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
11 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
12 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
13 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
15 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
17 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
19 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
21 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
23 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
25 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
26A Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
27 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
28 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
29 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
30 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
31 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
32 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
33 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
34 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
35 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
35A Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
36 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
37 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
38 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
39 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
40 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
42 Hayes Road, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5BU
1 Harriet Street, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XG
2 Harriet Street, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XG
3 Harriet Street, Cadishead, Manchester, M44 5XG

No neighbour responses have been received.

CONSULTATIONS

The following were consulted:

UV Environment- Have no objections to the application but have requested conditions relating to details of ventilation prior to installation, details of glazing prior to occupation, retention of the acoustic barrier, and the extension of the acoustic barrier (along Hayes Road) prior to occupation.

It is also suggested that conditions are attached to this scheme to ensure that any previous remediation carried out is not compromised by this development.

GMPTE- have acknowledged that the development is within walking distance of a number of bus stops and have suggested ways that the applicant can make residents more aware of the public transport services. 

Environment Agency- no objections to the scheme, but have suggested a condition relating to site investigations and an informative.

GMP Architectural Liaison Officer-no comments received.

Manchester Ship Canal Company- no comments received.

United Utilities- no objections to the scheme, but have suggested an informative be added for the applicants information.
 
The Open Spaces Society- no comments received.

The Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association- no comments received.

Ramblers Association Manchester Area- has no objections to this application.

Peak and Northern Footpaths Society-no comments received.

PLANNING POLICY

National Planning Policy

The national planning policy of relevance is: 

-PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development
-PPS1 Supplement; Planning & Climate Change
-PPS3 Housing
-PPG13 Transport
-PPG24 Planning & Noise

Regional Spatial Strategy

DP3-Quality in New Developments.

Unitary Development Plan Policy

Site Allocation: 

The application site is located within a built up area, however, it is not specifically allocated for a particular use and therefore the general policies apply, as shown below.

Other Policies:

The main policies for consideration are:

-DES1 Respecting Context
-DES2 Circulation and Movement
-DES7 Amenity of Users and Neighbours
-DES9 Landscaping
-DES10 Design and Crime
-H1 Provision of New Housing Development
-H8 Open Space Provision Associated With New Housing Development 
-A2 Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled.
-A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
-EN16 Contaminated Land
-EN17 Pollution Control

Other Material Considerations

Housing Planning Guidance.
Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document.
Sustainable Design and Construction Supplementary Planning Document.
Guidance on the Provision of Waste Storage, Recycling and Collection Facilities.
Design and Crime Supplementary Planning Guidance.

PLANNING APPRAISAL

The applicant is seeking outline approval for the scheme, including the matters of access and layout. Therefore the main issues for consideration are:

- the density and layout of the development,
- highways issues,
- the impact of noise on future occupiers,
- open space provision,
- the on-site remediation.

Principle of Development

The principle of residential development, on the former Clariant Works site, has been established through previous outline approvals. This site was not previously included in the most recent permission, however there are extant permissions, which have established that residential development is appropriate, and is of significant weight.  

Clariant submitted the application in 2003 (ref. 03/46638/OUT) without appreciation that they only had a leasehold on the land. In 2005 Harrow Estates submitted the application (ref. 05/51272/OUT) for the specific area as they could not agree the land deal, in respect of this site. This has subsequently been resolved, hence the submission of this application. This scheme will ‘round-off’ the larger site, which would benefit from being developed comprehensively.

Density and Layout

Policy H1 Provision of New Housing Development requires that new housing contributes to the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings at not less than 50 dwellings (net) per hectare on sites along good quality public transport routes and neighbourhood centres. The proposal complies with this requirement.

Policy DES1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan states that: Development will be required to respond to its physical context, respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated, and contribute towards local identity and distinctiveness.

The layout has been designed to reflect that of the already approved outline scheme. It is shown that three of the apartment blocks will face Cadishead Way (A57) and the Manchester Ship Canal and the fourth apartment block will front the curve of the road onto Hayes Road. This building will form an important focal point and this should be reflected in the detailed design of the proposal at the reserved matters stage.

The design and access statement explains how the layout has evolved, improving on the extant permission by extending the two cul-de-sacs into the site, using the curve of the junction to provide a gateway building on the corner of the site and extending the mix of dwelling types in the area.

Although apartments will not normally be encouraged, the location of this site with a strong road frontage and at the gateway to the area means that larger buildings would be more appropriate in design terms. The layout also reflects the design approach of the extant permission for 350 dwellings (ref. 05/51272/OUT) and makes for a more comprehensive development. This site forms part of a wider comprehensive development that will provide a wide range of dwelling types, including a significant amount of family housing. 

