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

A copy of the late representations received had been circulated in advance of the meeting regarding applications 141607/FO/2024, 141625/VO/2024, 141460/FO/2024, 141306/FO/2024, 141471/FO/2024, 140060/FO/2024 and 141816/FO/2024.

Decision

To receive and note the late representations.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 23 January 2025.

Decision

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 23 January 2025 as a correct record.

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

The Committee considered a report that proposed a new office campus at the former Central Retail Park comprising two office buildings. The north building would be ground plus seven storeys with roof top plant; and a south building would be ground plus six storeys with roof top plant. 

The south building would include active ground floor uses to Great Ancoats Street.  Public realm would include enhancements to Great Ancoats Street, the creation of a plaza to the Rochdale Canal along with a Boulevard between the north and south buildings.  An access would be created on Great Ancoats Street. 

There would be an enabling works phase to modify the site levels in advance of the creation of a Park which is being considered under a concurrent application. 

The agent for the applicant spoke in support of the proposal. She said the proposal would deliver significant economic and environmental benefits for the city, this was a highly sustainable design proposal that supported the regeneration of the wider area by bringing life back to an area of disused land, the creation of c7000 skilled jobs, the extensive consultation exercise that had been undertaken, the testing of the high quality scheme that included quality public realm had demonstrated that any detrimental impact were either neutral or mitigated.

The Chair then invited the local ward Councillors present at the meeting to make their representations on this and the subsequent application, and in doing so stating that they were two separate applications, and the Committee would be required to determine both individually.

Councillor Good, Ancoats and Beswick ward addressed the Committee and spoke on both applications. He stated that the proposal for the park was not ambitious enough and did not meet the needs of a growing population in the area. He said the proportion of green space available for people to use was very low in the overall scheme. He asked who would be responsible for the ongoing management of the park and would this be open to the public 24hrs a day.  He also enquired if consideration could be given to including a condition that saw only independent and/or local businesses occupy the proposed retail units. He also questioned the rationale and positioning of the 12ft concrete wall.

Councillor I. Robinson, Ancoats and Beswick ward addressed the Committee and spoke in support of both applications. She said that this proposal was a huge opportunity for Manchester that would deliver significant economic benefits to the city, creating a significant number of quality, well paid jobs and bringing an area of derelict land back into use. She also spoke to the improved green space and how this would support biodiversity and welcomed the introduction of play equipment. She paid tribute to the local skateboard community who had been using the land and committed to working with them to identify an alternative site for them to use. She also said that she would welcome independent traders using the available retail space.

The Planning Offer said that a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

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

The Committee considered a report that proposed a park with lawns, hard and soft landscaping, age friendly seating, three play areas and outdoor exercise equipment. Accessible routes would be created from Great Ancoats Street and Old Mill Street and a timber boardwalk would provide direct access to Cotton Field Park. 96 trees would be planted. 

The agent for the applicant spoke in support of the proposal. She said the proposal would deliver a new, high quality park that was a priority for the city; the proposal would deliver improved connectivity between existing spaces; the design exceeded accessibility standards and would be a place for all residents to meet, play and relax; noting the significant mental and physical health benefits green space delivered; adequate seating would be provided throughout;  this would be a place for families and children to play in a safe environment; the provision of outside gym equipment to support physical activity; diverse planting that would provide educational opportunities and support biodiversity; and the park would provide a green buffer from Great Ancoats Street. 

The Planning Offer said that this proposed park would connect to Cotton Field Park that when considered together would deliver a significantly large park in Manchester. He said there would be seating for 465 and play and gym equipment provided.

Councillor Gartside said that she fully supported a new park in the city, especially one that provided safe, inclusive play areas for all children. She said that the developer should engage with the local school on the design on the park.

Councillor Kilpatrick spoke and questioned if the proposal was sufficient and ambitious enough to meet the calls for a quality public park in the city and he felt unable to support the current proposal. He also questioned why consideration to the provision of accessible public toilet facilities in the curtilage of the site had not been given. He further sought clarification as to the management of the park and if 24 hour public access to the park would be allowed and if a condition could be applied to ensure this was the case.

Councillor Curley said the Council should be very proud in bringing forward another park to the city. He said that he supported the application making particular reference to the accessibility of quality green space; improved net biodiversity; and the creation of quality high paid jobs.

