The report of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is attached.

The site measures 0.3 hectares and is bounded by Rochdale Road, Swan Street, Cable Street and Mason Street.  It includes a two storey, red brick, warehouse building that was used as a fish processing factory but has been split into several units used for textile manufacturing, storage, double glazing sales and a furniture shop with garages at ground floor. 

The development proposes 373 apartments, 12 serviced apartments and 408 sq m of commercial space (Use Class A1, A2 or A3).  The building would have two taller elements with a 31 storey tower on the corner of Rochdale Road/Swan Street and 13 storey building on the corner of Cable Street/Mason Street which would be joined by a low rise section of building along Cable Street. 

Officers advised the Committee that the late representations contained information about several additional conditions that should have been detailed in the report, but had been omitted in error. 

The applicant’s agent spoke in support of the proposals and said that the development would enhance the New Cross Neighbourhood Development Framework (NDF) which will become a dense residential area and contribute to the City’s economic and population growth.  The Framework proposes development at a high to medium density with a taller building at the corner of Rochdale Road and Swan Street.   

He added that the development would include several residential amenity improvements, as detailed in the report. 19 units would be reserved for affordable rent at 80% local market rents, the units being spread throughout the development, and would include a mixture of different types of accommodation on offer.  He also said that the units would be directly marketed at key workers in Manchester.  He explained that there would also be a S106 contribution, as determined by the viability assessment, for improvements to the public realm in the area. 

He added that the principle of development accorded with Manchester Policies for growth, in particular the The Unitary Development Plan for the City of Manchester (1995).  The construction phase would support over 700 new jobs, with a local labour agreement to be put in place. He added that this was a high quality, well designed development, and would accord with the highest architectural standards and positively connect to the surrounding area.  The aim was to minimise car parking provision, but would include 1:1 cycle parking per unit.

Councillor Wheeler spoke regarding the proposals, and while he welcomed the fact that there would also be some on site affordable provision, was disappointed that this would only be 5% of the units developed.  He also expressed concerns about eligibility for the affordable units, and questioned how key workers would be defined.  He said that the Council should have nomination rights to the affordable units, so that the Council would determine who was a key worker rather than the developer.  He said that similar schemes in other local authority areas often used an ALMO or other local housing provider to determine who should occupy affordable units.

Officers confirmed that the issue of viability had been independently assessed on behalf of the Council, and that the independent assessment had concluded that a 5% provision was appropriate.   Officers added that this was the first time that on site affordable housing would be provided in the City Centre for many years.  The proposals had been fully tested against all local and regional benchmarks.

The Committee welcomed the provision of on-site affordable housing, but expressed disappointment that the scheme would not provide the Policy level of 20% affordable housing.  The Committee also expressed some concern at the height of the Tower, and agreed that the Council, in conjunction with a local housing provider should retain nomination rights to the affordable units.  The Committee also asked for more information regarding the proposed tree planting scheme, and asked for clarification as to how many trees would be planted.

Officers confirmed that the height of the tower was not unusual, and that the New Cross Neighbourhood Development Framework (NDF) actually required a tall building on this site.  Officers also confirmed that the Policy required a contribution of up to 20% affordable housing, subject to viability.  They added that the viability assessment had thoroughly tested the scheme, and the viable number of affordable units was 5%.  With regard to the trees, officers said that there would be a minimum of 5, but that the number of trees planted would be limited by the constraints of the site itself. 

While the Committee appreciated the provision of affordable housing, they also noted that consideration should be given to the provision of social housing in the city centre, as this was sadly lacking in the city centre environment.  The Committee were satisfied that the affordable units would be of benefit to key workers, but commented that housing provision was also needed for the very poorest members of society. 

The Committee also asked for clarification as to how the commercial units were assessed as part of the viability assessment, and officers advised that the commercial space is very small, but that this would have been factored in to the viability assessment. 

The Committee asked for further clarification as to the provision of outside space and services that would be required for families living in the units.  Officers confirmed that there were several green spaces within a short distance, and that further public realm being developed as part of the wider New Cross Neighbourhood Development Framework would add to this.  In addition, there is a green roof on the development, which is designed as an amenity space. There is a school within a short distance of the site, and there will be ongoing dialogue with health providers to ensure that health provision is adequate.

Officers confirmed that the provision of disabled parking acceptable in light of the highly sustainable location. The level is in accordance with the Core Strategy and the Residential Quality Guidance which states that the constraints of a site and the proximity of public transport should be a key consideration when considering onsite provision. Mobility scooters could be parked in safe and secure areas in the car park.  In addition, there is a condition that will ensure that the developer will address any specific parking issues for residents that may arise.

Decision

To approve the application subject to the conditions and reasons in the report and the late representation.