This site is predominantly apartments, however, the land take of the site developed as a whole (including ref. 05/51272/OUT) comprises of 26% apartments and the remaining balance being taken up with family housing, open space and associated infrastructure.

The location of the apartment buildings, in relation to the acoustic fence, has since been reviewed. The apartment blocks have been relocated further away, therefore improving the outlook from the ground floor units. The inclusion of apartments incorporates mitigation against the impact of the by-pass noise.

Policy DES7 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan states that: All new development, and alterations and extensions to existing buildings, will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity, in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect, and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users of other developments.

The proposal will not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity within this scheme, and it will meet all the requirements in relation to the wider scheme. There is adequate space and privacy for the occupants, which allow a satisfactory level of daylight and sunlight to the properties.

DES9 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan states: Development will be required to incorporate appropriate hard and soft landscaping provision where appropriate.

The landscaping within this scheme is a reserved matter for future consideration, therefore this will be provided in detail at that stage.

DES10 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan states: Development will not be permitted unless it is designed to discourage crime, anti-social behaviour and the fear of crime, and support personal and property security.

The layout clearly defines the private and public spaces, and therefore fulfils the first part of this policy. It also ensures that natural surveillance is available, with the landscaped and parking areas being overlooked by the development. A comprehensive lighting scheme should also be requested at the reserved matters stage, to ensure that all areas of the scheme are adequately lit.

Sustainable Construction

The Council’s adopted Supplementary Design and Construction SPD provides clear guidance on this. The detailed design of the buildings will not be determined until the reserved matters stage. The applicant is aware of the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD and understands that any reserved matters application should have full regard to this in terms of increasing the energy efficiency of the building. The company itself also has its own environmental policy which considers reducing the use of raw materials & supplies, recycling aggregates, reusing soils, minimising waste to landfill and only choosing contractors who fulfil the aims of their environmental policy. 

The developer has stated that the Government is moving further towards implementing the Code for Sustainable Homes as opposed to the BREEAM standards. Harrow Estates propose that dwellings are constructed to Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3. This greater regulation will ensure that the homes are built to increasingly high standards, and therefore complies with the aims of the SPD. 

Affordable Housing

Policy H4 of the UDP and Policy HOU3 of Housing Planning Guidance relates to affordable housing. Policy HOU3 applies to 20% of the dwellings on sites greater than 1 hectare or in housing developments of greater than 25 dwellings. Therefore, for this application 8 of the 42 units would be looked at as affordable. The eight dwellings have previously been considered under the outline application.

The policy goes on to state that lower proportions of affordable housing may be acceptable where material considerations are appropriate. Examples of such considerations are:

-There is a very high level of affordable housing in the immediate area;
-There are low house prices in the immediate area compared to average incomes;
-It would not otherwise be possible to provide the affordable dwellings with a sufficient discount to enable units to be purchased by an RSL;
-The development forms part of a wider scheme or development partnership that would ensure an average of 20% affordable housing across its entirety;
-There are exceptional costs associated with the development (excluding site purchase costs);
-The financial impact of the provision of affordable housing, combined with other planning obligations, as set out in the Planning Obligations SPD would affect scheme viability;
-The inclusion of affordable housing would prejudice the achievement of other important planning objectives; and
-The scheme was substantially developed before the adoption of this Guidance.

The scheme has been developed for this site and is seen as the most appropriate scheme. It fits in with the scheme provided on the adjacent site to form a comprehensive development. 

The developer could reduce costs further to make the scheme more viable by reducing the building costs or accepting a reduction in the level of return. However, this would however in turn reduce the quality of the scheme. 

There are a number of variables that could have an adverse effect on the viability of the scheme, including the current market conditions and how long the down turn in the housing market will continue. The developer has provided a viability report, which shows that this development’s viability results in a loss. However, Harrow Estates are prepared to absorb the shortfall within the wider development in order to deliver the regeneration of the former Clariant works.

The site was also contaminated and a lot of remediation has been carried out over several years, with no public subsidy. The securing of affordable housing provision as part of this scheme, along with the contribution through the Section 106, and the requirements as part of the Planning Obligations SPD (discussed later in the report) will further impact on the viability of the scheme. It is therefore considered that an exception to Policy HOU3 can be made in this case.

Highways Issues

The site will be accessed through the development that already has outline planning approval, via two cul-de-sacs. The most westerly of the cul-de-sacs has been extended to take into account this site. However, two of the dwellings that have been resited take their access off the main spine road. The main access into the site is from Hayes Road. 

