Subject: Submitted Planning Applications Status: For Publication

Report to: Rochdale Township Planning Committee

Date: 18 November 2014

Report of: Director of Economy and

Environment Author: See individual agenda reports

1. PURPOSE OF REPORT

1.1 To provide recommendations to the Committee on planning applications or related consents submitted to the Council and requiring the consideration and/or determination of the Committee in accordance with the Council’s

approved Scheme of Delegation.

1.2 To provide information on any other planning or development related matters which may affect the work of the Committee.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 Recommendations in respect of individual planning applications are as detailed in the following papers.

3. STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS

3.1 The submitted applications on this agenda are to be determined in accordance with the provisions of relevant legislation, including the Town

and Country Planning Act 1990, Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, Planning and Compensation Act 1991, Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, Planning Act 2008, Localism Act 2012 and

the Town and Country Planning (Development Management) Procedure Order 2010 together with any Circulars and Regulations which support that

legislation. 3.2 Planning law requires that applications be determined in accordance with

the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Where relevant, any such material considerations will be referred to in the

report.

ITEM NO.

The Development Plan

3.3 All planning applications referred to in this report have been assessed against the relevant policies and proposals of the development plan for the

Borough (currently the adopted Rochdale Unitary Development Plan 2006) and any Supplementary Planning Documents or Guidance adopted by the Council.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

3.4 In addition, in assessing the submitted planning applications, there is a

requirement to have regard to relevant national policies as set out within

the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) the policies of which are a material consideration. Where relevant, the provisions of the NPPF and any

other relevant national guidance will be referred to in the report. 4. RISK ASSESSMENT IMPLICATIONS

4.1 The Council has adopted a Code of Conduct for Members and Officers

dealing with Planning Matters. Members and Officers are required to have full regard to the Code in discharging their responsibilities and duties in relation to planning matters on behalf of the Council. The Code seeks to

ensure that all decision making is governed by an open and transparent process and represents a standard against which the conduct of Officers

and Member sitting on the Committee will be judged. 4.2 A Declaration of Member Interests Register is taken prior to the

commencement of the Committee meeting. Advice on whether any Member sitting on the Committee ought to declare any interest on any item

on the submitted agenda should be obtained from the Head of Legal and Democratic Services or the Chief Planning Officer.

4.3 The Council’s Standards Committee will monitor the operation of this Code of Conduct.

5. EQUALITIES IMPACTS

5.1 The above Acts require Local Planning Authorities to consider planning

applications on their individual merits having regard to the development

plan and other material planning considerations.

5.2 The Equality Act 2010 protects people from discrimination on the basis of certain characteristics which are known as protected characteristics. These protected characteristics are Age, Disability, Gender Reassignment,

Marriage or Civil Partnership, Pregnancy and Maternity, Race, Religion or Belief, Sex (Gender), Sexual Orientation, socio-economic status and Carer.

5.3 In applying the Equality Act 2010, the Council is required to consider the

effects of its decisions on different groups protected from discrimination,

including a duty to make reasonable adjustments. In taking account of all material planning considerations, including Council policy as set out in the

Unitary Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework, the

Service Director (Planning and Regulation Services) has concluded all

opportunities to promote equality through the planning process have been taken, or where adjustments cannot be made, these are justified on the

basis of the planning merits of the development proposal.

5.4 The Rochdale and District Disabled Access Working Group comments on relevant planning applications. Where comments are received, these will be included within the reported to Committee. Consideration is given in

designing access when dealing with the planning applications. Where applicable, any issues relating to these matters or other equal opportunity

matters will be referred to in individual planning application reports. 6. Human Rights Act 1998 considerations

6.1 The submitted applications need to be considered against the provisions of

the Human Rights Act 1998. Under Article 6, the applications (and those third parties, including local residents, who have made representations) have the right to a fair hearing and to this end the Committee must give full

consideration to their comments.

6.2 Article 8 and Protocol 1 Article 1 confer(s) a right of respect or a person’s home, other land and business assets. In taking account of all material considerations, including Council policy as set out in the Unitary

Development Plan, the Service Director (Planning and Regulation Services) has concluded that some rights conferred by these Articles on the

applicant(s)/objectors/residents and other occupiers and owners of nearby land that might be affected may be interfered with but that that interference is in accordance with the law and justified by being in the

public interest and on the basis of the planning merits of the development proposal. He believes that any restriction on these rights posed by

approval of the application is proportionate to the wider benefits of approval and that such a decision falls within the margin of discretion afforded to the Council under the Town and Country Planning Acts.

Background Papers

The background papers relevant to the planning applications to be considered on

this agenda will include:-

1. The Planning application file and its contents which will include: i) The planning application form and supporting information, together with

scaled drawings/plans and relevant statutory certificates. ii) Letters of response from statutory and other consultees who may have

been consulted or commented on the planning application iii) Letters and documents received from interested parties. iv) Notes of telephone conversations, meetings and any information received

and of relevance to the submitted proposal

2. For any previous planning application referred to in the agenda report or in the application file, the planning application forms and the decision on that proposal

3. Such other papers (if any) received after the preparation of individual reports on planning applications on this agenda (to be reported verbally at the meeting).

4. Any other guidance or procedural documents adopted by the Council and of

relevance to the recommendation and/or determination of any submitted

planning applications or related consents For further information about this report, or if you wish to see any background papers please contact: Sharon Hill, Senior Business Support Officer, in Economy and Environment, Number One Riverside, Smith Street, Rochdale, OL16 1XU

Telephone (01706) 924305 or via the online planning services at:

http://www.rochdale.gov.uk/planning

Application Number: 14/00672/FUL Ward: Norden

Proposal: Replacement dwelling in green belt with retention of the existing workshop

Site Address: Mount Pleasant Farm Church Road Heywood BL9 6XA

Applicant: Mr Graham Dixon

RECOMMENDATION: Grant subject to conditions

DELEGATION SCHEME

The Committee has delegated powers to refuse the application on reasonable planning grounds. In accordance with the Councils Delegation Scheme if Members are minded to support the recommendation to approve the decision must be referred to the Licensing and Regulatory Committee as the proposal is regarded as a departure from the Rochdale Unitary Development Plan.

SITE Mount Pleasant Farm lies within a rural landscape which contains a variety of farms and isolated dwellings. In the immediate vicinity of the site clear views into the site are afforded from the south along the lane which serves the site. To the north and west lies grazing land; to the south west lies Carr Croft Farm which is surrounded by grazing land. The site is accessed from Church Road which is a rural road which links Castle Hill Road and Birtle Road. Adjoining the west facing gable elevation of the farmhouse lies a footpath (HeyFp47) which extends between Birtle Road and Church Road. Mount Pleasant Farm consists of a number of attached buildings which are described below. Farmhouse The farmhouse is set over two storeys and it lies towards the west facing boundary of the site. It is constructed in stone and it contains a slated pitched roof. Attached to its front elevation is a small porch and due to the change in levels its rear elevation is partly built into the hillside. The ground floor contains a kitchen, a living and a parlour while the first floor contains three bedrooms. Storage building Attached to the farmhouse is a large stone built storage building. The building is set over two floors and due to the change in levels part of its rear elevation is single storey. Attached to the front elevation of the building is a small single storey utility building. Stables Attached to the storage building is a large stable and adjoining its rear elevation is an outdoor stable. The stables are constructed using blockwork and the stable which attached to the storage building contains a corrugated sheet metal pitched roof. The outdoor stable does not contain a roof. PROPOSAL The application is for the replacement of an existing farmhouse and its various outbuildings with a new dwelling. The main body of the new dwelling would lie on the footprint of the existing dwelling and the buildings which attach to it. The building would maintain the same roof profile and ridge height of the existing building and it would be constructed in stone recycled from the existing structure. The proposed house would be made up of three elements which are connected together by internal corridors. The central structure of the house would be the main staircase, dining room, kitchen and master bedroom, study at first floor while the west facing part would be single storey and contain the formal living room and three bedrooms. The east facing section of the house comprises a 360 degree glazed yoga studio and gymnasium. The walls to the house would be finished using a combination of random stone walling and full height glazing. The roof section which faces south would be finished using photovoltaic solar slates and the north facing section is to be finished using a sedum live roof. Hidden box guttering would be integrated within the elevations and large expansive south doors would serve the living room to allow maximum solar gain.

