The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licencing is now enclosed.

A copy of the late representations that were received in respect of applications (126435/FO/2020, 126608/FO/2020 and 125871/LL/2020), since the agenda was issued, was circulated.

Decision

To receive and note the late representations.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 30 July 2020.

Decision

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 30 July 2020 as a correct record.

The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed.

The application relates to the conversion of the existing dwelling to create two three bedroom dwellings; and the erection of two four bedroom dwellings with associated

car parking and landscaping.

The application site measures 1.421m² in size and is located on the western side of

Trenchard Drive. It is irregular in shape and consists of nos. 25 and 27/29 Trenchard

Drive. No. 25 Trenchard Drive was a former garage that was converted into a

dwellinghouse, without the benefit of planning permission, while nos. 27/29

Trenchard Drive, was originally a pair of semi-detached dwellings that was last used

as a single residence (now vacant following a fire).

To the north of the site lies the landscaped buffer associated with a Manchester

Airport operated long stay car park and to the west is an enclosed grass paddock associated with The Tatton Arms Public House which is located further south at the junction of Trenchard Drive and Ringway Road. To the south of the site stands a pair of semidetached dwellings. To the east of the site, on the opposite side of Trenchard Drive, there is a cleared plot of land (nos. 30-40 Trenchard Drive) which benefits from a planning permission for 15 dwellings (ref. 118924/JO/2018). The neighbourhood consists predominantly of two storey semi and terraced dwellings, though several commercial properties are located close to the junction of Trenchard Drive and Ringway Road, namely The Tatton Arms Public House, the Moss Nook Restaurant (currently vacant) and a detached two storey office premises called Moss Nook House.

The applicant is proposing the conversion of nos. 27/29 Trenchard Drive into a pair of 3 bed semi-detached dwellings, the erection of a rear dormer extension to nos. 27/29 Trenchard Drive, the erection of a 3 storey pair of 4 bed semi-detached dwellings to the side of nos. 27/29 Trenchard Drive, provision of 8 car parking spaces, 2 per dwelling and to facilitate the proposal the existing conservatory and no. 25 Trenchard Drive (the converted garage) would be demolished.

The Chair confirmed that Local Ward Councillor O’Neill had requested that the Committee consider a site visit and would have spoken on the Item but had problems accessing the virtual committee meeting.

The Chair invited the Planning Officer to present the Item.

A Planning Officer requested that the Committee draw their attention to the supplementary information provided for broader context on the plans for this development.

The Chair invited an objector to speak.

The objector also requested that the Committee make a site visit and the Chair confirmed that that request had been received via a Local Ward Councillor and would be addressed within the meeting.

The Chair invited the agent for the applicant to speak and the applicant’s agent addressed the Committee with information about the application.

The Chair invited a Planning Officer to speak.

The Planning Officer referred to the reduction of dwellings explaining that this was due to concerns over the visual aspect and issues regarding car parking and stated that the reduction will  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed.

The application relates to a site, known as T1, is 0.32 hectares and bounded by Water Street, Manchester Goods Yard, and Grape Street. It is accessed from Water Street and is in use as a construction site for Manchester Goods Yard. The original planning permission (114385/FO/2016) approved the Manchester Goods Yard offices and a residential ‘Tower (T1). Manchester Goods Yard is under construction and this proposal would replace the ‘T1’ element of that permission. The site is in the Castlefield Conservation Area and is part of a Masterplan and Strategic Regeneration Framework.

At its meeting on 30 July 2020 the Committee resolved that it was 'minded to refuse' the application on the grounds that the number of units proposed was too large and it did not provide sufficient parking for disabled people. They requested officers to bring a report to the next meeting which addresses these concerns.

This proposal would supersede the Tower 1 element of the previous permission with a 32 storey building comprising 390 Co-Living Apartments with 210no. 2-, 3- and 4-bed shared apartments and 180no. studios with 870 Bedspaces. There would be ancillary amenity space on four floors consisting of residents’ amenity space, a gym, commercial space, and  self storage. There would be 152 cycle spaces in the building and 40 sheffield stands in the public realm.

80% of the 870 bedspaces would be within the Duo, Trio or Quad units which would all be single occupancy.  The Duo, Trio and Quad (2, 3 and 4 bed) units could be a primary residence and would only be available on tenancies from 6-months upwards. When single occupancy is taken into account, each of the shared units meets or exceeds NDSS, without taking into account access to shared amenity. Bedroom areas would provide as much useable floorspace as possible.  Each apartment will have a shared communal kitchen and lounge. The studios would be available solely on short-term lets, up to 6 months in length, so would not be a primary residence.  This would be controlled via the Section 106 Agreement. 

The Chair invited a Planning Officer to make comment on the application.