To ensure that access can be secured a Grampian style condition shall be added to the decision notice, to ensure details are provided prior to commencement and implemented prior to the occupation.

There are 46 car parking spaces provided within the development for the users of the apartments. This equates to nearly 110% parking provision, of which 5% should be suitable for use by disabled persons. The dwellings have been provided with a mix of garages and driveways, therefore providing appropriate parking space within the curtilage of each dwelling house. There is no disabled parking shown and there is no cycle parking/motorcycle parking provided either. However, there is adequate space to provide both disabled parking and cycle parking/motorcycle parking within the development and a condition can be added accordingly.

Pedestrian and cycle access can be provided to this site, via the outline scheme, from Hayes Road.

Noise

The noise report, submitted with the application, recommends that mitigation measures are included. An acoustic fence has been provided along the site boundary with the Cadishead Way (A57), and this has been taken into account when the noise readings were taken. Notwithstanding this a further mitigation measure to include the provision of acoustic glazing should be provided. This point was reiterated in the comments provided by the noise engineers who recommended that conditions be attached in connection with the provision of upgraded glazing and acoustic mechanical ventilation. They also recommend the retention of the existing acoustic barrier and the extension of the barrier around the corner of the site into Hayes Road.

Financial Contribution-Section 106

Policy H8 of the UDP states that open space needs to be provided either as part of the development or through an equivalent financial contribution. The proposal would trigger the requirement for a contribution towards public open space, improvements to the city’s public realm, heritage and infrastructure, training of local residents in construction skills and the offsetting of greenhouse gas emissions. The details are provided within the Councils SPD Planning Obligations adopted in March 2007.

The eight dwellings have already been considered under the previous outline planning application, where a financial contribution was to be provided. Therefore the calculation for this development will be based on the 42 units within the apartment blocks, which provide 126 bed spaces.

Type of Contribution	Financial Contribution-Residential (apartments with 2 bedrooms or less)	Total	
Open Space	£658 per bed space	£82,908	
Public Realm, infrastructure & heritage	£1,500 per dwelling	£63,000	
Construction Training	£150 per dwelling	£6300	
Climate Change	£200 per dwelling	£8400	
Total	£1,850 per dwelling + £658 per bed space	£160,608	

The total contribution for public realm, infrastructure and open space provision, construction training and climate change equates to £160,608. An additional 2.5% admin charge would also be required.

The Planning Obligations SPD recognises that some developments would secure major benefits for the local area beyond what might normally be expected. In such circumstances, those benefits may be balanced against any mitigation that would normally be sought through a planning obligation, and the need for a contribution may be reduced or waived accordingly, provided that the scheme is acceptable in planning terms.

The applicant has stated that the site, when developed, will contribute to both the physical and social regeneration of the area and it will create a gateway along the new by-pass as well as bringing with it significant financial benefits. The site delivers substantial benefits as highlighted by PPS1 paragraphs 18 & 35 and as such it is not considered that the site needs to make further additional contributions to public realm, infrastructure and heritage.

The developer has stated that the climate change contribution has been overtaken by events, since the Government is moving further towards implementing the Code for Sustainable Homes as opposed to the BREEAM standards. Greater regulation will ensure that the homes are built to increasingly high standards and it is not accepted that a contribution needs to be made.

Whilst it is appreciated that in some instances these contributions may be justified it is not considered that they are fairly and reasonably relate to the development proposed nor do they recognise the extant residential history of the site, or the substantial investment and benefits to the wider environment and social regeneration resulting from the remediation and development of the site. The developer does not accept that a sum should be sought for local employment initiatives in relation to construction training as such a request is not reasonably related to the development proposed and it ignores the baseline in respect of an existing residential consent and as such is not justified in planning terms.

A significant area of new public open space is contained within the extant permission (ref. 05/51272/OUT) and the residents of this scheme will benefit from being able to use this, as it will be within easy walking distance. In addition additional financial contributions are facilitated within the S106 to the extant permission to facilitate improvements to Cadishead Park. In accordance with the SPD a contribution of £82,908 to the off site public open space is accepted in principle by the developer.

GMPTE suggested that a request for a financial contribution towards the CCTV and ‘help points’ at Irlam station is requested. However, after careful consideration it is not considered reasonable to request this under Circular 05/2005 Planning Obligations due to the developments distance from the station and given that that there was no previous request for the adjacent site.

In summary, given that the site has included substantial remediation, the fact that this scheme will round off the larger development site and provide a strong frontage and gateway into the area and having regard to the down turn in the housing market, it is considered that the development fulfils the requirements in PPS1 and that the contribution should be focused on the open space requirement which will provide benefits in the wider area, as opposed to climate change, construction training and further public realm, infrastructure and heritage. The applicant accepts that a S106 should be entered into for open space provision and construction training in order to secure a contribution of £89,208 together with 2.5% administration costs. 

