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

This application relates to the demolition of 42, 44 and 46 Thomas Street (including 41, 43 and 45 Back Turner Street) to facilitate redevelopment of the wider site under extant planning permission and listed building consent ref: 113475/FO/2016 and 113476/LO/2016.

At its meeting on 27 August 2020 the Committee resolved that it was 'minded to refuse' this application on the basis that the demolition would be contrary to policies on the conservation of historic assets in the city which represent Manchester’s working class heritage. They requested officers to bring a report to the next meeting to address their concerns.

Officers believe that the case setting out why these buildings cannot be retained was clearly set out in the previous report and on that basis they do not believe that a reason for refusal can be substantiated. However, there are policies that seek to protect the historic environment and if Members remain sufficiently concerned about the validity of the case to support the demolition the following reason for refusal is suggested:

The demolition of 42-46 Thomas Street would fail to preserve or enhance the Grade II designated heritage asset causing irreversible harm through the total loss of the buildings which would not meet the tests set out in section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework (Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment) as a clear and convincing justification for the loss has not been provided and it has not been demonstrated that the substantial harm or total loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss. It is therefore considered to be contrary to Government Guidance contained in Sections 16(2) of (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and The Core Strategy for the City of Manchester, in particular Policy EN3 (Heritage) CC9 (Design and Heritage) and saved policy DC19.1 (Listed Buildings) of the Unitary Development Plan for the City of  Manchester.

Notwithstanding the suggested reason for refusal, for the reasons set out in the remainder of the report, the recommendation of officers is that this application be approved subject referral to the Secretary of State in accordance with the Arrangements for handling heritage applications – notification to Historic England and National Amenity Societies and the Secretary of State (England) Direction 2015

The Chair invited the Planning Officer to introduce the report. The Committee was advised that the recommendation of planning officers was that the application should be approved, however if it was the Committee’s decision to refuse the application the report provided reasons to support the decision.

No objector attended the meeting.

The applicant’s agent addressed the Committee on the application.

A ward councillor addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

The Planning Officer responded to the issues raised and stated that the buildings were currently in a poor state of repair and it was unlikely that sufficient funds would be available to rescue the buildings and further decline was inevitable. In the current state the buildings had no commercial value.

The invited the Committee to comment on the application.

Members in commenting on the application referred to the heritage value of the buildings and the historical importance they hold in terms of Manchester’s textile history. It was considered that the historic value of the building outweighed the value provided by the development and for that reason the application should be refused.

Councillor White made a request to move refuse and this was seconded by Councillor J Hitchen.

Decision

Refuse - the demolition of 42-46 Thomas Street would fail to preserve or enhance the Grade II designated heritage asset causing irreversible harm through the total loss of the buildings which would not meet the tests set out in section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework (Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment) as a clear and convincing justification for the loss has not been provided and it has not been demonstrated that the substantial harm or total loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss. It is therefore considered to be contrary to Government Guidance contained in Sections 16(2) of (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and The Core Strategy for the City of Manchester, in particular Policy EN3 (Heritage) CC9 (Design and Heritage) and saved policy DC19.1 (Listed Buildings) of the Unitary Development Plan for the City of  Manchester.