Docstoc

Division

Document Sample
Division Powered By Docstoc
					PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL
PART I
SECTION 1: APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION                        3 December 2009




APPLICATION No:           09/58040/FUL
APPLICANT:                ID 4 Living Ltd
LOCATION:                 Land At Gerald Road, Charlestown, Salford,
PROPOSAL:                 Erection of 13 two storey dwellings (10 three bedroom houses and 3 two
                          bedroom houses) together with associated works, means of access,
                          landscaping and provision of footways
WARD:                     Irwell Riverside

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application site relates to an area of previously developed land of 0.3 hectares which has been
cleared. The site formed part of the wider Poets estate of terrace properties which have been
demolished. Whilst the whole of the Poets estate has now been cleared some 40 terrace properties were
sited within this application boundary.

The site is bounded by the River Irwell to the east, residential properties to the south, to the west of the
site is a four storey student village with a parcel of open space to the north. The parcel of land to the
north was originally included within the development area of this application for an additional 8
dwellings before that element and those dwellings were withdrawn from the scheme. The wider
surrounding area is predominantly residential in character.

Description of Proposal

The proposal seeks full planning consent for the erection of 13 two storey dwellings, ten of which
would have three bedrooms and 3 of which would have two bedrooms. The scheme also includes a
new vehicular access, landscaping and the provision of a footway along the river. The footway would
link together the existing footpaths adjacent to the student village (which runs from Seaford Road to
the south of this development site) to the riverside walkway which starts on the opposite side of Gerald
Road and continues along the river Irwell.

Each dwelling would have an off street car parking space to the front and private amenity space to the
rear. The access from Gerald Road would provide both vehicle and pedestrian access and would be
treated as a 'home zone' in that it would be a shared surface with seating and planting within it.

All of the properties would be affordable.

Site History

There is no relevant planning history regarding replacement dwellings on this parcel of the former
Poets estate.




                                                     1
Publicity
Site Notice: Affecting highway        Date Displayed: 21 September 2009

Press Advert: Salford Advertiser Date Published: 1 October 2009
Reason:Article 8 Affect Public Right of Way

Press Advert: IN Salford           Date Published: 1 October 2009
Reason:Article 8 Standard Press Notice

Neighbour Consultations

The Council has adopted its Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) in March 2008. The SCI
states that the Council will encourage applicants to undertake pre-application discussions with officers
prior to the submission of applications where the proposal would meet a number of criteria. The
document also highlights the importance of engagement with the local community which may be
affected by a development.

This process is supported by PPS1 'Promoting Sustainable Communities' and PPS12 'Creating Strong
Safe and Prosperous Communities Through Local Spatial Planning'

In accordance with the above the applicant has undertaken pre-application discussion with officers of
the Council, Urban Vision and members of the public.

The New Deal for Communities (NDC) has undertaken two drop-in events (in July 2008) to inform
and update residents of the Albion Estate on the proposed residential development and to consult
residents about the environmental improvements proposed for the river walkway. A further
consultation event relating to the environmental improvements on the river walkway took place in
February 2009.

Following submission of the application an exhibition was held to provide local residents with a
further opportunity to view the proposals.

Moreover, as part of the relocation project, NDC has undertaken individual meetings with the majority
of the owner occupiers in the Charlestown Riverside clearance area to provide details of the proposed
Gerald Road development to obtain expressions of interest in relocating to the new development.

The following properties were notified in terms of the statutory consultation process:

Flats 1 - 6 Chaucer House, IQ Student Quarter, Seaford Road,
Flats 1 - 7 Drinkwater House, IQ Student Quarter, Seaford Road,
Flats 1 - 7 Elliot House, IQ Student Quarter, Seaford Road,
1 - 5 Gemini Road
9 - 17 Benedict Close
1- 15 Cairn Drive
2 - 14 Collie Avenue
18 - 21 Paton Court
14 - 19 Pluto Close
St Bonifaces Presbytery, St Boniface Roa




                                                   2
Representations

A total of 97 individual objection letters have been received in response to the application publicity
(members should also note that many of the letters have been written by local children) and 1 letter
containing 5 signatures and a petition containing 49 signatures. The following issues have been raised:

              Loss of a well used green - 'Albion Green'
              Area tendered by local residents who have won awards from John Prescott and Britain
               in Bloom for their efforts
              Loss of wildlife
              Loss of trees
              Noise from student accommodation would be worse for future residents living closer
              Only 8 households would be from the demolition area would be relocated on this site
              Just a profit for the developer
              Residents have planted flowers and kept it clean
              No market for houses
              Loss of a safe place for kids to play
              There are enough policies to force the retention of the green space

A letter from Hazel Blears MP has also been received which includes 68 letters of objection from local
constituents. Mrs Blears raises the following issues:

              Support their (local constituents) objections
              Albion Green is used on a regular basis
              The proposal would be highly detrimental
              Not sensible in planning terms
              There is noise and disturbance from student provision already
              Not assist regeneration
              Other sites could be used and therefore not a good use of Homes and Community
               Agency (HCA) investment

Furthermore, a detailed evidence based objection was also submitted from the Albion Tenants and
Residents Association. The information includes:

              Covering letter
              Details of the history of the green
              Photographs of the 'Albion Green' in use by the community for play and events over a
               number of years
              A 165 named petition
              Rebuttal of evidence provided
              Regeneration statement and lead member report (Council reports)
              Letter to Hazel Blears MP on behalf of the association
              Letter to Hazel Blears from the NDC
              Minutes of meetings and flyers regarding this development
              Accreditations of 'Picture of Change' and 'Britain in Bloom'
              Various flyers of events held on the green including a 104 named attendance sheet




                                                  3
In summary, the concerns of the Albion Tenants and Residents Association relate to the part of the
application referred to as the 'Albion Site' (also referred to in this report as the 'Albion Green'. They
set out:

               The intrinsic qualities and benefits that the Green bestows upon the area and its
                residents
               The detrimental effect the loss of the Green would have on the residents and wildlife of
                the area in terms of community participation and the loss of the only piece of freely
                accessibly green space within a large radius
               That the plans don't make sense economically, environmentally and offer no sensible
                solution to the problem of re-housing people from the nearby demolition area
               The consultation process was flawed and perfunctory: lack of information and
                consultation
               The impact the development would have on the area in general given the fairly recent
                erection of the adjacent four storey, 550 bedroom student accommodation known as the
                IQ building

Following the weight of local opposition to the Albion Green element of the proposal, the applicant
has amended the scheme which removes all development from the Albion Green portion of the site.
Residents, objectors and lead names on petitions have been consulted on the revised plans on 20th
October 2009.

No responses have been received in relation to the additional consultation on the revised scheme.

Consultations

Urban Vision Environment - No objection subject to the inclusion of an appropriately worded
condition regarding site investigation and remediation together with a condition relating to the hours of
operation during construction.

Highways - No objection but highlight that the internal road would not be adoptable.

Environment Agency - No objection subject to the provision of conditions relating to the control of
surface water and Giant Hogweed.

Design For Security - No objections. They advised that the applicant engaged in pre-application
discussions and as a result several modifications were made to the scheme. One suggestion has been
made in response to the submitted scheme that the alleyway to the rear of Collie Avenue be gated.
However, the applicant has since amended the scheme to remove 8 properties from the Albion Green
element of the scheme which would have bounded this alleyway..

United Utilities - No objection.

Peak and Northern Footpaths Society - No comments received to date.

Natural England - No comments received to date.




                                                   4
Ramblers Association Manchester Area - Supports the application in view of the promotion of a
riverside pedestrian route.

The Open Spaces Society - No comments received to date.


Planning Policy Framework
Development Plan Policy
RSS              DP1 - Spatial Principles
RSS              DP3 - Promote Sustainable Communities
RSS              DP5 - Manage Travel Demand
RSS              DP9 - Reduce Emmissions, Adapt to Climate Cha
RSS              EM2 - Remediating Contaminated Land
UDP              EN9 - Wildlife Corridors
UDP              EN19 - Flood Risk and Surface Water
UDP              DEV5 - Planning Conditions and Obligations
UDP              A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled
UDP              A8 - Impact of Development on Highway Network
UDP              DES1 - Respecting Context
UDP              DES6 - Waterside Development
UDP              DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
UDP              DES10 - Design and Crime
UDP              ST14 - Global Environmental


Other Material Considerations
PPS             PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development
PPS             PPS25 - Development and Flood Risk
SPD             SPD12 - Design
SPD             SPD11 - Sustainable Design Construction
SPD             SPD5 - Design and Crime
SPD             SPD8 - Planning Obligations

Appraisal

Following instructions from the applicant to remove eight of the proposed dwellings from the part of
the site known as 'Albion Green' (located to the north of Gerald Road), it is considered that the main
planning issues in this case relate to the principle of redevelopment of this site; the type of residential
accommodation proposed; the design, scale and massing of the proposal; the appropriateness of the
highway layout; the sustainability credentials; ecology and flood risk together with the regenerative
context of the wider area. Each of these issues is discussed in more detail below.




                                                    5
Principle

The site was formerly part of the Poets estate and was last occupied by approximately 40 terrace
houses. As such, it is considered to constitute previously developed land.

Adopted Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) Policy DP1 sets out a number of principles which underpin
RSS and which all individual proposals, schemes and investment decisions should adhere to. The
policy also states that 'the 8 policies DP2-9 amplify these principles and should be taken together as
the spatial principles underlying the Strategy.'