Councillor Richards said that she welcomed and supported the application. She said that she noted and welcomed the mitigation in respect of light and the school. She said that the park would add value for children at the local school. She asked what the biodiversity net gain to be delivered from the park was, and asked what would happen to any archaeology that was uncovered during the excavation and build phase.

Councillor Davies said that she supported the call for inclusion of public toilets in the park, especially recognising the importance of these for older people. She enquired who would be responsible for the ongoing funding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

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

The Committee considered a report that proposed an increase the height of the hotel by three-storeys to provide an additional 54 bedrooms. It is proposed to remove the top storey of the building, add the new floors and reinstate the top storey above the new floors.

The site is a 146-bedroom hotel at 2-4 Atkinson Street. It is 0.47 ha, bounded by Atkinson Street, Scott Place and Tivoli Street and includes the Atkinson Street and Scott Place facades of Invicta House. An 8-storey new build element is clad in COR-TEN with a glazed top storey and louvred rooftop plant enclosure.

The agent for the applicant spoke in support of the proposal. He said that the proposal would deliver much needed hotel capacity in the city, noting that Manchester was the third most visited city in the UK and would contribute to Manchester being a world class visitor destination. He said that the design proposal was harmonious and in-keeping with the local physical environment adding that there would be no alteration to the lower floors or servicing arrangements. He said that the proposal would also result in the creation of additional jobs.

Councillor Curley said that he welcomed the proposal and noted that there were no concerns raised in relation to any detrimental historical or environmental impact. He also said that the increased capacity that would be delivered was much needed in the city.

Councillor Richards moved the recommendation to approve.

Councillor Hughes seconded the motion.

Decision

To approve the application.

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

The Committee considered a report that proposed the redevelopment of an existing retail store and associated areas of car parking to provide up to 115 residential properties.

The agent for the applicant spoke in support of the proposal. She said that the applicant had worked constructively with Planning Officers to bring forward this proposal. She said the proposal would deliver much needed housing on a Build to Rent scheme, adding that the applicant had also indicated that 8 of the proposed residential units would to be made available at an affordable rent. She said that in regard to the objections, no objection had been submitted by the Highways Department and said that the loss of the B&M Store was not a material planning consideration. She concluded by saying that the proposal would utilise a brown field site in a highly sustainable area and contribute to delivering much needed housing in the city.

Councillor Iqbal, Burnage ward addressed the Committee and said that he was representing the views of his fellow ward members. He said that whilst they were not opposed to developments that delivered much needed housing, however this proposal was not appropriate. He said that he was disappointed that only 7% of the units proposed were affordable. He said that the proposal was over development and was out of scale with the area and would place additional pressure on local infrastructure such as schools and NHS services. He also raised a concern that only 86 car parking spaces would be allocated for the proposed 115 units. He said that additional cars would also contribute to the already congested Kingsway Road, especially at peak times and he called for additional traffic lights. He also stated that the loss of the B&M store would be detrimental to local residents, adding that the local area was already underserved. He concluded by reiterating that whilst not opposed to development that delivered much needed housing this proposal was not appropriate for the area.

Councillor Kilpatrick sought clarification in relation to the flow of traffic, noting that  the road to the west of the site was private. He also stated he was disappointed that only 7% of the units proposed were affordable and developers needed to do more to deliver a minimum of 20%. He also asked if service charges had been incorporated into the affordability assessment. He also said that highways improvements needed to be applied to the whole area impacted by the development and not restricted to the immediate site.

Councillor Gartside asked for more details on the concerns raised by the objectors as she felt these were not sufficiently articulated in the written report, particularly regarding road safety. She also recognised the concerns raised by Councillor Igbal in relation to increased traffic and the impact this could have on Kingsway. She asked if the highways assessment had included the full length of Talbot Road to Mauldeth Road as she said this was already a very congested road. She asked if  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

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

The Committee considered a report that proposed the erection of a four bed detached dwelling on the site. Seventeen letters have been received from local residents, fifteen objecting to the proposal, while two welcome the inclusion of bat/bird boxes into the scheme. The main concerns raised include the size and location of the dwelling, the potential to exacerbate existing drainage issues, impact on existing ecological features and landscaping, the impact on the existing on-street parking arrangements, residential amenity and pedestrian/highway safety.

