Docstoc

Division

Document Sample
Division Powered By Docstoc
					PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 19 November 2009




APPLICATION No:          09/57433/FUL
APPLICANT:               Mr Abea Alsaid Alzeabi
LOCATION:                283 -285 Liverpool Road, Eccles, M30 0QN,
PROPOSAL:                Erection of a two storey rear extension, installation of a new window and
                         door on the Vine St elevation, removal of two chimneys and retention of
                         a door and access gate on the Vine St elevation
WARD:                    Barton

Background

This application relates to an end terraced property located at 283 Liverpool Road in Eccles and the
first floor of the adjoining property at 285 Liverpool Road. Until approximately one year ago the
ground floor of 283 Liverpool Road was used a hot food takeaway with ancillary living
accommodation above - this accommodation extended above the adjoining restaurant/takeaway at 285
Liverpool Road. The application property is currently undergoing extensive renovation in order to
allow the ground floor of 283 Liverpool Road to be used as a hot food takeaway and a cafe, which
share kitchen facilities, with an ancillary flat above. As part of the renovation, various internal works
have been undertaken, resulting in the premises being virtually gutted. A series of external works have
also been undertaken, mainly on the Vine Street elevation - a steel gate has also been installed and a
new door has been installed in an existing opening. This application seeks consent to regularise the
external works undertaken as well as seeking consent to erect a two storey rear extension and to insert
a new door and window into existing openings on the Vine Street elevation. There have been
numerous complaints about the work that has been undertaken with neighbours raising concerns over
the quality of the work that has been undertaken, the structural stability of the building, the hours of
working, the fact that development is being carried out without obtaining planning permission and
building regulations consent and the fact that those at 285 and 287 Liverpool Road have has their rear
access blocked by the installation of the gate. In order to address the concerns raised by neighbours the
various departments of the Council including Environmental Services, Highways, Planning and
Building Control have been involved as have the Health and Safety Executive and Greater Manchester
Fire Service.

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to an end terraced property located at 283 Liverpool Road in Eccles and the
first floor of the adjoining property at 285 Liverpool Road. The premises are currently undergoing
renovation, having last been used as a ground floor takeaway with ancillary living accommodation
above.

The application site is located within a mixed use area - there is an Indian restaurant/takeaway at 285
Liverpool Road (ground floor), a bedroom shop at 287 Liverpool Road, a Chinese takeaway at 289
Liverpool Road and two vacant retail units at 291 and 293 Liverpool Road. Travis Perkins, the
building supplier, has a store located at 281 Liverpool Road and a terrace of two storey residential




                                                   1
units occupies the land opposite the site at 280 to 286 Liverpool Road. The land to the rear of the site
is occupied by an industrial unit.

Description of Proposal

Planning permission is sought to retain an access gate and a door that have been installed on the Vine
Street elevation. The new door has been installed in an existing opening.

Consent is also sought for the erection of a two-storey rear extension, to raise and re-roof the existing
two-storey outrigger and to insert a new door and window into existing openings on the Vine Street
elevation. It is also proposed to remove two chimneys. The proposed two-storey extension would
project 2.5m from the rear elevation of the property at 283 Liverpool Road, along which it would run
for 3m. It would measure 6.4m in height at the eaves and 7.5m in height at the ridge with a pitched
roof that would extend over the existing 6.4m high two-storey outrigger.

With regard to the proposal to use the ground floor as a hot food takeaway and a café, it should be
noted that permission is not required for the use of the ground floor as a hot food takeaway and a café,
as the two uses share a kitchen and therefore the proposal is not resulting in the creation of a separate
planning unit.

Site History

Application 01/42956/COU for the use of the ground floor of 283 Liverpool Road as a hot food
takeaway was approved subject to conditions in October 2001.

Publicity

Site Notice: Article 8 site notice    Date Displayed: 24 September 2009

Press Advert: Not Applicable

Neighbour Notification

The following neighbours have been notified of the application-

281, 285, 287 and 289 Liverpool Road
280, 282, 284 and 286 Liverpool Road
3 Eliza Ann Street
6-8 Vine Street

Representations

Four letters of objection have been received in response to this application including one that is signed
by each of the occupants of the residential units at 280-286 Liverpool Road.

In addition there has been a significant amount of email correspondence from the occupant of 235
Liverpool Road.




                                                   2
There are also three letters from occupiers of other properties on Liverpool Road stating, in passing,
that they do not have any objections to the proposal.

The following issues have been raised -
     The works undertaken, including the creation of new openings on the Vine Street elevation
        and the installation of 3 roller shutters, has resulted in the building becoming structurally
        unsound and damage has been caused to 285 Liverpool Road.
     The works that have been undertaken have been carried out despite the HSE issuing an order
        banning further work on site
     Works are being undertaken at all hours of the day and night resulting in disturbance to
        neighbours
     The works that have been carried out have been done with obtaining planning permission or
        building regulations approval
     The gate that has been installed blocks the emergency access for those at 285 and 287 and as
        such it is a fire hazard. It also prevents those at 285 and 287 being able to take their rubbish
        out.
     A traffic sign has been removed from Vine Street making the traffic order invalid.
     Loss of light
     Loss of view
     The proposed extension will increase the number of people living in the flat and as such the
        proposal will result in an increased demand for parking which cannot be met due to the
        parking restrictions on Vine Street. The proposal will therefore have an adverse impact upon
        highway safety.

Loss of view is not a material planning consideration.

With regard to the comments made from one objector regarding the creation of new openings on the
Vine Street elevation, the replacement of a rear window with a door to create rear access and the
installation of 3 roller shutters the applicant has provided letters from the occupants of 287 Liverpool
Road and 6-8 Vine Street which confirm that the openings on the Vine Street elevation were made 5-6
years ago by a previous owner. Letters have also been provided from the occupants of 280, 284, 286
and 287 Liverpool Road and 6-8 Vine Street that confirm the roller shutters have been in situ for 6-
7years. In these circumstances these alterations benefit from deemed consent. Only the new door
requires retrospective consent as this has been in place for less than 4 years.

Other issues such as the structural stability of the property, the damage to neighbours properties, the
removal of a traffic sign and the works being undertaken despite the HSE issuing an order banning
further work on site are not planning issues, rather they are issues for Building Control, Traffic
Management and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). All three parties have investigated the issues
raised by neighbours and their findings are summarised below -

Building Control - A Building Regulations application for internal alterations, a new stair and a rear
extension was submitted in February 2009. This was rejected but it is possible to build under a rejected
building regulations notice provided that the work taking place does not contravene any regulations.
Works have been ongoing and regular inspections have taken place. The work undertaken to date is
acceptable from a building control perspective - structural calculations have been provided in support
of the alterations and have been approved. The plywood structure at the rear is a temporary measure to




                                                   3
provide security while building work takes place. An inspection of 285 Liverpool Road did not shown
any significant structural damage - this property appears to be structurally sound. It is between Mr
Alzeabi and the owner of 285 Liverpool Road to agree on how to resolve any structural damage that
has taken place through the party wall act or other legal means.

Traffic Management - The sign that has been removed was a no waiting at any time sign. Under the
Traffic Sign Regulations this sign is now redundant and would have had to be removed anyway.
Consequently it is not proposed to take any action against Mr Alzeabi.

HSE - A Prohibition Notice was served on the applicant, Mr Alzeabi, on the 15th April 2009, which
prevented him from carrying out further construction work unless he is working under the direct
supervision of a competent person. The HSE have visited the site on a number of occasions since the
prohibition notice was served and they have advised that the only activities that have been carried out
by Mr Alzeabi himself are minor works under the supervision of his main contractor - AMCO
construction. Consequently they have no reason to believe that Mr Alzeabi is not working in
accordance with the conditions of the contravention notice.

Consultations

Miller Goodall Environmental Services Limited - No objections.

Head of Engineering and Highways - No objections.

Urban Vision Environment - No objections.

Main Drainage - No objections.

Highways - No objections.

Urban Vision Environment - No objections.

Planning Policy Framework
Development Plan Policy
UDP              DES1 - Respecting Context
UDP              DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
UDP              DES8 - Alterations and Extensions
UDP              A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
UDP              A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Park

Appraisal

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

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




                                                   4
The proposed two-storey rear extension would project 2.5m from the rear elevation of 283 Liverpool
Road along which it would run for 3m. It would measure 6.4m in height at the eaves and 7.5m in
height at the ridge with a pitched roof that would extend over the existing 6.4m high two-storey
outrigger. The extension is of a simple design that would respect the existing building and it would be
constructed using matching materials in order to ensure it would not form an incongruous feature upon
the building or in the locality.

The windows and doors that would be inserted on the Vine Street elevation will match those in the
existing building. Consequently, it is not considered that the introduction of the proposed extension,
the raising and re-roofing of the existing outrigger or the introduction of new doors and windows on
the Vine Street elevation would have an adverse impact upon the visual amenities of the area.

Nor are there any objections to the removal of the two chimneys either as this work would not have an
adverse impact upon the character or appearance of the building. Similarly, there are no visual amenity
issues with the access gate that has been installed.

Policy DES7 states that development that would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the
occupiers or users of other developments will not normally be permitted.

The property at 283-285 Liverpool Road is bounded on three sides by commercial uses. The closest
residential properties are located at 280-286 Liverpool Road, opposite the application site. The
proposals would not result in the unit coming any closer to the residential units at 280-286 Liverpool
Road nor would it introduce overlooking where it did not exist previously. It is considered therefore
that the proposal would not have an adverse impact upon the residential amenity the occupants of 280-
286 Liverpool Road can reasonably enjoy.

With regard to the issues neighbours have raised over the hours of working, Environmental Protection
have investigated activities at the application site in order to ascertain whether a statutory noise
nuisance exists. This was done by installing noise monitoring equipment at 285 Liverpool Road on the
3/6/2009 for 7 days. Analysis of the recordings made did not indicate statutory nuisance had occurred.
Following the installation of the equipment further complaints were received and complainants were
provided with diary sheets asking for 7 days (normally 14) details of alleged nuisance, to support
installation of the noise equipment, however none of these were returned and consequently the case
was closed.

With regard to car parking UDP Policy A10 requires development to make adequate provision for
disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists, in accordance with the Council‟s maximum standards.