Site Remediation

This site along with the extant permission, has undergone extensive remediation. This is near completion, and there is some further monitoring required. Once this has been carried out then the site will be suitable for residential development. This was dealt with under planning application 04/49520, however, to ensure that this phase/sub-phase of the remediation scheme is not compromised a condition will be attached should the application be approved.

VALUE ADDED

The applicant has agreed to enter into a Section 106 agreement for a financial contribution of £89,208 towards the provision of open space, which has not been provided in this part of the scheme, and construction training.

The addition of an apartment block on the corner of the Cadishead Way (A57) and Hayes Road will also add a focal point to the overall scheme. 

CONCLUSION

The density of the scheme is considered to be appropriate and the layout compliments the previously approved scheme. The siting of the apartment block on the corner of the site, to provide a focal point, is welcomed. The site when developed will contribute in both physical and social terms to the regeneration of this area, it will create a gateway along the new bypass and it will also bring with it significant environmental benefits. The proposal would not compromise the aims and objectives of the relevant policies of the UDP and there are no other material planning considerations that would justify refusal of this application.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve: Subject to the following conditions and that;

i.	The Strategic Director of Customer and Support Services be given authority to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the provision of improved local open space,  and construction training schemes.

Conditions

1.	 Application for approval of reserved matters shall be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters, or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

2.	No development shall be started until full details of the following reserved matters have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority:
	
	a) appearance,
	
	b) landscaping, and
	
	c) scale.

3.	The car parking spaces shown on the submitted plans to be within the curtilage of the dwellings hereby permitted shall be made available for use prior to the first occupation of the units hereby approved. They shall be made available for use at all times for the parking of motor vehicles in connection with the use of the dwelling to which they relate.

4.	Prior to the commencement of development, hereby approved, full details of the proposed cycle parking/motorcycle parking shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such storage areas shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and shall be made available for use prior to the first occupation of dwellings hereby approved.
	
5.	Prior to the commencement of development details of the proposed disabled car parking shall be provided and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to the first occupation of the dwellings hereby approved.

6.	No development shall be started until full details of a scheme for the acoustic double glazing of the windows of all living rooms and bedrooms on dwellings affected by traffic on Cadishead Way (A57); have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These rooms shall be fitted with glazing with a performance equivalent or greater than 8/6/6.4 Stadip Silence glazing.  Such a scheme shall thereafter be implemented concurrently with the building works to ensure that no dwelling is occupied until such time as the associated acoustic double glazing has been installed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

7.	Prior to the commencement of development all habitable rooms facades facing Cadishead Way (A57), with direct line of sight to the road shall be fitted with acoustically attenuated mechanical ventilation with a performance equivalent or greater than Silavent Freshflo SM2/C combined mechanical and permanent ventilator. Details of the ventilation shall be provided to the Local Planning Authority, and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the dwellings hereby approved and it shall be maintained at all times throughout the lifetime of the scheme.

8.	The 2.0m high acoustic barrier along the southern boundary of the site (adjacent to Cadishead Way (A57)), shall be maintained as detailed on Figure 2 in the acoustics report by Hepworth Acoustics no 5202.1v2, at all times throughout the lifetime of the development.

9.	Prior to the occupation of the site an acoustic barrier shall be erected along the site boundary, on Hayes Road. All acoustic barriers shall have a minimum surface density of 10kgm/2. Details of the proposed fence shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commenecement of development. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of any of the dwellings hereby approved.

10.	Prior to the commencement of development drainage details, incorporating sustainable drainage principles, and an assessment of the hydrological and hydro-geological context of the development, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the development.

11.	No phase or sub-phase of development shall commence until it is demonstrated to the Local Planning Authority’s satisfaction that the previously agreed contaminated land remediation scheme for that phase or sub phase will not be compromised.  Should it be necessary to disturb or compromise the previously agreed contaminated land remediation scheme, the developer must provide details and verification that the scheme has been re-instated.  The scheme shall demonstrate that there will be no significant risk to future users of that part of the site.  All the previous documents relating to the contamination and the remediation of the corresponding part of the site must be obtained and a report demonstrating the understanding of these reports provided to the local planning authority.  It must be demonstrated to the local planning authority’s satisfaction that the specification of the remedial scheme are fully understood.  The scheme shall demonstrate that these works will not be detrimentally compromised during development.  The scheme must also include recommendations for any additional remediation required to protect the future residential users of that phase of the development.
	