The car parking for the site will be as existing; which is an area of hard standing located to the front of the property. There is one triangular section of land to the south of the site which is currently used as a formal garden. This garden area is to be retained. RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY National Guidance

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

The Department for Communities and Local Government published the NPPF on 27 March 2012. The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.

National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)

The government published its NPPG on 6 March 2014. This is intended to complement the NPPF and to provide a single resource for planning guidance, whilst rationalising and streamlining the material. Almost all previous planning Circulars and advice notes have been cancelled. Specific reference will be made to the NPPG or other national advice in the Analysis section of the report, where appropriate.

Unitary Development Plan (UDP)

G/D/2 Green Belt D/4 Control of Development in Green Belt – General G/H/1 Housing H/3 Residential Developments Outside Allocated Areas H/6 Provision of Recreational Open Space in New Housing Development G/RE/1 Countryside and the Rural Economy RE/4 Diversification of the Rural Economy RE/6 Recreational Rights of Way G/A/1 Accessibility A/2 New Development - Accessibility Hierarchy A/3 New Development - Access for Pedestrians and Disabled People A/9 New Development - Access for General Traffic A/10 New Development – Provision of Parking G/BE/1 Design Quality BE/2 Design Criteria for New Development BE/8 Landscaping in New Development G/BE/9 Conservation of the Built Environment BE/10 Development Affecting Archaeological Sites and Ancient Monuments BE/11 Protection of Locally Important Buildings and Features of Architectural and

Historic Interest. G/EM/1 Environmental Protection and Pollution Control EM/3 Noise and New Development EM/4 Contaminated Land EM/7 Development and Flood Risk EM/8 Protection of Surface and Ground Water

G/EM/12 Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation EM/13 Energy Efficiency and New Development G/NE/1 Nature Conservation NE/2 Designated Sites of Ecological and Geological / Geomorphological Importance NE/3 Biodiversity and Development NE/4 Protected Species G/NE/5 Landscape and Woodlands NE/8 Development Affecting Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows. Supplementary Planning Documents Biodiversity and Development (SPD) Energy and New Development (SPD) Provision of Recreational Open Space In New Housing Developments (SPD) Guidelines and Standards for Residential Development (SPG) RELEVANT SITE HISTORY No relevant history.

CONSULTATION RESPONSES Highways and Engineering – Raise no objections to the proposal

Environmental Health (Contamination) – Raise no objections

Greater Manchester Ecology Unit –No comment

Greater Manchester Archaeology Unit – No comment

REPRESENTATIONS The adjacent and adjoining properties have been notified, a site notice has been posted and the application has been advertised in the local press. Sixteen letters of objection have been received and the grounds of objection are summarised below followed by Officers response:

1. The property is highly visible being located on the side of the hill and whilst they do not necessarily object to the design it is essential that it is sympathetic to the local area in terms of layout, footprint and building. Response. The proposal is considered to be a very high quality scheme, taking into account the context and setting of the development.

2. Birtle is an area with significant character and is also historically important any new building should reflect this. The current plans are significantly different to other local properties and the site is in a dominant position. I feel a more traditional design within the existing buildings footprint would be much more appropriate. Response. Although the proposed dwelling would be visually different to the other dwellings within the area, the use of natural and high quality materials would ensure that it has a positive relationship with the landscape, and the overall design would provide a noteworthy addition to the area

3. It is very unnecessary to demolish a good structure when it has great potential to be refurbished and extended into the adjoining stone outbuildings in doing this it would be in keeping with other properties in the area. Response. It is for the Council to consider the merits of the planning application before it and unless the proposals are unacceptable it is not for it to consider whether an alternative proposal would be more desirable.

4. The proposal talks of raising housing standards in the area and I struggle with the potential destruction of the farm. Response. The farm is a good example of the way in which small farms in the Pennines grew organically; possibly beginning life as late 18th century cottages for workers employed in small scale industrial activity such as handloom weaving or, more likely in this case, for workers in the many stone quarries of the area. The farm is considered to be a typical example of its kind and the application contains an Archaeological Building Survey which ensures it has been accurately recorded.

5. The apparent disdain shown for the present buildings in the submission, shows little understanding of the rich heritage the buildings of Birtle have left us. Response. As stated above the application contains an Archaeological Building Survey which aim was to preserve ‘by record’ the information that may be lost as a result of demolition

6. It is matter of judgement whether the design is ‘truly outstanding or innovative, helping to raise standards more generally in rural areas’. I don’t believe the case has been made on these two points and in my view the design as a whole is incoherent. Birtle and its vicinity has suffered in recent years from some very mediocre architecture. Response. As stated above the design of the house would provide a noteworthy addition to the area.

7. Based on the applicants own calculations the current farmhouse has an overall volume of 621.231m3. Overall the new building structure and its living accommodation would be 1625.17m3 which is over 2.5 times the volume of the existing living accommodation. Response. Although the proposed house would be considerably larger than the existing farm house, it would be some 12% smaller than the buildings that would be demolished.

One letter of support has been submitted which is summarised below: -

1. If new designs were always rejected in favour of older neighbouring designs then we'd all still be living in mud huts and caves. I like this proposal which appears to me from the plans is going to use local materials and will bring a feeling of renewed life into the area

ANALYSIS Whether inappropriate development The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) indicates at paragraph 89 that the construction of new buildings should be regarded as inappropriate in the Green Belt unless they fall within certain specified exceptions including “the limited infilling or the partial or

complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether in redundant or continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purposes of including land within it than the existing development”. In this respect policy D/4 of the Local Plan is not consistent with the advice in the Framework, referring only to limited infilling or redevelopment at existing major developed sites as formerly indicated by Planning Policy Guidance 2. Accordingly, I consider little weight can be given to this element of the policy. The site is currently occupied by a two storey house, a large storage building and two stables (all attached). The farm has not been operational for some 30 years and the barn is used for storage and the stable are used. I consider that the ‘limited infilling’ exception as described above is relevant as the proposed development involves the complete redevelopment of a previously developed site which is in continuing use. As such the proposed development is not inappropriate within the Green Belt and there is therefore no need for the development to be justified by special circumstances. One of the other forms of specified exceptions of development considered appropriate within the Green Belt in accordance with the NPPF are replacement buildings, provided they are in the same use as the buildings they replace. Policies D/4 and D/8 of the UDP refer to replacement dwellings only. Nevertheless in this instance, it is not considered that this exception is relevant as the proposal includes replacing buildings which are not and do not appear to be in domestic use. Openness of the Green Belt Openness is an essential characteristic of the Green Belt and in order for the scheme to be acceptable it must not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing buildings The area is categorised by a rural landscape which contains a variety of farms and isolated dwellings. In the immediate vicinity of the site clear views into the site are afforded from the south along the lane which serves the site. To the north and west lies grazing land; to the south west lies Car Croft Farm which is surrounded by grazing land. It is considered the most sensitive views of the site would be from the south and from the public right of way which extends adjacent to the west facing gable elevation of the dwelling. The proposed main body of the proposed structure has a lower ridge line than the existing buildings and it has a smaller footprint than the building it would replace. The details of the existing and proposed buildings are described below:

• Existing volume of buildings: 2361.99 cubic metre

• Proposed volume of new house: 1625.17 cubic metres

• Proposed 31% reduction in the volume of the buildings on site

• The proposed building would have a smaller footprint than the existing

• The proposed ridge height is higher than the existing property. The rear elevation of the new build would accommodate a natural sedum roof which would help the building to blend into the landscape. The proposed material palette is to be a mixture of natural stone and slate recycled from the existing building, solar slate and hardwood cladding. Although the proposed dwelling would be set no higher than the existing buildings and it would be set within the existing footprint of them, part of the first floor of the proposed house would project beyond the rear elevation of the existing two storey storage building. However this projection would lie centrally within the rear elevation and it would not be viewed as a

prominent feature within the open countryside. I am satisfied that the overall size and bulk of the proposed house would not be greater than the existing buildings and the development would not be materially harmful to the openness of the Green Belt. Design and appearance of the house Criteria (a), (g) and (h) of UDP policy IS/2 require proposals to demonstrate good design by:

• Ensuring that they are compatible with or improve their surroundings by virtue of their scale, density, height, massing, layout, materials, architectural style and detail and means of enclosure;

• Providing for safe and convenient access and circulation;

• Minimising opportunities for crime against people or property.

Principles of good design in housing schemes are also outlined within the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD): Oldham and Rochdale Residential Design Guide. Paragraph 58 of the NPPF encourages good design by stipulating that planning policies and decisions should aim to ensure that developments:

• will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development;

• respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation;

The proposed dwelling would be made up of a collection of buildings which are linked by glazed corridors. The elements of the proposed dwelling are described below:

• The walls to the main farm house building would be finished using a combination of random stone walling and full height glazing. The roof section which faces south would be finished using photovoltaic solar slates and the north facing section is to be finished using a sedum live roof. Hidden box guttering would be integrated within the elevations and large expansive south doors would serve the living room to allow maximum solar gain.

• The walls to the main barn building would be finished using a combination of random stone and full height glazing. The roof section would be finished using photovoltaic solar slates and using natural welsh slates. The front elevation contains a recessed fully glazed atrium while its rear elevation contains a balcony.

• The link between the main barn building and the studio would be constructed using a reclaimed natural dry stone wall. The link would have a toughened glass high level wall and roof detail to provide natural light into the space.

• The kitchen extends from the main barn building and it would benefit from a southerly aspect. The walls would be finished using a combination of random stone and full height glazing. A large central frameless glazed atrium would be installed to create maximum natural light into the centre of the proposed kitchen.

• The studio would be partly enclosed by a wall which would be built using reclaimed natural dry-stone. Extending around the studio would be hardwood timber decking. The external walls to the studio would consist of full height glazing panels and cedar shingles would be used on the roof.

The proposal is considered to be a very high quality scheme, taking into account of the context and setting of the development. The use of natural and high quality materials would ensure that it has a positive relationship with the landscape, and the overall design would provide a noteworthy addition to the area. The proposed development is therefore in accordance with the requirements of UDP policies BE/2 and H/3, the Oldham and Rochdale Residential Design Guide and the NPPF. Ecology No part of the application site is designated for its ecological value and no designated sites are adjacent to the site. Although The Greater Manchester Ecological Unit (GMEU) have not commented on the proposal it is likely that any potential ecological constraints are most likely limited to any bat roosts located with the farm buildings. To address this issue a condition is recommended which requires a bat survey to be undertaken prior to any demolition works first taking place. It is therefore considered that the proposal is in accordance with the requirements of policies NE/3, NE/4 and NE/8 of the adopted UDP. Proposed Access Arrangements Policy A/8 of the adopted UDP seeks to ensure that new development does not have a detrimental impact on the existing highway network in respect of safety of existing highway network (particularly pedestrians and disabled people), the environmental impact on residential properties adjacent to the highway network, or substantially increase congestion. Policy A/9 seeks to ensure safe and convenient access for general traffic (cars, motorbikes and commercial vehicles) by making certain road junctions are suitable for the volumes and characteristics of traffic that use them. The Head of Highways and Engineering raises no objection to the proposal and it considered that the proposed development would provide suitable parking and access arrangements. There is already a dwelling on the site and therefore there would be no material increase in traffic generation or demand for parking from these proposals. Accordingly, there would be no material adverse effects in transportation terms.

Privacy and amenity of Neighbours

UDP policy H/3 (e) requires development proposals to be compatible with surrounding uses, both in terms of its impact upon those uses and the impact of surrounding uses upon the amenity of future residents. Criterion (i) of UDP policy BE/2 requires proposals to ensure adequate provision for natural light is made both within and between buildings. In addition, the space standards outlined in paragraph 5.2 of the Council’s SPG Note “Guidelines and Standards for Residential Development” state that a minimum separation distance of 21 metres should be retained between principal elevations of opposing dwellings and a distance of 14 metres between principal and secondary elevations. The site lies within a remote location and the proposed dwelling would adhere with the Councils adopted residential spacing standards. Therefore the development is in accordance with the requirements of UDP policies H/3 and BE/2, and the objectives of the SPG Note “Guidelines and Standards for Residential Development”. Recreational Open Space UDP policy H/6 requires new housing developments (including conversions) to make adequate provision for recreational open space. In the case of proposals comprising less than 100 bedrooms, a commuted sum payment towards the provision/improvement of off-site

recreational open space is required. Off-site contributions to recreational open space (comprising elements of both local open space and outdoor sports provision) are calculated on the basis of the number of bedrooms being created by a development and the resulting demand for recreational open space arising from the occupation of the new houses. In this case, the proposal involves a new build house which would contain 4 bedrooms. The site is within a reasonably remote location beyond walking distance (1.5 kilometres) of areas of Local Open Space which have an identified qualitative/quantitative deficiency. Therefore, a contribution to improve Local Open Space is not sought in this case. Also as identified in the SPD, contributions to Outdoor Sports Provision can be spent more strategically within the same Township or elsewhere throughout the borough as future occupiers are likely to travel further afield to access such facilities. The proposed residential development involves a total of four bedrooms and requires a contribution of £1,935.19 (including a 4% administration charge) towards Outdoor Sports Provision. The applicant is required to enter into a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act in order to secure the relevant contribution to recreational open space in accordance with the requirements of UDP policy H/6 and the Supplementary Planning Document ‘Provision of Recreational Open Space in New Housing’.

SUMMARY

The NPPF states that, except in very special circumstances, there will be a presumption against inappropriate development in the Green Belt. One of the categories of development which is appropriate in the Green Belt is a limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed site. In this particular case, I consider that the ‘limited infilling’ exception is relevant as the proposed development involves the complete redevelopment of a site which is in continuing use. As such the proposed development is not considered to be inappropriate development within the Green Belt. The overall size and bulk of the proposed house would not be greater than the existing building and therefore it would not be materially harmful to the openness of the Green Belt, and the character and appearance of the area. The use of natural and high quality materials would ensure that it has a positive relationship with the landscape, and the overall design would provide a noteworthy addition to the area. No other material harm outside the Green Belt has been identified to landscape, ecology, residential amenity, or transportation which would weigh against the development. The application is therefore recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Committee resolve: That Members are minded to GRANT planning permission subject to: 1. The completion of a Section 106 planning obligation in order to secure:

a) The provision and maintenance of recreational open space in

accordance with the Council’s open space policies.

