Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Planning and Highways Committee - Thursday, 15th December, 2022 2.00 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Level 2, Town Hall Extension. View directions

Contact: Ian Hinton-Smith 

Media

Items
No. Item

66.

Supplementary Information on Applications Being Considered pdf icon PDF 68 KB

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

Minutes:

A copy of the late representations received had been circulated in advance of the meeting regarding application 135281/FO/2022, 134603/FO/2022 and 134971/FO/2022.

 

Decision

 

To receive and note the late representations.

67.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 68 KB

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 17 November 2022.

Minutes:

Decision

 

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 17 November 2022 as a correct record.

68.

135281/FO/2022 - 32 Montcliffe Crescent, Manchester, M16 8GR - Whalley Range Ward pdf icon PDF 1 MB

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

Minutes:

The Committee considered the report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing that presented an application that sought the retention of a 3-bedroom single storey dwelling house (Class C3) in the rear garden of a two storey dwellinghouse known as 32 Montcliffe Crescent in the Whalley Range Ward.

 

This application relates to the rear garden of a modern two storey detached house within the Whalley Range ward. The property has a single storey side extension and gardens to the front and rear. There is a drive at the front of the property and a garage in the rear garden which has been demolished and replaced with a single storey 3-bedroom dwellinghouse that is the subject of this application. The original dwellinghouse fronts a footpath linking Montcliffe Crescent to Stoneyfield Close. Montcliffe Crescent runs along the eastern side of the site where access is provided by a double metal gate to the single storey dwellinghouse in the rear garden.

 

The planning officer did not add anything by way of a statement.

No objector to the application attended or made any representations.

 

The applicant’s agent for the application addressed the Committee and stated the family’s reasons for retaining the building at 32 Montcliffe Crescent, stating that the dwelling had been built for the family’s disabled daughter (a single mother) and her 3 children. The children were attending a school in the area, and it was hoped that the family would not have to be re-housed and need to find other school places as a result. The family’s needs would not easily be met outside of Whalley Range. The agent stated that these are challenging times and there would be a long waiting list for the family to await a housing solution in Manchester. The agent wished for the Planning Committee to support this family and overturn the officer’s recommendation of Refuse for the application.

 

The planning officer stated that this was decision was made all the more difficult in that the premises was currently occupied but added that there had been 2 previous applications for planning permission at this site that had been withdrawn due to having not been supported by the Planning team at the city council. Any public benefits of the scheme would be outweighed by the harm caused. Other extensions in this location had been granted but these differed in that they formed part of the main dwelling/garden and were not a separate dwelling with own fencing and sub-standard garden, parking and mentioned that this site, having already been built, was cramped and out of character for the area. The planning officer requested the Committee to refuse the application.

 

Councillor Leech asked how long the dwelling had been occupied.

 

The planning officer did not know but stated that it was not occupied prior to the previous, withdrawn applications.

 

Councillor Leech asked if the applicants were aware that the previous applications were deemed unsuitable by the Planning team.

 

The planning officer stated that they would have been made  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

69.

134603/FO/2022 - Pellowe House, Francis Road, Manchester, M20 9XP - Withington Ward pdf icon PDF 2 MB

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

Minutes:

The Committee considered the report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing that presented an application for the erection of a three-storey building to provide 24 apartments following demolition of existing buildings including creation of a new vehicular access from Francis Road, parking provision, landscaping and associated works.

 

The application site currently contains a former industrial building that previously contained a commercial laundry with areas of hardstanding to the front and rear used for vehicle parking associated with the use. The building on the application site is vacant.

 

The planning officer did not add anything by way of a statement.

 

No objector to the application attended or made any representations.

 

The application’s agent attended but did not wish to add anything to the printed report as no objector had attended to make representations.

 

Councillor Lyons enquired whether the scheme was affordable or social and also rent and/or shared ownership.

