Division by T38VvGO

VIEWS: 32 PAGES: 52

									PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION                                          21 July 2011


http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=externalDocuments&keyVal=L
DQCQ5NP00B00

APPLICATION No:                      10/59773/OUT
APPLICANT:                           Bredale Developments Ltd
LOCATION:                            Cygnet House, 111 Taylorson Street South, Salford, M5 3BL,
PROPOSAL:                            Outline application including access, appearance, layout and
                                     scale for the erection of a mixed use development comprising of
                                     a 204 roomed hotel, 54 apartment hotel suites, 132 residential
                                     apartments 14,279sq.m of office space, 1.233sqm of leisure
                                     facilities and 758sqm of retail units together with 2 level
                                     basement car parks comprising of 5 storeys to 24 storeys , ,
WARD:                                Ordsall

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The main site is regular in shape and consists of 0.55 ha of land. The site is bound by Taylorson Street South to
the northwest. The south-western boundary of the site abuts the Metrolink tramways and Colgate Lane. Other
buildings and land uses adjoin the site on the other boundaries. The site area has recently been extended to
include land that is required for highway works on Ordsall Lane and access off Colgate Lane and therefore
includes Taylorson Street South and parts of Colgate Lane.

The site accommodates a 2,304 sq m (24,800 sq ft) commercial building known as Cygnet House, with 70
parking spaces. It is occupied by the Post Office and is a cashing depot, and is therefore strictly safeguarded
and surrounded by a range security measures including high boundary fencing, controlled and gated access
points, no windows, and extensive CCTV coverage.The site is currently accessed from Taylorson Street South
and Ordsall Lane.

Salford Exchange Metrolink Station is located on the western boundary of the site. Bus routes are also
provided along Trafford Road and Ordsall Lane.

On the other side of Taylorson Street South to the northwest is the XQ7 residential apartment complex. These
apartments are 9 to 12 storeys in height. To the southeast there is a multi storey car park. To the northeast is
Waters Edge Business Park, which is a trade-counter park with associated parking, accessed off Hagley
Road/Ordsall Lane.

Beyond Waters Edge Business Park is Colgate Lane and the large, former Colgate factory site, which backs
onto the trade counter park, and fronts the riverside. It is currently undergoing a major, mixed use conversion
development. Monmouth Park is located a short distance to the north on the other side of Ordsall Lane.

Description of Proposal

The development comprises of two main tower blocks comprising of:

           204 bedroom 4* hotel;
           54 suite apartment hotel;
           14,279 sq m of office space;
           132 residential apartments; and
           3 ground floor ancillary (A1-A5 Use Class) retail units totalling 758 sq m;
           A first floor leisure unit totalling 1,233 sq m.




557c07df-7616-4287-b260-5a1a5da75d2f.rtf
The Physical Composition of the Development

The development essentially comprises of two glazed towers supported on a lower podium style buildings. The
two main buildings are separated by a 13.5m wide pedestrian link which helps facilitate direct access to
Exchange Quay Metrolink Station through the site towards Riverside Trading Park.

Tower A accommodates the hotel uses. It sits in a prominent location, fronting an existing plaza area, the
curved Metrolink route and Trafford Road to the southwest of the site. It is 24 storeys with a curved, fully glazed
corner elevation, which rises above two 17 and 16 storey wings clad in reconstituted white Portland stone with
blue/green window panels. A lower 4 storey podium element of this cluster fronts the neighbouring multi storey
car park to the southeast.

A range of apartments are provided within Tower B, which sits at the northeast end of the site. It is 15 storeys
and will have fully glazed elevations, reflecting those of Tower A. Tower B is also flanked by a lower 9 storey
tower which fronts onto the proposed pedestrian route through the site, and the 4 storey podium part which
fronts onto Taylorson Street South. Both flanked elevations also comprise of white reconstituted Portland stone
and blue/green windows.

Two separate roof garden spaces are provided on the lower 4 storey podium elements of the hotel and
apartment blocks.

Uses Within The Development

This section outlines the uses within the proposed development.

Hotel

The proposed hotels will sit in the larger of the two towers (Tower A). They constitute the principal use in the
development with a total gross floor area of 17,240 sq m (representing 37% of the total gross floor area). The
main hotel will be a 4* Hotel with 204 bedrooms, whilst the Apartment Hotel will include 54 suites. The
Apartment Hotel takes up 3,804 sq m, which represents 8% of the total development.

Commercial Uses

The 14,279 sq m of office space will be provided on the first to fourth floors of Tower B and the second to fourth
floors of Tower A. It represents 31% of the total floorspace of the proposed development.

The small ground floor retail units will front onto the proposed pedestrian route to create an active frontage.
They represent just 2% of the total proposed floorspace. The lobby of the leisure unit will also front the proposed
pedestrian route, with the main floor area located on the first floor of Tower A. It represents just 3% of the total
proposed floorspace.

The Residential Apartments

The mix of apartments will be located in Tower B and commence at the fifth floor. The total gross area of the
apartments is 12,945 sq m representing 28% of the total development proposal. The following mix will be
provided:

          61 nos 1-bed apartments (46%)
          39 nos 2-bed apartments (30%)
          32 nos 3-bed apartments (24%)

Parking

Car Parking will be provided at two basement levels, which deliver a total of 274, comprising of 266 standard
spaces and 8 disabled spaces. On the first level of basement parking, 33 bicycle spaces will also be provided.




                                                         2
Access

The main access to the proposed development will be via Taylorson Street South, where access to the
basement car parking is achieved. At the present time, Taylorson Street South is only accessible by vehicle
from Ordsall Lane. It is proposed to create a one way link from Clippers Quay over the Metrolink Line to
Taylorson Street South to allow access to the hotel and an egress for any taxis and. The majority of this link
currently exists to allow access to car parking.

Off site highway works will also be delivered on Ordsall Lane to create a dedicated right turn lane for traffic
looking to enter Taylorson Street South.

Developer Contributions

A range of developer contributions will be provided as per the Council’s Planning Obligations Supplementary
Planning Document. The main contributions relate to Open Space Provision (£233,806), Public Realm,
Infrastructure and Heritage (£868,200), Construction Training (£70,065), and Climate Change (£93,420). The
Climate Change contribution will be received if the completed development does not achieve a very good
BREEAM rating. These contributions will be set out in a s106 Agreement to be agreed with the applicant.

An offsite Affordable Housing contribution will also be sought and the principles of this will also be established
through a s106 Agreement at the outset. The value of the contribution will be quantified based on Gross Market
Values at the time of commencing the development. Based on current and deflated market values suggest this
contribution would be in excess of £1,190,000.


Site History

The planning applications of relevance to this site include:

02/43571/FUL Erection of CCTV cameras to exterior of building. Approved with conditions February 2002.

04/49534/FUL Erection of security CCTV camera tower. Approved with conditions January 2005.



Publicity

Site Notice: Site notice
Reason: Wider Publicity

Site Notice: Site notice Date Displayed: 14 January 2011
Reason: Wider Publicity


Neighbour Notification

The following neighbours were notified of the application on 22/12/10, 10/01/10 and 14/06/11;

18-20 Exchange Quay,
Ground to Second Floor, 22 Exchange Quay,
Ground Floor to Third Floors, 24 Exchange Quay,
30-32, 6 Exchange Quay,
Abstract Nikal Management, part ground floor, The Soap Works, Ordsall Lane,
Ground to Seventh Floors, 4 Exchange Quay,
PH1-PH9 XQ7 Building, Taylorson Street South, Salford,
Apartments 1301-1309, XQ7 Building, Taylorson Street South,
Apartments 1200-1225, XQ7 Building, Taylorson Street South,
Apartments 1100-1124, XQ7 Building, Taylorson Street South,
Apartments 1000-1030 XQ7 Building, Taylorson Street South,




                                                         3
Apartments 900-930, XQ7 Building, Taylorson Street South,
Apartments 800-830, XQ7 Building, Taylorson Street South,
Apartments 700-730, XQ7 Building, Taylorson Street South,
Apartments 600-630, XQ7 Building, Taylorson Street South,
Apartments 500-530, XQ7 Building, Taylorson Street South,
Apartments 400-425, XQ7 Building, Taylorson Street South,
Second to Fourth Floors, 3 Exchange Quay,
Ground to Third Floor, 26 Exchange Quay,
Second Floor to Third Floor, 16 Exchange Quay,
Ground to First Floor, 14 Exchange Quay,
Ground to Third Floor, 12 Exchange Quay,
10 Exchange Quay,
First Floor, 8 Exchange Quay,
Associates Capital Corporation, 8 Exchange Quay,
Blue Sky, Fifth Floor, 8 Exchange Quay
Post Office, 8 Exchange Quay,
First Floor_ Second Floor, 5 Exchange Quay,
Esterre, Part Third Floor, 5 Exchange Quay,
Eleventh Floor, 5 Exchange Quay,
First to Sixth Floor, 1 Exchange Quay,
Fifth Floor, 3 Exchange Quay,
601-608, 6 Exchange Quay,
32-42 (evens), 6 Exchange Quay,
Imperial Court, 2 Exchange Quay,
Colgate Parmolive Site, Colgate Lane,
1001-1012 Abito, 4 Clippers Quay,
901-916 Abito, 4 Clippers Quay,
801-820 Abito, 4 Clippers Quay,
701-726 Abito,4 Clippers Quay,
601-636 Abito, 4 Clippers Quay,
501-536 Abito, 4 Clippers Quay
401-436 Abito, 4 Clippers Quay,
301-336 Abito, 4 Clippers Quay,
201-236 Abito, 4 Clippers Quay,
101-136 Abito, 4 Clippers Quay,
Unit 1,1A and 2, Abito, 4 Clippers Quay,
Conceirge Office, Abito, 4 Clippers Quay,
1-21 Adamson House, 4 Elmira Way,
Apartment 1 and 2 Platt House, 5 Elmira Way,
22-45 Adamson House, 4 Elmira Way,
1-56 Walker House, 6 Elmira Way,
1-41 Platt House, 5 Elmera Way,
Shell UK, Petrol Station, Trafford Road,
Ground to Second Floor, Vanguard House, Merchants Quay,
37-57 (odds) Craven Drive,
1-26 Weedall Avenue,
71-77 (odds) Taylorson Street,
1-15 Treelands Walk,
1-31 (odds) Warburton Street,
Copthorne Hotel Manchester, Clippers Quay,
Renown House, Clippers Quay,
Cinema, Clippers Quay,
1-10 Lawler Avenue,
Transport House, Merchants Quay,
Subway, Petrol Station, Trafford Road,
400-402 (evens) Ordsall Lane,
Ground to Third Floor, Optimum House, Clippers Quay,
_ to Fifth Floor, 1 Exchange Quay,
P2 Stores, 8 Exchange Quay,
CMG Fifth Floor Part, 8 Exchange Quay,




                                                    4
Ground Floor Unit 1, and all suites up to and including Ninth Floor, 8 Exchange Quay,
Ground to Seventh Floor, 7 Exchange Quay,
Second to Thirteenth Floors, 5 Exchange Quay,
1-9 Lapwing Centre, Hagley Road,


Representations

Eight letters of objection have been received in response to the application publicity. These have included two
local residents, resident in Derbyshire, representative for the Post Office, representative of Everything
Everywhere Ltd, developer and owner of the Soapworks/Ivy Wharf Scheme, a representative of the owners of
the Metro on Trafford Road and trustee of the Exchange Quay Master Trust who owns the majority of the
Exchange Quay development.The issued raised are summarised as follows:

-Over development of the site.
-Daylight and Sunlight assessment details that the reduction in daylight is greater than BRE good practice
guidance.
-Overlooking appears not to have been addressed.
-Contrary to Ordsall and Riverside Planning Guidance which seeks to resisit buildings that are 16 and 24
storeys tall.
-No reference to an assessment under PPS4 for the town centre uses.
-Unlikely to be built as lacking commercial deliverability.
-Consideration should be given to the adverse impacts resulting from the proposed scale of B1 office
floorspace, hotel development and retail space.
-No scope for convenience floorspace due to the likely impacts on Trafford Road.
-Overall effect of the development is a view of a compound mass of tall buildings rather than individual
structures.
-The mass and scale of this quantum of development is overly dominant/overbearing and patently out of scale
with the local context.
-Impact on setting of the Grade 1 Ordsall Hall.
-Height of the development and its proximity and alignment are all such that they compromise the potential
evening outdoor use of this key space.
-The proposed buildings and its towers, lies in a direct path between the Soapworks and the Winter Hill
transmitter, and additional information should be requested.
-The development does not satisfy the exception test required by PPS25.
-24 storey tower is out of scale with lower rise adjacent buildings such as the Metro which is only 6 storeys in
height.
-The revised road configuration on Ordsall Lane and Taylorson Street South will be inadequate to service the
traffic ingress/egress requirements of the development.
-Dust and airbourne particulates from construction traffic.
-Dust released during demolition and rebuilding.
-Dust resuspension on the sections of sites temporarily not covered by hard standing.
-Dust arising from vehicle movements and construction activities.
-Excessive noise.
-Direct accident risk to the switch facility.
-The height/scale of buildings, specific activities such as chemical storage or specific construction activities such
as piling or the height and location of construction cranes.
-Right to light-A legal right which one property may acquire over the land of another. If a building is erected
which reduces the light in an eligible property to below acceptable levels, then the right to light is infringed.
-Detrimental effect on the lives of residents in the XQ7 building.
-Construction noise impacts on local residents.
-How can a loss of almost half of their light be condoned.
-Consideration has not been taken that one room may be used for office space for self employed people who
run their businesses from home.
-They do not consider disabled residents or residents living with an illness who may spend a greater proportion
of their day in their bedrooms.
-I along with 80 or more other will be out of a job if this development goes ahead.
-The 24 storey building will cast a shadow over the low rise properties around Ordsall Hall.
-Nine Acre Court, which is some distance to the north of this area, is known to block sunlight from properties in
the area.




                                                          5
-Our client has no idea of timescales or delivery of the project.
-The nature of the operation currently on site is highly specialised and not easy to relocate at short notice.
-Tallest element will have a massive impact on the streetscene, be out of scale with adjacent development, but
moreover severely impact on the adjacent residential development in terms of overshadowing and overlooking.
-Mitigation measures in relation to the wind effect should be considered in greater depth.
-Significant issues can only be addressed through a comprehensive redesign of the scheme and that should be
considered before determining whether the overall finish is of the highest quality.

One letter of support from the scheme has been received from a local resident, who states:

-Increase in hotel rooms is vital to support the development such as Media City.
-It will bring more visitors to the area.
-Where there are visitors then leisure and retail are a must.
-We live in an area bursting with commerce, and we should be proud of that and invite new business to build on
that.
-This will increase living standards and convenience to local residents, and at the same time further
development the area.

Consultations

Design For Security - The Crime Prevention Plan provided, whilst it contains some helpful general statements, it
does not examine the particular disorder issues affecting the area around the proposed development and the
specific design measures that would address them. The plan refers to the principles of Secured by Design
which, in addition to target hardening, is equally pertinent to the proposed layout of the development. As this will
be finalised on gaining planning approval, it is clearly beneficial to discuss layout issues with GMP prior to the
planning application being submitted.

There should be recessed areas around the building footprint, in particular along the more secluded elevations.

Access to the narrow corridor beside the multi storey car park should be restricted with gates and fencing.

Servicing arrangements for the individual units should allow ease of access for delivery vehicles and security
staff dealing with cash in transit. In particular, Retail unit 1 appears to have no service access.

The car park access ramp is long and it is essential that the gates/shutters are located as close to Taylorson
Street South as possible, ideally in line with the back of the footpath.

Parking for residents should be separate from hotel guests and staff.

Long stay cycle parking should be located within secure enclosures with access available only to legitimate
cyclists.

Arrangements for deliveries (e.g post) to the residential units should not allow delivery staff unlimited access to
the apartment buildings.

Landscape plans should be encouraged in tandem with lighting and CCTV proposals, so the sight lines and
coverage are not compromised. The inclusion of 2m high blocks of planting along the pedestrian route could
impede the effectiveness of other security measures.

Main Drainage - No objections subject to satisfactory drainage provision to Salford CC approval. Minimum floor
level 300mm above adjacent road. If existing drain connections to be used. CCTV inspection required and
possible United Utilities approvals required as the drain may be a public sewer.

Basements will require pumped system. It is not clear whether sewers cross the site. The maximum discharge
to the adjacent sewers to be restricted to figure agreed with United Utilities.

The site will be vulnerable to flooding and therefore will need to be constructed with flood resilient materials.