2. That the Council enters into an agreement under the provisions of Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and other appropriate legislation with regard to the matters set out above;

3. The Head of Planning being authorised to issue the decision notice on completion of

the Section 106 Agreement;

and subject to the following conditions and reasons:- 1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning

with the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with the requirements of section 91 of the Town and Country

Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 The permission relates to the following plans:- (A)-4 - 01 Rev A - Site Location Plan as existing and proposed (A)-1 - 01 Rev A - Ground Floor Plan as existing (A) 1-02 Rev A – First Floor Plan as Existing (A) 1-03 Rev A – Roof Plan as Existing (A) 2-04 – Proposed Elevations and Showing Existing Farm Outline (A)2-01 – Elevations as Existing (A)3 -01 – Section A-A and B-B as Proposed (A)1-06 – Roof Plan as Proposed (A)1-05 – First Floor Plan as Proposed (A)2-02 – Front and Side Elevation as Proposed (A)1-04 – Ground Floor Plan as Proposed and the development shall not be carried out other than in complete accordance with

these drawings hereby approved. Reason. For the avoidance of any doubt and to ensure a satisfactory standard of

development in accordance with policies of the Rochdale Unitary Development Plan. 3 Notwithstanding any description of materials in the application no development shall

take place until samples or full details of materials to be used externally on the building(s) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include the type, colour and texture of the materials. Only the materials so approved shall be used, in accordance with any terms of such approval.

Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity

in accordance with Policy BE/2 of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan. 4 Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes A, B, C, D, or E of the

Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended by The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (No.2) (England) Order 2008, or any equivalent Order following the revocation and re-enactment thereof), no development shall take place to the dwelling under Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes A, B, C, D or E,of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended) unless a further planning permission in respect thereof has been granted on application to the Local Planning Authority .

Reason - The Local Planning Authority considers it expedient, having regard to the

design and appearance of the development, to regulate any future alterations/extensions, in accordance with policies BE/2, H/3 and D/4 of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan as well as the NPPF.

5 No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The hard landscape details shall include proposed finished levels; any means of enclosures and hard surfacing materials. The soft landscaping works shall include planting plans; schedules of plants and trees, noting species, plant/tree sizes and proposed numbers/densities and the implementation programme. The approved details shall be carried out in full before the first occupation of the dwelling.

Reason - To ensure that the development site is landscaped to an acceptable standard

in the interests of enhancing the visual amenity and character of the site, in accordance with policies BE/2, BE/8 and H/3 of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan as well as the NPPF.

6 No development hereby permitted shall not take place until details of the reveals,

appearance, materials, profile, and method of opening of all new windows and doors has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme and retained as such thereafter.

Reason - In the interests of protecting both the character and appearance of the

building and the area within which the site is located, in accordance with policies BE/2, H/3 and D/4 of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan as well as the NPPF.

7 The development hereby permitted shall not take place until a scheme to regulate

surface water run-off has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented before the first occupation of the dwelling hereby approved, and it shall be maintained thereafter.

Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding and ensure future maintenance of

the surface water drainage system in order to comply with Unitary Development Plan EM/7 and the NPPF.

8 No development shall take place until details of the means of foul water disposal have

been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details, as approved, shall be implemented in full before the development hereby permitted is first brought into use.

Reason. To secure a satisfactory system of drainage and to prevent pollution of the

water environment in accordance with Policies EM/7 and EM/8 of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan and the NPPF.

9 No development shall take place until details of finished site and floor levels relative to

an off-site datum have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and in order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in

order to comply with the requirements of Unitary Development Plan policies H/3 and BE/2.

10 No development shall take place until a survey has been conducted, by a person the

identity of whom has previously been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, to investigate whether the site is or has been utilised by bats and the survey results shall be passed to the Local Planning Authority. If such a use is established, a scheme for the protection of the wildlife habitat shall be submitted for the written approval of the

Local Planning Authority and the scheme shall be implemented in full in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To safeguard any protected species which may be present within the building

in accordance with Policy NE/4 of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan. 11 The development hereby permitted shall not take place until details of all rainwater

goods including method of support, design and surface finish has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme and retained as such thereafter.

Reason - In the interests of protecting both the character and appearance of the

building and the area within which the site is located, in accordance with policies BE/2, H/3 of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan as well as the NPPF.

Report Author Paul Ambrose

________________________________________________

Application Number: 14/00696/FUL Ward: Central Rochdale

Proposal: Erection of single storey building to form four units for B1 use and one unit for Van Sales and ancillary services (Sui Generis)

Site Address: Site Of Former Hamer Working Mens Club Cook Street Rochdale

Applicant: Mr Parvaiz Akhtar

RECOMMENDATION: Grant subject to conditions

DELEGATION SCHEME The application has been brought to Committee as there have been more than 3 objections and the recommendation is to approve. The Committee has delegated powers to approve or refuse the application on reasonable planning grounds SITE The application relates to a vacant site which is bounded to the west by Halifax Road which forms part of the strategic highway linking Rochdale and Littleborough. This section of Halifax Road contains a mixture of residential and commercial uses. The site is bounded to the north by Cook Street which extends from Halifax Road. The southern side of Cook Street is fronted by rows of terraced dwellings while its northern side contains a variety of house types.

Adjoining the east facing boundary of the site is Cliff Street which extends from Cook Street. Cliff Street is the primary route used to access the approved residential development (application 11/D54532) for 73 dwellings on land to the south of Dean Street. The first phase of this development has now been completed with two rows of dwellings extending from the south facing boundary of the application site. Two of the proposed dwellings which form part of this development overlook the application site. The site has previously obtained planning permissions for a number of uses which include office development, a car showroom and a restaurant. These planning permissions have now lapsed. The application site was previously occupied by Hamer Mens Working Club which was demolished in 2007. PROPOSAL The application seeks full planning permission for the erection of a single storey detached building which will contain 5 industrial units. The proposed building will be ‘L’ shaped measuring 41.2 metes in length and, at its widest point, it would measure 26.3 metres. Four of the proposed units extend along the length of Halifax Road and three of them would be identical measuring 9.4m in length and 8 metres wide. The other unit along Halifax Road would occupy a rectangular footprint measuring 9.4metres in length and 15.9 in width. All of the proposed units along Halifax Road would be used for light industry (use class B1). The fifth unit would lie adjacent to the south facing boundary of the site, it would occupy a rectangular footprint measuring 12.5 metres in length and 16.3 metres wide. It is proposed that this unit would be used for van sales and the applicant has confirmed that all the vans for sale will only be displayed from within the building. Externally the four units along Halifax Road would be designed with a pitched roof (height to ridge 5.2 metres) while the unit to be used for van sales would be designed with a flat roof which would be 5.6 metres high. The units would be finished using a mixture of brickwork and cladding. The cladding would be predominately used on the elevations which overlook Halifax Road and Cook Street. The four units along the Halifax Road frontage would contain a service door which would face into the site and towards Cliff Street. The van sales unit contains two service doors facing across the sit and towards Cook Street. The application proposes two vehicular access points from Cliff Street which would extend into a car park containing 15 spaces. RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY National Guidance: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): The DCLG published the National Planning Policy Framework on 27 March 2012. The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. With immediate effect the NPPF replaces 44 documents including Planning Policy Statements; Planning Policy Guidance; Minerals Policy Statements; Minerals Policy Guidance; Circular 05/2005:Planning Obligations; and various letters to Chief Planning Officers. The NPPF will be referred to as appropriate in the report. National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) The government published its NPPG on 6 March 2014. This is intended to complement the NPPF and to provide a single resource for planning guidance, whilst rationalising and streamlining the material. Almost all previous planning Circulars and advice notes have been cancelled. Specific reference will be made to the NPPG or other national advice in the Analysis section of the report, where appropriate.

