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

Councillor Leech declared an interest and moved to the public seating area, in order to address Committee on the application.

The Committee considered the report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing that presented an application regarding the erection of part two, part three storey building to provide 26 retirement apartments with associated communal facilities, landscaping, boundary treatments and car parking following the demolition of the existing dwelling.

At its meeting held on 16 February 2023, the committee agreed the proposal of Minded-to-Refuse, based on the scale and mass of the scheme coupled with the lack of adequate parking and disabled parking spaces.

The Planning Officer noted the applicant had taken on board concerns raised at the previous meeting and increased the number of car park spaces to 26. The ridgeline of the roof facing Lancaster Road had also been reduced by 0.65m.  The officer also stated that additional images and CGIs are included within the report to demonstrate that the proposed scheme is in line with the conclusions reached by the inspector who dismissed the previous appeal.

An objector attended and addressed the Committee, raising concerns regarding scale and mass, and car parking having an impact on the street scene.

The applicant’s agent attended and addressed the Committee, providing information on the purpose of the application. They noted a lower percentage of their residents would utilise a car. They stated the changes that the applicant had made since the previous meeting relating to parking, scale and mass, and tree planting.

Councillor Leech addressed the meeting as a ward councillor, noting his disappointment that there had not been a re-consultation for the significant changes proposed. Councillor Leech felt that the increase in car parking created a different problem in terms of the loss of landscaping. He felt that the site was too small for the proposal and the reduction in size was insignificant. He considered that the scale and massing of the development was still too large.

Councillor Leech then left the meeting and took no further part in the discussion or decision-making process.

Councillor Hilal addressed the meeting as a ward councillor, raising concerns about the increase in car parking and its impact on green space and not being in-keeping with the area. It was felt that the reduction in height was not a reduction as it took the size down to the original application that was previously rejected on appeal. Councillor Hilal felt the application would still be overbearing. It was noted that this application did not offer affordable housing, and this was not in line with Manchester’s policy.

The Planning Officer noted the two reasons for Minded to Refuse at the last meeting. One was car parking, which had been addressed with the increase to 26 spaces and was considered to be visually acceptable on the street scene. In regard to scale and mass, there had been a substantial reduction since the previous appeal.

Councillor Andrews sought clarity on the Officer’s recommendation of Minded to Approve subject to a legal agreement.

The Planning Officer stated the legal agreement related to the future retesting of the viability of affordable housing now the scheme had been reduced.

Councillor Andrews moved the Officer’s recommendation.

Councillor Lovecy noted the additional provision of car parking but still felt that the scale and mass of the application was not appropriate.

Councillor Kamal seconded Councillor Andrew’s proposal to move the Officer’s recommendation.

Decision

The Committee resolved that it was Minded to Approve the application, subject to a legal agreement containing a reconciliation clause which would require the future retesting of viability for the provision of affordable units, as set out in the reports submitted.

(Councillor Flanagan declared a Pecuniary interest in the item and withdrew from the meeting for the duration taking no part in the discussion or decision-making process).