Flood escape routes will need to be designated.




                                                          6
Highways - The Transport Assessment is acceptable. No objections subject to GMPTE/HMRI being satsified
with the vehicle crossing of the tramway.

Environment Agency - Planning permission should only be granted for the proposed development providing that
conditions are provided. These include a condition in relation to development should be carried out in relation to
the Flood Risk Assessment and the mitigation measures highlighted.

A condition is also requested in relation to the provision of a site investigation to identify potential contaminated
land.

Urban Vision Environment - The document 'Taylorson Street South, Salford-Preliminary Risk Assessment (Desk
Study)', RPS, reference IBP0266/PRA, 14 December 2010 was assessed.

The submitted report adequately assesses the site and we are in agreement with the conclusions that any
potentially contaminated made ground will be removed during construction. We also agreed with the need for
gas risk assessment.

If there is any reuse of the soils from the site or any imported soils for landscaping these will need to be tested
to show they are suitable for use. As such a contaminated land condition is recommended.

Transport For Greater Manchester - Broadly GMPTE welcome development in the vicinity of Metrolink stops
because of the positive affect on patronage. However, in shared street running areas increased road and
pedestrian traffic can have a negative effect on the operation of the Metrolink service by reducing run-times. As
long as the impact on Metrolink is taken into account at the planning and design stage of a development it
should be possible to design out or mitigate negative effects on Metrolink operation. There were concerns in
relation to:

-Possible disruption to the Metrolink during the construction of the development.
-Sightlines for the tram drivers.
-Reconstruction of the track bed may be required.
-Pedestrian routes.
-Increased traffic flow and impacts on the road junction.
-The form of control across the tracks.

City of Manchester - No comments have been received.

Miller Goodall Environmental Services Limited - The residential and hotel elements of the development are
noise sensitive and as such may be adversely impacted by existing noise sources in the vicinity of the site,
including road traffic noise along Trafford road and tram noise from tramlines located within a few metres of the
development. There is also the potential of disturbance due to structure borne noise and vibration from tram
movements. Furthermore, the proposed commercial and retail units may generate noise. e.g from building
services equipment, entertainment and patron use, that has potential to cause disturbance to new and existing
residents.

A noise assessment has been submitted by FR Mark acoustic consultants in support of the application. The
report contains details of a limited number of attended noise measurements taken around of the proposed site
and the author has undertaken a PPG24 assessment using the shortened measurement method described
within CRTN (Calculation of Road Traffic Noise). This is an acceptable approach for an outline planning
application. The assessment places the site in NEC B/C. Planning conditions relating to noise will therefore be
appropriate.

The noise assessment recommends mitigation measures, however, further measurements are suggested. A
vibration assessment is also required. A detailed condition is recommended requesting further assessments and
detailed mitigation measures.

United Utilities - United Utilities initially raised an objection in relation to drawing no. PL03 showing Tower 'A'
has been built over a public sewer. It is a requirement of Section H4 of the Building Regulations that no
buildings are constructed within 3.0m of a sewer. Therefore these proposals do not meet the requirements of
the Building Act.




                                                          7
A further drainage report was carried out by RPS, which has been assessed by United Utilities. The following
comments have been received:

If it is felt that the public sewer between m/h 3703 and 3602 is 'dead' then you can apply to have the sewer
closed in accordance with Section 116 of the Water Industry Act.

It was reiterated that no buildings should be constructed within 3.0m of a public sewer. If, as suggested within
the report, the upstream section of the sewer only serves your proposed development (and no other legal users)
then you may wish to apply to have this section of sewer divested. This would amend the status to a private
drain rather than a public sewer, thus allowing it to be built over if necessary.

Trafford M B C - No comments have been received.


Planning Policy Framework

Development Plan Policy

Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy DP1 - Spatial Principles
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy DP3 - Promote Sustainable Communities
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy DP5 - Manage Travel Demand
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy DP7 - Promote Environmental Quality
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy DP8 - Mainstreaming Rural Issues
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy RDF1 - Spatial Priorities
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy W2 - Regionally Significant Economic Dev
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy W5 - Retail Development
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy L5 - Affordable Housing
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy RT2 - Managing Travel Demand
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy RT9 - Walking and Cycling
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy EM5 - Integrated Water Management
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy MCR2 - Regional Centre, Inner Manchester City
Regional Spatial Strategy   - Policy MCR5 - Northern Part of Manchester City Region


Unitary Development Plan MX1 - Development in Mixed-use Areas
This policy states that a wide range of uses and activities (housing, offices, tourism, leisure, culture, education,
community facilities, retail, infrastructure, knowledge-based employment) are permitted within the identified
mixed use areas (Chapel Street East. Chapel Street West, Salford Quays, Ordsall Lane Riverside Corridor).

Unitary Development Plan DEV7 - Protection of Aviation Safety at Manchester
This policy states that development that would have an unacceptable impact on the operational integrity or
safety of Manchester Airport will not be permitted.

Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context
This policy 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.

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

Unitary Development Plan DES3 - Design of Public Space
This policy states that development should include the provision of public space; designed to have a clear role
and purpose which responds to local needs; reflects and enhances the character and identify of the area; is an
integral part of and provide appropriate setting and an appropriate scale for the surrounding development; be
attractive and safe; connect to establish pedestrian routes and public spaces and minimise and make provision
for maintenance requirements.




                                                          8
Unitary Development Plan DES4 - Relationship Development to Public Space
This policy states that developments that adjoin a public space shall be designed to have a strong and positive
relationship with that space by creating clearly defining public and private spaces, promoting natural
surveillance and reduce the visual impact of car parking.

Unitary Development Plan DES5 - Tall Buildings
This policy states that tall buildings will be permitted where: the scale of the development is appropriate; the
location is highly accessible; the building would positively relate to adjacent public realm; is of high quality
design; makes a positive contribution to the skyline; would not detract from important views; would not cause
unacceptable overshadowing or overlooking, detrimental to the amenity of neighbouring occupiers; be no
unacceptable impact on the setting of a listed building or value of a conservation area; be no unacceptable
impact on microclimate; be no unacceptable impact on telecommunications; and there would be no
unacceptable impact on aviation safety.

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

Unitary Development Plan DES9 - Landscaping
This policy states that hard and soft landscaping should be provided where appropriate that is of a high quality
and would enhance the design of the development, not detract from the safety and security of the area and
would enhance the attractiveness and character of the built environment.

Unitary Development Plan DES10 - Design and Crime
This policy states that developments must be designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour, and the fear
of crime. Development should i) be clearly delineated ii) allow natural surveillance iii) avoid places of
concealment iv) encourage activity within public areas.

Unitary Development Plan H1 - Provision of New Housing Development
This policy states that all new housing will contribute toward the provision of a balanced housing mix; be built of
an appropriate density; provide a high quality residential environment; make adequate provision for open space;
where necessary make a contribution to local infrastructure and facilities required to support the development;
and be consistent with other policies of the UDP.

Unitary Development Plan H4 - Affordable Housing
This policy states that in areas that there is a demonstrable lack of affordable to meet local needs developers
will be required by negotiation with the city council to provide an element of affordable housing of appropriate
types.

Unitary Development Plan H8 - Open Space Provision with New Housing
This policy states that planning permission will only be granted where there is adequate and appropriate
provision for formal and informal open space, and its maintenance over a twenty-year period. Standards to be
reached will be based upon policy R2 and guidance contained within Supplementary Planning Documents.

Unitary Development Plan A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
This policy states that development proposals, road improvement schemes and traffic management measures
will be required to make adequate provision for safe and convenient access by the disabled, other people with
limited or impaired mobility, pedestrians and cyclists

Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network
This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon
highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal
Load Routes.

Unitary Development Plan A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Park
This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in
accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded;




                                                          9
and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards
of safety and security.

Unitary Development Plan EN18 - Protection of Water Courses
This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would have an unacceptable impact on
surface or ground water.

Unitary Development Plan EN19 - Flood Risk and Surface Water
This policy states that any application for development that it is considered likely to be at risk of flooding or
increase the risk of flooding elsewhere will need to be accompanied by a formal flood risk assessment. It should
identify mitigation or other measures to be incorporated into the development or undertaking on other land,
which are designed to reduce that risk of flooding to an acceptable level.

Unitary Development Plan EN22 - Resource Conservation
This policy states that development proposals for more than 5,000 square metres of floorspace 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.

Unitary Development Plan CH2 - Dev. Affecting Setting of Listed Building
This policy states that development will not be granted that would have an unacceptable impact on the setting of
any listed building.

Unitary Development Plan DEV5 - Planning Conditions and Obligations
This policy 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
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.



Other Material Considerations

Planning Policy Statement PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment
This policy states the Government’s objectives for the historic environment and the rationale for its conservation.
It recognises the unique place the historic environment holds in England’s cultural heritage and the multiple
ways its supports and contributes to the economy, society and daily life. The PPS identifies the historic
environment as a non-renewable resource; its fragile and finite nature is a particularly important consideration in
planning. Conserving this resource for future generations accords with the principles of sustainable
development. Tests are identified to ensure that any damage or loss is permitted, against the historic
environment is permitted only where it is properly justified.

Planning Policy Statement PPS23 - Planning and Pollution Control
This policy states that the planning system plays a key role in determining the location of development which
may give rise to pollution and in ensuring that other uses and developments are not affected by major existing
or potential sources of pollution. The presence of pollution in land can present risks to human health and the
environment but development presents opportunity to deal with these risks successfully. PPS23 puts the
responsibility on the developer to ensure that a development is safe and suitable for use for the purpose for
which it is intended. Therefore, the developer is responsible for determining whether land is suitable for a
particular development.

Planning Policy Statement PPS25 - Development and Flood Risk
This policy states that all forms of flooding and their impact on the natural and built environment are material
planning considerations. The aims of planning policy on development and flood risk are to ensure that flood risk
is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of
flooding, and to direct development away from areas at highest risk. Where new development is, exceptionally,
necessary in such areas, policy aims to make it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere and where
possible, reducing flood risk overall.




                                                         10
Planning Policy Statement PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development
This policy states that planning should facilitate and promote sustainable and inclusive patterns of development
through a range of measures that includes ensuring high quality development through good and inclusive
design and ensuring that development supports existing communities and contributes and contributes to the
creation of safe, sustainable, liveable, and mixed communities with good access to jobs and key services for all
members of the community.

Planning Policy Statement PPS4 - Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth
This policy states that the overarching objective is sustainable economic growth to be achieved by: improving
the economic performance of urban and rural areas; reducing the gap in economic growth between regions;
promoting regeneration and tackling deprivation; delivering sustainable patterns of development by reducing the
need to travel; and promoting the vitality and viability of town and other centres. Local Authorities are
encouraged to adopt a positive approach towards planning applications for economic development having
regard to a range of impact considerations such as carbon dioxide emissions, accessibility, design and
regeneration. Proposals for main town centre uses outside existing centres should undertake a sequential
assessment to ensure there are no suitable sites available within existing centres and to consider the impact of
their proposals on the vitality and viability of those centres. Applications, which fail either of these tests, should
be refused planning permission.

Planning Policy Statement PPS3 - Housing
This policy identifies a number of planning for housing policy objectives designed to ensure that the planning
system delivers:
* High quality housing that is well designed and built to a high standard
* A mix of housing, both market and affordable, particularly in terms of tenure and price, to support a wide
variety of households in all areas, both urban and rural
* A sufficient quantity of housing taking into account need and demand and seeking to improve choice
* Housing development in suitable locations, which offer a good range of community facilities and good access
to jobs, key services and infrastructure
* A flexible, responsive supply of land - managed in a way that makes efficient and effective use of land,
including the re-use of previously developed land, where appropriate.


Planning Policy Statement PPG13 - Transport
This policy states that the main objective of the guidance is to promote more sustainable transport choices for
both people and for moving freight. It aims to promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and
services by public transport, walking and cycling and reduce the need to travel by car. For retail and leisure
policies should seek to promote the vitality and viability of town centres, which should be the preferred locations
for new retail and leisure development. Preference should be given first to town centres then edge of centre and
then on out of centre sites in locations which are (will be) well served by public transport.


Appraisal

This application is an outline application, with the only reserved matter being landscaping. Therefore the details
of access, appearance, layout and scale are for consideration under this application.

The main planning issues to be considered are:-

-Principle of the development
-Design of the proposal
-Flood Risk
-Surface Water Management
-Overshadowing
-Microclimate: Wind Effect
-Highways Issues
-Waste Management
-Contaminated Land
-Impact on Neighbouring Uses
-Sustainability and Energy Issues
-Noise Impacts/Assessment




                                                         11
-Air Quality Impacts
-Heads of Terms (S106)

Principle of Development: Mixed Use Area

The site is contained within a mixed-use area, as highlighted on the proposals map of the City of Salford Unitary
Development Plan (UDP), where Policy MX1/4 Ordsall Lane Riverside Corridor is of relevance.

The elements of this proposal include a mixture of residential, office, hotel, leisure and retail uses, which are
acceptable uses as outlined in Policy MX1. The policy then goes on the say that in determining the appropriate
mix of uses on individual sites, regard will be had to certain criteria. Therefore taking each criteria in turn the
following assessment is made:

-The positive impact that the proposed development could have on the wider regeneration of the area.

The development will provide the physical redevelopment of a strategically located site, which is currently under
utilised and underdeveloped given its proximity to the office complex of Exchange Quay and the Metrolink
Station. There will also be a direct pedestrian link to the area where Exchange Square is to be located.

The scheme is to create up to 1,200 jobs through the delivery of the hotel, Grade A office space, and retail and
leisure uses, which the applicant states, would help deliver around £18.4 million into the local economy.

A developer contribution totalling £1,265,491 relating to the creation and maintenance of local open space
provision, public realm and infrastructure, ‘green infrastructure’ provision; and the delivery of training
programmes in construction techniques for local residents and groups.

-The use on adjoining sites and the extent to which the proposed development would support the objective of
maintaining a mix and balance of uses throughout the mixed-use area.

The adjoining sites are a mixture of residential, office and light industrial uses. This proposal includes retail and
office space, which is already present in the area, however, it is also includes a hotel and small retail uses which
will support the existing uses and create a wider mix that complement each other.

-The contribution that the proposed development would make towards securing activity in the area throughout
the day.

The uses on the site would ensure that there is activity during the day with the office uses, retail uses, leisure
unit and hotel providing a larger amount of development that would generate more activity in the area. This,
along with the residential development, would ensure that there is 24 hour activity on this site, albeit peaks and
troughs of the amount of activity.

-The prominence of the location, particularly in relation to key pedestrian and other transport routes.

The site is adjacent to the Exchange Quay Metrolink Station, and will link into Trafford Road and Ordsall Lane,
where there are a number of buses that use these road with the main routes into Salford and Manchester.

Pedestrian links will be provided to the Metrolink and link into the existing local network and beyond to where
Exchange Square is to be located.

-The size of the site.

The site is 0.55ha of land, which is a small site in relation to the amount of floorspace of development proposed,
hence the high density scheme.

-The potential to support the establishment, expansion and success of the Knowledge Capital, in accordance
with Policy E3 ‘Knowledge Capital’.

This has the potential to support the above.

In general terms the proposal complies with Policy MX1 of the City of Salford UDP.




                                                         12
The other allocation policy of relevance to this site is Policy DEV7 Protection of Aviation Safety at Manchester
Airport, where it states; ‘Development that would have an unacceptable impact on the operational integrity or
safety of Manchester Airport will not be permitted.’

The reasoned justification then goes on to specify certain criteria where the airport should be notified. This
development is not above 90m in height and it does not involve significant tree planting, significant areas of
water or any of the other criteria mentioned. Therefore it complies with the policy above.

Within Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 it states ‘If regard is to be had to the
development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts the determination
must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.’ Whilst it complies
with the development plan policy in relation to allocation the material considerations need to be looked at and
assessed, and these will be considered under the various headings below.

Proposed Uses

The site also falls within the area covered by the Ordsall Riverside and Irwell City Park Planning Guidance
documents, which although are not part of the statutory development plan, are adopted by the City Council and
highlight the Council’s Vision for the areas identified. Policy ICP1 of the Irwell City Park document reiterates the
acceptability of commercial, residential, cultural, retail and leisure uses in this area. Whilst the Ordsall Riverside
Planning Guidance Policy OR9 confirms that offices, small business units, hotels and limited food and drink
uses (only where they are consistent with UDP policies) are appropriate in the wider area which the site lies.

