Manchester City Council

Decisions

Decisions

Use the below search options at the bottom of the page to find information regarding recent decisions that have been taken by the council’s decision making bodies.

Alternatively you can visit the officer decisions page for information on officer delegated decisions that have been taken by council officers.

Decisions published

25/07/2019 - 123274/FO/2019 - Xaverian College Lower Park Item No Road Manchester M14 5RB - Rusholme Ward ref: 314    Refused

Decision Maker: Planning and Highways Committee

Made at meeting: 25/07/2019 - Planning and Highways Committee

Decision published: 07/08/2019

Effective from: 25/07/2019

Decision:

The Committee had undertaken a site visit in the morning prior to the start of the meeting.

 

The application related to the erection of a 2 storey teaching block and re-arrangement of the associated car park.

 

In addition to the report submitted officers reported that concern had been expressed during the site visit on the location of the proposed development. The Committee was informed that the location was chosen following a feasibility study which determined that this was the optimum location. It was noted that whilst there would an impact from Dagenham Road this was judged to be acceptable and would result in less than substantial harm on the Victoria Park Conservation Area. A further environmental statement was provided by the applicant and included the proposed removal of a Category C tree and a Category U tree and their replacement by two standard heavy trees and the retention of the trees on the northern boundary of the site.

 

No objectors to the application were in attendance.

 

Councillor Ahmed Ali addressed the Committee as Rusholme Ward Councillor and in welcoming the development of the Xaverian College campus requested that further consideration be given to the location of the proposal. The main concern of the related to the loss of the view from Dagenham Road onto the college campus as part of the Victoria Park Conservation Area.

 

The applicant addressed the Committee and explained that the proposal is the result of the need to expand the current facilities on the campus to meet the needs of the demographic growth (‘post 16 years’ provision), maintain financial security of the college in the post 16 sector and maintain a high quality educational provision.

 

The Committee referred to the negotiation with the applicant and the issue relating to the proposed location of the development to provide a view from Dagenham Road. Members expressed concern regarding the potential harm that would be caused by the development that they considered would be substantial. A member commented that there was a requirement to balance the proposal with the existing site and buildings and the wider conservation area.

 

Councillor Lovecy proposed Minded to Refuse the application and this was seconded by Councillor Clay.

 

Decision

 

Minded to refuse the application due to concerns expressed regarding the impact of the proposed development on the Victoria Park Conservation Area resulting in loss of views from Dagenham Road (as referred to in policy EN3, and saved policies DC18 and DC19 (UDP)).

 

(The Director of Planning has been requested to submit a report which addresses the concerns raised and whether there are reasons for refusal which could be sustained.)

Wards affected: Rusholme;


25/07/2019 - Minutes ref: 315    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning and Highways Committee

Made at meeting: 25/07/2019 - Planning and Highways Committee

Decision published: 07/08/2019

Effective from: 25/07/2019

Decision:

Decision

 

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 27 June 2019 as a correct record.


25/07/2019 - Request to Defer Planning Applications ref: 316    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning and Highways Committee

Made at meeting: 25/07/2019 - Planning and Highways Committee

Decision published: 07/08/2019

Effective from: 25/07/2019

Decision:

The Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing reported that a request had been submitted by the applicant for the deferral of applications 121375/FO/2018 and 121447/FO/2018 to allow the applicant to further review the issues raised, in particular, affordable housing on the proposal relating to 20-36 High Street, Manchester. 

 

The Committee agreed to the request.

 

Decision

 

To defer consideration of applications 121375/FO/2018 and 121447/FO/2018.

 


25/07/2019 - 123215/FO/2019 - 52-58 Thomas Street, Manchester, M4 1EG - Piccadilly Ward ref: 311    Refused

Decision Maker: Planning and Highways Committee

Made at meeting: 25/07/2019 - Planning and Highways Committee

Decision published: 07/08/2019

Effective from: 25/07/2019

Decision:

The application related to the conversion of 56-58 Thomas Street (retention of facades, roof and some internal structural elements)  and erection of a new part three, part four and part five storey building comprising to create twenty six room hotel/aparthotel (C1 use class) to the upper storeys with Class A1 (Shop), Class A3 (Restaurant and Café) and Class A4 (Drinking Establishment) uses to the basement and ground floor following  demolition of the remaining built fabric at 9 John Street and 52-54 Thomas Street including parts fronting onto Back Turner Street along with retrospective consent for the demolition works within the site carried out in September 2018.

 

No objectors to the application were in attendance.

 

The applicant addressed the committee on the proposal.

 

Members referred the environment around the development and sought assurance that street trees or greenery such as hanging baskets will be included as part of the proposal, Also, were there arrangements in place for bin storage inside the development to prevent bags from being left on the street.