	The scheme shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to start of any works within the area of the site corresponding to that phase or sub-phase of the development.  Recommendations contained within the approved report shall be agreed by the developer prior to occupation of the area of the site corresponding to that phase or sub-phase of the development.
	
	Prior to discharge of the condition and in any case prior to the first occupation of the area of the site corresponding to that phase or sub-phase a site completion report shall be submitted the Local Planning Authority for approval.  Each completion report shall validate the scheme and that confirm all works on that phase of the site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

12.	Prior to the commencement of development details of the proposed floor levels shall be provided and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

13.	Development shall not begin until details of the means of access, from the adjacent site, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be occupied until the approved access has been constructed in accordance with the approved details. Thereafter it shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

14.	 This permission shall relate to the amended plan received on 8th August 2008 (Plan No. CWC/001.Rev.D) which shows amended layout of apartments.

15.	 The development hereby approved shall achieve a 'very good' or 'excellent' Building Research Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM) rating or equivalent, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

Where this is achieved, a post-construction certificate confirming such an outcome shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any of the buildings hereby approved are first occupied, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

Where this is not achieved, a scheme to offset the development's impact on the global environment, in accordance with the standards set out in Policy OB4 of the Council's Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any of the buildings hereby approved are first occupied.  The approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to first occupation unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

(Reasons)

1.	Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 

2.	The application is for outline permission only and these matters were reserved by the applicant for subsequent approval. 

3.	In the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

4.	In the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

5.	In the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

6.	To safeguard the amenity of future occupants of the development in accordance with DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

7.	To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with Policy DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

8.	To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with Policy DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

9.	To safeguard the amenity of future occupants of the development in accordance with Policy DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

10.	To encourage the sustainable management of water in accordance with Policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

11.	To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with Policy EN16 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

12.	To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with Policy EN19 of the City of Salford Development Plan.

13.	To ensure the successful development of the site and in the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy A10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

14.	To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 

15.	In the interests of resource conservation and environmental sustainability. This is in accordance with Policies ST1, ST14 and DEV5 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and Policy OB4 of the Council's Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document.

Note(s) for Applicant

1.	The watercourse adjacent to the site is the Manchester Ship Canal, does not fall under the Environment Agency’s jurisdiction in terms of flood defence/land drainage issues. Accordingly, it is advised that contact is made with the Manchester Ship Canal Company regarding any liability in relation to the maintenance and repair of the canal bank and also, matters relating to flood risk and discharge of surface water to it.

2.	The site should be drained on a separate system, with foul drainage only connected into the foul sewer. Surface water should be discharged 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 sewer system the flow may require to be attenuated to a maximum discharge rate determined by United Utilities.

APPLICATION No:	08/56699/FUL

APPLICANT:	M Afzal

LOCATION:	144 Cromwell Road Salford M6 6DE    

PROPOSAL:	Continued use as a shop for the sale of hot food with variaion of condition 4 (Hours of Use) on planning permission 06/51962/COU

WARD:	Irwell Riverside

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
The site to which the application relates is located on the corner of a row of terraced properties at the junction of Cromwell Road and Rowsley Street. At present the premises have orange roller shutters fitted to the windows and door. 

Adjoining the premises at ground floor is a hair salon with a residential unit above. Directly above the ground floor premises there is also a residential unit. The applicant has not provided any information in relation to the use of the first floor flat however there is a separate entrance to this flat located on the side elevation of the building. Therefore the first floor unit could be occupied independently of the takeaway. 

The area is predominantly residential and is characterised by typical red brick terraced houses. Commercial units are present at ground floor level fronting onto Cromwell Road.

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL
Permission was originally granted in 2006 for the change of use of the premises. Condition 4 states ‘The use hereby permitted shall operate between the hours and on the days specified below and at no other time: Monday to Saturday - 11:00 hours to 20:00 hours and not at all on Sundays or Bank Holidays’ Permission is now sought for the continued use of the premises as a hot food takeaway with extended opening hours to allow the business to operate from 11am to 1 am every day, thus varying condition 4 of 06/51962/COU

The plans submitted include the installation of an external flue. However this was granted permission at the time that the change of use was permitted.