Unitary Development Plan (UDP): G/D/1 Defined Urban Area G/BE/1 Design Quality BE/2 Design Criteria for New Development BE/8 Landscaping in New Development G/EC/1 Employment Land Supply EC/5 Employment Developments and Extensions Outside Allocated Areas G/EM/1 Environmental Protection and Pollution Control EM/3 Noise and New Development EM/4 Contaminated Land EM/7 Development and Flood Risk EM/8 Protection of Surface and Ground Water G/A/1 Accessibility A/7 New Development – Access for Service Vehicles A/8 New Development – Capacity of the Highway Network A/9 New Development – Access for General Traffic A/10 New Development – Provision of Parking Supplementary Planning Documents Energy and New Development RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 04/D44577 - Car showroom - Approved 04/D44578 – Retail Development – Withdrawn 04/D44579 – Storage and Distribution - Withdrawn 04/D44580 - General Industrial Development – Withdrawn 04/D44581 – Residential Development – Approved 04/D44582 – Restaurant – Approved 04/D44583 – Office development. Approved 06/D47065 – Residential development of 28 apartments. Approved. CONSULTATION RESPONSES Highways and Engineering: - No objections. Comments as follows:

� The proposed level of parking provision would be adequate to serve industrial units of the size proposed.

� The development would not have a negative impact upon the local network capacity. � The proposed site access is adequate � The proposed development will have no adverse impact on highway safety.

United Utilities: - No objections. Comments as follows:

� The site should be drained on separate systems for foul and surface water. Surface water should discharge in the most sustainable way.

Greater Manchester Police Design for Security. No objections

Contaminated Land Officer: - Condition to be attached to any permission granted requiring site investigation prior to development taking place.

Environmental Health: - No objections. Conditions should be attached to any permission granted as follows:

� Opening hours (including deliveries) limited to between 08:00 and 19:00 Monday to Friday and 09:00 to 18:00 on Saturdays only.

� Noise from the site should not exceed 50 dBA Leq 1 hour during opening hours and 40 dBA Leq 15 min at all other times.

GM Fire and Rescue – No objections REPRESENTATIONS Direct Publicity: - The appropriate neighbouring properties were notified of the application by letter and a site notice posted. 19 letters of objection and 29 letters of support have been received. The points of objections and support are summarised below: - Objections.

� A van sale centre inappropriate for this area. � The local roads are already very busy and the proposed use would exacerbate the

situation.

� I do not believe we need any more business premises in the area. Residential use would be preferable.

� The proposal would harm the amenities and privacy of the occupiers of the nearby houses.

� The proposed development would be an eyesore. � The proposed development, in particular the van sales unit, will cause a noise

nuisance. Support

� The plans look really good for this stretch of road and will no doubt create much needed interest and jobs in the area.

� The site has been vacant for a number of years and the proposed scheme should be supported.

� The proposed units will improve the visual amenities of the area. � The proposed uses would support the existing local businesses.

ANALYSIS Appearance and design: Criterion (a) of UDP policy BE/2 requires developments to demonstrate good design by:

� Ensuring that they are compatible with or improve their surroundings by virtue of their scale, density, height, massing, layout, materials, architectural style and detail and means of enclosure;

Criterion (c) of UDP policy EC/5 states that proposals for industrial, business or warehouse development (use classes B1, B2 and B8), including changes of use and extensions to existing premises, will be permitted outside allocated employment areas provided that:

� In all cases the scale and form of the development is sympathetic to the character of surrounding land uses.

The industrial units would be clearly visible from this section of Halifax Road which contains a variety of uses which include a fire station, new housing and rows of small commercial units which form part of the Halifax Road Local Centre. Externally, the building would be of a modest scale and height and, despite being on elevated land, would not be at odds with the scale of surrounding development. The elevations which face towards Halifax Road and Cook Street incorporate horizontal slip cladding in three complementary colours (white, blue and grey) which would add visual interest to the building and ensure it has a positive relationship with Halifax Road. The proposed building, by virtue of its size, scale, layout, materials and design, would be compatible with the character of the area and add visual interest. It is worth noting that the form of the building is similar to the nearby fire station which has incorporated similar cladding. Landscaping would be introduced along the boundaries of the site to Halifax Road and Cook Street. The use of landscaping would soften the visual impact of the development. The proposed development would be compatible with the character of the site and its surroundings, would respect the mix of surrounding land uses by virtue of its scale and form, and would have no adverse impact on the appearance of the street scene. The proposal is therefore in accordance with the requirements of UDP policies BE/2 and EC/5. Impact on neighbouring occupiers: The forth bullet point to paragraph 109 of the NPPF indicates that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:

� Preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution.

The first bullet point to paragraph 123 of the NPPF stipulates that planning policies and decisions should aim to:

� Avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development.

Criteria (a) and (c) of UDP policy EC/5 indicate that proposals for industrial, business or warehouse development (use classes B1, B2 and B8), including changes of use and extensions to existing premises, will be permitted outside allocated employment areas provided that:

� In the case of new development within or adjoining primarily residential areas the development is within Use Class B1 and will, therefore, by definition have no unacceptable impact on the environment or amenity of surrounding land uses by reason of visual appearance, noise, vibration, odour, atmospheric pollution or other nuisance;

� In all cases the scale and form of the development is sympathetic to the character, and protects the amenity, of surrounding land uses.

Criterion (a) of UDP policy EM/3 states that development will not be permitted where:

� It would lead to unacceptable levels of noise nuisance to nearby existing or future occupants of buildings, or users of open space.

Criterion (j) of UDP policy BE/2 requires developments to demonstrate good design by:

� Minimising their potential environmental impact, including noise, air and water pollution.

Despite being located within an area which comprises a mix of uses, the site lies amongst areas of housing to all four sides. Houses closest to the proposed building comprise the new

detached dwellings which are located to the east along The Foothills and terrace dwellings which lie to the east and north along Cook Street and Dean Street. The front elevations of units 1-4 would lie between 29-30m from the gable elevations of no.’s 1 and 2 Dean Street while the gable elevation of unit 5 would lie 12.7m from the front elevation of no. 1 The Foothills. No. 1 Foothills is a detached dwelling which as stated above would overlook the blank gable elevation of unit 5 which contains a flat roof and is some 5.6m high. This area is characterised by high density dwellings and it is not un-common to find principal elevations of dwellings lying some 11m apart. In this instance, I am satisfied that by reason its scale and position unit 5 would have an acceptable relationship with the adjoining uses, and in particular it would not be overbearing or significantly harm the outlook from no.1 Foothills. Elsewhere, the building would achieve minimum separation distances of 24 metres with houses on the opposite side of Halifax Road and between 36 and 37m from no. 1 Cook Street and no. 1 Cook Terrace. No hours of operation have been proposed as part of the scheme. However, it is considered that a restriction should be imposed in this regard due to the development’s setting amongst residential properties. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer has recommended that the hours of operation be limited to between 08:00 – 19:00 Monday to Friday and 09:00 - 18:00 on Saturdays (with no opening on Sundays). Conditions have also been recommended to limit noise emissions and to ensure that details of any lighting on the building are submitted prior to installation. The proposed development, by virtue of its size, scale, height, siting, materials, design and detail, would not have an oppressive or overbearing impact on surrounding occupiers and would not unduly affect their amenity through overlooking, overshadowing, loss of outlook or loss of daylight. Four off the proposed units would be used for B1 purposes and therefore, by definition, would have no unacceptable impact on the amenity of surrounding residential occupiers by reason of noise, vibration, odour or other nuisance. With regard to the unit to be used for van sales, given its modest scale it is not considered that it is likely to generate excessive comings and goings which would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents. The proposal is therefore in accordance with the requirements of UDP policies EC/5, EM/3 and BE/2, and the NPPF. Highways: Criteria (d), (e) and (f) of UDP policy EC/5 indicate that proposals for industrial, business or warehouse development (use classes B1, B2 and B8), including changes of use and extensions to existing premises, will be permitted outside allocated employment areas provided that:

� Satisfactory vehicular access can be provided and adequate on - site provision is made for car parking, servicing and manoeuvring;

� The surrounding highway network is capable either as existing or as proposed to be upgraded (including by the developer as a result of a proposal), of accommodating any additional vehicular traffic generated by the proposal without damage to amenity or road safety; and

� For new development (excluding extensions) the site is, or is capable of being, adequately served by public transport.