A Planning Officer stated that they had looked at addressing the Committee’s concerns following the previous Committee meeting on 30 July 2020, stating that the applicant had secured 35 car parking spaces in an adjacent building for the sole use of disabled parking for both buildings, namely T1 (minded to refuse at the previous committee meeting) and T2 (approved at the previous committee meeting). The Planning Officer confirmed that if T1 were not approved then the disabled parking spaces would not be available for T2. The Planning Officer informed the Committee that the scheme was in keeping with the Executive resolution and that if the Co-living scheme were to be subject to a more dispersed approach it would use up more land and have a broader consequence on other requirements for commercial space in the St John’s area and create a larger challenge in managing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41.

The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed.

This application is for the construction of four buildings of heights varying from 10 storeys to 45 storeys together comprising Co-living bedspaces (use class Sui Generis) and associated amenity facilities, with ground floor commercial units

(Use classes A3 (Café / Restaurant and D2 (Gym)), private amenity space and public realm comprising hard and soft landscaping, car parking and cycle facilities and other associated works.

Consideration of this application was deferred at the meeting of the Planning and

Highways Committee on 30July 2020 to enable a site visit to take place to allow

Members to assess the impact that the proposed development would have on nearby listed buildings. The site visit was undertaken on the morning of 27 August 2020.

A Planning Officer addressed the Committee with information about the application.

The applicant’s agent attended the meeting and addressed the Committee.

A Local Ward Councillor gave objection to the proposal on the grounds of the height of the buildings with the tallest being two storeys shorter that the Beetham Tower which the Local Ward Councillor felt was not in keeping with this area, stating that First Street was comprised of mid-rise towers of public realm usage. The Local Ward Councillor further stated that the development would overshadow areas of Deansgate and Hulme and sit uneasily with the immediately local aspects of Manchester’s industrial history. The Local Ward Councillor made comment that the Co-living aspect is in conflict with current space standard and felt concerned around the impact of the Coronovirus restrictions when applied to living in such dwellings. Further comment was made about the large increase of population in this Local Ward from this development alone and how that would present with more traffic and round the clock disturbances from food deliveries and taxis. In conclusion the Local Ward Councillor stated that whilst the open green space proposed as part of the development was welcomed, it was outweighed by the harm that allowing this application would present on the local surrounding area.

The Chair invited the Planning Officer to address the concerns of the Local Ward Councillor.

The Planning Officer questioned the comment that the building was too tall by stating that the site was situated at the main gateway entrance to the City Centre from the Airport and South Manchester motorway network and that this would be a prime location for such a development, being built on open land and away from the more historic aspects of the City Centre. The Planning Officer requested that the Committee take note of the inclusion of a park on the site and that the site in its current state was overdue for development.

The Chair invited the Committee to comment and ask questions.

A Member raised concerns around the close proximity of this development to listed buildings at Mackintosh Mill and Cambridge Street Mill, the loss of residential amenities in the north side of Hulme, the potential for a conversion plan if the Co-living scheme was not successful, if short term tenancies  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed.

This application is regarding the erection of part 4, part 11 storey residential (Class C3) development (with roof top plant room) comprising 66 (Class C3) residential units (3 x 2 bed town houses, 46 x two bed apartments and 17 x one bed apartments) together with associated car parking (10 spaces including 5 Electric Vehicle Charging spaces), cycle parking (66 spaces) communal roof terrace (level 6), landscaping and ancillary infrastructure including rooftop PV solar panels, alterations to access onto Store Street

The site is 0.1 hectares and bounded by Store Street, the Ashton Canal, the 3 storey

William Jessop Court, a retaining wall and the junction of Millbank Street and Store

Street. The elevated Ashton canal passes the southern boundary and crosses Store

Street on an aqueduct, which is grade II* listed. The site is 200 m North West of

Piccadilly Station and is close to all sustainable transport options. The site is in Flood Risk Zone 1 (low risk) and is within a critical drainage area.

The application proposes the erection of part 4, part 11 storey building comprising 66

shared ownership homes (100% affordable) delivered through a joint venture with a

registered provider. It would include 3 two bed town houses, 46 two bed apartments

and 17 one bed apartments.

20% of the affordable homes would be secured through a S106 Agreement and the

remaining 80% as a condition of grant funding from Homes England. The shared

ownership housing model requires that the homes would be available for purchase at

between 25% and 75% of market value. Occupiers who have entered into a Shared

Ownership Lease would be allowed to ‘staircase’ to full ownership.

The applicant’s agent addressed the Committee with information about the application.

The Chair invited a Local Ward Councillor to speak on the application.

