APPLICATION No:	07/55619/FUL

APPLICANT:	Safestore

LOCATION:	Units 1/2 Hazelhurst Road Worsley M28 2SQ   

PROPOSAL:	Continued use a warehouse with variation to condition 2 (Hours of Use) on planning permission 01/42481/COU)

WARD:	Worsley

This application was considered by the Panel on 7th February 2008 when it was resolved inter alia:

“THAT it be noted that Members were minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions as detailed in the report now submitted, and that the Strategic Director of Customer and Support Services be authorised to enter into a legal agreement, under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to ensure that 

(a)	all heavy goods vehicles entering and leaving the site in association with the business at Units 1 and 2 shall approach and leave the site along Hazelhurst Road onto Moorside Road and not divert onto any other route unless TMU controls require such diversions and 

(b) the use of the site by HGVs during the extended hours are (sic) restricted.”

The original report was substantially as set out below.

Following consultation with the City Solicitor, it has since come to the attention of officers that there are a number of shortcomings with the wording of the original s.106 agreement associated with approval 01/42481/COU that call into question its effectiveness.  Therefore, it has been necessary to re-evaluate whether a s.106 agreement can be used to control the routing of HGVs to a site.  Advice was sought from Counsel regarding this matter who has confirmed that two approaches can be used to control the routing of HGVs on the public highway.

Firstly, it has been advised that a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) is the only method which can control the use of the public highway.  However, it would have to apply to all HGV traffic on the road and not just HGV traffic visiting particular premises.

Secondly, a form of control can be achieved via a s.106 agreement. It could not control the use of the public highway as such because all that a section 106 can do, which is relevant for present purposes, is to restrict the use of the land which is bound by the agreement in a specified way.  The agreement could, however, set out details contained in a covenant by the owner not to allow the use of the land by HGVs unless a particular procedure specified in the obligation was operated to ensure that those HGVs came to and left the land only by a specified route.  However, it is advised that this form of control is not as robust as a TRO.

In light of the deficiencies of the original agreement and the legal advice that has been received, it is necessary for the application to be re-considered by the Panel.  

At present a TRO exists along Hazelhurst Road from the junction with Moorside Road to Worsley Road.  This restricts the use of Hazelhurst Road by vehicles larger than 7.5tonnes (equivalent to a small box van) except for access.  Given that the access to the application site lies within the area covered by the TRO, all vehicles visiting the site have a right of access from either side of Hazelhurst Road.  However, if the eastern most section of the TRO was revoked from the site access to Moorside Road (so that the access to the site was not within the area covered by the TRO), then all vehicles above 7.5tonnes would be required to access the site from Moorside Road.  It should be noted, however, that such a revocation would have to be considered under separate legislation and it is not, therefore, a material consideration in the determination of this application.  It is recommended, however, that the process of revoking this short section of the TRO be commenced as it offers the most robust control and would apply to all traffic, not just vehicles visiting the applicant’s business which is all that a s.106 agreement would reasonably be able to control.

Given that a TRO is the subject of separate legislation and the process is likely to take several months with no guaranteed outcome, it is also considered appropriate to enter into a s.106 agreement in accordance with the advice and approach set out by Counsel as detailed above.   However, with regard to part (b) of the Panel’s original resolution to restrict the use of the site by HGVs during the extended hours, it is considered more appropriate to secure this by way of condition and as such this has been attached.  It is therefore recommended that the resolution should be:

(1) THAT it be noted that Members were minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions as detailed in the report now submitted, and that the Strategic Director of Customer and Support Services be authorised to enter into a legal agreement, under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to control the use of the site so as to ensure that all heavy goods vehicles entering and leaving the site in association with the business at Units 1 and 2 shall approach and leave the site along Hazelhurst Road and Moorside Road unless otherwise required by a traffic regulation order

(2) THAT the applicant be informed that the City Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions as detailed in the report now submitted, on completion of such legal agreement.

(3) THAT authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application, to be issued, subject to the conditions as detailed in the report now submitted, on completion of such legal agreement.

(4) THAT authority be given to refuse the application, if the applicant fails to complete the section 106 agreement within a reasonable period, on the grounds that the proposals would be contrary to Policy EN17 of the City of Salford Adopted Unitary Development Plan.

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL

This application relates to Safe Store warehousing unit located on Hazelhurst Road. This warehousing unit is bounded on the north by the East Lancashire Road with residential properties located to the West and South of the site. The surrounding residential roads include Partington Street and Cross Street which are located to the east of the site, Hazelhurst Road to the south. The surrounding residential units are mainly terraced properties. 

The store itself is separated from Hazelhurst Road by the onsite carpark. However, as the warehouse is set at an acute angle in relation to Hazelhurst Road, the distance between the site and the surrounding residential properties varies accordingly. In this instance the distance between the warehouse and Hazelhurst Road varies between 30m from the entrance, to a minimum of 18m from the corner of the unit to the main road. The unit is also in close proximity to those properties located on Cross Street, in particular No.10 whose gable elevation and rear garden run directly adjacent to the site. Furthermore, there are a number of what appear to be rear gardens belonging to Nos 12 to 34 Partington Street, which bound the western boundary of the site.

The only access and egress point available to the site is that which fronts Hazelhurst Road directly opposite the entrance to Aldersgate Court and opposite No.1, 3, 5, 7 and 9 Hazelhurst Road. These properties do not benefit from having front gardens.

The proposal relates to the variation of a condition attached to planning permission 01/42481/COU. The current condition states that; ‘The use hereby permitted shall only be operated between the hours of 8am and 6pm Monday to Friday and 9am to 3pm on Saturdays’. The intention is to vary this condition so that the extended hours of operation would include 8am to 6.00pm on Saturdays and 10am to 4pm on Sundays. 

SITE HISTORY

The original application was approved with conditions for the use of this warehouse as a storage facility (B8) under application number 01/42481/COU. There have also been a number of advertisement consents applied for. These are listed as follows:

•	95/33692/ADV, Retention of externally illuminated free standing sign, one externally illuminated fascia sign and one non illuminated fascia sign – Approved May 1995.
•	01/42954/ADV, Display of one internally illuminated free standing sign and building signage illuminated by floodlights – Approved October 2001.
•	04/47945/ADV, Display of 2 internally illuminated totem signs, various internally illuminated flexface boxes, various externally illuminated fascia panels and various non-illuminated signs – refused April 2004.
•	05/50472/ADV, Display of internally and externally illuminated fascia signs and free standing signs – Approved June 2005.

CONSULTATIONS

Urban Vision Environment – recommend the erection of an acoustic boundary fence along the Cross Street Boundary. 

PUBLICITY

The following neighbour addresses were notified;
101 – 107 Moorside Road, Swinton 
1 – 11 Hazelhurst Road, Worsley 
Flat1, Aldergate Court, Chapel Road, Swinton 
Flat2, Aldergate Court, Chapel Road, Swinton 
Flat3, Aldergate Court, Chapel Road, Swinton 
Flat4, Aldergate Court, Chapel Road, Swinton
2 Cross Street, Worsley 
4Cross Street, Worsley 
6 Cross Street, Worsley 
8 Cross Street, Worsley
10 Cross Street, Worsley
18 East Lancashire Road, Worsley
Moorside Independent Methodist Church, Hazelhurst Road

REPRESENTATIONS

I have received 4 letters of objection, two of which are from the same correspondent, regarding this application. There has also been an email received on behalf of the Moorside South Residents Association. The concerns raised regarding this application include;

•	This being a residential area, the creation of additional noise pollution would be unacceptable to the nearby residential dwellings.
•	There would be an increase in traffic to the site, which would be unacceptable in a residential area.
•	The Moorside South Residents Association also raised concerns that the current occupiers of the site already contravene the existing conditions regarding hours of operation in that the site is open 24hrs per day and that on occasions there is external storage on site. MSRA also stated that the commercial vehicles and cars visiting the site already cause disturbance to local residents and to traffic flow at the junction with the A580. Finally, there was concern raised over the use of the site on Sundays, in particular to the Methodist Church opposite the site and to the elderly residents block adjacent to this church. 

UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Site specific policies: None

Site allocation: None

Other policies: EN17 – Pollution Control

PLANNING APPRAISAL

The main planning issue relating to this application relates to the impact on residential amenity and whether there would be an increase in noise and traffic generation from the extended opening hours.

AMENITY 

Policy EN17 states that development proposals that would be likely to cause or contribute towards a significant increase in pollution to the air (including dust pollution), water or soil, or by reason of noise, odour, artificial light or vibration, will not be permitted unless they include mitigation measures commensurate with the scale of impact of the development. Potential releases of pollution must be capable of being adequately regulated by the relevant pollution control authority under the pollution control framework.

When assessing such proposals particular regard will be had to the proximity of the development and its effect upon environmentally sensitive uses, buildings, features, areas and considerations such as:
i. Housing;
ii. Schools, hospitals, nursing homes or similar institutions;
iii. Areas of open space used frequently for recreation purposes;
iv. Industrial processes and utilities infrastructure that require specific operating conditions;
v. The landscape;
vi. The quality of soil, air, and ground and surface waters;
vii. Nature conservation;
viii. Agricultural land quality;
ix. Water supply; and
x. Archaeological designations.

The applicant states that as this variation of condition will only relate to weekend opening times, the traffic generated will consist of private cars rather than vans or goods vehicles as the applicant considers that the majority of visitors to the site at weekends tends to be householders. 

Using the data collected by the applicant over the period of the 27th February to 30 July 2007, the applicant states that there were, on average, 46.6 weekly visits to this storage facility. This accordingly equates to 9.3 visits on a daily basis, which generates an overall of 18.6 traffic movements per day.

The variation of the condition in this instance seeks to extend opening times on the Saturday to 8am until 6pm. This increase corresponds to the normal opening hours associated with the current week day business, and taking into account the fact that there have been no objections on noise grounds from GMGU and that opening would not extend into the evening, I am satisfied that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact, in terms of noise generation, upon the current levels of amenity afforded to nearby residents. 

The application also seeks to extend the current business hours to include Sundays. In this instance the hours proposed will be 10am to 4pm Sundays only. As stated above, the current operations do not generate excessive amounts of traffic to this site and there is no reason to believe that the average amount of traffic associated with this operation would be unacceptable in this location on a Sunday taking into account that no early morning or evening opening is proposed.

The applicant further states that the primary activity associated with the site is the moving and carrying of goods, and therefore the activity that generates the most noise pollution occurs within the warehouse. The onsite activity includes the moving of storage units around the internal aspect of the warehouse and may also include the use of forklift trucks. It is accepted that these activities will generate noise, however, such activities occur within a closed environment and not out within the forecourt. As such, the noise can be contained within the fabric of the building significantly reducing the potential for noise pollution in the area.  External storage will be controlled via condition.

The application site is directly adjacent to the busy East Lancashire Road, which in itself generates large amounts of noise pollution to nearby residents. This being the case, it is considered that local residents already experience large amounts of noise pollution during both the day and night and that any increase in hours of operation granted would have minimal effect when considered against the backdrop of this already noisy area. 

It should be noted that the applicant and the City Council entered into a legal agreement during the granting of the original permission, 01/42481/COU. This agreement stated that the applicant shall ensure that all heavy good vehicles entering or leaving the site in association with the business at Unit 1 and 2 Hazelhurst Road shall approach and leave the site along Hazelhurst Road onto Moorside Road and shall not divert onto any other route unless Traffic Management Controls require any such diversion. This agreement seeks to ensure that noise and disturbance coming directly from vehicular traffic associated with the site can be minimised in order to protect the existing residential amenity on site. In order to ensure that the existing legal agreement is amended to relate to the new application, if approved, the recommendation of approval is subject to a satisfactory legal agreement.

Other Issues Raised

With regard to the comments made by the Moorside South Residents Association relating to external storage and 24hr use, this matter has been investigated by the enforcement team but to date insufficient evidence of a breach of planning exists.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion I am satisfied that any increase in traffic and noise would not have an unacceptable impact upon the amenity of neighbouring residents. This modest increase in on site activity will occur primarily within the warehouse itself, and the amount of traffic generated by these activities would not be excessive, given the current character of the surrounding area. There will also be a condition attached to this permission that will seek to ensure that there shall be no external storage on the site. This again will limit any noise and disturbance generated by activities associated with this use. The proposal is therefore recommended for approval subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement stipulating the means of access and egress on site.

This proposal is therefore in accordance with policy EN17 of the Salford Unitary Development Plan and there are no other material considerations that outweigh this finding. 

Minded to Approve Subject to the following Conditions and that;

I.	The Strategic Director of Customer and Support Services be authorised to enter into a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure that all heavy goods vehicles entering or leaving the site in association with Units 1 and 2 Hazelhurst Road shall approach and leave the site along Hazelhurst Road onto Moorside Road and shall not divert onto any other route unless Traffic Management Controls require any such diversion.

II.	The applicant be informed that the Council is minded to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions stated below, on completion of such legal agreement;

III.	Authority be given for the decision notice relating to the application be issued, (subject to the conditions and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement;

IV.	Authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the S106 within a reasonable period on the grounds that the proposals do not support the aim and objectives of PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Subject to the following Conditions

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

2.	The use hereby permitted shall only be be operated between the hours of 8am and 6pm Monday to Saturday and 10am to 4pm on Sundays

3.	There shall be no external storage of equipment, refuse or machinery on the site at any time unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

4.	No HGVs shall enter, leave or operate within the site on Sundays and during the following additional hours:
	
	8am-9am and 3pm-6pm on Saturdays.

(Reasons)

1.	Standard Reason R000 Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.	Standard Reason R005B To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

3.	Standard Reason R005B To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

4.	Standard Reason R005B To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

Note(s) for Applicant

1.	The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the Applicant should take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of their proposal. Developers must also seek permission from the Coal Authority before undertaking any operation that involves entry into any coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and adits and the implementation of site investigations or other works.   Property specific summary information on any past, current or proposed surface and underground mining activity to affect the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The Coal Authority Mining Reports Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk

	

APPLICATION No:	08/56901/FUL

APPLICANT:	Taylor Wimpey

LOCATION:	Land Off Agecroft Road Pendlebury Swinton  

PROPOSAL:	Erection of four dwellings and one three storey building comprising 15 apartments together with associated landscaping, car parking and construction of new pedestrian access

WARD:	Pendlebury

Background

In March 2005 planning permission was granted for the erection of 58 dwellings and 96 apartments with associated car parking together with the creation of a new vehicular access of Agecroft Road.  The application also included the provision of a footpath / cycle way through the site ref: 04/47881/FUL).

Since this permission was granted the site has changed owners and a number of subsequent applications have been received from the current owners / developers.  These are detailed in the planning history section of the report below.

The area that is the subject of this application has extant planning permission for the erection of five three bedroom houses in the form of one pair of semi-detached properties, a row of three terraces as permitted by planning permission 07/54548/FUL, and one block of nine two bedroom apartments as permitted by planning permission 06/53288/FUL.

A Section 106 agreement accompanied planning permission 04/47881/FUL.  The agreement covered a number of aspects including; a commuted sum of £154, 719 to be paid in connection with off site formal open space provision within 1km of the site.  The agreement also detailed on site open space provision in the form of a footpath and cycle link around the north of the site through the open space within the site boundary.                      

Following the implementation of the previous approvals and physical works on the site it became apparent that the horizontal route of the proposed footpath was originally planned along a line that is too steep to be constructed and used safely.  This has been confirmed by an accompanied visit with a principle planning officer on-site. The level of the site is at 62.292m and falls steeply at the point of the retained tree line. The footpath was proposed to pick a route through the trees, however, at the start of the bank the slope drops down in level by some 5 meters over a length of 10 meters to a level of 57m resulting in a 1:2 gradient, this clearly would be to steep to be reasonably used and potentially dangerous. A generally reasonable, and safe to use footpath should by approximately 1:12 to allow safe access in all weather conditions.

Description of Site and Surroundings 

The site forms part of a larger development site.  The whole site is bounded by a railway line to the south- west and Agecroft Road to the south- east, beyond which are residential properties.  To the north of the site is the Slack Brook Country Park and to the east is Lumns Lane.  

The area that is the subject of this application is located along the north and west of the larger development site.  To the north within the site is uneven greenspace.  Whilst along the west boundary is an upwards slope with the railway beyond that.  The majority of the larger development site is either under construction or has been completed with many properties being occupied.  In particular the properties along Agecroft Road, Lumns Lane and all the dwellings to the east of the application site have been constructed.  The majority of the apartment blocks have been completed.

Description of Proposal

The applicant seeks consent for the erection of 4 two-storey three bed dwellings (consisting of two pairs of semi-detached dwellings) and 1no three-storey building (comprising of fifteen apartments, consisting of nine one-bedroom and six two-bedroom apartments).  Each of the dwellings would benefit from front and rear gardens. 

It is also proposed to vary the original Section 106 agreement attached to planning permission 04/47881/FUL.

(b)	An additional contribution of £10,032 in respect of five additional dwellings on the site;
(c)	The widening of the geographical area that the above contributions can be spent on from 1km to 2km within 3 years of receipt.
(d)	An additional £8, 100 due to the omission of the footpath / cycle link.
(e)	Incorporate all relevant planning permissions into the deed of variation.

The following documents were submitted in support of the application:

Design and Access Statement
Basic Site Investigation Report
Supporting Planning Statement
Sustainable Design and Construction Statement

Relevant Site History and Background

In May 2007 planning permission was granted for the erection of eight dwellings (substitution of house types on planning permission 04/47881/FUL) (07/54548/FUL)

In October 2006 planning permission was granted for the re-positioning of one - block of nine apartments (06/53288/FUL) as approved by 05/51472 FUL.

In December 2005 planning permission was granted for the erection of seven - three storey buildings comprising 96 apartments together with associated landscaping, car parking and construction of new vehicular access (ref: 05/51472/FUL).  This superseded the apartment provision as approved by 04/47881/FUL.

In March 2005 planning permission was granted for the erection of 58 dwellings and 96 apartments with associated car parking together with the creation of a new vehicular access of Agecroft Road (ref: 04/47881/FUL).

Publicity

A site notice was displayed 22nd September 2008.

A press notice was published on 25th September 2008.

The following neighbour addresses have been notified:

	16 – 38 (evens) Pendlecroft Avenue.
	JME Transport, Alec Sharples and Manchester Coach Painters Lumns Lane,
	39 – 103 (odds), 135, 139, 24 – 56 (evens) and 60 – 68 (evens) Brattice Drive.  (part of larger development)

Representations

No representations have been received in response to the publicity.

Consultations

Greater Manchester Geological – No objections but recommends a condition is attached requiring a site investigation report.  A condition is attached.

Environment Agency – No objections but recommends a condition relating to the submission of a scheme for surface water.  A condition is attached.

Police Architectural Liaison Officer – No comments received to date.

United Utilities – No objections providing the drainage meets a number of criteria.  A condition has been attached requesting a scheme be submitted.

Network Rail – No comment received to date.

The Development Plan

THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

ADOPTED REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY FOR THE NORTH WEST (RSS) (as adopted on 30/09)

DP4 – Making the Best use of Existing Resources and Infrastructure
MCR5 - Northern Part of the Manchester City Region.

UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Site specific policies: EN5 – Irwell valley
			EN8/18 – nature Conservation Sites of Local Importance
			EN9 – Wildlife Corridor	
			R4 – Key Recreation Area
	
Other policies:	H1 – Provision of New Housing Development
		H2 – Managing of the Supply of Housing
		DES1 – Respecting Context
		DES7 – Amenity of Users and Neighbours
		DES9 - Landscaping
		DES10 – Design and Crime
EN16 – Contaminated Land
EN19 – Flood Risk and Surface Water
A10 – Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
ST11 – Location of New Development

OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

NATIONAL PLANNING GUIDANCE

Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development  (PPS1)
Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (PPS3)
Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk (PPS25)

SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS (SPD)

Salford Greenspace Strategy (adopted July 2006)
Design and Crime SPD (adopted July 2006)
Trees and Development SPD (adopted in July 2006)
Sustainable Design and Construction Guide SPD (adopted in March 2008)
Design SPD (adopted in March 2008)

PLANNING GUIDANCE

Housing Planning Guidance (adopted on 20  December 2006) 
Flood Risk Planning Guidance (adopted July 2008) 

Appraisal

The main issues of consideration in the determination of this planning application are: whether the principle of the proposed development is acceptable, whether the proposal would provide adequate access into the site; whether the applicant would make an appropriate contribution to the provision of open space; whether issues of contamination have been taken into account, whether the layout and design of the site is acceptable; and whether the proposal complies with the relevant provisions of the Adopted UDP.  Each of these matters is dealt with in turn below.

Principle of Development

Policy ST11 of the Unitary Development Plan advocates a sequential approach to development with sites involving the reuse and conversion of existing buildings being the preferred location of development, followed by previously developed land with Greenfield sites last.  Sites should also be well served by a choice of means of access and are well related to housing, employment services and infrastructure.

Policy H1 of the UDP states that new housing development should, inter alia, contribute to the provision of a balanced mix of dwellings within the local area, provide a high quality residential environment and make adequate provision for open space.

Policy HOU1 of the Housing Guidance states that Within West Salford, the large majority of dwellings within new developments should be in the form of houses rather than apartments, in order to protect the existing character of the areas and reflect the generally lower levels of accessibility compared to other parts of the city.

Policy HOU2 of the Housing Guidance states that the majority of dwellings shall have a minimum of three bedrooms.  Paragraph 4.31 considers that the majority of new apartments should normally have two or three bedrooms, with a floorspace and layout that makes them adaptable to changing needs (typically 57 square metres or above).

Policy EN5 of the UDP states that development within the Irwell Valley will not be permitted where it would be contrary to a number of factors, including where it would reduce public accessibility of the valley, result in the unacceptable loss of land of acknowledged recreational value or have an unacceptable impact on important views into, through or within the valley.

Policy R4 of the UDP states that planning permission will only be granted on land within, adjoining or directly affecting a Key Recreation Area where it would be consistent with a number of objectives, including the protection and enhancement of the existing and potential recreational use of the area, the protection and improvement of the amenity of the area, the provision of public access for walking and cycling and the provision of open land recreational uses. 

Clearly the principal of the development has already been established in terms of UDP policy ST11 and PPS3.  However it is appropriate to consider the mix and type of dwellings.

The site is located within the Irwell Valley and an area of search for wildlife habitats and corridors in the Adopted UDP, and is also allocated for recreational purposes in the Adopted UDP under Policy R4.

The site has extant permissions for the erection of 58 dwellings and 96 two – bedroom apartments including the provision of a footpath / cycle way through the site.

This application would increase the overall number to 57 dwellings and 102 apartments.  Although the number of units are increasing on the site the number of bed spaces is the same as the extant permissions.  The apartment mix would now include nine one-bedroom apartments (see table below).  The one-berdroom apartments would have a floor space less than 57 square metres, however this represents less than 10% of the apartments in the overall scheme.  Given the extant permissions it is considered that this is acceptable.

Impact of proposal on overall housing mix	
Property type	Extant permissions	Proposed development	
1 bed apartments	0	9	
2 bed apartments	96	93	
3 bed dwellings	36	35	
4 bed dwellings	23	23	
 
It is intended to omit the proposed cycle / footpath link to the north of the site due to technical issues with its construction.  The link was internal and did not go beyond the realms of the application site.  It provided a link from the east to the west of the site.  Given that the path did not provide a link beyond the development site its omission is not considered to be unacceptable, subject to a payment in lieu of the provision for enhancements elsewhere.  This matter is considered in more detail later in the report. 

It is therefore considered that the proposal complies with the policies above and that the principle of the development is acceptable.

Design, Scale and Massing

Policy DES1 of the UDP requires developments to respond to their physical context and to respect the character of the surrounding area. In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with this policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.

Adopted Policy DES9 states that landscaping should be of a high quality, reflect the character of the area and the development, not detract from safety and security and form an integral part of the development.

Policy DES10 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and the Supplementary Planning Document ‘Design and Crime’ requires that development is not permitted unless it is designed to discourage crime, anti-social behaviour, and the fear of crime and support personal and property security.

The proposed dwellings are of a brick and tile roof construction and consist of two pairs of two-storey semi detached dwellings.  The materials to be used within the construction are used elsewhere in the site.

The proposed three- storey apartment block would be of brick and tile roof construction with a hipped roof.  The entrance to the block would face the proposed highway to the front.  The proposed materials have been used elsewhere on the site and the height is similar to the extant permission.  The proposed design and massing is considered to be acceptable in accordance with DES1.  

A landscape scheme has been submitted as part of the application.  The scheme is similar to the approved scheme and a condition has been attached to ensure the development would be carried out in accordance with the submitted scheme.

The layout of the scheme is similar to the extant permissions.  The apartment block has windows on all elevations to ensure natural surveillance.  No comments have been received from the Police Architectural Liaison Officer.  It is therefore considered the proposal is acceptable in accordance with DES10. 

Sustainable Design and Construction

Policy EN19 Flood Risk and Surface Water states that development, including the alteration of land levels, will not be permitted where it would:
•	be subject to an unacceptable risk of flooding; 
•	materially increase the risk of flooding elsewhere; 
•	or result in an unacceptable maintenance liability for the city council or any other agency in terms of dealing with flooding issues.
The site lies within the catchment of Slack Brook.  The Environment Agency have been consulted who do not consider that the development would exacerabate any future flooding.  United Utilities have no obejction to the proposal.  Both consultees have recommended a scheme be submitted in respect of surface water.  A scheme has previously been submitted and agreed as part of the extant permissons.  A condition would be attached to ensure a further scheme be submitted.
The applicant has provided a sustainability checklist to demonstrate what steps have been taken to incorporate construction techniques that would help reduce the impact of emissions.

Minimise energy consumption
	
The proposed layout is subject to site levels and the siting of the extant planning approval.
	
Maximise the provision of on-site renewable energy supply and/or connections to a decentralised low-carbon energy supply
	
Standard specification has been applied as part of the on going construction of the development site.
	
Incorporate public and private open spaces that offer shade and shelter from extreme weather events
	
Amenity space is provided for each dwelling and there are areas of green space around the apartments.  There will be some natural shading provided by buildings and trees throughout the site.
	
Minimise the impacts of ambient air and noise pollution
	
In terms of air pollution the site has extant permission in relation to the location of new developments.  
Acoustic measures in addition to double-glazing have been made to the properties adjacent to the railway line as required by the noise mitigation strategy.  The site will accord with the relevant Building Regulations.
	
Minimise water consumption
	
The scheme will include water metres.
	
Minimise the speed and quantity of surface water run-off
	
The application site area would be to small and impractical to incorporate a SUD’s system
	
Minimise the impact of flood events
	
A flood risk assessment has been carried out and no flood risk is anticipated
	
Maximise the use of responsibly sourced and/or recycled building materials
	
An option for timber framed construction has been examined however subject to the on going development it is impractical to change specification.
Based upon our construction specification the materials used will achieve a rating of D as a minimum.  This achievement is purely down to the specification we use and has not been tailored to meet the green Guide.
	
Minimise construction waste
	
The site has a Site Waste management Plan.  The proposal not involve demolition.
	
Incorporate adequate waste recycling facilities	
Areas for composting bins will be allocated to the houses.
There are areas allowed for in the scheme to the front of the houses and apartments for kerbside collections.
There is level access throughout the scheme to allow safe access for the elderly and disabled.
	
