Agenda and draft minutes
Planning and Highways Committee - Thursday, 19th December, 2024 2.00 pm
Venue: Council Chamber, Level 2, Town Hall Extension. View directions
Contact: Callum Jones
Media
No. | Item |
---|---|
Supplementary Information on Applications Being Considered The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licencing is enclosed. Minutes: A copy of the late representations received had been circulated in advance of the meeting regarding applications 136256/FO/2023, 141415/FO/2024 and 139778/FO/2024.
Decision
To receive and note the late representations. |
|
To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 21 November 2024. Minutes: Decision
To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 21 November 2024 as a correct record. |
|
136256/FO/2023 - 136 Withington Road, Manchester M16 8FB - Whalley Range Ward The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed. Minutes: The Committee considered a report that proposed the partial demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment to provide 35 no. residential homes, consisting of 31 apartments (13 x 1 bed and 18 x 2 bed) and 4 townhouses (2 x 2 bed and 2 x 3 bed), landscaping, access and associated works.
The application site, which formerly accommodated the former Nello James Centre, comprises a brownfield site measuring 0.25 hectares located on Withington Road within Whalley Range Conservation Area within Whalley Range Ward. The building on site is a non-designated heritage asset.
The proposals were subject to the notification by way of 117 letters to nearby addresses, a site notice was posted on site and an advertisement placed in the Manchester Evening News.
In response to the originally conducted neighbour notification 8 letters of objection were received, 1 letter of support was also received. 4 letters of objection have been received in relation to the submission of revised plans, one neutral comment and one comment of support, additionally Ward Councillor Razaq has objected.
There were no objectors present.
The applicant’s agent spoke in support of the application. He said that the site was currently in a state of significant disrepair and attracted anti-social behaviour. He said that the developer had worked closely with the Planning Department to bring forward the proposal that was well designed, high quality and sympathetic to the local conservation area. He said that the proposal was to deliver 13 one bedroom apartments, 18 two bedroom apartments and 4 townhouses. He said that all options to retain the existing trees had been explored and that whilst three mature trees would be lost, noting that one had recently been lost due to a storm, 18 new trees would be planted. He commented that the site was in a highly sustainable area with access to public transport and the car parking space offered had been assessed as being acceptable for the proposed development, in addition to the 36 secure cycle parking that would be delivered. He concluded by stating that the proposed development would address a site that was currently dilapidated and increase the housing stock in the area. He asked that the Committee endorse the officer recommendation and approve the application.
Councillor Curley stated that the site visit had been very beneficial, a view that was reiterated by a number of Members. He commented that whist he had every confidence in the assessment of the Viability Statement that had been received to state that the development cannot support any affordable housing provision, he remained disappointed that no affordable housing could be provided, making reference to the Council’sManchester Housing Strategy 2022 to 2032 that identified increasing affordable housing as a priority for the city. He said that for this reason alone he could not support the application.
Councillor Kilpatrick spoke and referred to the current state of disrepair on the site and acknowledged the cost associated with bringing this site back into use. He also stated that he was ... view the full minutes text for item 72. |
|
141415/FO/2024 - 16 Alness Road, Manchester M16 8ET - Whalley Range Ward The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed. Minutes: The Committee considered a report that presented the application for the change of use of the property from a House in Multiple Occupation to a 15 unit property offering short stay accommodation for homeless single men over 18 years of age with complex needs. A single storey extension and associated wheelchair lift and external steps are proposed at the rear, along with car parking and cycle and bin stores. The site is located within the Whalley Range Conservation Area.
Twelve letters had been received from local residents, ten of which object to the proposal, while the remaining two did not object in principle but requested that any consent granted be conditioned to ensure that users of the service sign up to a code of conduct and a system to be in place to deal with local residents’ concerns when the use is operational. The objections raised include overdevelopment of the site; potential increase in anti-social activity and crime in the area resulting from future residents; and the design of the extension and elevational alterations.
The applicant was proposing the following:
The proposal would provide accommodation for 15 single homeless men, with complex needs, who meet the following referral criteria:
The Planning Officer commented that if the application was approved, there would be a revision to Condtition10 in accordance with the City Arborist report.
There were no objectors present.
The applicant was present but chose not to address the Committee.
Councillor Gartside spoke and said that the inclusion of a floor plan in the papers would have greatly assisted the Committee. This view was reiterated by a number of Members. She enquired if there was a communal area for residents to congregate and socialise.
Councillor Lovecy commented that it was often important for people with complex needs to be able to access communal areas to engage with therapeutic and social activities.
Councillor Bell enquired about the use of the basement for accommodation and the need to ensure resident safety if they needed to evacuate in the event of an emergency. He also enquired about the location of the staff office.
Councillor Curley addressed ... view the full minutes text for item 73. |
|
The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed. Minutes: The Committee considered a proposal for the part retention, part demolition of existing buildings with the retained fabric forming part the base of an 18 storey ‘tower’. There would be 2 ground floor commercial units, 2 basements and a central landscaped courtyard. There have been 11 objections and a neutral comment.
Objections have been received from Victorian Society, Georgian Group and Historic Buildings and Places, none of whom are Statutory Consultees.
Historic England’s interest relates to the impact on the setting of the Grade II* Listed Express Building and have not objected.
There were no objectors present.
The applicant’s agent spoke in support of the application. He said that the applicant had worked with Planning Officers and the scheme would deliver significant commercial and economic benefits to the city. It would retain some aspects of the heritage buildings. All buildings are vacant and structurally unsafe. The proposal is a modern, high quality design and would deliver high quality office space that would be attractive to existing and new businesses.
Councillor Garside, whilst noting the comments from the Agent expressed concern that a significant section of working class heritage could be lost.
Councillor Richards stated that there was always a tension between development and protecting heritage, however she was satisfied that the correct balance had been achieved in the proposals presented to Committee.
The Deputy Director of Planning reiterated the comment previously expressed by the Agent that none of the buildings were protected and they did not sit within a conservation area. He said that all consultees and their responses were documented in the report. There are two viable options for the site, demolish the whole site or retain the best examples of heritage and incorporate these into the proposal. Officers consider the proposal as the best option.
Councillor Garside proposed a site visit to enable members to understand the nature of the heritage to be retained and the impact the development would have on the immediate area.
Councillor Kilpatrick seconded the proposal.
Decision
The Committee resolved to defer consideration of the application, so that a site visit could be undertaken for the reasons stated.
|