Adopted RSS policy DP4 'Make the Best Use of Existing Resources and Infrastructure' states that
development should accord with the following sequential approach:

               First, using existing buildings (including conversion) within settlements, and previously
                developed land within settlements;
               Second, using other suitable infill opportunities within settlements, where compatible
                with other RSS policies;
               Third, the development of other land where this is well-located in relation to housing,
                jobs, other services and infrastructure and which complies with other principles in DP1-
                9

Adopted RSS policy DP5 'Manage Travel Demand; Reduce the Need to Travel, and Increase
Accessibility' states 'Development should be located so as to reduce the need to travel, especially by
car, and to enable people as far as possible to meet their needs locally. And, 'All new development
should be genuinely accessible by public transport, walking and cycling, and priority will be given to
locations where such access is already available.'

It is considered that this site represents a suitable infill opportunity within an established settlement
which is centrally located to existing services and to existing public transport. Therefore, it is
considered that the principle of redevelopment is in accordance with the development plan for Salford.

Housing Mix

Housing Planning Guidance policy HOU1 states that within Central Salford, new development should
provide a broad mix of dwelling types, and apartments should only be the predominant form of
provision in the most accessible locations. The reasoned justification to policy HOU1 states that in
this location, houses should normally be the predominant building form in new residential
developments, typically accounting for around 50-60% of the units. The scheme promotes all housing
provision and as such it is considered to be in accordance with policy HOU1 of the Housing Planning
Guidance and the context of the surrounding area.

Policy HOU2 of Housing Planning Guidance states that the majority of new houses should have at
least three bedrooms. Following the amendment of the scheme, there are 10 three bedroom houses and
3 with two bedrooms. It is therefore considered that the scheme complies with policy HOU2 of the
Housing Planning Guidance.




                                                    6
Regeneration case

The applicant has submitted a regeneration statement to support the proposal and to highlight how this
scheme relates to other development sites within the Charlestown and Lower Kersal New Deal for
Communities area.

A summary of main regenerative benefits highlighted in the report are as follows:

              The scheme will contribute to the diversification of the immediate area housing stock
              It offers 3 bedroom family housing
              The development provides all affordable housing some of which will be made available
               for the relocation of existing homeowners from the Charlestown clearance area
              The location of the site is within close proximity to the Charlestown clearance area
              It will help retain the confidence of residents affected by clearance
              The site is located within an existing residential area in close proximity to a wide range
               of amenities
              It would provide investment to the infrastructure of Gerald Road; upgrading the un-
               adopted section to adoptable standard [the new internal road would not be adopted]
              Provide natural surveillance to the riverside walkway
              Provide an improved footpath which would provide a link to the existing riverside
               walkway and the sculpture trail

It is clear that substantial benefits would be delivered upon the implementation of the scheme and that
regenerative benefit is a material planning consideration. However, it should be noted that the
principle of redevelopment of the site, following the applicant's amendment of the scheme, is
considered to accord with the development plan in any event.

Design and Public Realm

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

Policy DES6 states that all new development adjacent to the River Irwell, the Manchester Ship Canal,
Salford Quays, the Bridgewater Canal, and the Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal will be required to
facilitate pedestrian access to, along and, where appropriate, across the waterway by the provision of:

1. A safe, attractive and overlooked waterside walkway, accessible to all and at all times of the day,
where this is compatible with the commercial role of the waterway;
2. Pedestrian links between the waterside walkway and other key pedestrian routes; and
3. Where appropriate, ground floor uses that generate pedestrian activity, and larger waterside spaces
to act as focal points for public activity.

The site is a constrained site as it is in close proximity to the River Irwell and to the rear of the
neighbouring four storey residential student accommodation. Moreover, the applicant has also




                                                   7
acknowledged the need to link the footpath adjacent to the student halls with the walkway adjacent to
the river to the north.

The scheme, therefore includes a design strategy based on the following:
          The repair of the urban fabric
          The maximising of the views onto the river
          Giving the development a unique character to develop community cohesion

Whilst a proportion of the scheme has been removed from this application, it is considered that the
design strategy is relevant and appropriate to the constraints and character of the area.

In general the appearance of the proposed dwellings is traditional and simple in its use of brick as the
predominant material. Whilst simple in appearance the dwellings are positioned in smaller groups
where they front the river to avoid repetition. The properties which would front Gerald Road are
stepped in elevation to provide interest and depth to the street scene. An important factor of the
scheme is to add to the local section of footpath and riverside walkway. In order to ensure that this
route is a safe route for the community to use it is important that high levels of natural surveillance are
incorporated into the development. In this particular case 10 of the dwellings are orientated towards
the river and riverside walkway. The proposed property on the corner of Gerald Road has a unique
design which provides an entrance within the gable directly fronting Gerald Road whilst maintaining
aspect to the river. This design solution, together with secondary windows within the gable of plot 12,
provides surveillance to the riverside walkways and Gerald Road.

All of the properties are two storey and would have a canopy detail above the front doors. They are
8m to the ridge and 5.3m to the eaves. The three bedroom properties would front the river and would
have a footprint of 45 sq m. The two bedroom properties would be the same scale as the three
bedroom units although occupy a smaller footprint. The two bedroom units facing Gerald Road would
further enhance the natural surveillance to the 'Albion Green'.

Each of the properties includes a private rear garden space.

The scheme includes a 'home zone' concept of a shared space for vehicles and pedestrians. It also
includes landscaping and seating. It is considered that the principle will aid the riverside walkway and
provide an enhanced public realm. However, in order to ensure quality a condition relating to the use
of materials, other than black top tarmac, in this area is recommended.

In conclusion, it is considered that the scheme would provide an appropriate design solution for this
site and would enhance access to the river in accordance with policies DES1 and DES6 of the UDP.


Amenity of existing and future occupiers

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

There are no dwellings which directly face any of the existing housing in the locality. The closest
existing residential property is located on Pluto Close to the south east of the scheme. Given that plot




                                                    8
12 is off set to this property and would maintain 12.8m from corner to corner, it is not considered that
the proposal would result in a detrimental impact upon this dwelling. The three properties that front
Gerald Road would maintain approximately 50m to the rear of those properties on Collie Avenue with
the 'Albion Green' and Gerald Road located between.

To the west is the is the student halls which is four storey in height. The proposal would maintain 21m
between the closest dwelling and the halls (with a rear aspect facing the student halls). Due to the
positioning of the proposal the separation increases from 21m to a distance of 25.2m to the students
halls. This closest relationship would also provide half of the separation within the curtilage of the
closest dwelling. Given this intervening distance it is considered that both the future occupiers of the
scheme and the existing occupiers of the halls would be provided with a sufficient level of amenity and
privacy.

In conclusion, it is considered that the layout of the scheme would be sufficient to ensure that both
existing neighbouring residents and those who would occupy the scheme in the future would be
provided with an appropriate level of amenity in the future in accordance with the requirements of
policy DES7 as highlighted above.

However, in the short term during construction, Urban Vision Environment have suggested a condition
restricting the hours of construction to safeguard residential amenity during this period. A condition
has been recommended.

Design and Crime

Policy DES10 and the Council's Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) on Design and Crime seeks
to ensure that development is designed to discourage crime, anti-social behaviour and the fear of
crime, and support personal and property security. Crime and Disorder is a material planning
consideration.

The applicant has engaged with the Design for Security team prior to submission.
The applicant has also made further amendments to ensure that the heights, positions and design of
boundary treatments do not detract from the character and amenity of the area whilst acknowledging
the need to provide natural surveillance to the riverside walkway. Where natural surveillance is
paramount the timber fences have been substituted with railings. More generally, the proposal would
include 1.5m timber fences to subdivide rear gardens, 1.8m timber fences to private pedestrian access
points, 1.1m timber fencing to subdivide front garden areas and low brick wall will railings above
(2.1m in total) adjacent to the new footpath route.

As a result there is no objection to the scheme as amended and it is considered that the proposal would
accord with the provisions of the development as highlighted above with regard design and crime.

Highways

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

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




                                                   9
The proposal seeks a limited number of dwellings which would be accessed from Gerald Road. Each
property would have one off street car parking space.

No highway objections have been received although it has been highlighted that the internal road
layout would not be adopted by the Highway Authority given that it is a shared space without defined
footways.

It is considered, therefore, that the scheme accords with the development plan policies highlighted
above regarding highway implications.

Sustainability Credentials

PPS1 sets out the Governments agenda for delivering sustainable development. The Council have
recently adopted the new Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (March 2008), which recognises
the aims of PPS1. For major developments such as this, policy SDC1 sets out a full criteria of
measures that applicants need to demonstrate they have made full effort to comply with.

Policy DP9 of the North West RSS requires applicants and local authorities to ensure that all
developments meet minimum sustainability requirements.

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

The applicant has advised that the scheme will achieve Eco homes code level three and have
completed the RSS checklist.

The North West Sustainability Checklist is comprised of 8 sections with a score out of 100 given for
each section. The results of the sustainability checklist for the proposed scheme is as follows:

Climate Change
Rating = Minimum
           The site is protected against the 1:100 year events
           The site is orientated to benefit from heat reduction
           The development will incorporate water saving devices, rainwater harvesting and water
             butts and water recycling systems


Place Making
Rating = Best
               Reuse a brownfield site
               The scheme promotes pedestrian access through the area
               Surface water is proposed to be managed through storage
               All dwellings are affordable




                                                  10
Community
Rating = Best
           The community have been involved in shaping the proposal
           Information packs are to be provided to future occupiers regarding integration to
              existing community facilities
           The proposal would provide level access
           Part of a wider regeneration plan

Transport
Rating = Best
           Use of home zones to improve linkages
           Highly accessible area
           All dwellings include secure lockable cycle stores

Ecology
Rating = Good
           The site has low ecology value
           The developer will remove invasive species to the betterment of the existing ecology

Resources
Rating = Good
           The scheme has been developed in conjunction with advice from the EA
           The proposal incorporates water saving devices e.g low use toilets and showers
           A site waste management plan has been produced

Business
Rating = No score
           Not considered applicable

Buildings
Rating = Good
           The scheme has been designed to achieved Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3

In consideration of the above, it is considered that the development would be in accordance with
policy DP9 of the adopted RSS and policy ST14 of the UDP.