Maximise the provision of wildlife habitats
	
The wider site has retained a large number of mature trees.
	
Incorporate appropriate facilities for cyclists and pedestrians
	
There is cycle storage to the side of the apartments available within the whole site.  Footpaths along desire lines have been proposed within the whole site.

As mentioned the majority of the site is already constucted.  The  above checklist demonstrates that steps have been taken to ensure elements of sustainable construction.  A condition would be attached  to any permission requesting constructions detail of the hardstanding to the front of the dwellings to reduce surface water drainage.  Givent he extant permissons on the site the above steps are consider acceptable in this circumstance in accordance with the above policies.

Impact on Amenity

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

Policy EN16 states that development proposals on sites known or thought to be contaminated will require the submission of a site assessment as part of any planning application, identifying the nature and extent of the contamination involved, the risk involved, the risk it poses to future users/occupiers of the site, and the practical remedial measures it proposes to deal with the contamination.

There are no properties located to the rear of the proposed residential units.  Habitable room windows in the apartment block would be in excess of 21m to the facing apartment block.  The dwellings would be in located along the same building line as the extant permission.  Each of the dwellings would have a front and rear garden.  All of the apartment blocks throughout the site have green spaces around them with a large area of greenspace to the north.  It is therefore considered the proposal accords with DES7.

In accordance with Policy EN16, the applicants have submitted a site assessment report with the application.  This has been considered by the GMGU. The site has previously been landfilled and is a gassing site.  Part of the site has been developed and contamination issues are being monitored.  A condition would be attached to ensure that a full site investigation report be submitted in accordance with EN16. 

Highway Implications

Adopted Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s maximum standards. It also states that the maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded.

The details submitted indicate that each of the dwellings would have two car parking spaces provided to the front and the apartments scheme would accommodate 17 car parking spaces including one disabled space.

The car parking scheme was being revised at the time of writing this report. 

Developer Contributions

The current S106 agreement requires the following:

•	Provision of a footpath and cycle link;
•	Payment of £154,719 in lieu of on-site provision in respect of open space provision and maintenance to be used in a location of 1km of the development site.

It is proposed to vary the above agreement by the following:

•	Omission of the footpath and cycle link with an additional contribution of £8,100 to be paid in lieu of on-site provision to enhance public open space elsewhere.
•	An additional contribution of £10,032 in respect of five additional dwellings on the site.
•	The widening of the geographical area that the above contributions can be spent on from 1km to 2km within 3 years of receipt.

Value Added to Development

The deed of variation would allow the developer contributions to be spent on an identified site that does not fall within 1km of the site.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is considered that the principle of the proposed development is acceptable. The scheme would contribute to the provision of a mix of dwelling types in the area, and the amenity of existing and future residents will not be unacceptably  affect as a result of this scheme.  The proposal accounts for contamination issues and incorporates appropriate sustainability measures.  It is therefore considered that the application is consistent with the relevant policies of the City of Salford UDP.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Subject to the following Conditions and that the Strategic Director of Customer and Support Services be given authority to enter in to a Deed of Variation to vary the above detailed Section 106 agreement.

Conditions

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

2.	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 prior to first occupation of the development.  The Verification Report shall validate that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the LPA. 

3.	Prior to the commencement of development detailed designs of the gas protection measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include all details of the gas control schemes for the site and individual properties, details of the gas vent stacks, the method of connection between the stacks and the Geofin, the method of connection around service entries to the houses and the layout of foundation down stands.

4.	Prior to the commencement of a development a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Plannng Authority detailing the provision and implementation of a surface water regulation system.  The appoved sheme shall be implmented prior to first occupation.

5.	The landscape scheme hereby approved (Drawing No. TW-PR-ll-01 and TW-PR-BP-01) shall be carried out within 12 of the commencement of development.  Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced with the same species within twelve months.

6.	The development hereby approved shall be constructed in accordance with the materials as detailed on the submitted Drawing No. 2138/PPSP/01-EE unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

7.	Prior to first occupation the bin storage and recycling facilities shall be constructed and available for use in accordance with submitted plan Drawing No. 12138/PSP/01-EE and TW-PR-BS-01 and retained thereafter.

8.	Prior to the commencement of the development construction details for the proposed car parking / hardstandings for the dwellings and apartments shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The car parking / hardstanding shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and made available for use prior to first occupation.

(Reasons)

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

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

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

4.	To reduce the risk of flooding in accordance with UDP Policy EN19

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

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

7.	To encourage recycling.

8.	To reduce the risk of flooding in accordance with UDP Policy EN19

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.

2.	This permission relates to the following submitted plans;
	
	TW-PR-BP-01
	TW-PR-PD-02
	TW-PR-PD-03
	TW-PR-LL-01
	TW-PR-PD-01
	TW-PR-Bs-01
	________

3.	The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.

APPLICATION No:	08/57016/HH

APPLICANT:	Mr Paul Bainbridge

LOCATION:	52 Overlinks Drive Salford M6 7PF    

PROPOSAL:	Retention of a first floor rear extension

WARD:	Claremont

Description of Site and Surroundings 

This application relates to a semi-detached dwelling on Overlinks Drive, Salford. The application site and no.50 currently have detached garages to the rear closest to the side common boundaries with each other. No.51 Avondale Drive (property to the rear) currently has a single storey rear extension.

Description of Proposal

The application is for the retention of a first floor side extension. The proposal projects 2.7m from the main rear elevation, it is set in 1.7m from the side common boundary with no.54 Overlinks Drive and it is 1.1m from the side common boundary with no.50 Overlinks Drive. It is 4.5m in width and is 5m in height to the eaves and 6.7m in height to the ridge. The applicant is disabled and the extension provides a lift and an en-suite.

Site History

93/31397/HH- Erection of a single storey rear extension- permitted August 1993.

07/54955/HH- Erection of a first floor rear extension- permitted August 2007. This extant permission has been implemented.

The current application is identical to the extant permission in terms of size, location and massing the difference being the addition of an obscure glazed window, which has been introduced to the side elevation facing no.54 Overlinks Drive.

Publicity

The following neighbour addresses have been notified:

50 and 54 Overlinks Drive
49,51,53 Avondale Drive

Representations

One letter of objection has been received regarding the above application the following issues have been raised:

•	Loss of privacy to no.54 Overlinks Drive

An email from Councillor Owen has been received requesting this application to be determined by the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel due to the side facing window being inserted without planning permission and loss of privacy to no.54 Overlinks Drive.

Consultations

N/A

The Development Plan

Adopted City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

Site specific policies: None
DES1 (Respecting Context)
DES7 (Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES8 (Alterations and Extensions)

Other Material Considerations

Supplementary Planning Document- House Extensions

Appraisal

The main issues for consideration with this application are the impact of the proposed extension on the amenity of the surrounding and future residents and the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area. The main policies of relevance are DES1, DES7, and DES8 of the City of Salford adopted UDP and the House Extensions SPD.

DESIGN

UDP Policy DES1 states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness. 

UDP Policy DES8 states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area.

The proposed development is to the rear of the application site and is not visible from Overlinks Drive. The proposed development has been constructed with a hipped roof and it has been constructed from materials that match the existing dwelling. The extension is 0.6m lower than the main roof and therefore appears subordinate to the main house. The proposed development is indentical in design, scale and massing as the extant permission. It is therefore considered the proposal is not an incongruous feature within this residential setting nor does it harm the character of the dwelling or the character of the area in accordance with DES1 and DES8.

AMENITY

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

There is an en-suite window in the rear elevation of the extension that is 18m from the rear elevation of the neighbouring dwellings to the rear. The dimensions of the extension are identical to the extant permission. It is therefore considered the proposal does not have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring occupiers in terms of privacy in accordance with DES7.

Policy HE2 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for extensions that introduce windows or open aspects close to and directly overlooking the gardens of neighbouring dwellings. The term ‘close to’ refers to 5m, however this can be overcome with obscure glazing, except to principal habitable room windows.

There is an obscure galzed window in the side elevation of the extension that is situated adjacent to the lift opening. This window is 1.7m from the side common boundary with no.54 Overlinks Drive. The planning officer entered the site and viewed the extension internally, when looking through this window towards no.54 it is obscure glazed and cant be seen through, also the window barley opens and when opened there is only a minimal view towards no.54. The proposed window is in front of the lift opening and it is considered unlikely to be used as a habitable room due to its small size and also given that this would prevent access to the lift. A condition could be attached to ensure this window remains obscurely glazed. It is therefore considered the proposal does not have an unacceptable impact on the neighbouring occupiers on no.54 in terms of privacy in accordance with DES7.

Policy HE7 of the House Extensions SPD states in the absence of an extension along the common boundary of the adjoining dwelling planning permission will normally be granted for a two storey/first floor rear extension provided its projection is equal too or less than its distance from the nearest common boundary.

The extension is 1.7m from the side common boundary with no.54 and it projects 2.7m from the main rear elevation of no.54. The extension is identical in size and massing as the extant permission. Paragraph 14.1 of the House Extensions SPD states that personal circumstances, such as a disability, or the specific requirements of minority groups may make it difficult to provide the necessary facilities within the standards set out within this document.  The council may interpret these standards flexibly in such circumstances, but proposals that significantly deviate from them are still unlikely to be appropriate. Consideration of personal circumstances will be assessed on a case – by –case basis. The extension is for a disabled applicant and it facilitates a lift and an en-suite, thus the extension projects no further and is no closer to the side common boundary with no.54 than the extant permission. Therefore when balancing the needs of the applicant against the impact of the proposed development it is considered the proposal is acceptable.

Although no.50 does not adjoin the application site the principle of this policy can still be applied in order to assess the impact the extension may have in terms of loss of light and overbearing. The extension is 2.7m from the main rear elevation of no.50 and it project 2.7m from the main rear elevation of no.50. It is therefore considered the proposal does not have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring occupiers in terms of loss of light and overbearing in accordance with DES7. 

CONCLUSION

It is considered that the proposal does not have a detrimental impact on the street scene, or on the occupiers of neighbouring properties. The proposal is in accordance with the Council's Supplementary Planning Document on House Extensions and policies DES1, DES7 and DES8 of the adopted City of Salford UDP.

Accordingly, approval is recommended. 

	

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Subject to the following Conditions

1.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, the window in the side elevation of the development facing the side common boundary with no.54 Overlinks Drive shall remain permanently glazed, in textured glass whose obscuration level is 5 on a scale of 1-5 (where 1 is clear and 5 is completely obscure.

(Reason)

1.	Standard Reason R005B 

Note(s) for Applicant

1.	The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the Applicant should take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of their proposal. Developers must also seek permission from the Coal Authority before undertaking any operation that involves entry into any coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and adits and the implementation of site investigations or other works.   Property specific summary information on any past, current or proposed surface and underground mining activity to affect the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The Coal Authority Mining Reports Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk

2.	Please note this permission relates to the following plans: drawing no.1.1277 AB received on 30th September 2008.

APPLICATION No:	08/56874/HH

APPLICANT:	D Hancock

LOCATION:	2 Lyndale Avenue Swinton M27 0BF    

PROPOSAL:	Demolition of existing garage and single storey rear extension and erection of a part single/part two storey side/rear extension

WARD:	Worsley

At the meeting of the panel held on the 6th November 2008 consideration of this application was DEFERRED FOR AN INSPECTION BY THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL.

The observations are set out below:

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

The application relates to a semi-detached property on Lyndale Avenue, Swinton. Lyndale Avenue is a short straight cul de sac made up of two pairs of semi detached dwellings. The area is residential in nature and is dominated by semi detached dwellings. The property, along with the other in the street has a single storey out rigger to the rear. The property also has an existing attached garage to the side. These elements would be demolished to make way for the proposal. The adjacent property, 9 Wentworth Road has a single storey detached garage to the rear of the property which runs along the side boundary of the application site. This is accessed via Lyndale Avenue. The adjoining property, 4 Lyndale Avenue currently projects approximately 0.5m beyond the main rear elevation of the application property. 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

Permission is sought for the demolition of the existing garage and single storey rear extension and the erection of a part single/part two storey side/rear extension.

The proposed side extension at ground floor would be flush with the front elevation of the existing dwelling. It would project approximately 2.95m from the side of the original dwelling before extending approximately 5.3m back. It would then step in approximately 0.8m before extending a further 6.4m back. (It would project approximately 3.6m beyond the main rear elevation of the existing dwelling.)The proposal would then wrap round the rear of the existing dwelling and extend the full width of the dwelling. It would be set in approximately 0.15m from the common boundary with the adjoining dwelling. 

The first floor would be set back 0.6m from the main front elevation.

The rear element of the proposal would be part single storey, part two storey. The single storey element would be sited along the common boundary with the adjoining property and would be approximately 3.4m in width. The two storey element would be set in approximately 3.6m from the same common boundary and would be approximately 4.75m in width.

The single storey element of the proposed side extension would be approximately 3.5m in height with a hipped roof. The single storey rear element would be approximately 3.5m in height with a pitched roof. The two storey element of the proposal would be approximately 7.1m in height at its highest point (approximately 1.1m lower than the main dwelling)and would incorporate a hipped roof.

Internally the proposal would accommodate a garage, W.C, utility room, kitchen and a dining room at ground floor level and a bedroom, bathroom and two en suites at first floor level.

SITE HISTORY

The site has no previous planning history.

PUBLICITY

The following neighbour addresses were notified:

7, 9, 11, 13 and 15 Wentworth Road, Swinton.
1, 3 and 4 Lyndale Avenue, Swinton.
22 and 24 Ashley Avenue, Swinton.

Amended description letters sent: 02/09/08

Amended plan letters sent: 13/10/08

REPRESENTATIONS

Councillor Macdonald has requested that the application be determined by the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel for the following reason:
•	the proposed development would result in an unacceptable loss of light to the rear room of 4 Lyndale Avenue.

Nine letters of objection have been received. (Six from 4 Lyndale Avenue, one from 9 Wentworth Avenue and two from 11 Wentworth Avenue.)

The letters raise the following concerns:
•	The possibility of additional windows being added at a later date which would overlook the properties along Wentworth Road
•	The boundary line indicated on the plans in incorrect
•	Possible impact of the proposal on the kitchen extensions of the properties along Wentworth Road 
•	Loss of light and tunnel effect
•	Height of the proposal and loss of view

Loss of view is not a material planning consideration and cannot be considered as part of this application. The possibility that future windows may be added over looking the rear gardens of properties along Wentworth Road cannot be considered as part of this application. The amendments to the General Permitted Development Order which came into force on 1st October 2008 allow for the insertion of a window without the need for planning permission subject to the condition that any upper floor window located in a wall forming the side elevation of the dwelling house shall be obscure glazed. If any new first floor windows are not obscure glazed then planning permission will be required and the impact on the occupiers of surrounding properties will be assessed as part of the application.

Any disputes over the location of the boundary are a civil matter. The red line boundary submitted with the application has remained the same throughout the application process. The applicants have confirmed that they do not propose to remove the existing boundary treatment which is currently in place and the boundary line has been shown on the floor plans as an indication only. 

Concerns have been raised in relation to the boundary line shown on the initial floor plans submitted and amended plans have since been received. A further letter of objection was received stating that the boundary shown on the amended floor plans was also incorrect. As a result the applicant has spoken to the occupiers of 9 and 11 Wentworth Road and they have agreed to go back to the boundary line indicated on the initial floor plans submitted. 
 
The other concerns raised will be considered as part of the appraisal of proposal below.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY

UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN 

Site specific policies: None
DES1 (Respecting Context)
DES7 (Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES8 (Alterations and Extensions)
A8	(Impact of Development on the Highway Network) 

OTHER MATERIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS 

House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document. 

PLANNING APPRAISAL

The main planning issues relating to this application are the impact of the proposed extension on the amenity of the surrounding and future residents; impact on highway safety and the impact of the proposed development on the character of the area and whether the proposal accords with all relevant policies of the Unitary Development Plan and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Documents on House Extensions.

DESIGN  

UDP Policy DES1 states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness. 

UDP Policy DES8 states that planning permission will only be granted for alterations or extensions to existing buildings that respect the general scale, character, rhythm, proportions, details and materials of the original structure and complement the general character of the surrounding area. 

The proposed side extension would be visible from the street. It would incorporate a hipped roof and is of a design, which is considered to be in keeping with the existing dwelling and surrounding area. The two storey element would be approximately 1.1m lower than the main dwelling therefore appearing subordinate. It is considered the proposed side extension would not look out of place or have a significant effect on the character of the area or be an incongruous feature in this setting. The rear elements of the proposal would not be visible from the street however it is considered that they have been designed well and would be in keeping with the existing dwelling. The applicant accounts that materials (roof and walls) would match the main dwelling and a condition would be attached to ensure this. In respect of this, it is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with policies DES1 and DES8.      

Policy HE8 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for a two storey side extension that lies within 1m of the side boundary of the dwelling unless the first floor element is set back a minimum of 2m from the front main wall of the property or the ground and first floor elements are set back a minimum of 1m from the front main wall of the property.

The proposed side extension would be set in approximately 0.2m from the side boundary and the first floor would be set back approximately 0.6m from the main front elevation of the existing dwelling. As the street only comprises of two pairs of semi detached dwellings (one pair on each side of the road) it is considered that terracing cannot occur and that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable effect on the street scene, in accordance with Policy HE8.  

AMENITY

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

Policy HE1 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for extensions that do not maintain a minimum distance of 21m between facing principal windows of habitable rooms and a minimum distance of 10.5m between the principal window of any habitable room of the proposed extension and the common boundary with the facing property if applicable.

Policy HE2 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for extensions that introduce windows or open aspects close to and directly overlooking the gardens of neighbouring dwellings. The term ‘close to’ refers to 5m, however this can be overcome with obscure glazing, except to principle habitable room windows.

Policy HE3 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for a two-storey or first floor extension that does not maintain a minimum of 13m between its blank gable end wall and facing ground floor principal windows of habitable rooms of neighbouring dwellings. The same distance applies for proposed extensions that face a two storey blank gable end wall.
Policy HE5 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for single storey rear extensions that project beyond a 45 degree line taken from either the mid point of a principal ground floor window of a habitable room or a point 3m along the common boundary from the rear elevation of adjoining or adjacent dwellings.

The front elevation of the proposed side extension would introduce a habitable room window (bedroom) at first floor level. This window would directly face the single storey garage at the facing property and would maintain a distance of approximately 19m. The bedroom window would be no closer than existing habitable room windows in the front elevation of the application site and surrounding properties.

The application site and other properties in the street already have less than the required 21m distance between facing habitable room windows. (The distances maintained are approximately 18.5m. 

As such it is considered that the proposed development would not be of such detriment to the living conditions of the occupiers of the facing property (1 Lyndale Avenue) to justify the refusal of this proposal. 

The rear elevation of the proposal would introduce habitable room windows at ground floor level. A distance of approximately 20m would be maintained to the rear boundary with the nearest facing properties to the rear being approximately 30m away.

The side elevation of the proposed side extension would introduce a first floor window adjacent the boundary with 9 Wentworth Road. In order to protect the privacy of the occupiers of 9 Wentworth Road the applicants have agreed to obscure glaze this windows. A condition would be attached to ensure this. The side elevation of the single storey rear extension would introduce no windows.

The side elevation of the proposed two-storey side/rear extension would directly face the rear elevations of 9 and 11 Wentworth Road. 9 Wentworth Road has a detached garage to the rear of the property, along the common boundary with the application site, which would partially screen the proposal. 9 and 11 Wentworth Road each have a single storey outrigger which accommodates the kitchen. A distance of approximately 10.5m would be maintained. Given that kitchens are not considered to be habitable rooms it is not considered necessary to protect light to these rooms. The proposed two-storey side/rear extension would maintain a distance of approximately 14.5m from the ground floor habitable room window in the main rear elevation of 9 Wentworth Road and approximately 14m from the ground floor habitable room window in the main rear elevation of 11 Wentworth Road.

The proposed single storey rear extension would not project beyond a 45 degree line taken from a point 3m along the common boundary from the main rear elevation of 4 Lyndale Avenue.

The proposed two-storey rear element of the proposal would project approximately 3.1m beyond the main rear elevation of 4 Lyndale Avenue and would be set in approximately 3.6m from the common boundary.

It is therefore considered that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact to the current or future occupiers of the application site or surrounding properties in accordance with policies HE1, HE2, HE3, HE5 and DES7.

HIGHWAY SAFETY

UDP Policy A8 states development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety.

Policy HE12 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for the erection of a garage with an up and over door unless a hard standing of 5.5m in length and 2.4m in width is kept between the front of the garage and the highway, unless there would be no impact on highway safety and the free flow of traffic. The reasoned justification for this policy goes on to say that where a roller shutter door is proposed it may be possible to reduce the length of the hard standing to 4.8m.

The proposed garage would have a roller shutter door and would maintain a hard standing of approximately 4.7m in length and 2.8m in width. Highway Engineers have been consulted and have no objection provided a roller shutter door is provided. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable effect on traffic safety, in accordance with Policies A8 and HE12.

VALUE ADDED TO DEVELOPMENT	

Initial plans submitted indicated a step in the boundary line between the application property and 9 and 11 Wentworth Road. Amended plans have since been received which indicate a straight line boundary. 

CONCLUSION

The proposal would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the street scene or the amenity of neighbours and future occupiers in accordance with all relevant policies within the Unitary Development Plan and House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document and there are no other material considerations that outweigh those policies. 

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Subject to the following Conditions

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

2.	The facing materials to be used for the walls and roof of the development shall be the same type, colour and texture as those of the existing building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

3.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, prior to the development hereby approved being brought into use, the window in the side elevation facing the boundary with 9 and 11 Wentworth Road shall be provided with and permanently glazed, in textured glass whose obscuration level is 5 on a scale of 1-5 (where 1 is clear and 5 is completely obscure).

4.	The garage hereby approved shall be fitted with a roller shutter door prior to the first use of the garage and shall be retained thereafter.

(Reasons)

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

2.	To ensure the development fits in with the existing building in accordance with policy DES1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 

3.	To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 

4.	In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A 8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 

Note(s) for Applicant

1.	The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the Applicant should take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of their proposal. Developers must also seek permission from the Coal Authority before undertaking any operation that involves entry into any coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and adits and the implementation of site investigations or other works.   Property specific summary information on any past, current or proposed surface and underground mining activity to affect the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The Coal Authority Mining Reports Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk

2.	Please note this permission relates to the submitted plans received 20th August 2008.

APPLICATION No:	08/57054/HH

APPLICANT:	P Heavey

LOCATION:	21 Lancaster Road Salford M6 8AQ    

PROPOSAL:	Erection of a detached double garage with construction of dormers in front roof space (Resubmission of planning application 08/56162/HH)

WARD:	Weaste And Seedley

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

This application relates to a detached property on Lancaster Road, Salford. The area is residential in nature with a mix of different house types. To the side of the site is The Oaklands Hospital. The site has a large garden to the rear, which slopes downwards towards the rear boundary. The property has an existing single storey element to the rear (this is consistent with the other properties in the row), which is to be retained. The property also has an existing detached garage to the side/rear, which is to be demolished. An existing drive way is present at the application site which runs adjacent to the common boundary with Oaklands Hospital. The hard standing continues along the boundary, the full length of the garden and to the rear of the site it is the full width of the garden. This hard standing is to be retained.

Boundary treatment to the rear consists of a 1.5m high fence. Boundary treatment to the side of the rear garden along the side boundary with 23 Lancaster Road consists of 1.5m fencing with a 1.7m high wall between the two properties. Boundary treatment on the side boundary adjacent to the hospital consists of a 2m wall along the side of the dwelling and 1.8m fencing to the garden area. 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

Permission is sought for the erection of a detached double garage with the construction of two dormers in the front roof space.

The proposed garage would be sited along the rear common boundary with 22 Venesta Avenue. (Approximately 0.4m from the rear boundary) The garage would be approximately 28m from the rear elevation of the existing single storey rear element of the dwelling house.

The garage would be approximately 7.8m in width and 7.14m in depth excluding the external staircase. The external staircase would be approximately 0.8m in width and approximately 3.6m in height to the highest point of the hand rail. The platform area at the top of the staircase out side the door to the storeroom would be approximately 1.5m in length by 0.8m in width.

The garage would incorporate a pitched roof and would be 6.05m in height at its highest point. It would have two dormers in the front roof space, which would be the same height as the proposed garage. They would be approximately 2.8m in width and would project a maximum of approximately 3.45m from the roof plane. 

The garage would accommodate space for two cars at ground floor level and a storeroom in the roof space which would be accessed by the external staircase.

It is also proposed to construct a further hard standing area to the front of the garage approximately 6.5m by 8m. This hard standing is permitted under Class F of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (No. 2) (England) Order 2008 and as such will not be considered as part of this application.

Development is permitted by Class F subject to the condition that where:
•	the hard surface would be situated on land between a wall forming the principal elevation of the dwelling house and a highway, and
•	the area of ground covered by the hard surface, or the area of hard surface replaces, would exceed 5 square metres,
either the hard surface shall be made of porous materials, or provision shall be made to direct run-off water from the hard surface to a permeable or porous area or surface within the curtilage of the dwelling house.

The hard standing is not located between the house and the highway and as such is permitted under class F. 

SITE HISTORY

08/56162/HH –Erection of a part first/part two storey rear extension, conservatory to rear and a detached double garage with construction of dormers in front roof space.

This application was refused under delegated powers on 12th May 2008 for the following reasons:

•	‘The proposed development would result in an unacceptable loss of light and be overbearing to the residents of No. 23 Lancaster Road, contrary to Policy DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and HE3 of the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance for House Extensions.’
•	‘The proposed development would result in an unacceptable loss of privacy to the residents of No. 23 Lancaster Road, contrary to Policy DES7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan and HE2 of the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance for House Extensions.’

This application differs from the previous application, as the part first floor/part two-storey rear extension and conservatory are not proposed. The proposed garage is the same size and is of the same design as that of the previously refused application. The previous refusal did not relate to the proposed garage but related specifically to the proposed part first floor/part two storey rear extension.

08/00039/REF - There is currently an ongoing appeal in relation to the previously refused application, 08/56126/HH.
The appeal has only recently been submitted. The Council’s statement is to be submitted by 10th December 2008 and as such a decision is not likely to be made until the new year.

PUBLICITY

The following neighbour addresses were notified:

20, 22 and 24 Venesta Avenue, Salford M6
23 Lancaster Road, Salford M6
Oakland’s Hospital, 19 Lancaster Road, Salford M6

REPRESENTATIONS

Councillor Ainsworth has requested that the application be determined by the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel. No reasons for this request have been provided.

A number of objection letters have also been received in relation to the application. One from the occupiers of 24 Venesta Avenue, one from the occupiers of 23 Lancaster Road and two from the occupiers of 22 Venesta Avenue.
The letters raise the following concerns:
1.	Size, nature and location of proposal
2.	Scale, density is out of keeping with adjoining residences and family gardens
3.	Detrimental impact in neighbouring amenities
4.	Visual intrusion
5.	Increased potential noise, including night time vehicle entry and exit noise to the garage
6.	Light pollution from car headlights
7.	Loss of light
8.	Loss of privacy
9.	Pollution from extra cars
10.	Loss of trees and wildlife 
11.	Loss of view
12.	Garage is two storey  - possibility of future conversion to a dwelling
13.	Environmental impact in terms of noise and fumes to surrounding gardens
14.	Overlooking 
15.	Out of character with the area
16.	Closeness of garage to properties to the rear
17.	Aesthetic ugliness of the proposed garage/the garage would be an eyesore
18.	Proposed garage and vehicles contained therein may provide an increased incentive for criminals 
19.	A substantial amount of the rear garden will be replaced by driveway/hard standing
20.	Reduced quality of amenity space
21.	Reduction in value of surrounding properties 
22.	Are there any TPO’s on the site
23.	The location of windows close to the boundary with properties along Venesta Avenue.