The proposed extension would result in a 7.5sqm increase in floorspace. The extension would
incorporate a staircase and it would also provide a small storage area for the takeaway/cafe and the
ancillary residential flat. The extension would not facilitate an increase in the active commercial
floorspace nor would it allow the number of bedrooms in the ancillary flat to be increased and in fact
the proposal would see the number of bedrooms in the flat being reduced from three to two.
Consequently taking into account the opening hours of the takeaway/cafe - 8am till midnight - and the
reduced number of bedrooms that will be provided in the ancillary flat, it is not considered that the
proposal would result in a significant increase in the demand for car parking. In these circumstances it
is not considered that the proposal would have an adverse impact upon highway safety.




                                                   5
Policy A2 of the UDP states: "Development that would result in the diversion or extinguishment of an
existing public right of way will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that adequate levels
of access for the disabled, pedestrians and cyclists will be maintained to, around and where
appropriate, through the site".

The gate that has been installed on the Vine Street elevation does not affect any public rights of way. It
has, however, been erected at the end of a passage proving rear access to the properties at 283, 285 and
287 Liverpool Road. At the request of a Greater Manchester Fire Officer, the gate has been fitted with
a lock, which allows it to be opened and closed from Vine Street and within the alleyway. Occupants
of the properties at 285 and 287 have been provided with a key to the gate in order to allow access and
have confirmed in writing that this is the case. Having regard to the open nature of the alleyway the
fire officer has confirmed that he is happy with the gate from a fire safety perspective.

Conclusions

It is considered that proposed two-storey rear extension, the alterations to the roof and the works to the
Vine Street elevation comply with the relevant policies of the Adopted UDP and there are no material
considerations to outweigh this. It is therefore recommended that the application be approved subject
to conditions.


Recommendation

Approve


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

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

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

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




                                                    6
APPLICATION No:           09/58238/CLUD
APPLICANT:                Mr Robert Purvis
LOCATION:                 Creamline Dairies, Weymouth Road, Eccles, M30 8WL,
PROPOSAL:                 Application for a lawful development certificate in relation to condition
                          4 (operating hours) of planning application 96/35092/FUL
WARD:                     Winton

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The site to which the application relates stands at the end of Weymouth Road in Eccles and is occupied
by Creamline Dairies. The application site is formed from two separate parcels of land, which is to the
north and south of Weymouth Road. To the end of the road, there are a number of light industrial units,
however along the majority of the length of Weymouth Road at its access with Gee Lane are semi
detached dwellings.

The site currently accommodates the offices and ancillary refrigeration space associated with the
working of the dairy.

The site is bounded to the north by the M602 motorway.

Description of Proposal

The application before members for consideration is for a Certificate of Lawfulness with respect to the
hours of processing within the site.

As can be seen from the planning history section below, and as Members will recall, there has been a
number of planning permissions on the site in recent years, the most recent to be considered being
09/57654/CLUD (considered on 15.10.2009) which is currently subject to an appeal against non-
determination to be determined by the Planning Inspectorate on behalf of the Secretary of State.
Members were minded to approve this certificate in part on the basis of hours of processing but not in
relation to hours of deliveries based on the evidence submitted by three employees of the Dairy in the
form of sworn declarations.

Due to the appeal being lodged with the Planning Inspectorate members were unable to make a
decision on the certificate and were only „minded‟ to approve this part of the application. This
application has now been submitted to allow members to formally grant the certificate on the basis of
the previous resolution and arguments put forward by the applicant in terms of processing. This will
allow this part of the appeal to be omitted from consideration by the Inspector, and for only the
evidence submitted in relation to deliveries being considered at the Inquiry.

What Is A Certificate Of Lawfulness And What Matters Can Be Taken Into Account

As has been previously set out for the benefit of the panel, a certificate of lawfulness is a certificate,
granted under section 191 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (“TCPA”), that establishes that a use,
operational development or breach of condition is lawful.




                                                    7
 A breach of condition is lawful where the breach of condition has become immune from enforcement
action. A breach of condition will become immune from enforcement where
(i) the breach does not constitute a breach of an enforcement notice then in force (Members should
     note that no enforcement notice has been issued in the present case), and
(ii) the breach of condition has been continuous for 10 years, and
(iii) the breach of condition continues to the date of the application.

When dealing with a certificate of lawful use or development members cannot take into account the
planning merits of a case. A decision on such a matter must be taken as a matter of law, on the basis of
information available at the time of decision.

When reaching their decision, Members should have regard to paragraph 8.15 of Circular 10/97 (“the
Circular”).

In summary, that paragraph states that the burden of proof is on the Applicant to show, on the balance
of probabilities, that the breach of planning control is immune from enforcement. Therefore, the
Applicant must show, on the balance of probabilities, that the breach of condition has been continuous
for 10 years, and that the breach continues at the date of the application.

Circular 10/97 goes on to say that 'If the Local Planning Authority have no evidence of their own, or
from others, to contradict or otherwise make the appellant's version of events less than probable, there
is no good reason to refuse the application, provided (emphasis added) the applicant's evidence alone is
sufficiently precise and unambiguous (emphasis added) to justify the grant of a certificate "on the
balance of probability".'

The Circular also confirms that neither the identity of the Applicant (except to the extent that he or she
may or may not be able personally to confirm the accuracy of any claim being made about the history
of a parcel of land), nor the planning merits of the activity being carried on, are relevant to the
consideration of the purely legal issues which are involved in determining an application.

Thus, from the above is clear in that there are 2 no. matters to consider:-

1.     Is the evidence submitted by the applicants sufficiently precise and unambiguous to
       demonstrate on the balance of probability that the breach has occurred continuously for at least
       a 10-year period and continues to the date of the application?
2.     Is there evidence available to the Council that contradicts the Applicant‟s version of events or
       otherwise make the appellant‟s version of events less than probable such that the Applicant has
       not demonstrated, on the balance of probability, that the breaches of condition are lawful?

The applicant claims, in line with the previous certificate application that the site has operated between
the hours of 6am to 7pm Monday to Friday and 6am to 6pm on Saturdays and 9am to 6pm on Sundays
and Bank Holidays including Christmas, Boxing and New Years Day.

Condition 6 of application 96/35092/FUL states that 'The processing of milk shall only take place
between the hours of 7am to 7pm on Mondays to Fridays and between 9am to 6pm on Saturdays,
Sundays and Bank Holidays'




                                                     8
The applicant is seeking to demonstrate that they have operated in breach of the above conditions such
that a Certificate is granted for processing to allow the following additional hours:

(i)     6am – 7am Mondays to Fridays
(ii)    6am – 9am Saturdays and Bank Holidays (excluding Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New
        Years Day)
(iii)   6pm – 7pm Saturdays and Bank Holidays (excluding Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New
        Years Day)

(for the avoidance of doubt the applicant is seeking to demonstrate that they have operated in terms of
processing 1 hour before the times in the condition Monday to Friday, and 3 hours before and 1 hour
after the times in the condition on Saturdays and Bank Holidays excluding Christmas Day, Boxing
Day and New Years Day).

Site History

In 1996, planning permission was granted for the erection of two buildings to house milk filling,
processing & distribution together with new vehicular access & associated car parking and traffic
calming measures (96/35092/FUL) This application was approved with conditions.

This application sought to rationalise the northern parcel of land to create a total of 57 car parking
spaces, 35 of which would for milk floats and the remainder of which were for staff parking. The main
office, workshop and large refrigeration unit were to be retained and continue to be utilised. One
storage building was demolished. The existing access was improved and gated under this application.

The majority of the works under this application took place on the southern parcel of land belonging to
the dairy. These works included the erection of a milk filling, processing and distribution plant where
raw milk would arrive in tankers, be processed and then be distributed as bottled milk. The building is
L-shaped and sited against the entire eastern, southern and part western boundaries of the site. The part
of the building on the southern boundary houses a production compressor, boiler plant, two raw milk
silos, water silo, tanker reception area, milk processing area and bottling hall. Offices and a finished
milk gallery also formed part of this application. The easterly edge of the site houses a large fridge
with associated compressor room and a produce store.

Following this grant of planning permission a further application was received in 2000
(00/40581/FUL) for the erection of a single storey extension to the existing offices on the southern
parcel of land. This application was approved and implemented.

Later in 2000 another application was received for the siting of two linked portable office buildings
(00/41314/FUL). This was permitted with no restriction on operations/deliveries.

In 2008 an application was received by the City Council, for the erection of two light industrial units
and a tunnel under Weymouth Road, linking the two parts of the site. The application was
subsequently amended omitting the tunnel and one of the units. The proposal involved the demolition
of the industrial unit to the western part of the northern parcel of land and the erection of a
refrigeration unit to store milk once it has been processed. The building was designed to allow tankers
to reverse up to and be loaded directly from five large loading bays.




                                                   9
This application was approved with a condition relating to operations on site, which stated:

Except for access, the operation of the site, including loading and unloading shall only take place
between the hours of 7am to 7pm Monday to Friday and 9am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank
Holidays.

Members may recall that the reason for attaching this condition was due to neighbours experiencing
disturbance from lorries and their refrigeration units whilst waiting on Weymouth Road for the site to
open. This condition was designed to allow entry to the site to remove lorries from the highway but to
still restrict processing and loading/unloading. It was considered that this would reduce the impact
upon residents in terms of noise disturbance.

This application was approved by members on the 22nd January 2009, but has to date, never been
implemented.

09/57654/CLUD - Application for a lawful development certificate in relation to condition 4
(operating hours) and condition 6 (milk processing) of planning application 96/35092/FUL Split
decision, members minded to authorise certificate in relation to processing but not for deliveries.

There are a number of other applications, which relate to this site, namely:
E13261 – Erection of building to house electricity terminal (Approved December 1981)
E18274 – Erection of building for use as a milk store (Approved March 1985)

ENFORCEMENT HISTORY

Complaint:     Possible breach of condition in relation to hours of operation.
Reference:     03/00147/BRCOND
Date:          May 2003
Outcome:       No action was taken although it was unclear whether a breach of planning control had
occurred

Complaint:     Possible breach of condition in relation to hours of operation and/or cars parking on
highway
Reference:     03/00324/BRCOND
Date:          September 2003
Outcome:       No action was taken although it was unclear whether a breach of planning control had
occurred

Complaint: Conveyor belt overhanging the highway, outside of boundary.
Reference:   03/00361/DEVWPP
Date:        September 2003
Outcome:     Site visit confirmed the conveyor belt was within the curtilage and not overhanging the
highway. No action taken.

