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 138662/FO/2023 and 139751/FO/2024.

Decision

To receive and note the late representations.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 28 June 2024.

Decision

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 28 June 2024 as a correct record.

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

The Committee considered the report that reminded Members that this application was initiallyconsidered by the Planning and Highway Committee on 30 May 2024, where it was  deferred  in order to undertake a site visit and to allow further information and clarification to be provided on how the accommodation would be  managed, and about  other similar uses in the ward. The site visit took place on the morning of 28 June and was later considered by the Committee. At the May Committee Members were minded to refuse the item, with a decision being deferred to allow officers to address the concerns raised as follows:

•           How resident’s contracts would be terminated in the event of a breach of their agreement, and if/how the operator could move residents on.

•           The signposting and provision of access to daycentres for residents to meet friends and families, and the general management of and support given to residents outside of the facility.

•           The impact on the neighbouring school’s accesses, and the impact on the local community and operation of the school.

•           The overconcentration of uses of this nature in Miles Platting and Newton Heath and their subsequent wider effect on the ward.

In reporting back to Committee, officers advised that these concerns could not form the basis of defendable planning reasons to refuse the application, on the basis that:

The termination of a resident’s license and the protocol for moving residents on would be addressed through the management and operation of the facility. The Management Plan could be controlled via a planning condition (See condition 12). It has been confirmed that residents would occupy on a license agreement, which could be terminated without notice if they breach the terms of the agreement. No notice is required and there are no legal rights of appeal. Causing anti-social behaviour, congregating outside the site or on local streets would be in breach of the license agreement and could lead to immediate eviction. Effective management of residents outside of the facility would be achieved through the deterrent of the termination of their license agreement.

Residents would be encouraged and signposted to attend other sites in the local area to meet friends and family. These measures would be included in the Management Plan. The site is on the boundary of Piccadilly ward and the facilities that residents would be signposted to are in neighbouring areas. These include day centres, educational, volunteering and training services and other leisure facilities. Examples include the Booth Centre, Barnabus, Lifeshare and Caritas facilities. Other examples include Mustard Tree and Back on Track. Other leisure facilities include Central Library, Aquatics Centre, The art gallery and MOSI.

All residents would be registered at the Urban Village Medical Practice under their homeless person contract ensuring services would not be taken away from local people. The practice is fully supportive of this scheme.

Residents would access the facility through the main entrance at the southern end of the site. The vehicular access to the car park and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

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

The Committee considered the report that described the proposal for the erection of a 4 storey building to form 42 no. residential units (Use Class C3) with ground floor commercial restaurant / cafe and retail units (Use Class E and sui generis), car parking, cycle parking and associated infrastructure following the demolition of the existing building on site.

Following the notification process of the application proposals 13 responses were received 11 of these raising concerns and objections and 2 indicating support.

The key issues were:

- The scale and massing of the proposals.

- Impact on residential amenity and neighbouring properties.

- Highway impacts arising from the development.

- Demolition and construction impacts.

The agent for the applicant attended the hearing and addressed the Committee on the application, stating that they had worked closely with the Planning Department to address the issues relating to the previous decision to refuse and submit an amended application. These amendments included an alteration to the northern elevation facing the adjacent ‘Jobs Centre Plus building’ to improve the window relationship of proposed residential units to that site and also alterations to the internal layout including relocation of the entrances to the retail units so these reflect the more commercial frontages on Wilmslow Road and Grandale Street opposite the site. These amendments were subject to further renotification of residents and consultees. He said that the hight and footprint of the proposal had been reduced and the architecture was sympathetic to the local area, and an increase in onsite car parking and the provision of 100% secure cycle storage. He said that occupants of these high quality residential properties would not be able to access the local residents parking zone in the area, noting that the site was well accessed by sustainable modes of transport and there had been no objections to the amended proposal by Highways. The agent concluded by stating that he was confident that sufficient measures and controls had been proposed to address any concerns and requested the Committee endorse the Planning Officers recommendation to approve the application.

The Chair invited the Committee to ask questions or make comments

Councillor Gartside stated that she recognised the benefits of developing this site and welcomed the application. She enquired about the implications of the amendments to parking bays on Grandale Road.