The issues raised will be considered as part of the appraisal of proposal below.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY

UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN 

Site specific policies: None
DES1 (Respecting Context)
DES7 (Amenity of Users and Neighbours)
DES8 (Alterations and Extensions)
DES10 (Design and Crime)
A8 (Impact of Development on the Highway Network) 

OTHER MATERIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS 

House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document. 
Design and Crime Supplementary Planning Document

APPRAISAL OF PROPOSAL

The main planning issues relating to this application are the impact of the proposed garage on the amenity of the surrounding and future residents; impact on highway safety and the impact of the proposed development on the character of the area and whether the proposal accords with all relevant policies of the Unitary Development Plan, the House Extensions Supplementary Planning Documents and the Design and Crime Supplementary Planning Document. 
DESIGN
UDP Policy DES1 states that development will be required to respond to its physical context and respect the positive character of the local area in which it is situated and contribute towards a local identity and distinctiveness. 
The proposal would not be visible from the street. The site benefits from a large garden to the rear. The proposal would maintain a large area of open garden space to the rear and as such it is considered that the proposal would be of an appropriate scale in relation to the site. The proposed garage would be in a similar location and of a similar size to an existing detached garage in the rear garden of number 29 Lancaster Road. (4 plots up from the application site.) This was given permission in 1998 (97/37480/HH) The proposed garage would introduce two dormers in the front roof space. The proposed dormers would not project above the ridge of the proposed garage, would not be built off any external walls and would be set back approximately 0.2m back from the eaves. The dormers would incorporate pitched roofs in keeping with the proposed garage. The applicant accounts that materials used would match those of the existing dwelling.

It is therefore considered that the design of the proposal would be in keeping with the existing property and would not look out of place or have a significant effect on the character of the area in accordance with policy DES1.
AMENITY
UDP Policy DES7 states that alterations and extensions to existing buildings will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. It states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of occupiers or users of other developments.

Policy HE3 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for a two-storey or first floor extension that does not maintain a minimum of 13m between its blank gable end wall and facing ground floor principal windows of habitable rooms of neighbouring dwellings. The same distance applies for proposed extensions that face a two storey blank gable end wall.

Policy HE4 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for a single storey extension that does not maintain a minimum distance of 9m between its blank gable end wall and facing ground floor principal windows of habitable rooms of neighbouring dwellings. This same distance applies for proposed single storey extensions facing existing blank gable end wall and extensions at the same floor level as neighbouring windows.

The proposed garage would introduce no habitable room windows. The front elevation of the proposal would introduce two dormer windows, which would serve a storeroom. These windows would look directly over the rear garden of the application site (towards the rear elevation of the existing dwelling.) The dormers would maintain a distance of approximately 33m from the habitable room windows in the main rear elevation of the application property and the adjacent property, 23 Lancaster Road. (A distance of approximately 28m would be maintained to the rear elevations of the existing single storey rear elements at the application site and 23 Lancaster Road)

The side elevations of the proposed garage would introduce no windows. The proposed external staircase would provide access to the roof space of the proposal and would be site adjacent to the boundary with Oaklands Hospital. Beyond this is the car park, which serves the hospital.

The rear elevation of the proposed garage would directly face the rear elevation of 22 Venesta Avenue. 22 Venesta Avenue has a single storey rear element which accommodates a kitchen. (This is considered to be a non habitable room) 

The main rear elevation of 22 Venesta Avenue has habitable room windows at ground and first floor level. The proposed garage would be single storey with a storeroom in the roof space. The ground level of the properties along Venesta Avenue is approximately 0.5m lower than the ground level of the application site. 

Policy HE4 relates to single storey extensions and requires that a distance of 9m be maintained between a blank gable wall and the ground floor habitable room windows of facing properties. Policy HE3 relates to two storey extensions and requires a distance of 13m to be maintained from the blank gable to the ground floor habitable room windows of facing properties. The proposal would maintain a distance of approximately 14.5m from the ground floor habitable room windows in the rear elevation of 22 Venesta Avenue, this is in excess of the distances required by both policies HE3 and HE4. 

Approximately 1.2m of the proposal would directly face the rear elevation of 24 Venesta Avenue. 24 Venesta Avenue has a single storey extension to the rear and habitable room windows in the rear elevation at ground and first floor level. A distance of approximately 12m would be maintained to the single storey extension at 24 Venesta Avenue. This is well in excess of the 9m distance required by policy HE3. Should the proposal be considered to be two storey, it is considered that as only 1.2m of the proposal would directly face the rear elevation of 24 Venesta Avenue it would not be of such detriment to the living conditions of the occupiers of 24 Venesta Avenue to justify the refusal of this proposal.

Access to the store room in the roof space would be via an external staircase which would be sited adjacent the common boundary with Oakland’s Hospital. The staircase would be approximately 2.6m from the rear common boundary with 22 Venesta Avenue. The platform at the top of the stairs would be approximately 1.5m in length by 0.8m in width. It is considered that the platform would not allow seating outside and would not provide a usable area of space. As such it would not result in an unacceptable loss of privacy to the occupants of the properties to the rear. 

It is therefore considered that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact to the current or future occupiers of the application site or surrounding properties in accordance with policies DES7 and HE4.

DESIGN AND CRIME

Policy DES10 states that development will not be permitted unless it is designed to discourage crime, anti-social band fear of crime and support personal and property security.

The garage would be located to the rear of the site and would be visible from surrounding properties therefore allowing natural surveillance. Existing boundary treatments are to be retained and as such the garage could only be accessed from the application site. The garage would be fitted with a secure door and as such it is not considered that it would result in an increased level of crime.

HIGHWAY SAFETY

UDP Policy A8 states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety.

Policy HE12 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for the erection of a garage with an up and over door unless a hard standing of 5.5m in length and 2.4m in width is kept between the front of the garage and the highway, unless there would be no impact on highway safety and the free flow of traffic. 

The existing hard standing to the front/side of the property is to be maintained. The proposed garage would introduce a further hard standing area to the front approximately 6.5m by 8m. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety, in accordance with policies A8 and HE12.

OTHER ISSUES

Possible pollution/noise from extra cars, night time vehicle entry and exit, light pollution - the proposed garage would be used by the occupiers of the application site. The application site is a residential dwelling, which has an existing detached garage (which is to be demolished). The proposed detached garage would not alter nor intensify the current use of the dwelling. As such it is considered that there would not be a significant increase in the number of cars coming and going to and from the application site nor would there be a significant increase in noise or light.

The provision of a hard standing in the rear garden does not require planning permission, nor would the parking of cars to the rear of the property or the removal of existing bushes/shrubs. There is at TPO on the tree to the front of the property along the boundary with Oaklands Hospital. There are also a number of trees within the grounds of Oakland’s hospital which are sited adjacent the existing hard standing at the application site. The existing crown spread of the trees does not overhang the site and no works would be carried out within the vicinity of the trees.

The agent has been contacted with regards to the use of the first floor of the proposed garage and has confirmed that the intended use of the first floor is as a storeroom. However as long as the use of the proposal is incidental to the use of the main dwelling then it would be acceptable. 

For example if the accommodation to be provided in a new garden building is of the sort which would normally be considered as essential to the everyday requirements of a house it cannot be considered as incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house. E.g. a building which was to contain all facilities normally associated with a house, such as a living room, bedroom, kitchen and a bathroom, it would not be considered to be incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house. 
However where the function of the space provided is subordinate to the basic or primary accommodation to be expected at a dwelling house then it would be classed as incidental.

If a new separate dwelling was created then planning permission would be required. An informative has been added to this effect.

Loss of view and reduction in the value of surrounding properties are not material planning considerations. 

CONCLUSION

It is considered that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the street scene or the amenity of neighbours and future occupiers in accordance with all relevant policies within the Unitary Development Plan and House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document and there are no other material considerations that outweigh those policies. 

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Subject to the following Conditions

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

(Reason)

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

Note(s) for Applicant

1.	The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the Applicant should take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of their proposal. Developers must also seek permission from the Coal Authority before undertaking any operation that involves entry into any coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and adits and the implementation of site investigations or other works.   Property specific summary information on any past, current or proposed surface and underground mining activity to affect the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The Coal Authority Mining Reports Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk

2.	Please note this permission relates to the submitted plans received 7th October 2008.

3.	The applicants are advised that should the garage hereby approved be used for any purpose which is not incidental to the main dwelling house then planning permission will be required.

APPLICATION No:	08/56810/FUL

APPLICANT:	Peel Media Ltd

LOCATION:	Land At Quays Point Off Broadway Salford Quays Salford 5   

PROPOSAL:	Application to amend condition 30 of planning permission 06/53168/OUt to allow occupation of buildings prior to the Broadway link coming into use

WARD:	Ordsall

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDINGS 

This applications relates to two sites, firstly the MediaCity development site located at quays point and secondly the Broadway Link Road, between Centenary Way and Daniel Adamson Road.

MediaCity location

The MediaCity development occupiers a site known as Quays Point, which lies to the north of Dock 9. To the north of Quays Point is Broadway, beyond which are a number of industrial uses. To the south, the site is bounded by the Manchester Ship Canal and Dock 9. The Imperial War Museum is located on the opposite side of the Ship Canal, within Trafford. To the south, across Dock 9, are the Lowry Theatre, Lowry Plaza and the Lowry Outlet shopping centre. To the south east of the site are the three NV buildings and the City Lofts development. To the east of the site is the Metrolink tramline, beyond which are industrial units.

Broadway Link Road Location

The Broadway Link Road forms an area of land between Centenary Way (A576) and Broadway (A5186). The site is linear stretch of land running from the northwest (Centenary Way) to the southeast (Broadway). The site is constrained to the north and south by commercial land.

To the north of the application site at the northwest end is a new build office development (Centenary Park), which contains a variety of office and warehousing units. At the southwest end of the site is a large sewage works. To the south of the application site at the northwest end is a large flour mill and a sub station, to the southwest of the site is a cement works. To the south of the site close to Pacific Way, planning permission has been granted for office development (ref 07/54015/FUL)

There are no formal north/ south routes that link with the site, to the east of Centenary Park there is a small track running from the application site, between industrial properties to Eccles New Road. At approximately half way along the application site, a railway line crosses the site, which is used on an infrequent basis by freight trains and serves the Cement Works. To the north of the site more generally are a range of industrial and employment units and beyond the Eccles New Road. To the south of the site beyond the flourmill, is the Manchester Ship Canal and beyond that Trafford Park Industrial Estate.

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

This application seeks to vary condition 30 of the outline planning consent for the MediaCity development (ref: 06/53168/OUT).

Condition 30 is worded as follows:

‘None of the buildings hereby approved shall be first occupied unless and until the Broadway Link (Broadway to Centenary Way, as identified in Policy A9 in the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 2004 - 2016 ) is available for use’
The application seeks the amendment to the condition by adding the wording ‘unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority’. This, the agent reports, is required in order that some of the residential units currently under construction on the site, could be occupied, should, as is currently envisaged, they will be available for occupation before the Broadway link road would be made available for use. However, this permission does not seek the occupation of any unit in advance of the development being available for use at this stage, but would simply allow sufficient flexibility, if and when this may be necessary for the applicant to approach the Council, as Local Planning Authority, to ask whether some units could be occupied before the Broadway Link is available for use.

SITE HISTORY

This application forms part of a wider development site where the following applications are considered to be relevant:

In April 2008 planning permission was granted for the construction of a 1.2km link road connecting the roundabout on Centenary Way to Daniel Adamson Road. (ref. 08/55210/EIA)

In February 2008 planning permission was granted for details of scale and appearance pursuant to outline planning permission 06/53168/OUT for the erection of a part 5, part 17, part 21 storey building to comprise of 168 residential units, 3252sq m of office accommodation, 24,233 sq m of studio space and 11,170sq m of hotel accommodation (ref. 07/55650/REM)

In February 2008 planning permission was granted for the erection of a 11 storey carpark to include 2116 carparking spaces, associated plant and support facilities for Mediacity, retail and commercial (ref. 07/55626/FUL).

In April 2007 a reserved matters application for the erection of 371 residential units, 46,475 sq m of commercial accommodation in three mixed used buildings referred to as A, B, C were granted consent (ref: 07/54178/REM).

In October 2006 outline planning consent was granted for the redevelopment of the land at Quays Point for the redevelopment of business, studios and production space, residential, live work units, retail, hotel and leisure facilities together with associated car parking highway works and open space (ref: 06/53168/OUT)

PUBLICITY

A site notice was displayed on: 27th August 2008
A press notice was displayed in the Advertiser: 30th October 2008
Neighbours were notified: 5th September 2008

REPRESENTATIONS

The following neighbours have been notified:

The Emerson Group, Emerson House, Alderley Edge

A letter of concern has been raised with regards to this application on the following grounds:
•	Condition 30 relating to the Broadway Link improvements is fundamental to the developments satisfactory delivery and integration within the surrounding area.
•	The variation to condition 30 would be detrimental to the highway network of Salford Quays
•	A stronger planning argument for the amendment should be demonstrated.
•	Uncertainty relating to which of the buildings are proposed to be occupied prior to the occupation of the link road
•	An accurate timescale for the constructions of buildings A, B and C should be provided and how this relates to the implementation of the Broadway Link Road
•	The approved transport assessment submitted in relation to the outline planning consent for the MediaCity development is outdated and therefore the indicative date the appropriate implementation of the Broadway link is no longer accurate.
•	The suggested wording of the condition would result in the general public and parties with an interest in the implementation of the Link Road being kept out of the loop of information.
•	Request that the Emerson Group is kept informed of any agreements made by the LPA allowing the development to be occupied prior to the implementation of the Link Road.
•	There is too much flexibility in the wording of the condition.

Consultations

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – no objections in principle to the amended wording, however raises concerns regarding the construction of the Metrolink and the occupation of the buildings on site.

Highway Agency – no objections to the amendment of condition 30 but request that the Highway Agency are kept informed of agreement made by the Local Planning Authority allowing the development to be occupied prior to the completion of the Broadway Link.

Spatial Planning – no comments received to date.

THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Adopted City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

A1 Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
A8 Impact of the Development on the Highway Network
A9 Provision of New Highways

Adopted Regional Spatial Strategy

DP4 Make the Best Use of Existing Resources and Infrastructure
DP5 Manage Travel Demand; Reduce the Need to Travel, and increase Accessibility

APPRAISAL

It is considered that the main issue for consideration with this application is the impact on the local and strategic highway network if some of the development within the MediaCity development site were to be brought into occupation prior to the completion of the Broadway Link Road.

The provision for a link road between Centenary Way and the Broadway Link is set out within policy A9 of the adopted UDP. The reason justification of which states that the Broadway Link will improve access to Salford Quays and Trafford Park for buses, cyclists, pedestrians and cars and will help open up several major development opportunities within this important part of the Western Gateway. It goes on to state that the scheme would support and enable the development of the land at Dock 9 and it is anticipated that the provision of the road would be funded through the development of the Dock 9 site. The granting of outline planning permission for the Dock 9 site for the Mediacity:UK development has secured the development of the link road which formed condition number 30 of this permission.

Within the adopted UDP policy A1 requires applications for developments likely to give rise to significant transport implications will not be permitted unless accompanied by a transport assessment and where appropriate a travel plan.

Policy A8 states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety or the ability of the strategic Route Network to accommodate appropriate traffic flows or cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of high, wide, long or heavy vehicles along Abnormal Load Routes.

The applicant has submitted information to support their request to change the wording of condition 30.

This application to amend the conditions has been prompted by the need to bring forward residential occupation of buildings A and B in order to respond to the BBCs desire to have an active settled and pleasant environment surrounding its buildings from the outset rather than the office function taking place ahead of those other elements which are seen as essential to the success of a true mixed use development.

The occupation of building B is now scheduled for the end of October 2009. The programme for the construction of the Broadway link was originally scheduled to be finished by the end of 2010. Whilst this is being accelerated as much as possible, resulting in a short time lag between the two, there is a possibility that residential units within building B will be ready for occupation in advance of the Link Road.

The transport assessment undertaken by Arup and submitted in support of the outline application assumed a base year of 2008 and concluded that 2013 would be an appropriate year for the Broadway Link to be in place as this is when the development traffic associated with Dock 9 (including the other approved developments outside the MediaCity development) would start to lead to a deterioration in the road network conditions.

The transport assessment also concluded that the public transport would be a key component of the access strategy for the MediaCity development and that the development offers opportunities to promote sustainable travel. This is reflected by condition 46 of the outline permission requires the implementation of measures to achieve a 45% non-car modal split. Conditions 47 and 48 are also linked to the first occupation of the buildings and require the implementation of traffic control systems and the establishment of a transport steering group.

It is considered that the original Transport Assessment demonstrated that the Broadway Link was not required until a significant part of MediaCity had been developed. The proposed occupation of the residential elements of buildings A and B (370 units) is far below this threshold of development. In any event this application seeks only the flexibility in the wording of the condition and further approval is still required by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of any of the buildings on site. 

Value Added to Development

This application is the result of ongoing discussions with the applicants and their advisors. It is considered that these discussions are an ongoing process that will continue for the remaining phases of the redevelopment of Quays Point.

Conclusion

The variation of the wording of condition 30 would support the front-loading of development on this site whilst ensuring that there would be no adverse impact on the local highway network. Notwithstanding this, it is noted that given the proposal, should Members be minded to approve the application, will not allow in itself, units to be occupied prior to the provision of the link road, rather it will allow the applicants, under the terms of the condition (as revised) to seek a judgement from the City Council, as Local Planning Authotity. With this in mind it is also recommended that an informative guidance note should be attached to any consent which states that any request to allow buildings to be occupied in advance of an operation Broadway Link should be determined in consultation with the Head of Planning and Development and the Chair of the Planning Panel. 

Subject to the above, it is considered that the proposed development is acceptable.

RECOMMENDATION

Approve, subject to the following conditions

1.	No development shall be started on any one phase or unit of development within the site until full details of the following reserved matters for that phase or unit of development have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority:
	a) appearance; 
	b) landscaping; and
	c) scale.

2.	Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of ten years beginning on the 26th October 2006 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.

3.	Prior to the commencement of the development of any phase or unit of development within the site, samples of all external facing and roofing materials for that phase or unit of development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All works shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the details as approved unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

4.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the development hereby approved shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the phasing detailed on Page 3 of the Addendum to the Environmental Statement (entitled Response to Initial Planning and Design Comments, September 2006 prepared by Peel Media Ltd) and the maximum floorspaces/unit numbers within each of the phases as specified on Page 3 of the above document shall not be exceeded.

5.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the development hereby approved shall not exceed the heights shown on the Development Heights plan (Drawing No. 6998/01_08 of the Design and Access Statement September 2006 prepared by Peel Media Ltd).

6.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the maximum gross floor areas/unit numbers within the development including any internal alterations shall not exceed:
	
	B1 Business: 119,120sqm
	Studios/Production Space: 23,225sqm
	Live/work units: 4,280sqm
	Residential: 2,249 units
	Retail: 2,415sqm
	Leisure: 3,176sqm
	Hotel: 300 bedrooms 

7.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the first phase of the development hereby approved shall be undertaken within the boundaries shown on drawing no. 6998/01_07 Rev A.

8.	Any application for the approval of reserved matters (other than those only relating to landscaping alone) shall be accompanied by a review of the air quality assessment (contained within Chapter 11 of the Environmental Statement dated July 2006 prepared by Peel Media Ltd) against the current air quality standards at the time of the submission of the applications for the approval of reserved matters. Such a statement shall provide full details of mitigation measures to address the air quality issues identified, and shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved mitigation measures identified in the assessment shall be implemented in full prior to the occupation of any of the residential units within the area of the site to which the relevant application for the approval of reserved matters relates, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

9.	Any application for the approval of reserved matters shall be accompanied by a site investigation report (the report). The report shall address the nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focussing primarily on:
	
	a)	risks to human health; and 
	b)	controlled waters, as well as groundwater and surface waters associated on and off the site, 
	
	that may be affected by the development to which the application for approval of reserved matters relates. The report shall also address the implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems and property. The report shall include a risk assessment and, where appropriate, an options appraisal including the remedial strategy.
	
	The risk assessment and proposed sampling and analytical strategy shall be subject to the approval of the Local Planning Authority and agreed in writing prior to the start of the Site Investigation Survey.
	
	Where the site investigation survey reveals the need for remedial measures, these shall be detailed in the report, and shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development.
	
	Where remedial measures have been identified and approved by the Local Planning Authority, the development to which the application for approval of reserved matters relates shall be carried out in accordance with the approved measures. Where approved remedial measures have been undertaken, a site completion report shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval validating that all works have been completed in accordance with the approved measures.

10.	Any application for the approval of reserved matters (other those only relating to landscaping alone) shall be accompanied by an assessment of noise. Such assessments should follow PPG24 guidelines towards assessing the noise from the surrounding road network and should also assess noise from non-residential uses within the site. The assessments shall identify all noise attenuation and alternative ventilation measures to reduce the impact of noise on the residential properties on site and achieve the requirements of BS8233:1999 for internal noise levels, and shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the approved noise attenuation and alternative ventilation measures shall be implemented prior to first occupation of any of the residential units within the area of the site to which the relevant application for the approval of reserved matters relates and shall thereafter retained.

11.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, noise from fixed plant and equipment on the site (LAeq,T) shall not exceed the background level (LA90T) by more than -5dB as measured at the boundary of the nearest residential premises. 'T' is specified as any 1 hour time period between the hours 07.00 to 23.00hrs and is specified as any 5 minutes time period outside of the specified times.

12.	Any application for the approval of reserved matters shall be accompanied by a wind assessment.  Such assessment shall include details of the likely impacts of the development on pedestrian level wind conditions and terrace and balcony level wind environments within both the area of the site to which the application for the approval of reserved matters relates and within the remainder of the site covered by this permission. Such assessment shall also provide full details of measures to mitigate such impacts, along with timescales for the implementation of such measures. The assessment shall be approved in writing prior to the commencement of the development within the area of the site to which the application for the approval of reserved matters relates, and the mitigation measures shall be implemented in accordance with the approved timescale for implementation.

13.	Prior to the erection of any wind screening devices within the site, an acoustic assessment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such assessment shall investigate the potential of the wind screening devices and the buildings within the site, under differing climatic or weather conditions, to create tonal or harmonic noise and the impact of such noise on residential properties, and shall identify mitigation measures to prevent the occurrence of any tonal or harmonic noise. The approved measures shall be implemented in full prior to the erection of the wind screening devices assessed, and retained thereafter.

14.	Any application for the approval of reserved matters (other than those relating to landscaping alone) shall be accompanied by details of the delivery hours to, and operating hours of, all non-residential uses within the area of the site covered by the relevant application for the approval of reserved matters. The details shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior first occupation of any building within the area of the site to which the details relate. The non-residential uses shall be operated in accordance with the approved details, and there shall be no deliveries to non-residential premises outside the approved hours, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

15.	Any application for the approval of reserved matters (other than those relating to landscaping alone) shall be accompanied by details of the provision of recycling facilities within the area of the site to which the application for approval of reserved matters relates . Such details shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development within the site to which the application for the approval of reserved matters relates. Such provision shall be made available prior to the first occupation and use of any part of the development within the site to which the application for reserved matters relates and retained thereafter.

16.	Any proposals for A3, A4 or A5 uses (as defined by The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Amendment) (England) Order 2005) shall be accompanied by schemes including full details of fume extraction systems to the cooking and/or food preparation areas, which shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved schemes shall be implemented prior to first use of the commercial units to which they relate and shall thereafter be retained.

17.	No development shall commence on any one phase or unit of development approved by this permission unless and until a written scheme of archaeological investigation, to include a watching brief, trial trenching or combination of both, along with any recommendations for future archaeological work within the site to which the scheme relates and timescales for such work, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any archaeological work identified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details and timescales.

18.	Any application for the approval of reserved matters (other than those only relating to landscaping alone), shall be accompanied by a scheme outlining the scope of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). No development shall commence on any unit within the area of the site to which the application for approval of reserved matters relates unless and until the CEMP for that site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All operations shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with those details throughout the construction period within that area of the site, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

19.	No external lighting shall be provided for any commercial, studio or leisure units within the site unless and until a scheme or schemes have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No unit shall be occupied until the approved scheme relevant to that unit has been implemented in full.

20.	Prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway system, all surface water drainage from the development shall be passed through an oil interceptor designed and constructed to have a capacity and details compatible with, the site being drained.  Roof water shall not pass through the interceptor.

21.	Prior to the commencement of any development on any phase or unit of development within the site, a scheme detailing the disposal of foul and surface waters shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation of that unit of development or any of the units within that phase, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

22.	Any application for the approval of reserved matters shall be accompanied by full details demonstrating that the development to which the application for approval of reserved matters relates seeks to reduce the impact on the supply of non-renewable resources and that full consideration has been given to the use of realistic renewable energy options and incorporated where practicable. The details shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development within the area of the site to which the application for the approval of reserved matters relates shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

23.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no development shall take place on any phase or unit of development until details of measures to achieve BREEAM 'very good' ratings for that phase or unit of development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development of that phase or unit of development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

24.	Within three months of first occupation of each phase or unit of development, a travel plan for that phase or unit of development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such travel 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 travel plan shall be implemented thereafter, together with any additional measures that, after review, are found to be necessary to deliver the travel plan objectives.

25.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority no more than 4,500 car parking spaces, to include a minimum of 182 spaces for disabled drivers, and a minimum of 834 cycle and 222 motorcycle parking spaces, shall be provided within the site. Such disabled, cycle and motorcycle spaces shall be retained and kept available for use thereafter.

26.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority no more than 2,400 car parking spaces shall be for non-residential uses.

27.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no more than 2,000 car parking spaces, to include a minimum of 71 spaces for disabled drivers and a minimum of 267 cycle and 71 motorcycle parking spaces shall be provided within Phase 1 (as shown on drawing no. 6998/01_07 Rev A). Such disabled, cycle and motorcycle spaces shall be retained and kept available for use thereafter.

28.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no more than 1,250 car parking spaces, to include a minimum of 50 spaces for disabled drivers and a minimum of 299 cycle and 80 motorcycle parking spaces shall be provided within Phase 2. Such disabled, cycle and motorcycle spaces shall be retained and kept available for use thereafter.

29.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no more than 1,250 car parking spaces, to include a minimum of 61 spaces for disabled drivers and a minimum of 268 cycle and 71 motorcycle parking spaces shall be provided within Phase 3. Such disabled, cycle and motorcycle spaces shall be retained and kept available for use thereafter.

30.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, none of the buildings hereby approved shall be first occupied unless and until the Broadway Link (Broadway to Centenary Way, as identified in Policy A9 in the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan 2004 - 2016 ) is available for use.