Appraisal

In support of the application, as with the previous application, the applicant has provided evidence in
the form of three sworn declarations from existing employees who have worked at the company for




                                                  10
over ten years. That evidence is from a Mr A Coxon, the Production Manager (Statement A), and Mr R
Purvis the Joint Managing Director (Statement B) and Mr D J Salter the Transport Manager (Statement
C).

Notwithstanding the lack of contrary evidence from third parties which is one element that the Local
Planning Authority must consider members must still be satisfied that the evidence which is available
i.e. the three sworn statements from staff of Creamline Dairies is sufficiently precise and unambiguous
to demonstrate on the balance of probability that the breach has occurred continuously for at least a 10
year period and continues to the date of the application. In this regard the report will hereby set out the
submitted evidence with respect to condition 4, and identifies areas of concern with respect to whether
such evidence is sufficiently precise and unambiguous. It must be noted that the evidence and
recommendations set out below are identical to those considered by Panel on the 15.10.2009

Processing

The evidence submitted in terms of processing is set out below, taking each declaration in turn, it is
important to note that processing may involve several different elements, such as for example
pasteurisation and bottling process. The original condition 4 of the 1996 permission fails to identify the
full process to which the condition refers, but in any event a reasonable judgement can be taken. For
the avoidance of doubt comments in the brackets are statements which form part of the professional
officers assessment of the submitted evidence.

Statement A: (Coxon) Original and revised statement

      Since October 1998 processing has begun no later than 6am Monday to Saturdays with no
       change on account of Bank Holidays except Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Years Day
       (It is noted that no reference is made to Sundays).
      No processing has taken place on Christmas, Boxing and New Years Day
      The latest that processing would start was 6am
      It is noted that no reference is made to processing taking place between 6pm – 7pm on
       Saturdays or bank holidays.

Statement B: (Purvis)

      States staff were picking and loading from 5am onwards (It is noted that there is ambiguity as
       to whether picking and loading is part of the processing referred to in the condition)
      Drawing on the evidence of Messrs Coxon and Salter, it is stated that the processing of milk
       has been commencing no later than 6am Monday to Saturday each week since October 1998 (It
       is noted that no reference is made to Sundays, or processing taking place between 6pm – 7pm
       on Saturdays or bank holidays)

Statement C (Salter)

      From October 1998 until 2003 vehicles were regularly going out fully loaded for bulk dispatch
       of bottled milk to customers from 6am every day Monday to Saturday with no exception on
       Bank Holidays except for Christmas and New Years Day when there were no deliveries. (It is




                                                    11
       noted that whilst bottling is referred to it is not known when it was bottled, not necessarily that
       morning, and therefore nor precise and unambiguous).


On the basis of the three statements it remains the view that the processing of milk has occurred from
6.00am Mondays to Saturdays and Bank Holidays (except for Christmas Day, Boxing Day, and New
Years Day) continuously from 1998. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary for what is
essentially an „internal‟ operation within the buildings on site, and in being mindful that significant
weight must be attached to a statutory declaration, it is considered that on the balance of probabilities
with the evidence available, that processing has been undertaken in breach of the condition for a
continuous ten-year period, and that there should be no objection to the certificate in this regard.
However, the available evidence is not clear and unambiguous with respect to evening operations i.e.
after 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays. Moreover no reference is made to Sunday
working, such that it is in breach of the original condition.

Conclusions/Summary

Having regard to the above and the previous resolution of the Panel, it is recommended in full
accordance with the previous resolution that the certificate be granted to allow the processing of milk
shall hereby only take place on the site edged red on the attached plan between the hours of 6.00 a.m.
to 7.00 p.m. Monday to Friday, including Bank Holidays but except Christmas Day, Boxing Day and
New Year‟s Day, and 6.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. on Saturdays and 9.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. on Sundays.‟

Recommendation

Authorise

1.   The processing of milk shall only take place on the site edged red on the attached plan between
     the hours of 6.am to 7.00pm Monday to Friday (including Bank Holidays but excluding
     Christmas, Boxing and New Years Day) and 6 am to 6pm on Saturdays and 9am to 6pm on
     Sundays.




                                                   12
APPLICATION No:           09/58239/FUL
APPLICANT:                Mr Robert Purvis
LOCATION:                 Creamline Dairies, Weymouth Road, Eccles, M30 8WL,
PROPOSAL:                 Variation of Condition 6 to allow deliveries between the hours of 7am
                          and 7pm on any day (planning permission 96/35092/FUL)
WARD:                     Winton

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The site to which the application relates stands at the end of Weymouth Road in Eccles and is occupied
by Creamline Dairies. The application site is formed from two separate parcels of land, which are to
the north and south of Weymouth Road. To the end of the road, there are a number of light industrial
units, however along the majority of the length of Weymouth Road at from its access with Gee Lane
are semi detached dwellings.

The site currently accommodates the offices and ancillary refrigeration space associated with the
working of the dairy.

The site is bounded to the north by the M602 motorway.

Description of Proposal

The application before members is for the variation of condition 6 of planning application
96/35092/FUL which states: „deliveries of raw milk and bulk dispatch of bottled milk shall only occur
between the hours of 7.30am and 7pm on any day‟

The applicant requires the condition to be varied to allow deliveries of raw milk and bulk dispatch of
bottled milk between the hours of 7am and 7pm on any day, thus enabling them to take deliveries 30
minutes earlier than the existing planning permission allows.

Site History

In 1996, planning permission was granted for the erection of two buildings to house milk filling,
processing & distribution together with new vehicular access & associated car parking and traffic
calming measures (96/35092/FUL) This application was approved with conditions.

This application sought to rationalise the northern parcel of land to create a total of 57 car parking
spaces, 35 of which would for milk floats and the remainder of which were for staff parking. The main
office, workshop and large refrigeration unit were to be retained and continue to be utilised. One
storage building was demolished. The existing access was improved and gated under this application.

The majority of the works under this application took place on the southern parcel of land belonging to
the dairy. These works included the erection of a milk filling, processing and distribution plant where




                                                  13
raw milk would arrive in tankers, be processed and then be distributed as bottled milk. The building is
L-shaped and sited against the entire eastern, southern and part western boundaries of the site. The part
of the building on the southern boundary houses a production compressor, boiler plant, two raw milk
silos, water silo, tanker reception area, milk processing area and bottling hall. Offices and a finished
milk gallery also formed part of this application. The easterly edge of the site houses a large fridge
with associated compressor room and a produce store.

Following this grant of planning permission a further application was received in 2000
(00/40581/FUL) for the erection of a single storey extension to the existing offices on the southern
parcel of land. This application was approved and implemented.

Later in 2000 another application was received for the siting of two linked portable office buildings
(00/41314/FUL). This was permitted with no restriction on operations/deliveries.

In 2008 an application was received by the City Council, for the erection of two light industrial units
and a tunnel under Weymouth Road, linking the two parts of the site. The application was
subsequently amended omitting the tunnel and one of the units. The proposal involved the demolition
of the industrial unit to the western part of the northern parcel of land and the erection of a
refrigeration unit to store milk once it has been processed. The building was designed to allow tankers
to reverse up to and be loaded directly from five large loading bays.

This application was approved with a condition relating to operations on site which stated:

Except for access, the operation of the site, including loading and unloading shall only take place
between the hours of 7am to 7pm Monday to Friday and 9am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank
Holidays.

Members may recall that the reason for attaching this condition was due to neighbours experiencing
disturbance from lorries and their refrigeration units whilst waiting on Weymouth Road for the site to
open. This condition was designed to allow entry to the site to remove lorries from the highway but to
still restrict processing and loading/unloading. It was considered that this would reduce the impact
upon residents in terms of noise disturbance.

This application was approved by members on the 22nd January 2009, but has to date, never been
implemented.

There are a number of other applications, which relate to this site, namely:
E13261 – Erection of building to house electricity terminal (Approved December 1981)
E18274 – Erection of building for use as a milk store (Approved March 1985)

Publicity

Site Notice: Not Applicable

Press Advert: Not Applicable




                                                   14
Neighbour Notification

Neighbours were notified on the 6th November 2009.
The following neighbours were notified:
2,30,46,48,50,52,55,57,59, 61 Weymouth Road
Antonelli Brothers Limited, 54 Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8FB,
T S Hattersley And Son Limited, 63 Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8TH,
Bridgewater Metals, Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8BT,
APR Windows, Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8BT,
BKW, Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8SH,
Ace Scaffolding, Bridgewater Park, Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8NW,
Unit 1-3 Bridgewater Park, Weymouth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8NN,
9-15 Lulworth Road, Eccles, MANCHESTER, M30 8WP,
34 _ 24 Lulworth Road

Representations

No letters of representation have been received to date

Consultations

The Chief Executive - Economic Development - No comments to date.

Highways - No objections.

Planning Policy Framework
Development Plan Policy
UDP              DES1 - Respecting Context
UDP              A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
UDP              DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
UDP              A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network

Appraisal

Members will recall an application for the erection of one light industrial unit on the northern parcel of
land at Creamline Dairies (Ref: 08/55964/FUL) was approved on the 22nd January 2009. This
permission has not been implemented but remains extant.

This application was approved subject to conditions, one of which was as follows:

„Except for access, the operation of the site, including loading and unloading shall only take place
between the hours of 7am to 7pm Mondays to Fridays and between 9am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays
and Bank Holidays‟.

Members will recall that the main issue associated with this site is the disturbance caused to nearby
local residents from vehicles traveling along Weymouth Road and waiting outside the site until such a
time as it opens and from engines and refrigeration units labouring outside their houses in the early
hours of the morning.




                                                   15
The applicant now requires a variation of the condition to allow deliveries to and from the site on any
day from 7am to 7pm. As the condition from permission 08/55964/FUL allows deliveries on weekdays
between the hours of 7am to 7pm it is considered that permitting this through this variation of
condition would have no additional impact than that which could occur should the 2008 permission be
implemented.

The variation of condition however, would permit deliveries to and from the site one hour later on
Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays than the 2008 permission but only 30 minutes earlier and no
later than they can at present under the 1996 permission, under which the site operates at present.
Members will recall that at a recent meeting of the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel, they
were minded to authorise a certificate for processing operations on the site between the hours of 6am
to 7pm on most days.