SITE HISTORY
95/34271/COU - Change of use from shoe repairs to shop for the sale of hot food (cafe) – PERMITTED

02/44920/COU - Change of use from shop to shop for the sale of hot food – REFUSED
Appeal - 03/00025/REF Change of use from shop to shop for the sale of hot food APPEAL DISMISSED

03/47376/COU - Change of use from shop to shop for the sale of hot food (resubmission of application – REFUSED
Appeal - 04/00020/REF Change of use from shop to shop for the sale of hot food (resubmission of application 02/44920/COU) APPEAL UPHELD on the basis that the site is located on a busy main road and as such noise and disturbance would not be significantly exacerbated by the creation of a hot food takeaway in this location so long as it is not operated at night or on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

06/51962/COU- Change of use from shop to shop for the sale of hot food, erection of side/rear extension and external flue - PERMITTED

CONSULTATIONS
Urban Vision Environment
Any extension of the approved opening hours of the take-away will be to the detriment of the amenity enjoyed by the occupier at 146 Cromwell Road by reason of noise and cooking odours and fumes. Furthermore the proposed hours of opening of 11.00am to 1.00am daily are particularly undesirable. In addition there are dwellings to the rear of the take-away, which because of their close proximity would also be detrimentally affected by the proposal.

Police Architectural Liaison Unit
No comments to date

PUBLICITY
The following neighbours were notified of the application:
138-140 Cromwell Road, Salford, M6 6DE,
142- 162 Cromwell Road, Salford, M6 6DE(evens)
Flat, 158 Cromwell Road, Salford, M6 6DN
13- 19 Beeley Street, Salford, M6 6BW (odds)
4-10 Rowsley Street, Salford, M6 6AE (evens)
18 Haddon Street, Salford, M6 6BN,

REPRESENTATIONS
13 letters of representation have been received  of which 5 letters were objections to the proposal and 8 letters were in support.
 in addition and one petition with 37 signatories in support of the application has been submitted. 
The following issues have been raised:
•	Increase in crime
•	Intimidation
•	Litter
•	Noise
•	Increase in traffic and on street parking
•	Temptation for children to become involved with alcohol
•	Early morning deliveries
•	Disturbance
•	The premises have not been in use as a hot food takeaway
•	Encouragement to eat unhealthy foods
•	Cumulative effect upon residents amenity due to other businesses operating in the area

The reasons for support were:
•	That the hours of operation would bring the facility in line with other takeaway establishments on Cromwell Road
•	The hours would not have any negative impact upon the amenity of residents

DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP1: Economy in the Use of Land and Building
DP4: Promoting Sustainable Economic Growth and Competitiveness and Social Inclusion
DP3 – Quality in New Development

ADOPTED UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
S4 (Amusement Centres, Restaurants and Cafes, drinking Establishments and Hot Food Takeaways)
EN17 (Pollution Control)

OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Supplementary Planning Document ‘Hot Food Takeaways’

PLANNING APPRAISAL
This application does not seek to establish the principle of a hot food takeaway at this location given that it lawfully operates under 06/51962/COU. Consideration must only be given in the determination of the proposal to vary condition 4 to change from 8pm in the evenings, Monday to Saturday to 1am 7 days per week.

Policy S4 states that proposals for hot food takeaways will not be permitted by the Council where the use would have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of surrounding residential occupiers by reason of noise, disturbance, smells, fumes, litter, vehicular traffic movements, parking or pedestrian traffic and the vitality and viability of a town centre and visual amenity.

EN17 states that development that would be likely to cause or contribute to significant increase in pollution will not be permitted unless they include mitigation measures commensurate with the scale and impact of the development.

Policy HFTA1 of the SPD‘Hot Food Takeaways’ states that hot food takeaways should not be permitted where they would be directly beneath or adjacent to residential units either at ground or first floor.

Policy HFTA3 of the SPD ‘Hot Food Takeaways’ states that normal opening hours for hot food takeaways within 30 metres of a residential property should normally be restricted to 8am to 10pm Monday to Saturdays with no opening on Sundays or Bank Holidays.   

Taking into account the existing situation and the presence of residential units at first floor both above and adjacent to the application site which have the potential to be occupied separately of the hot food takeaway, it is not considered that the extended opening hours are appropriate as they would cause significant additional disturbance to surrounding residential occupiers by reason of increase in noise from customers in and around the premises, noise from cooking operations and also from increase in smells and odours.

Whilst it is acknowledged that some disturbance could be experienced from the operation of this established hot food takeaway, in any event the hours of operation have been restricted by way of a condition to protect residential amenity. To allow an extension of hours late in to the evening and early morning would be wholly inappropriate given the proximity of the site to residential units.

The proposed opening hours would also be contrary to those set out in Policy HFTA3 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan as they exceed the 10pm ceiling when residential properties exist within 30 metres of the premises. 