Planning Policy Statement 4 (PPS4) Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth (Policy EC10.2) sets out that all
planning applications should be assessed against the following five impact considerations; a) whether the
proposal limits carbon dioxide emissions and provides resilience to climate change; b) accessibility of the
proposal; c) whether the proposal secures a high quality and inclusive design; d) the impact on economic and
physical regeneration in the area; e) the impact on local employment.

Taking each criterion separately the following assessment has been made:

a)      whether the proposal limits carbon dioxide emissions and provided resilience to climate change;

A report in relation titled ‘Energy and Sustainability Statement’ was submitted with the application. The
maximum carbon dioxide emission reductions on site are detailed by providing the following measures; as heat
pumps provided 24.5% reduction, CHP providing 10% reduction, photovoltaics providing 2.1% reduction, and
solar thermal providing 3.7% reduction. A financial contribution as part of the S106 agreement will also be
provided towards the reduction and offsetting of carbon dioxide emissions. This shows consideration for the
reduction in carbon dioxide emissions has been looked into. There will be more detail in relation to the
sustainability issues in the main body of the report.

In relation to its resilience to climate change and energy demand the applicant has stated that details on
reduced energy demand will come through the detailed construction drawings and specification of the building.
There will also be works in relation to flood risk. These issues are discussed in more detail within the main body
of the report.

b)      accessibility of this proposal

The site is accessible to public transport, by way of the Exchange Quay Metrolink Station and a number of
buses that use Trafford Road and Ordsall Lane. There are also pedestrian links to Exchange Square and
beyond. This shows that the proposal is linked to public transport which provides the alternative to private car
use, which also links into criterion a) in relation to limits of carbon dioxide emissions.

c)      whether the proposal secures a high quality and inclusive design

The design of the proposal is discussed in more detail later on in the report. The applicant has specified that
high quality materials will be used in relation to this proposal, as it is a prominent site within the City.

d)      the impact on economic and physical regeneration




                                                          13
The proposal will aid the regeneration of the area, as mentioned above under Policy MX1/4, as the development
will provide the physical redevelopment of a strategically located site, which is currently under utilised and
underdeveloped given its proximity to the office complex of Exchange Quay and the Metrolink Station. There will
also be a direct pedestrian link to the area where Exchange Square is to be located.

The scheme is to create up to 1,200 jobs through the delivery of the hotel, Grade A office space, and retail and
leisure uses, which the applicant states, would help deliver around £18.4 million into the local economy.

A developer contribution totalling £1,265,491 relating to the creation and maintenance of local open space
provision, public realm and infrastructure, ‘green infrastructure’ provision; and the delivery of training
programmes in construction techniques for local residents and groups.

e)       the impact on local employment

There will be a large number of jobs created from such a scheme, both during the construction of it and when
the proposal is fully operational. The applicant estimated that 1,200 jobs will be created. The range of jobs
would provide opportunities both locally and within the City as a whole.

It should be noted that the Post Office currently operate from the site, and employ approximately 80 people.
They have submitted an objection to the proposal as they state that they have not been contacted in relation to
the proposal. Although there is no technical requirement for the developers (Bredale) to relocate the existing
Post Office it has been made clear by the Council that suitable premises should be found for the Post Office.
Policy OR1 of the Planning Guidance for Ordsall reiterates that reasonable steps should be taken to relocate
existing businesses. Bredale have acknowledged that the Post Office are an ‘excellent, blue chip tenant’ and
they will work with the Post Office in order to retain them as a tenant.

There have been searches for alternative premises, where the Council’s Business Support Team have assisted
and revealed 27 potential sites within Salford. Bredale will review all the sites should the proposal be granted
planning permission and assist the Post Office to find a site within the area. Condition relating to finding
alternative premises prior to the commencement.

Commercial

The hotel/hotel apartment, offices and leisure facilities proposed would normally require a PPS4 assessment
(Policy EC15 and Policy EC16.1) However, these uses are considered appropriate in the area confirmed by
UDP Policy MX1, and as such are in accordance with the development plan. Therefore PPS4 Policies EC15
and EC16.1 are not applicable in this instance.

Retail

In relation to the retail element the total floorspace is 768 sqm, which has to be assessed against PPS4, as it is
not contained within an existing centre. The retail elements proposed are A1 use for one unit, with two other
being for a restaurant, bar, café or coffee shop. Whilst PPS4 paragraph EC 14.3 states that a sequential
assessment is needed for planning applications for main town centre uses that are not in an existing centre and
not in accordance with an up to date development plan. In consideration of what tests should reasonably be
applied and looking at a) the quantum and nature of retail uses, b) potential cumulative impact of this scheme
taken together with schemes already with permission within the Ordsall Riverside Planning Guidance (SPG)
area, it would be unreasonable to request a comprehensive sequential assessment. The floorspace in Policy
EC16.1 of PPS4 would not warrant an impact assessment to be carried out.

Notwithstanding the above, there is a need to restrict the amount of A1 use convenience floorspace, to those
commensurate with any local needs generated by the scheme, and as such unlikely to unacceptably impact on
the vitality and viability of the closest neighbourhood centres. Therefore a condition is suggested to restrict the
size of the A1 uses, within the three units to 300 sq m net, out of a total of 758 sq m. The figure of 378 sq m is
about the size of a Tesco Express or Sainsbury Local, for example.




                                                         14
Housing

The housing mix is provided as the following:

61 no. 1 bed apartments (46%)
39 no. 2 bed apartments (30%)
32 no. 3 bed apartments (24%)

Within the Ordsall Riverside Planning Guidance Policy OR2 and its reasoned justification (paragraph 6.65) it
indicated that 30% of the apartments should be family orientated homes. This scheme provided 24% of the
scheme as 3 no bed apartments. Whilst this falls short of the requirement set out in the guidance, paragraph
6.30 of the same guidance indicated that the majority of the development should consist of 2 and 3 bedroom
apartments. Therefore taking this into account 54% of the scheme would meet these requirements and
therefore it is the majority of the scheme. It is therefore acknowledged that there is a suitable housing mix within
the development as a whole. Therefore the policy within the guidance is met as well as that within Planning
Policy Statement 3 (PPS3): Housing.

Affordable Housing

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

The Housing Planning Guidance sets out the amount of affordable housing that would be required on the site.
On the basis of 132 apartments, the number of units required would be 26 affordable units (20% of the site) as a
35% discount. This equates to 7% value of the development. Initial discussions centred around providing this on
site, and they would be required proportionally across the site, and include for 12 x 1 bed apartments, 8 x 2 bed
apartments and 6 x 3 bed apartments. They would be 50% rent and 50% intermediate.

Further discussions were held with the applicants, where it was highlighted that they would prefer a contribution
to be secured through a Section 106 agreement, due to the high service charge for potential affordable housing
tenants. Also, the demand is for more family based housing, although there are some larger apartments
provided, it is not typical of this scheme. This option has been considered, and further information was required
to demonstrate that this was the most appropriate option. There would need to be dialogue with two Register
Social Landlords (RSLs), where they would offer the units and the RSL’s would need to respond. Written
confirmation ,that they were not interested in acquiring any units, would mean that the best way forward would
be through a financial contribution. Two RSL’s have responded and said that they are not interested in taking on
any of the affordable units, if included within the scheme. The reasons given are that the management fee
would be more than the average amount they would expect to pay, and the three bedroom apartments are not
what they would be looking to take on, as the demand is for family housing.

The financial contribution would be £1,191,575. The first payment would be made on completion of the first
block and prior to the first occupation. The second payment would be balance and be made on completion of
the second block and prior to first occupation.

The payment would be equivalent to 7% (20% of the units at 35% discount) of total sales value for each block,
and the payment would be equivalent to the proportion of affordable units that the block should contain e.g
Block A consists of 73 units (55% of the development), which would require equivalent of 14 representative
affordable units (55% of the 26 units as part of the contribution). The developer would need to show the Council
its actual sales prices secured through open book accounting. If on completion of either block there are
insufficient sales to generate a sales figure, then an assessment will be made on Open Market Value. Any Open
Market Value would need to be tested and agreed by the Council.

In using this approach it would mean that the total commuted sum would only be identified on completion of the
second block. However, by using the agreed formula and the untested Open Market Value gives us an
indication that the likely commuted sum would be £1,191,575.




                                                         15
Design of the Proposal

The proposal is an outline application, however, the only matter reserved is landscaping. Therefore the scheme
has been worked up into full details and needs to be considered under the headings of access, appearance,
layout and scale. There have been indicative details provided in relation to landscaping, however, this is not for
consideration with this application.

Design issues are of high importance both at a local level and national level. This is reflected nationally in PPS1:
Delivering Sustainable Development and PPS3: Housing. At a local level Policy DES1 of the UDP: Respecting
Context is of relevance as well as Policies DES2: Circulation and Movement, DES3: Design of Public Open
Space, DES4: Relationship of Development to Public Open Space and DES10 Design and Crime. The Salford
Design Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) also reflects the importance of design at a local level.

The Salford Design SPD identifies Ordsall Riverside as a sub-area within the Regional Centre and establishes
broad area-specific design guidance. The Ordsall Riverside SPG has expanded on this and provided guidance
on design of open space, urban form, building heights and layout.

Amount

The amount of development has to be specified in outline planning applications. This amount of development is
described earlier on in the report, but to reiterate it proposes:

-204 bedroom 4 star hotel
-54 suite apartment hotel
-14,279 sqm of office space
-132 residential apartments
-3 retail units (A1-A5 use class) totalling 758 sqm of floorspace
-Leisure unit (1,233 sqm)

Layout

The layout of the buildings, within the site, reflects the Ordsall Riverside Planning Guidance and Policy OR3 VI)
which seeks '..a new public square within the revitalised Exchange Quay Character Area, leading to Exchange
Quay Metrolink Station.' The layout of this site is such that a 13.5m (approximately) wide pedestrian link is sited
between the two proposed blocks. A number of entrances such as retail, leisure, residential and office all have
entrances that open onto this space.

The layout has been influenced by creating the connection between Ordsall Riverside to Salford and
Manchester. There is a green area referred to as the ‘green finger’ which will link the residential developments
to Exchange Quay commercial areas and beyond. The overall ethos being to create and encourage living and
working in the same area for a more sustainable community.

In relation to the position of the uses, the commercial uses are mainly at the lower levels to create the activity to
the area during the day and night time. These will overlook the public realm areas and have been looked at to
provide added security to the area. In relation to other security issues, there have been comments provided by
Greater Manchester Police. These are detailed issues such as not leaving recessed areas around the building
footprint, access to the narrow corridor beside the multi storey car park should be restricted to gates or fencing,
servicing arrangements for the individual units should allow ease of access for delivery vehicles and security
staff, the car park access ramp is long and it is essential that the gates/shutters are located close to Taylorson
Street South (ideally at the back of the footpath), parking for residents should be separate from hotel guests and
staff, cycle parking should be located within secure enclosures with access available only to legitimate cyclists,
arrangements for deliveries to residential units should be limited and landscaping plans should be developed in
tandem with lighting and CCTV proposals. Conditions can be added to ensure that these are considered prior to
the commencement and the reserved matters application will consider the detailed landscaping and associated
security issues.

Due to the height and layout of the buildings there may be microclimate effects. There have been a number of
reports accompanying the application that highlight some impacts that may occur from the wind being forced in




                                                         16
certain directions because of the height of the buildings and possible overshadowing of neighbouring buildings
and occupiers due to the height of the buildings.

Scale

The scale of the proposal has caused a lot of discussion, as the proposal seeks a considerable mass and scale
of development on the site. This scheme has evolved following some computer aided design modelling being
carried out, and various impact assessments, and photo montages to illustrate potential impacts and how the
design could mitigate these impacts.

The proposal seeks a considerable mass and scale of development, on a site which is key to the aspirations of
the ORPG. The scale of the blocks has changed and evolved through pre-application discussions, resulting in a
range of towers ranging from 5 to 24 storeys, which will be visible within the area, with two main towers
providing the landmark features. The largest tower is 78m high and the lower tower is 54m high.

Paragraph 6.103 of the Ordsall Riverside Planning Guidance (ORPG) states that:

‘Buildings of a significantly larger scale will only be permitted at the southern and northern ends of the line
corridor; where a precedent has been set by the development at Exchange Quay.’ It then goes on to say that
within these areas they should be lower than the surrounding buildings. This is then linked to Map 6 which then
refers to heights of certain buildings but is different to what is outlined in the text. Therefore the guidance should
be treated as such and some flexibility can be looked at in relation to this, as the guidance also acknowledges
that buildings which provide a variety of heights also provide interest in an area.

The Councils’ guidance therefore accepts that there could be a taller building envisaged for this site, providing
that there is access to the proposed Exchange Square. The general principle of a tall building is considered
acceptable in this location.

Policy DES5 of the UDP provides more detail and criteria that need to be considered when considering tall
buildings. The following criteria are highlighted below; with appropriate commentary. Tall buildings will be
permitted where:

i)      The scale of the development is appropriate to its context and location;

It has been discussed above that the ORPG accepts that there could be a taller building within this area, where
the context would have been taken into consideration when putting the guidance together. It is considered in
these general terms that it is appropriate in this location.

ii)     The location is highly accessible by public transport, walking and cycling;

As previously discussed there are pedestrian/cycle links to the Metrolink Station and bus stops on the main
roads of Trafford Road and Ordsall Lane. It is considered that the proposal is highly accessible in general terms.

iii)    The building would positive relate and interact with the adjacent public realm, particularly in terms of
recognising its scale and not discouraging the use of public spaces.

The details of landscaping are to be considered at the reserved matters stage. However, the building has been
designed alongside the public realm. The ground floor retail uses are designed to open out onto the public
spaces, and the entrance to the hotel will also have a main entrance onto the public spaces.

By linking the pedestrian links throughout the development, ties in the building into the public space and
ensures that these will be used.

iv)     The building would be of the highest quality design and construction.

The applicant has stated that it will be a high quality scheme in terms of materials and the construction. The
design of the actual building is discussed in more detail below, under the heading of ‘appearance’. A condition
can be added to ensure that good quality materials are provided, and need to be agreed prior to
commencement of the development.




                                                          17
v)      The building would make a positive addition to the skyline.

The ORPG states in Policy OR9 makes reference to a landmark building being acceptable in this location. It
states ‘The landmark building may be taller than the surrounding buildings, however, its height should not overly
dominate the corridor.’

Whilst it is difficult to envisage what a tall building will look like in relation to the surrounding area a series of
photomontages have been provided as part of the planning application to show the building in context, from
various points in the area, including from Pomona Strand, Ordsall Lane, Trafford Road Bridge and 7other
locations around the area. The building does not appear to dominate the corridor and it is considered that it
makes a positive addition to the skyline.

vi)     The building would not detract from important views.

As discussed above there have been photomontages provided of the various views in and out of the area. It
would appear that the building does not detract from any important views.

vii)   There would be no unacceptable overshadowing or overlooking that would be detrimental to the
amenity of neighbouring occupiers.

There have been neighbour objections raised in relation to the possible overshadowing of the apartments in the
XQ7 building. A daylight and sunlight assessment was carried out, to accompany this proposal. This is an
important issue in relation to existing occupier and is therefore discussed in more detail later on within the
report.

viii)  There would be no unacceptable impact on the setting of a listed building, or the character and
appearance of a conservation area.

There are four heritage assets that the site affects the setting of. These are the Trafford Road Bridge (grade II
listed), the Dock Office, and the gates (grade II listed), Ordsall Hall (grade I listed) and the historic landscape of
Salford Quays and its associated infrastructure of waterways, roads and warehouses. There are no
conservation areas adjacent to the development.

The Council’s Conservation Officer has considered the above, and states that other than Ordsall Hall the sites
are all linked to a working dock and are commercial and industrial in nature. This proposal also contains the
same uses and is although it is a tall building it forms part of a townscape that embraces the modern city and
where change has already taken place. It is not considered that the proposal would compromise these assets.
Ordsall Hall is a grade I listed building and is therefore an important heritage asset. It pre-dates everything in the
area, and there has already been significant change during the 19th and 20th Centuries around this area and
the hall itself. The proposal would be in the setting of the hall, but grouped with the other tall buildings around
Exchange Quays and the Soap Works it is not considered to have an unacceptable impact on Ordsall Hall.

ix)      There would be no unacceptable impact on microclimate, for example in terms of wind speed or
direction.

An assessment has been carried out in relation to the impact of wind, and any proposed mitigation. This is
discussed below in more detail, as it is an important issue that has been considered.

x)      There would be no unacceptable impact on telecommunication activity.