It is considered that permitting deliveries to enter the site earlier in the morning would not have any
significant impact upon the amenities of neighbours, because at present lorries are still arriving at the
site, but due to the restrictions imposed by condition 4 of application 96/35092/FUL which states:

„Deliveries of raw milk and bulk dispatch of bottled milk shall only occur between the hours of 7.30am
and 7pm on any day‟.

Under this condition they are unable to enter the site and as such remain on the highway causing
disturbance to neighbours as a result of labouring engines/refrigeration units. This issue was addressed
through the careful wording of condition 10 of planning permission 08/55964/FUL, which states:

'Except for access, the operation of the site, including loading and unloading shall only take place
between the hours of 7am to 7pm Monday to Friday and between 9am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays
and Bank Holidays'

This condition was intended to remove the issue of vehicles waiting on Weymouth Road and causing
disturbance to local residents, and although the permission has not been implemented to date, should
the development be commenced, then vehicles could lawfully enter the site from 7am onwards in any
case, providing a fall back position.

For these reasons it is considered that by allowing delivery vehicles to enter the site earlier than is
possible at present, the impact upon residents in relation to the amount of noise and disturbance
experienced would in fact be reduced.

Conclusions/Summary

It is in being mindful that the City Council has previously accepted deliveries from 7am and vehicles
entering the site (albeit this permission is extant but not implemented), it is recommended that a
variation of condition 6 of application 96/35092/FUL is permitted to allow deliveries of raw milk and
bulk dispatch of bottled milk between the hours of 7am to 7pm on any day.

Therefore the recommendation to members is that a variation of condition 6 of application
96/35092/FUL is permitted to allow deliveries of raw milk and bulk dispatch of bottled milk between
the hours of 7am to 7pm on any day.




                                                   16
Recommendation

Approve


1.   Deliveries of raw milk and bulk dispatch bottled milk shall not take place except from between
     the hours of 7am to 7pm on any day.

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

2.   The processing of milk shall only take place between the hours of 7am to 7pm on Mondays to
     Friday and between 9am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays.

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

3.   The rating level of noise emitted from the application site shall not exceed 45dBL Aeq (5
     minutes) between the hours stated in condition 2 and 40dBL Aeq (5 minutes) at any other time as
     measured at the nearest residential property.

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

4.   The parking spaces shown on the approved plan(s) shall always remain available at all times in
     connection with the use of the premises to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

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


Notes to Applicant


1.    This permission shall relate to the amended plan received on the 14th June 1996 which shows
      enclosure of spare bottle store
2.    The applicant is made aware that condition 2 of this permission has been superceded by
      09/58238/CLUD




                                                17
APPLICATION No:          09/58128/FUL
APPLICANT:               Turris Ltd
LOCATION:                The Lime Kilns, Stablefold, Worsley, M28 2EA, ,
PROPOSAL:                Variation of condition 3 (Landscaping) and 13 (Viewing Platform) of
                         planning permission 00/41647/FUL
WARD:                    Worsley

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application site relates to an area of land partly within and partly adjacent to the Worsley Village
Conservation Area. The site is bounded to the north by the Bridgewater Canal and towpath, to the
south and east by the Barton Arms public house and residential properties on Stablefold, to the west by
Worsley Brook and the Granary Office buildings.

The development site has already been built out in line with the plans approved under planning
permission 00/41647/FUL

Site History

In May 2002 the site was granted planning permission subject to conditions for the erection of 14 flats
in two four storey blocks, together with the formation of a new vehicular access, laying out of the car
parking and associated open space.

The site has recently been the subject of planning enforcement action, which has resulted in the
submission of this application.

A summary of the relevant enforcement action is detailed below:

Section 215 Notice

A complaint was received regarding the untidy state of the Lime Kilns area which appeared to have
been being used use for the storage of site waste and an area of land which was intended to be used as
car parking but was being used for the storage of two shipping containers. A formal s215 notice was
served on the landowners of the site that required the shipping containers to be removed and the area
of the Lime Kilns to be cleared and maintained in a tidy state. This notice was not complied with by
the landowners and as a result the Council sought a formal prosecution on this matter. Following an
initial hearing in court a provisional date for trial was agreed for 1st December 2009.

In the interim period before this date Council Officers met with the landowners to discuss the specific
works required to be undertaken to comply with this notice. Since this meeting the Lime Kilns have
been cleared to a satisfactory standard and the shipping containers have also been removed. It is for
this reason that the Council has now ceased prosecution for the non-compliance of the s215 notice.
The landowners are aware of their requirement to maintain these areas of land in a tidy state and if for




                                                  18
any reason the site were to become untidy again then the Council is able to continue with enforcement
action.

Breach of Condition Notice

The breach of condition notice was the result of an investigation into the site rather than as a direct
result of a neighbour complaint. The notice related to the non-compliance of 3 pre-commencement
conditions relating to landscaping, car parking and the installation of a viewing platform at the site.
Again, this notice was not complied with by the landowners and as a result the Council sought a
formal prosecution on this matter. Following an initial hearing in court a provisional date for trial was
agreed for 1st December 2009.

Background

This application has been submitted in order to try and identify the remaining issues in complying with
the planning conditions on the original consent. The wording of the original conditions and the need
for additional archaeological work to be undertaken prior to complying with the conditions in respect
of landscaping and the viewing platform is not reflected in the original wording. It is considered by the
applicant that the splitting up of the landscaping consent to allow for the implementation of a
landscaping scheme around the wider site whilst an archaeological survey is undertaken on the Lime
Kilns will ensure the most expedient resolution of the breach of the landscaping condition. In addition
the applicants consider that condition 13 of the original consent, which required details of a viewing
platform and information boards to be provided prior to the commencement of development needs to
be revisited.

Description of Proposal

This application seeks to vary conditions 3 and 13 of planning consent 00/41647/FUL, which are as
follows:

Condition 3 (original)

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

Condition 3 (proposed by applicant)

The site, excluding the Lime Kilns, shown highlighted yellow on drawing no. 2072.01 rev K(i) shall be
treated in accordance with a landscape scheme submitted to and approved by the Director of
Development Services. The landscape scheme to be submitted to the Director for approval within one
calendar month of the planning permission hereby granted. The scheme to include full details of trees
and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary and surface treatment and shall be carried out within
6 months of the directors approval of the scheme. Thereafter, the landscaping shall be maintained to




                                                   19
the satisfaction of the local planning authority. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting
shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services.

The applicants have also submitted a proposed landscaping scheme for the wider site in
accompaniment to this application.

Additional Landscaping Condition (proposed by applicant)

A landscaping scheme for the area of the Lime Kilns shown highlighted yellow on drawing no.
2072.01 rev Ki shall be submitted to the Director of Development Services within one calendar month
of the Director's approval of the archaeological survey submitted as required by condition no. 13. The
scheme to include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary and surface
treatment and shall be carried out within 6 months of the Director's approval of the scheme. Thereafter,
the landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. Any trees or
shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Director of
Development Services.

Condition 13 (original)

A public viewing platform for the lime kiln which shall be accessible and available for public use at all
times, shall be provided within the site together with an information board. Full details of the platform,
its siting and access to it, and full details of the information board shall be submitted to and approved
in writing by the Director of Development Services prior to the commencement of development. The
platform shall be implemented and available for use before the occupation of the first dwelling hereby
approved.

Condition 13 (proposed by applicant)

Information boards shall be provided adjacent to Barton Road and Bridgwater Canal Tow Path,
following removal of the soil form the Lime Kilns and after and archaeological survey has been
submitted to the Director of Development Services for approval. The soil removal and archaeological
survey to have been carried out and submitted to the Director within 12 months of the planning
permission hereby granted. The design for the information board to be submitted for approval by the
Director within six months of the approval of the archaeological survey. The information boards to be
erected within six months of the Director‟s approval of their design. Thereafter the boards to be
maintained to the satisfaction of the local planning authority and if damaged or destroyed shall be
replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services.

Publicity

Site Notice: Article 8 site notice

Site Notice: Con. Area site notice     Date Displayed: 9 November 2009

Press Advert: Salford Advertiser Date Published: 12 November 2009
Reason: Article 8 Standard Press Notice




                                                   20
Neighbour Notification

1 - 11 The Granery, 50 Barton Road
1-15 The Lime Kilns
43-53, 59-69 (odds) Barton Road
2-6 (evens) Stablefold
Worsley Methodist Church
5,6, 8, 11 Parkstone Lane
21,54 Farm Lane
6 Heathfield
1,14, 28 Ryecroft
The Dock House
4, 5 Lowerbrook Lane
35 The Crescent
16 Edenfield
3 The Moorings
15 Lime Grove
18 Greenarce
35 Drywood Avenue
5 Edenfield
19 Shearbrook Lane

Representations

The earliest decision date for this application is not until 30th November. As a result of the on going
enforcement action on the site against the breach of conditions for landscaping and the viewing
platform there is a provisional trial date for the non compliance of the breach of condition notice
scheduled for the 1st of December. Currently proceedings for this trial have been adjourned until the
24th November where all parties will meet to discuss the case. The reason this application is before the
Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel in advance of the expiration of the consultation period
on this site is to ensure the Council has a resolution on this application in time for the case meeting on
24th November. Whilst the date for the press notice and site notice are yet to expire on the site all
nearby residents were consulted on 13th October with a deadline response date of 3rd November, just
one letter has been received in response to this consultation with comments as follows:

      the site is an important historic site which should have visitor access.

Consultations

English Heritage - No comments received to date.

Design For Security - No comments received to date.

Main Drainage - No comments received to date.

Highways - No comments received to date.

Urban Vision Environment - No comments to make.




                                                   21
Worsley Civic Trust and Amenity Society - No comments received to date.

Worsley Village Community Association - No comments received to date.

Manchester Ship Canal Company - No comments received to date.

Environment Agency - No objections.

Planning Policy Framework
Development Plan Policy
UDP              DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
UDP              CH3 - Works Within Conservation Areas
UDP              CH5 - Archaeology and Ancient Monuments

Appraisal

It is considered that the main issue for consideration with this application is the implication that the
variation of these conditions would have on the residential amenity of the area, the impact on the
historic setting of the site and the historic importance of the Lime Kilns and timescales in which the
conditions would be complied with.

Policy DES9 states that development will be required to incorporate appropriate hard and soft
landscaping provision where appropriate.