Planning obligations

Planning obligations are an appropriate mechanism to mitigate the impact of a development. In this
particular case, the development site formed part of the Poets Estate with 40 of those dwellings located
on this specific site.

Having regard to this recent history it is recognised that the implementation of this scheme would not
result in a net gain of dwellings. Therefore, it cannot be argued that the implementation of the scheme




                                                  11
would result in an unacceptable impact upon local resources to warrant additional mitigation. As such,
it is not considered necessary for planning obligations to be provided in this particular case.

Notwithstanding this point the applicant has provided information as the benefit secured by the
proposal which would normally be mitigated against through a S106 agreement. Those are:

Public realm - 'There will be a significant contribution to public realm in bringing Gerald Road up to
adoptable standard, together with improvements to the river corridor through the development of a
derelict site and through the inclusion of pedestrian links.

Construction training - The partnership between Inspired Development and G&J Seddon Limited has
to date provided employment to a total of 86 people from Salford, including 11 trade apprentices and 2
trainee Quantity Surveyors.

Whilst it is not necessary in this particular case to provide further mitigation by way of a S106
agreement, it is considered that the scheme will deliver enhancements to the public realm within the
area, continue the existing construction training scheme which is already in place and deliver a
sustainable development in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Obligations SPD.

Furthermore, all of the 13 units proposed will be affordable.

Ecology

The stretch of the River Irwell adjacent to the application site is designated as a Wildlife Corridor
within the adopted UDP and policy EN9 is therefore of relevance. This states that development that
would affect any land that functions as a wildlife corridor will not be permitted where it would
unacceptably impair the movement of flora and fauna.

In this particular case the applicant has liaised directly with the Greater Manchester Ecology Unit prior
to the submission of the application.

The ecologist highlights that "The sites (referring to the Albion site also) do not support important
habitats and are not considered to have potential to support any protected and/or priority species"

In conclusion, it is not considered that the scheme would result in a detrimental impact upon ecology.
However, conditions have been recommended to treat invasive species which are evident on this site in
accordance with the Countryside Act 1981.

Flood risk

Policy EN19 states development, including the alteration of land levels, will not be permitted where it
would:

1. be subject to an unacceptable risk of flooding;
2. materially increase the risk of flooding elsewhere; or
3. result in an unacceptable maintenance liability for the city council or any other agency in terms of
dealing with flooding issues.




                                                   12
The site is located within flood zone 2 and therefore in accordance with the requirements of PPS25 the
applicant has submitted a Flood Risk Assessment. The submitted Flood Risk Assessment (FRA), in
paragraph 4.2.15, states that United Utilities (UU) have reported several instances of sewer flooding
due to blockages in the area south of Gerald Road. It is imperative therefore that finished floor levels
are above the roads, in line with drainage engineer's advice (300mm above adjacent road). This would
also help to safeguard properties from surface water flooding / overland flows. A condition is
recommended requiring the finished floor levels to be above the height of the adjoining highway as
advised.

No objection has been raised in relation to the scheme from United Utilities or the Environment
Agency. However, the EA have advised that a condition regarding surface water drainage be attached
should planning permission be approved. A condition has been recommended although the flood risk
assessment highlights that the scheme will include water storage area.

It is considered, therefore, that the scheme would accord with the advice of PPS25 and policy EN20 of
the development with regard development in areas of flood risk.

Pollution

Policy EN16 states that planning permission for development on or near to contaminated land will
only be granted where the development would not expose the occupiers of the development to
unacceptable risk, threaten the structural integrity of any existing or proposed building on or adjoining
the site, lead to the contamination of a watercourse, or cause the contamination of adjoining land or
allow such contamination to continue.

Urban Vision Environment (UVE) have considered the site investigation information and raise no
objection to the principle subject to an appropriate remediation condition and control of construction
hours. Conditions have been recommended to this effect.

Therefore, it is considered that the scheme accords with the provisions of the development as
highlighted above regarding control of pollution.

Other Issues

Trees

The applicant has provided an arboricultural assessment with the scheme. However, there are no trees
within the resultant part of the scheme as amended by the applicant. The trees which are located on
the Albion Green element would be unaffected by the proposal.

Value Added

               A section of Gerald Road would be made up to adoptable standards
               The proposal would link together two existing footways and provide greater
                accessibility to the riverside




                                                   13
Conclusions/Summary

The proposed development accords with the relevant policies of the adopted Development Plan for
Salford. The proposal would not unacceptably compromise the amenities of existing or future
residents, or give rise to an unsatisfactory level of traffic generation. It is also considered that the
proposed development is of an acceptable quality of design and the scheme has been influenced by
community consultation.

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

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

3.   Further to the outline drainage strategy set out in the submitted Flood Risk Assessment prepared
     by WSP dated August 2009 no development shall commence until a scheme for surface water
     regulation has been submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The
     development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drainage scheme unless
     otherwise 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 City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

4.   Prior to the commencement of development:

     I.       A Site Investigation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
     Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of land
     contamination on site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors
     focusing primarily on risks to human health and the wider environment; and

     II.      The details of any proposed Remedial Works shall be submitted to, and approved in
     writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such Remedial Works shall be incorporated into the
     development during the course of construction and completed prior to occupation of the
     development; and




                                                  14
     III.     A Verification Report shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local
     Planning Authority. The Verification Report shall validate that all remedial works undertaken
     on site were completed in accordance with those agreed by the LPA.

     In the interests of public safety in accordance with policy EM2 of Regional Spatial Strategy

5.   Prior to the commencement of development, a detailed method statement for the removal or
     long-term management / eradication of Giant Hogweed and Japanese Knotweed on the site shall
     be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The method statement
     shall include proposed measures to prevent the spread of Giant hogweed and Japanese Knotweed
     during any operations such as mowing, strimming or soil movement. It shall also contain
     measures to ensure that any soils brought to the site are free of the seeds / root / stem of any
     invasive plant covered under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Development shall proceed
     in accordance with the approved method statement.

     Giant hogweed and Japanese Knotweed is an invasive plant, the spread of which is prohibited
     under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Without measures to prevent its spread as a result
     of the development there would be the risk of an offence being committed and avoidable harm to
     the environment occurring.

6.   The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be submitted to and
     approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is started. Such scheme shall
     include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted, walls, fences, boundary and surface
     treatment for the home zone, driveways and public walkways together with a programme for
     implementation. The scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the approved programme
     and shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or shrubs
     dying within five years of the initial implementation of the planting scheme shall be replaced to
     the satisfaction of 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.

7.   Prior to commencement of development a scheme which details in full how the development will
     reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change shall be
     submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall achieve
     the minimum standards of the North West Sustainability Checklist and shall incorporate the
     measures identified in the NW Sustainability Checklist submitted as part of the application on
     18th November 2009.

     The development shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved scheme and the
     mitigation measures identified shall be retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by
     the local planning authority.

     Prior to discharge of this condition a verification report shall be submitted to, and approved in
     writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The verification report shall validate that all mitigation
     measures have been completed in accordance with those agreed by the local planning authority.




                                                  15
      To reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change in
      accordance with Policy DP9 of the adopted Regional Spatial Strategy for the North West and
      Policy ST14 of the adopted City of Salford Unitary Development Plan

8.    Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the finished floor levels of
      the dwellings hereby approved shall be a minimum of 300mm above the adjacent road level

      To prevent flooding in accordance with Policy EN19 of the City of Salford Unitary Development
      Plan.

9.    Construction works shall not be permitted outside the following hours:
      Monday to Friday       08:00 to 18:00
      Saturdays              08:00 to 13:00
      Construction works shall not be permitted on Sundays or Bank or Public Holidays

      Access and egress for delivery vehicles shall be restricted to the working hours indicated above.

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

10.   The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans unless otherwise
      agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority:

      P (113) Rev A   Block 9-11 Plans
      P(114) Rev A    Block 12-13 Plans
      P(115) Rev B    Block 17-19 Plans
      P(116)          Block 14-16 Plans
      P(117) Rev A    Blocks 20-21 Plans
      P(203) Rev B    Block 9-11 Elevations
      P(204) Rev C    Block 12-13 Elevations
      P(205) Rev D    Block 17-19 Elevations
      P(206) Rev A    Block 14-16 Elevations
      P(207) Rev A    Blocks 20-21 Elevations
      P(210) Rev C    Site Elevations
      P (300) Rev C   Site Sections
      P(400)          External Works Details – Home Zones
      P(901) Rev H    Proposed Site Plan

      Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.


Notes to Applicant


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




                                                   16
2.   Further to the requirements of condition 4 the applicant is advised that if, during any works on
     site, contamination is suspected or found, or contamination is caused, the LPA shall be notified
     immediately. Where required, a suitable risk assessment shall be carried out and/or any
     remedial action shall be carried out in accordance to an agreed process and within agreed
     timescales in agreement with the LPA.
3.   The applicants attention is drawn to the advice of United Utilities contained in their letters
     dated 28th September 2009 and 30th September 2009
4.   Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991, and the Land Drainage Byelaws, the prior
     written consent of the Environment Agency is required for any proposed works or structures,
     in, under, over or within 8 metres of the top of the bank of the River Irwell which, is designated
     a ‘main river’.