A Ward Councillor gave support to the application giving mention to it being a proposal of 100 percent affordable housing by Government definition and 20 percent genuinely affordable by the Manchester definition. The Ward Councillor welcomed the addition of City Centre premises that were classed as affordable and the two to one provision on tree planting whereby any one tree removed to develop the site would be replaced with two.

The Chair invited the Committee to comment and ask questions.

Councillor Lyons confirmed that he had declared an interest on the Item and was speaking as a Local Ward Councillor, not as a Member of the Committee.

Councillor Lyons stated that this was the result of Local Ward Councillors putting their values and principles in action and thanked the applicants for working together with them to realise this vision of affordable housing in the City Centre.  Councillor Lyons then left the meeting and took no part in the debate or vote on this item.

The Chair again invited the Committee to comment and ask questions.

A Member spoke in support of the application on the basis of affordable housing on a shared ownership scheme and the two to one  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed.

This application is in regard to the demolition of 42, 44 and 46 Thomas Street (including 41, 43 and 45 Back Turner Street) to facilitate redevelopment of the wider site under extant planning permission and listed building consent ref:

113475/FO/2016 and 113476/LO/2016

Planning permission and listed building consent were granted in August 2017 to develop a site bounded by Thomas Street, Kelvin Street and Back Turner Street. The scheme incorporated 7 Kelvin Street, a grade II listed building, but removed the 3 storey former weaver’s cottages known as 42-46 Thomas Street (including 41, 43 and 45 Back Turner Street). 7 Kelvin Street is on the City Council’s local Buildings at

Risk list.

Due to the particular circumstances of the matter a site visit had been arranged for members which took place in the morning prior to the committee meeting.

The meeting was informed that the Weavers Cottages referred to were not then listed but they were considered to be non-designated heritage assets. The impact of their loss was properly considered in the context of national and local planning policies. They have been heavily altered internally and much original fabric and character has been lost.

The application approved the erection of a 4/5 storey building that retained and incorporated the Grade II Listed 7 Kelvin Street, to provide 20 dwellings, with active ground floor uses, following the demolition of numbers 42 to 46 Thomas Street

(113475).

A related application for listed building consent approved alterations and repair and change of use of 7 Kelvin Street to 3 apartments as part of a 4/5 storey residential development (113476).   

In July 2018, following the acquisition of the site, the Weavers cottages were designated as Grade II Listed. As such all remaining buildings on-site are now grade-II listed. Applications to discharge pre-commencement conditions on the site have been submitted and are currently under consideration

The Chair invited a Planning Officer to introduce the Item.

The Planning Officer requested the Committee take note of a minor amendment in the supplementary agenda.

The Chair then invited the applicant to speak and the applicant addressed the Committee with information about the application.

A Ward Councillor spoke in objection to the proposed demolition and redevelopment of the site, stating that the grade-II listed buildings in question consist of three mill workers cottages and are survivors of Manchester’s industrial and working class heritage. The Ward Councillor gave mention to Historic England having submitted a representation which detailed why they felt the demolition should not be allowed and that Historic England believed there was still a viable use for the buildings in their current state. The Ward Councillor requested the Committee consider a decision of minded to refuse to facilitate further investigations on how the buildings could be developed without losing their heritage character, giving further mention of Heritage England’s alleged intention of appealing any proposed demolition and redevelopment.

The Chair invited the Committee to comment and ask questions.

Councillor Lyons confirmed that he had declared an interest on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed.

The application site relates to an open piece of land situated along The Fairway within a predominantly residential area of Moston in North Manchester. The site is bounded by residential to the north, east and the west, with Moston Brook

Recreational Space to the east. The site is accessed via The Fairway.

The proposal site is irregular in shape with the frontage being narrower than the remainder of the site which opens up as it goes further rearward. It is immediately bounded to the north east of the application site by a sub-station and a detached property identified as no. 51 The Fairway. Moston Brook Recreational Space lies immediately to the south of the site, and to the east residential properties on West

Avenue and opposite the site and to the east are residential properties relating to The Fairway.

Currently the frontage of the site is bounded by low timber rail fencing erected by the applicant and connects to the dry stone wall that returns partially along the eastern boundary with the pathway running through to Moston Brook Recreational Space.

There is no formal vehicular access to the site with the main access being pedestrianised.

The submitted application proposes the erection of one 2 storey dwellinghouse

(Class C3) with associated parking, landscaping and boundary treatment.

The Chair invited the applicant to speak and the applicant addressed the Committee with information about the application.

The Chair invited the Committee to comment and ask questions.

Members welcomed the proposal and the zero loss of trees on the site.

Councillor Lyons moved the recommendation and this was seconded by Councillor S Ali.

Decision

To approve the application, subject to the conditions and reasons set out in the report submitted.