Policy CH3 states that development in conservation areas will only be permitted where it would
preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation area.

Policy CH5 states that where planning permission is granted for development that will effect known or
suspected remains of local archaeological value, planning conditions will be imposed to secure the
recording and evaluation of the remains, if appropriate, their excavation and preservation and/ or its
setting.

Landscaping (Condition 3)

This application seeks to split the existing condition 3 for the landscaping of the site into two parts.
The splitting of this condition would enable the wider site to be fully landscaped in advance of the
works to the Lime Kilns being undertaken. As part of this application a landscaping scheme which will
include the formal planting of beds around the wider site and the treatment of communal areas within
site has been submitted and is considered to be acceptable in principle. It is therefore proposed to vary
condition 3 as follows:

The site, excluding the Lime Kilns, shown highlighted yellow on drawing no. 2072.01 Rev K(i) shall be
treated in accordance with the approved landscaping scheme in full as detailed on drawing submitted
on the 12th October 2009 at the next available planting season following the date of this decision. Any
trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced with the same species within
twelve months.




                                                   22
This application seeks to address the delay in the landscaping of the site to date. The Lime Kilns area
is of significant archaeological and local interest and has the potential to become a designated ancient
monument. However in order to establish the exact level of archaeological interest the site may hold an
archaeological survey has to be undertaken. The result of this survey will determine how the Lime
Kilns are to be treated, could involve excavating the Kilns, landscaping the area or recreating the
original Lime Kilns on the site. Since the site has the potential to become a designated ancient
monument the outcome of this survey is critical in determining the future of the Lime Kilns.

The archaeological survey has not been undertaken to date and as such it is not possible to agree the
future works required to the Lime Kilns. The applicant has suggested the addition of a condition to
require an archaeological survey to be submitted within 12 months and a scheme detailing the
landscaping of the Lime Kilns to be submitted within 1 month of the approval of the archaeological
survey with the landscaping scheme to be carried out in full within 12 months. Having considered the
proposed variation it is proposed to change the timescales identified within the condition to ensure the
expediency of compliance with the condition. It is therefore proposed that the wording of the condition
requiring works to the Lime Kilns to be as follows:

Within 6 months of the date of this permission an archaeological survey shall be submitted to and be
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The survey shall include detailed measures for
the restoration and landscaping of the Lime Kilns area identified in yellow on drawing no. 2072.01
Rev K(i) and a full timescale for implementation. The approved measures shall be implemented in full
within the approved timescale and maintained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the
Local Planning Authority.

It is considered that the varying of the condition as above would ensure that the archaeological
importance of the Lime Kilns is fully explored and the site is remediated fully with an appropriate
landscaping scheme, as was the intention of the original condition.

Information Boards (Condition 13)

The original consent required the provision of a public viewing platform at the site. This application
seeks to vary this condition to require information boards to be provided in two locations, Barton Road
and on the Bridgewater Canal Tow Path. There are some practical difficulties with implementing the
original condition 13; firstly the condition required the location of the platform and information boards
to be approved prior to the commencement of development on the site. However the positioning of
such a platform and the information can only be determined once the notes of the archaeological
survey are known.

The envisaged location of the viewing platform was intended to be from Barton Road in the same
location as a painting of the original Lime Kilns undertaken by Nattes. During a recent site meeting it
was clear that the narrow paths and steep embankments on the Barton Road side of the Kilns make it
difficult to provide a viewing platform within this area without detrimentally affecting the character
and appearance of the area and Lime Kilns. As such it is proposed to vary the requirement for a
viewing platform in favour of two information boards. It is therefore proposed to vary the wording of
condition 13 as follows:

The detailed design of Information boards to be provided adjacent to Barton Road and the
Bridgewater Canal Tow Path shall be submitted to and approved in writing within 6 months of




                                                   23
approval of the archaeological survey required by condition 2. The approved boards shall be erected
within 6 months of the approval of their design and shall be maintained thereafter. If the boards are
damaged or destroyed they shall be replaced in full within a timescale agreed and approved in writing
with the Local Planning Authority.

Value Added

This application has been submitted following discussions between planning enforcement officers and
the applicants to ensure the expedient resolution of the recent enforcement action.

Conclusions

It is considered that the current appearance of the site is now tidy due to the recent compliance with the
s215 notice. However, whilst the site itself is in an acceptable appearance the landscaping of the site
needs to be undertaken as expediently as possible. It is considered that the landscaping scheme
proposed to the wider site is acceptable in principle and as a result of this verification would be
implemented within the next planting season, considerably improving the character of the site on the
wider area. The condition requiring an archaeological survey to be submitted within 6 months would
ensure that the momentum, which has been achieved through recent discussions and enforcement,
notices is not lost and that the future of an important historic asset to the city is secured as soon as
possible. Finally it is considered acceptable that two information boards would be provided on Barton
Road and on the canal towpath, which would highlight the importance of the Lime Kilns to local
residents and visitors to the area.

Recommendation

Approve


1.    The site, excluding the Lime Kilns, shown highlighted yellow on drawing no. 2072.01 Rev K(i)
      shall be treated in accordance with the approved landscaping scheme in full as detailed on
      drawing submitted on the 12th October 2009 at the next available planting season following the
      date of this decision. Any trees or shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced
      with the same species within twelve months.

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

2.    Within 6 months of the date of this permission an archaeological survey shall be submitted to
      and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The survey shall include detailed
      measures for the restoration and landscaping of the Lime Kilns area identified in yellow on
      drawing no. 2072.01 Rev K(i) and a full timescale for implementation. The approved measures
      shall be implemented in full within the approved timescale and maintained thereafter unless
      otherwise agreed 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.




                                                   24
3.   This permission shall relate to the following amended plans received on 2 April 2002:

     drawing number 2072 01 Rev K - Site Layout
     drawing number 2072 17 Rev A - Blocks 3,4, and 5 North and South Elevations
     drawing number 2072 18 Rev A - Block 3 East and Block 5 West Elevations
     drawing number 2072 07 Rev E - Floor plans for Blocks 3, 4 and 5

     and the following plan received on 28 February 2002:

     drawing number 2072 02 Rev G - Blocks 1,2 Plans and Elevations

     For the avoidance of doubt

4.   The site investigation across the site shall address the nature, degree and distribution of
     contamination and underground gases on site and its implications on the risk to human health
     and controlled water receptors as defined under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 Part IIA.
     The investigation shall also address the health and safety of the site workers, nearby persons,
     building structures and services, landscaping schemes, final users of the site and the
     environmental pollution in ground water.

     The sampling and analytical strategy shall be approved by the LPA prior to the start of the
     survey and recommendations and remedial works contained within the improved report shall be
     implemented by the developer prior to occupation of the site.

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

5.   No trees which are the subject of a Tree Preservation Order (other than those clearly shown to be
     so affected on the submitted plan) and including those trees on the top of the lime kiln identified
     as T1232, T1233, T1234 and T1235 on the tree proposals plan, drawing number 2072 19, shall
     be topped, lopped or cut down unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning
     Authority.

     Reason: To protect trees which are the subject of a Tree Preservation Order in accordance with
     policy EN 10 of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

6.   The mound area of the lime kiln as shown on drawing number 2072 01 Rev K and received on 2
     April 2002, shall be maintained and retained as amenity space for residents at all time, unless
     otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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

7.   The 14 car parking spaces and 4 visitor spaces as shown on drawing number 2072 01 Rev K,
     received on 2 April 2002, shall be retained and maintained at all times.

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




                                                  25
8.   The four car parking spaces G34, G35, G36 and G37 as shown on drawing number 2072 01 Rev
     K and received on 2 April 2002 shall be made available for use by the occupiers of the Granary
     offices and be retained at all times.

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

9.   The detailed design of Information boards to be provided adjacent to Barton Road and the
     Bridgewater Canal Tow Path shall be submitted to and approved in writing within 6 months of
     approval of the archaeological survey required by condition 2. The approved boards shall be
     erected within 6 months of the approval of their design and shall be maintained thereafter. If the
     boards are damaged or destroyed they shall be replaced in full within a timescale agreed and
     approved in writing with 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.




                                                 26
APPLICATION No:           09/58120/HH
APPLICANT:                Hartwell Investments
LOCATION:                 6 And 8 Leicester Avenue, Salford, M7 4HA,
PROPOSAL:                 Demolition of existing single storey side and rear elements at number six
                          and erection of a part single/part two storey/part 3 storey side/rear
                          extension to number 6 and single storey rear extensions to numbers 6
                          and 8
WARD:                     Kersal

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to a pair of semi-detached dwellings on Leicester Avenue, Salford 7, a
predominantly residential area. Number 6 Leicester Avenue has an existing single storey rear
extension, single storey side porch and detached garage to the side/rear of the property along the
common boundary with 4 Leicester Avenue. This would be demolished in order to accommodate the
proposed development. The adjoining property, 8 Leicester Avenue has an existing single storey
side/rear extension and a two-storey rear extension, which are to be retained. The adjacent properties
to the south west, 2 and 4 Leicester Avenue, have part single/part two storey extensions to the rear.
The application properties have large rear gardens, beyond which is a car park on George Street North.
There are also a number of mature trees in the rear garden of the site, but these would not be affected
by the proposed development and a tree survey is not required. Boundary treatment along the common
boundary with 4 Leicester Avenue consists of a 1m high wire mesh fencing. Along the common
boundary to the north west with 10 Leicester Avenue is a dwarf wall and fencing approximately 2m in
height.

Description of Proposal

Permission is sought for the demolition of the existing single storey side and rear elements at number 6
and erection of a part single/part two storey/part 3 storey side/rear extension to number 6 and single
storey rear extensions to numbers 6 and 8.

Details of the existing elements at number 6 which are to be demolished are as follows:

Demolition of existing single storey side element

This element is set back approximately 3.8m from the main front elevation of the existing dwelling. It
is 0.6m in width and 2.3m in depth and approximately 2.8m in height at its highest point with a sloping
roof. Internally it accommodates a porch.

Demolition of existing single storey rear element

This element is set in approximately 0.1m from the side gable of the dwelling. It projects
approximately 4.4m beyond the main rear elevation, is approximately 3.1m in width and 3.4m in
height with a pitched roof. Internally it accommodates a conservatory.