There has been a letter of objection received from Alder King on behalf of Everything Everywhere Ltd (EE) in
relation to their concerns about the potential impact on the telecommunications switching centre, which is
adjacent to the site. This issue is discussed in more detail within the section about ‘impact on neighbouring
uses’, later on in this report.

xi)     There would be no unacceptable impact on aviation safety.

Policy DEV7 of the UDP is of relevance and makes reference to aviation safety at Manchester Airport. The
development is not above 90m in height, with the tallest tower (Tower A) being 78m in height, and it does not




                                                            18
involve significant tree planting, significant areas of water or any of the other criteria mentioned. Therefore there
would not be an unacceptable impact on aviation safety.

xii)     The development would be consistent with other policies and proposals within the UDP.

These are discussed in details throughout the report.

There are a number of criteria that the proposal complies with within Policy DES5, however, there are other
issues that are discussed in more detail throughout the report. The conclusion will tie together all the issues,
and summarise whether the proposal complies with the appropriate policies.

Appearance

There are a mix of building styles and different materials used within the area. This development will have two
slim and elegantly designed towers of unequal heights, which will have curved glazed facades, and will become
a landmark feature.

The design of the blocks is such that it appears to be separated by the ‘green finger’ linking in Ordsall Riverside.
The hotel (taller tower) will be facing the open space towards Trafford Road, and the more public areas of the
Metrolink. The residential block will be tucked away from Trafford Road, and set away from the more public
areas.

The materials will be a mixture of glass, at the upper levels, and stone panels at the lower levels, with glazed
facades, with recessed balconies and glazed balustrades to provide a more solid appearance at the lower
levels. There is no detail in relation to the size of panels, how different elements join together, and will the joins
be read as part of the design. A condition in relation to the materials will be requested, which will include how
the different elements fit together.

Whilst the effect of the scheme is considered in the wider context of the surrounding area the feel of the scheme
from within the public realm is not touched upon, within the application. There have not been any streetscenes
provided to illustrate this. The detail of the ground floor and the interaction with the public realm is important as
viewing the buildings as a whole in its wider context. However, if the application is approved then details of the
landscaping will be required to be submitted in detail, which would be conditioned accordingly.

In relation to the access and egress to the car parking in the basement, it is not clear how the gating and
security features will be dealt with. Therefore a condition will be added requesting the detail to be submitted,
prior to commencement.

Access

The main access into the site is from Taylorson Street South. At the present time Taylorson Street South is only
accessible by vehicle from Ordsall Lane. However, as part of this application it is proposed to create a one way
link from Clippers Quay to Taylorson Street South. The majority of the link currently exists, to allow access to
car parking and therefore the completion of this link currently exists, to allow access to car parking. The details
of the access in relation to the highways/transport will be looked at in a different section of this report.

In relation to this building, all entrances will have levels accesses and automatic doors, with lifts to all floors.
These will all be DDA compliant. The majority of the entrances will be alongside Taylorson Street South or the
new pedestrian route.

There are pedestrian routes throughout this area and this proposal will link into those. It is well served by public
transport, and the routes will also be connected.

The corridor widths conform with or exceed the Building Regulations requirements, with all thresholds being
flush. There will also be disabled refuges and safe external areas away from the building for mobility impaired
people in case of an emergency. The emergency services will be able to access the area, as they can at the
moment.




                                                          19
Landscaping

Landscaping is a reserved matter, however, as it was important to show how the landscaping fits into the overall
scheme and is integral it has been shown indicatively. The ‘green finger’ area provides a link through the area,
however, it has been pointed out that the scheme would need to deal with the raised levels on the new public
route, as there are a number of steps and a ramp centrally placed. This will have to be dealt with through any
reserved matters application.

There have been a number of issues that have arisen from the microclimate report in relation to pedestrian
comfort. Due to the scale of the buildings there may be some adverse effects that arise, in extreme cases, such
as wind tunnels. The buildings have been designed to mitigate some of the effects, however, there may be
some at ground level. The use of landscaping, with careful design and use of materials will provide some
mitigation. For example soft planting can act as wind breakers. The detail design and materials will be
considered as a reserved matter application.

Flood Risk

Planning Policy Statement (PPS25) 25: Development and Flood Risk, refers to the need for a sequential
assessment to be carried out. In relation to this proposal that includes the Ordsall Riverside area, which needs
to be examined to see whether it is capable of accommodating this development. The sequential assessment
considers that the areas of Ordsall Riverside Area that fall outside Flood Zone 3 are located to Manchester City
Centre and over half a kilometre away, from the development site. The proposal is for a tall, landmark building,
where these type of buildings are only promoted on a selected number of sites within the Ordsall Riverside
Planning Guidance, which includes this site (Policy OR9). With regards to the rest of the corridor, Policy OR4
stipulates that a hierarchy of building heights should be adhered to, as such it is inappropriate for this
development to be located within the Riverside Living Quarter and the vast majority of land outside Flood Zone
3.

The only location that allows for similar building heights is at the opposite end of the corridor on Regent Road.
This site is considered too far from Salford Quays, Exchange Quay and Manchester City Centre as a viable
office or premier hotel location. Notwithstanding that there are viable operators on the site such as KFC,
Grosvenor Casino, etc. therefore the site is unavailable for further development. Therefore the sequential test is
satisfied.

The Environment Agency have responded in relation to flood risk. They reviewed the Flood Risk Assessment
(FRA) where they raised concerns in relation to emergency evacuation, and that Local Authority staff
(Emergency Planning) should be consulted to discuss the proposed access/egress onto the proposed
development during an extreme flood event.

Following consultation safe evacuation procedures can be identified through the preparation of a Flood
Evacuation Plan. This can be ensured through condition, and the Council’s Emergency Planning Section would
be consulted throughout this process.

In general terms the FRA informed where the floor levels of the building would be set, which are above the 1 in
100 year event plus climate change level scenario. A 20% increase in rainfall intensity is included in such a
scenario, which takes into account climate change, which gives an expected lifetime of up to 60 years, for the
building.

The Environment Agency have suggested conditions in relation to limiting the surface water run-off, setting the
ground level at 25.1m AOD, setting the ground level of the basement car park at 25.3m AOD, flood proofing
measures, preparation of an emergency evacuation plan including registration with Floodline to receive a Flood
Warning, and the identification of safe routes into and out of the site as appropriate.

It is considered that all the appropriate issues in relation to flooding have been resolved, and provided the
conditions are imposed then the proposal complies with PPS25.

Surface Water Management

United Utilities objected to the proposal due to Tower A being built over a public sewer, and therefore not
allowing an easement of 3.0m either side.




                                                        20
A further report was submitted, by the applicant to United Utilities, which assessed the drainage across the site.
It found that the sewer was not used and that the applicant could then apply to have the sewer closed under
Section 116 of the Water Industry Act. The upstream section of the sewer has also been found to only serve this
development, therefore the applicant can apply for the sewer to be divested. This would then change the status
from a public sewer to a private drain, which would then mean that the development could build over it, and not
be in breach of Section H4 of the Building Regulations.

In relation to surface water run-off a reduction on the site will be required. The maximum total storage required
to achieve a 50% reduction in run-off for a 100 year event plus 20% climate change allowance, is 338m3. This
attenuation requirement is likely to be met through a combination of porous paving and underground
attenuation.

The approach to dealing with water efficiency includes:

-Reduced tap flows.
-Rain water harvesting.
-Electronic sensors for taps.
-Dual flush toilets.

It is considered that the proposal can adequately deal with the management of the surface water management.
However, a condition is required to ensure that full details are provided prior to the commencement of
development.

Overshadowing

Policy DES5 Tall Buildings applies to those that are significantly higher than surrounding buildings, or which
could have a significant impact on their surroundings by virtue of their height.

Part vii of DES5 is of relevance where it states ‘Tall buildings will be permitted where….vii.there would be no
unacceptable overshadowing or overlooking that would be detrimental to the amenity of neighbouring
occupiers.;’

A Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Assessment (ENVIRON March 2011) was submitted as part of the
application. The conclusion to the report states that there is an impact on the daylight levels with the
neighbouring XQ7 building. It goes on to say ‘…however, the vast majority of dwellings within the XQ7 building
will continue to meet the accepted minimum daylight threshold criteria. Less than 9% of rooms tested failed to
meet the minimum ADF criteria, therefore an overall impact of the Proposed Development is considered to be
negligible.’

A number of neighbour concerns raise the issue that there will be a significant and detrimental loss of light to a
great number of residents in the XQ7 building. Within the ENVIRON report slightly over half of the windows in
the XQ7 building will experience a noticeable reduction in daylight, due to its current location adjacent to the
warehouse. Analysis of daylight reduction, has been carried out using the Average Daylight Factor method,
which considers the amount of light in a room. This shows that more than 90% of the rooms tested will have an
acceptable level of daylight following the development of this proposal. 21 out of the 231 rooms will experience
a loss of light that will be noticeable and below the recommended minimum set out in the British Standard (BS
8206-2:2008) for new dwellings. However, these impacts are not unusual in an urban context.

The assessment also looks at the amount of light available on the outside plane of the centre of a window (VSC)
as a ratio (expressed as a percentage), of the amount of total unobstructed sky viewable following the
introduction of barriers such as new buildings. The BRE guidelines state that if the VSC is greater than 27%
then enough sunlight should be reaching the windows. Where a window has a resultant VSC of less than 27%
and with a 20% reduction on the former value it is considered that there is a noticeable impact. In these
circumstances then the ADF method, as explained above, is used to test whether the amount of light would be
considered acceptable.

The ADF method is a more complex method of calculation to determine natural internal illuminance, which takes
into account window size, number of windows available to the room, room size, glass transmittance and room




                                                          21
surface reflectance. The ADF test is a measurement of the daylight and the VSC test only measures the amount
of light falling on the window.

The assessment also looks at pass/fail criteria in relation to levels set out in BS 8206. The question was asked
by a local resident on how can rooms that experience a 47.6% loss of light still pass the criteria. The loss of this
amount of light may occur and may be noticeable, however the level of natural light within the room can still be
considered to pass the threshold of acceptability as set out in the British Standard.

An issue was also raised in relation to the loss of sunlight. There is a difference between the loss of direct
sunlight and daylight. The BS 8206 states that it is important to have patches of direct sunlight to enhance the
overall brightness rather than having it fall directly on you. However, consistent daylight e.g visible sky is
considered preferable.

The Annual Probable Sunlight Hours (APSH) method is used to predict sunlight availability throughout the year.
The BRE guidance advises that ‘an existing window may be adversely affected if a point at the centre of the
window receives in a year less than 25% of the annual probable sunlight hours (APSH) including less than 5%
of the annual probable sunlight hours during winter months (21 September to 21 March) and less than 0.8 times
its former sunlight hours during either the whole year or just the winter months.’ Therefore there is less of an
expectation of receiving direct sunlight during the winter months.

The report states that of 114 of the windows tested fail the above criteria, and of those predicted to experience a
medium of low magnitude fail, 84% of the windows receive more than a quarter of the APSH in the summer
months, but fail due to receiving less than 5% total APSH during the winter. The windows tested only fail the
threshold criteria in the winter months and not during the summer months. It is therefore an adverse impact
during the winter period and not the summer period.

The BRE good practice guidance states that consideration should be given to whether the building being
assessed is a ‘good neighbour’ itself, in terms of impacting on others. Where buildings are built right up to the
edge of their site boundaries, it may be considered that they have reduced expectation for good light conditions.
In the case of the XQ7 site the magnitude of change is exaggerated because the adjacent building is currently a
single storey warehouse building. Therefore if the assumption is a building of a similar size is located on the
adjoining site then the magnitude of change would be significantly smaller and the impact less.

The height of the proposed development means that properties on the upper floors of the XQ7 building will also
experience loss of direct sunlight, however, daylight levels remain high due to there being good access to
skylight and good distribution of light in the room.




Microclimate: Wind Effect

Policy DES5 of the UDP is also of relevance when considering the microclimate that may be created by tall
buildings. It states ‘Tall buildings will be permitted where…ix. there would be no unacceptable impact on
microclimate, for example in terms of wind speed or direction.’

A Wind Microclimate Assessment was carried out by AECOM (November 2010). The report concluded that the
proposed development is relatively sheltered from the wind by adjacent buildings, with some exposure to the
west side. It goes on to say that ‘This is likely to result in relatively low wind speeds around the site with some
local increase in velocities due to downdraft on taller buildings and channelling around the proposed blocks.’

In relation to Block A the study points out due to the height and smooth nature of the tower there may be some
downdraft towards the main entrance. There is an overhang and canopy present, which will provide some
protection. However, this may still have an impact at pedestrian height. It is recommended, in the report, that the
2m high planting, which is indicative, is likely to be sufficient. As landscaping is a reserved matter then detailed
discussion will be required in relation to this.

There may be other high wind speeds experienced around Block A, around the northern corner and into the
‘green finger’ between Blocks A and B. These winds may accelerate as they emerge from Block A, however,
planting as discussed above is likely to dissipate these winds.




                                                         22
The ‘green finger’ area will act as a channel for the winds, and with there being lack of shelter then this could
have an impact on pedestrians using the area. Again the planting as mentioned above is likely to reduce the
winds around the corner of Block A, with additional planting also helping the situation further along the area. A
comprehensive landscaping scheme will ameliorate this situation, which will be looked at during the reserved
matters stage.

The area between Block A and Building 6, along Colgate Lane, will provide an area for winds to channel. This is
likely to cause uncomfortable conditions for people who are standing or sitting in this area for any period of time,
however, no mitigation measures are proposed. This will also need looking at during the reserved matters
stage, in relation to how the landscaping can diffuse any high velocity winds.

High velocity winds are likely to be experienced on the taller rooftops, especially on windy days. There are 1.5m
high solid screens shown around the perimeter of balconies and roof terraces that are shown on the application
drawings. These will provide mitigation at the high levels.

It is acknowledged that there will be some channelling of wind experienced, however, with the use of canopies,
screening around balconies and the detailing of the landscaping it is considered that this is appropriate
mitigation and there will not be an unacceptable impact. The proposal therefore complies with part ix of Policy
DES5 of the UDP.

Highways Issues

Planning Policy Guidance 13 (PPG): Transport, which was updated in January 2011, provides guidance on
strategic matters in relation to transport. It is aimed at encouraging development within settlement boundaries
where there is access to local centres, community facilities and employment opportunities and working towards
more sustainable communities, where people are less dependent on using a private car.

RSS Policy DP5: Manage Travel Demand; Reduce the Need to Travel, and Increase Accessibility reiterates the
Government guidance, with again the emphasis on reducing the need to travel, especially by car, and ensure
that people as far as possible have all the services they need provided locally.

The following UDP Policies are also of relevance and include Policy A2: Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled,
Policy A8 Impact of the Development on the Highway Network and Policy A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and
Motorcycle Parking in New Developments.

The location of the proposal, and the uses provided within it can be classed as a sustainable development in
highway terms. The development itself provides residential and employment opportunities, along with some
commercial and retail uses. There are buses that can be easily accessed close by and a Metrolink Station also
adjacent to the development. The development fulfils the aims of PPG13 as well as PPS1 in sustainability
terms.

At a local level and in relation to the design of the proposal the main access into the site is from Taylorson
Street South. At the present time Taylorson Street South is only accessible by vehicle from Ordsall Lane.
However, as part of this application it is proposed to create a one way link from Clippers Quay to Taylorson
Street South. The majority of the link currently exists, to allow access to car parking and therefore the
completion of this link currently exists, to allow access to car parking.

It is proposed to provide 274 car parking spaces as part of the proposed development. Car parking will be
provided within the basement level, as shown on the application drawings. Due to the high quality and level of
pedestrian and public transport facilities within the area, and immediate vicinity of the proposal this level of car
parking is considered acceptable. This is part of the ethos behind PPG13 and PPS1 and the promotion of public
transport as an alternative to the private car and a reliance on the use of a private car.

The existing site is accessed from Taylorson Street South, which forms a priority controlled junction with Ordsall
Lane, which are both single lane in each direction. Visibility is good from both directions therefore there is not
issue in relation to highway safety. Following discussions with the Council's Highways Engineer it has been
agreed that a right-turn lane is to be provided from Ordsall Lane to Taylorson Street South. This would be dealt
with through a S78 agreement.




                                                        23
There are numerous bus stops located on Ordsall Lane and Trafford Road which are all within an acceptable
walking distance of the proposed development. The Metrolink station (Exchange Quay Station) is adjacent to
the proposed development site and provides services into 'Broadway and Eccles' and 'Manchester and Bury'. It
is therefore considered that the proposal would be served by adequate public transport services.