 

Officers confirmed that a bin storage scheme inside the development is included in the proposal to prevent bags from being left for collection on the street. A street tree condition is included in the proposal, however, it would be unlikely that trees could be planted on the pavement area due to the limited space available.

 

Decision

 

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

Wards affected: Piccadilly;


25/07/2019 - 123437/FO/2019 - 4 Angel Square, Corporation Street, Manchester, M4 4DU - Piccadilly Ward ref: 312    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning and Highways Committee

Made at meeting: 25/07/2019 - Planning and Highways Committee

Decision published: 07/08/2019

Effective from: 25/07/2019

Decision:

The application related to the demolition of existing buildings to facilitate construction of an eleven storey building with external terrace to form a mixed use development comprising office use (Use Class B1) and ground floor commercial units (Use Classes A1, A2, A3, A4, B1 and D2); creation of a new public square and associated landscaping, undercroft car and cycle parking, provision of plant and servicing and related access and highways' works and associated works.

 

The Director of Planning reported that due to a drafting error within the report on the agenda the complete revised recommended planning conditions had been provided in the late representations document circulated within the supplementary agenda.

 

No objectors to the application were in attendance.

 

The applicant addressed the committee and provided an outline of the proposal and the work undertaken in phase 1 on the redevelopment of the NOMA estate within the site.

 

Members asked how many trees would be planted as part of the development and sought assurance that the proposed public realm area would be accessible by the public.

 

Officers reported that the proposal included the planting of street trees and trees in the public realm area. NOMA intended to plant as many trees as possible across the development area and details on the final number would be provided for members. The public area would be owned by NOMA and would be a space that included shop units and bars and would be open to the public to access retail facilities. Previous developments by the applicant have demonstrated a commitment to public spaces open for public access.

 

Members referred to the proposal to demolish the Ducie Bridge Public House and officers were asked if the building could be maintained in view of the cultural heritage it represented.

 

Officers reported that the Ducie Bridge Public House building is not a listed building and is not within a conservation area. It was acknowledged that the building does have character and some historic social value, however the building has been subject to a lot of alteration and does not retain original fixtures or features. A request had previously been made to list the building but this was not supported.

 

A member referred to the importance of communication with local residents and requested that the proposed conditions ensured that good communication is maintained throughout the development and that this was maintained as standard for similar future applications as part of the construction management plan.

 

Officers reported that the conditions would be amended to include detail on communication with residents in the construction management plan, as detailed in conditions 5 and 6 of the report.

 

Decision

 

To approve the application subject to the amended conditions outlined above and within the late representations and the reasons in the report.

Wards affected: Piccadilly;


25/07/2019 - 121945/FO/2018 - English Martyrs Tennis Club, Alness Road, Manchester, M16 8HW - Whalley Range Ward ref: 313    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Planning and Highways Committee

Made at meeting: 25/07/2019 - Planning and Highways Committee

Decision published: 07/08/2019

Effective from: 25/07/2019

Decision:

The application related to the erection of four two-storey, four bed dwellinghouses with accommodation in the roof, with associated parking, boundary treatment, and landscaping with vehicular access from Alness Road, following demolition of existing tennis club house.

 

In addition to the report submitted officers reported that the applicant had submitted an environmental statement that referred to the glazing and insulation to be used on the development and the inclusion of a charging point for electric vehicles. Trees on the site would be retained with the planting of two additional heavy trees and a hedge to the front of the site.

 

No objectors to the application were in attendance.

 

The applicant addressed the Committee and provided background information relating to the decline of the tennis facilities and the tennis club decision to sell the site due in part to a decline in the number of members at the club. The site is currently derelict and is an eyesore and the proposed development will have a positive impact on the site and surrounding area and will include additional planting to provide more habitat for wildlife. The applicant explained that in view of the loss of the sports provision (tennis) an agreement had been reached to provide a Section 106 contribution that will improve the tennis facilities located in Alexandra Park.

 

The Committee commented on the application, in particular the design and scale which was in keeping with the surrounding area. Reference was also made to the Section 106 contribution and how this would be used. Officers explained that the contribution would cover the cost of key pads to access tennis courts at Alexandra Park, which is run by the Council and is available to use by the public. The Committee was informed that the Section 106 policy required the council to consider the leisure related facility that would be affected and to determine how the contribution is used. In this case the activity was tennis and the contribution will be used to improve the existing tennis facilities in the area.

 

Decision

 

To approve the application subject to the conditions and reasons set out in the report.

 

(Councillor Watson declared a prejudicial interest in respect of the application and left the meeting during consideration of the application.)

Wards affected: Whalley Range;