                                                    27
It is also proposed to demolish the existing detached garage but this does not require planning
permission and as such will not be considered as part of this application.

Details of the proposed extensions are as follows:

Part single/part two-storey/part 3-storey side/rear extension to number 6 Leicester Avenue

This element would be flush with the main front elevation of the existing dwelling. It would project
approximately 1.9m beyond the side gable before extending back approximately 7.7m. It would then
project a further 0.3m to the side and a further 3.3m back before finally stepping a further 0.6m to the
side and 6.3m back. It would wrap around the main rear elevation of number 6 and would have a
maximum width of approximately 6.5m.

The first 5.8m would be two storey and would be the same height as the existing dwelling
(approximately 7.4m) with a hipped roof. The next 9.7m would be three storey and would be
approximately 8.6m in height at its highest point and would incorporate a hipped roof. The last 1.8m
would be single storey and would be approximately 3.5m in height at its highest point with a sloping
roof.

Internally this element would accommodate a study, WC, cloakroom, extended kitchen, utility room
and breakfast room at ground floor level and two extended bedrooms, an en suite, a utility room and a
bathroom at first floor level and two bedrooms and a WC at second floor level.

Single storey rear extensions to numbers 6 and 8 Leicester Avenue

The proposed single storey rear extensions would be set in approximately 3.7m from the two-storey
gable elevation of number 8. They would project approximately 5.3m beyond the main rear elevations
of both properties and would be approximately 7.7m in width becoming flush with the side of the
proposed three-storey side/rear element at number 6. The single storey rear extensions would each
accommodate a succah and would be approximately 3.5m in height with a flat roof.

Site History

8 Leicester Avenue:
    96/35342/HH - Erection of single storey side extension to provide bedroom hall and shower
       room. Permitted 09/07/1996

      07/55301/HH - Erection of single storey extension to front and single storey rear extension.
       Withdrawn 17.10.2007

6 Leicester Avenue has no previous planning history.

Publicity

Site Notice: Not Applicable

Press Advert: Not Applicable




                                                     28
Neighbour Notification

The following neighbour addresses were notified:
- Flats 1-8, 16 Leicester Avenue
- Flats 1-8, 14 Leicester Avenue
- Apartments 1-5, 10 Leicester Avenue
- Hurstleigh Hotel, 10 Leicester Avenue
- Flats 1-12, Glover Court, Leicester Avenue
- 8 and 9 Eskrigge Close
- 6, 8, 123, 14 and 16 Leicester Avenue

Councillor Wilson has requested that the application be determined by the Planning and Transportation
Regulatory Panel as the applicants consider that the development is acceptable.

Representations

One letter of support has been received from the occupiers of 4 Leicester Avenue.

Planning Policy Framework
Development Plan Policy
UDP              DES1 - Respecting Context
UDP              DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
UDP              DES8 - Alterations and Extensions
UDP              A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network


Other Material Considerations
SPD             SPD1 - House Extensions


Appraisal

It is considered the main issues for consideration with this application are the impact of the proposed
extension on highway safety, the amenity of the surrounding and future residents, and the impact of the
proposed development on the character of the area. The main policies of relevance are DES1, DES7,
DES8 and A8 of the City of Salford adopted UDP and the House Extensions SPD.

Design

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

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




                                                   29
Policy HE8 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for a
two storey side extension that lies within 1m of the side boundary of the dwelling unless the first floor
element is set back a minimum of 2m from the front main wall of the property or the ground and first
floor elements are set back a minimum of 1m from the front main wall of the property.

The proposed side extension would be flush with the main front elevation of the existing dwelling and
would be set in 1m from the common boundary with 4 Leicester Avenue. It is, therefore, considered
that the proposal would not result in a potential to create a terracing effect in accordance with policy
HE8.

The proposed side/rear element of the proposed development would be visible from the street. The rear
elements would also be visible from the car park and George Street North to the rear of the site.
Leicester Avenue is a small straight road, which comprises 12 residential dwellings. To the front of the
site, on the opposite side of the road are residential bungalows and beyond this is Leicester Road.

Whilst the flat roof design of the proposed single storey rear extensions at both properties is not ideal,
these extensions are relatively small scale and would provide a succah to each of the properties.

The application properties are two storey residential dwellings. Whilst the frontage of the proposed
development would maintain the two-storey design the three-storey side/rear element would project
above the line of the existing dwelling and would appear as an incongruous feature, which would
detract from the character and appearance of 6 Leicester Avenue, the application site as a whole and
the wider residential area.

The three-storey element of the proposal is considered to be out of character with the existing property
and does not respect the general scale, character or design of the dwelling. It is significant in scale and
does not appear subordinate to the main dwelling.

It is considered, therefore, that the proposed development would not respect the general rhythm and
proportions of the main dwelling and as a result would significantly harm the character and appearance
of the existing dwelling and would result in an incongruous feature in the street scene which would not
respect the character and appearance of the area contrary to policies DES1 and DES8 of the UDP.

Amenity

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

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

Policy HE2 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for
extensions that introduce windows or open aspects close to and directly overlooking the gardens of




                                                    30
neighbouring dwellings. The term 'close to' refers to 5m, however this can be overcome with obscure
glazing, except to principle habitable room windows.

The front elevation of the proposed side/rear extension at number 6 would introduce a bedroom
window at first floor level. The distance maintained to the front boundary would be approximately
12m with the facing properties to the front being approximately 29m away. The rear elevation of the
proposed side/rear extension at number 6 would also introduce bedroom windows at ground, first and
second floor level. The distance maintained to the rear boundary would be between approximately
48m and 49m, beyond this is a car park. The proposed single storey rear extensions at both properties
would introduce no habitable room windows

The side elevation of the proposed side/rear extension at number 6 would introduce non habitable
room windows at ground, first and second floor level between 1m and 1.4m from the common
boundary with 4 Leicester Avenue. In order to protect the privacy of the occupiers of number 4, the
agent has agreed to obscure glaze these windows and a condition could be attached to ensure this. The
other side elevations of the proposed development would introduce no windows.

It is considered, therefore, that the proposed development would not result in an unacceptable loss of
privacy to the occupiers of surrounding properties in accordance with policies HE1 and HE2.

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

There are no windows in the side elevation of 4 Leicester Avenue. 10 Leicester Avenue is currently
vacant but it does have windows in its side elevation, which may serve habitable rooms. These
windows are set at an angle to the side gable of the proposed single storey rear extension at number 8
and would maintain a distance of approximately 11m, which is in accordance with policy HE4.

Policy HE5 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for
single storey rear extensions that project beyond a 45 degree line taken from either the mid point of a
principal ground floor window of a habitable room or a point 3m along the common boundary from
the rear elevation of adjoining or adjacent dwellings.

The proposed single storey rear extensions would project approximately 5.3m beyond the main rear
elevations of both dwellings. If these were built individually, it is considered that each of the proposed
extensions would have an unacceptable detrimental impact in terms of loss of light and would be
overbearing to the occupiers of the adjoining property. If built concurrently however, the extensions
would not impact on the amenity of the occupiers of the adjoining property and would be in
accordance with policy HE5. A condition could be attached to ensure the extensions were built
concurrently.

The single storey element of the proposed side/rear extension at number 6 would not project beyond a
45-degree line taken from a point 3m along the common boundary form the rear elevation of 4
Leicester Avenue.




                                                   31
The proposed single storey rear extensions would not project beyond the rear elevations of numbers 4
and 10 Leicester Avenue and would not be visible from within their rear elevations

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

The principles of this policy have been used to assess the impact of the proposed three-storey side/rear
element on the occupiers of the adjoining and adjacent properties.

The proposed three-storey side/rear element at number 6 would not project beyond the rear of the
proposed single storey rear extension at number 8. Number 8 Leicester Avenue has a first floor
bedroom window adjacent to the common boundary with number 6 Leicester Avenue. The three storey
element of the proposed development at number 6 would project approximately 5.3m beyond the main
rear elevation of 8 Leicester Avenue and would maintain a distance of between approximately 4m and
2.8m from the common boundary.

The adjacent property, 4 Leicester Avenue has an existing part single/part two-storey side/rear
extension. The three-storey element of the proposed extension would not project beyond the rear of the
single storey extension. Number 4 has a bedroom window at first floor level adjacent to the common
boundary with the application site. The proposed three-storey side/rear extension would project
approximately 2.5m beyond the two-storey rear extension at number 4 and would maintain a distance
of approximately 1.6m from its side elevation.

It is considered, therefore, that the proposed development would result in an unacceptable loss of light
and would be overbearing to the occupiers of numbers 4 and 8 Leicester Avenue contrary to the
principles of policy HE7 and DES7.

Highway Safety

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

Policy HE11 of the House Extensions SPD states planning permission will not normally be granted for
extensions that do not maintain a hard standing of 4.8m in length and 2.4m in width to accommodate at
least one car clear of the highway unless there would be no unacceptable impact on highway safety
and the free flow of traffic. Where possible the width should be 3.6m.

The proposed development would maintain a hard standing area to the front of each of the dwellings in
excess of 4.8m in length by 2.4m in width. It is considered, therefore, that the proposal would not
result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety, in accordance with Policies A8 and HE11.

Other Issues

Paragraph 14.1 of the House Extensions SPD states, "personal circumstances, such as a disability, or
the specific requirements of minority groups may make it difficult to provide the necessary facilities
within the standards set out within this document. The council may interpret these standards flexibly in




                                                  32
such circumstances, but proposals that significantly deviate from them are still unlikely to be
appropriate. Consideration of personal circumstances will be assessed on a case-by-case basis."

The applicant has submitted a design and access statement in support of their application and a letter,
which outlines personal circumstances.

The design and access statement states:
'The properties are both occupied by families of faith and both neighbours have agreed to construct a
Sukkah for their religious beliefs. The Sukkah is a room that is used for celebrating over a period of
seven days and nights, where all meals are taken, and the room is regarded as the home. The roof of
the Sukkah is made so as to be able to be opened to the sky.

In addition to the Sukkah, the owners of No. 6 Leicester Avenue have recognised the need to provide
more living accommodation for their growing family. There are presently eight children living at
home, and as the children grow up and leave home, it is a strong part of the Jewish faith and family life
for the children to return home with their own family and stay for a period of time. The need for
additional bedroom space is now of paramount importance.”