31.	Any application for the approval of reserved matters (other those relating to landscaping alone) shall be accompanied by a scheme demonstrating how service and delivery vehicles to that phase or unit of development enter and leave the adopted highway in a forward gear. The scheme shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development to which the application for the approval of reserved matters relates. That development shall thereafter be operated in accordance with the approved scheme.

32.	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 disabled, cycle and motorcycle spaces shall be retained and kept available for use thereafter.

33.	Prior to the commencement of any development on any phase or unit of development, the applicant shall submit studies that:
	
	a)	Identify, before development on the relevant phase or unit of development commences, the potential impact area in which television reception is likely to be adversely affected by the development hereby approved, and provide details of when in the construction process an impact on television reception might occur;
	b)	Measure the existing television signal reception within the potential impact area identified in (a) above before development on the relevant phase or unit of development commences, and provide details of the results obtained.
	c)	Assess the impact of the development of the relevant phase or unit of development on television signal reception within the potential impact area identified in (a) prior to first occupation of any of the units within the relevant phase or unit of development. Such assessment shall identify measures to maintain at least the pre-existing level and quality of signal reception identified by the measurements undertaken in accordance with (b) above, and such measures shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to first occupation of any of the units within the relevant phase or unit of development. The approved measures shall be implemented prior to first occupation of any of the units within the relevant phase or unit of development, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

34.	On or prior to each application for the approval of reserved matters a statement detailing:
	
	(a) 	the design principles and design concepts of those aspects of the development to which the application for the approval of reserved matters relates;
	(b) 	how such principles and concepts are reflected in the proposals for development set out in the reserved matters application; and
	(c) 	the relationship of the portion of the development to which the reserved matters application relates, to the development site as a whole and to the wider context
	
	shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the approval of reserved matters shall be in accordance with that approved statement.

35.	Prior to first occupation of any phase or unit of development approved by this permission, a landscape maintenance and management scheme relating to that phase or unit of development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The landscape management and maintenance of the area of the site to which the application for the approval of reserved matters relates shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved scheme.

36.	Upon approval of the landscaping details, pursuant to Condition 1 of this permission, the new planting for each unit of development shall be carried out during the planting season October/March inclusive, (in accordance with the appropriate British Standards for ground preparation, staking etc in BS4428:1989 (1979)) immediately following first occupation of each phase or unit of development to which the approved landscaping details relate.  Any plants found damaged, dead or dying in the first five years are to be duly replaced and the scheme thereafter retained.

37.	All areas of publicly accessible amenity space within Phase 1 (as shown on drawing no. 6998/01_07 Rev A and as detailed within planning permission 08/56024/REM), including, but not limited to, pocket parks, the piazza area and the Canal/Riverside walkway shall be treated in accordance with the details submitted on the 4th November 2008, as agreed in the Council’s letter dated 2nd January 2008 (ref. 07/57148/REM/ 07/53168/OUT) unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter no development of any further phase of development shall be commenced until a drawing showing such publicly accessible space within that phase has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

38.	Prior to first occupation of any of the buildings hereby approved, a scheme detailing the maintenance management and accessibility of the publicly accessible amenity space shown on the drawing submitted pursuant to Condition 37 for the phase of the development in which that building is situated, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The maintenance and management of these spaces shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved scheme.

39.	The publicly accessible amenity space shown on the drawing submitted pursuant to Condition 37 of this permission shall at all times be accessible to the public in accordance with the maintenance and management scheme approved pursuant to Condition 38 of this permission, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

40.	Prior to first occupation of any of the residential units within Phase 1 (as shown on drawing no. 6998/01_07 Rev A) a minimum of 0.29ha of publicly accessible amenity space shall be provided, in accordance with the details submitted pursuant to Condition 37 of this permission.

41.	Prior to first occupation of any of the residential units within Phase 2, and unless already provided within Phase 1, a minimum of 1ha of amenity space shall be provided within Phase 2, in accordance with the details submitted pursuant to Condition 37 of this permission.

42.	Prior to first occupation of any of the residential units within Phase 3, and unless already provided within phases 1 or 2, a minimum of 0.53ha of amenity space shall be provided within Phase 3, in accordance with the details submitted pursuant to Condition 37 of this permission.

43.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the development hereby approved shall provide for commercial, retail or leisure uses within the ground floor levels of multi storey car parks within the site and there shall be no car parking at those ground floor levels within such multi storey car parks, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

44.	The gross internal floorspace of any A1, A3, A4 or A5 unit hereby approved shall not exceed 465 sq. metres unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

45.	No development shall commence on any one phase or unit of development approved by this permission until survey work (additional to the "walk-over" survey undertaken in May 2006) has been undertaken to discover the location of nesting birds within that phase or unit of development. If nesting birds are identified, a method statement detailing the measures to be taken to mitigate against any disturbance to nesting birds and the timescales involved in such mitigation should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved method statement shall be implemented in full in accordance with the approved timescales.

46.	Development of any area of the site to which any application for the approval of reserved matters relates shall not commence unless and until a scheme outlining measures to achieve a target of 45% non-car modal split (public transport, walking, cycling and taxi) for all trips to the site in the AM and PM peak hours (defined as a 60 minute period from 0700 to 1000 and 1600 to 1900 when the combined background and development traffic in each period is at its highest) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved measures shall be implemented in full accordance with the timescales for implementation within each scheme.

47.	None of the buildings hereby approved shall be first occupied unless and until the operation of junctions along Trafford Road between, and including, M602 Junction 3 and Pomona Swing Bridge has been improved through the implementation of a traffic control system (SCOOT or MOVA).

48.	Prior to first occupation of any part of the development hereby approved a Media City Transport Steering Group (MCTSG) shall be established with persons being entitled to be represented thereon including, but not being limited to, the Local Planning Authority, Local Highways Authority and the Highways Agency. Thereafter the MCTSG shall review the effectiveness of the Travel Plans (approved pursuant to Condition 24 of this permission) and other measures to achieve a target of a 45% non car modal split as identified in Condition 46 of this permission.

(Reasons)

1.	Reason: Required to be imposed in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 (1) of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995.

2.	Reason: Required to be imposed in accordance Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

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

4.	Reason: In order to ensure that any impacts on the environment are minimised and in order to ensure an appropriate balance of land uses, in accordance with policies ST1, ST7, ST8, MX1 and EN17 of the Unitary Development Plan.

5.	Reason: In order to ensure that buildings are of an appropriate height in relation to their surroundings, in accordance with Policy DES1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

6.	Reason: In order to ensure an appropriate balance of land uses in accordance with the assessment undertaken in the Environmental Statement and in accordance with policies ST1, ST7, ST8 and MX1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

7.	Reason: In order to ensure an appropriate balance of land uses in accordance with the assessment undertaken in the Environmental Statement and in accordance with policies ST1, ST7, ST8 and MX1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

8.	Reason: In order protect the quality of the air and the amenity of residents, in accordance with Policy EN17 of the Unitary Development Plan.

9.	Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the future occupants of the development in accordance with Policy DES7 of the Unitary Development Plan and in order to prevent the pollution of any watercourse, in accordance with Policy EN18 of the Unitary Development Plan

10.	Reason: 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.

11.	Reason: 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.

12.	Reason: In order to ensure that there would be no unacceptable detrimental impact on microclimate, in accordance with Policy DES5 of the Unitary Development Plan.

13.	Reason: 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.

14.	Reason: 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.	Reason: In order to encourage high standards of environmental management, in accordance with Policy ST8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

16.	Reason: 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.

17.	Reason: In order to protect features of archaeological importance, in accordance with Policy CH5 of the Unitary Development Plan.

18.	Reason: To ensure that the environment and the safety of local residents, businesses, and the general public in the vicinity of the construction works are satisfactorily protected in accordance with the mitigation measures detailed in the Environmental Statement and in accordance with policies EN17 and DES7 of the Unitary Development Plan.

19.	Reason: 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.

20.	Reason: In order to prevent the pollution of any watercourse, in accordance with Policy EN18 of the Unitary Development Plan

21.	Reason: In order to ensure satisfactory drainage on the site and the protection of water resources, in accordance with Policy EN18 of the Unitary Development Plan

22.	Reason: To ensure the development accords with policy EN22 of the Unitary Development Plan.

23.	Reason: In order to ensure the conservation of resources, in accordance with Policy EN22 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

24.	Reason: In order to encourage the use of more sustainable modes of transport, in accordance with Policy A1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

25.	Reason: In order to ensure that the development makes sufficient provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in order to ensure that the Council's maximum car parking standards are not exceeded and in order to encourage the use of more sustainable modes of transport in accordance with policies A1 and A10 of the Unitary Development Plan.

26.	Reason: In order to ensure that the Council's maximum car parking standards are not exceeded and in order to encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport in accordance with policies A1 and A10 Unitary Development Plan

27.	Reason: In order to ensure that the development makes sufficient provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists and in order to ensure that the Council's maximum car parking standards are not exceeded, in accordance with Policy A10 of the Unitary Development Plan.

28.	Reason: In order to ensure that the development makes sufficient provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists and in order to ensure that the Council's maximum car parking standards are not exceeded, in accordance with Policy A10 of the Unitary Development Plan.

29.	Reason: In order to ensure that the development makes sufficient provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists and in order to ensure that the Council's maximum car parking standards are not exceeded, in accordance with Policy A10 of the Unitary Development Plan.

30.	Reason: In order to ensure that there would be no unacceptable detrimental impacts on the highway network, in accordance with policies A8 and A9 of the Unitary Development Plan.

31.	Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A 8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

32.	Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A 8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

33.	Reason: In order to ensure that there would be no unacceptable detrimental impact on telecommunications activity, in accordance with Policy DES5 of the Unitary Development Plan.

34.	Reason: To ensure that future applications accord with the provisions of policies DES11 and DES9 of the Unitary Development Plan.

35.	Reason: In order to ensure that hard and soft landscaping is satisfactorily managed and maintained, in accordance with Policy DES9 of the Unitary Development Plan and Policy UR10 of the Regional Spatial Strategy.

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

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

38.	Reason: In order to ensure that there would sufficient publicly accessible amenity space within the site, in accordance with Policy H8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

39.	Reason: In order to ensure that there would sufficient publicly accessible amenity space within the site, in accordance with Policy H8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

40.	Reason: In order to ensure that there would sufficient publicly accessible amenity space within the site, in accordance with Policy H8 of the Unitary Development Plan

41.	Reason: In order to ensure that there would sufficient publicly accessible amenity space within the site, in accordance with Policy H8 of the Unitary Development Plan

42.	Reason: In order to ensure that there would sufficient publicly accessible amenity space within the site, in accordance with Policy H8 of the Unitary Development Plan

43.	Reason: In order to ensure appropriate uses are provided at ground floor level and in order to safeguard the amenity of the area, in accordance with Policy DES1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

44.	Reason: In order to ensure that there would be no unacceptable impact on the vitality and viability of any town or neighbourhood centre and that the units are of an appropriate scale to their location, in accordance with Policy S2 of the Unitary Development Plan.

45.	Reason: In order to ensure than legally protected species are not unacceptably affected, in accordance with Policy EN10 of the Unitary Development Plan.

46.	Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A 8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

47.	Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A 8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

48.	Reason: In order to encourage the use of more sustainable modes of transport, in accordance with Policy A1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Note(s) for Applicant

1.	You are advised that any request in relation to condition 30 of this permission seeking to to occupy any building within the site prior to the occupation of the  Broadway Link will be determined by the Local Planning Authority in consultantion with the Head of Planning and Development and the Chair of Planning Committee.

2.	The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must be satisfied prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the conditions precedent renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and appropriate action may be taken by the Council.

3.	The applicant is advised that the Construction Environmental Management Plan should contain information on the following topics: 
	 
	§	The construction site
	§	Protection of trees
	§	Archaeology and cultural heritage
	§	Noise and vibration
	§	The control of emissions to air
	§	Dust mitigation
	§	Ecology
	§	Water Management and Pollution Control (Discharge to water and site drainage)
	§	Neighbourhood liaison
	§	Asbestos
	§	Waste management
	§	Materials storage and handling
	§	Emergencies & accidents
	§	Traffic management
	§	Training 
	§	Monitoring

4.	The applicant is advised that if any works are likely to disturb bat roosts, a licence will need to be obtained from the Rural Development Service of DEFRA before work can commence. The method statement will form part of this licence.

5.	The applicant's attention is drawn to the attached letter from the Environment Agency

6.	The applicant is advised that the responsibility to properly address contaminated land issues, including safe development and secure occupancy, and irrespective of any involvement by this Authority, lies with the owner/developer of the site.

7.	The applicant is advised that if any of the proposed A3/A4/A5 uses operate beyond 23.00 hours, they may fall under requirements of the new licensing regime. The applicant is advised to contact the City Council's Licensing Team (0161 793 3114) at the earliest opportunity to clarify what licences or special conditions may apply under the Licensing Act.

8.	The applicant is advised to contact the City Council's Commercial Services team (0161 737 0551) for discussions and advice on the layout, design and procedures undertaken by the proposed use prior to the commencement of the business. Commercial Services can provide such advice concerning matters relating to the Food Safety Act and the Health & Safety at Work etc Act.

APPLICATION No: 	08/56940/FUL

APPLICANT:	Peel Media Ltd

LOCATION:	Land At Quay Point Off Broadway Salford Quays Salford   

PROPOSAL:	Erection of a part two, part five, part 18 storey building containing 2,194 sq.m of A3,A4 and A5 (food and drink) 4159sq.m of B1 (office) and 9,365sq.m of D1 (University)

WARD:	Ordsall

Description of Site and Surroundings 

The application relates to an area of land situated within a wider site known as Quays Point, which lies to the north of Dock 9. To the north of Quays Point is Broadway, beyond which are a number of industrial uses. To the south, the site is bounded by the Manchester Ship Canal and Dock 9. The Imperial War Museum is located on the opposite side of the Ship Canal, within Trafford. To the south, across Dock 9, are the Lowry Theatre, Lowry Plaza and the Lowry Outlet shopping centre. To the south east of the site are the three NV buildings and the City Lofts development. To the east of the site is the Metrolink tramline, beyond which are industrial units.

The Quays Point site has outline planning permission for layout and access (06/53168/OUT) for the wider Media:City development. The application site is situated to the north of Media Park (08/56024/REM), to the east of Building B which is currently under construction (07/54178/REM). It is bounded to the north and east by plots with outline consent for a mix of use.

Description of Proposal

Whilst the proposed development occupies a site benefiting from a wider outline consent for layout and access, it is considered that the proposal differs significantly from the outline consent in regards to layout, scale and massing. The proposal also introduces a new educational use. Consequently a detailed planning permission is required.

This full planning application seeks permission for the erection of a part two, part 5 and part 18-storey building containing 2,194sq m of A3, A4 and A5 (food and drink), 4,159 sq m of B1 (office) and 9,365 sq m of D1 (university) uses.

The proposed University elemnt for the application would provide accommodation for the University of Salford’s faculty of Arts, Media, and Social Sciences. This element of the proposal is to be located along the northern half of the proposed development for the ground and first floor. Thereafter the university would occupy the entire span of floors two and three, with the potential for growth onto the fourth floor at a future date.

Floors five to eighteen would be occupied by office accommodation. This would be located in the tower element of the proposed building which runs in a north south orientation parallel to the residential tower of the approved building B. 

The food and drink element of the development is split into 6 units occupying both the ground and first floor on the southern part of the site. Proposed units 4-6 would have access to a small terraced area at first floor. 

Site History

This application forms part of a wider development site where the following applications are considered to be relevant:

In April 2008 planning permission was granted for details in respect of landscaping for Phase I relating to planning permission 06/53168/OUT (ref. 08/56024/REM)

In February 2008 planning permission was granted for details of scale and appearance pursuant to outline planning permission 06/53168/OUT for the erection of a part 5, part 17, part 21 storey building to comprise of 168 residential units, 3252sq m of office accommodation, 24,233 sq m of studio space and 11,170sq m of hotel accommodation (ref. 07/55650/REM)

In February 2008 planning permission was granted for the erection of a 11 storey carpark to include 2116 carparking spaces, associated plant and support facilities for Mediacity, retail and commercial (ref. 07/55626/FUL).

In April 2007 a reserved matters application for the erection of 371 residential units, 46,475 sq m of commercial accommodation in three mixed used buildings referred to as A, B, C were granted consent (ref: 07/54178/REM).

In October 2006 outline planning consent was granted for the redevelopment of the land at Quays Point for the redevelopment of B1 business (119,120 sq m), studios and production space (23, 255 sq m), residential (2,249 uinits), live work units (4,280 sq m), retail(2, 415 sq m), hotel (300 bed) and leisure facilities ( 3,176 sq m) together with associated car parking highway works and open space (ref: 06/53168/OUT)
 
In November 2003, planning permission was granted for the variation of conditions 1 and 3 on application ref: 97/36749/OUT (development of land for offices, residential, retail, leisure, hotel and car parking) to extend the date for the submission of reserved matters by a further five years to 31st October 2008 (ref: 03/46042/OUT).

In October 2000, outline planning permission was granted for the development of land at Harbour City, Dock 9 And Broadway for offices (91,862sqm) residential, (600 units), retail (2,415sqm), leisure (3,716sqm) and hotel (300 beds) (ref: 97/36749/OUT).

Publicity

A press notice was displayed in the Advertiser: 18th September 2008
Neighbours were notified: 10th September 2008

Representations

The following neighbours have been notified:

All units at the Lowry Designer Outlet, The Quays, Salford, M50 3AG, 	
All units at Imperial Point, The Quays, Salford, M50 3RA, 	
All units at the NV Buildings, 100 The Quays, Salford, M50 3BE, 	
All units at the Metroplex Business Park, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UW, 	
All  units Washington Centre, 104 - 106 Broadway, Salford, M50 2UW, 	
Unit N, 94 Northstage, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UW, 	
Unit L, 90 Northstage, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UW, 	
Unit M, 92 Northstage, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UW,	
Unit 302 Gerber Technology, Metroplex Business Park, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UE, 	
Unit 400 First Floor, Metroplex Business Park, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UE, 	
2A South Stage, Michigan Avenue, Salford, M50 2GY, 	
2 Michigan Avenue, Salford, M50 2GY, 	
Unit 12, Michigan Avenue, Salford, M50 2GY, 	
Unit 8, Michigan Avenue, Salford, M50 2GY, 	
Unit 10, Michigan Park, Michigan Avenue, Salford, M50 2GY, 	
Raab Karcher, South Langworthy Road, Salford, M5 2PW, 	
30-54 Winnipeg Quay, Salford, M50 3TY, 	
City Lofts (Salford Quays), Town Centre House, Harrogate, Yorkshire	
The Emerson Group, Emerson House, Heyes Lane, Alderley Edge, Cheshire, SK9 7LF, 	

Consultations

Peter Hunter Architect – Considers that the ‘stunning building’ will only be achieved if the expensive  ‘unitised’ geometrical faēade design is fully implemented and colour, texture and quality are not diminished. Therefore it is recommended that an assembled storey height bay be built on site for consideration prior to commencement. Consider that it is very good to see a site plan/ masterplan included with the application, however a north/ south section from Broadway to the Lowry would also be informative.

Engineering – No objection

Central Salford Urban Regeneration Company – No response received at the time of writing.

City of Manchester – No comment

Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council – No comment

Manchester Ship Canal Company – No comment

Greater Manchester Ecology Unit – no comments received to date

Greater Manchester Geological Unit – no objections subject to a condition requiring verification report to be submitted in regards to land contamination. 

Greater Manchester Architectural Liaison Unit – No objections, have met with the architect to discuss the development achieving ‘Secured by Design’ (SBD) accreditation.

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – no objections – consider that a travel plan for this application should be conditioned and should include the details of a dedicated bus service as set out in the submitted design and access statement.  Would also like consideration given to whether developer contributions from this development could be used to kick-start a ‘Locks and Quays’ bus service.

Manchester Airport – No objection subject to conditions

Natural England – no comments received to date 

Environment Agency – No objections, subject to a condition relating to surface water drainage

United Utilities – no objections, subject to conditions relating to surface water drainage and foul drainage.

Grain Wharf Residents Association – No comments received

Grain Wharf Management Company – No comments received

RSPB – No comments received

Lancashire Wildlife Trust – No comments received

The Development Plan

Adopted Regional Spatial Strategy
		
		DP2 Promote Sustainable Communities
		DP3 Promote Sustainable Economic Development		
DP4 Make the Best Use of Existing Resources and Infrastructure
DP5 Manage Travel Demand; Reduce the Need to Travel, and increase Accessibility
DP7 Promote Environmental Quality
DP9 Reduce Emissions and Adapt to Climate Change
W1 Strengthening the Regional Economy
W5 Retail Development
L1 Health, Sport, Recreation, Cultural and Education Services Provision
EM2 Remediating Contaminated Land
EM11 Waste Management Principles
MCR1 Manchester City Region Priorities
MCR2 Regional Centre and Inner Area of Manchester City Region

Adopted City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

Site specific policies: 
MX1/3 – Development in Mixed Use Areas (Salford Quays)
Other policies:  
ST1: Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods
 ST5: Transport Networks
 ST8: Environmental Quality
 ST9: Retail, Leisure, Social and Community Provision
 ST11: Location of New Development
 DES1: Respecting Context
 DES2: Circulation and Movement
 DES3: Design of Public Space
 DES4: Relationship of Development with Public Space
 DES5: Tall Buildings
 DES6: Waterside Development
 DES7: Amenity of Users and Neighbours 
 DES9: Landscaping
 DES10: Design and Crime
 DES11: Design Statement
 S2: Retail and Leisure Development Outside Town Centres, and Neighbourhood Centres
 S4: Amusement Centre and Food and Drink Uses
 A1: Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
 A2: Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
 A8: Impact of Development on the Highway Network
 A10: Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
 EN16: Contaminated Land
 EN17: Pollution Control
 EN18: Protection of Water Resources

Other Material Considerations

National Planning Guidance:

Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development (PPS1)
Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres (PPS6)
Planning Policy Guidance Note 13: Transport (PPG13)
Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control (PPS23)
Planning Policy Guidance 24: Planning and Noise (PPG24)
Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk (PPS25)

Supplementary Planning Documents:

Design and Crime SPD
Sustainable Design and Construction SPD
Hot Food Takeaways SPD
Planning Obligations SPD
Design SPD

Planning Guidance:

Flood Risk Planning Guidance
Mediacity:uk & Quays Point Planning Guidance

Appraisal

It is considered that the main issues for consideration with this application are the principle of the redevelopment of the site, the principle of the proposed uses on the site, the design of the proposed development and the potential impact on the wider Dock 9 masterplan, the impact on the amenity of nearby residents and future users of the site, access to the proposed development, crime, sustainability and the need for any planning obligation.

Principal of the redevelopment of the site

Policy ST11 outlines the sequential approach to the bringing forward of land for development and details the order in which sites for development should be brought forward: existing buildings; previously developed land which is well served by a choice of means of transport and is well related to housing, employment, services and infrastructure; previously developed land in other locations provided that adequate levels of accessibility could be achieved; and finally greenfield sites in locations which are, or would be made to be, well served by a choice of transport and well related to employment, services and infrastructure.

In addition the adopted RSS sets out the following spatial strategies influencing the location of new development in region:

Policy DP2 states that sustainable communities should meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents, promote community cohesions and equality and diversity, be sensitive to the environment, and contribute to a high quality of life. 

Policy DP3 relates to promoting sustainable economic development and states that sustainable economic growth should be supported and promoted.

Policy DP4 seeks to make the best use of existing resources and infrastructure with priority for new development to be given to developments in locations consistent with the regional and sub-regional spatial frameworks.

The principle for developing the wider quays point site has been established by the granting of the outline planning consent (06/53168/OUT). The proposed development is in accordance with both local and regional policies regarding the siting of new development. The proposed development would be located on brownfield land, close to a wide range of services and facilities and a good public transport network.

The southern part of the development site is identified as being within phase one of the outline consent, whilst the northern part of the development sits within phase 2. Whilst this is a full planning application it is important that the quantum of development identified within the ES are given significant weight or where quantum differ that thorough justification is provided to demonstrate that there would be no adverse environmental impact on the wider area.

Principal of the proposed uses

Policy MX1 states that Salford Quays will be developed as a vibrant mixed-use area with a broad range of uses and activities, and development within it will be required to support this.

The adopted RSS includes policies MCR1 and MCR2, which are considered to be directly relevant to this application. Policy MCR1 identifies the priorities of the Manchester City region, which include significant improvements in the sub-regions economic performance and secure improvements to public transport links. It states that proposals and schemes will be directed primarily towards locations where they can contribute to these priorities.

Policy MCR2 seeks to ensure that the Regional Centre of Manchester City Region continues to develop as the primary economic driver, providing the main focus for business, retail, leisure, cultural and tourism development in the City Region. In addition it states that the expansion of the knowledge economy throughout the Regional Centre, and particularly related to the Universities will be a particular priority.

The whole site falls within the Salford Quays mixed-use area, as defined on the Proposals Map as MX1/3. The proposal incorporates a broad range of uses and activities, including offices, housing, live/work units, retail, leisure, hotels, essential infrastructure and support facilities and cultural uses.

Further site specific guidance is provided within the mediacity:uk and quays point planning guidance. Policy MC:UK1 and MC:UK2 of this guidance promote a mix of uses within the Quays Point area in line with MX1, these include commercial development, retail, leisure, tourism and residential.

The approved outline planning consent for Dock 9 has previously established the principle and quantum of development on this site. This application is a standalone application for full planning consent, the impact of uses proposed in relation to local and regional policy and the approved outline planning consent are discussed in more detail below.

Office

Both local and regional guidance support the development of office accommodation within this area.

PPS6 Planning for Town Centres identifies B1 office development as being a main town centre use with paragraphs 3.9 and 3.20 stating that need must be demonstrated and an impact assessment carried out in an edge/out of centre location unless it is in accordance with an up to date development plan. Since the application is situated within an allocated mixed-use area, which supports the development of offices it is considered that office development in this location is in accordance with PPS6.

Within the outline application condition 6 sets an upper limit of 119,120sq m of B1 uses for the wider development site. Within phase 1 condition 4 requires a maximum of 58, 623sq m office development to be built out. To date within the approved applications of phase 1, 46, 475 sq m of office space has granted within buildings A. B and C and an additional 3252 sq m of office space within the approved studio block, resulting in a total provision of 49,727. This results in a surplus of 8,896 sq m of office space available within the parameters of phase one. 

The proposed development proposes the creation of an additional 21,041sq m of office space. This would exceed the threshold set for phase 1 by 12,145 sq m. A further 30,497sq m of office space has been identified as coming forward within phase 2. 

It has been accepted previously that the parameters as set during the ES do not accurately reflect the masterplan as it has the potential to be built out. The parameters were based on the best information available at the time of the ES. Since the outline consent was approved and conditioned subject to these parameters it is important that the overall quantum of development is not exceeded over all phases when taken together. This application will not result go beyond the tolerances of the ES which underpinned the outline approval and accordingly it is considered that the level of office development being brought forward as part of this application would not be detrimental to the aims of the outline application. However, at a future date a comprehensive review of the level of development likely to come forward across the site must be formally undertaken.

Leisure/Retail

The retail element of the proposal will comprise six units facing the waterfront for use as ancillary restaurants and cafes, drinking establishments or hot food takeaways (A3, A4, and A5 uses).  Paragraph 3.3 of the submitted Leisure Assessment states that this will provide a total of 2, 179 sq m which does differ slightly from the amount proposed under the application (2, 194 sq m).  