The current pedestrian facilities in the area are considered excellent with footways, and controlled pedestrian
crossing points, with dropped kerbs and tactile paving provided throughout the surrounding area. There is no
further requirement to upgrade the existing pedestrian facilities.

The existing cycling facilities are limited. However, a major traffic free route is located to the south of the site
which connects into the wider cycling network. Cycle parking will be provided within the proposed development,
however, the exact number of stands and type have not been agreed. Therefore a condition can be added
requesting this detail. Within the non-residential elements, of the proposal, changing areas, lockers and
showering facilities will be provided to help encourage cycling as an alternative means of transport.

There is an area of the proposed access road to the dropping off/picking up areas, which will cross over the
existing tram line. The operator GMPTE has raised concern about the construction of the proposal and the
impact that it will have on the tram services. Also during the operational stage there may be a traffic light
controlled junction required. Also, depending on the amount of traffic using the road, where it crossed the tram
line, there may be major reconstruction of the track bed required.

Waste Management

A waste management strategy was provided as part of the application. The main issue in relation to the
collection of refuse is that the area can get congested by cars parking along Taylorson Street South, due to
there not being any yellow lines along the road. There is an existing problem with gaining access to the bins at
the XQ7 building opposite this site.

If the Council’s bin collection service is to be used then the collection would be once a week from the kerbside.
Therefore this causes issues in relation to areas of hardstanding, adjacent to where the bins can be collected.
There would also need to be recycling bins provided as well. The management company would be responsible
for ensuring that there is adequate space for the refuse vehicles to get to the bins to enable them to be emptied.

Within the strategy provided with the application, it suggests that a private contractor may be used. However,
there is no decision on this and this is not a matter that needs to be resolved in relation to the planning
application.

Conditions can be added to ensure that further details of the collection areas to be provided for the bins and
vehicles prior to the commencement of development.

Contaminated Land

A report was submitted which assessed the development site. UV Environment assessed the report and found
that it adequately assessed the site and were in agreement with the conclusions. This included for any
potentially contaminated ground to be removed during construction and that a gas risk assessment will also be
required.

The Environment Agency reiterate the above and have suggested a condition is required. Therefore a condition
is recommended in relation to the above.

Impact on Neighbouring Uses

There have been discussions in relation to the neighbouring uses, throughout the report. This section brings
these together as outlined below.

-Existing Residents

There have been concerns raised, by a number of residents that reside in the XQ7 building, in relation to loss of
sunlight/daylight. This is discussed in more detail within the section addressing overshadowing.




                                                         24
One resident raised concerns that as they work from home then this has a further impact, as they rely on
daylight for their work. The assessment shows that this particular apartment predicts that the bedrooms will
pass the ADF test, albeit with a noticeable loss of light. The objection is in relation to the loss of sunlight. For a
working area the BS 8206 states that generally sunlight should not fall on visual tasks or people directly at work.
It is more important to have patches of direct sunlight to enhance to overall brightness. However, visible sky is
considered preferable as this will provide consistent daylight. This is often difficult to obtain in a built up urban
environment. The rooms in relation to this apartment have been assessed. The room that is assumed to be
used as an office has an ADF value of 1.76% which is considered adequately lit for a living room. In relation to
another room, the front part of the room, closest to the window will have access to skylight and will therefore
have a daylit appearance, which is considered suitable for working.

-Employment

There is an existing building on site which is occupied by the Post Office. They occupy a warehouse building an
employ around 80 employees. There are also adjacent office uses at the Metro, and other buildings in the
vicinity and existing 2 storey industrial units on Hagley Road. The main impact will be on Cygnet House, which
is occupied by the Post Office as they cannot be accommodated on the site. Therefore alternative premises will
be required. It is suggested that a condition is added in relation to this.

The other uses, buildings and people occupying them will not be directly affected like the Post Office.

-Listed Buildings

This has already been discussed in the section relation to Policy DES5 of the UDP, however, it is also relevant
to this section of the report therefore the following is reiterated.

There are four heritage assets that the site affects the setting of. These are the Trafford Road Bridge (grade II
listed), the Dock Office, and the gates (grade II listed), Ordsall Hall (grade I listed) and the historic landscape of
Salford Quays and its associated infrastructure of waterways, roads and warehouses. There are no
conservation areas adjacent to the development.

The Council’s Conservation Officer has considered the above, and states that other than Ordsall Hall the sites
are all linked to a working dock and are commercial and industrial in nature. This proposal also contains the
same uses and is although it is a tall building it forms part of a townscape that embraces the modern city and
where change has already taken place. It is not considered that the proposal would compromise these assets.
Ordsall Hall is a grade I listed building and is therefore an important heritage asset. It pre-dates everything in the
area, and there has already been significant change during the 19th and 20th Centuries around this area and
the hall itself. The proposal would be in the setting of the hall, but grouped with the other tall buildings around
Exchange Quays and the Soap Works it is not considered to have an unacceptable impact on Ordsall Hall.

-Tram (Metrolink)

Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE) raised a number of issues in relation to the
impact of the proposal on the Metrolink tramline. The scheme is adjacent to Exchange Quay station and also
the proposed road works include for a crossing over part of the tram line itself. There have been discussions
with the applicant and GMPTE.

-Telecommunications equipment

Everything Everywhere Ltd owns an adjacent site from which it operates a telecommunications switching centre.
The is one of 36 core sites within their national network, which has a number of functions. These include:

-Supporting a mobile telephone service for 650,000 customers. This service includes not only mobile calls but a
range of other services including SMS text messaging, voicemail and mobile internet provision. If any site were
to become non operational then those customers would no longer have coverage.

-Allowing the flow of traffic nationally by linking up the wide band transmission rings. If unavailable then it would
reduce their ability to transfer core traffic around it’s national network.

-Hosting and managing business critical platforms for national usage.




                                                          25
These switching centres are generally modern and are occupied by Everything Everywhere Ltd as a
telecommunications switching centre. Buildings are fitted out to provide an environmentally controlled and
protected facility for the operation of highly sensitive computer based telecommunications equipment essential
to the support and running of their network within the region.

The potential impacts that have been raised include:

-Dust and airborne particulate from construction vehicle movements and exhausts.
-Dust released during demolition and rebuilding, erection or extension of buildings.
-Dust resuspension on the sections of sites temporarily not covered by hard standing.
-Dust arising from approved site activities and vehicle movements.
-Vibration arising from vehicle movements and construction activities.
-Excessive noise.
-Direct accident risk to the switch facility.
-The height/scale of buildings, specific activities such as chemical storage or specific construction activities such
as piling or the height and location of construction cranes.

During the construction period the developer proposes to implement all measures to minimise dust. The
Environmental Health Officer will be consulted prior to the commencement and detailed method statements will
be prepared.

All methods to minimise vibration will be considered in the detailed design of the building and in the method of
construction. All good engineering practices will be adopted to British Standards, and vibration monitoring will be
implemented if found appropriate.

It is inevitable with large construction projects that there will be some noise. Levels are to be minimised and stay
within the good practice guidelines. All direct accident risks will be assessed under current health and safety
legislation and requirements. Detailed plans will be produced prior to construction, and the appointed contractor
will subscribe to the Considerate Constructors Scheme.

The good construction health and safety practice, is regulated and regularly inspected by the local authority
health and safety officers. In relation to the construction phase and associated impacts raised, this can be
conditioned by suggesting that a construction method statement is provided and agreed prior to the
commencement of development.




Sustainability and Energy Issues

PPS1 sets out the Government’s agenda for delivering sustainable development. The aims of PPS1 are
recognised in Policy SDC1 (Sustainable Design and Construction in New Developments) of the Sustainable
Design and Construction SPD. The SPD seeks new development to improve its impact on the surrounding
environment and to build into proposals a design that maximises the potential, utilises green technologies and
ensures that the users employ a sustainable pattern of travel.

The North West Sustainability checklist has been completed in accordance with Policy RSS Policy DP9. The
checklist comprises of 8 sections with a score out of 100 given for each section. The results of the sustainability
checklist is as follows:

-Climate Change (adaptation, mitigation and energy)        (Predicted score-75% best)
-Place Making                                              (Predicted score-63% good)
-Community                                                 (Predicted score-64% good)
-Transport                                                 (Predicted score-75% best)
-Ecology                                                   (Predicted score-33% minimum)
-Resources                                                 (Predicted score-63% good)
-Business                                                  (Predicted score-84% best)
-Buildings                                                 (Predicted score-67% good)




                                                         26
The site shows good or best ratings on all but one criterion. Ecology has been shown as a minimum rating as
there is an existing structure on the site and no established biodiversity. It is recommended that to enhance the
ecological value and the site’s biodiversity then new wildlife habitat, within landscaping and built features that
attract wildlife can be incorporated. This can be conditioned accordingly.

The need to improve energy efficiency is also part of the Government’s agenda for delivering sustainable
development. UDP Policy EN22 also states that proposals of more than 100 dwellings or 5,000 square metres
of floorspace will only be permitted where; ‘a. the impact on the conservation of non-renewable resources, and
on the local and global environments, has been minimised as far as practicable; and b. full consideration has
been given to the use of realistic renewable energy options, and such measures have been incorporated into
the new development where practicable.’ The Sustainable Design and Construction SPD Policy SDC1 also
requires all development to maximise energy efficiency.

Design innovations will be introduced to reduce the reliance on energy consumption by maximising natural
daylighting and improving air tightness. A list of measures that can be introduced at the design stage include:

-Fan Invertors to more accurately match the required capacity.
-Systems sizing to optimise plant and ductwork sizes.
-Smart energy metering used to raise awareness of energy use.
-Thermal mass increasing insulation to a minimum of 300mm.
-Air tightness.
-Orientation.
-Reduce lighting levels from 1200 to 900 lux where possible.
-Lighting which is dimmable and zoned.
-Shading: provision of brise soleille to minimise glare and heat gain.
-User guide for householders and facilities managers.

A review of the various low carbon and renewable energy technologies identified four that are feasible for the
proposed development. These are solar thermal, photovoltaic panels, gas combined heat and power air source
heat pumps.
A maximum 40.3% carbon reduction is possible, which is shown in the table below:

        CO2 Reduction (tonnes) % Reduction
Heat Pumps    555     24.5%
CHP     487   10.0%
Photovoltaics 103     2.1%
Solar Thermal 182     3.7%

The applicant has stated that the scheme will be developed further through the planning design process. It is
recommended that the 10% renewable energy/low carbon target as set out in Policy EM18 of the RSS is
secured through a planning condition.

The Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (Policy SDC1) also requires the development the development
to minimise the impact of flooding and surface water drainage.

The site, with this proposal, has been assessed for its capability in relation to meeting the requirements of
PPS25 and satisfy the requirements of the Environment Agency, as discussed within the section on Flood
Issues.

In relation to surface water run-off a reduction on the site will be required. The maximum total storage required
to achieve a 50% reduction in run-off for a 100 year event plus 20% climate change allowance, is 338m3. This
attenuation requirement is likely to be met through a combination of porous paving and underground
attenuation.

The approach to dealing with water efficiency includes:

-Reduced tap flows.
-Rain water harvesting.
-Electronic sensors for taps.
-Dual flush toilets.




                                                          27
It is considered that the applicant has demonstrated that all practicable measures have been taken to minimise
energy consumption, and maximise the provision on on-site renewable energy supply.

Noise Impacts/Assessment

PPS 24 Planning and Noise is the national guidance in relation to minimising the adverse impact of noise and it
outlines the considerations to be taken into account when determining planning applications both for noise
sensitive developments and for those activities, which will generate noise.

UDP Policy EN17: Pollution Control states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or
national standards, planning permission will only be granted where development incorporates adequate
measures to ensure that there is no acceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with a
satisfactory level of amenity.

A noise assessment was submitted with the application, and Miller Goodall provided comments on the
assessment. The residential and hotel elements of the proposal are noise sensitive and may be adversely
affected by existing road traffic, and tram noise. There may also be vibration from the tram line itself. The
commercial and retail elements may also generate noise in themselves, from servicing equipment, and patron
use etc.

The noise assessment has been carried out using an appropriate methodology and has recommended
mitigation measures. The report identifies that noise from commercial and retail activities has the potential to
cause disturbance, however, no assessment has been carried out. Also, the noise assessment does not include
any vibration measurements as a result of tram pass-bys. Given that there are other developments, adjacent to
the tram, which includes the residential development at the XQ7 building, it is not considered that this would not
lead to a refusal of planning permission. Also, Miller Goodall do not have any objection to the proposal subject
to appropriate conditions being attached. This will include an assessment of the road traffic and Metrolink traffic,
and noise attenuation measures, which will be detailed. There will be rating levels included for fixed plant and
machinery and vibration dose values in relation to the tramlines. It is considered that the proposal complies with
PPS24 Planning and Noise and Policy EN17 of the UDP and that appropriate mitigation measures can be put in
place for this type of mixed use development, in relation to noise.

The noise in relation to the construction of the proposal are to be minimised and stay within the good practice
guidelines. This issue will be addressed through the construction method statement that will be conditioned
accordingly.


Air Quality Impacts

Policy EN17 of the UDP is of relevance in relation to air quality as well. It states that in areas where existing
levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning permission will only be granted where
development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is no acceptable risk or nuisance to
occupiers, and that they are provided with a satisfactory level of amenity.

The site falls within an Air Quality Management Area. Miller Goodall have been consulted and it is their view that
whilst they feel that there are insufficient grounds to refuse the application based on air quality, it is
recommended that an air quality survey is carried out prior to the commencement of development. A condition is
therefore suggested to include the identification all control measures, which are required to control the impact of
poor air quality on future residents, which should be put in place prior to occupation of the development.

During the construction period the developer proposes to implement all measures to minimise dust. The
Environmental Health Officer will be consulted prior to the commencement and detailed method statements will
be prepared. This can be conditioned as part of the construction method statement.

It is considered that there are only be adequate measures that can be put in place to ensure that there is no
unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with a satisfactory level of amenity, and
therefore complies with Policy EN17 of the UDP.




                                                         28
Heads of Terms (S106)

The heads of terms, which are outlined is the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document on Planning
Obligations, are agreed to by the applicant are as follows:

-Open Space Provision (Policy OB1): £233,806
-Public Realm, Infrastructure and Heritage (Policy OB2): £868,200
-Training Programme for Construction Workers (Policy OB3): £70,065
-Reducing and Offsetting Carbon Dioxide Emissions (Policy OB4): £93,420.



In terms of affordable housing, as discussed earlier on in the report the financial contribution would be
£1,191,575, towards off-site provision.



Conclusions/Summary

To conclude it is acknowledged that the proposal is large in terms of scale and massing, and there is a balance
to be made in consideration of such a landmark building within this part of this City to help towards the
regeneration of the Ordsall Riverside area, along with the material considerations as outlined in the report. It is
considered that the scheme will provide positive benefits in delivering a mixture of uses to the area, in a
sustainable location and with appropriate conditions the proposal will sit alongside the adjacent land uses. The
proposal is therefore recommended for approval with conditions, subject to the entering into a Section 106
agreement.

Recommendation

Planning permission be granted subject to the following planning conditions and that:

1) 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 to secure the following heads of terms:

-Open Space Provision
-Public Realm Infrastructure and Heritage Provision
-Construction Training Contribution
-Climate Change Contribution
-Affordable Housing Contribution.

2) That 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;

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

4) That authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the s106 agreement within
reasonable period on the grounds that the proposals do not support the aim and objectives of PPS1 Delivering
Sustainable Development, PPS3 Housing and PPS4 Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth.


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

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




                                                         29
2.   No development for which outline planning permission has hereby been granted shall be started on any
     phase within the development until full details of the following reserved matters have been submitted to
     and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:

     -Landscaping

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

3.   No development shall be started until full details of the colour and type of facing materials to be used for
     the of the development have been 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.

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

4.   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 Remediation 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 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 the site were completed in
     accordance with those agreed by the local planning authority.

     If, during any works on site, contamination is suspected or found, or contamination is caused, the local
     planning authority 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 with the local planning authority.

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

5.   Prior to the commencement of development the developer shall submit to the local planning authority for
     written approval an assessment of road traffic, rail traffic (Metrolink) and industrial noise likely to affect the
     application site. The assessment methodology to be used, including measurement positions, shall be
     agreed with the local planning authority prior to the commencement of noise measurements.