It is not considered that the extension of the hours would significantly increase the number of cars visiting the site during the existing hours of operation. However it would allow for a more prolonged period of disturbance to neighbouring occupiers into the early hours of the morning. In addition there is the potential for disturbance from customers in and around the takeaway. There is no dedicated car parking for the takeaway, and restrictions are in place along Cromwell Road to prevent parking of vehicles. On street parking is available in the streets surrounding the takeaway and it is acknowledged that the increased hours of operation of the premises may lead to more cars visiting the site in total, however this would be over a prolonged period of time and as such is unlikely to cause a significant increase in car parking at any one time. This said, the disturbance caused to nearby residential occupiers by way of increased activity would be significant and as such would have an unacceptable impact upon their amenities.

It is acknowledged that within the previous application a flue was proposed to be inserted within the rear elevation. Whilst this would stop the majority of fumes escaping, there will still be some remaining odours which could percolate through the building causing nuisance to residential occupiers above which would be contrary to Policies S4 and EN17 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and Policy HFTA1 of the Adopted Supplementary Planning Documents ‘Hot Food Takeaways’

The neighbour objections are acknowledged, and the level of support for the development has also been taken into account. However it is considered that such support does not outweigh the harmful extended opening hours would have in terms of noise and disturbance to local residents into the early hours of the morning. In addition to this there would be potential for a significant increase in disturbance from additional activity within and around the premises including the potential for some evening deliveries during the extended hours as raised by some objectors.

Objectors also raised the issue of the premises having not been used as a takeaway. Following a site visit, it is clear that the premises have been altered to accommodate a commercial use. Whether the takeaway is currently in operation is not considered material to the acceptability of the proposed extension of the opening hours as the permission is still extant.

The cumulative effect of further late night uses being permitted was also raised as an issue. Whilst it is acknowledged that some disturbance may already occur as a result of other takeaways in the area, it is not considered that the longer opening hours alone would significantly increase the level of disturbance in the area generally. However, it is considered that by virtue of the proposed late night opening and the potential for additional disturbance to the immediate residential occupiers, the development would be unacceptable.

It is not considered that the increased opening hours would increase the potential for crime being committed although it may encourage anti-social behaviour and additional disturbance later into the evening and early hours of the morning. The Police Architectural Liaison Unit have not commented on the application to date.

Issues have also been raised in relation to the development increasing the temptation for children to become involved in alcohol. It is not considered that this can be used as a reasonable argument.

Issues were also raised regarding healthy eating options. It would not be possible to control what food is sold at hot food premises, however Policy HFTA8 of the SPD ‘Hot Food Takeaways’ gives guidance on healthy eating. Should the application be approved the owner would be encouraged to liaise with Salford City Council’s Health and Well-Being Manager to look into the possibility of providing healthy eating options.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion it is considered that the proposed hours of operation would cause a significant level of additional disturbance to nearby occupiers and would cause nuisance by reason of increased noise, smells, fumes and odours and general disturbance by virtue of the increase in activity within and around the site in the late evening and early hours of the morning. For these reasons it is considered that the development would be contrary to Policies S4 and EN17 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and Policies HFTA1 and HFTA3 of the Supplementary Planning Document ‘Hot Food Takeaways’.

RECOMMENDATION:

Refuse For the following Reasons:

1.	The proposed development would be seriously detrimental to neighbouring residents by reason of smell, fumes, noise, disturbance and general activity, and thus would be contrary to policies S4 and EN17of the adopted Unitary Development Plan and Policies HFTA1 and HFTA3 of the Supplementary Planning Document ‘Hot Food Takeaways’.

APPLICATION No:	         08/56733/ART10

APPLICANT:	Trafford Council

LOCATION:	Partington Wharfside Off Manchester Road Carrington (Article 10 Consultation)   

PROPOSAL:	Article 10 Consultation received from Trafford Council in respect of development of a recycled paper mill including external raw material storage area, raw material preparation and paper making building, finished goods warehouse and loading canopy, workshops, electricity and steam generating plant, water treatment plant, offices and associated buildings, car and lorry parking and revised access

WARD:	 

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
The proposed application site at Partington is located adjacent to the Manchester Ship Canal and to the north east of the village of Partington. The application site covers an area of 15.75 hectares of brownfield land which was formerly  used as a BP oil depot. 

Access to the site is from the A6144Manchester Road which links with the A6144(M) Carrington Spur and theM60 to the north east of the site. The site is opposite the Northbank Industrial Estate which is in Irlam, Salford. The site lies within  Flood Risk Zone 1 (low risk).

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL
The proposal is to create a new recycled paper mill that would utilise recovered paper as itsprincipal raw material and would produce around 400,000 tonnes of recycled paper per annum suitable for use in the production of corrugated cases. 

Access to the site is to be taken from and existing but unused road within Trafford (Manchester Road).