An objector spoke in opposition to the application. He said he would strongly encourage the Committee to undertake a site visit to fully appreciate and understand the area before making a decision on the current application. He said that the site was currently soaked as it acted as a soak away from the adjacent park and modelling of water run off needed to be undertaken. He said the proposal was an addition to and not part of the existing avenue. He referred to the number of objections to the application from the current residents, noting that the development would take approximately 1-3 years to complete and present significant disruption to the residents, particularly the immediate neighbours. He said HGV vehicles would have difficulty accessing the site, compounded by the threat of these then becoming stuck due to the ground condition. He also added that building materials would also be required to be craned over the existing houses and vehicles. He also added that the proposal would represent a significant loss of biodiversity.

The applicant addressed the Committee and said that the application was subject to positive preplanning meetings with the Planning Department. The proposal was for a 2 storey family home of a high quality design in a highly sustainable area that would enhance the street scene. He said the design, height and footprint was comparable with other properties, noting that planning permission had been granted to similar developments on the street. He said the proposal was wholly consistent with the Local Core Strategy and National Planning Framework. He recognised that the Highways Department, United Utilities and Flood Risk Management Team were satisfied with the proposal, noting that the site was not within Flood Zone 2 or 3. He said that bat and bird boxes would be installed, along with the installation of hedgehog friendly fencing, and the Neighbourhood Team Leader (Arboriculture) had no objection to the proposal from an arboriculture perspective. He concluded that the Committee should endorse the Planning Officers recommendation and approve the application.

Councillor Simcock, Didsbury East ward addressed the Committee and said that he supported the residents request for a site visit. He said that Didsbury had recently witnessed unprecedented levels of flooding that had directly impacted homes in this area and he questioned the views articulated in the report from the Flood Risk Management Team. He said that climate change was a reality and Fog Lane Park was a site that would continue to experience flooding that would directly impact adjoining properties. He  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

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

The Committee considered a report that proposed the erection of a part 4, part 5 storey building comprising purpose-built student accommodation (PBSA) (Sui Generis) with associated access, parking, cycle storage, landscaping, and other ancillary works following demolition of existing buildings.

The Planning Officer stated that the reference to The National Planning Policy Framework December 2023 should read as December 2024, however there was no change to the information and guidance provided in that section of the published report.

The agent for the applicant spoke in support of the proposal. She said that the applicant, a local and experienced developer had worked constructively with Planning Officers to bring forward this proposal over the previous 12 months. She said that the proposal would deliver 76 bedspaces in Purpose Built Student Accommodation, 8 of which would be fully accessible. She commented that this was a high quality design in a space already used for student accommodation. She said that an experienced management company would be employed that would provide a 24 hour point of contact for both students and local residents. She said that two disabled car parking spaces would be provided, however the site would be car free and this would be managed by way of a condition. She made reference to the positive extensive engagement and consultation exercise undertaken with both local residents and ward councillors. She said that the issue of parking had been raised and arrangements had been agreed to manage student arrivals and departure at the beginning and end of the term time, and this arrangement would be included as a condition of occupancy. She said the proposal was in a highly sustainable area and biodiversity would be increased by installing green roofs. She said that a viability assessment had been undertaken and that had concluded that affordable housing could not be delivered as part of this scheme.    

Councillor Curley asked who would be responsible for enforcing any conditions attached with the right to occupy, especially in regard to car ownership and what would be the sanction for any breach.

The Planning Officer said that it was highly unlikely that students choosing to live in this accommodation would own a car. He said the site was in a highly sustainable location with access to the Oxford Road corridor, the city centre and Universities. He said that the management company would ultimately be responsible for managing this.

Councillor Richards moved the recommendation to be minded to approve subject to the outcome of the independently assessed viability report.

Councillor Hassan seconded the motion.

Decision

The Committee resolved to be minded to approve, subject to the outcome of the independently assessed viability report.

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

The Committee considered a report that proposed retention 21m temporary lattice mast for temporary period of 12 months. This mast, which supports three antennas, two dishes, and two cabinets, is essential for maintaining telecommunications services, including emergency services, while a permanent site is being developed.

Councillor Kilpatrick sated that he was frustrated by the application and the applicant should secure a permanent site as the Committee had no alternative but to approve. This view was echoed by Councillor Richards. The Planning Officer stated that the applicant had identified a permanent site for the mast, and he was hopeful that this could be secured in the next twelve months.

Decision

To approve the retention 21m temporary lattice mast for temporary period of 12 months.