UDP policy A/7 states that proposals for industrial, commercial or shopping developments will be required to make adequate provision for delivery vehicles off the highway unless the constraints of the site, such as its size, site levels and adjacent land uses, make off-highway provision impracticable.

UDP policy A/8 indicates that new development will be permitted provided that the additional traffic generated will not be detrimental to the safe and efficient operation of the Highway Network, both adjacent to and further away from the site. Specifically, proposals should not:

a) Have an adverse impact on the safety of any road users; b) Have an adverse impact on accessibility for pedestrians, including people with

restricted mobility, cyclists or users of public transport in the immediate vicinity of the development;

c) Substantially increase congestion; d) Divert traffic on to less suitable roads; or e) Cause an unacceptable environmental impact on residential properties passed by

traffic associated with the development whilst accessing the principal road network. UDP policy A/9 stipulates that development proposals will be required to facilitate safe and convenient access for general traffic, which includes cars, motorcycles and commercial vehicles. Relative to the scale, type and location of development, proposals should ensure that:

a) Roads, junctions and access points to/from premises are safe, convenient and suitable for the volume and characteristics of traffic that will be required to use them; and

b) Access for emergency service vehicles and other service vehicles, such as waste collection vehicles, is provided.

UDP policy A/10 relates to parking provision and refers to the Council’s Schedule of Parking Standards (UDP Appendix C) which identifies maximum standards for car parking provision and minimum standards for cycle and motorcycle parking. The maximum standard for car parking provision for standalone B1 uses is 1 space per 35 square metres of floorspace. The proposed industrial units would provide 410 square metres of floorspace, equating to a maximum of 12 car parking spaces. The proposal would provide a total of 15 car parking spaces which would mean that if 12 spaces were used by the B1 industrial uses then 3 spaces would remain for users of the van sales units. The UDP does not give guidance on the parking standards for car sales but in this instance, it is considered that a total of 15 car parking spaces is adequate to meet the expected demand of the whole site. In order to ensure that there is satisfactory disabled parking, a condition is imposed which requires 3 of the 15 spaces to be for disabled use. The building would be accessed from Cliff Street via Cook Street and Halifax Road. The width and visibility available at these junctions would be sufficient to cater for the increased volume of traffic visiting the site in association with the development. Two access points would be formed from Cliff Street and in order to ensure safe vehicular movements to and from the site, a condition is imposed which requires them to operate in a ‘in’ and ‘out’ mode. The proposed development would make suitable arrangements for vehicle manoeuvring and parking in order to facilitate safe and convenient access and circulation for the volume and characteristics of traffic visiting the site. The existing highway network is capable of accommodating any additional vehicular traffic generated by the proposal without damage to residential amenity or road safety. The proposal is therefore in accordance with the requirements of UDP policies EC/5, A/7, A/8, A/9 and A/10. SUMMARY The proposed development, by virtue of its size, scale, height, siting, materials, design and detail, would not have an oppressive or overbearing impact on surrounding occupiers and would not unduly affect their amenity through overlooking, overshadowing, loss of outlook or loss of daylight. Furthermore the scheme would be compatible with the character of the area and appropriate access and parking arrangements would be achieved in order to ensure that the development would have no detrimental impact on the safe and efficient operation of the

highway network, either adjacent to or further away from the site. Measures can also be put in place in order to ensure that the development poses no unacceptable risk in terms of contamination. RECOMMENDATION GRANT subject to the following conditions 1 The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning

with the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with the requirements of section 91 of the Town and Country

Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 This permission relates to the following plans: • 26158192-F – Block Plan • Site Location Plan - Scale 1:1250 • 26158192 – B - Existing Plan • 26158192 – Existing Elevations • 26158192 – D – Proposed Plan • 26158192 – C – Proposed Elevations • 26158192 – E – Proposed Roof Plan The development shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved

drawings. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure a satisfactory standard of

development in accordance with the reason for decision as detailed below on this decision notice.

3 Notwithstanding any details shown on the approved plans and the requirements of

condition 2 of this permission, no development shall take place until samples or full details of materials to be used on the external surfaces of the building have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be constructed in accordance with the duly approved materials.

Reason: In order to ensure use of appropriate materials which are compatible with the

character of the site and its surroundings in accordance with the requirements of Unitary Development Plan policies BE/2 and EC/5.

4 No development shall take place until an investigation and risk assessment (in addition

to any assessment provided with the planning application) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The assessment shall investigate the nature and extent of any contamination on the site (whether or not it originates on the site). The assessment shall be undertaken by competent persons and a written report of the findings submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any development takes place. The submitted report shall include:

i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: • human health,

• property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland, and service lines and pipes,

• adjoining land, • groundwaters and surface waters, • ecological systems, • archaeological sites and ancient monuments; iii) where unacceptable risks are identified, an appraisal of remedial options and

proposal of the preferred option(s) to form a remediation strategy for the site. The development shall thereafter be carried out in full accordance with the duly

approved remediation strategy and a verification report submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any of the building(s) hereby approved are first occupied.

Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and to ensure the safe

development of the site in the interests of the amenity of future occupiers in accordance with Unitary Development Plan policies EM/4, EM/8 and BE/2, and the National Planning Policy Framework.

5 The units hereby approved shall not be open for trade or business nor shall any

deliveries take place at the site before 08:00 hours nor after 19:00 hours Monday to Friday, before 09:00 hours nor after 18:00 hours on Saturdays or at any time on Sundays.

Reason: In order to safeguard the amenity of surrounding residents and to prevent

nuisance arising in accordance with the requirements of Unitary Development Plan Policies EC/5 and EM/3.

6 Noise from operations associated with the development (including any plant and

equipment used in connection with it) shall not exceed 50 dBA Leq 1 hour between the hours of 08:00 and 19:00 Monday to Saturday and 40 dBA Leq 15 minutes at all other times when measured within the curtilage of noise sensitive premises.

Reason: In order to safeguard the amenity of surrounding residents and to prevent

nuisance arising in accordance with the requirements of Unitary Development Plan Policies EC/5 and EM/3.

7 Notwithstanding any details shown on the approved plans and the requirements of

condition 2 of this permission, no development shall take place until a scheme for the design, construction, drainage and marking out of the car park has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The duly approved scheme shall be implemented in full before the building hereby permitted is first occupied and the car park shall be maintained solely for the use of staff and customers. Three of the car parking spaces shall be designed, in terms of their width and construction for the exclusive use of disabled persons.