The supporting letter states:
'We are a large family of 10 members in the household ranging from a 1 year old to a 14 year old. The
children are split up into 3 small bedrooms, to an extent that one of the children actually sleeps on a
mattress spread out on the floor.

As the children grow up, the lack of privacy is clearly affecting their maturity.

Furthermore, my elderly mother of 75 who has sadly lost her husband recently is moving into our
home so that we could tend to her needs and to give her the re-assurance of a warm home and loving
care, thereby preventing her from being a burden on the state.

As a family of faith and religion, we have been residents in the Salford M7 area for over 15 years, and
enjoying the freedom and respect of the Salford community. We are restricted to the Broughton Park
area of Salford where we have all the facilities, whether to the religious education of the children or to
the local grocery stores that specifically caters for our community etc. To move to a larger
accommodation out of the Broughton Park area is not an option.

It is with these points in mind that the need for additional living and bedroom space is now of
paramount necessity and importance.'

The dwelling at number 6 currently has a lounge, kitchen, dining room and conservatory at ground
floor level and four bedrooms, a store, utility room and bathroom at first floor level. If approved and
implemented the proposed development would see the change of the existing dining room to a study
and the introduction of a utility room, cloakroom, WC, succah and breakfast room at ground floor
level. At first floor would accommodate two extended bedrooms (bedrooms 2 and 3 as indicated on the
submitted plans) and the relocation of bedroom 4, bathroom and utility room. Two new bedrooms
would also be introduced at second floor level.

It is considered that the proposed development would result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on
the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and surrounding area contrary to policies DES1




                                                    33
and DES8 of the UDP and would also result in an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of
the occupiers of surrounding properties contrary to policy DES7 of the UDP and the principles of
policy HE7 of the House Extensions SPD. It is considered that the needs of the applicants do not
outweigh the harm, which would be caused by the proposed development.

During a meeting on site with the applicants, their agent and Mr Koppenhein a number of properties
were brought to the case officer‟s attention which had similar extensions to that proposed under this
application.

Details of these are listed below:

95 Leicester Road - flush with front elevation and site boundary

07/54645/HH - Erection of a two storey side extension a single storey rear extension, front porch, flat
roof dormer at rear, pitched roof dormer to the front of the dwelling, and raising the ridge of the roof
by 0.33m. This application was recommended for refusal by the case officer for the following reasons:
     The proposed raising of the roof ridgeline would be contrary to Policies DES1 and DES8 of the
       Adopted UDP, and Policy HE10 of the House Extensions SPD, as it would detract from the
       appearance of existing buildings (in particular 95/97 Leicester Road) and the surrounding area,
       damaging visual amenity and the character of the area.
     The proposed windows at ground and first floor facing the gable elevation of 93 Leicester
       Road, and the proposed patio doors facing the gardens of 93 and 97 Leicester Road, would
       result in the loss of privacy for neighbouring residents, contrary to Policy DES7 of the UDP
       and Policy HE2 of the House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document.
     The proposed extension would create a terracing effect which would have an unacceptable
       detrimental impact on the street scene, contrary to UDP Polices DES1 and DES8, and policy
       HE8 of the House Extensions SPD.

The decision was overturned at panel and the application was approved.

4 Merry Bower Road - flush with front elevation and set in only approximately 0.6m from side
boundary

99/40024/HH - Erection of two storey side and single storey rear extension. Permitted 19.11.1999
This application was determined prior to the adoption of the current House Extensions Supplementary
Planning Document.

3 Eskrigge Close - three storey extension to two storey dwelling

04/48338/HH - Erection of part single and part three storey rear extension. Permitted 20.07.2004
This application was determined prior to the adoption of the current House Extensions Supplementary
Planning Document.

Conclusions/Summary

It is considered that the proposal would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact on highway
safety. However it is considered that the proposed development at number 6 Leicester Avenue would
result in unacceptable loss of light and would be overbearing to the occupiers of numbers 4 and 8




                                                  34
Leicester Avenue contrary to policy DES7 of the UDP and the principles of policy HE7 of the House
Extensions SPD. It is not considered that the proposed development would result in an unacceptable
impact to the occupiers of other surrounding properties

It is also considered that the proposed development would be an incongruous feature in the street scene
and would not respect the general rhythm and proportions of the existing dwelling. As a result it would
harm the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and surrounding area contrary to policies
DES1 and DES8 of the UDP.

Recommendation

Refuse

1.   The proposed development would result in a loss of light and would be overbearing to the
     occupiers of 4 and 8 Leicester Avenue contrary to Policy DES7 of the Adopted Unitary
     Development Plan and the principles of Policy HE7 of the House Extension Supplementary
     Planning Document.

2.   By reason of its size, siting, design and appearance the proposed three storey side/rear element
     of the development would result in an incongruous feature in the street scene and would not
     respect the character and appearance of the existing dwelling contrary to policies DES1 and
     DES8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Notes to Applicant


1.       Please note this refusal relates to drawing numbers 01 Revision A, 06 Revision D and 07.




                                                   35
APPLICATION No:           09/58131/FUL
APPLICANT:                Mr William Leeson
LOCATION:                 Plot 3, Linnyshaw Trading Estate, Moss Lane, Worsley, M28 3LY, ,
PROPOSAL:                 Erection of a single storey bulk handling building
WARD:                     Walkden North

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The site to which the application relates stands within the northern part of the Linnyshaw Trading
Estate off Moss Lane in Worsley. The application relates to Plot 2 of Unit 1 of the Linnyshaw Trading
Estate. The site is currently used as a waste transfer station following approval of application
01/43281/COU in June 2002. The site is currently used for the transfer, crushing and screening of
inert waste and storage

The Trading Estate itself is accessed via Moss Lane, which runs along its southern boundary. Along
the southern side of Moss Lane are residential properties. To the south of Moss Lane is an extensive
housing estate.

To the north there is a garage, which is used for the repair of vehicles. This garage building was
approved under 02/44179/FUL. To the north of this is Linnyshaw Moss, which is a designated wildlife
corridor and is of greenbelt allocation within the Adopted Unitary Development Plan.

The trading estate itself is segregated to the north by a linear formation of mature trees running along
the existing strategic recreation route.

To the east of the site is the Blackleach Country Park, which is a site of Biological Importance, a Key
Recreation Area and also a Wildlife Corridor.

Access to the site is currently taken from Moss Lane and then from an internal private service road
with turning head adjacent to the site.

The site currently accommodates a crusher and screener and there is open storage of materials stacked
in piles on the site. There is an existing building within the very northern part of the site but this does
not form part of this application.

Description of Proposal

The proposal involves the erection of a building with a floor area of 864m2, with an eaves height of 10
metres and an overall ridge height of 11.8m. It is proposed that the front of the building (west facing)
is largely open to provide access for tipper lorries and the equipment, which is currently used, for
separation of the waste, which is entering the site. The proposed building would be a used as a bulk
handing building, within which waste for recycling would be sorted.




                                                    36
The building, which is proposed, would be 10 metres to the eaves and 11.8 metres to the ridge. The
access to the site is not proposed to be altered.

The upper walls of the building are to be constructed of box profile metal cladding. The applicant has
not stated a colour for the cladding. At the lower level there is a concrete push wall to a height of 3m.
No alterations to any landscaping or boundary treatments are proposed as part of this development.

Site History

98/38714/FUL Change of use of part of approved industrial site to open storage of contractors plant
etc. - APPROVED 7.1.1999

00/40943/COU - Change of use from B8 storage to industrial use (B2) with associated operation of
plant for the crushing and screening of demolition and excavation material soil and hardcore.
Formation of access road (re-submission of 00/40500/COU) (Temporary permission - lapsed on
28.10.2008) - APPROVED 19.10.2000

01/43281/COU - Use of site as a waste transfer station, crushing and screening of inert wastes and
ancillary storage - APPROVED 20.6.2002

For the avoidance of doubt, Plots 1 and 2 are currently operating under 01/43281/COU

There is currently an outstanding enforcement issue regarding the hours at which the screener and
crusher can be operate and the hours of entry of vehicles into the site. These restrictions were placed
on the site through application 01/43281/FUL. In relation to vehicle movements planning permission
01/43281/FUL states that vehicles shall only enter and leave the site between the hours of 7.30am and
6pm Monday to Friday with no movements at weekends or on bank holidays. With regard to the
operation of the crusher planning approval 01/43281/FUL stated that the crusher can only be operated
between the hours of 8am and 6pm Monday to Friday with no working at weekends or on bank
holidays.

Publicity

Site Notice: Not Applicable

Press Advert: Not Applicable

Neighbour Notification

Neighbours were notified on the 8th October 2009
Earliest Decision Date: 30th October 2009

The following neighbours were notified:

6,5,4 Fernside Grove, Worsley
4A Fernside Grove, Worsley
3 Fernside Grove, Worsley
3A Fernside Grove, Worsley




                                                   37
2 Fernside Grove, Worsley
46-56 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
46 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
31 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
44 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
44A Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
43 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
42 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
42A Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
41 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
40 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
39 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
38 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
37 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
36 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
35 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
35A Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
34 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
33 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
33A Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
32 Meadowside Avenue, Worsley
58 Sportside Avenue, Worsley
56 Sportside Avenue, Worsley
54 Sportside Avenue, Worsley
52 Sportside Avenue, Worsley
50 Sportside Avenue, Worsley
48 Sportside Avenue, Worsley
46 Sportside Avenue, Worsley
21 Springside Avenue, Worsley
23 Springside Avenue, Worsley
10 Springside Close, Worsley
9 Springside Close, Worsley
8 Springside Close, Worsley
7 Springside Close, Worsley
6 Springside Close, Worsley
6A Springside Close, Worsley
5 Springside Close, Worsley
5A Springside Close, Worsley
4 Springside Close, Worsley
3 Springside Close, Worsley
2 Springside Close, Worsley
1 Springside Close, Worsley
39 Springside Avenue, Worsley
37 Springside Avenue, Worsley
35 Springside Avenue, Worsley
33 Springside Avenue, Worsley
31 Springside Avenue, Worsley
29 Springside Avenue, Worsley