The original outline application for Media City,  06/53168/OUT allowed for 2,450 sq m of retail.  Subsequently a reserved matters application for buildings a,b and c, reference 07/54178/REM, permitted 1,250 sqm of retail, whilst application 07/55626/FUL, for the multi storey car park permitted a total of 902 sq m of retail.  This application now being considered would bring the total amount of retail provision in Media City to 4, 346 sq m, an additional 1,896 sq m more than the original outline application approved.  Whilst this application is a FUL application, the original outline permission established the principle of 2, 450 sq m of open retailing and as such is a material consideration in the assessment of this proposal.   

As the proposal is out of centre, the requirements of PPS6 must be addressed in terms of:
•	the need for the development
•	that the development is of an appropriate scale
•	that there are no more central sites for the development
•	that there are no unacceptable impact on existing centres, and
•	that locations are accessible.

Adopted UDP policy MX1 identifies retail uses as appropriate within a mixed use area provided that this is consistent with the retail policies of the UDP.  Salford Quays is not an identified town or local centre and therefore Policy S2 of the UDP applies.  This policy reflects the requirements of PPS6 Town Centres.

In addition policy W5 of the adopted RSS states that in considering proposals and schemes any investment made should be consistent with the scale and function of the centre, should no undermine the vitality and viability of any other centre or result in the creation of unsustainable shopping patterns.

Criteria i) of UDP policy S2 relates to the quantitative and qualitative need for the additional retailing.  The applicants have submitted a leisure assessment and demonstrated that taking into account all of the recent planning permissions across the area, the resident population is expected to almost triple in size by 2011, since the time of the last census in 2001.  Furthermore, they identified that the current population spend a higher amount of their disposable income than the national average on retail leisure related activities and that this too will also increase by 2011.  This will therefore generate a considerable level of local need that should be met.

The applicant has identified that the existing provision in the Salford Quays area is predominated by cafes and hot food takeaways accounting for some 52% of provision.  Although there is no identified user for the proposed units it is intended that they will be for the “high end” operator.  Whilst there are some high end users within the Lowry (Lime, Café Rouge, Pizza Express), this accounts for a relatively low percentage across the locality, especially in comparison to the provision of cafes and hot food takeaways.

It is therefore considered that the proposal would increase the provision of retail leisure mix across the area to meet the local need but would also, owing to its location on the waterfront and piazza, contribute to the development of a vibrant mixed use area.  

Criteria ii) and iii) of policy S2 relate to the sequential test and impact on other centres.  It has been identified that the increased population arising from the development of Media City will generate an increased local need and it is appropriate that this need is provided within the locality.  The nearest neighbourhood centres are Regent Road and Langworthy both of which are over 1km away and therefore if the additional identified need were to be provided in these centres this would encourage people to undertake additional journeys.  If however, the retail was provided in the proposed application location, this would ensure the Media City development was sustainable and reduce the requirement for additional journeys.  Furthermore,  it is not considered that the provision of additional retail of this nature (A3 – A5) would have a detrimental impact upon the existing centres but would instead contribute to the vibrancy of this mixed use area.   

Criteria iv) and v) relate to accessibility and traffic generation.  It is intended that this retail provision will meet the local need and therefore it would be highly accessible to its users and should not generate significant additional traffic.   

Criteria vi) requires the development to be of an appropriate scale for the location and well related to its intended catchment population.  Given the scale of the Media City proposal together with other existing permissions that have been approved over recent months, it is considered that it is of an appropriate scale and is well related to its intended catchment population.

Criteria viii) requires development to be of a high standard of design.  This is considered below.

Criteria ix) states that the development must not have an unacceptable impact on environmental quality or residential amenity.  This matter is also considered below.

Policy MC:UK1 identifies that the Quays Point area has the potential to accommodate a vibrant mix of leisure, retail and visitor attractions but that this should complement and strengthen the current retail offer on the Quays rather than competing with Manchester City Council’s shopping offer.  It states that the emphasis should be on serving the needs of the new development within which it is located , as well as meeting unmet demand within the Quays area.  It is considered that the retail as now proposed would provide for local needs and is not at a scale which would compete with Manchester or any other neighbouring centre.

University

The proposed university element for the application would provide accommodation for the University’s faculty of Arts, Media and Social Sciences.

Policy W1 of Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS), the Regional Economic Strategy and the Manchester City Region Development Plan (CRDP) all identify the creative/ digital/ new media sector as a key economic driver for the region.  The CRDP also describes the city region as the North of England’s centre for creative sector activity, second only to London in importance. 

In addition, the Manchester City Region Sub-Regional Action Plan similarly identifies the creative/digital/new media sector as a priority, describing that it is one of four sectors that have been chosen because they offer significant potential to deliver GVA growth and are driven by the private sector. In particular the action plan identifies MediaCityUK as presenting a significant opportunity for the expansion of the creative and media sector in the sub region. The RES is clear that opportunities arising out of the creation of a media enterprise zone linked to the BBC should be exploited. 

The update to the MCRDP (published in September 2006) describes a key action in driving forward the creative/ digital/ new media sector in the city region as the development of MediaCityUK and associated assets, including the Northern Centre of Excellence in Media Enterprise and Skills, the Media Research Institute and the Media Enterprise Centre (MCRDP Update p.23). 

The original CRDP (June 2005 - p.48) goes on to describe that the creation of such a facility will address both the operation requirements of the sector and will link Higher Education Institution (HEI) research capacity to create international centres of excellence. It went on to recognise the contribution such an asset could make to the regions economic base, together with the economic / commercial benefits of HEI research into digital media and broadcasting (MCRDP v.1 p.47). The original CRDP similarly highlights the importance of linking the creative assets within and between the city regions and identifies, as a regional priority, the development and exploitation of the city region’s existing cultural and creative offer (MCRDP v.1 p.48).

Regional and sub-regional economic policy would therefore appear to link closely the growth of the sector with the establishment of appropriate research and educational facilities. The CRDP in particular, specifically highlights the potential to link MediaCityUK with higher education research capacity to create international centres of excellence. 

The proposal to provide some university accommodation at Quays Point is therefore supported by regional policy.  

At the local level, Policy MX1 of the UDP identifies four mixed use areas; this site falls within the Salford Quays mixed use area.  The policy states that the area will be developed as a vibrant mixed use area with a broad range of uses and activities.  These uses are listed and include inter alia education. Policy ECH5 states that planning permission will be granted for development that supports the University of Salford’s role as a higher education establishment of national and international importance, where this is consistent with the other policies and proposals of the UDP.

Further, Policy L1 of the adopted RSS states that proposals and schemes (including those of education, training and health service providers) should ensure that there is provision for all members of the community.

In January 2007 the city council adopted guidance for Mediacity: UK & Quays Point.  This guidance supports policy MX1 of the UDP and promotes Mediacity, including Quays Point, as suitable for the development of a vibrant mixed use area with a broad range of uses and activities. The vision for the area is to create a globally significant media city with Quay Point forming the heart of a wider media quarter.   Policy MC:UK 1 promotes a mix of uses but states that there will be a particular emphasis on media and creative industries in the Quays Point area.

Both the UDP and the Mediacity:UK Quays Point planning guidance emphasise the importance of securing a cohesive, vibrant and diverse area and this will be achieved through the development of a mix of uses in the area.  

Policy MX1 identifies education as an appropriate use within this mixed use area and the university accommodation would complement the other media quarter uses that have already been approved.   Increasing the range of uses into the area would attract a wider and more diverse range of users which in turn would contribute to the vibrancy and character of the area.  It is therefore considered that the university element of the proposal is consistent with both the overall purpose of Policy MX1 and also the Mediacity: UK & Quays Point guidance.

Design and Access

Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context and to respect the character of the surrounding area. In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with this policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings, the relationship to existing buildings, the impact on views and vistas, the streets horizontal and vertical rhythms and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.

Policy DES5 outlines a number of circumstances where tall buildings will be permitted, including: where the scale of the development is appropriate to its location; the location is highly accessible by public transport, walking and cycling; the buildings would positively relate to and interact with the public realm; the buildings would be of the highest quality, would make a positive addition to the skyline and would not detract from important views; there would be no unacceptable overshadowing or overlooking; there would be no unacceptable impact on microclimate, telecommunications activity, aviation safety, and the development would be consistent with other UDP policies.

Policy DES11 requires the submission of a design statement with all major applications explaining how the development takes account of the need for good design, the design principles and design concept and how these are reflected in the development’s layout, density, scale, visual appearance and landscaping, the relationship of the development to its site and the wider context and how the development will meet the Council’s design objectives.

Policy MC:UK 3 outlines the requirements for the urban form, density and massing at the Quays Point site. It states that the redevelopment of the site should take a more traditional urban form than has been typical at the Quays, with dense and compact city blocks, generally eight to ten storeys in height, punctuated with the occasional high tower, possibly over twenty storeys in height, at the Broadway end of the site. Areas of public realm should radiate from the waterfront, with a piazza on the waterfront to Dock 9.

Policy MC:UK4 states that the Imperial War Museum North and the Lowry are nationally important landmarks and therefore their settings and strategic views will be protected and enhanced. As development within the wider mediacity:uk area moves away from the waterfront and key transport nodes, densities will generally reduce.

It is considered that there are a number of important design considerations with this application, these include the relationship of the proposed building with both approved and future applications and its location within a wider masterplan, the scale and massing of the proposed development and the quality of the materials proposed as part of the development. Each of these elements will be addressed in turn below:

Wider Masterplan

Whilst this application is a full planning application it occupies a central and prominent position within the wider Media:City site which has been developed in accordance with a masterplan which underpins an overall approach. It is therefore considered that the masterplan developed as part of the outline planning application should be afforded considerable weight. 

The outline masterplan was developed by Benoy’s who identified a number of key parameters on the site, these include:

•	Geometry – the masterplan is based on a strong radial geometry centred on the drum of the Lowey Centre, this led to the internal streets and roads forming either concentric or radial bands.
•	Urban Grain – it was considered that the urban grain of the site should be as dense as possible with a variety of experiences throughout the site. A key element of this is that the development site does not have a ‘business park’ feel about it.
•	Mix of Uses – the master plan identified a wide mix of uses spread throughout the site, all of which are considered to be vital in ensuring that the area can form a true sustainable community.

In addition to the outline masterplan the proposed development should be considered in context with the approved applications on the site. The most important of which in relation to this application is building B. 

As part of the accompanying information submitted in support of this application the applicants have undertaken an assessment of the proposed building in context of the outline masterplan and the approved applications. 

Scale and Massing

The design and access statement accompanying the outline planning application split the site into 4 development bands.  A waterfront band fronting onto the Manchester Ship Canal, which forms a series of towers rising to 40 storeys, a band fronting Broadway identified as being high density with building heights ranging from 8-40 storeys, a mid band reducing in density and a band fronting the public plaza. The band fronting the plaza is described as generally consisting of lower scale developments characterised with active frontage and pedestrian friendly links.

The strong geometry of the site and the concentric and radial bands has led to the creation of block areas between roads. Whilst the form of these areas differs across the site, each block is characterised by a low-rise area punctuated by a taller tower. This block form is apparent in both buildings A, B and the studio block. The taller areas of each of the block are orientated so that it runs parallel to the radial lines through the site, thus ensuring that maximum views are retained across the site. The low rise element of the block typically increases in height towards Broadway.

The proposed block will increase the height and mass originally envisaged for this plot within the master planning exercise. However, careful consideration through discussions between the applicants and consultant officers of the Council has acknowledged that as a full planning application, there is scope, should it be considered appropriate, to allow a greater height of building at this location. In terms of the elevation to the Plaza, it is considered that picture-frame faēade proposed will allow an appropriate transition along the water front from Building C and the studio block. Concerns initially arose regarding the impact of a building of the height proposed upon the plot immediate to the north of the site but the applicants have demonstrate a number of potential solutions which could come forward in this area, demonstrating, to the satisfaction of Officers, that the site will not prejudice the ability to implement the general principles of the masterplan. The strong principles of the materplan in terms of the concentric and radial bands will be maintained, as will the urban grain. Additionally, a wider mix of complementary uses will be provided, as has been found above. 

Quality of Materials

The proposed building is expressed through a number of different vertical and horizontal elements, which each have a different cladding treatment.

Cladding Type A: Principal Office Elevations - The cladding proposed on the principal office elevation of the building is intended to be the most dominant, recognisable feature of the building. The faēade comprises of unitised cladding panels incorporating both glass and aluminium areas of cladding. Each cladding panel will measure 1.5m wide by 4m in depth and would be preassembled in the factory and fixed in position on site. This is to ensure the highest quality of workmanship and installation.

The intention is to create a perceived depth to the cladding, so that the glazed window elements appear to be punched out of solid metal. The thickness if the metal will vary to create a unique faceted appearance. 

Cladding Type B: Secondary Tower Cladding – The core tower is intended to be subservient to the principal office elevations and the cladding strategy proposed reflects this. The cladding has a vertical-banded pattern, incorporating windows within recessed vertical bands. The solid areas of cladding are designed as rainscreen cladding comprising of mineral fibre panels with the possibility of using shades of colour and texture.

Cladding Type C: South facing elevations – the southern elevation of the office tower has been designed to form a framed picture window, therefore the treatment of this faēade is a clean glazed appearance. In order to reduce the potential for solar gain and limit glare it is proposed that a unitised glass faēade system is used to incorporating insulated shadow-box elements over structural service zones and high performance glazing.  

Cladding Type D: Lower-storey North Office Accommodation – the treatment for the north office accommodation on the lower two storeys is required to optimise transparency, with minimal glazing fixings, whilst achieving the required degree of thermal insulation. The proposed treatment comprises of high areas of glazing with small joints between modules and carefully proportioned bands of insulated glass panels at selected intervals.

External Exposed Columns – in keeping with other exposed columns on buildings A, B and C and the Studio Block it is proposed that the columns are a high-quality concrete finish.

Cladding Type E: Infill Cladding – due to the strong cladding techniques used on the principal elevations of the building, the areas of infill are required to be visually anonymous. It is proposed that a curtain-walling type cladding with vertical mullions alternating between fully glazed and insulated with black-coated glass.

Cladding Type F: Food and Drinks Units – The final treatment of the six food and drink uses are likely to be subject to separate planning applications by the end users. In order to retain quality within the scheme a cladding framework is to be provided. It is proposed that a curtain-walling type cladding with emphasised horizontal transoms. It is proposed to unify the signage areas for each of the units.

Plant Cladding – there are a number of proposed treatments for the areas of plant on the proposed building. On the podium roofs it is intended that plant areas be fully enclosed in pod-like structures with a roof, the higher quality design of this plant area is to reflect its high visibility within the site. The proposed treatment for this plant area is a stainless steel mesh cladding fixed to a modular galvanised steel frame. The largest proportion of plant equipment is located on the roof of the tower, it is proposed to extend the solid elements of the main tower cladding and secondary tower cladding by an additional storey provide additional screening. There are some smaller areas of louvres on the building, these will be restricted to secondary elevations to minimise impact. 

Landscaping

Policy DES3 states that where development includes the provision of, or works to, public space, that public space must be designed to, have a clear role and purpose, responding to established or proposed local economic, social, cultural and environmental needs, reflect and enhance the character and identity of the area, form an integral part of, and provide an appropriate setting for, surrounding developments be attractive, safe, uncluttered and appropriately lit, be of an appropriate scale, connect to established pedestrian routes and other public spaces and minimise, and make provision for, maintenance requirements.

Policy DES4 outlines that development which adjoins public space shall be designed to have a strong and positive relationship with that space.

Policy DES6 requires all new development adjacent to Salford Quays to facilitate pedestrian access to, along and, where appropriate, across the waterway by the provision of a safe, attractive and overlooked waterside walkway accessible to all at all times, pedestrian links between the waterside walkway and other key pedestrian routes, and where appropriate, ground floor uses which generate pedestrian activity. Development will also be required to, where possible, protect, improve or provide wildlife habitats and conserve and complement any historic features and not affect the maintenance or integrity of the waterway. Finally, the policy requires all built development along the Quays to face onto the water, incorporate entrances onto the waterfront where appropriate, be of the highest standard of design, be of a scale sufficient to frame the edge of the waterside and enhance views from, of, across and along the waterway. 

Policy DES9 states that developments will be required to incorporate appropriate hard and soft landscaping provision. Where landscaping is required as part of a development, it must be of a high quality, reflect and enhance the character of the area, not detract from safety and security, form an integral part of the development, be easily maintained, respect adjacent land uses and wherever possible make provision for the creation of new wildlife habitats. 

Members may recall that the public realm for phase 1 of the wider development has already been approved. The applicant reports that the landscaping for this plot is at the current time indicative in nature, as it is the intention that a comprehensive landscaping scheme for the site will be developed, which will extend and expand upon that already submitted. The applicant reports that this will be in the form of a fresh reserved matters application for the treatment of the public realm. However, given that this is a full planning application, a condition is recommended. It is accepted that any future public realm works approved under the reserved matters procedure, could, if implemented, satisfy such a condition.

Amenity
Policy HFTA3 relates to hours of opening for a hot food takeaway and states that the hours of opening of a hot food take away within 30m of a residential property will normally be restricted to 8.00 –22.00 Monday to Saturday with no opening on Sundays and Bank Holidays. It states that when considering appropriate hours of opening for hot food takeaways regard will also be had to the existing of an established late night economy in the area, the character and function of the immediate area and the potential benefits of the proposal for the wider community.

Policy HFTA5 relates to the extraction of odours and requires new developments for hot food takeaways to have and effective extraction or abatement system.

Policy HFTA6 requires commercial bin stores to be contained within the main building.

Policy HFTA7 states that hot food take aways will normally be required to provide a litter bin outside the premises at all times when the business is open.

It is acknowledged that from the inception of the wider Media:City development that there has been a strong desire to create a city-centre style environment, which suggests a high density of buildings and uses, with plots of various heights and sizes. With this in mind, discussions are ongoing with the applicant to ensure an appropriate operating hours for these uses. An update on this matter will be provided for Members in advance of the Panel.

Overshadowing and privacy
The applicants have submitted a shadow study in support of the application to demonstrate the impact of the building on both building b and the surrounding masterplan. Studies have been submitted for the summer and winter seasons, to adequately demonstrate any potential overshadowing issues, especially with respect to block b. 

The submitted diagrams do illustrate that residential units within block b will be in shade either throughout the morning or early evening. However, it is not considered that this is fatal to the scheme in being mindful of the city centre environment which is being created as detailed above. Indeed, it is considered that ample privacy distances (which range from 22-27 metres), bearing in mind this context, will be achieved.

Noise 
Two retail plant areas would be provided at 1st floor level to the west and east elevations. These spaces will include a louvered external faced. The external roof plant spaces for dirty extract system would be located on the roof of level one. This plant space would be hidden from view by a screen in keeping with the overall architectural scheme.  All ducts would be fitted with filters and acoustic attenuation within the tenants demise as required. 

Design and Crime

Policy DES10 development will not be permitted unless it is designed to discourage crime, anti-social behaviour and the fear of crime.

The application is accompanied by a crime prevention plan which sets out how the proposed building would achieve an appropriate standard of security in order to comply with the secured by design initiative.

The site wide issues relating to the suitability of landscaping and the lighting of the public realm is conditioned as part of the outline planning approval on the site. 

The design of the proposed building has taken into account the need for natural surveillance to all elevations within the building and includes prominent entrances with minimal opportunities for concealment.

The southern elevation of the building addresses the waterfront with views across to the Lowry. The food and drink units at ground floor level address the new public piazza, which leads to the waterfront and is the main route for pedestrian circulation between buildings.

The main entrance to the office tower is on the north side of the building, sitting prominently within the middle of the building and facing the broad street on which it is situated. The main entrance to the university section of the building is also prominently located on the north south route through the site to the west of the building.

Since there are no ‘backs’ to the buildings the delivery bay area is located on the east side of the building to which access is allowed for larger vehicles for deliveries and refuse collection. 

Consideration has been given by the applications to commercial facades on the ground floor and the possibility of criminal attack. Stall risers are to be installed at the base of the classing comprising of 4mm aluminium facing fixed over the curtain walling system as a flashing.

It is considered that the proposed building would help create an environment of passive surveillance within the wider development site. In addition the design of the building has ensured that potential hiding areas have been designed out. 

Access

Policy DES2 requires the design and layout of new development to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists to, through and around the site, enable pedestrians to navigate their way through an area by providing appropriate views, vistas and transport links, enable safe, direct and convenient access to public transport facilities and other local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

MC:UK7 states that a network of pedestrian and cycle friendly streets will be promoted throughout Quays Point which should link to the urban fabric north of Broadway.

Policy A1 requires planning applications for developments which would give rise to significant transport implications will not be permitted unless they are accompanied by a transport assessment and, where appropriate, a travel plan.

Policy A2 requires development proposals to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists through the protection and improvement of key routes.

Policy A3 states that the extension to the Metrolink system to the Lowry will be permitted, and the line of this extension, as shown on the Proposals Map, will be safeguarded. 

Policy A5 states that development of bus corridors will be permitted where they are consistent with regeneration objectives and policies in the UDP.

Policy A8 states that development will not be permitted where it would compromise highway safety by virtue of traffic generation and access.

Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the council’s maximum standards. It also states that the maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded.

Policy DP5 states that development should be located so as to reduce the need to travel, especially by car, and to enable people as far as possible to meet their needs locally.

Policy W1 states that regional significant economic development will be located close to sustainable transport nodes within the urban area of Manchester.

The applicant has submitted an access statement as part of their application. Car parking has been considered as part of the outline application for the development site, and such provision, as expressed as a maximum standard will not be exceeded. In addition there is a condition attached to the outline consent requiring a 45% non-car modal split to the site, part of the provision of which is the Metrolink extension. Maximum parameters with respect to the overall quantum of development which underpinned the wider outline application will not be exceeded and there is accordingly no objection in this regard.

In addition, as a full planning permission is sought  travel plan will be provided which ties into the wider MediaCity site.

Archaeology

Policy CH5 states that planning permission will not be granted for development that would have an unacceptable impact on an ancient monument, or site or feature of archaeological importance, or its setting.

As with the outline consent for the wider site it is proposed that archaeological matters can be adequately addressed by a condition which seeks to ensure that development within the site is undertaken on the basis of a watching brief, should that any artefacts of a archaeological nature be discovered, works on site would only continue under the supervision of a relevant professional. Subject to a condition to this effect, there is no objection in this regard.

Sustainability

Policy ST14 states that development will be required to minimise its impact on the global environment and major development will be required to demonstrate how they will minimise greenhouse gas emissions.

Policy ST8 requires new development to contribute towards enhanced standards of environmental quality through, design, amenity, safety and environmental management.

Policy DP9 seeks to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change, it states that applicants and local planning authorities should ensure that all developments meet at least the minimum standards set out in the North West Sustainability Checklist for developments and should apply good or best practice standards wherever practicable.

Policy EM2 states that proposals and schemes should encourage the adoption of sustainable remediation technologies.

Policy EM11 relates to Waste Management Principles and states that every effort should be made to minimise waste, maximise re-use, and maximise opportunities for the use of recycled material.

In March 2008 Salford City Council adopted the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD. The SPD sets out to promote the highest practical standard of resource and energy efficiency in new developments, encourage the use of renewable energy, reduce the proportion of waste that goes to landfill, enhance biodiversity and to promote sustainable forms of travel.

The application has submitted a sustainability matrix in relation to their site, which includes the elements of the Council’s Sustainability Checklist.

Energy Consumption – whilst developing the design of the building regard was had to designing in suitable amounts of daylight and maximising solar shading to the east and south. 
Energy Supply – A combined heat and power plant is proposed as part of the wider development of the site, which would power this building.
Open Spaces – A wind study has been produced, as part of the site to understanding the impact the building would have on the surrounding open spaces.
Air and Noise Pollution – The proposed building has been designed to cope with noise levels in association with a 24-hour development. During construction Bovis has a site wide Environmental Management Plan which protects the amenity of nearby residents.
Water Consumption – A water saving strategy is set out within the Environmental Management Plan.
Construction Waste – A site waste management plan has been produced as part of the this application. 

Planning Obligations

Policy DEV5 requires development that would have an adverse impact on any interests of acknowledges importance or would result in a material increase in the need or demand for infrastructure, services facilities and or maintenance will only be granted planning permission subject to planning conditions or planning obligations that would ensure adequate mitigation measures are put in place.

Policy MC:UK 9 of the MediaCity:UK and Quays Point Planning Guidance states that all developments on the application site will be required to contribute proportionately to the required high level of infrastructure necessary to serve the overall site and cross refers to the aforementioned Planning Obligations SPD.

The Planning Obligations SPD sets out a number of policies in relation to planning obligations in respect of commercial properties, these are as follows:

Policy OB2 states that where a commuted sum is to be paid in lieu of the provision or improvement of public realm infrastructure or heritage unless material considerations indicate otherwise the commuted sum should equate to £20 per square metre of non- residential floorspace.

Policy OB3 states that major developments should contribute to the improvement of construction skills amongst Salford residents, either through the Salford Construction Partnership or an equivalent scheme. Where a developer does not already contribute to existing schemes within the city then the contribution from new developments should equate to £1.50 per square metre of non-residential floorspace.

Policy OB4 states that major developments that do not achieve at least the Very Good ‘BREEAM’ standard should make a financial contribution towards projects aimed at reducing and or offsetting carbon dioxide emission equating to £2 per square metre of non-residential floorspace.

Policy OB5 states that developers should pay all reasonable expenses incurred by the city council in drawing up the administering legal agreements. Where commuted sums are to be paid, an additional charge of 2.5% will be added to cover the administrative costs of ensuring that the commuted sums are directed towards appropriate schemes.

The scale of development is such that a contribution in line with the SPD Planning Obligations as follows:

Type of contribution		Cost	
Public realm, Infrastructure and heritage	£20 per m2 non-residential floorspace	£20 x 32,600 m2
£652,000	
Construction training	£1.50 per m2 non-residential floorspace	£1.50 X 32,600 m2
£48,900
	
Climate change	£2 per m2 non-residential floorspace	£2 x 32,600 m2
£65,200	
Sub total	£766,100	
Plus 2.5% administration fee	£19,153	
Total	£785,253	

The application is accompanied by ‘Planning Report – Supplemental 2’, which sets out in detail the applicants position in relation to the requirement for planning obligations for this development.  Firstly the applicant concludes that the reason that this application is a full application and not a reserve matter application due to the introduction of a new educational use into the site. As discussed previously, there are other factors which influence the reasoning as to why this application is a full application and not a reserved matters application, although it is clear that this part of the site has always been intended to be brought forward at an early stage within the Media:City development. 

The issue of planning obligations for Media:City has been discussed at length previously within the outline planning consent. At the time the decision was taken the planning obligations SPD had not been formally adopted. However it is clear that it was considered at the time of the outline planning consent that the level and quality of public realm being and the high levels of infrastructure improvements being achieved by the scheme that there was no need for an addition contribution in respect of public realm, infrastructure and heritage. It is considered that there is nothing within this application which gives rise for the need for additional contributions in this respect, given that the overall quantum of development across the site has not been exceeded.