Reason: In order to ensure provision of appropriate parking facilities to serve the

development in the interests of highway safety in accordance with the requirements of Unitary Development Plan policies EC/5 and A/10.

8 Notwithstanding any details shown on the approved plans and the requirements of

condition 2 of this permission, within three months of development first taking place details of a landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such a scheme shall include details of the type, species, siting, planting distances and the programme of planting of trees and shrubs. The duly approved landscaping scheme shall be carried out during the first planting season after

the development is substantially completed and the areas which are landscaped shall be retained as landscaped areas thereafter. Any trees or shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within three years of planting shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted.

Reason: In order to soften the visual impact of the development when viewed from

adjacent houses in accordance with the requirements of Unitary Development Plan policies EC/5, BE/2 and BE/8.

9 Notwithstanding any information contained within the application, full details of any

external lighting to be installed on the building or on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to its installation. Such details shall include its position and height on the building or site, its luminance (including light spillage), angle of installation and any hoods to be fixed to the lights. Only lighting as approved shall be installed on the site in accordance with the terms of any such approval.

Reason: To ensure that any lighting to be installed on the site does not cause a

nuisance to surrounding occupiers in accordance with the requirements of Unitary Development Plan Policies BE/2 and EM/3.

10 No site preparation, delivery of materials or construction works, other than quiet

internal building operations such as plastering and electrical installation, shall take place other than between 0730 and 18:00 hours, Monday-Friday and between 0800 hours and noon on Saturday, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and to prevent nuisance arising in order to comply

with the requirements of Unitary Development Plan policy BE/2 and EM/3. 11 The development hereby permitted shall not take place until a scheme to regulate

surface water run off has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented before any of the units are first brought into use and be subsequently maintained thereafter.

Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding and ensure future maintenance of

the surface water drainage system in order to comply with Unitary Development Plan EM/7 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

12 The development hereby permitted shall not take place until a scheme to regulate foul

water has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be fully implemented before any of the units are first brought into use and be subsequently maintained thereafter.

Reason: To ensure future maintenance of the foul water drainage system in order to

comply with Unitary Development Plan EM/7 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

13 No development shall take place until full details of the treatment of all boundaries,

including fences, walls, retaining walls and any other means of enclosure both surrounding and within the site, including their height and details or samples of materials to be used have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme and to an agreed timescale and retained thereafter.

Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy BE/2 of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan.

14 All vans displayed for sale shall only be sited from within Unit 5. Reason. In order to provide satisfactory parking arrangements and to prevent

nuisance arising, in accordance with the requirements of Unitary Development Plan policies EM/3, A/10 and BE/2.

15 No development shall take place until a signage scheme for the car park has been

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme and to an agreed timescale and retained thereafter.

Reason. In the interest of highway safety, in accordance with the requirements of

Unitary Development Plan policies A/7 A/9 and BE/2. 16 The development hereby approved shall achieve a ‘very good’ or ‘excellent’ Building

Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM) rating or equivalent, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Where this BREEAM requirement is achieved, a post construction certificate

confirming such an outcome, and detailing the energy supply technology installed within the development, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before (delete as appropriate - any building/or that part of the building under construction) is first occupied, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Where the BREEAM requirement is not achieved, a scheme to offset the

development’s impact on the global environment, in accordance with the advice and standards set out in the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document, ‘Energy and New Development.’ shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any building/or that part of the building under construction is first occupied. The approved scheme shall thereafter be fully implemented before the relevant building/part of the building is occupied, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason. To ensure that the development is sustainable and makes efficient use of

energy, in accordance with Policy EM/13 of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan and the Council’s Unitary Development Plan and the Council’s ‘Energy and New Development Supplementary Planning Document

Report Author Paul Ambrose ________________________________________________

Application Number: 14/00720/FUL Ward: Milkstone And Deeplish

Proposal: Five storey extension to existing mosque

Site Address: Neeli Mosque And Islamic Centre Durham Street Rochdale OL11 1JJ

Applicant: Mr Zamir Ahmad Neeli Mosque (UKIM) RECOMMENDATION: Refuse

DELEGATION SCHEME The Committee has delegated powers to approve or refuse the application on reasonable planning grounds. SITE The application relates to a vacant area of land which adjoins the southern boundary of the Neeli Mosque. The site measures 12m by 27m and it is broadly rectangular in shape. The site previously contained a large detached dwelling which was demolished several years ago. The site is bounded to the east by Falmouth Street which is a short section of highway linking Durham Street and Exeter Street. The southern boundary of the site is bounded by Exeter Street while Hare Street bounds the western boundary. The area surrounding the site is characterised by rows of terraced dwellings which are generally two storeys high. Facing towards the site are two rows of terraced dwellings which are located at no’s 8-12 Hare Street and no’s 1-7 Harefield Avenue. Neeli Mosque itself is currently a two storey building which lies in between the junctions of Durham Street/Hare Street and Durham Street/Falmouth Street.

The building is overlooked by nos. 2-4 Hare Street and nos. 47 to 59 Durham Street. Three large minarets stand on the roof of the Mosque and by reason of their size and design they are clearly visible from the surrounding area. PROPOSAL The application proposes a 5 storey extension to the Mosque which would extend from its south facing elevation. Each floor within the extension is described below:- Basement

• Would contain a large classroom/community room and storage space.

Ground floor

• The main external access into the extension would be by way of double doors which

would face across Hare Street. This floor would contain male accessible toilet facilities

and a mortuary. The mortuary would be accessed from within the building and it also

would contain an external access which would face Falmouth Street.

First Floor

• The first floor would contain female accessible toilets, a kitchen and a

classroom/community room.

Second floor

• The second floor would contain male accessible toilets and a classroom/community

room.

Third Floor

• Would contain a classroom/community room.

The applicant has confirmed that the classrooms would be used by children Monday to Friday between 17:00 to 18:45 and adult classes would take place at weekends. A youth club would operate on Fridays between 19:30 and 21:30. The front elevation of the extension would face across Hare Street and a two storey link corridor would extend in between the Mosque and the proposed extension. The front elevation facing Hare Street would be four storeys high. Both the rear (facing Falmouth Street) and side (facing Exeter Street) elevations would be five storeys high and a pitched roof would extend over them. Each elevation would contain long vertical rows of glazing which would serve the staircases, the toilets and the teaching rooms. RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY National Guidance National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) The Department for Communities and Local Government published the NPPF on 27 March 2012. The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)

The government published its NPPG on 6 March 2014. This is intended to complement the NPPF and to provide a single resource for planning guidance, whilst rationalising and streamlining the material. Almost all previous planning Circulars and advice notes have been cancelled. Specific reference will be made to the NPPG or other national advice in the Analysis section of the report, where appropriate. Unitary Development Plan (UDP): G/CF/1 (Part One Policy) Community Facilities and Public Services CF/2 General Criteria for the Development of Local Community and Health Facilities G/BE/1 (Part One Policy) Design Criteria BE/2 Design Criteria for New Development G/A/1 Accessibility A/8 New Development – Capacity of the Highway Network A/10 New Development – Access for General Traffic G/EM/1 Environmental Protection and Pollution Control EM/3 Noise and New Development Supplementary Planning Documents Oldham and Rochdale Urban Design Guide Energy and New Development RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 94/D31113 – Erection of mosque with associated car parking. Approved October 1994. 95/D32504 – Revised proposal for erection of mosque with associated car parking. Approved January 1996. 01/D39481 – Construction of minaret to mosque. Approved February 2002. CONSULTATION RESPONSES Highways And Engineering – Raise no objection and recommend a condition be imposed which requires dedicated parking strategy be agreed prior to the first use of the extension. Environmental Health (Noise) - No comment Greater Manchester Police (Design for Security) – No comment United Utilities – No comment REPRESENTATIONS Letters of notification were sent to surrounding neighbours, a notice positioned close to the site and three letters of objection have been received which are summarised below: -