     The applicant is advised that further information on this matter is contained in the letter of the
     Environment Agency dated 6th October 2009




                                                17
APPLICATION No:           09/58269/DEEM3
APPLICANT:                Salford City Council
LOCATION:                 Rear Of 2-76 Coronation Street, Salford, M5 3RW,
PROPOSAL:                 Erection of 2.2m high gates and 2m high metal railings to alleyway
WARD:                     Ordsall

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to two alleyways - one that runs to the rear of 2 to 38 Coronation Street and
another that runs to the rear of 40 to 76 Coronation Street. The site is located to the south of Regent
Road, within the Ordsall area of Salford. The area comprises of predominantly terraced residential
properties with the rear gardens of the properties along Coronation Street separated from the dwellings
by the alleyways which are the subject of this application.

Description of Proposal

Consent is sought for the erection of three 2.2m high alley gates, together with associated pedestrian
gates and 2m high railings. Details of the proposed gates are as follows:

 Gate 1 would be located to the rear of 40 Coronation Street. It would comprise of a 2.2m high double
gate, 3.5m in width, a 2.2m high pedestrian gate, 1.2m in width and single gate and 2m high railings
spanning a width of 2.3m.

 Gate 2 would be located to the rear of 38 Coronation Street. It would comprise of a 2.2m high double
gate, 3.5m in width, a 2.2m high pedestrian gate, 1.2m in width and single gate and 2m high railings
spanning a width of 2.6m.

 Gate 3 would be located to the rear of 2 Coronation Street. It would comprise of a 2.2m high
pedestrian gate, 0.98m in width in between the existing brick pillars. There are existing gates/railings
to the rear of number 2 Coronation Street which would be retained. The proposed pedestrian gate
would run parallel with this existing fence and would provide access for pedestrians

The gates and railings would be constructed of galvanised steel and are proposed to be painted green
with gold finials.

Site History

09/57343/DEEM3 - Erection of 2m high fencing and 2.2m high gates to alleyway. This application
was withdrawn in order that the applicant could discuss the proposals with the Waste Management
Team responsible for the collection of bins. These discussions have now taken place and the waste
Management Team have confirmed that they have no objections to the proposals.

09/57776/DEEM3 - Erection of 2m high fencing and 2.2m high gates to alleyway. This application
was withdrawn to allow the gating order for the alleyway to be applied for to enable both elements to
be dealt with by the planning panel at the same meeting.




                                                  18
Publicity

Site Notice: Affecting highway     Date Displayed: 17 November 2009
Reason: Affecting Public Right of Way

Press Advert: Salford Advertiser Date Published: 12 November 2009
Reason:Article 8 Affect Public Right of Way

Neighbour Notification

The following neighbour addresses have been notified:
2 - 76 Coronation Street (evens)

Representations

A number of letters of support (17) have been received from the occupiers of 6, 18, 30, 42 and 46
Coronation Street.

The application is to be determined by the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel as the
proposal received objections during the community involvement undertaken by the applicants. As a
result of this publicity, the gating order for the alleyway is also to be considered on this agenda. The
objections raised were in terms of the alleyway being a main access for pedestrians, practicalities of
taking deliveries etc and that further discussion of such issues is required for them to be resolved.
These issues will be discussed as part of the appraisal of the proposal below.


Consultations

Head of Engineering and Highways - No comments received to date.

United Utilities - No objections but have provided the following comments:

United Utilities has public sewers, manholes and water mains crossing the site which may be affected
by the proposals.

If the proposals leave any live apparatus within an enclosed site United Utilities will require 24 hours
per day access. Should access be required, every effort will be made to contact a key holder. If a key
holder is not available, United Utilities will take the necessary steps to gain entry to our apparatus but
will make every effort to minimise any damage. However, United Utilities will not be held liable for
the cost of repairing or making good any damage so caused

Deep-rooted shrubs or trees must not be planted in the vicinity of our apparatus.

If future proposals involve building close to or over the line of our apparatus or altering ground levels,
a diversion of the affected apparatus at the applicant's expense may be required. To establish if a
diversion is feasible the applicant must discuss this, once the stopping up order is granted or when site
plans are being drawn up, with our Network Engineers.




                                                   19
Highways - No objections.

Design For Security - No objections.

Main Drainage - Drainage: No objections.

The Greater Manchester Pedestrian Assoc. - No comments received to date.

Peak and Northern Footpaths Society - No comments received to date.

The Open Spaces Society - No comments received to date.

Ramblers Association Manchester Area - No objections.


Planning Policy Framework
Development Plan Policy
UDP              DES1 - Respecting Context
UDP              DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
UDP              DES10 - Design and Crime
UDP              A2 - Cyclists, Pedestrians and the Disabled


Other Material Considerations
SPD             SPD5 - Design and Crime


Appraisal

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

The proposed alley gates and fencing are to be constructed of galvanised steel painted green with gold
finials and will allow surveillance along the alleyway. The materials and scale of the proposed
development are considered to be appropriate within this location and consequently it is considered
that the introduction of the proposed alley gates and associated railings would not have an adverse
impact upon the visual amenity of the area. The proposal is therefore in accordance with Policy DES1
of the adopted UDP.

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

Although visible from the adjacent residential properties, it is not considered that the gates or fencing
will significantly affect the amenities of adjacent residents. It is therefore considered that the proposal
will not have a detrimental impact on the residential amenity currently enjoyed by neighbouring
residents. The proposal is therefore in accordance with Policy DES7 of the adopted UDP.




                                                    20
Policy DES10 states that development will not be permitted unless it is designed to discourage crime,
anti-social behaviour and fear of crime, and support personal and property security.

Policy DC18 of the Council's Supplementary Planning Document on Design and Crime states alley
gating should be designed as to make scaling them difficult and their locks should be protected so as to
deter tampering and vandalism. They should be flush with the building line and should allow views
through them.

The main purpose of the alley gates and railings is to control the access to the alleyway in order to
prevent anti-social behaviour and damage to private property. The alley gates would offer added
security as well as clearly defining the alley as a communal space for adjoining residents.

It is considered that the siting of the gates and railings, the inclusion of finials and the fact that the
gates do not have any central horizontal bars means that they will be difficult to scale and therefore
people will be prevented from climbing over them. In addition they are designed in such a way to
allow views through them and along the alleyway ensuring a high level of natural surveillance.

It is therefore considered that the proposal would be in accordance with DES10 and DC18.

Access

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.

All adjacent property owners would have a key to the alley gates with landlords being responsible for
supplying tenants with a key. Any utility company that has equipment on the alleyway will also be
entitled to gain access. The proposed alley gates would restrict the use of the alleyway to the residents
adjacent to the alleyway. The alleyway provides access to the rear of the properties adjoining it and
pedestrian and cycle traffic can easily be diverted to the footpaths along Coronation Street or Regent
Road, both of which are well lit, without any significant increase in travel distance.

There is currently vehicular access to the rear of the properties and this would be maintained with the
double gates, which are wide enough to allow vehicle access. The gates are positioned as such to allow
vehicle parking to the rear of the properties without blocking the gates. In addition there are no parking
restrictions to the front of the properties along Coronation Street.

Consequently it is considered that the proposed alley gates would not affect the safe and convenient
access to and around the site and as such the proposal is in accordance with Policy A2.




                                                   21
Waste Collection

The existing waste refuse collection is such that the bin wagon drives down the alleyway to empty
residents bins. The applicants have confirmed through their refuse arrangements statement that they
have agreed with environmental services management that the existing refuse collection arrangements
will not change with the introduction of the alley gates. The gates are designed to accommodate the
width of Salford City Councils refuse wagons and they will have a master key.

Other Issues

Residents of Coronation Street were consulted prior to the submission of this application and were
asked to fill in a questionnaire. 63% responded and of these responses 95.8% were in favour of the
proposal with only 4.2% being against.

Reasons for the proposed alley gates include car and property crime, theft, threatening behaviour,
congregating youths, fly tipping, graffiti and alleyway used as an escape route. The reasons against
were as follows: ‘the situation is much more complex than a normal back alley. This is the main access
route for pedestrians. Gate is also wide. Security if gate versus attack/taking practicalities for deliveries
etc. Consultations would need to involve to and fro discussion of such issues as to stand a chance of
being resolved. In particular I don’t think the gate at the west end should be openable.’

Results of the survey shows that 37% of respondents felt unsecure or very unsecure in their property
and 33% felt unsafe when using the alleyway to the rear of Coronation Street. 54% of respondents
were of the view that crime or anti-social behaviour had been aided by the alleyway, a clear issue in
terms of perceived fear of crime.

Specific incidents of crime, nuisance or anti-social behaviour noted on the survey included damage to
cars and property, fly tipping and youths congregating in the gardens of the properties.

Whilst no necessary to demonstrate need in planning terms it is considered that the reduction of crime,
vandalism and anti-social behaviour in the area has the potential to be considerable with the
installation of the gates. The alley gates and railings would define public and private space and would
act as a deterrent and limit access to residents only.

The application site and surrounding area has been subject to a significant number of crimes over the
last couple of years and it is considered that the proposed alley gating is likely to assist in crime
reduction in the area, with the fear of crime also likely to be reduced.

There have been concerns raised by one owner/resident of Coronation Street in relation to practicalities
of taking deliveries etc and the alleyway being a main access route for pedestrians. As previously
stated all resident would be provided with a key in order to maintain access to the rear of their
properties. The double gates would be wide enough for vehicle access and an alternative route for
pedestrians is provided by the pavement to the front of Coronation Street and Regent Road.

Conclusions/Summary

It is considered that the proposal would not compromise highway safety or be out of character with the
surrounding area. In addition, it is considered that the proposal would not cause any significant harm to




                                                     22
the amenity of neighbouring occupiers or unacceptably restrict movements of pedestrians or mobility
impared. The proposal would reduce the potential for crime to arise and would be in accordance with
all relevant policies within the Unitary Development Plan and the Design and Crime SPD and there are
no other material considerations that outweigh those policies.

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.   The alleygates and railings hereby approved shall be colour treated with the approved colour
     green with gold finials prior to installation and shall be maintained as such thereafter.