With regards to construction training, whilst the applicants are not necessarily contributing directly to an approved construction training programme, the long term creation of 15,000 jobs that are expected to be generated by the wider MediaCity development are considered to outweigh this need. It is considered that there is nothing within this application which gives rise for the need for additional contributions in this respect.

CONCLUSION

The development of Media City as a mixed use development was established with the granting of the outline permission in 2006.  The inclusion of university accommodation as now proposed within the mix of uses within the area for Arts, Media and Social uses would complement the other media related activities in the area whilst also adding to the vibrancy, character and dynamism of the Quays Point site.  Similarly, it is considered that the extension of retail provision to provide an addition 1,896sq m over and above the 2, 450 sq m approved at the outline stage, would meet a local need that would be generated from the development of the area and again contribute to the mix of uses and therefore users of the area and add to the vibrancy and character.

A building of the highest design quality is proposed, which would address both the Plaza area and waterfront and adjacent plots. It is considered that the development is fully compliant with national, regional, and local policy and accorindingly, subject to condition, approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Subject to the following Conditions

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

2.	Prior to the commencement of the development, samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out using the approved materials, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

3.	A Remediation 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.

4.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, noise from fixed plant and equipment on the site (LAeq,T) shall not exceed the background level (LA90T) by more than -5dB as measured at the boundary of the nearest residential premises. 'T' is specified as any 1 hour time period between the hours 07.00 to 23.00hrs and is specified as any 5 minutes time period outside of the specified times.

5.	Prior to the erection of any wind screening devices within the site, an acoustic assessment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such assessment shall investigate the potential of the wind screening devices and the buildings within the site, under differing climatic or weather conditions, to create tonal or harmonic noise and the impact of such noise on residential properties, and shall identify mitigation measures to prevent the occurrence of any tonal or harmonic noise. The approved measures shall be implemented in full prior to the erection of the wind screening devices assessed, and retained thereafter.

6.	No development shall commence unless and until a written scheme of archaeological investigation, to include a watching brief, trial trenching or combination of both, along with any recommendations for future archaeological work within the site to which the scheme relates and timescales for such work, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any archaeological work identified in the approved scheme shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details and timescales.

7.	No development shall commence until  a scheme outlining the scope and detail of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All operations shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with those details throughout the construction period within that area of the site, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

8.	No external lighting shall be provided within the site unless and until a scheme or schemes have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to the use of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

9.	Prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway system, all surface water drainage from the development shall be passed through an oil interceptor designed and constructed to have a capacity and details compatible with, the site being drained.  Roof water shall not pass through the interceptor.

10.	Prior to the commencement of development on, a scheme detailing the disposal of foul and surface waters (which shall be in general accordance with Sections 5.3 and 5.4 of the submitted Flood Risk Assessment) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to first occupation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

11.	Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, no development shall take place until details of measures to achieve BREEAM 'very good' ratings for that phase or unit of development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development of that phase or unit of development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

12.	Within three months of first occupation of the development, a travel plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such travel 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 travel plan shall be implemented thereafter, together with any additional measures that, after review, are found to be necessary to deliver the travel plan objectives.

13.	Prior to the commencement of any development, the applicant shall submit studies that:
		
		a)	Identify, before development commences, the potential impact area in which television reception is likely to be adversely affected by the development hereby approved, and provide details of when in the construction process an impact on television reception might occur;
		b)	Measure the existing television signal reception within the potential impact area identified in (a) above before development on the relevant phase or unit of development commences, and provide details of the results obtained.
		c)	Assess the impact of the development on television signal reception within the potential impact area identified in (a) prior to first occupation. Such assessment shall identify measures to maintain at least the pre-existing level and quality of signal reception identified by the measurements undertaken in accordance with (b) above, and such measures shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to first occupation. The approved measures shall be implemented prior to first occupation, unless agreed otherwise 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.	To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 

3.	In the interests of public safety in accordance with policy EN16 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan
4.	 To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 and EN16 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

5.	 To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 and EN16 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

6.	To secure the recording and evaluation of remains pursuant to policy CH% of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

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

8.	 To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

9.	To ensure adequate drainage of the site pursuant to policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

10.	To ensure adequate drainage of the site pursuant to policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

11.	In the interests of sustainable design and construction pursuant to policy ST14 and EN22 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

12.	In the interests of promoting and providing sustainable modal choice pursuant to policy A1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

13.	 To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

Note(s) for Applicant

1.	Approved plans

2.	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:	08/57007/REM

APPLICANT:	Peel Media Ltd

LOCATION:	Land At Quay Point Off Broadway Salford Quays Salford 5   

PROPOSAL:	Details of scale, external appearance and landscaping pursuant to outline planning permission 06/53168/OUT for the erection of 370 residential units and 46,475sq m of commercial accommodation in three mixed use buildings referred to as A, B and C. Building A to comprise of a part 8, part 26 storey building to provide 178 residential units (C2) and 14,975sq m of office accommodation (B1) and 650 sq m of retail accommodation. Building B to comprise of a part 7, part 22-storey building to provide 200 residential units (C2) and 12,370sq m of office accommodation and 600sq m of retail accommodation. Building C to comprise of a 7-storey building to provide 19,130 sq m of office accommodation and studio space (B1).

WARD:	Ordsall

 DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL

This application relates to an area of land within Salford Quays previously granted outline planning consent (ref 06/53168/OUT) for the wider Media City development. The area to which the outline application relates is known as Quays Point and is located to the north of Dock 9. The site subject to the outline application is bounded to the north by Broadway, to the south and west by Manchester Ship Canal and Dock 9 and to the east by the three NV buildings and a building known as City Lofts.

This is a reserved matters application for scale, external appearance and landscaping, which relates to a smaller area of the outline application site and forms part of phase one of the development. A previous permission was granted under application 07/54178/REM, however changes are required to the external appearance of the buildings to accommodate plant, and a change to the number and size of apartments within the two residential elements within Buildings A and B.

The area of land to which this application relates is the southern corner of the original site and comprises of three buildings, referred to as buildings A, B and C. These buildings are intended to form the main office accommodation for the BBC as well as some residential units. Below is a map identifying the key areas referred to within this report.

•	Building A
•	Building B
•	Building C
•	Media Street
•	Plaza Area
•	Studio Block
•	Security Cordons

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

7

7

Building A 

Building A is located on the western side of the site and is bounded to the southwest by the Manchester Ship Canal, to the southeast by building C, to the northeast by a site identified within the masterplan as a new studio block and to the northwest by a site identified for office and residential development.

The changes to building A include an additional three units of residential accommodation and an increase in the overall height of the building by 0.5 metres. A mezzanine level has been incorporated to accommodate plant and equipment. The tallest (25 storey) part of this building will remain residential in use with the remainder being commercial in nature.

Doors have been introduced to the ground floor of this building to allow access to cycle stores and bin storage areas. Louvres are to be situated on these ground floor elevations to screen the bin and cycle storage areas.

Building B

Building B is separated from the other buildings by the studio block (granted planning permission under 07/55650/REM) and which bounds the site to the west. The south of the site is bounded by the proposed public plaza commonly referred to as ‘Media Square’. T
The northern and eastern aspects of the site are bounded by areas proposed for use as a mixed use area.

An additional five units of accommodation are proposed within building B, bringing the total number of units within this building to 200.

The commercial element of the development would contain a reception area, plant rooms and a retail unit on ground floor and open plan office space on the upper floors.

Access to the commercial space would be via a reception area in the southwestern corner of the development. It is proposed that the residential element of the development would be located on the northeastern corner of the development. Access for servicing would be provided along the northern elevation.

The cladding strategy has been altered from concrete and glass to metal panelling. Lourves have been inserted at a high level to accommodate the new plant layout.

Building C

Building C is located on the southern corner of the site bounded to the south by the Manchester Ship Canal and Salford Quays, to the northeast by an area of land identified as a future public plaza and to the north west by Building A.

Pedestrian access to the building would be via a reception area situated in the northeastern of corner of the plot.  It is proposed that a small service yard would be incorporated within the northern elevation. 

SITE HISTORY
In November 2007 a planning application was granted approval for the Details of scale and appearance pursuant to outline planning permission 06/53168/OUT for the erection of a part 5, part 17, part 21 storey building to comprise of 168 residential units, 3252sq m of office accommodation, 24,233 sq m of studio space and 11,170sq m of hotel accommodation. (07/55650/REM)

In November 2007 a planning application was granted approval for the erection of 11 storey multistorey car park to include 2116 carparking spaces,  associated plant and support facilities for Media City and retail , commercial and leisure units (A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 ·& D2) on the ground floor. (07/55626/FUL)

In August 2007 a planning application was approved for the construction of a 1.2km link road connecting the roundabout on Centenary Way  (A576) to Daniel Adamson Road, to include a section of elevated road over the existing railway line and associated landscaping works.

In August 2007 a planning extension to existing metrolink line between Broadway and Harbour City to a new stop within the proposed plaza area of the approved Media City development (06/53168/OUT) (07/55210/FUL)

In October 2006 outline planning consent was granted for the redevelopment of the land at Quays Point for the redevelopment of business, studios and production space, residential, live work units, retail, hotel and leisure facilities together with associated car parking highway works and open space (ref: 06/53168/OUT)
 
In November 2003, planning permission was granted for the variation of conditions 1 and 3 on application ref: 97/36749/OUT (development of land for offices, residential, retail, leisure, hotel and car parking) to extend the date for the submission of reserved matters by a further five years to 31st October 2008 (ref: 03/46042/OUT).

In October 2000, outline planning permission was granted for the development of land at Harbour City, Dock 9 And Broadway for offices (91,862sqm) residential, (600 units), retail (2,415sqm), leisure (3,716sqm) and hotel (300 beds) (ref: 97/36749/OUT). 

In January 1999, planning permission was granted for the use of the site as a temporary site storage compound and the siting of storage containers (ref: 98/38480/COU).

CONSULTATIONS

Central Salford URC – No comments

City of Manchester –Trafford MBC – no comments received to date

Manchester Ship Canal Company – no comments

Greater Manchester Archaeology Unit – no comments received to date

Greater Manchester Geology Unit - no comments received to date

Greater Manchester Architectural Liaison Unit – Encourages Secured by Design standards

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – no comments received to date

Manchester Airport – no objection

Natural England – Do not wish to comment on the proposal

Environment Agency – No objections

United Utilities – No objections 

Grain Wharf Residents Association – no comments received to date

Grain Wharf Management Company - no comments received to date

RSPB - no comments received to date

Lancashire Wildlife Trust - no comments received to date

Urban Vision Environment – Details of flues need to be submitted and a condition relating to noise from traffic, railway and commercial sources needs to be submitted.

PUBLICITY

A site notice was displayed on 9th October 2008
A press notice was displayed in the Salford Advertiser 10th October 2008

The following neighbour addresses were notified:

All units at the Lowry Designer Outlet, The Quays, Salford, M50 3AG, 	
All units at Imperial Point, The Quays, Salford, M50 3RA, 	
All units at the NV Buildings, 100 The Quays, Salford, M50 3BE, 	
All units at the Metroplex Business Park, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UW, 	
All  units Washington Centre, 104 - 106 Broadway, Salford, M50 2UW, 	
Unit N, 94 Northstage, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UW, 	
Unit L, 90 Northstage, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UW, 	
Unit M, 92 Northstage, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UW,	
Unit 302 Gerber Technology, Metroplex Business Park, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UE, 	
Unit 400 First Floor, Metroplex Business Park, Broadway, Salford, M50 2UE, 	
2A South Stage, Michigan Avenue, Salford, M50 2GY, 	
2 Michigan Avenue, Salford, M50 2GY, 	
Unit 12, Michigan Avenue, Salford, M50 2GY, 	
Unit 8, Michigan Avenue, Salford, M50 2GY, 	
Unit 10, Michigan Park, Michigan Avenue, Salford, M50 2GY, 	
Raab Karcher, South Langworthy Road, Salford, M5 2PW, 	
30-54 Winnipeg Quay, Salford, M50 3TY, 	
City Lofts (Salford Quays), Town Centre House, Harrogate, Yorkshire	
The Emerson Group, Emerson House, Heyes Lane, Alderley Edge, Cheshire, SK9 7LF, 	

REPRESENTATIONS

No letters of objection.

REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
Site specific policies: none
Other policies: DP1: Regional Development Principles
		RDF1: Main Development Locations
		W1: Strengthening the Regional Economy
		W2: Broad Locations for Regionally Significant Economic Development
W5: Retail Development
L4: Regional Housing Provision
L5: Affordable Housing
RT2: Management and Maintenance of the Highway Network
RT6: Parking Policy and Provision
RT7: A Regional Framework for Walking and Cycling
EM2: Remediating Contaminated Land
MCR1: Manchester City Region Priorities
MCR2: Regional Centre and Inner Areas of the Manchester City Region 

UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY

Site specific policies: MX1/3 – Development in Mixed Use Areas (Salford Quays)
Other policies: ST1: Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods
 ST2: Housing Supply
 ST3: Employment Supply
 ST5: Transport Networks
 ST6: Major Trip Generating Development
 ST7: Mixed-Use Development
 ST8: Environmental Quality
 ST9: Retail, Leisure, Social and Community Provision
 ST11: Location of New Development
 ST12: Development Density
 DES1: Respecting Context
 DES2: Circulation and Movement
 DES3: Design of Public Space
 DES4: Relationship of Development with Public Space
 DES5: Tall Buildings
 DES6: Waterside Development
 DES9: Landscaping
 DES10: Design and Crime
 DES11: Design Statement
 H1: Provision of New Housing Development
 H2: Managing the Supply of Housing
 H4: Affordable Housing
 H8:  Open Space Provision Associated with New Housing Development
 S2: Retail and Leisure Development Outside Town Centres, and   Neighbourhood Centres
 S4: Amusement Centre and Food and Drink Uses
 A1: Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
 A2: Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
 A8: Impact of Development on the Highway Network
 A10: Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
 EN10: Protection of Species
 EN14: Derelict, Underused and Neglected Land
 EN16: Contaminated Land
 EN17: Pollution Control
 EN18: Protection of Water Resources
 EN22: Resource Conservation
 R2: Provision of Recreational Land and Facilities

OTHER MATERIAL COSIDERATIONS
There are a number of Supplementary Planning Documents and Planning Guidance which are also relevant to the development of the site. These include Design and Crime SPD, Mediacity:UK and Quays Point Planning Guidance and Housing Planning Guidance, 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 which in the case of Mediacity:UK Guidance have been adopted by both Salford City Council and Trafford MBC, and which both authorities should have regard to in the determination of planning applications.

PLANNING APPRAISAL

Principle of Development
The principle of the redevelopment of this site has already been established through the granting outline planning consent, and the overall design of the buildings has been accepted through the granting of the previous permission for these three buildings. Therefore the main issues for consideration with this application are whether the proposed housing mix is acceptable and whether the altered design of the buildings is acceptable. The principle of this development and the complex discussion in relation to the wider masterplan have been explored through the previous application for buildings A,B and C. Therefore whilst regards will be given to the wider site and the overall design of the buildings from the masterplan stage, this report will focus upon the changes to the housing mix and changes to the elevational treatments only.

Housing Mix

The principle of residential development on this site was established during the outline application. At that time the number of residential units across the site as a whole was limited by way of a condition to 2,249 units. Across phase 1 this was limited to 296 units unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The application proposes 378 units. The previous approved reserved matters proposed 371 units therefore an additional 7 are mow proposed

Within the previous application, the applicants maintained that given the outline permission sets an overall limit on the total amount of residential development, in particular 1000 units in phase 2 and 953 units in phase 3, there is the scope to bring forward some of this development into phase 1. They also state that the increased amount of residential development in phase 1 will help to ‘frontload’ the development and will assist in establishing a critical mass. It is not considered that the increase in the number of apartments (total 7 across all buildings) from that previously approved would have any significant increased impact upon the development or the phasing of the wider scheme.

Since this application forms part of the first stage of development within Media City it is considered that the increase of 83 residential units in phase 1 can be suitably absorbed within the later phases of development. In addition the increase in units would not result in the parameters of the Environmental Statement submitted with the outline application being exceeded. It is therefore considered that the increase in unit numbers is acceptable in principle.

Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (November 2006) 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 achieved 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’. In regards 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.

Since outline consent was granted on this site the Council has adopted its Housing Planning Guidance (December 2006), which supplements policy H1 of the Adopted UDP. Although this document does not form part of the statutory development plan it is considered that it should be given substantial weight as it has been subject to a lengthy consultation process.

Policy HOU1 states that within the Regional Centre apartments will normally be the most appropriate form of housing provision.

Policy HOU2 of the Guidance relates to the size of new dwellings, it 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. In particular it states that small dwellings (studios and 1 bedroom units) should not predominate and a significant proportion of three bedroom apartments should be provided wherever practicable. A significant proportion is usually considered to be at least 10% of units. The reasoned justification of this policy expands further and states the three bedroom apartments should be provided in a mix of locations and not just in the form of penthouses, in order to ensure that they are affordable. 

The reasoned justification of policy HOU2 provides further clarification as to the size of proposed dwellings. It is considered at least 50% of units in new developments should have a floorspace and layout that makes them adaptable to changing needs; typically this is accepted as being 57 sq m and above.

Both policies H1 of the UDP and HOU2 of the housing planning guidance state that alternative approaches on individual sites may be permitted where it can be demonstrated by the applicant that there are specific circumstance that justify this and that regard is had to criteria A-H of policy H1.

The Mediacity:uk and Quays Point: Salford Quays and Trafford Wharfside Planning Guidance includes policy MC:UK 1 which relates to the mix of uses at Quays Point. Part 3 of this policy envisages that new residential activity will consist predominantly of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartment dwellings, however it states that innovative approaches to the provision of suitable high density family accommodation forms part of the mix.

Both buildings A and B contain residential units; the previously proposed composition of these residential units is set out below.

Unit Type	Building A	Building B	
	(No. Units)	(Percentage)	(No. Units)	(Percentage)	
Studio	67	38 %	40	21 %	
1 Bed	23	13 %	44	23 %	
2 Bed	84	48 %	108	55 %	
3 Bed	2	1 %	3	2 %	
					
Total	176		195		

The amended scheme has the following composition:
Unit Type	Building A	Building B	
	(No. Units)	(Percentage)	(No. Units)	(Percentage)	
Studio	61	34%	40	20%	
1 Bed	6	3%	44	22%	
2 Bed	90	51%	114	57%	
3 Bed	21	12%	2	1%	
					
Total	178		200		

The difference in the size and type of units provided across buildings A, B and C from that approved within the previous application is considered to be minimal and would not have any significant impact upon the scheme as a whole. It is recognised that the number of larger apartments has increased, however smaller apartments in the form of studios still form a significant part of the dwellings created.

It was considered at the outline consent stage that significant benefits arising from the redevelopment of the entire site outweighed the need to secure affordable housing on the site.  The addition of 7 units does not materially change this stance.

Within the previous application it was considered that the development fell someway short of the requirement of the Housing Planning Guidance, however the Local Planning Authority was satisfied that the mix of units put forward as part of this development would enable the ‘prime pumping’ of the commercial element of this development. It was also considered likely that the residential element proposed as part of the previous development proposal would mainly attract young professionals where smaller units may be more suitable. It is considered that by providing more two bedroom dwellings, but retaining smaller apartments in the form of studios, that the mix within the amended scheme is more acceptable.

As future phases develop on the wider site the local planning authority will be mindful of the provision within this first reserved matters in terms of how it will apply the Guidance across the rest of the site. 

It is there fore considered that the housing mix proposed will enable the front loading of development at this first phase, but will not restrict the local planning authority’s power to ensure that a more appropriate mix is put forward across the later phases of the site.

Design 

Policy DES1 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 a local identity and distinctiveness.

Policy DES4 outlines that development that adjoins public space shall be designed to have a strong and positive relationship with that space.

Policy DES5 outlines a number of circumstances where tall buildings will be permitted, including: where the scale of the development is appropriate to its location; the location is highly accessible by public transport, walking and cycling; the buildings would positively relate to and interact with the public realm; the buildings would be of the highest quality, would make a positive addition to the skyline and would not detract from important views; there would be no unacceptable overshadowing or overlooking; there would be no unacceptable impact on microclimate, telecommunications activity, aviation safety; and the development would be consistent with other UDP policies. 

Policy DES10 states that development will not be permitted unless it is designed to discourage crime, anti-social behaviour and the fear of crime.

Policy DES11 requires the submission of a design statement with all major applications explaining how the development takes account of the need for good design, the design principles and design concept and how these are reflected in the development’s layout, density, scale, visual appearance and landscaping, the relationship of the development to its site and the wider context and how the development will meet the Council’s design objectives. 

All of the changes to the design of the three buildings has taken place due to changes in the internal layout of the buildings and to accommodate plant and equipment.

Building A
Building A comprises a 25 storey tower with a smaller office element. There is an overall increase in height of the tower by 0.5 metres. Whilst the Benoy masterplan, approved under application 06/53168/OUT restricted the heights of the buildings, the previous application for these three buildings allowed an increase in height of 22 metres from that which was originally anticipated through the masterplan. Benoy were consulted as part of the previous application and stated: ‘The current planning application is in keeping with the fundamental generators and principles of the original masterplan concept and we would anticipate that the current proposals should not have a detrimental effect upon the later development stages’.

It is not considered that the additional 0.5 metres overall increase in building height would be significant in addition to the 22 metres previously permitted. The increase in height is as a result of the requirement to accommodate additional plant and the insertion of a mezzanine level.

Cycle stores and bin stores have been inserted to the ground floor with elevational treatments being changed to louvring to screen these. As part of the original proposals for Building A it was always envisaged that some cycle storage would be accommodated to ensure that the minimum number of secure cycle spaces are provided across the site in line with condition 25 of the outline permission which requires a minimum of a minimum of 834 cycle spaces be provided across the site.

The windows within the elevations of Building A have all been moved slightly (between 100-200mm) to align with the internal layouts of the apartments. This is not considered to be significant and would not have any detrimental impact upon the overall design of the building.

In addition to the elevational changes an access lift has been fitted to the top of the building to allow for cleaning and maintenance. This lift is centrally attached to the roof of the building and rotates to allow a straight route down the sides and around the  building.

Building B
Cycle and bin stores have also been accommodated within the ground floor areas of Building B with louvring used as screening. Again it is considered that this is acceptable as it was envisaged that some cycle storage would be accommodated within Building B in line with the requirements to provide a minimum amount of cycle parking across the site in accordance with the requirements of Condition 25 of the outline consent.

The cladding of building B is proposed to change from concrete and glass to metal panelling. It is considered that this change is acceptable and would not have any significant impact upon the character or appearance of the building. Louvres have been added to screen the plant and equipment now required however this is situated at a high level and would not have any significant impact upon the appearance of the building as a whole.

Building C

Again, the cladding strategy for building C has changed to incorporate metal panelling as opposed to concrete and glass. This material is considered to be more modern and have a more sympathetic appearance than concrete and glazing.

A satellite dish farm has also been shown on the submitted drawings, however within the previous application, any plant or machinery was restricted where it is to be externally located. A similar condition has been attached to this permission to ensure that details of the size, type and colour of such equipment has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

CONCLUSION
In conclusion it is considered that the changes to the fenestration, glazing, elevations and housing mix is relatively minor and would not have any significant impact upon the character or appearance of the buildings in the context of the wider site. It is considered that the development would remain in line with the requirements of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan, The Regional Spatial Strategy and all national and supplementary planning documents and as such is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Subject to the following Conditions

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

2.	 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.

3.	Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved plans no flue or upstanding elements shall be constructed on the roof of any building without details of heights and purpose of such flues being first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

4.	Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved no plant or equipment, including any satellites, antenna or telecommunication equipment shall be externally located on any of the buildings hereby permitted unless and until full details of the size, colour and location of any such equipment have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The equipment shall then be sited in accordance with the approved details 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.	 To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

3.	 To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

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

APPLICATION No:	08/57059/FUL

APPLICANT:	Peel Media Ltd

LOCATION:	Land At Quay Point Off Broadway Salford Quays Salford 5   

PROPOSAL:	Erection of a new pedestrian footbridge with ancillary works spanning from Dock 9 at Salford Quays across the Manchester Ship Canal to Trafford Wharf Road

WARD:	Ordsall

Description of Site and Surroundings 

The application relates to an area of land within a wider sight known as Quays Point, which lies to the north of Dock 9. To the north of Quays Point is Broadway, beyond which are a number of industrial uses. To the south, the site is bounded by the Manchester Ship Canal and Dock 9. The Imperial War Museum is located on the opposite side of the Ship Canal, within Trafford. To the south, across Dock 9, are the Lowry Theatre, Lowry Plaza and the Lowry Outlet shopping centre. To the south east of the site are the three NV buildings and the City Lofts development. To the east of the site is the Metrolink tramline, beyond which are industrial units.

The Quays Point site has outline planning permission for layout and access (06/53168/OUT), the application site is situated between the buildings referred to as building A and building C, which are currently under construction (07/54178/REM). The area between building A and building C forms part of the approved public realm for phase 1 of the Media City Development (08/56024/REM).

The proposed bridge spans the Manchester Ship Canal to Trafford. The area on the Trafford side of the Manchester Ship Canal comprises of former industrial land, currently used on match days for car parking. To the east of the proposed bridge landing is the Imperial War Museum North and vacant land to the west. To the south is a mix of industrial and commercial developments within Trafford Park.

Description of Proposal

The proposed application is for the construction of a pedestrian footbridge across the Manchester Ship Canal, linking the MediaCity development at Quays Point with Trafford Wharf Road and Wharfside. 

The proposed bridge is orientated in a north east – south west direction across the ship canal. It is a swing bridge approximately 85m in length with a slight curve. The bridge element of the development increases in width along its length from 6m at the northern end to 20m at the southern end. It is proposed that the bridge is pedestrian access only, with cyclists having to dismount, as is the case at present with the Lowry footbridge.

The bridge is supported by a single pier near to the south canal bank, acting as a pivot allowing for canal vessels to pass. The bridge would swing in a westward direction. The bridge opening movement would be controlled from a machine room located within the pier below the pedestrian deck. When it opens the whole bridge will move including the open space at the southern end, which will balance the rest of the bridge.

On the north side of the canal, the proposed bridge will link into the approved public realm for phase 1 of the of the MediaCity development. The approach to the bridge on this side would comprise a sing ramp with steps on both sides. The ramp would measure approximately 20.5m in length and have a gradient of 1:15. A cantilevered vertical glass parapet with a stainless steel handrail would extend along the ramp and steps.

This vertical glass parapet would extend along the east elevation of the bridge whilst and include stainless steel barrier would extend along the west elevation. The decking between would comprise of a combination of non-slip aluminium and aggregate surfacing.

On the eastern side, behind the vertical glass parapet, eight high tensile steel cables would extend upwards linking the bridge platform to the top of a 36m ‘fan shaped’ mast, situated above the support pier. Eight cables would then drop from the top of this mast to attach across the south side of the bridge platform.

On the south side of the canal, the approach to the bridge would comprise of a 16m wide flight of steps, which extend across the back of the public realm on the bridge. Manually operated gates across these steps would restrict access to the bridge when it is moving. A 19m long ramp is also proposed at a gradient of 1:15, bound by a cantilevered glass parapet system. A temporary footpath will link the bridge with Trafford Wharf Road whilst development proposals for the adjoining site are brought forward. This footpath will measure 3m in width and extend along the side of the existing boundary fence for the Imperial War Museum.

