8 affordable homes at Grassland To The North/East Of Amberley Drive, Manchester

What was proposed

The application proposed eight two-storey homes in four semi-detached blocks, with affordable rent, parking, infrastructure and landscaping.

“Proposal Erection of 8no dwelling houses (4no blocks of semi-detached), with associated infrastructure works, car parking and hard and soft landscaping.”

“The applicant is proposing to erect 8 dwellinghouses on the site in the form of 4 blocks of 2 storey semi-detached buildings. Four of the dwellinghouses would have two bedrooms, while the remainder would have three bedrooms. Each property would have a dedicated on-street car parking space. The tenure of the dwellings would be 100% affordable rent. The proposed layout is shown here:”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The elongated grassland site adjoins Mill Brook and sits among houses, flats, trees, shrubs and open space.

“This application relates to an elongated and irregular shaped site, approximately 100 metres in length and occupying a site 0.14 hectares in size, which is located on the eastern side of Amberley Drive where it adjoins Mill Brook.”

“The site consists of grassland with a number of trees and shrubs running along the north-eastern and eastern boundary of the site. To the east of Mill Brook there are further dwellinghouses on Greenbrow Road. Adjoining the site, to the northwest, there is a pair of semi-detached dwellinghouses (nos. 18a and 18b Amberley Drive), while to the west, on the opposite side of Amberley Drive, there is a 3-storey block of flats.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the limited open-space loss was outweighed by housing benefits and other impacts were considered acceptable with conditions.

“Having regard to both local and national planning policy, including the presumption in favour of sustainable development, it is considered that the loss of this small and functionally limited area of open space is acceptable in this instance. The proposal would make a modest but valuable contribution to housing supply, and the benefits of redevelopment are considered to outweigh the limited harm arising from the loss of this open space.”

“Space Standards – The City Council adopted the Manchester Residential Quality Guidance in December 2016 and within that document reference is made to the use of a combination of the Nationally Described Space Standards and the London Housing Design Guide space standards to form Manchester’s space standards for residential developments. The proposed development has been assessed against these standards.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Highways, ecology, flood-risk, water and environmental consultees raised no objection overall, while tree officers opposed removing the oak.

“MCC Flood Risk Management – Requests the imposition of a condition requiring the applicant to submit a surface water drainage scheme prior to the commencement of works on the site.”

“Greater Manchester Ecology Unit – No objections to the proposal have been raised following confirmation about the purchase of off-site BNG credits and the fact that there is no need for further bat surveys. They have recommended that a construction environmental management plan condition be attached to any approval granted, along with conditions concerning vegetation clearance and the provision of ecological enhancements such as bird boxes.”

Officer report

What residents said

Five households objected over green-space and habitat loss, traffic and parking, construction disruption, residential amenity, and drainage risks.

“Concerns have been raised about increased congestion, particularly near the sharp bend in the road, which is already hazardous due to speeding and poor visibility. The road should be improved to prevent further issues. • Additional on-street parking from new residents may obstruct the main road and footpaths, exacerbating existing issues caused by hospital staff and residents of the flats.”

“Concerns have been raised about anticipated noise, mess, and disruption during construction, including mud on roads, damage to kerbs and footpaths. Concerns that access to tram and bus stations may become longer and less safe due to increased traffic and construction activity.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The planning officer addressed the committee, while no objector or applicant attended to speak.

Members’ discussion

Members discussed affordable housing, drainage, tree loss, traffic, speed bumps and keeping biodiversity measures near Wythenshawe.

“Councillor Andrews stated that he and Ward Councillor Rawlins both felt a need to support housing offers in Wythenshawe but sought assurances on drainage on the site, stating that they would need to be more than adequate. The removal of trees on the site, including an oak tree, was a negative aspect and he questioned on traffic and the potential for adding speed bumps, noting that hospital parking is a concern in this area.”

“The Planning Officer stated that the flood risk had been fully considered, all flood and surface water would be dealt with and captured on site, similar to a nearby scheme. The loss of the oak tree was regrettable as it could not be retained but trees would be replaced on site and planting off site on land controlled by the applicant. There would also be a 10% uplift on Biodiversity Net Gain which would need to be off-site.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Councillor Andrews moved the officer recommendation and Councillor Curley seconded it.

“Councillor Curley added that he welcomed the 100% affordable rent scheme proposed here, albeit noting there would be some negative impact and seconded the motion.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee approved the application for the reasons and subject to the conditions in the report.

“The Committee resolved to approve the application for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out within the report.”

Minutes