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


Notes to Applicant


1.     This grant of planning permission does not authorise the closure or diversion of the public right
       of way as indicated on the approved plan, until the appropriate order has been made.
2.     Please note this permission relates to the submitted plans received 30th October 2009.
3.     The applicants are advised that United Utilities has public sewers, manholes and water mains
       crossing the site which may be affected by the proposals. If the proposals leave any live
       apparatus within an enclosed site United Utilities will require 24 hours per day access. Should
       access be required, every effort will be made to contact a key holder. If a key holder is not
       available, United Utilities will take the necessary steps to gain entry to our apparatus but will
       make every effort to minimise any damage. However, United Utilities will not be held liable
       for the cost of repairing or making good any damage so caused. Deep-rooted shrubs or trees
       must not be planted in the vicinity of our apparatus.

       If future proposals involve building close to or over the line of our apparatus or altering ground
       levels, a diversion of the affected apparatus at the applicant's expense may be required. To
       establish if a diversion is feasible the applicant must discuss this, once the stopping up order is
       granted or when site plans are being drawn up, with our Network Engineers: Wasterwater:
       0161 608 0625. Water 01925 733444 as a lengthy lead in period may be required if a diversion
       proves to be acceptable.




                                                   23
APPLICATION No:           09/58030/HH
APPLICANT:                Mr P Wilde
LOCATION:                 12 West King Street, Salford, M3 6BD,
PROPOSAL:                 Erection of a single storey side extension
WARD:                     Irwell Riverside

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to an end terraced property on West King Street. The property has an existing
conservatory to the rear which would be retained. To the rear of the site, the garden area is at a lower
level (approximately 0.9m lower) as are the properties to the rear which are sited adjacent the rear
garden of the application property. The property also has two detached garages to the side which
would be demolished in order to accommodate the proposal.

Description of Proposal

Permission is sought for the erection of a single storey side extension.

The proposed extension would be flush with the main front elevation of the existing dwelling. It would
project 9.1m from the side gable of the existing dwelling and would be 7.25m in depth being set back
approximately 1m from the main rear elevation of the existing dwelling. It would be approximately
4.2m in height at its highest point with a pitched roof. The eaves would be 2.4m in height.

The application form indicates that the extension is to provide disabled living space and the proposed
extension would accommodate a bedroom, bathroom, kitchen and lounge.

It is proposed to demolish the existing detached garages to accommodate the proposal and also to erect
a 2m high fence or wall to the rear of the proposed development. This does not require planning
permission.

Site History

The site has no previous planning history.


Publicity

Site Notice: Household Article 8      Date Displayed: 9 November 2009
Reason:      Wider Publicity

Site Notice: Household Article 8      Date Displayed: 16 September 2009
Reason:      Wider Publicity

Press Advert: Not Applicable




                                                   24
Neighbour Notification

The following neighbour addresses were notified:

15 and 17 Picton Close
10 and 14 West King Street

Representations

No letters of objection have been received. one letter of support has been received from the occupiers
of 10 West King Street.

The application is to be determined by the Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel as the
proposed development is considered to be contrary to council policy, however it is recommended for
approval based on the personal circumstances of the applicant.

Consultations

No comments received to date.


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.

Personal Circumstances

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
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."




                                                   25
In support of the application the applicant has provided a number of letters from himself, his landlord,
his doctor and the NHS. The letters outline his personal circumstances and the need for the proposed
extension.

Mr Patel suffers from lumber disc disease and in the future will be dependent on a wheel chair to get
around. The letter from Mr Patel's doctor confirms his disability and states that he has trouble with his
mobility due to the constant pain he suffers. It goes onto say that he has difficulty bending, rising and
using stairs and that the provision of the proposed extension and additional space would help to
improve his quality of life.

Mr Patel currently lives at the property with his landlord and he has explained that he finds it
increasingly difficult to climb the stairs and often has to spend the night on the sofa downstairs.

Mr Patel's family do not live close by and his sister comes to visit every 2-3 weeks to help clean and
cook meals to last for the following few weeks. When Mr Patel's sister visits she also brings their
father who is also in poor health and for whom she is the principal carer.

The applicant has considered alternative accommodation however he has lived on West King Street for
approximately 23 years and knows most of the residents who are also his friends. Mr Patel often relies
on his landlord and his friends/neighbours for day to day care and tasks when his sister is unable to
visit.

The proposed extension would allow Mr Patel to have all the facilities he requires on one level and
would also give him an element of independence away from his landlord, however as the extension
would be linked to the main dwelling, his landlord would still be able to help him as and when
required.

Design

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

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

The proposed extension would be visible from the street. Is considered to be large in scale and would
not appear subordinate to the existing dwelling. Despite this the design of the proposal is considered to
be of a residential nature and would be viewed in context with the row of terraced properties. The
application site slopes downwards away from the road and as West King Street is a cul de sac the
proposal would be viewed only by residents and visitors accessing properties. There would be no
through traffic.

The proposed extension would replace the two garages which are currently present at the application
site. The garages are not in a particularly good state of repair. The proposed extension would therefore
improve the appearance of the area to the side of the dwelling where the existing garages are sited.




                                                   26
The application form indicates that materials used would match those of the existing dwelling and a
condition would be attached to ensure this.

It is considered that some harm may be caused by the resulting building, in terms of it not appearing
subordinate to the parent dwelling. However given the existence of the two garages and the fact that
the extension would be read in the context of the whole terrace, it is considered the harm would be
limited and is outweighed by the personal circumstances expressed and evidenced by the applicant.

Amenity

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

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

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

The proposed extension would introduce principle habitable room windows in its front elevation. The
distance maintained to the front boundary would be approximately 7.5m. To the front of the site is a
block of flats at a distance of approximately 34m at their closest point.

The rear elevation of the proposed extension would introduce windows within 5m of the common
boundary with 15 Picton Close. The submitted plans indicate that a 2m high boundary wall/fence
would be erected to the rear, along the common boundary with 15 Picton Close. This can be erected
without the need for planning permission.

In order to prevent overlooking into 15 Picton Close, it would be necessary for either the wall/fence to
be erected or for the rear elevation to be fitted with obscure glazing. A condition has been attached
which requires either of these to be in place prior to the extension being brought into use.

One of the windows introduced would be a habitable room window and would serve a bedroom,
however outlook and light would be provided by the window in the front elevation which also serves
the bedroom and as such it is considered that the obscure glazing of the rear window would not result
in an unacceptable loss of amenity to the occupiers of the property. The other windows in the rear
elevation would serve non habitable rooms (a kitchen and a bathroom).

The property to the rear, 15 Picton Close is at a lower level to the application site. (Approximately
0.9m lower). The rear elevation of 15 Picton Close currently faces the rear elevation of the existing
garages at the application property at a distance of approximately 6m at their closest point. The




                                                  27
proposed extension would also directly face the rear elevation of 15 Picton Close at a distance of
approximately 6.8m.

The height of the existing garages is approximately 2.1m closest to 15 Picton Close. The proposed
extension would be approximately 2.4m to the eaves. The roof of the proposed extension would slope
upwards away from 15 Picton Close therefore reducing its impact. Taking account of the fact that a 2m
high wall/fence could be erected along the common boundary without the need for planning
permission, and given the proposed extension would be set in 1.05m from this common boundary, it is
not considered that the additional 0.4m would not have any additional detrimental impact.

The side elevation of the proposed extension would not introduce any windows and there are no
properties directly to the side of the application property. To the side is the front garden of 14 West
King Street. It is not considered necessary to protect front gardens and in addition screening would be
provided by the existing conifers present along the common boundary.

The proposed extension would not project beyond the main front and rear elevations of the existing
property and as such would not be visible from within the adjoining property, 10 West King Street.

In conclusion it is considered that no significant harm would be caused to surrounding occupiers.

Highway Safety

UDP Policy A8 states that 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 approximately 7.4m in
length by 9m 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.

Conclusions/Summary

It is considered that the proposal would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenity of
neighbours and future occupiers or have an unacceptable impact on highway safety in accordance with
all relevant policies within the Unitary Development Plan and House Extensions Supplementary
Planning Document, and that there are no other material considerations that outweigh those policies.
Although some harm would result in terms of the extension not being subordinate to the parent
dwelling, for the reasons set out in this report it is considered that the application should be supported.




                                                    28
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.   The facing materials to be used for the walls and roof of the development shall be the same type,
     colour and texture as those of the existing building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the
     Local Planning Authority.

     To ensure the development fits in with the existing building in accordance with policy DES8 of
     the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.

3.   Prior to the first occupation of the extension hereby approved, one of the following two options
     shall be implemented and shall be retained as such thereafter:
     1) A 2m high wall or fence shall be erected along the rear common boundary with 15 Picton
     Close, full details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
     Authority prior to the erection of the fence or wall; or
     2) The windows in the rear elevation of the development facing the boundary with number 15
     Picton Close shall be provided with and permanently glazed, in textured glass whose obscuration
     level is 5 on a scale of 1-5 (where 1 is clear and 5 is completely obscure).

     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.    The proposed development lies within a coal mining area. In the circumstances the Applicant
      should take account of any coal mining related hazards to the stability of their proposal.
      Developers must also seek permission from the Coal Authority before undertaking any
      operation that involves entry into any coal or mines of coal, including coal mine shafts and
      adits and the implementation of site investigations or other works. Property specific summary
      information on any past, current or proposed surface and underground mining activity to affect
      the development can be obtained from the Coal Authority. The Coal Authority Mining Reports
      Service can be contacted on 0845 762 6848 or at www.coal.gov.uk
2.    Please note this refusal relates to drawing numbers 01 and 02 received 27th August 2009 and
      the site cross sections received 5th October 2009.