The maximum height of the main building is 27.5m high. It is proposed that the existing green corridor is retained to the south and west of the site.

Operation of the Site
The paper mill would use recovered paper and native starch as its principal raw materials only. Paper would be produced in reel form and would be despatched by road to UK customers from an on site warehouse. The paper mill would utilise raw water from the Manchester Ship Canal with the full consent of the Environment Agency, and would treat the waste waters arising from the process in an advanced biological treatment plant, before returning approximately 70% of the water abstracted from the canal back into it.

A self contained power station employing high efficiency Natural Gas fired Combined
Heat and Power technologies would provide all of the electrical and 80% of the steam needed for the site, whilst also generating surplus electricity which may be exported to the National Grid. Residues arising from the process would be further processed in an Energy Recovery Boiler generating the remaining 20% of the steam requirements of the site. 

Paper would be produced in reel form and would be despatched by road to UK customers from an on site warehouse.

The applicant has submitted an Environmental Statement and a series of appendices which outline the impacts upon the environment including details on contaminated land, hydrology, hydrogeology, landscape and visual impact, ecology, noise and air quality. Information has also been submitted relating to cultural heritage and transportation.

SITE HISTORY
Planning permission was granted in April 2008 for the development of an employment park on the site of the current planning application.

CONSULTATIONS
Urban Vision Environment
Urban Vision Environment have been sent a copy of the Environmental Statement and appendices and do not have any concerns relating to contaminated land. Also it has been confirmed that the development would not have any impact upon Salford by reason of noise disturbance or air quality.

Plans Group
No comments to date

Ecology
No comments to date

Highway Engineers
No objections

Drainage Engineer
No objection

PUBLICITY
There was no requirement for Salford City Council to give publicity to the application as Trafford Council are the determining Authority.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
The site falls outside of the City of Salford and as such none of the development Plan Policies directly apply. However, the application will be assessed having regard to the impacts the development may have on Salford and its residents in terms of visual and residential amenity, impact upon the road network, ecological impacts, noise and public safety issues such as contaminated land and air quality.

PLANNING APPRAISAL
The main issue associated with this development is whether it will have any significant and unacceptable impact upon Salford or its residents in terms of visual and residential amenity, noise pollution and air quality, contaminated land and impacts upon the highway network which may affect roads within Salford. Taking each issue in turn:

Amenity
The site is located on the opposite side of the Manchester Ship Canal from the Northbank Industrial Estate in Irlam. There are no residential properties directly opposite the site as this part of the Manchester Ship Canal bank is bounded by industrial development within Salford. The main building is to be approximately 28 metres in height, but given the distance from any residential units within Salford, it is not considered that this would have an overbearing or intrusive presence. It is proposed that the green corridor along the southern and part of the western boundary of the site is retained. This will help to screen the development from view and to reduce the impact upon visual amenity. It is not considered tat there would be any significant impact upon the amenities of Salford’s residents by way of loss of visual or residential amenity.

Impacts upon the Highway
Whilst the development may result in an increase in traffic in the immediate vicinity of the site, in the form of HGVs and employees cars, it is acknowledged that permission currently exists for an employment park on the site which may have the potential to generate significant levels of traffic. If this application is approved the development of the employment park will not take place. It is not anticipated that the development would have any significant impact upon Salford’s road network The site is accessed from Manchester Road which is within Trafford, and is separated from Salford by the Manchester Ship Canal. No objections were received on highway grounds.

Ecological Impacts
No comments to date

Noise
It is considered that the site is an adequate distance away to ensure that noise is not significant and does not affect Salford or any of its residents. Urban Vision Environment have received a copy of the Environmental Statement and appendices and do not have any objections to the proposals on noise grounds and as such the development is considered to be acceptable in this respect.

Contaminated Land
It is not considered that the development would have any significant impact upon Salford in terms of contaminated land. Trafford Council may consider it necessary to attach conditions relating to contaminated land, however it is not anticipated that contaminated land would have any impact upon Salford’s residents. A copy of the Environmental Statement has been sent to Urban vision Environment for assessment and they have confirmed that there are no objections on contamination grounds.

Air Quality
It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact upon air quality in the area, and given the distance from Salford and the presence of the Manchester Ship Canal, it is not anticipated that the development would have any significant impact upon air quality within Salford. Urban Vision Environment have raised no objection to the proposals on air quality grounds.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion it is considered unlikely that the proposed development would have any significant impact either upon Salford or its residents and there would be no negative impacts as a result of the development. For these reasons it is recommended that Salford responds to the application without objection.

RECOMMENDATION:

No Objections