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

The application was placed before Committee on 6 July 2023, where it was

resolved to defer consideration of the proposal to allow for a site visit to enable Members to gain a better understanding of the impact the proposed development would have on the local neighbourhood, owing to concerns expressed regarding the height of the development.

 

The Committee considered the reports of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing that described that full planning permission was sought for the demolition of 470-472 Moss Lane East and conversion of 466 – 468 Moss Lane East, in order to facilitate the erection of a 7-9 storey building to form purpose-built student accommodation (sui generis) and provide in total 261 student bedrooms with a mix of studios and en-suite rooms set within clusters bedrooms.

 

Listed Building Consent was also sought for internal and external alterations and extension, in the form of a link building to the Grade II listed 466 to 468 Moss Lane East to facilitate its conversion to purpose-built student accommodation.

 

Seventeen individual representations had been received, 12 of which objected and 5 of which supported the proposed development. Objections had also been received from Platt Claremont Residents Association, Moss Side Tenants Union, Great Southern to Western Community Action Network, The Victorian Society and from Councillor Emily Rowles on behalf of the Moss Side Councillors.

 

The Planning Officer addressed a note of clarification from Councillor Sharif

Mahamed who had stated that the scheme would address and improve the needs of students in the city. As stated in the Late Reps report, the applicant had resolved to offer 20% of the bedspaces at a 20% discount on their base market value and to make these rooms available on this basis. Furthermore, there would be no parking permits available to tenants.

 

Councillor Bayunu addressed the Committee as a Moss Side resident, stating that this was a sign of a creeping impact of student accommodation off the Oxford Road corridor. In terms of accuracy amongst those already living at this location, a door to door check had been made by residents and found lots of families on site. There should be clearer information about the impact this development would have on the area. It was expressed that the Council cannot open up to this kind of development.

 

Councillor Bayunu objected to this application and felt there were inaccuracies that required addressing.

 

The applicant’s agent addressed the Committee and stated that this was a significant student accommodation offer which was greatly needed in Manchester, the shortfall of which was having an impact in retaining potential family homes as they were currently being used as HMOs. This site was 200 metres from Oxford Road and a 10 minute walk to the University. The University had written with a representation of support for the application. Purpose built student accommodation (PBSAs) were of high need. The application was sensitive to the context of the area and of suitable

scale and massing. Preservation of the building style had been included.

 

There were no impacts from loss of light and a 24 hour contact point was available. Manchester was an attractive destination and students were an addition to the city. The scheme now offered 20% reduced rate dwellings, as set out in the late report.

 

The Planning Officer stated that due diligence had been applied with units to be lost having been checked (a summary was in the printed report on page 103). There would be packages to rehome anyone affected by this demolition and redevelopment of this site.

 

The Chair invited the Committee to make comments or ask questions.

Councillor Curley stated that the site visit had been very useful and felt that this scheme would improve the building. The footpath was noted to be in a poor state and it was put to the Planning Officer whether a condition could be added to improve this as part of adjacent public realm.

 

Councillor Johnson understood the need for student accommodation in Manchester and stated that Moss Side was densely populated and more homes for residents and families would be good. Disabled parking on the proposal was insufficient and this would be an ideal site due to the park and nearby public transport links.

 

Councillor Johnson noted the use of terminology relating to the Oxford Road Corridor and raised that this site is not on Oxford Road, adding that taller buildings can be seen on Oxford Road and expressed that this should be a development of lesser height.

 

Councillor Johnson was concerned that this would set a precedent and encourage further tall buildings in this residential area. Councillor Johnson stated that she may wish to propose a motion to address the height aspect later in the meeting.

 

Councillor Davies had concerns for any families living at the current site. Page 103 of the printed report referred to the standard of the building at present.

 

Councillor Davies enquired about the details of these families who are due to be rehoused and needed reassurances before making any decision.

 

The Planning Officer stated that the footpath issues raised by Councillor Curley could be included as part of Highways. Regarding disabled parking, 3 spaces were available on the street and a further condition could be added.

 

The University had plans for students already due to move into this development when complete.

 

Regarding the height, this scheme was closely related to the Oxford Road Corridor and based on its own merits and that this application had been deemed as appropriate for this area. Families in this dwelling would be re-homed.

 

Councillor Davies considered that there was insufficient awareness of these families and their voices had not been heard as part of this aspect of the application.

 

Councillor Lovecy expressed that the site visit was very useful. She stated that she was not Minded to Approve for this application due to the scale being more in line with buildings on Oxford Road. The impact of 7 and 9 storey buildings in this area would impact negatively on the amenity of local residents. Also, the heritage aspect of this building should be considered. Whilst the building would be improved, it would then be dwarfed by the additional buildings.

 

Councillor Hughes stated that he was considering supporting the application after the site visit but now had concerns about the rehousing of families as this is always a difficult proposition with the potential for children having to change schools.

 

The Director of Planning stated that the rehousing issue is something that the

Planning Team take very seriously and, having asked for information on current tenants, found that they were all under short term tenancies. If the

 

Committee were Minded to Approve for the application, the Planning Team would work with the Chair of the Planning & Highways Committee to create a condition for development not to start until there was an awareness of ongoing arrangements. This would be taken away for discussion with the developer and legal services.

 

Councillor Johnson welcomed this proposal from the Director of Planning but added her concern that the overall scale and massing issue remains.

 

Councillor Riasat added that the site visit was useful, that there was a similar sized building close by and confirmed his support for the application, moving the officer’s recommendation of Minded to Approve.

 

Councillor Shaukat Ali seconded the proposal with the added condition stipulated earlier by the Director of Planning concerning a rehousing strategy.

 

Councillor Lovecy stated her preference for a maximum 6 storey height and raised concerns over the impact on the neighbourhood.

 

Councillor Johnson wished to propose a motion regarding the scale and massing.

 

The Chair explained due process, in that, if the proposal put forward by

 

Councillor Riasat fell then another motion could then be considered for the Committee to make a decision on.

 

Councillor Davies felt that the onus should be on the developer to make rehousing arrangements.

 

The Director of Planning confirmed that this responsibility would lie with the

developer.

 

Councillor Curley noted that a similar scheme in Chorlton had been agreed under the same process and asked the Director of Planning if the same process would be adhered to.

 

The Director of Planning confirmed this with Councillor Curley.

 

The Chair confirmed with the Committee that the Minded to Approve decision was for both applications concerning this development.

 

Decision

 

The Committee resolved to move the officer’s recommendation of Minded to Approve for both applications subject to an additional condition whereby the developer entered into discussions with the city council regarding the rehousing of current tenants and devise their own rehousing strategy and subject to conditions set out in the report.