                                                 29
APPLICATION No:          09/57845/FUL
APPLICANT:               McInerney Homes North West Ltd
LOCATION:                Land At Redmans Close, Eccles, M30 7EL,
PROPOSAL:                Erection of 6no. 2-storey 3 bedroomed dwellings
WARD:                    Winton

Description of Site and Surrounding Area
The site to which the application relates is 0.15 hectares and is currently occupied by play equipment
which has fallen into a state of disrepair.

As detailed in the approval section of the report, this equipment was provided as part of open space
provision which provided for 74no residential units (applications 01/42881/OUT and 03/45951/REM)

The site lies to the south of a large residential estate, which was granted consent under application
01/42881/OUT and 03/45951/REM. The southern and eastern boundaries of the site adjoin the Barton
Hall Industrial Estate.

The area which is the subject of this application stands at the end of Redmans Close, and is also
accessible on foot from the end of Henty Close, both of which are cul-de-sacs. The site is
approximately 500 metres from Liverpool Road (A57).

The area is predominantly residential with the exception of the industrial units on Barton Hall
Industrial Estate to the south. The typical house types in the area are detached and semi-detached
dwellings of brick construction with slate roofs.


Description of Proposal
The proposal involves the erection of six two storey dwellings, each with three bedrooms. The layout
of the properties is such that there would be two semi detached dwellings and two detached properties.
The plots have been referred to as plots 1-6 within the application.

Plots 1,2 and 3 have north facing front elevations, plots 5 and 6 have east facing front elevations, and
plot 6 has a southwest facing front elevation. All of the properties would have private amenity space to
the rear, which is also where wheelie bins would be stored to be brought to the street on collection
days.

The dwellings on plots 1,2,3 and 4 would have two private car parking spaces on the driveways to the
side of the houses and plots 5 and 6 would have two car parking spaces each at the head of the cul-de-
sac. All of the properties are accessed via a shared driveway adjoining Redmans Close. All of the 6
proposed dwellings would have three bedrooms.

The design of the proposed dwellings would match those in the immediate area. Dwellings would have
a pitched roof and be constructed of red brick with red interlocking roof tiles to match the existing




                                                  30
properties in the immediate area. Details to the front elevations such a canopies above the front doors
and soldier coursing have been included to add interest.

The proposed properties are 5 metres in height to the eaves and 8 metres in height to the pitch. The
garden areas of the proposed dwellings would have a timber fence boundary treatment to a height of
1.5 metres.

The applicant has stated that the development would contain 100% affordable socially rented housing
provision and has identified a Rented Social Landlord in this regard.

In support of the application the applicant has submitted: a Design and Access Statement, Crime
Impact Assessment, Sustainability Checklist, Affordable Housing Statement, Planning Statement,
Noise Assessment and a Utilities Statement.

Site History
History, Context and Site Issues
In 2001 an outline application was submitted for the use of the land at Barton Hall for the principle of
residential development (01/42881/OUT). This application was approved on the 7.2.2002.

As part of the development, a legal agreement between the City Council and the applicant was signed
on 8.4.2003 under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). This legal
agreement required the developer to pay the City Council the total sum of £45,585.00 (the commuted
sum) payable to the Council upon the formal handover of the open space to be provided on site. The
agreement required an open space of 1024 metres of equipped play facilities and details of specific
location of site and equipment and materials to be used in respect of both the informal open space and
equipped play facilities and that this should be the subject of a written agreement between the
applicant and the Council’s Environmental Services Directorate, with this being made prior to any
works commencing on site in relation to the residential units. This application relates to the site of the
public open space.

A reserved matters application pursuant to the outline (03/45951/REM) was submitted in 2003 for
approval of the details of the siting, design and external appearance of 74 dwellings together with
creation of new vehicular and pedestrian access and associated landscaping including public open
space.

In addition, the agreement required that the open space required should be provided on site when 25%
of the dwellings that were approved for construction on the site are built and have been issued with a
completion certificate.

The current situation is that a play area has been installed within the site (the exact point in time at
which this occurred is not clear) however, the specification for this was never agreed with the
Council’s Environmental Services Directorate nor was any of the commuted sum paid.

The play area has fallen into a state of disrepair and the Council are not in a position to take
responsibility for this equipment given that it was not installed to the correct standard of specification,
and the positioning of it in an area which does not benefit from a large amount of natural surveillance

In order to resolve the issues on the site, the applicant has offered to take the following steps:




                                                     31
1.To remove all equipment should be removed from the site at the expense of the developer and
handed over to Salford City Council to be located within nearby recreation space

2.The monies required by the original s106 agreement attached to application 03/45951/FUL in terms
of maintenance for a twenty-year period (£45,585). This will be required to be included within an
addendum to the original s.106 agreement

3.The equipment shall be removed and the maintenance monies shall be paid within 28 days of the
addendum to the legal agreement being signed

In addition to this it has been agreed that the site of the current play area can be developed for
residential purposes subject to this being in the form of 100% affordable units.

This application was subsequently submitted. This application will attract planning contributions in
line with the Adopted Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document as although it is a
minor development in itself it is being treated as an extension to the 74 houses approved.

The developer is providing 100% affordable housing and as such they are arguing that the
development cannot support the extra contributions and have submitted a financial viability appraisal
to justify this position.

Despite the above, the site remains the responsibility of the developer and since no handover has taken
place to date, they have been asked to maintain the site, otherwise enforcement action could be served.

Previous Applications
01/42881/OUT - Outline planning application for the development of land for residential purposes -
APPROVED

03/45951/REM - Details of the siting, design and external appearance of 74 dwellings together with
creation of new vehicular and pedestrian access and associated landscaping including public open
space - APPROVED

04/47843/FUL - Variation of housetype to include erection of garage to Plot 11 - APPROVED

Publicity
Earliest Decision Date: 11 August 2009

Neighbour Notification
81 Neighbours were notified of this application

Representations
Two letters of objection have been received in relation to the proposal. The following issues are raised:

The proposed access would encroach onto the driveway of number 14 Redmans Close

The proposed road would lead to trespass on to the driveways of occupiers adjacent to the access at
number 14 Redmans Close




                                                   32
Consultations

Miller Goodall Environmental Services Limited - No objections subject to a contaminated land
condition.

Head of Engineering and Highways - No objections.

Design For Security - No comments received to date.

Urban Vision Environment - No comments received to date.

Environment Agency - No objections subject to a contaminated land condition.

United Utilities - No objections.

Planning Policy Framework Development Plan Policy
RSS DP1 - Spatial Principles
RSS EM2 - Remediating Contaminated Land
UDP DES1 - Respecting Context
UDP DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
UDP H1 - Provision of New Housing Development
UDP A10 - Provision of Car, Cycle, Motorcycle Park
UDP DES10 - Design and Crime
UDP R1 - Protection of Recreation Land Facilities

Other Material Considerations
PPS PPS3 - Housing
SPD SPD11 - Sustainable Design Construction
SPD SPD5 - Design and Crime
SPD SPD8 - Planning Obligations

Appraisal
Principle of Development
Policy DP1 of the Adopted Regional Spatial Strategy for the Northwest and National Guidance in the
form of PPS3 requires that development locations are brought forward in a sequentially preferable
order, emphasising the need to first consider the re-use or conversion of existing buildings, followed
by the development of brownfield sites.

The site is currently occupied by play equipment which was installed by the developer following the
grant of planning permission for the large residential development to the north and formed part of the
planning obligation as set out in the above section ‘background’. However, prior to this site formed
part of the wider Barton Hall Industrial Estate. PPS 3 puts emphasis on the need to encourage
development on brownfield land and as such this site is considered sequentially preferable.
PPS3 also advises on appropriate housing densities, in order to make efficient use of available land, the
density should be justified compared to the previously developed site to the north. The site extends to
0.15 hectares with six 3-bedroom, two storey units proposed. This equates to 40 dwellings per hectare,
which is mid-way between the desired 30-50 units per hectare standard. This is also comparable to the
existing development.




                                                   33
Loss of Public Open Space Provision
Planning Policy Guidance Note 17 relates to planning for open space, sport and recreation. Its general
principles are to secure well designed facilities which promote social inclusion and community
cohesion and health and wellbeing as well as promoting sustainable development.

Policy R1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan states that the development of recreation land or
facilities will not be permitted unless: the development is for formal or informal recreation purposes
that would contribute to the continued recreation use of the site; adequate replacement recreation
provision, of equivalent or better accessibility, community benefit and management, is made in a
suitable location; it has been clearly demonstrated that the site is surplus to recreational requirements,
and the development would facilitate the wider regeneration of the wider area; or the development is
ancillary to the principal use of the site.

This proposal would result in the removal of such an area of open space which is closely related to an
existing development. However PPG17 puts emphasis on the need to secure ‘well designed’ facilities.
Whilst the removal of the equipment in itself is not ideal, given the history of the site and the impact
the play equipment has on the local residents, by virtue of it attracting youths and increasing anti-
social behaviour, it is considered necessary to remove it. The play equipment has been neither well
designed in terms of its specification nor has it been sited in such a way so as to provide a valuable
resource for local residents. At present the play equipment is un-usable and unsafe and as such does
not promote social inclusion or community cohesion as required by PPG17, and it is considered that at
present it is contributing to the opposite effect upon the local community. For these reasons, and
subject to the handover of the play equipment in order for it to be utilised in an alternative location, it
is considered that the loss of this recreation land is acceptable and the development would be in
accordance with Planning Policy Guidance Note 17 and Policy R1 of the Adopted Unitary
Development Plan.

Housing Mix
Policy H1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments contribute towards a
mix of dwellings in an area, be built at an appropriate density, provide a high quality environment,
make adequate provision for open space, and be consistent with other policies within the UDP.