1. The proposed extension would overwhelm the front elevation of no. 6 Hare Street.

2. Anyone inside the extension would be able to see directly into no. 6 Hare Street.

3. The proposed extension would be an eyesore.

When a decision is made on a planning application, only certain issues may be taken into account; these are often referred to as ’material planning considerations’. In this particular case the Local Planning Authority has received a number of letters which have raised non-

material planning considerations and therefore they are not relevant to the determination of this planning application and have not been summarised in the report. ANALYSIS Principle of use Criteria (a) of Unitary Development Plan Policy CF/2 states that proposals for new and improved local community and health facilities will be supported provided that:

• The facility is accessible to the community it is intended to serve and, where

practicable, within District or Local Centres;

The application site is located in residential area which is characterised by two storey terraced dwellings. The site lies within walking distance of the Milkstone Road Local Centre as well as Rochdale Train Station and the Maclure Road Metrolink Stop. Although the site is not in a district or local centre it is considered that the proposed use, like the existing mosque which this proposal seeks to extend, would be compatible with the nature and function of surrounding uses. The principle of extending the mosque is therefore acceptable in principle. Impact on Surrounding Uses and Residents Unitary Development Plan Policy EM/3 relates to noise and new development. Criterion (a) states that development will not be permitted where:

• It would lead to unacceptable levels of noise nuisance to nearby existing or future

occupants of buildings, or users of open space.

Criteria (b) of Unitary Development Plan Policy CF/2 States that proposal for new and improved local community and health facilities will be permitted and supported, provided:

• The proposal will have no unacceptable impact on the amenity of surrounding land

uses, particularly residential, by reason of visual appearance, scale, noise or other

nuisance;

Criteria (j) of UDP policy BE/2 states that development proposals will be required to demonstrate good design by:

• Minimising the potential environmental impact of and on the development, including

noise, air and water pollution.

The application site adjoins the junctions of Exeter Street/Hare Street and Exeter Street/Falmouth Street. The following separation distances would exist between the proposed extension and dwellings which overlook the site: -

• The rear elevations of no’s 1-7 Harefield Avenue would lie 16.2m from the side

elevation (south facing) of the proposed extension. This facing section of the

extension is 5 storeys high.

• The front elevations of 6-12 Hare Street would lie 13.3m from the front elevation (west

facing) of the proposed extension. The front elevation of the building is 4 storeys high.

The highest part of the proposed extension would be significantly higher than the neighbouring dwellings and would be highly visible from and in close proximity to them. The Council’s Guidelines and Standards for Residential Development, which can be reasonably extrapolated to any development in proximity to existing residential properties, states that a five storey building should be separated from a two storey building by 29m, even where there are no facing windows. Where habitable room windows would face onto each other, the minimum

distance should be 34m where a five storey building faces a two storey building. Those distances are reduced by 5m to 24m and 29m respectively, where a four storey building faces onto a two storey building. It is clear, therefore, that the separation distances in this case fall far short of what would normally be expected. The size, scale and massing of the elevations, in close proximity to neighbouring residential properties, would have an intensely overbearing impact would therefore result in overshadowing and a significant loss of outlook from the principal windows within the rear elevation of nos. 1-7 Harefield Street and from the windows within the front elevations of nos. 8-12 Hare Street. Furthermore within the south and east facing elevations of the proposed building there would be large areas of glazing which would serve the main staircase and the classrooms. There would be clear views from these windows towards nos. 1-7 Harefield Street and nos. 8-12 Hare Street and given the separation distances involved, it is considered that overlooking would be possible into these windows and the rear yard areas of properties on Harefield Avenue (just 11m distant) which would lead to a loss of privacy for the occupiers of these properties. The location, size, scale and massing of the extension would therefore be detrimental to the amenity of nearby residential properties contrary to Policy CF/2 and BE/2 of the adopted Rochdale Unitary Development Plan. Although for most of the time the use only generates a modest amount of comings and goings it is acknowledged that occasionally the centre holds specific events or religious celebrations which generate a significant number of comings and goings. The applicant has confirmed that the existing building is not able to meet the needs of the local community, as such the proposed extension would provide better facilities for the current users. Although it is expected that an extension of such a size would result in increased comings and goings from the site, it is reasonable to assume that many of the users of the facility would access the site by foot. Although the extension would increase the number of users of the Mosque, it is not considered that the effect of this on the surrounding environment would be so frequent or severe that planning permission should be refused. Design and Appearance Criterion (a) of Unitary Development Plan Policy BE/2 (Design Criteria for Development) states that development proposals will be required to demonstrate good design by ensuring they are compatible with or improve their surroundings by virtue of their scale, height, massing, layout and architectural style. The Rochdale Design Guide states that good design should respond positively to nearby buildings and spaces, helping to reinforce the character of already attractive places and improve the qualities of less attractive places. The principles of ensuring that new development responds positively are: -

• Development should contribute positively to the prevailing streetscene and improve it.

• The scale of new development should be appropriate and sensitive to its context;

• Normally, new buildings should be of a scale that reflects the predominant scale already

existing in the locality. Major changes in scale between new and existing buildings

should generally be avoided;

Paragraph 56 of the NPPF states that the Government attaches great importance to the design of the built environment. Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning, and should contribute positively to making places better for people.

The best schemes are usually those that recognise the individuality of a place and in this particular case the design and scale of the building is inappropriate. Normally new buildings should be of a scale that reflects the predominant scale already existing in the locality which is two storeys. In this particular case the extension would be significantly higher than the existing Mosque (with the exception of the minaret tower) and it would be an imposing feature within the street scene which would overwhelm the adjacent rows of two storey dwellings. The overwhelming scale of the extension is compounded by its poor design. Good design quality - whatever the architectural style – tends to introduce visual richness through the use of good quality detailing, materials and an appreciation of its context. The extension has no coherent architectural style, reflecting neither the style of the surrounding development, nor the existing mosque. In summary, the design, appearance and scale of the proposed extension is inappropriate within this context. The extension would be 5 storeys high which is out of scale within this locality and it would overwhelm the adjacent the two storey dwellings. Furthermore the design of the scheme is poor as it neither draws on the vernacular nor innovatively contrasts with the surroundings and rather proposes a development which would neither improve nor enhance the area. The proposal is therefore contrary to the requirements of Unitary Development Plan Policies BE/2 (Design Criteria for New Development) as well as guidance contained within the Rochdale Urban Design Guide and the NPPF. Highways Unitary Development Plan Policy A/8 relates to the impact of new development on the capacity of the highway network and stipulates that proposals will be permitted providing that the additional traffic generated will not be detrimental to the safe and efficient operation of the Highway network, both adjacent to and further away from the site. Specifically, criterion (a) and (c) of the policy state that proposals should not:

• Have an adverse impact on the safety of any road users;

• Substantially increase congestion.

Unitary Development Plan Policy A/9 requires development proposals to facilitate safe and convenient access for general traffic. Criterion (a) of the policy states that, relative to the scale, type and location of development, proposals should ensure that:

• Roads, junctions and access points to/from premises are safe, convenient and suitable

for the volume and characteristics of traffic that will be required to use them.

Criteria (c) of Unitary Development Plan Policy CF/2 states that proposals for new and improved local community and health facilities will be permitted and supported provided:

• The surrounding road network is capable of accommodating any additional vehicular

traffic likely to