This application straddles the Salford/ Trafford boundary, a separate application has been submitted to Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council. Each Planning Authority is required to deal with that part of the development within its own area, but the application documents have been submitted as a whole, reflecting the fact that it is a single development. 

The applicant reports that the bride is required at this stage as it is one of the requirements of the BBC before occupying the site.

Site History

This application forms part of a wider development site where the following applications are considered to be relevant:

In April 2008 planning permission was granted for details in respect of landscaping for Phase I relating to planning permission 06/53168/OUT (ref. 08/56024/REM)

In April 2007 a reserved matters application for the erection of 371 residential units, 46,475 sq m of commercial accommodation in three mixed used buildings referred to as A, B, C were granted consent (ref: 07/54178/REM).

In October 2006 outline planning consent was granted for the redevelopment of the land at Quays Point for the redevelopment of business, studios and production space, residential, live work units, retail, hotel and leisure facilities together with associated car parking highway works and open space (ref: 06/53168/OUT)
 
In November 2003, planning permission was granted for the variation of conditions 1 and 3 on application ref: 97/36749/OUT (development of land for offices, residential, retail, leisure, hotel and car parking) to extend the date for the submission of reserved matters by a further five years to 31st October 2008 (ref: 03/46042/OUT).

In October 2000, outline planning permission was granted for the development of land at Harbour City, Dock 9 And Broadway for offices (91,862sqm) residential, (600 units), retail (2,415sqm), leisure (3,716sqm) and hotel (300 beds) (ref: 97/36749/OUT).

Site History (South Side Trafford)

H/20337 – Filling in of barge dock. Approved 18 October 1984

H/31545 – Erection of entertainment arena with associated building, car parking and service area. Refused 9 July 1990

H/35967 – Change of use of cleared land to car boot sales and market, the erection of a portable office building and ancillary car parking and landscaping. Refused November 1992

H/38311 – Reclamation of site. Approved January 1994

H/39538 – Change of use of vacant to football stadium car parking on match days. Approved August 1994.

Publicity

A press notice was displayed in the Advertiser: 23rd October 2008
Neighbours were notified: 10th September 2008

Representations

The following neighbours have been notified:

The Lowry Theatre, Salford Quays

Consultations

Greater Manchester Geology unit – No objection 

Spatial Planning - No objection

Environment Agency – No comments received to date

Greater Manchester Architectural Liaison Unit - no objections subject to the mitigation measures set out within the document ‘measures for crime prevention’ are put into practice

Archaeological Unit – No objection

Greater Manchester Ecology Unit – Note that the bridge pier will be constructed within the Canal, where water quality has recently been improving. It is recommended that measures are put in place to minimise the temporary effects caused by the construction of the bridge on water quality. To this end a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) should be secured by condition should permission be granted. It is also recommended that no vegetation should be cleared on the banks of the Canal during the bird nesting season (March to July inclusive) unless nesting birds have been shown to be absent.

Central Salford Urban Regeneration Company – No comments received to date

Natural England – No comments received to date

Trafford MBC – No comments received to date. Although it is noted that the application will be considered at Trafford MBC’s Planning Committee on the 13th November 2008, being recommended for approval.

The Development Plan

Adopted City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

Site specific policies: MX1/3 – Development in Mixed Use Areas (Salford Quays)
Other policies: ST1: Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods
		 ST4 Key Tourism Areas
 ST5: Transport Networks
 ST8: Environmental Quality
 ST10 Recreation Provision
 DES1: Respecting Context
 DES2: Circulation and Movement
 DES3: Design of Public Space
 DES4: Relationship of Development with Public Space
 DES6: Waterside Development
 DES7: Amenity of Users and Neighbours 
 DES9: Landscaping
 DES10: Design and Crime
 DES11: Design Statements
 A2: Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
 EN9 Wildlife Corridors
 EN16: Contaminated Land
 EN17: Pollution Control
 EN18: Protection of Water Resources
 EN19 Flood Risk and Surface Water
 EN23 Environmental Improvement Corridors
 R4 Key Recreation Areas

Adopted Regional Spatial Strategy

DP2 Promote Sustainable Communities
DP5 Manage Travel Demand; Reduce the Need to Travel, and increase Accessibility
DP7 Promote Environmental Quality
DP9 Reduce Emissions and Adapt to Climate Change
W1 Strengthening the Regional Economy
EM2 Remediating Contaminated Land
EM11 Waste Management Principles
MCR1 Manchester City Region Priorities
MCR2 Regional Centre and Inner Area of Manchester City Region

Other Material Considerations

National Planning Guidance:

Planning Policy Guidance Note 13: Transport (PPG13)
Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control (PPS23)
Planning Policy Guidance 24: Planning and Noise (PPG24)
Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk (PPS25)

Supplementary Planning Documents:

Design and Crime SPD
Sustainable Design and Construction SPD
Planning Obligations SPD
Design SPD

Planning Guidance:

Flood Risk Planning Guidance
Mediacity:uk & Quays Point Planning Guidance
Irwell City Park Planning Guidance

Appraisal

It is considered that the main issues for consideration with this application are the principle of the redevelopment of the site, the design of the proposed development and the potential impact on the wider Quays Point development, the impact on the amenity of nearby residents and future users of the site, access along the ship canal and pedestrian and cycle access along the bridge, the environmental impact, crime, sustainability and the need for any planning obligation.

Principle of Development

Policy ST1 states that development will be required to contribute towards the maintenance of sustainable urban neighbourhoods. 

Policy ST5 requires the Salford Quays area to be protected and enhanced as a tourism destination.

Policy MX1 states that Salford Quays will be developed as a vibrant mixed-use area with a broad range of uses and activities, and development within it will be required to support this.

The proposed bridge whilst situated outside the red line of the outline planning consent for the MediaCity development has always been an important element in the redevelopment of the wider Dock 9 area and its position has been indicated on many of the early masterplans for the area.

It is acknowledged by the Mediacity:uk & Quays Point planning guidance that both Salford and Trafford Councils support the wider development of this area for a variety of uses, especially those linked to the media industry. The proposed bridge would provide a pedestrian link to Trafford Wharfside area extending investment opportunities across the canal and encouraging economic and social integration between the media industry and the established industrial estate of Trafford Park.  

Design, Scale and Massing

Policy DES1 requires developments to respond to their physical context and to respect the character of the surrounding area. In assessing the extent to which proposals comply with this policy, regard will be had to a number of factors, including the relationship to existing buildings, the relationship to existing buildings, the impact on views and vistas, the streets horizontal and vertical rhythms and the quality and appropriateness of proposed materials.

Policy DES11 requires the submission of a design statement with all major applications explaining how the development takes account of the need for good design, the design principles and design concept and how these are reflected in the development’s layout, density, scale, visual appearance and landscaping, the relationship of the development to its site and the wider context and how the development will meet the Council’s design objectives.

Policy MC:UK4 states that the Imperial War Museum North and the Lowry are nationally important landmarks and therefore their settings and strategic views will be protected and enhanced. As development within the wider mediacity:uk area moves away from the waterfront and key transport nodes, densities will generally reduce.

Technical Requirements and standards

There are a number of technical requirements and standards that have influenced the shape, scale, type and design of the proposed footbridge.

One of the key influences for the design of the proposed bridge was whether the bridge was required to open for passing vessels and if so what clearances were required to allow vessels to pass. At present there is a public right of navigation over the Port of Manchester. The port is defined as the area downstream of Eastham and Upstream to Hunts Bank. The Harbours and Docks Act 1847 requires the harbour and dock to open to all persons for the shipping of goods and passengers.

If a fixed bridge were to be built on site then statutory authority is required in the form of a Harbour Revision Order, this gives all stakeholders a right to make representations. A permanently fixed bridge would cause difficulties in upstream dredging as well as preventing navigation of large vessels down the ship canal. For opening bridges such issues do not arise and the necessary permissions required are only that of planning permission, as was the case with the pedestrian bridge at the Lowry.

The bridge is required to be designed in accordance with the guidance set out in a number of technical criteria set out in ‘The Design Manual for Road and Bridges’ as issued by the highway agency. These criteria ensure that the loading and strength of materials are acceptable.

Navigational Requirements

The height of the bridge above the water level of the Ship Canal has been driven by the navigational requirements of the Manchester Ship Canal Company. The proposed bridge is required to satisfy dual head room requirements, meaning that it must provide for a navigable channel for large vessels when open and for smaller boats when in the closed position.  It has been the requirement for smaller boats to pass when the bridge is in a close position that has determined the profile for the pedestrian deck of the footbridge.

As a standard the Manchester Ship Canal Company require clearance for ships in the closed position to be at least that of the nearby Lowry Bridge, to allow for more efficient opening. The Lowry footbridge built in 1999 has a navigation clearance of 4.77m above water level measured across the full width of the canal.

Through discussions with the Manchester Ship Canal Company the applicants agreed a reduced width of the navigable channel beneath the bridge, since the size of the locks further upstream restrict the width of vessels using the Ship Canal to 20m. Although ships greater than 20m are not able to navigate further upstream they are required to be able to turn into North Bay dock between MediaCity and the Lowry Centre, which requires a large width of the canal.  As a result the final navigation envelope of the proposed bridge has been set at 4.77m above water level with a 30m wide channel.

Design Concept

In keeping with the original Benoy Masterplan principals on the MediaCity site the proposed bridge is slightly curved so as to continue the concentric bands that run throughout the site. Since 48m clear navigation is required when the bridge is in an open position, the pivot point for the bridge is located to the rear of the site. As a result the southern part of the bridge has been flared to act as a counter balance to the remaining span.

This area to the southern end of the bridge has been intended to be seen as a civic space above the water, the base of the fanned mast and the cable anchorages of the back space define the northern and southern edges of this zone. It is proposed that seating to be incorporated into the cable anchorages would encourage pedestrians to linger and appreciates the views and structure of the bridge.

To the north of the bridge, the curved street between building A and C links directly into the large media square which opens up to the dock to the south east and provides views of the Lowry Centre and the Imperial War Museum North. It has been designed so that the bridge is highly visible from this space due to its offset pivot and mast.

It is proposed that the cable arrangement will draw pedestrian’s form all directions. The centrepiece of the bridge is a large mast formed from a fanned array of individual pylons, which support the cables. The mast at its highest point is 35m in height and would be made from shaped circular hollow sections.

It is considered that the proposed bridge structure would form an attractive and contemporary landmark feature, which spans the canal, drawing views from the waterfront throughout the daytime and evening. Its design, layout and materials would enhance the surrounding townscape whilst ensuring that it would not detract from the nearby buildings. It is recommended that a condition be attached requiring the submission of samples of materials to ensure that the highest quality finish is achieved.

Lighting

It is proposed that both task lighting and aesthetic lighting would be provided on the bridge and approaches. Task lighting would be provided to illuminate the public access areas to provide a safe a secure environment for pedestrians during the hours of darkness. Aesthetic lighting would be provided throughout the bridge to highlight and emphasise the dramatic form of the structure at night. The lighting would be designed in such a way so as not to distract the vessel operators on the Canal.

It is intended that the final lighting strategy for the proposed bridge form part of the wider lighting strategy for MediaCity. It is therefore recommended that a condition be attached requiring the final details to be submitted for approval and implemented prior to the bridge being brought into use.

Access

Policy DES2 requires the design and layout of new development to be fully accessible to all people, maximise the movement of pedestrians and cyclists to, through and around the site, enable pedestrians to navigate their way through an area by providing appropriate views, vistas and transport links, enable safe, direct and convenient access to public transport facilities and other local amenities and minimise potential conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

MC:UK7 states that a network of pedestrian and cycle friendly streets will be promoted throughout Quays Point which should link to the urban fabric north of Broadway.

Policy A2 requires development proposals to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists through the protection and improvement of key routes.

As discussed previously the height and width of the navigable channel of the bridge has been dictated by the requirements of the Manchester Ship Canal Company and the nearby Lowry footbridge. These navigable requirements directly impact the height of the bridge deck above water, which in turn impacts on the length of the approach ramp. 

The gradients required for pedestrian access across the bridge are set out in a document ‘BD 29/04 Design Criteria for Footbridges’ which is issued by the Highways Agency. The states that the maximum preferred gradient for a bridge deck is defined as 1:20 (5%) although steeper inclines up to a maximum on 1:12 (8.33%) will be considered under exceptional circumstances dictated by the constraints of the site.

The only way to decrease the gradient of the bridge is to extend a ramp onto either dockside, which in itself causes difficulties. It is considered that a large ramp could create a visual and physical barrier for pedestrians wishing to use the canalside walkway between buildings A and C.

The design of the proposed bridge has resulted in a compromise on all parts. Further negotiations by the applicant with the Manchester Ship Canal Company have lead to only the central 10m of the required 30m width having to be at the full height of 4.77m, with the shoulder areas being reduced to 4.26m in height.

The optimum gradient of 1:20 could only be achieved on this site with significant ramps and dog legs that would extend far into the public realm between buildings A and C, which would not only provide significant disruption to pedestrian movement but would result in the loss of extensive public realm. The compromise proposed is to incorporate a steeper incline of 1:15, which would still require ramps, albeit to a much smaller extent. 

The gradient of 1:15 could be achieved with a ramp that is 1.25m above grade as it crosses the quayside edge, allowing for increased visibility for pedestrians, in addition steps will be provided for those pedestrians wishing to continue on a parallel journey with the waters edge. It is considered that the proposed gradient in striking a balance between encouraging pedestrian movement and mobility and ensuring high quality areas of public space. 

On the most part pedestrian access across the bridge will be unrestricted. When the bridge is in an open position, gates concealed above the quayside edge would be manually closed to halt pedestrian movement onto the bridge. 

Cyclists would not be allowed to cycle across the bridge and would be required to dismount.

Crime and design

Policy DES10 states development will not be permitted unless it is designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour and the fear of crime and support personal and property security.

The proposed bridge has been designed as an open structure with clear lines of site along the deck from both the Salford and Trafford banks where it makes landfall. It has been located so as to promote pedestrian use at a point where people would want to cross the Ship Canal, making the best use of the facilities and services on each bank. The proposed bridge is as short and direct as possible, taking into account engineering considerations and the need to maintain the radial bridge. The proposed bridge can be clearly viewed from nearby building and adjoining opens spaces providing which provide good passive surveillance of the bridge. 

It is intended that the bridge would be illuminated as part of the comprehensive lighting strategy for the wider MediaCity development. The bridge would be maintained by Peel Media Ltd as part of the overall MediaCity development and would be incorporated into the site wide CCTV coverage area.

Amenity

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

The nearest residential properties are located within the residential tower within building A situated 50m from the nearest part of the proposed footbridge. It is not considered that any noise arising from the opening and closing of the proposed swing bridge will have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the nearby residents.

Wind mitigation measures proposed as part of the landscape measures for the Public Realm approved for the Media City site (including the placement of evergreen and deciduous tress, porous screens and hoardings) will be comprise by the footprint of the development now proposed. A revised wind mitigation strategy would therefore be required in order to ameliorate adverse conditions predicated. 

As with other developments within this location it is therefore considered essential that a condition be imposed upon any grant of planning permission to secure adequate wind mitigation. Such mitigation, whether it be landscaping or street furniture, must be non-movable and permanently in place. The applicant has agreed with a condition to this effect and has already commissioned specialist consultants to explore the scope of any mitigation that may be required. It is hoped that this will be available before Panel, allowing a further update.

Environment

Policy EN16 states that development proposals on sites known or thought to be contaminated will require the submission of a site assessment as part of any planning application, identifying the nature and extent of the contamination involved, the risk it poses to future users/occupiers of the site, and the practical remedial measures proposed to deal with the contamination.

Policy EN17 states that development proposals that would be likely to cause or contribute towards a significant increase in pollution to the air (including dust pollution), water or soil, or by reason of noise, odour, artificial light or vibration, will not be permitted unless they include mitigation measures commensurate with the scale and impact of the development.

Policy DP7 states that environmental quality should be protected and enhanced.

Contamination

The application is accompanied by a ground condition assessment undertaken by Gifford’s. The report concludes that there is a significant potential for contamination to be present on site from the variety of industrial land uses on either side of the canal. It is therefore recommended that a condition be attached requiring a full contaminated land assessment to be undertaken and for the land to be remediated in accordance with methods approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Water Quality and Ecology

Policy EN18 states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on surface or ground water.

Policy EN9 states that development that would affect any land that functions as a wildlife corridor or that provides an important link or stepping stone between habitats will not be permitted where it would unacceptably impair the movement of flora or fauna.

The application is accompanied by a water quality desk study. The report identifies two possible sources of adverse water quality impact. Firstly during the construction phase and secondly through the operational use of the bridge. An extended phase one ecological appraisal has also been undertaken. 

The ecological appraisal concluded that most of the site comprises of hardstanding and areas of bare ground with areas of scrub, tall ruderal and ephemeral species. No invasive species were found to be present on the site, but since the habitat is considered suitable for invasive species it is recommended that an informative be attached. There are not records of protected or notable species recorded at the site. There is the potential that the site can be used by nesting birds during the nesting season of February – August, it is therefore recommended that no development is undertaken throughout this season.

Old wharves and canal walls may provide suitable habitat for bats, however it is considered to be unlikely in this location since no evidence of bats were noted on site and no records of bats have been encountered within the MediaCity development.

With respect to water quality the Manchester Ship Canal currently supports a cyprinid fishery and has a fair chemical water quality status. However the water quality in the area is improving through projects being undertaken in Salford Quays. As the Greater Manchester Ecology Unit (GMEU) are noted. GMEU have stated above there is the potential that construction activities within the canal could release sediments, which could decrease the water quality of the canal and subsequently affect aquatic ecology. Therefore it is required that measures are put in place to minimise the temporary effects caused by the construction. Suitable construction techniques should be used to minimise the impacts, these could include the use of silt nets and other techniques to control the release of sediments during construction. In order to secure such an approach a condition is recommended to ensure that a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) is provided. Subject to this, there is no objection to the proposed development in this regard.

Flood Risk

A Flood Risk Scoping Report accompanies the application, which has assessed the proposed development in respect of tidal, fluvial and induced surface water flooding. The proposed bridge is not adjacent to any tidally influenced waterway and therefore tidal flooding is not anticipated to be a problem.

Whilst the proposed development is located directly above a waterway it is not identified as being on the Environment Agencies Flood Risk Maps for fluvial flooding. This is likely to be due to the fact that that the water body is a managed canal. As a managed canal the water levels can be managed to ensure that no adverse flood risk is presented to others. Although the Manchester Ship Canal is fed by water from the River Irwell, the channel capacity of the Ship Canal is significantly greater than the Irwell and so fluctuations in flows have a significantly lesser impact on the water levels. 

It is likely that by inserting the bridge pier into the Ship Canal that there will be some impact on the fluvial hydraulics of the canal. It is not however anticipated that this would be significant in altering the flow. This is due to the extensive lock and sluice fate system immediately downstream of the bridge that is anticipated to have a far more significant impact of the hydraulics of the river even in times of minimal interference with flow.

Due to the design of the bridge no surface water is to be collected in any manner beyond that which currently takes place. Water is not intended to collect on the bridge deck but will instead be dispersed directly into the Ship Canal.

Sustainable Design and Construction

UDP Policy EN 22 states that development proposals of this size will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the impact on the conservation of non-renewable resources, and on the local and global environments, has been minimised as far as practicable; and full consideration has been given to the use of realistic renewable energy options, and such measures have been incorporated into the development where practicable. Also of relevance is the Council’s recently adopted Sustainable Design and Construction SPD

The applicant has completed the council’s sustainability checklist in relation to this application. Many of the areas of the checklist are not directly relevant to this application for a pedestrian footbridge, however the proposed development does include a number of sustainable elements, these include:
•	Minimising noise pollution caused by the plant
•	Where possible using recycled materials, including the steelwork for the bridge.
•	Using materials and techniques to minimise the environmental impact.

It is considered that given the specialist nature of the bridge, the applicant has fully explored the possible alternatives to the development to ensure that the bridges sustainability credentials are as high as possible.

Developer Contributions

Policy DEV5 states that development that would have an adverse impact on any interests of acknowledged importance or would result in a material increase in the need or demand for infrastructure, services, facilities or maintenance will only be granted planning permission subject to planning conditions or planning obligations that would ensure adequate mitigation measures are put in place.
It is not considered that the proposed footbridge would result in an adverse impact on the surrounding areas. The proposed footbridge is to managed and maintained as part of the wider MediaCity development and provides an essential piece of infrastructure and high quality public realm. It is not therefore considered that a planning obligation is required in respect of this development.

Value Added to Development

This application is the result of ongoing discussions with the applicants and their advisors. It is considered that these discussions are an ongoing process that will continue for the remaining phases of the redevelopment of Quays Point.

Conclusion

It is considered that the proposed development would provide a high quality piece of landmark infrastructure for both Salford City Council and Trafford MBC. The proposed bridge would open up investment to the Trafford Wharf area and help to kick start regeneration in the area. It is considered that the proposed footbridge is in accordance with the policies of the UDP and RSS and therefore is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

	

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Subject to the following Conditions

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

2.	Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples and details of all materials, including the walkway, railings, steps, ramps, and barriers 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.

3.	Prior to the commencement of the development, the developer shall submit a site investigation report for the approval of the Local Planning Authority.  The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of ground contamination and ground gases on site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Part IIA, focusing primarily on risks to human health and controlled waters.  The investigation shall also address the implications of ground conditions on the health and safety of site workers, on nearby occupied building structures, on services and landscaping schemes and on wider environmental receptors including ecological systems and property.

The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the start of the site investigation survey.  Recommendations and remedial works contained within the approved report shall be implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the site.

Prior to discharge of the Contaminated Land Condition, a Site Completion Report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval.  The Site Completion Report shall validate that all works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the Local Planning Authority. 

4.	Prior to the commencement of any development the scope of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No development shall commence unless and until the CEMP has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and all operations undertaken strictly in accordance with those details throughout the construction period, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5.	No development shall commence on the bridge hereby approved until survey work (additional to the "walk-over" survey undertaken in May 2006) has been undertaken to discover the location of nesting birds within that phase or unit of development. If nesting birds are identified, a method statement detailing the measures to be taken to mitigate against any disturbance to nesting birds and the timescales involved in such mitigation should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved method statement shall be implemented in full in accordance with the approved timescales.

6.	No external lighting shall be provided on or around the bridge hereby approved unless and until a scheme or schemes have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The bridge shall not be open for use until such a time as the proposed lighting scheme has been implemented in full.

7.	Notwithstanding the landscaping details hereby submitted the area indicated within the redline plan (drawing no. 414/P/102/P1) shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the buildings hereby approved.  The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme in the first available planting season unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

8.	Prior to the commencement of development a wind assessment shall be submitted which includes details of the likely impacts of the development on pedestrian level wind conditions (dockside and deck level) within both the area of the site to which the application relates and within the area of public space between Buildings A and C of the Media:City development. Such assessment shall also provide full details of measures to mitigate such impacts, along with timescales for the implementation of such measures. The assessment shall be approved in writing prior to the commencement of the development and the mitigation measures shall be implemented in accordance with the approved timescale for implementation.

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

4.	To ensure that the environment and the safety of local residents, businesses, and the general public in the vicinity of the construction works are satisfactorily protected in accordance with the mitigation measures detailed in the Environmental Statement and in accordance with policies EN17 and DES7 of the Unitary Development Plan.

5.	To ensure the development does not have any detrimental impact upon nesting birds or protected species.

6.	 To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DES 1 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. 

8.	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

APPLICATION No:		08/56945/DEEM3

APPLICANT:	Childrens Services Directorate

LOCATION:	Land Bounded By Goulden Street, Alexander Street  And Nansen Street Salford 6     

PROPOSAL:	Erection of a primary school together with associated playing areas, landscaping, car parking and construction of new vehicular and pedestrian accesses, and installation of CCTV.

WARD:	Langworthy

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

This application relates to a 1.8 hectare site in Langworthy. The application site is bounded by the rear of commercials premises 161 –219 Langworthy Road to the east, by Greenland Street and Alexandra Street to the south, Goulden Street to the east and Sydney Street together the rear of dwellings 73, 75 Norway Street, 11, 14 Woodrange Close, 26 and 28 Fairbrook Drive to the north.

The majority of the site formally housed terraced dwelling, however many of these have now been demolished and are now grassed areas with knee rails around the perimeter. There are still three rows of properties within the site along Goulden Street, Southern Street and Harmsworth Street. All of these properties with the exception of a chip shop on Southern Street are vacant. 

The surrounding uses of the site are predominantly residential, with terraced dwelling to the south and west and semi detached dwelling to the north. To the east are commercial premises along Langworthy Road, many of this commercial premises have residential flats at first floor.

BACKGROUND 

The proposal arises as a result of a schools closure and amalgamation plan devised by Salford City Council. The project forms part of the Primary Capital Programme, which is intended to roll our over the city during the forthcoming decade. 

In 2001 the Local Authority carried out a strategic review of all its primary school places across the City. This review highlighted that the level of surplus places was too high. This was especially the case in two review areas Weaste, Seedley, Langworthy and Ordsall,  and Kersal, Broughton and Blackfriars.

As a consequence Salford Cabinet approved the commencement of an initial stage of consultation with all primary schools in these two areas. This consisted of 6 public meetings and discussion with 9 community groups. The groups consisted of representations from community regeneration, Head teachers and Chair of Governors from all the schools within the review area, along with officers from the council and the Lead Members of Children’s Services. The partnership groups met on several occasions from early 2003 to December 2005.

A report was submitted to Cabinet in April 2006 to approve the commencement of the statutory process to consult on the closure of Langworthy Road, Tootal Drive, Seedley and St Lukes CE Primary School and establish a 420 place community primary school on the current Seedley primary school site. Consultation took place with the four schools in May 2006.

Following consultation it was decided that St Lukes CE School would remain open. Langworthy Road, Tootal Drive and Seedley Primary schools would close to establish a 420 place community primary school on the Glendinning Street site (subject to the outcome of this application). In addition All Souls and St James RC primary schools would close and a new 210 place RC primary school would be established on the Langworthy Road School site. The scheme proposed as part of this application was approved by the Cabinet in January 2007 and approved by Salford’s School Organisation Committee (SOC) in April 2007.

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

Planning permission is sought for the erection of a primary school with a total floor area of 2833 sqm. The building is mainly two storey in height with a step up (approximately half storey) which marks the curved entrance area to the building.

The site is of an irregular shape with the school in the centre of the site with recreation space extending away from the building in eastern and western directions. To the north of the building is a staff car park and servicing area, both are accessed off Sydney Street, which is to be extended as part of this proposal. Visitor car parking and the only pedestrian access to the site is off Greenland Street, to the south of the site.

The outside space within the development consists of a grassed football pitch to the east, and to the west is a hard surfaced play area and early years play area. Within the site there are a number of landscape features including a tree cathedral, amphitheatre, wetland habitat area and activity park.

Should planning permission be granted it is envisaged that works will commence on-site in January 2009, with the school being complete for September 2010.

SITE HISTORY

There is no planning history relevant to this proposal

CONSULTATIONS

Environment Agency – No objections but recommend that a number of conditions

Architectural Liaison Officer – No objection subject to the details contained within the Crime Impact Assessment submitted with the application.