Policy HOU1 of the SPD requires that within West Salford, Broughton Park, Claremont and Weaste
and Seedley new developments should be in the form of houses rather than apartments.
The application site falls within the area defined as west Salford, and therefore the development of
houses as opposed to apartments in this location is considered to be acceptable.

Policy HOU2 requires that the majority of new houses should have at least three bedrooms.

The proposed dwellings would all have three bedroom which are considered to be of an appropriate
size and as such the development would be in accordance with Policy HOU2 and the spirit of the
Housing Planning Guidance

Impact upon Amenity
Policy DES1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan states that developments should respect the
character of the area within which they are set and respond to the physical characteristics of that area.




                                                    34
The applicant has added detail in the form of soldier coursing to beneath some of the windows, and has
included canopies above the front doors to add interest to the front elevations of the dwellings. It is
considered that the design of the dwellings is appropriate and in keeping with the general character of
the area and as such is in accordance with Policy DES1 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan.

Policy DES7 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that all developments provide a
satisfactory level of amenity for the future occupiers of that development and for the users of other
nearby developments.

The dwellings proposed within this application are of a standard brick construction with slate roof and
would be matching to those in the immediate locality. It is considered that the proposed design is
acceptable and would be in keeping with the character of the area.

The proposed development sits on the periphery of an established residential estate and is in close
proximity to existing dwellings. None of the proposed dwellings would directly face any of the
existing dwellings. The separation distance between the gable of 14 Redmans Close and the rear
elevation of the dwelling at plot 5 is 12 metres. The standard separation distance is 13 metres from
gable to habitable room window. The side elevation of number 14 does not contain any habitable room
windows and as such there would be no loss of amenity for the residents of this dwelling or the
proposed dwelling at plot 5. The separation distance between the windows within the rear elevation is
slightly less than that which would usually be expected (13 metres) however it is considered that this
would not significantly impact upon the outlook of this resident.

In addition, the separation distances between the houses which form part of this proposal are
considered acceptable, as there would be no directly facing habitable windows and the distances from
gable to habitable room window exceed the distance usually expected which is 13 metres from
habitable room window to two storey gable elevation. These distances however are guidelines only
when dealing with new buildings and do not form part of an adopted document.

The separation distance between the habitable room windows within the front elevation of dwellings at
plots 1 and 2 and the gable elevation of the dwelling at plot 4 is 11 metres. The dwelling at plot 3 does
not have any buildings directly to the front. The separation distance between habitable room windows
in the front elevation of the dwellings at plots 4 and 5 to the gable of the dwelling at plot 6 at its closest
point is 12 metres, and the gable is at an offset angle to these windows. There would remain 11.5
metres from the rear elevations of plots 4 and 5 to the side elevation of number 12 Henty Close. All of
the dwellings are proposed to have three bedrooms.

Impact upon the Highway
Policy A10 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan requires that developments with more that 1.5
car parking spaces will not usually be permitted.
The development would accommodate the equivalent of two car parking spaces per dwelling, however
Policy A10 takes into account the provision across the city and is not site specific. The site itself is not
considered to be highly accessible in that the nearest main road is approximately 500 metres away and
the site is not within walking distance of any town or neighbourhood centres. In addition to this, four
of the car parking spaces are on street and not within the curtilage of any of the dwellings and as such
could be used by visitors. In light of this, it is considered that although the development would exceed
the amount of car parking usually permitted, in this case it is considered acceptable.




                                                     35
The neighbour objection in relation to access is acknowledged however it is considered that the
applicant has submitted a correct red line plan. The issue of trespass across the land belonging to 14
Redmans Close is considered to be a private matter between the developer and these residents, and the
boundary treatment is considered to be the responsibility of the resident.

Design and Crime
In support of the application, the applicant has submitted a Crime Impact Statement which details the
natural surveillance which will exist across the site, in to gardens and across parking areas; boundary
treatments and secured by design features such as high standard windows/doors, locked gates and
security lighting.

Policy DES10 which is supported by the Supplementary Planning Document ‘Design and Crime,
requires that developments are designed so as to reduce the opportunity for crime and the fear of crime
or anti-social behaviour, and avoid creating areas of concealment where crime or anti social behaviour
could be committed. Policy DES10 also requires developments not to appear fortress-like or increase
the fear of crime, but to encourage personal and property security aswel as clearly delineating public,
private and semi private spaces.

The development would be accessible by car from Redmans Close, or on foot via Henty Close. The
dwellings would all have a timber fence to a height of 1.5 metres. This is considered acceptable to
protect the garden areas of the dwellings without appearing fortress like and increasing the fear of
crime and anti-social behaviour. There is a pathway to the side of the dwelling at plot 6, and although
this fence would run down the eastern boundary of the path, it would remain open on the other side.
Natural surveillance is achieved to this path and also to the boundary of the dwelling at plot 6, from the
habitable room windows within the front elevations of the dwellings at plots 4 and 5, and also from the
windows within the front elevation of plot 3.

The side boundary treatment of the dwelling at plot 4 would bound the driveway and as such the
parking spaces would appear outside of the defined curtilage. However, if the fence was located along
the footpath, this would create an area of concealment between the dwelling itself and the fence, with
the drive between the two. No natural surveillance can be achieved to the drive way of plot 4 from the
house itself as there are no habitable room windows within the side elevation of the dwelling.
Surveillance in this regard is achieved from the windows within the front elevation of the properties at
plots 1 and 2.

Similarly the driveway of the property at plot 1 is partially visible from the dwelling at 14 Redmans
Close and the boundary treatment does not extend to the highway at the front. Therefore, the site
remains open, albeit the rear garden is secured by the fencing which runs along the side boundary and
adjoins the dwelling.

It is considered that the applicant has produced the optimum layout in terms of ensuring both that the
development does not appear fortress-like and that it reduces the likelihood of criminal activity or the
fear of crime occurring. For these reasons it is considered that the development would be in
accordance with Policy DES10 of the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and the Supplementary
Planning Document ‘Design and Crime.’




                                                   36
Developer Contributions
The Supplementary Planning Document ‘Planning Obligations’ requires developers to make financial
contributions in relation to open space provision, public realm, construction training and climate
change plus an administration fee of 2.5% of the total amount.

In relation to the units now proposed, the developer contributions would be as follows:

The sum of £45,585.00 as required by the previous permission will still be paid by the developer to the
Council to maintain the play equipment. The applicant has confirmed that they are willing to pay this
amount.

In addition to this a further legal agreement would normally be required for the additional 6 units. This
legal agreement would require a commuted sum of £22,410.60. This is calculated on the basis set out
below:

Open Space Provision (£598 per bedspace)                            = £10,764
Public Realm, Infrastructure and Heritage (£1500 per dwelling)      = £9,000
Construction Training (£150 per Dwelling)                           = £900
Climate Change                                                      = £1200
Total                                                               = £21, 864

                                      +2.5% Administration Fee      £22,410.60

This application involves the provision of 100% affordable housing in the form of socially rented
provision,, which is not ordinarily required for a development of this size. Given this the applicant has
submitted a financial viability appraisal which confirms that the development, if it is to be a 100%
affordable scheme, it would not be financially viable to provide this amount. The developer has
confirmed that they are willing to pay a commuted sum of £8,600, the £45,585.00 for POS committed
from the original approval, and the affordable housing provision, in addition to handing over the play
equipment to the City Council. This case and the financial viability appraisal has been assessed by the
City Council Surveyors, and has been found to be sufficiently robust. Therefore it is considered that
the developer contributions in full are not required in this instance in being mindful of the £45,585.00
to be paid, and the subject to the developer carrying out the steps outlined within the ‘Historical
Background’ section towards the beginning of this report.

Contaminated Land
Policy EM2 of the Adopted Regional Spatial Strategy states that proposals should encourage the
adoption of sustainable remediation technologies. Where soft end uses are to be provided on
previously developed site, appropriate remediation technologies should be considered which reduce or
render harmless any contamination that may be present.

The applicant has submitted information with regards contaminated land and Urban Vision
Environment have confirmed that the information submitted is acceptable. A condition has been
attached which requires further investigations to take place.

Sustainable Development
The Adopted Supplementary Planning Document ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’ requires all
developments to contribute to sustainability wherever possible.




                                                   37
The proposed development has been designed to reduce the consumption of water and energy by
means of water saving and energy efficient appliances and fittings. Low energy light fittings are
proposed to be used, together with dual flush toilets and low flow bathroom fittings. All of the
properties would achieve Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3.

It is considered that Code for sustainable homes Level 3 is acceptable and would provide a suitable
sustainable development in line with the requirements of the Adopted Supplementary Planning
Document ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’.


Conclusions/Summary
In conclusion it is considered that the development would provide an adequate mix of dwelling types
in a suitable location and would re-use previously developed land in line with national requirements.
The design and size of the dwellings are considered appropriate and it is not considered that there
would be any significant impact upon highway safety or on-street car parking. The argument in
relation to affordability is accepted and as such developer contributions have been agreed at a lower
level. It is considered that the development would be in accordance with all of the relevant policies
within the Adopted Unitary Development Plan and as such is recommended for approval subject to
conditions.

Recommendation:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions and that;

I. The Strategic Director of Customer and Support Services be authorised to enter into a revised legal
agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the repayment of
improved local open space/play equipment improvements to the public realm, schemes to offset
climate change and construction training schemes and a scheme for the on-site provision of 100%
Affordable Housing.

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

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

IV. Authority be given to refuse the application if the applicant fails to complete the S106 within a
reasonable period on the grounds that the proposals do not support the aim and objectives of PPS1
Delivering Sustainable Development and PPS3 Housing

Conditions

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.




                                                   38
2.   Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, samples and details of the
     materials for 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.