     Notwithstanding the above, the assessment must incorporate noise measurements taken across the site
     post demolition of the existing buildings on site prior to the erection of any new buildings on the site.
     Assessment of the noise shall be made in accordance with PPG24 Planning and Noise (September
     1994). The assessment shall provide details of noise attenuation measures required to ensure that the
     following standards are attained with respect to residential accommodation on the site as stipulated in BS
     8233:1999 'Sound insulation and noise reduction for buildings-Code of Practice':

     a) internal noise levels not in excess of 30 dB LAeq, (8hour) within bedrooms between 23.00 hours and
     07.00 hours.

     b) internal noise level not in excess of 40 dB LAeq, (16hour) within living areas between 07.00 and 23.00
     hours.

     c) typical individual noise events not in excess of 45 dB LAmax in bedrooms between 23.00 and 07.00
     hours.




                                                         30
     d) external noise levels of less than 55 dB LAeq, (16hour) in gardens, balconies and private communal
     areas between 07.00 and 23.00 hours.

     The use of ventilation measures which obviate the need for future residents to open windows for cooling
     and rapid ventilation shall be identified and incorporated into the noise assessment report.

     The mitigation measures shall be approved in writing by the local planning authority and installed prior to
     occupation of the site. Prior to occupation of the site 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.


     Reason: To ensure that the amenities of nearby residents and the character of the locality are not
     adversely affected by noise and nuisance in accordance with policies DES7, EN14 and S4 of the City of
     Salford Unitary Development Plan.

6.   The rating level (LAeq,T) from all fixed plant and machinery associated with the development, when
     operating simultaneously, shall not exceed the background noise level (LA90,T) by more than -5dB at any
     time when measured at the nearest existing (or proposed) noise sensitive premises. Noise
     measurements and assessments shall be carried out according to BS4142: 1997 'Rating industrial noise
     affecting mixed residential and industrial areas.' 'T' refers to any 1 hour period between 07.00 hrs and
     23.00 hrs and any 5 minute period between 23.00 hrs and 07.00 hrs.

     Reason: To ensure that the amenities of nearby residents and the character of the locality are not
     adversely affected by noise and nuisance in accordance with policies DES7, EN14 and S4 of the City of
     Salford Unitary Development Plan.

7.   Prior to development of the site the developer shall prepare and submit for the written approval of the
     local planning authority an assessment relating to the control of ground borne noise and vibration as a
     result of the nearby Metrolink tramlines.

     The following vibration dose values (VDVs) shall not be exceeded when measured at the nearest
     proposed noise sensitive premises:


                                                       -1.75                             -1.75
       Place                 Daytime 16 hr VDU (ms )         Night-time 8 hr VDV (ms )
       Critical Working Area                0.11                          0.09
       Residential                       0.22-0.43                        0.13
       Offices                              0.43                          0.36
       Workshops                            0.87                          0.73
     Ground bourne noise as a result of tram movements shall not exceed a level of 35 dB LAFmax at any
     time within dwellings.

     The assessment shall identify fully all control measures which are required to control the impact of ground
     borne noise and vibration from trams on future residents of the development. All control measures
     identified must be approved in writing by the local planning authority and installed prior to occupation of
     the development. All approved measures shall be retained and maintained thereafter. A Verification
     Report shall be submitted for written approval to the local planning authority confirming that all approved
     measures have been implemented in full prior to the final occupation of the site.

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

8.   Prior to the commencement of development the developer shall prepare and submit for the written
     approval of the local planning authority a statement of mitigation in respect of local air quality. The
     statement shall identify fully all control measures which are required to control the impact of poor air
     quality on future residents of the development. All control measures identified must be approved in writing
     by the local planning authority and installed prior to occupation of the development. All approved
     measures shall be retained and maintained thereafter. A verification report shall be submitted for written




                                                      31
      approval to the local planning authority confirming that all approved measures have been implemented in
      full prior to the final occupation of the site.

      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.

9.    The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the
      approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) from RPS (Ref: RCEF 12666-005 R November 2010) and the
      following mitigation measures:

      1. Limiting the surface water run-off by using permeable surface (FRA section 8).
      2. The ground level is set at least at 25.1mAOD (Paragraph 7.16).
      3. The basement car park entrance level is set at least 25.3m AOD (proposed section AA drawing
      no.PL30)
      4. Flood-proofing measures detailed in paragraph 7.26.
      5. The preparation of an emergency evacuation plan, including registration with Floodline to receive a
      Flood Warning.
      6. Identification and provision of safe routes into and out of the site to an appropriate safe haven
      (Paragraphs 7.10).

      Reason: To prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage and disposal of surface water from the
      site and to reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants, to reduce the
      risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants, to reduce the impact of flooding on
      the proposed development and future occupants, and ensure safe access and egress from and to the site
      to comply with PPS25.

10.   No demolition or construction activities shall be commenced until a Considerate Contractors Scheme,
      including a Construction Environmental Management Plan, has been submitted to and approved in writing
      by the local planning authority. The Considerate Contractors Scheme shall be adhered to in full for the
      duration of any demolition or construction work.

      Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with Policy EN17 of the
      City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

11.   Prior to the commencement of development, the developer shall submit a Dust Management Plan for the
      written approval of the local planning authority. The Dust Management Plan shall identify all areas of the
      site and site operations where dust may be generated and further identify control methods to ensure that
      dust does not travel beyond the site boundary. Once in place, all identified measures shall be
      implemented and maintained at all times. Should any equipment used to control dust fail, the site shall
      cease all material handling operations immediately until the dust control equipment has been repaired or
      replaced.

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

12.   The finished floor levels shall be a minimum of 300mm above the adjacent road level, unless otherwise
      agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

      Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding from overland flows in accordance with Policy EN19 of the City of
      Salford Unitary Development Plan.

13.   No development shall begin until a scheme detailing how the proposed development complies with the
      principles of Secure by Design has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning
      authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

      Reason: To ensure that the development is appropriately secured from crime in accordance with Policy
      DES10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

14.   Prior to the commencement of development, hereby approved, full details of the refuse and recycling
      facility storage areas, within the site, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning




                                                        32
      authority. Such storage areas shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and shall be
      made available for use prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved.

      Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with Policy DES1 of the City of Salford
      Unitary Development Plan.

15.   Prior to the commencement of development the details of the cycle and motorcycle parking shall be
      provided and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in
      accordance with the approved scheme.

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

16.   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. The 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.

      Reason: In the interests of promoting and providing sustainable modal choice pursuant to PPG13.

17.   No construction activities shall take place on the site outside the following times: 08.00 to 18.00 hours on
      Monday to Friday or 08.00 to 13.00 hours on Saturday, nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public
      Holidays.

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

18.   Prior to the commencement of development (including any works for demolition) it should be
      demonstrated that reasonable steps have been taken to progress a scheme for the re-provision/re-
      location of the Post Office building, including a timetable for implementation, shall be submitted to and
      approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in
      accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

      Reason: To ensure that the premises is relocated to protect the jobs of the existing employees, as
      outlined in Policy OR1 of the Ordsall Riverside Planning Guidance.

19.   Prior to the commencement of development hereby approved a Crime Prevention Plan shall be submitted
      for the written approval of the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in
      accordance with the approved Crime Prevention Plan.

      Reason: To ensure the development is appropriately secured from crime in accordance with policy
      DES10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

20.   Prior to the commencement of development details of measures to achieve BREEAM 'very good' ratings
      for the development (including where appropriate roof top planting) have bee submitted to and approved
      in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the
      approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

      Where this is achieved, a post-construction certificate confirming such an outcome shall be submitted to
      and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any buildings hereby approved 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




                                                        33
      any buildings are first occupied. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to first
      occupation unless otherwise agreed in wrting by the local planning authority.

      Reason: In the interests of sustainable design and construction pursuant to Policy ST17 and EN22 of the
      City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

21.   Prior to the commencement of development details of how the development can secure at least 10% of
      their predicted energy requirements from decentralised or renewable or low-carbon sources, shall be
      submitted and agreed in writing to the local planning authority.

      Reason: To ensure the development complies with PPS1 and the Government's move towards more
      sustainable development.

22.   The A1 retail unit shall be restricted to 300 sq.m. net in floor area, unless otherwise agreed in writing by
      the local planning authority.

      To ensure the development complies with PPS4.

23.   Prior to the commencement of development details of a pumped system for water management within the
      basements of the proposed development shall be submitted and agreed in writing by the local planning
      authority. These details shall be implemented in full.

      To ensure appropriate water management systems are in place and to comply with PPS25.

24.   Prior to the commencement of development details of the proposed construction works adjacent to the
      Metrolink (tramline) shall be provided and agreed in writing by the local planning authority.




                                                        34
http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=externalDocuments&k
eyVal=LH0E9PNP5Y000

APPLICATION No:               11/60008/COU
APPLICANT:                    Mrs T Bird - Flutterbies Day Nursery
LOCATION:                     7 Penry Avenue, Cadishead, Irlam, M44 5ZE
PROPOSAL:                     Change of use to a day nursery (D1 use)
WARD:                         Cadishead

Amendment Report

Panel will recall that this application was considered at the 21st of April Panel where the officer recommendation
was for refusal due to limited parking on the site and due to the location of the development on a short side
road.

It was considered by officers that the proposed nursery would result in a significant increase in the demand for
on street parking and would also result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on highway safety and residential
amenity by virtue of highway manoeuvring.

Following consideration of the matter, panel members were minded to approve the application subject to

(a) the implementation of appropriate conditions including those relating to details of;

(i) the gate to be located within the site,
(ii) the new access into the garage site,
(iii) hours of use, and
(iv) acoustic treatment;

(b) exploration of the possibility of additional parking being secured on the adjacent garage site, and

(c) authority to grant planning permission being delegated to the Strategic Director for Sustainable
Regeneration, in consultation with the Chair of the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel.

In response to the matters above, the current position is as follows:

i) Gate to be located within the site

Originally, it was proposed to locate the play area adjacent to the dividing fence with the adjacent residential
property at no.9 Penry Avenue. The site has now been laid out so that the play area is now separated from this
property by an area to be used for parking. A new fence and gate has also been erected which segregates the
play area from the parking area at the side of the property.

Urban Vision Environment have responded in view of the revised layout, and have confirmed that they are now
satisfied with this arrangement

ii) New access to be located into the garage site

A new gate has been inserted into the existing fence line of the garage. The gate is considered adequate, as it
is at close quarters to the front entry of the nursery and would provide suitable access for staff / children
between the garage forecourt and the nursery.

iii) Hours of use

The applicant has provided confirmation that the hours of operation of the premises will be 7.15 am to 6.30 pm
as proposed within application (Monday-Friday). It is considered that these hours are acceptable.




                                                         35
iv) Acoustic treatment,

Given the relocation of the play area, away from the side boundary with no.9 Penry Avenue, and the erection of
a fence and gate, it is now considered that there no outstanding issues relating to acoustic treatment. As stated
above, Urban Vision Environment have commented that they are satisfied with this arrangement.

b) exploration of the possibility of additional parking being secured on the adjacent garage site

No firm figures have been given within the application, but the building is of a size that could accommodate at
least 50 children

The applicant provided in correspondence that 10 spaces would be provided on the adjacent garage site
(accessed through a new gate), and that a heads of terms would be provided to this effect.

The spaces are shown to be provided adjacent to the Penry Avenue elevation of the garage within close
proximity to the front of the proposed nursery.

It is noted, following a site visit, that the parking scheme would not be able to accommodate 10 spaces due to
the positioning of buildings on the site, which would make manoeuvring difficult. It considered however that 6-7
spaces could be provided in this area.

Due to the reorganisation of the application site itself, further spaces are now been provided at the side of the
building which is now sufficient for five vehicles, together with parking on the front of the building which would
be suitable for 2 vehicles.

This would give an overall figure of 14 spaces, if the parking provision of the application building itself and the
garage was to be fully utililised. It is noted within the original panel report, a requirement for 12 spaces was set
out which was based on 17 staff and 50 Children.

A copy of a lease has been provided by the applicant to this effect. The lease is for 9 years, although the lease
contains a 6 months break option which allows either party to break from the lease agreement with 6 months
notice.

However, the lease is between the garage and the applicants, and there is no control over this lease by the
Local Planning Authority.

Based on the provision of the lease, a section 106 agreement has been requested from the applicant. The
solicitor acting on behalf of the adjacent garage owners has stated that the garage is unwilling to enter into such
an agreement, stating that they deem that the leasehold interest provides the requisite control required.

Whilst there is car parking available at the adjacent site at present, it is not possible to require the retention
through condition as it would be very difficult to enforce given that this is on 3rd party land.

As such, it is considered that whilst issues i-iv have been resolved, that it is not considered that sufficient car
parking has been secured, and as such the application is recommended for refusal in line with the original
recommendation made to panel on the 21st April 2011.

The Applicant's solicitor has advised that the lease has been executed, but that it has not been completed. It
has been confirmed that this lease will be issued to the landlord's solicitor on the confirmation of the planning
permission, but this would be at the insistence of the applicant.

Little weight can be given to the lease that is offered and therefore, although 7 parking spaces are now
proposed within the site, on balance the officer’s recommendation remains refusal.

Additional 3rd Party Representations

Since the application was considered at panel on the 21st April 2011, a number of additional objections have
been received including a petition from no’s,8.9,11,13,14 Penry Avenue.

Contamination of Land




                                                          36
Concerns of Highway Officer
Child Safety
Clashing with Church Functions
Blocking Access for Emergency Vehicles
Parents will not park at Automech in bad weather
No official drop off point
Noise Pollution
De-valuing of property
Blocking of pavement
Parking restrictions on place
Injury to pets
Disruption to bin collection
Public Right of Way Blocked
Death of trees overhanging ground

Various Issues have also been raised about the condition building itself including asbestos check, structural
problems, size of playground, fire escape, where the smoking area will be, whether there are enough bathroom
facilities and where the nappy bin will be stored, the previous use of dangerous chemicals inside and outside
the building.

Concerns have also been raised by Councillor Christine Hudson regarding contaminated land, the use of the
garage for car parking, a reduction of parking for the garage, health and safety issues, and a right of way issue.

Contamination of Land

Urban Vision Environment have confirmed that a preliminary risk assessment is required, as noted in the
original panel report. Since the application was presented to panel, there has also been works to undertaken
including the removal of the top 9 inches of concrete/ stones to the rear of the site and the laying of topsoil and
turf to form a play area.

Urban Vision Environment have stated that confirmation of the source of soil imported and, if necessary,
chemical analysis and interpretation would be required in order to demonstrate that the soil is suitable for use.

This would be attached as a condition, should the members be minded to recommend the application for
approval.

Rights of Way

An issue has been raised regarding a right of way being blocked which runs down the side and to the rear of the
building and connects with a definitive footpath at the rear. It has been suggested from the letters of
representation received that this has been blocked for 5 years.

Having checked Highways records, this area is listed as an un-adopted passage and as such is not a formal
right-of-way. It would be up to a claimant to come forward and state that they have had interrupted access over
this area for 20 years, and make an application to this effect. No such action has been undertaken at this time,
this would be a matter to be addressed under separate legislation.


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to a sizable commercial building on Penry Avenue which has a floor area of
approximately 350 sqm.

The property is currently vacant and is available to let. The property is a brick-built Victorian age building which
adjoins a commercial garage located on Liverpool Road. The property is adjoined on other sides by residential
properties.




                                                         37
The property has been previously occupied by a printers and has a small hard standing area to the front and
side and a grassed area to the rear.

Penry Avenue itself is effectively a cul-de-sac, although it does provide access to St Mary's Church and
Community Hall which are located at the north west end of Penry Avenue. The south side of Penry Avenue,
occupied by the application property has parking restrictions in place designating this part of the street as a
clearway between 8am and 6pm.

Description of Proposal

Permission is sought for the change of use of the building to a day nursery (use class D1). It is also proposed
that the building is used as an after school club for children in primary education which will also provide for
breakfast and a holiday club, this would be within the main hours of use of he property of 7.15am-6.30pm.

The nursery would operate between the hours of 7.15am-6.30pm. It is anticipated that the nursery would
employ approximately 14 members of staff full time and 3 members of staff part time. The applicant has verbally
confirmed that the nursery would have up to 50 infants. The applicant has been requested to provide written
confirmation of the numbers using the nursery as well as those attending outside of the nursery hours, but this
information has not been forthcoming.

No external alterations to the building are proposed. The existing hard and soft landscaping surrounding the
building would be retained and includes hard standing to the front and side (for parking and drop off.) The
grassed area to the rear will be partially flagged, and a small decking area installed. This is to provide an area
for external play, which will be subdivided from the parking area at the front by new security gates.