United Utilities – No objections

Natural England – Were not clear if the if there were buildings within the site were to be demolished. If there are buildings within the site they would expect to see results of a bat survey.

Sport England – Support the application subject to a condition for the details of the playing fields

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive – Consider that a dedicated bus service to the school is not normally expected for a primary school, give the young age of students. They do support the proposal for a travel plan.

Greater Manchester Ecology Unit – Do not consider that there is potential for roosting bats within the development site due to a number of surveys being carried in recent years. No objection to the application on nature conservation grounds, providing that any required demolition is carried out with due attention paid to the possible presence of bats.

Greater Manchester Archaeological Unit - No objection

Director of Education and Leisure – No comments received

Peak and Northern Footpaths Society – No comments received

The Open Spaces Society – No comments received

The Greater Manchester Pedestrian Association – No comments received

Ramblers Association (Manchester Area) – No comments received

PUBLICITY

A site notice was displayed on the 22nd September 2008
A press notice was published on the 9th October 2008
The following neighbouring residents were notified:
5, 10 Alexander Street
54 to 57, 59 to 67 (odd) Edward Onyon Court
1 to 8 Emmeline Grange
1 to 12, 14 to 32 (even) Fairbrook Drive
1 to 23, 24 to 30 (even) Fram Street
2  to 72, 73 to 79 (odd) Goulden Street
4 to 68 (even), 55 to 83 (odd) Langton Street
133 to 219 (odd) Langworthy Road
484, 500 Liverpool Street
3 to 23 (odd), 39 to 45 (odd), 46 to 59, 60 to 76 (evens) Nansen Street
18 to 20 (even) Nona Street
1 to 36, 38 to 42 (even), 73 to 75 (odd) Norway Street
63 to 141 (odd) Seedley Park Road
2 to 34 (even), 35 to 61, 62 to 76 (even) Southern Street
1 to 9 (odd), 10 to 12 (even) Springwell Close
2 to 7, 9 to 17 (odd) Sydney Street
2 to 6 (evens) Trail Street
1 to 14 Woodgrange Close

REPRESENTATIONS

There have been 3 letters of representation received for this application, the issues raised are summarised below:
1.	There should be no use of Fairbrook Drive for service vehicles
2.	Potential loss of light to neighbouring properties
3.	Increase in traffic
4.	Increase in traffic, noise, dust and parking when the school is being built

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY

REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY

Site specific policies: None
Other policies:	Policy DP 1: Spatial Principles
Policy DP 2: Promote Sustainable Communities
Policy DP 3: Promote Sustainable Economic Development
Policy DP 4: Make the Best Use of Existing Resources and Infrastructure
Policy DP 5: Manage Travel Demand; Reduce the Need to Travel, and Increase Accessibility
Policy DP 7: Promote Environmental Quality
Policy DP 9: Reduce Emissions and Adapt to Climate Change
Policy L 1: Health, Sport, Recreation, Cultural and Education Services Provision
Policy EM 2: Remediating Contaminated Land
Policy EM 16: Energy Conservation & Efficiency

UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY

Site Specific Policies: EHC9: Site for the Provision of a New School
Other Polices	ST1: Sustainable Urban Neighbourhoods
		ST10: Recreation Provision
ST9: Retail, Leisure, Social and Community Provision
ST11: Location of New Development
DES 1: Respecting Context
DES 2: Circulation and Movement
DES7: Amenity of Users and Neighbours
DES9: Landscape
DES10: Design and Crime
EHC1: Provision and Improvement of Schools and College
A1: Transport Assessments and Travel Plans
A2: Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
A8: Impact of Development on the Highway Network
A10: Provision of Car, Cycle and Motorcycle Parking in New Developments
EN13: Protected Trees
EN14: Derelict, Underused and Neglected Land
EN16: Contaminated Land
EN17: Pollution Control
EN18: Protection of Water Resources
EN19: Flood Risk and Surface Water
EN22: Resource Conservation

OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS

Supplementary Planning Documents that are of relevance to the determination of this application include Design and Crime, Trees and Development, Planning Obligations, Sustainable Design and Construction. 

PLANNING APPRAISAL

The main planning issues relating to this application are whether the principal of the development is acceptable on this site; whether the siting and design of the proposal is acceptable, whether the development incorporates crime prevention measures, whether the development would have an unacceptable impact on trees, whether the landscaping proposals are acceptable, whether there is an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents, whether highway, accesses and parking provision is acceptable, whether the development would have an unacceptable impact on the environment and whether the developer contribution is appropriate. Each of the above will be dealt with in turn below.

PRINCIPLE

Policy ST11 outlines the sequential approach to the bringing forward of land for development and details the order in which sites for development should be brought forward: existing buildings; previously developed land which is well served by a choice of means of transport and is well related to housing, employment, services and infrastructure; previously developed land in other locations provided that adequate levels of accessibility could be achieved; and finally greenfield sites in locations which are, or would be made to be, well served by a choice of transport and well related to employment, services and infrastructure.

This site once housed terraced dwelling, albeit many of the dwelling have now been demolished or are vacant. The site therefore comprises previously developed land. The site is located close to Langworthy Road, Liverpool Street and Tootal Drive which have good public transport links. The site is therefore considered to be well served by a choice of transport modes. 

The site is allocated within the Unitary Development Plan under policy EHC9. Policy EHC9 states that land at Glendinning Street, Langworthy (1.9 ha) is allocated for the provision of a new primary school in accordance with Policy ST 9 ‘Retail, Leisure, Social and Community Provision’ and Policy EHC 1 ‘Provision and Improvement of Schools and Colleges’.

The reasoned justification for the policy states that the site is required for a new primary school, which will replace an existing school on the site allocated under Policy S5 ‘Site for New Retail Development’ for a new superstore at Salford Precinct, and will form an important part of the regeneration of the Seedley and Langworthy area. 

Therefore, the acceptability of the principle of the redevelopment of this site for a primary school has been established through the adoption of the Unitary Development Plan.

Policy EHC1 states that planning permission will be granted for the provision of new schools and colleges, and also for the improvement or replacement of schools and colleges on existing sites, provided that the development would, not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring uses, secure an adequate standard of playing field, accessible to the community by a range of means of transport, incorporate adequate disabled access, not give rise to unacceptable levels of traffic congestion and make provision wherever possible for community use of building and grounds.

The criteria of this policy will be assessed below in the planning appraisal if the criteria above are satisfied it is considered that the principal of development will be acceptable.

SITING AND Design

Policy DES1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments respond to their physical context and respects the positive character of the local area. In assessing applications regard should be had to the existing landscape; the character scale and pattern of streets and building plots; the relationship to existing buildings; the impact, on and quality of views; the scale of the proposed development; the improvement of the existing townscape and public space; the quality of proposed materials and their appropriateness; and the functional compatibility with adjoining land uses.

The site is irregular in shape with the proposed school building in the centre of the site with recreation space extending away from the building in eastern and western directions. It is considered that the school building is located in the most rational place within the site, in that in this location the building will have least effect on the amenity of existing local residents and the majority of residents will retain views onto open space.

The school is two storeys high with a step up (approximately half storey) which marks the curved entrance area. It is considered that increasing the building in height, helps to break up its overall mass and provide visual interest to the elevations. Further to this the front and rear elevations have detailing such as a canopy which aids the breaks up of the elevational massing. Amended plans have been sought through the application process to improve the design of the gable ends of the building and add visual interest to these elevations. Extending render and adding visual details such as louvers and windows have achieved this. 

The two storey height of the building is considered acceptable as this corresponds with the surrounding residential development. The proposal does increase in height at the entrance area and will take the height of the above the height of surrounding properties but the mass of the building as a whole would not be unduly dominant or overbearing in the street scene and the impact of the proposal is reduced as the building is set well back within the site. 

The proposal is to be constructed with a mix of materials, which use a variety of colours to break up the elevations. The spines of the building, which extend from the curved entrance would be constructed from red brick to respect the facing materials of the surrounding residential dwellings. The curved entrance would be colour rendered in a blue and sections above the spines will be rendered element in a yellow. The balconies and canopied would be stainless steel. A yellow perspex would be used on the canopies to match the yellow render along the spine of the building and the canopies proposed would be covered with orange perspex to create a warm glow. The Council’s Urban Designer has concerns over the use of orange perspex. The applicants have directly responded to the Councils Urban Designers concerns by stating that the use of orange rather than yellow was decided because it gives greater depth of colour which will be subtly reflected on the floor. As the remaining orange Perspex used in the horizontal sections forming the canopies will not be able to be seen from the street, it is considered that the orange perspex proposed is acceptable. Samples of the proposed materials will be presented to the panel and members can make the final decision on whether the choice of materials are acceptable. 

It is considered that the design, siting and massing of the building is acceptable. Subject to a condition which seeks the approval of materials prior to the commencement of development it is considered that the proposal fully complaint with Unitary Development Plan policy DES1.

CRIME PREVENTION

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

The application was accompanied with a Crime Impact Assessment (CIA). The scheme highlighted positive elements of the scheme, which are pedestrian accesses to the development exclusively from Greenland Street, the car parking areas are secured and the site benefits from and enhances natural surveillance in the area. The report also identifies weak areas of the scheme, primarily the public footpath along the northern boundary of the site which is relatively narrow and would feel enclosed when the site is redeveloped.

The applicant wishes to retain this footpath in the development and erect fencing to secure the school. The applicants have addressed the concerns of the CIA by the use of permeable fencing around the perimeter of the site which will allow views of the footpath from alleyway to the rear of premises along Langworthy Road and from Greenland Street due to the open nature of the playing fields. The proposed landscaping along the northern boundary is spaced and tree crowns will be maintained above 2m in height which will help to ensure that this pathway is subject to natural surveillance and no hiding places are created. A number of conditions are recommended, which will ensure that this footpath will be subject to such natural surveillance. Firstly a condition detailing the proposed works to the footpath will be required. Secondly a landscaping management scheme for the site will be required that will ensure that the trees are pruned to ensure that surveillance opportunities are maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. 

The CIA report also identifies that the site will be subject to CCTV provision, which could ultimately feed into the wider CCTV coverage across the City. A condition is accordingly recommended such that a scheme detailing the CCTV is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to occupation of the school. This will allow the quality and coverage of the CCTV to be fully appraised, including the identified priority to ensure surveillance for the said footpath. The Police Architectural Liaison Officer has no objections to the proposal, subject to the above provisions. 

It is considered that redeveloping the site would have a positive impact on the visual amenity of the area and this in turn will reduce the fear of crime in the area. The proposal encourages natural surveillance and also would involve introduction of CCTV in the area which secure the site and make the surrounding street safer. It is therefore considered that the development accords with DES10 of the Unitary Development Plan.

TREES AND LANDSCAPING

EN13 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plans states that development which would result in an unacceptable loss of, or damage to protected trees will not be permitted. Where the loss of trees is considered acceptable adequate replacement provision will be provided.

There are 3 no. trees on site which are located close to Greenland Street. These trees are to be removed as part of the development proposals. The applicants state that trees are of poor health and as such are to be removed. The proposed landscaping plan indicates that the scheme will provide a number of replacement trees which is well above the Council two for one standard. Whilst the loss of the trees is regrettable, it is considered that their retention cannot be insisted upon in this instance. However the level of planting proposed as part of the development will compensate for such loss at a far greater ratio that a standard replacement. It is therefore considered, subject to a condition which seeks the submission of a detailed landscape and management scheme that the proposal is considered to accord with EN13 of the Unitary Development Plan.

DES9 required to incorporate hard and soft landscaping provision where appropriate which must be of a high quality that would enhance the design of the development, and not detract from the safety and security of the area which as a result would enhance the attractiveness and character of the built environment.

The landscaping scheme has been designed to include both hard and soft landscaping. The scheme will include for tree and shrub planting, grassed areas and hard paved areas of bitmac, resin, bonded gravel and paving. The proposal includes landscaping features such as a wetland habitat area, activity park and woodland educational area. Details of proposed boundary treatments around the perimeter and within the site have also been submitted with the application. Weldmesh fencing is proposed around the perimeter of the site ranging in height between 2m to 3m. Overall it is considered that the proposed landscaping would be of a high quality and relates well with the proposed school building. It is considered that the landscaping of the site would have a positive impact on the street scene and the visual amenity of the area in accordance with DES9 of the Unitary Development Plan.

AMENITY

DES7 states that development will be required to provide potential users with a satisfactory level of amenity in terms of space, sunlight, daylight, privacy, aspect and layout. Development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers or users.

The location of the school building within the centre of the site would ensure that the proposed building would not have an overbearing impact on the light, outlook and privacy currently enjoyed by neighbouring residents bounding the site. It is also considered that the landscaping features would not have an overbearing impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents. 

It is acknowledged that this site is situated in a predominantly residential area. A management strategy was submitted with the application which details how the site will operate for example servicing and car parking. This reported that the staff car park and servicing area would be predominately be used during day-time hours, albeit is noted that on occasion (parents evening for example)this may be used until approximately 10pm. It is acknowledged that the formal management of the school has yet to be fixed as this will be undertaken by the board of governors and ultimately the head teacher.  However, in order to ensure that the site is appropriately managed in terms of utilisation of the staff car park and servicing areas a condition is recommended to requirement the submission of a management plan for the site prior to the occupation of the school.

Turning to other amenity issues it is noted that physical design of the proposal is such as to minimise the impacts of the development on neighbouring residents. The outside play areas have no external lighting thus ensuring that use is largely self regulated in that the ability for them to be used outside of daylight hours is severely restricted. In any event, the terms of when the playing fields can be used (which is only with the authorisation of the school) will be the subject of the said management regime. In addition, it is noted that the only pedestrian access to the school is off Greenland Street which focuses potential issues of access and egress to one point where there is limited impact on neighbouring residents. 

It is appreciated that the development of this site will have inevitably have an effect on the amenity of surrounding residents, by the very nature of the proposed use, particularly at am and pm pick up/drop off. However, the layout of the scheme will minimise such effects, as will the suggested condition which will require future approval of a management strategy for the site. On balance, in being mindful of the allocation of the site for a new Primary School, it is considered that there will not be an unacceptable impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents and that accordingly the proposal accords with UDP Policy DES7.

ACCESS, HIGHWAYS AND PARKING

Policy A1 requires planning applications for developments which would give rise to significant transport implications will not be permitted unless they are accompanied by a transport assessment and, where appropriate, a travel plan.

Policy A8 states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety.

Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council’s maximum standards. It also states that the maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded.

A transport assessment (TA) was submitted with the application. The TA notes that the site is well served by public transport links along Liverpool Street, Langworthy Road and Tootal Drive. It is acknowledged that the school would be expected to generate increased volumes of traffic during off peak periods (in the morning and late afternoon). However, any congestion will be for short periods either side of the school day.

The TA states that in order to reduce reliance on the private motor car a travel plan will be produced.  In accordance with such recommendations and UDP policy A1 a condition is recommended to this effect.

The proposed development will involve the extension of the existing Sydney Street and this would provide access to the staff car park and servicing area for the school. The proposal would involve changing the existing pedestrian and vehicle access of existing properties 73 and 75 Norway Street to the new extension of Sydney Street. A condition is recommended to ensure that during the construction period 73 and 75 Norway Street have pedestrian and vehicle access all times. In addition to this a condition is also required to ensure that the footpath along the northern boundary of the site is to be maintained during the construction period. 

As stated above Sydney Street will be extended and will provide access to the servicing area for the school and staff car park. The proposed servicing area is considered to be of a sufficient size to cater for medium sized goods vehicles. The proposed staff car park would provide 30 spaces and 2 disable spaces. In addition to the staff car parking visitor car parking would be provided off Greenland Street. The visitor car parking would provide 6 spaces and 2 disabled spaces. It is considered that the car parking provision including disabled provision proposed is acceptable in accordance with Unitary Development Plan policy A10

The proposal includes provision for 10 cycles in covered shelters, this development does not meet the minimum cycle parking requirement. However it is considered that as this is a primary school and many of the children will be accompanied to school with adults therefore number of pupils that cycle to school will be minimal. It is therefore considered that the provision provided for this development will be acceptable.

Subject to the imposition of the conditions detailed above there are no objection to the proposal on highway safety grounds.

BIODIVERSITY

Policy EN10 states that development that would be likely to have an adverse impact on legally protected species will only be permitted where mitigation measures are put in place to maintain the population level of the species at a favourable conservation status within its natural range.

A comprehensive survey of the properties in the development site was conducted in September and October 2006. This survey concluded that properties had low potential to support bats given the lack of suitable foraging habitats in the area and the ongoing disturbance from the demolition of properties. No record of bats was found. More recent inspections in October 2007 indicated there has been no material change in the area that will have improved the situation for bats. To the contrary, it is considered that works in the area to date have made the site less attractive for bats.

The Greater Manchester Ecology Unit have commented that they have carried out a number of bat activity and emergence/re-entry bat surveys in this area at various times over the last couple of years in association with the redevelopment of the wider area, and has detected no bat activity. Further, the extensive redevelopment works that have taken place recently and are continuing in the immediate area represent a significant level of disturbance that would reduce any likelihood of bats being present, although it is recognised that bats can be found in unlikely places. In these circumstances they have no objections to the application on nature conservation grounds, providing that any required demolition works are carried out with due attention paid to the possible presence of bats. If bat or signs of bats are found at any time then works must cease immediately and advice sought qualified bat consultant. Notwithstanding the views of GMEU it is noted that Natural England, the statutory consultees on the application have taken a different view. Natural England state a bat survey is need for any properties on site which have not yet been demolished. In this case a difficulty and unique position has arisen whereby there if a difference of opinion between ecologists advising the Council. However, in being mindful that the applicants have made every reasonable step to assess the potential for bats within the site at this stage, it is considered that this application can be determined subject to a condition requiring all demolition works on site to be monitored by a suitably qualified ecologist. Subject to a condition to this effect there is no objection to the proposal in this regard. 

SUSTAINABLE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

Unitary Development Plan policy EN22 states that development proposals of this size will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the impact on the conservation of non-renewable resources, and on the local and global environments, has been minimised as far as practicable; and full consideration has been given to the use of realistic renewable energy options, and such measures have been incorporated into the development where practicable. Also of relevance is the Council’s Sustainable Design and Construction Supplementary Planning Document.

The applicants have confirmed that the proposed building will meet BREEAM Very Good. The development includes many elements which minimise energy consumption including high insulations standards and the utilisation of energy efficient goods.

SUDS have been incorporated into the proposal with hard surfaces being permeable in nature. Water run-off will drain into the proposed swale and in a secondary storage tank below ground. 
 
It is considered that the development has fully satisfied the requirement to reduce, wherever possible, impacts on local and global environments. A condition is recommended to ensure that this such measures are secured.

IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT

Air Quality and Noise

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

The planning application contains a noise assessment which addresses the potential noise impact of the construction of the development on the existing local residential dwellings. An Air Quality Assessment has also been provided. The Council’s environmental consultants are still to advise on this matter and a full update will therefore be provided in advance of Panel.

External Lighting

The application would include the erection of external lighting. The lighting will mainly be erected on the building, although additional lighting columns are proposed around the car parking areas. 

The applicant has submitted a light spill survey, which indicates the proposed flux levels surrounding the site when the lights are in use. The survey indicates that the area within the site will be lit at a maximum of 68 lux. Due to the position of the lights the lux levels near residential properties would be between 0 and 9 lux. The maximum lux within residential boundaries would be 2 lux. Such levels are considered acceptable in ensuring that the amenities of residents will not be unacceptably affected. A condition is recommended to secure lighting in accordance with the submitted scheme unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Contamination

Policy EN14 development involving the reclamation, remediation or improvement of derelict, underused or neglected land should include measures to ensure that the physical risks are reduced to acceptable levels. 

Policy EN 16 states that development on sites known or thought to be contaminated will require the submission of a site assessment as part of any planning application, identifying the nature and extent of the contamination involved, the risk it poses to future users/occupiers of the site, and the practical remedial measures proposed to deal with the contamination. Planning permission for development on or near to contaminated land will only be granted where the development would not, expose the occupiers of the development and neighbouring land uses to unacceptable risk; threaten the structural integrity of any existing or proposed building on or adjoining the site; lead to the contamination of any watercourse, water body, or aquifer; or cause the contamination of adjoining land or allow such contamination to continue.

The applicants submitted a Phase 2 Ground Investigation Report with the application. The contaminated land report is been assessed by Urban Vision Environment it is recommended that the full-contaminated land condition should be applied to the site. The existing report submitted with the application will be accepted as part compliance with the condition, however, the outstanding issues need to be assessed as and when they are complete.

DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION

Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document requires developers for non residential development with a floor area of over 1,000m2 to make an appropriate contribution to
•	Improvements to the city’s public realm, heritage and infrastructure
•	The training of local residents in construction skills
•	The offsetting of greenhouse gas emissions

The proposal will involve improvements to the surrounding highway infrastructure to a level that is sufficient to meet the requirements of the school and to the benefit of the local highway netwrok. The majority of the existing site is currently vacant. The proposal will involve an improvement to the public realm, for example, through the provision of tree planting and landscaping. Therefore, it is considered that the school provides considerable improvements to the existing infrastructure and public realm and, as such, does not require the provision of additional improvements in the form of a commuted sum or off site provision. 

With regards to Climate Change; the proposal will include for a variety of sustainable construction methods and will achieve a BREEAM rating of ‘Good’. As such, that the provision of commuted sums in order to off-set the carbon footprint of the proposal is not necessary.

OTHER ISSUES

Community Use Agreement

Policy R1 states that the redevelopment of existing recreational land will not be permitted unless, amongst other things, adequate replacement recreation provision, of equivalent or better accessibility, community benefit and management is made in a suitable location to the satisfaction of the City Council.

The extent of the community use would be controlled through the use of a condition requiring the submission and written approval of a community use scheme to ensure that the pitch can be used by the local community outside school hours. However it must be noted that the as there is no floodlighting these hours will be self-regulating. In addition regard must be had to the residential context of the site and this also restricts the use of the outside areas. It is also recommended that notwithstanding the approved plans a condition be attached to any planning consent ensuring the details of surface treatment, layout and drainage of the new playing fields shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  
 
Objections

With regard to the letters of objection received the impact of the proposed development and the increase in traffic has been assessed. With regard to disturbance during the construction period, it is appreciated that some disturbance will occur and that there may be an increase in traffic. However construction activity is likely to be relatively short term and considered to be an acceptable consequence of development. In any event a condition is recommended to secure a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)which will allow the construction phase of the development to be appropriately managed and regulated. With regard to Fairbrook Avenue, this road is to the north of the development and does not provide a link from the school to the surrounding road network. Therefore it is unlikely that service vehicles for the school will use Fairbrook Drive. 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the site is allocated for the erection of a primary school in the Unitary Development Plan therefore the principal of development is considered to be acceptable. The proposed development would provide a modern educational establishment for the future, utilising this vacant site.  The layout and access arrangement would respect the residential context of the site and there would be no unacceptable impact on the capacity of the local highway network or highway safety.  The scheme would have significant benefits for the wider community and would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents.  Therefore approval is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve Subject to the following Conditions

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

2.	Prior to occupation of the school a scheme for CCTV coverage, including the design, type, mounting, and colour of all equipment, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implement prior to the fist occupation of the building and be retained at all times thereafter.

3.	Prior to commencement of development a scheme detailing the improvements proposed for the pedestrian footpath to the north of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implement prior to the occupation of the school and shall be retained as such thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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

5.	Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved prior to occupation of the school a landscaping management scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall detail the maintenance regime for all areas of landscaping (hard and soft), including for the provision of a minimum crown clearance for trees to the northern boundary of the site, adjacent to the footpath linking Sydney Street to Nansen Street. The approved landscaping management scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained at all times thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

6.	Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved no development shall commence, save for site clearance and site remediation, unless full details, including dimensions, and exetrnal appearance (design and colour) of the tree cathedral, activity park, and all other funiture (including seating) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be implemented fully in accordance with the approved scheme unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

7.	The site boundaries of the development hereby approved shall be treated in accordance with the fencing details as shown in approved plan drawings E11855/L/C05, E11855/L/C06, E11855/L/C07E11855/L/C08, E11855/L/C09 rev A unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

8.	Prior to the first occupation of the building the car parking and cycle provision as shown in E11855/L/C02  shall be made available for use. Such provision shall be retained and kept available for use thereafter.

9.	Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, save for site clearance and site remediation, 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.

10.	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.

11.	The development hereby approved shall achieve at least 'very good' 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 the building hereby approved is 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.

12.	Prior to the commencement of development, including site clearance and site remediation, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The CEMP shall include all works at clearance, remediation, construction, and operational phases of the development, and include a site operating statement, and shall relate to the provision of permitted hours for construction works, delivery of materials and delivery and collection of equipment, provision and use of on-site parking for contractors and workpeople’s vehicles, dust suppression measures, wheelwashing facilities, street sweeping, temporary lighting, spill contingency plans, waste management, pollution prevention, management of fill and excavated material, and no development or activities related or incidental thereto shall take place on site in contravention of the CEMP.

13.	No development approved by this permission shall be commenced, save for site clearance, until a scheme for the provision of surface water drainage works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans.

14.	Prior to the commencement of works, save for site clearance, details of the surface treatment, layout and drainage of the new playing field, a maintenance and management plan and a programme for delivery (including a date of first use (to be no later than 2 years after the commencement of these works)) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  Such details shall be in line with Sport England's Design Guidance Note `Natural Turf for Sport' (available from the Sport England web site www.sportengland.org ).

15.	At all times during the development, including clearance, remediation, construction, and operational phases, vehicle and pedestrian access shall be maintained to 73 and 75 Norway Street unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

16.	At all times during the development including clearance, remediation, construction, and operational phases, access along the footpath joining Sydney Street to Nansen Street should be maintained unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

17.	The development hereby approved shall be implemented in accordance with the proposed lighting scheme as shown in the E11855 PL05 rev A, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

18.	Prior to occupation of the school a community use scheme relating to the school's sports facilities, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Scheme shall include details of pricing policy, hours of use, access by non-school users/non-members, changing provision, management responsibilities and include a mechanism for review. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full and shall remain in place whilst the use is in operation 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.	To ensure that the development is appropriately secured from crime in accordance with policy DES 11 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 

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

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

5.	To ensure that the proposed landscaping does not obstruct natural surveillance of the public footpath along the northern boundary of the site in accordance with DES10 of the Unitary Development Plan.

6.	To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents 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. 

8.	In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy A 8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 

9.	In accordance with A1 of the Unitary Development Plan

10.	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. 

11.	To ensure that the development accords with sustainability principles in accordance with Unitary Development Plan policy EN22 and Sustainable Design and Construction SPD.

12.	To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan. 

13.	To reduce the increased risk of flooding by ensuring the provision of a satisfactory means of surface water disposal in accordnace with En19 fo the Unitary Development Plan.

14.	To ensure the playing pitch is laid and maintained in an appropriate manner to ensure its continued use.

15.	 To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

16.	 To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

17.	To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy DES 7 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

Note(s) for Applicant

1.	The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the Applicant should take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of their proposal. Developers must also seek permission from the Coal Authority before undertaking any operation that involves entry into any coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and adits and the implementation of site investigations or other works.   Property specific summary information on any past, current or proposed surface and underground mining activity to affect the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The Coal Authority Mining Reports Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk

2.	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.