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

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

4.   Prior to the commencement of the development, a Preliminary Risk Assessment report, including
     a conceptual model and a site walk over, to assess the potential risk of land contamination, shall
     be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Should a potential risk
     be identified then:

     i.       A Site Investigation report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
     Planning Authority. The investigation shall address the nature, degree and distribution of land
     contamination on site and shall include an identification and assessment of the risk to receptors
     focusing primarily on risks to human health and the wider environment; and

     ii.      The details of any proposed Remedial Works shall be submitted to, and approved in
     writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such Remedial Works shall be incorporated into the
     development during the course of construction and completed prior to occupation of the
     development and

     iii.     A Verification Report shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local
     Planning Authority prior to first occupation of the development. The Verification Report shall
     validate that all remedial works undertaken on site were completed in accordance with those
     agreed by the LPA.

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

5.   The development hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the means of vehicular
     access from Redmans Close has been constructed and laid out in accordance with the approved
     plans.

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




                                                 39
6.   The parking spaces shown on the submitted plan(s) shall be made available at all times in
     connection with the use of the premises.

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

7.   No development authorised by this permission shall take place unless and until the local
     planning authority has received and approved in writing a site operating statement in relation to
     provision of: Permitted hours for construction works; delivery of materials and delivery and
     collection of equipment; provision and use of on-site parking contractors’ and workpeoples;
     vehicles; wheelwashing; and street sweeping; and no development or activities related or
     incidental thereto shall take place on the site in contravention of such site operating statement.

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

8.   If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site
     then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing by teh Local Planning
     Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted and obtained written approval
     from the LPA for an amendment to the remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected
     contamination shall be dealt with

     To ensure a safe form of development that poses no unacceptable risk of pollution.




                                                 40
APPLICATION No:           09/58151/HH
APPLICANT:                Mr D Evans
LOCATION:                 1 Gertrude Close, Salford, M5 4GR,
PROPOSAL:                 Erection of part single part two storey rear extension
WARD:                     Ordsall

Description of Site and Surrounding Area

This application relates to a terraced property on Gertrude Close, Salford. The area is residential in
nature and is dominated by terraced properties. The application property is the end terrace in the row.
To the side and rear of the property is a public footpath and beyond this to the rear is the Broadway Inn
Public House. Boundary treatments to the side/rear of the site consists of a 1.4m high fence.

Description of Proposal

Permission is sought for the erection of a part single/part two-storey rear extension.

The proposed extension would be flush with the side gable of the existing dwelling. It would have a
maximum projection of 4.15m from the main rear elevation of the existing dwelling and would have a
maximum width of 4.3m at ground floor, whilst the first floor would be 3.3m in width. It would be set
in approximately 1.5m from the common boundary with 3 Gertrude Close with the two storey element
set in 2.5m. The single storey element would be approximately 3.4m in height with a monopitch roof
which would slope upwards away from the common boundary with 3 Gertrude Close. The two-storey
element would be approximately 5.7m in height at its highest point with a duo pitched roof.
(Approximately 1.4m lower than the existing dwelling).

Internally the proposal would accommodate a kitchen at ground floor level and a twin bedroom at first
floor level.

Site History

07/54736/HH - part single/part two-storey rear extension. Refused 27/9/09 for the following reasons:

The two storey element of the part single/part two storey rear extension would result in an
unacceptable loss of light and be overbearing to the residents of No.3 Gertrude Close. The proposal is
contrary to Policy HE7 of the City of Salford's Supplementary Planning Document and Policy DES7
of the Adopted UDP.

The roof design of the part single/part two storey rear extension does not respect the general character
rhythm and proportion of the original structure and in doing so does not respect the character of the
area, contrary to Policies DES1 and DES8 of the Adopted UDP.




                                                    41
The current application differs from the previous refused application as the depth of the two-storey
element has been increased from 3.15m to 4.15m and the width has been increased from 3.25m to
3.3m. The window size and design has also been amended as has the design of the roof of the two
storey element which would now introduce a shallower pitch roof more in keeping with the existing
dwelling. As a result the height has also been reduced. The depth of the single storey element has been
reduced by approximately 0.1m and its height has also been increased slightly.

In addition a letter has also been submitted with the current application outlining the personal
circumstances of the applicants. This will be addressed later in this report.

Publicity

Site Notice: Not Applicable
Press Advert: Not Applicable

Neighbour Notification

The following neighbour addresses were notified:

3 Gertrude Close, Salford M5
1 Byrom Street, Salford M5
Broadway Inn, 32 Broadway, Salford M5
Managers accommodation, Braodway Inn, Broadway, Salford, M5
16 Isaac Close, Salford M5

Representations

None received to date

Councillor Kean has requested that the application be determined by the Planning and Transportation
Regulatory Panel for the following reasons:
to enable the applicant to put forward the personal circumstances for this application

Consultations

No comments received to date.

Planning Policy Framework
Development Plan Policy

UDP               DES1 - Respecting Context
UDP               DES7 - Amenity of Users and Neighbours
UDP               DES8 - Alterations and Extensions


Other Material Considerations

SPD               SPD1 - House Extensions




                                                   42
Appraisal

It is considered the main issues for consideration with this application are the impact of the proposed
extension on the amenity of the surrounding and future residents, and the impact of the proposed
development on the character of the area.

Design

Unitary Development Plan 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.

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

The proposed development would not be visible from Gertrude Close. It would however be visible
from the foot paths to the side and rear of the property and Isaac Close. The two storey element of the
proposal would be approximately 1.4m lower than the main dwelling and the single storey element
would be approximately 3.4m in height at its highest point. The proposed development would
therefore appear subordinate to the parent dwelling. It would incorporate low angled pitched roofs in
keeping with the existing dwelling and the window size and design is also considered to be in keeping
with the existing dwelling.

The application form indicates that materials used would match those of the existing dwelling and a
condition would be attached to ensure this.

It is considered therefore that the proposed development would not appear as a prominent feature in
the street scene and would not have an unacceptable impact on the character and appearance of the
existing dwelling and surrounding area in accordance with policies DES1 and DES8.

Amenity

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

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

Policy 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




                                                  43
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 development would introduce a bedroom window in its rear elevation at first floor level.
The distance maintained to the rear boundary would be approximately 2.2m. To the rear of the site is a
footpath and beyond the footpath is the Broadway Inn Public House. It is considered therefore that the
obscure glazing of this window is not necessary.

The proposed development would introduce no windows in its side elevations and there are no
windows in the side gable of 16 Isaac Close.

The single storey element of the proposed development would not project beyond a 45 degree line
taken from a point 3m along the common boundary from the rear elevation of 3 Gertrude Close in
accordance with policy HE5.

Both elements of the proposed extension would not project beyond the rear elevation of 16 Isaac close
and as such would not be visible from within its rear elevation.

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

The two storey element of the proposed development would project 4.15m beyond the rear elevation of
3 Gertrude Close and would maintain a distance of approximately 2.5m from the common boundary.

The existing situation on site is such that the properties along Isaac Close are at a higher level that
those of Gertrude Close (approximately 1.2m higher). The side gable of 16 Isaac Close also projects
approximately 4m beyond the main rear elevation of the properties along Gertrude Close. The
application site and adjoining property are sited to the south of 16 Isaac Close, but the presence of the
gable of No 16 has a notable impact on the amenity of 1 and 3 Gertrude Close.

There has been a previous application on this site (07/54736/HH) which was refused due to design and
the impact of the proposed extension on the occupiers of 3 Gertrude Close in terms of loss of light and
overbearing.

In terms of the impact of the proposal on the occupiers of 3 Gertrude Close, the previous scheme had
an eaves height of approximately 4.9m and an overall height of approximately 7m.

The current proposal has reduced the height of the eaves to approximately 4.5m (closest the boundary
with 3 Gertrude close) and has reduced the overall height to approximately 5.7m at its highest point.
Despite this the maximum projection of the proposed extension has been increased from 3.15m to
4.15m.

The side gable at 16 Isaac Close is approximately 7m from the common boundary between 1 and 3
Gertrude Close. The two-storey element of the proposed extension would be approximately 2.5m from
this same common boundary.




                                                   44
It is considered therefore that the two storey element of the proposed extension would result in a
significant detrimental impact on the amenity of 3 Gertrude Close in terms of loss of light and
overbearing presence. The proposal would therefore be contrary to contrary to policy HE7 of the
House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document and policy DES7 of the Unitary Development
Plan.

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
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 applicants have submitted a letter outlining their personal circumstances in support of the
application. The letter states that the applicants occupy the house with their four children, some of
which are in higher education and require additional space for study and to live comfortably. The
applicants have explained that they cannot afford to move to a larger house and so extending is the
only option.

The existing property comprises of a hall, a living room and kitchen/dining room at ground floor level
and three bedrooms, a WC and a bathroom at first floor level.

The proposed development would allow a separate kitchen and dining room at ground floor level and
would introduce a new bedroom at first floor level as well as an extended bathroom.

Although it is acknowledged that the applicants would benefit from additional space it is considered
that their circumstances and the need for the extension would not outweigh the harm caused to the
amenity of surrounding occupiers.

Conclusions/Summary

It is considered that the proposal would not have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the street
scene. However it is considered that the proposed development would result in unacceptable loss of
light and would be overbearing to the occupiers of number 3 Gertrude Close contrary to policy DES7
of the UDP and policy HE7 of the House Extensions SPD and that there are no other material
considerations that outweigh those policies.

Recommendation

Refuse

1.   The proposed development would result in an unacceptable loss of light and would be
     overbearing to the occupiers of 3 Gertrude Close contrary to Policy DES7 of the Adopted
     Unitary Development Plan and Policy HE7 of the House Extension Supplementary Planning
     Document.

Notes to Applicant




                                                  45
1.   Please note this refusal relates to drawing numbers 229.01 Revision A, 229.02 and 229.03




                                              46

				
DOCUMENT INFO