                                   38
27 Springside Avenue, Worsley
25 Springside Avenue, Worsley
6 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
6A Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
5 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
Unit 3 And 4, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street
Kane House Unit 15, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Moss Lane
W Leeson, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street, Worsley
Unit 5, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street, Worsley
Unit 7, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street, Worsley
T J Murphy Limited And Ubu Environmental, Moss Lane
F Parks Construction, Moss Lane, Worsley
Unit 6, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street, Worsley
Vehicle Rescue Service, Moss Lane, Worsley
RTK Grab Hire, Linnyshaw Industrial Estate, Sharp Street, Worsley
4 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
22 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
4A Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
3 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
2 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
2A Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
1 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
20 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
19 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
18 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
17 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
16 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
15 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
14 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
13 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
12 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
11 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
10 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
9 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
8 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
7 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
6 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
5 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
4 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
3 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
2 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
1 Stoneyside Grove, Worsley
47 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
45 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
43 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
41 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
39 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
37 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley




                                                39
35 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
33 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
32 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
31 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
30 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
29 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
28 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
27 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
26 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
25 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
24 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
23 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
21 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
20 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
17 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
16 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
15 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
14 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
13 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
12 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
11 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
10 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
9 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
8 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
8A Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
7 Stoneyside Avenue, Worsley
1 Fernside Grove, Worsley
30, 29,27 ,25 ,23,23A,21, 21A,19, 19A, 17, 17A, 15,15A, 13, 13A

Representations

40 letter of objection have been received. The issues raised are summarised as:

      Existing issues regarding work outside of the permitted hours on the trading estate
      Hours should be restricted
      Noise and Disturbance from traffic
      The use should not be allowed to expand due to the impact upon residents amenities
      Dust pollution

Consultations

Urban Vision Environment - There are no sensitive uses in proximity to the proposal and the erection
of a building on the site will provide an improvement to any noise or dust that is being created
therefore no further comments in relation to noise and air quality.

No comments in relation to contaminated land..




                                                  40
Main Drainage - No objections. Any vehicle cleaning/maintenence areas must drain to foul sewer via
oil interceptors. Maximum discharge to Whittle Brook is 10L/s.

Highways - No comments received to date.

Design For Security - No comments received to date.

Environment Agency - No objections following submission of additional information, but have
requested conditions relating to suspended solid materials and surface water drainage..

Planning Policy Framework
Development Plan Policy
RSS              DP1 - Spatial Principles
UDP              EN18 - Protection of Water Courses
UDP              EN19 - Flood Risk and Surface Water
UDP              R4 - Key Recreational Areas
UDP              A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network
UDP              DES1 - Respecting Context
UDP              DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
UDP              DES9 - Landscaping
UDP              E5 - Develop. in Established Employment Areas
UDP              A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
UDP              EN12 - Important Landscape Features
UDP              EN9 - Wildlife Corridors

Other Material Considerations
SPD             SPD11 - Sustainable Design Construction

Appraisal

The development involves the erection of one building, which is to be used for the bulk handling of
material in association with the use of the site as a waste transfer station. The site is currently used as a
waste transfer facility with some vehicle repairs taking place on the adjoining northern area (known as
plot 3). This application refers to part of the entire planning unit, but there is no extant permission for
the use of the latter part of the site as a waste transfer station.

It is considered that the main issues associated with the development are whether the principle of
development on this site is appropriate, whether the building would have any significant impact upon
the visual amenity of the area in general, whether the building would have any specific impact upon
the special landscape character of the surrounding area, whether there would be any unacceptable
impact upon water resources, whether there would be any loss of residential amenity as a result of the
development and whether the development would lead to an unacceptable impact upon highway safety
or on street car parking. Each of these issues will be addressed in turn.

Principle of Development

Policy DP1 of the Adopted Regional Spatial Strategy aims to promote sustainable communities and
economic development, make the best use of existing resources and infrastructure, manage travel




                                                     41
demand, marry opportunity and need, promote environmental quality, mainstream rural issues, reduce
emissions and adapt to climate change.

The site to which the application relates is within an established employment area and as such Policy
E5 applies.

Policy E5 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan states that within established employment areas
planning permission should be granted for: the modernisation and refurbishment of existing building,
the redevelopment of land for employment purposes; improvements to access, circulation, parking and
servicing; the environmental improvement of an area and improvements to personal and property
security.

It is considered that the site and the wider Trading Estate is currently an „established employment use‟
and is brownfield being previously developed land. The erection of the proposed building would assist
in the improvements to the site, in that it would constitute an upgrading of facilities that would allow
for the bulk storage of materials to be enclosed, thereby reducing the amount of open storage on the
site. It is considered that this would also improve the environmental quality of the area by reducing the
likelihood of noise and dust pollution.

Visual Amenity and Landscape Character

Policy DES1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments respond to the
positive physical characteristics of that area, and do not lead to a loss of visual amenity or cause harm
to the appearance of that area.

The proposed building is located centrally within the site on the area known by the applicant as plot 2
(one of the three plots located there). The site is surrounded on three sides (east, south and west) by
other buildings within the trading estate and to the north by a disused railway and a linear feature of
mature trees. The proposed building is proposed to be 10 metres to the eaves and 11.8 metres to the
ridge but given the existing backdrop of buildings, it is considered that the building would not appear
overly intrusive. The landscape buffer to the northern boundary provides screening for pedestrians
walking along the footpath and from Linnyshaw Moss.

It is considered that although this is a large industrial building, its design is appropriate within the area
and to the general use of the site and would be unlikely to have a significant impact upon the visual
amenity of the area and would be in accordance with Policy Des1 of the Adopted Unitary
Development Plan.

Policy EN9 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires development which would affect any
land that functions as a wildlife corridor will not be permitted where it would impair the movement of
fauna and flora.

The proposal site is bounded to the north and west by a wildlife corridor but given that the
development is wholly contained within an existing site and does not bound the designated wildlife
corridor directly it is considered unlikely that it would have any significant impact upon any fauna or
flora or the movement thereof. For this reason it is considered that the development would not be
contrary to Policy EN9 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan.




                                                     42
Impact upon Water Resources

Policy EN18 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments should not be
permitted where they would have an unacceptable impact upon surface or ground water in terms of
quality, level or flow.

Policy EN19 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments should not be
permitted where they would be subject to an unacceptable risk of flooding; materially increase the risk
of flooding elsewhere; or result in an unacceptable maintenance liability for the City Council or other
Agency in terms of dealing with flooding.

The Environment Agency originally commented that there was insufficient information submitted with
regards to contaminated land and also flooding. The applicant has since submitted the outstanding
information and the Environment Agency has now lifted their objection subject to two conditions
being attached relating to surface water drainage/run off, and surface water solids being attached.
These conditions have been attached to the recommendation. Further informatives have been attached
relating to oil interceptors and discharge into Whittle Brook. It is considered that the development
would be in accordance with Policies EN18 and EN19 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan
subject to these conditions being complied with.

Impact upon Residential Amenity

Policy DES7 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments provide an
adequate level of amenity for users of developments and occupiers of other nearby uses.

The proposed building is to be located within the curtilage of an existing unit and would be surrounded
by buildings to three sides. It would be in excess of 150 metres from the nearest residential property,
and other units occupy the space between the development site and these dwellings. The assessment is
that the proposed building would not appear prominently when viewed from these houses and the
impact upon the outlook of these residents would be minimal. The proposed building is intended to
accommodate activity, which already occur on site and would create a barrier to noise, which may
currently affect the amenities of residents. The building will have one open wall but this would be west
facing and there are no residential properties to the west of the site. It is considered that the
development would be likely to reduce the amount of noise emanating from the site which might
currently affect the amenities of nearby residential occupiers.

Neighbours have raised issues in relation to noise and have recognised that the proposals may go some
way to alleviate the problems associated with the site, but have requested that the hours of operation
are restricted. In practical terms it is possible to restrict only the hours of use of the building and
movements in to and out of the site. The permissions previously granted for the site allowed working
allowed operations to take place between the hours of 7.30am and 6pm Monday to Friday with no
working on Saturdays, Sundays or Bank Holidays. It is appropriate that a condition be applied to
reflect this.

Highway Implications

Policy A8 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments should not be
permitted where they would have an unacceptable impact upon highway safety or the ability of the




                                                  43
strategic route network to accommodate appropriate traffic flows by virtue of traffic generation,
access, parking, servicing arrangements or cause an unacceptable restriction to movement of high,
wide, long or heavy vehicles along abnormal load routes.

The proposed development would not increase the intensity of use of the site nor would it be likely to
lead to a significant increase in the number of vehicles entering or leaving the site. The area where the
proposed building is to be located is currently used for storage of materials which are being processed.
This building is to be used to accommodate those materials and in effect the use of the land will not
change. There would be no loss of car parking as a result of the development and as such it is not
considered that the development would lead to an increase in on street car parking outside of the site.
For these reasons it is considered that the development would neither have any significant effect upon
the strategic route network or impact upon access, servicing or parking and as such would be in
accordance with policy A8 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Conclusions/Summary

It is considered that the housing of the stored materials within the proposed building would constitute
an environmental improvement, an improvement to residential and visual amenity and would have no
significant impact upon the character of the area. Subject to compliance with appropriate conditions no
water resources would be significantly affected and the development would be unlikely to have any
significant impact upon any important landscape character. There would be no significant impact upon
highway safety nor would the development lead to a significant increase in on street car parking.
Whilst neighbour objections are acknowledged, it is considered that the development would be in
accordance with all of the relevant policies within the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and taking
into account all other material considerations it is considered acceptable. The application is therefore
recommended for approval subject to conditions.

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

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




                                                   44
3.   The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such a time as a scheme to
     drain surface water run-off has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
     Authority.

     The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained in accordance with the
     timing/phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme or within any other period as may
     subsequently be agreed, in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

     To prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage of/disposal of surface water from the
     site in accordance with Policy EN19 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan.

4.   The development hereby approved shall not be commenced until such a time as a scheme to treat
     and remove suspended solids from surface water run off during construction works has been
     submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be
     implemented as approved.

     In order to protect the downstream reservoirs which are sensitive fisheries in accordance with
     Policy EN18 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan

5.   The building hereby approved shall only be used between the hours of 7.30am and 6pm Monday
     to Friday and shall not be open for business on Saturdays, Sundays or Bank Holidays.

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

Notes to Applicant


1.    Maximum discharge to Whittle Brook is 10L/s
2.    Any vehicle cleaning/maintenance areas must drain to foul sewer via oil interceptors.




                                                45

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:11
posted:12/6/2011
language:English
pages:45