Publicity

Neighbour Notification

The following properties have been notified of the application;

St Marys Vicarage, Penry Avenue, Cadishead, MANCHESTER, M44 5ZE,
2A Prospect Road, Cadishead, MANCHESTER, M44 5AW,
Ground Floor Part, First Floor Part 82B Liverpool Road, Cadishead, MANCHESTER, M44 5AN, ,
78-80 Liverpool Road, Cadishead, MANCHESTER, M44 5AN,
Flat 1, 2, 68 Liverpool Road, Cadishead, MANCHESTER, M44 5AF,
8-14 Penry Avenue, Cadishead, MANCHESTER, M44 5ZE,
4, 6 Penry Avenue, Cadishead, MANCHESTER, M44 5ZE,
2-10 (evens) Prospect Road, Cadishead, MANCHESTER, M44 5AW,
68 Liverpool Road, Cadishead, MANCHESTER, M44 5AF,
70-80 Liverpool Road, Cadishead, MANCHESTER, M44 5AF,
The Stables, 82B Liverpool Road, Cadishead, MANCHESTER, M44 5AN,

Representations

3 letters of representation have been received in response to the publicity of the application, the issues raises
are

- Insufficient parking for the proposed nursery
- Existing parking problems for residents, this will be made worse due to the nursery which would cuase more
problems.
- Effects on Access along Penry Avenue
- No safe space available for outdoor play


Representations have been received from St Marys Church Parish Parochial Council with regard to the scheme

The Lay-Chair has reported that a meeting was held with the applicant and local residents on Tuesday the 19th
of April. It is reported that generally everyone was in support of the nursery, but that everyone expressed




                                                         38
concern with regard to parking and traffic congestion. It also reported that there was concern over health, safety
and the wellbeing of children.

The Parish Council state that they will not be providing daily access or parking for the Nursery within the church
ground, although the council would remain receptive to the use of the grounds for special events. The Parish
Council considered that the proposal to use Automech for staff parking, and drop off / collection would serve the
proposal well, and it was agreed that gate access to be provided by Automech would assist with congestion
concerns on Penry Avenue.



Consultations

Design For Security - No comments received

Main Drainage - No objections subject to satisfactory drainage provision. Have commented that finished floor
levels should be 300mm above the adjacent road level.

Highways - One space for each three full time staff or part time equivalent, one space for every ten children for
picking up and dropping off this should also include for a 10% disabled parking provision. If this cannot be
provided the application should be refused.


Urban Vision Environment - Have recommended that a condition for a preliminary risk assessment be submitted
due to the use of outdoor areas as a play area.

Miller Goodall Environmental Services Limited - Have recommended a condition for a noise barrier to be
constructed due to the proximity of the outdoor play areas to residential properties.


Planning Policy Framework

Development Plan Policy



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

Unitary Development Plan EN17 - Pollution Control
This policy states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning
permission will only be granted where the development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is
no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory
level of amenity.

Unitary Development Plan EHC3 - Provision, Improve of Health, Community
This policy states that planning permission will be granted for the provision of new, and improved existing,
health and community facilities by public, private and voluntary agencies, provided that the development would:
not have an unacceptable impact on residential amenity and character; not have an unacceptable impact on
environmental quality; be accessible to the community it serves by a range of means of transport; not give rise
to unacceptable levels of traffic congestion, or have an adverse impact on highway safety; have the potential to
act as a community focus and encourage linked trips wherever possible; and be consistent with other policies
and proposals of the UDP.




                                                         39
Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network
This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon
highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal
Load Routes.

Unitary Development Plan A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Park
This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in
accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded;
and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards
of safety and security.

Other Material Considerations

Planning Policy Statement PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development
This policy states that planning should facilitate and promote sustainable and inclusive patterns of development
through a range of measures that includes ensuring high quality development through good and inclusive
design and ensuring that development supports existing communities and contributes and contributes to the
creation of safe, sustainable, liveable, and mixed communities with good access to jobs and key services for all
members of the community.

Planning Policy Statement PPS4 - Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth
This policy states that the overarching objective is sustainable economic growth to be achieved by: improving
the economic performance of urban and rural areas; reducing the gap in economic growth between regions;
promoting regeneration and tackling deprivation; delivering sustainable patterns of development by reducing the
need to travel; and promoting the vitality and viability of town and other centres. Local Authorities are
encouraged to adopt a positive approach towards planning applications for economic development having
regard to a range of impact considerations such as carbon dioxide emissions, accessibility, design and
regeneration. Proposals for main town centre uses outside existing centres should undertake a sequential
assessment to ensure there are no suitable sites available within existing centres and to consider the impact of
their proposals on the vitality and viability of those centres. Applications, which fail either of these tests, should
be refused planning permission.



Principle of Development

The proposed use does not fall within a town centre use as defined in PPS4. The site is not allocated within the
Unitary Development Plan although it is sited adjacent to the Cadishead Neighbourhood Centre, which contains
a mix of uses. The site is not located within an established employment area. Within the wider surrounding area
are a mix of commercial and residential properties with Northbank Industrial Estate being within close proximity.

The proposed use would bring a vacant building back into use and would seek to serve the local community in
which it would be sited as well as people who work within the surrounding commercial properties. It is
considered that the proposed D1 use would add to the mix of uses currently present in the area, including
offices, housing and retail. No external alterations to the building are proposed other than the flagging and
reorganisation of the side and rear yard area and the installation of a small area of decking.

The site is accessible by car and on foot. In addition, Liverpool Road is a main road through the city and is an
established route for public transport. The site would accommodate off street parking for approximately 4 cars.
The issues of parking and highways are discussed further in the report below.

Subject to the issues considered below, the principle of the use is considered acceptable.

Amenity

The proposed use would operate between the hours of 7.15am-6.30pm. There are residential properties to the
north and west of the site. To the east is a commercial garage and to the south are the extended garden areas
and garage plots of the properties along Prospect Road. To the rear of the application building is a grassed
area, which will be partly flagged and would be used for outdoor play.




                                                         40
The grassed area to the rear of the building is currently bordered by a 2.1m high wall at the rear and 1.8m high
fence to the side with no. 9 Penry Avenue.

Urban Vision Environment have been consulted and have provided the following comments ‘I do not consider
there to be any significant air quality implications associated with this proposal. I note, however, that the
external areas associated with the building lie at the rear of the building, adjacent to residential garden areas. If
this area were to be used by the nursery for outdoor play there may be some noise generated by children. In
order to mitigate this noise a noise barrier in the form of either a solid fence or brick wall will be necessary along
the boundaries with adjacent residential uses. The height of this barrier should be between 1.5 and 2m

Due to concerns regarding the noise impact of outdoor play on the amenity of surrounding residents, sufficient
mitigation measures would need to be provided as part of a planning condition requiring a fence (including
height, type and acoustic qualities) if the scheme were to receive a positive recommendation.

The area is mixed-use in nature and given the close proximity of the neighbourhood centre, including a
commercial garage at the end of Penry Avenue, which has no restrictions on its hours of operation, the
proposed hours are considered to be acceptable during the normal working week.

The existing B2 use if re-established could have a significant impact on the amenities of adjacent residential
properties in terms of noise and disturbance, and it is not considered that that the operation of the nursery would
have any impact in terms of noise or disturbance significantly above that which could occur from the use of the
premises for a B2 use.

In order to protect the amenity of surrounding residents a condition could also be attached to ensure the use
would not operate beyond these hours or at weekends or on bank holidays.

In addition to the comments above regarding noise and disturbance, Urban Vision Environment (Contaminated
Land ) have advised, due to the use and re-development of the external area, and the nature of the previous
commercial use that a preliminary risk assessment would be required to be provided prior to the
commencement of development. This would be secured through a planning condition if the scheme were to
receive a positive recommendation and it is not considered that this would be a reason for refusal.

Subject to the issues raised above being addressed, it is considered that the proposed D1 use of the site would
not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity currently enjoyed by the occupiers of
surrounding properties in accordance with policies DES7 and EN17.

Highway Safety and Accessibility

The application site is accessible by car with some car parking available in the surrounding streets. The site is
also located within very close proximity to Liverpool Road, which is a main bus route.

The existing hard standing area to the front of the building would be retained and used predominantly for drop-
off and pick up of children

Highways have been consulted and have stated that the proposal requires one space for each three full time
staff or part time equivalent, one space for every ten children for picking up and dropping off and 10% disabled
parking provision. Highways have stated that if this cannot be provided the application should be refused.

The applicant has confirmed verbally that there will be up to 50 infants attending the nursery at any one time
which would mean that there was a requirement for 5 spaces, there are 17 full time and part time staff proposed
which would equate to a further 6 spaces. Disabled provision would be one space which would bring the total to
12 spaces. Information has not been submitted to indicate the level of use from the after-school club and other
associated activities.

A maximum of two spaces could reasonably be provided on the frontage given that this area measures
approximately 2.4m x 15.5m, and that access would need to be maintained to the front door of the property.
Two stacked spaces could be provided to the side of the property bearing in mind that this area is to be
segregated for use from the childrens play area.




                                                          41
This would give a shortfall of 6 spaces, based on numbers attending given by the applicant.

The applicant has stated their intention to utilise parking capacity at adjacent properties including Automech for
up to 10 staff/parent spaces which is located next door at 78-80 Liverpool Road, as well as parking at St Mary's
Church for parking for special occasions.

For the Authority to have control over this parking area, a legal agreement would need to be provided with the
application. Alternatively the areas would need to be provided within the site edged red which would require a
new planning application to be submitted.

The applicant has indicated that they would be willing to enter into such an agreement with Automech, and that
the parking to the front of the building will be for drop off/ collection only. There would be a member of staff on
the door to assist with any congestion which may arise.

However it is considered that even in the event of such an agreement being submitted with alternative parking
provided, parents would tend to use Penry Avenue for pick up and drop off of children and infants. Access to
and from Automech is sufficiently divorced from the access to the proposed nursery, with there being no direct
access between the two premises to allow this being used for any other purpose but for staff/visitor car parking.

Given that Penry Avenue is a short cul-de-sac with no turning head, it is considered that the use of this short
road for drop off and pick up, would at peak times lead to problems of turning and parking on the road which
would have a knock-on impact on accessibility for users of Penry Avenue for both access to residential
properties as well as the church and community hall which is accessed from the end of the avenue. It is also
considered that the potential congestion would have a detrimental impact on residential amenity itself.

The applicant has provided as part of justification for this scheme details of other nurseries within the area which
it is felt have similar parking issues including Jitterbugs Nursery Located at 183-185 Liverpool Road and
Munchkins Nursery which is located on the corner of Preston Avenue and Liverpool Road.

With regards to Jitterbugs Nursery, it is noted that some off-street parking is available to the rear (4 spaces) for
members of staff and visitors. This property is located on the main road frontage. Munchkins Nursery has a
separate of area of parking (4 spaces) provided, and it also has access from a main road frontage.

It is not considered at these sites that drop off or pick up would interfere with access or cause congestion to the
same degree as the application property, given the siting on a short cul-de-sac with parking restrictions and no
tuning head. In any case, each application has to be assessed on its own merits.

Conclusions/Summary

Given the limited parking on the site and the location of the development, it is considered that the proposed
nursery would result in a significant increase in the demand for on street parking and would also result in an
unacceptable detrimental impact on highway safety by virtue of manoeuvring which would have a detrimental
impact on residential amenity. As such, the development would be contrary to policies A8, A10 and EHC3 of the
UDP.

It is not considered that there are any other material considerations which would outweigh this finding.


Recommendation

Refuse


1.    Given the limited parking on the site and the location of the development, it is considered that the
      proposed nursery would result in a significant increase in the demand for on street parking and would
      also result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on highway safety and residential amenity by virtue of
      highway maneuvering and as such the development would contrary to policies A8, A10 and EHC3 of the
      UDP.




                                                         42
http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=externalDocuments&keyVal=L
MTKXFNP5Y000

APPLICATION No:             11/60494/FUL
APPLICANT:                  Miss Bianca Leder
LOCATION:                   590 Liverpool Road, Irlam, M44 5AA
PROPOSAL:                   Change of use from residential use to private day nursery
                            including demolition of front wall to form parking area (re-sub of
                            11/59990/COU)and the construction of a dropped crossing.
WARD:                       Cadishead

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to a dwelling on Liverpool Road which is currently vacant and is for sale. The property is
a brick-built / rendered detached dwelling building which adjoins a church to the north. The property is adjoined
to the south by residential properties, although there are a mixture of residential properties and commercial
properties within the immediate locality, which includes a shop and takeaway across the road.

The property has a large enclosed garden area to the rear, which backs onto the Church car park, although
there is no vehicular access from this area.

To the front of the property, Liverpool Road has double-yellow lines on both sides.

Description of Proposal

Permission is sought for the change of use of the building to a private day nursery (use class D1). The hours on
the application form have been given as Monday - Friday 7am - 6pm, although two sets of hours have been
given for different activities being carried out within these hours. The application form does not indicate that
there would be weekend working.

The applicant has confirmed that there would be 30 under 5s and 25 over 5s for after school club, and it is
anticipated that the nursery would employ approximately 10 members of staff full time and 8 members of staff
part time. The property will have a number of different rooms including two play rooms, one for ages 5-7 and
one for ages 8+, there will also be a number of activity rooms including a Dining/ Art and Craft Area/ Sand /
Water play room, a sensory room, an imaginative play area with outdoor access, childrens toilets, book area/
reading room and a baby area.

It is proposed to knock down the walling at the front of the property and use the existing garden area to form a
parking area, one space would be able to be located within this area to allow leaving and entering the highway
in a forward gear.

The application is a resubmission of a previous application which was refused on the grounds of a lack of car
parking provision for the nursery.

Within the revised application, the applicant has undertaken to enter into a section 106 agreement with the
adjacent Church ( St Teresa's) to provide 10 car parking spaces. The church has a car park immediately to the
rear of the property, it is proposed that access to this car park will be via a gate.

The applicant has also submitted a letter from the Railway Inn at 600 Liverpool Road confirming that the
landlord is happy for the car park of the pub to be used




                                                        43
Site History

11/59990/COU - Change of use from residential use to private day nursery including demolition of front wall to
form parking area- Refused 16 May 2011
11/59991/ADV - Display of one non-illuminated fascia sign - Refuse - 15 April 2011
11/60495/ADV - Display of one non-illuminated fascia sign (Re-sub of application 11/59991/ADV) - Pending



Publicity

Neighbour Notification

The following properties were notified of the application;

Flat 1,2, 592 Liverpool Road, Irlam, MANCHESTER, M44 5AA,
Managers Accommodation, White Horse, 575 Liverpool Road, Irlam, MANCHESTER, M44 5BE,
New Irlam Cars, 575A Liverpool Road, Irlam, MANCHESTER, M44 5BE,
St Teresas Roman Catholic Church, Astley Road, Irlam, MANCHESTER, ,
White Horse, 575 Liverpool Road, Irlam, MANCHESTER, M44 5BE,
577-585 (odds) Liverpool Road, Irlam, MANCHESTER, M44 5BE,
592, 594, 596 Liverpool Road, Irlam, MANCHESTER, M44 5AA,

Representations

No representations have been received as a result of the publicity of the application

Consultations

Main Drainage - No objections subject to satisfactory drainage provision

Highways - No comments received. In the previous application, highways commented that one parking space
for each 10 children for pick up and drop off and one space for three full time staff or part time equivalent is
required. Highways also commented that Liverpool Road is a classified road, so any vehicles would need to
leave the road in a forward gear.


Miller Goodall Environmental Services Limited - No comments to make

Urban Vision Environment - No comments, have recommended an informative regarding contamination is
added to any approval.


Planning Policy Framework

Development Plan Policy

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

Unitary Development Plan EHC3 - Provision, Improve of Health, Community
This policy states that planning permission will be granted for the provision of new, and improved existing,
health and community facilities by public, private and voluntary agencies, provided that the development would:
not have an unacceptable impact on residential amenity and character; not have an unacceptable impact on
environmental quality; be accessible to the community it serves by a range of means of transport; not give rise
to unacceptable levels of traffic congestion, or have an adverse impact on highway safety; have the potential to




                                                         44
act as a community focus and encourage linked trips wherever possible; and be consistent with other policies
and proposals of the UDP.

Unitary Development Plan A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network
This policy states that development will not be permitted where it would i) have an unacceptable impact upon
highway safety ii) cause an unacceptable restriction to the movement of heavy goods vehicles along Abnormal
Load Routes.

Unitary Development Plan A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Park
This policy states that there should be adequate provision for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in
accordance with the Council’s minimum standards; maximum car parking standards should not be exceeded;
and parking facilities should be provided consistent with the provision and maintenance of adequate standards
of safety and security.