 

The planning officer stated that the scheme was either for affordable or social rented accommodation which will be decided through discharging a condition of planning permission for 100% rented product, managed by the registered provider.

 

Councillor Leech stated that he knew this area fairly well and questioned the lack of 100% off-street parking for the scheme, with parking being a problem in this location. Councillor Leech was not convinced that the scheme would not add to additional car journeys or further parking issues in this area, noting that Christies Hospital extended parking scheme areas which has experienced problems. He noted that there were more electric vehicle charging points to come but asked what would happen for cars with no parking space for this development. Previous planning applications for this site had been deemed not sustainable at 16 places for 16 dwellings and yet this scheme had been deemed suitable at 62% parking. Councillor Leech concluded by stating that affordable rented property was welcome, but should the Committee approve them if the parking was not sustainable.

 

The planning officer stated that there was a balance to be struck with what exists at the site already. Currently there was a factory building with limited parking on site whereas this was a scheme with a travel plan including public transport links and 100% cycle parking for all dwellings, and therefore, fully sustainable. The planning officer asked the Committee to consider the merits of this application and noted the 4 electric vehicle charging points with more to follow. Additionally, the scheme was worthy of approval on its own merits, regardless of its offer of 100% affordable rented property.

 

Councillor Leech noted the report stating the need for people to downsize who are under-occupying their properties. Councillor Leech felt that the majority of tenants for these dwelling places would be older people who would be less likely to cycle, adding that there was a need for larger homes in the area, contrary to the comments in the report.

 

The planning officer referred to his previous statement with nothing further to add.

 

Councillor Flanagan  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

70.

134971/FO/2022 - 67 Deansgate, Manchester, M3 2BW - Deansgate Ward pdf icon PDF 587 KB

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

Minutes:

The Committee considered the report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing that presented an application for the use of a ground floor property on Deansgate in Manchester City Centre as an Adult Gaming Centre.

 

It is proposed to change the use of the ground floor to an adult gaming centre (Sui Generis), with slot machines for gambling. This would occupy the ground floor with the upper floor and basement used for storage and staff facilities. The premises would be open to the public and in use 24 hours a day, seven days a week. 

 

This site is a three-storey building with frontages onto Deansgate and Barton Square. The building adjoins the Grade II* Listed Barton Arcade and is in St Ann’s Square Conservation Area and adjacent to the Parsonage Gardens Conservation Area.

 

The building is not listed but is a non-designated heritage asset with decorative stone elevations and modern shopfronts.

 

The planning officer noted the information in the late representations report regarding the marketing that was taken to let out the property and explained why this was not successful. The applicant stated that vacancy rates had risen on Deansgate and that no other offers came forward for the property during the advertising period. The planning officer confirmed that the officer’s recommendation was still to refuse the application.

 

No objector to the application attended or made any representations.

 

The applicant’s agent for the application addressed the Committee and stated that there were no external alterations and that the refusal reason given was that the scheme was not compatible with Deansgate. Leisure uses in this area were permitted by the city council and the NPPF specifies that this style of property is a leisure-based premises, appropriate for town centres. The agent expressed that it would surely be better to have this development and the creation of 12 jobs, rather than a derelict shop front. He noted that the client had provided a bespoke plan and that the use of digital displays would add interest to the frontage. Another gambling premises in this location with digital displays in the windows had their planning applications approved and the agent noted that a refusal reason was regarding the scheme providing insufficient natural surveillance and would be harmful to the vitality, viability and character of the area, yet there had been no objections from the environmental agency or GMP, who had encouraged a 24-hour establishment. Having a premises open for 24 hours a day would be good for the area in terms of safety, environment and security. Adult Gaming Centres are notable for generating increased footfall in town centres, information in which had been submitted to the city council and possibly overlooked. The agent concluded by stating that the client would not have chosen this area if they did not think it suitable and requested that the Committee overturn the officer’s recommendation to refuse the application.

 

The planning officer stated that all the reasons for the officer’s recommendation to refuse were set out  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.