Councillor Kilpatrick welcomed the provision of 100% secure and covered cycle parking provision within the ground floor of the development. He commented that the development would deliver 15 on-site car parking spaces and questioned whether this would be sufficient for the number of units. He further sought an opinion as to whether it would be lawful to exclude residents from this development from having access to the Resident Parking Zone scheme.

The Planning Officer stated that the loss of the parking bay was on the North side of Grandale Street and was not one that was part of the Resident Parking Zone scheme, adding that the bay to the South side would not be lost.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

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

The Committee considered the report for the erection of a new foodstore (Use Class E) and 1no. retail unit (Use Class E) and 1no. hot food delivery unit (sui generis) with associated car parking and landscaping.

Planning permission was granted in May 2022 for a new foodstore, following the demolition of existing retail units on this site.

The current application also proposes the erection of a new foodstore (Use Class E) to be operated by Lidl, with associated car parking and 2no. new sub-let units, within Fallowfield Shopping Centre.

The main changes between the two applications relates to an increase to the proposed building footprint, alterations to the car parking arrangement, the addition of a further sub-let retail unit and the loss of the existing medical centre.

Following notification of the application, one representation has been received, objecting to the proposal, on the grounds undue operational and construction.

The key issues were:

- Regeneration and sustainable location within an established shopping centre. The application site relates to accessible, brownfield land and would offer favourable regeneration to provide appropriately scaled economic development which would create a range of local employment opportunities.

-  Loss of the existing medical centre. The site currently accommodates a medical centre to be demolished and not re-provided. This issue is covered in detail in the body of the report.

- Environmental. The proposed redevelopment has the potential to bring about significant environmental and visual improvements, offering the redevelopment of an underutilised brownfield site to deliver a modern foodstore development. Such development would improve the appearance of a prominent site adjacent to a key arterial route.

-  Impact to residential amenity. Given the context of the proposal within an out-of-town retail park, the levels of activity would not be untypical.

-  Impact to the operation of the highway. The application has been considered by both TfGM and Highways Services. Subject to necessary off-site highway works to be secured by an attached planning condition, no significant issues are raised.

The agent for the applicant attended the hearing and addressed the Committee on the application, stating that the application reflected the Lidl operating model. He commented that the provision of car parking had been increased from 94 to 102 and the proposal would deliver 40 new jobs and the subletting of two retail units. He commented that there had been no objections from statutory consultees. He said that the NHS were of the opinion that that the current medical centre building was not fit for purpose, and it was understood that the NHS who operated the medical centre were presently exploring options for its relocation nearby and they had been granted an additional 12 months to secure an alternative site.

Councillor Kilpatrick asked if approval had been agreed with HS2 to develop the site, noting that the northern part of a site currently used for wider car parking provision and was previously earmarked for a HS2 ventilation shaft. This area was still subject to a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41.

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

The Committee considered the report for the erection of a three-storey apartment block comprising 20 apartments following demolition of existing building, supported by access, parking, landscaping, drainage, and other associated works.

The proposals related to the development of a site that currently contains a two-storey vacant building last used as a day nursery and prior to that a public house. The building is proposed to be demolished with the site redeveloped to provide 20 affordable residential apartments in a three-storey building with associated car parking area to the rear of the site.

Following notification of the application 7 representations were received objecting to the proposals.

The key issues were:

- Scale and height of the proposed building.

- Impact on adjacent existing residential properties.

The agent for the applicant attended the hearing and addressed the Committee on the application, stating that the proposal would realise the redevelopment of a vacant building for the provision of 20 affordable residential units within a sustainable location. The units would comprise of 1 and 2 bedroom apartments that would be of a high-quality design providing good size accommodation. These would support older residents to right size. She commented that the proposal would not impact on local amenities as the proposed height and depth of the development had reduced so as not to be detrimental to neighbouring properties. Further she commented that the car parking proposal were considered to be acceptable by the Planning Department and the proposal was in a location accessible by public transport and the proposal would provide 20 internal cycle parking spaces.

Councillor Gartside welcomed the proposal and the delivery of affordable housing. She also welcomed the opportunity this proposal presented for people to right size.

Councillor Hughes moved the recommendation to approve the application.

Councillor Kamal seconded this motion.

Decision

The Committee resolved to Approve the application.