Unitary Development Plan DES8 - Alterations and Extensions
This policy 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.

Other Material Considerations

Planning Policy Statement PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development
This policy states that planning should facilitate and promote sustainable and inclusive patterns of development
through a range of measures that includes ensuring high quality development through good and inclusive
design and ensuring that development supports existing communities and contributes and contributes to the
creation of safe, sustainable, liveable, and mixed communities with good access to jobs and key services for all
members of the community.

Planning Policy Statement PPS4 - Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth
This policy states that the overarching objective is sustainable economic growth to be achieved by: improving
the economic performance of urban and rural areas; reducing the gap in economic growth between regions;
promoting regeneration and tackling deprivation; delivering sustainable patterns of development by reducing the
need to travel; and promoting the vitality and viability of town and other centres. Local Authorities are
encouraged to adopt a positive approach towards planning applications for economic development having
regard to a range of impact considerations such as carbon dioxide emissions, accessibility, design and
regeneration. Proposals for main town centre uses outside existing centres should undertake a sequential
assessment to ensure there are no suitable sites available within existing centres and to consider the impact of
their proposals on the vitality and viability of those centres. Applications, which fail either of these tests, should
be refused planning permission.



Appraisal

Principle of Development

The site is not allocated within the Unitary Development Plan although it is sited adjacent to the Lower Irlam
Neighbourhood Centre, which contains a mix of uses. It is noted that there are existing nurseries within the
area, the nearest being Munchkins Nursery on the corner of Preston Avenue.

The proposed use would bring a vacant building back into use and would seek to serve the local community in
which it would be sited as well as people who work within the area.

It is considered that the proposed D1 use would add to the mix of uses currently present in the area, including
offices, housing and retail. No external alterations to the building are proposed other than the flagging and
demolition of the wall to the front to provide a parking area.

The site is accessible by car and on foot. In addition, Liverpool Road is a main road through the city and is an
established route for public transport. The site would accommodate off street parking for 1 car. The issues of
parking and highways are discussed further in the report below.




                                                         45
Subject to the issues considered below, the principle of the use is considered acceptable.

Amenities of Neighbouring Properties

The proposed use would operate overall between the hours of 7.00am-6.00pm. There are residential properties
to the south of the property in the form of flats, and a church to the north. It is noted that there is only a very
small yard area to the rear of the adjacent flats, with the rest of the area to the rear of these flats being used for
car parking.

To the rear of the application building is an enclosed garden area, which has the potential to be used for outdoor
play. Urban Vision Environment have made no objections to the proposals.

The area is mixed-use in nature and given the close proximity of other community uses and commercial
properties, the proposed hours are considered to be acceptable during the normal working week. It is not
considered a reason for refusal could be supported on noise or disturbance grounds. It is recommended that a
condition regarding hours of operation is attached should approval be given

Highway Safety and Accessibility

The application site is accessible by car with some car parking available in the surrounding streets. The site is
also located within very close proximity to Liverpool Road, which is a main bus route.

The existing garden area to the front of the property would be used for parking for one vehicle. A dropped
crossing would be required which is proposed within this application.

The Highways officer has stated that there are no objections to the proposal on these grounds and that such an
area is capable of being provided and that vehicles would be able to leave and enter the highway in a forward
gear, but that the submitted layout plan is inaccurate and it is likely that all of the boundary wall to the front of
the property would be required to be removed.

In view of this, a condition is recommended requiring the provision of a plan to be submitted prior to the
commencement of the development to show this parking area together with details of surfacing and boundary
treatments.

Highways stated previously that the proposal requires one space for each three full time staff or part time
equivalent and one space for every ten children for picking up and dropping off. 10% disabled parking provision
would also be required.

The applicant has confirmed that there would be 30 under 5s and 25 over 5s for after school club which would
equate to 5-6 spaces being provided. Staff figures have also been given which would mean that there was a
requirement for 6 spaces, as there are 18 full time and part time staff proposed. Disabled provision would be
one space which would bring the total to 7 spaces, this would be excluding any provision for parent drop off/
pick-up and visitor parking.

Overall the requirement would be for 13 spaces to be provided. It is considered given that there is a split
between nursery and after-school use (meaning that the property will not be fully occupied all at once) that a
lesser figure may be sufficient.

The applicant in the previous application, provided a letter of support from the adjacent St Teresa's Church
which gave permission for the use of three spaces. Whilst this figure would not have been sufficient, the Local
Authority would also have had no control over this parking area which is not within the applicant's ownership.

In the new application, the applicant has provided a letter of support from the Railway Inn - to provide car
parking provision although this cannot be controlled through this application, the applicant has also stated that
there is parking for staff on Astley Road.

The applicant has also undertaken to enter into a section 106 agreement with St Teresa's Church for the use of
parking spaces at the Church which are in close proximity to the proposed nursery. These spaces are to be
accessed via a gate between the properties.




                                                          46
Given that the Church has 16 spaces, including 2 disabled spaces, it is not considered that such provision of car
parking would conflict with the operation of the church, particularly at the weekend when the nursery will be
closed. Therefore, subject to the completion of the legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country
Planning Act it is considered that the development would be acceptable in terms of parking provision.

No details have been provided of the pathway linking the property to this parking area, although because of the
close proximity of the car park to the rear of the application property, the installation of a gate would be possible.
As such is it is recommended that a condition be attached requiring the details of the gate to be submitted to the
Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development.


Conclusions/Summary

In view of the above assessment, and the application of suitable conditions in terms of gate access, details of
the hard standing / parking area to be provided to the front and hours of operation, it is considered that the
development is acceptable and is therefore recommended that the application is 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 the provision of 10 car parking spaces at St
Teresa's Church, adjacent to the application site.

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 to be issued, (subject to the conditions
and reasons stated below) on completion of the above-mentioned legal agreement; and

IV. Authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the S106 within a reasonable
period on the grounds that insufficient car parking has been provided for use of the proposed nursery which
would result in a significant increase in the demand for on street parking which would result in an unacceptable
detrimental impact on highway safety by virtue of parking and manoeuvring contrary to policies A8, A10 and
EHC3 of the UDP.

Recommendation

Minded to approve


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

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

2.    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans
      and information;

      Document entitled 'Annotation to Site Map' submitted with application dated 15.06.2011
      1:1250 Site Plan submitted with application dated 15.06.2011


      Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3.    Notwithstanding the plans submitted with the application, prior to the commencement of development, full
      details including the surfacing and boundary treatment of the parking area to be implemented at the front
      of the property shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme
      shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained as such thereafter.




                                                          47
     Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the visual amenities of the streetscene, in accordance with
     policies DES1 amd A 8 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

4.   Prior to the commencement of development, full details of the location and appearance of the gate to be
     installed between the property and the adjacent church shall be submitted to and approved in writing by
     the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details
     and shall be retained as such thereafter.

     Reason: In the interests of providing suitable pedestrian access to the site, pursuant to policy A2 of the
     City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

5.   The use hereby permitted shall NOT be operated on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays and shall
     ONLY be operated between the hours of 7am - 6pm Monday - Friday

     Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the neighbouring residents in accordance with policy EN17 of the
     City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

6.   Notwithstanding the provisions of Class D1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987,
     as amended, this permission does not permit the use of the property for any other use than as a Day
     Nursery / After School Club.

     Reason: Owing to the location of the property and the restricted parking available for the proposed use,
     other uses within the D1 use class may have significant impacts on the amenities of the locality in terms
     of residential amenity and highway safety which would be contrary to policies EN17., EHC3, A8 and A10
     of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.


Notes to 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.     The Development Services Directorate (Highways Section) should be consulted regarding the
       construction of a footway crossing, the cost of which will be the responsibility of the developer.




                                                       48
http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=externalDocuments&keyVal=L
N5BYLNP00300

APPLICATION No:             11/60524/DEEM3
APPLICANT:                  Mrs K Mildenstein - Salford City Council
LOCATION:                   James Brindley Community Primary School, Parrfold Avenue,
                            Worsley, M28 7HE,
PROPOSAL:                   Erection of a new detached classroom unit
WARD:                       Walkden South

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to James Brindley Community Primary School on the west side of Parrfold Avenue in
Worsley. The school site is situated in a residential area with dwellings surrounding the site. The school is single
storey in height and is set back from the Parrfold Avenue. There are a number of trees within the school
grounds. These trees would not be affected by the proposed development and as such a tree survey is not
required to be submitted in support of the application. The existing school is constructed of grey concrete bricks.
It has a flat roof and white upvc windows.

Description of Proposal

Permission is sought for the erection of a new detached classroom unit.

The unit would be sited to the north of the school, approximately 9m from the side boundary of 4 Rochester
Avenue. The unit would be single storey with a flat roof and would accommodate a 63m2 classroom and a toilet.
It would be of standard ‘SIBCAS’ design and would be constructed of steel cladding, goosewing grey in colour
with a Torflex roof, also grey in colour in order to blend in with the appearance of the existing school building.

The proposed classroom unit would be sited within close proximity to the existing school building, being
approximately 10m away.

The unit would be sited in the same location as a previously demolished building which had a footprint of
120m2. The applicants have confirmed that the unit would be used to accommodate an additional 30 pupils,
which are expected at the beginning of the academic school year. (September 2011.)

Foul and surface water drainage would be connected into the existing school drainage system.

No additional car parking is proposed.

Site History

10/58735/FUL - Erection of 1 no. cycle shelter and 1 no. play shelter. Permitted

06/52097/DEEM3 - Erection of a single storey infill extension for special education needs. Permitted

05/50272/DEEM3 - Erection of 2.4m high boundary railings adjacent to Parr Fold Avenue including rear section
of 36 Parr Fold Avenue, rear school playing field and rear of 6, 8 and 10 Carlton Close. Erection of 2m high
boundary railings adjacent to , Rochester Avenue and front section of 36 Parr Fold Avenue and 4 Rochester
Avenue. Permitted

04/49584/DEEM3 - Retention of 2.44m high pagoda and 1.5m high fencing. Permitted

03/46709/DEEM3 - Erection of 2.4m high crusader railings. Permitted




                                                        49
03/45721/DEEM3 - Construction of extension to existing car parking area to provide ten additional spaces.
Permitted

99/39666/DEEM3 - Erection of extension enclosing existing courtyard area and creation of covered play area at
rear of school building



Publicity

Site Notice: Site notice Date Displayed: 23 June 2011
Reason: Wider Publicity


Neighbour Notification

The following neighbour addresses have been notified:
- 25, 27, 29, 31, 33, 35, 37, 39, 41, 43, 45, 47, 49, 51 and 53 Normanby Road
- 20, 22, 24 and 26 Parrfold Avenue
- 2 and 4 Rochester Avenue
- 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 and 16 Stafford Road

Representations

One letter of objection has been received. No name and address detail are provided in the letter, however it
does state they are a local resident and wish to withold their personal details. The letter raises concerns in
relation to the increased number of cars into an already congested area with regards to access for emergency
vehicles and risks to pupils walking to school and suggests a number of traffic calming measure should be put in
place if planning permission is granted.

The proposed classroom unit would accommodate 30 pupils which are to start at the school in September. All
existing parking and access arrangement at the site will remain unchanged. Parking is available on surrounding
streets where there are no parking restrictions. Highways comments will be added to the addendum sheet prior
to the Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting.

Consultations

Design For Security - 1. The detached classroom unit will potentially be a target for offenders due the imbalance
of security between what is in place at the main school building and limited security afforded to a temporary unit.
For this reason I would strongly recommend that no valuable electronic equipment, such as computers, laptops,
or projectors, be stored in this unit whilst the school is closed.
2. Criminal damage is a regular occurrence in this area. If the glazing installed is not laminated I would
recommend that a perforated mesh, certified by Secure by Design, be installed over the windows for additional
protection (please see www.securedbydesign.com for products).
3. I would recommend that the classroom is covered by a monitored alarm.

Main Drainage - No objections subject to satisfactory drainage provision. Surface water should drain to
soakaway.

Highways - No comments received to date

Urban Vision Environment - Recommend an informative in relation to contaminated land. The recommended
informative has been attached

Miller Goodall Environmental Services Limited - The application concerns the erection of a 90m2 classroom to
be erected on the site of a previously demolished building. The proposed building is relatively close to 4
Rochester Avenue but given its use and times of occupation I do not have any objection in relation to noise or
air quality.




                                                        50
Planning Policy Framework

Development Plan Policy



Unitary Development Plan DES1 - Respecting Context
This policy 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.

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

Unitary Development Plan EN17 - Pollution Control
This policy states that in areas where existing levels of pollution exceed local or national standards, planning
permission will only be granted where the development incorporates adequate measures to ensure that there is
no unacceptable risk or nuisance to occupiers, and that they are provided with an appropriate and satisfactory
level of amenity.

Unitary Development Plan EHC1 - Provision, Improvement of Schools, Colleges
This policy states that planning permission will be granted for the improvement, replacement or provision of new
schools and colleges, provided that the development would i) not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity
of neighbouring uses; ii) secure adequate, accessible playing field provision iii) be accessible by a rage of
means of transport iv) incorporate disabled access v) not give rise to unacceptable levels of traffic generation,
impact on highway safety, parking or servicing; vi) make provision, where possible, for community use of
buildings and grounds.

Unitary Development Plan DES10 - Design and Crime
This policy states that developments must be designed to discourage crime, antisocial behaviour, and the fear
of crime. Development should i) be clearly delineated ii) allow natural surveillance iii) avoid places of
concealment iv) encourage activity within public areas.

Other Material Considerations

Supplementary Planning Document - Design and Crime
This policy document contains a number policies used to assess and determine planning applications and is
intended as a guide in designing out crime.


Appraisal

Principle of Development

The proposed classroom unit would provide additional facilities for an existing school. The development, due to
its nature and siting would not impact on the recreational facilities associated with the school nor would it impact
on the school being accessible to the community it serves. Two additional members of staff would be employed
as a result of the development and as such the proposal would not place significant increased demand on car
parking or impact on highway safety. In light of the above it is considered that the proposal accords with policy
EHC1 and there are no in principle objections subject to compliance with other relevant UDP policies.

Design

The proposed classroom unit is of a standard ‘SIBCAS’ design and appearance. The unit would not be highly
visible within the street scene as it would be located within the site and not directly adjacent to the site
boundaries. The unit would appear subordinate to the existing school building and is considered to be of
appropriate scale and design. The materials of the unit are also considered acceptable in this location and
would complement the design and appearance of the existing school building which it would be seen in




                                                         51
conjunction with. It is therefore considered that the proposal accords with DES1 of the Unitary Development
Plan.

Amenity

The proposed classroom unit would be sited in the same location as a previously demolished building. It would
be set in from the site boundaries and would be approximately 9m from the common boundary with the closest
adjacent property, 4 Rochester Avenue and would be offset from its main front elevation.

The proposed classroom unit would introduce windows in its side elevation, which would face the common
boundary with 4 Rochester Avenue at a distance of 9m. Number 4 Rochester Avenue has a single storey
garage, which runs along this common boundary and has no windows its side elevation. As such no issues are
raised with regards to loss of privacy.

It is considered that the proposed classroom unit would not result in an unacceptable impact on the amenity
currently enjoyed by the occupiers of surrounding properties and no objections are raised by Miller Goodall in
relation to noise and air quality.

It is therefore considered that the proposed development would accord with policies EN17 and DES7 of the
Unitary Development Plan.

Design and Crime

The school site is bounded by a 1.8m high perimeter fence, which provides a first line of defence. The proposed
classroom unit would be within close proximity to the school and would not be isolated from the existing
building. It has windows in its side elevations and there are windows in the northern elevation of the school
building (which would directly face the unit), which would provide an element of natural surveillance. The
comments from Design for Security have been acknowledged and a condition has been attached to ensure a
scheme detailing measures to minimise the risk of crime is submitted to and approve in writing by the LPA and
implemented and retained as such thereafter.

Recommendation

Approve

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

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

2.    Prior to the commencement of the development a scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing
      by the Local Planning Authority, which details the measures to be put in place to minimise the risk of
      crime. The scheme shall comply with the principles of secure by design and once approved shall be
      implemented in full and retained as such thereafter.

      To ensure that the development is appropriately secured from crime in accordance with policy DES 10 of
      the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

3.    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers
      UV/EPS/RT/01 and UV/EPS/RT/02

      Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

Notes to Applicant

1.      If, during any works on site, contamination is suspected or found, or contamination is caused, the Local
        Planning Authority (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.




                                                       52

								
To top