Student accommodation towers at Cambridge Halls Of Residence, Manchester

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing existing halls and building two student accommodation towers with commercial, community, amenity, landscaping and highway works.

“Proposal Demolition of existing halls of residence and erection of two buildings of 30 and 24 storeys above ground, plus basement and rooftop plant levels, comprising: purpose-built student accommodation with internal and external rooftop communal amenity space (Sui Generis); ground floor commercial and community uses (Flexible Use Classes E, F1(a) or F2(b)); hard and soft landscaping; and associated highway works.”

“The application proposes buildings of 30 and 24 storeys to form Purpose Built Student Accommodation (PBSA) (Sui Generis) with amenity spaces, public realm, landscaping, commercial uses and highway works. 2,302 beds would be provided.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The site formed part of the All Saints Campus and contained two five- to six-storey halls with 771 bedrooms, courtyards and limited trees.

“The site forms part of Manchester Metropolitan University’s All Saints Campus and comprises two blocks, each designed around central courtyards. The development was constructed in 1998 and comprises 771 single bedrooms. The buildings are red brick and are 5 to 6 storeys. The internal courtyards comprise hardstanding with a small number of trees.”

“The site is in Flood Zone 1 and a critical drainage area with a low risk of surface water flooding. It is in the Manchester Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) where air quality conditions are poor. The site is not located within a designated Conservation Area with the Whitworth Street Conservation Area being the closest which is 500m north-east of the site.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the scheme policy-compliant, sustainable and beneficial through student accommodation, regeneration, jobs, public realm, accessibility and low-carbon measures.

“The proposal accords with national and local planning policies, and would bring significant economic, social and environmental benefits. It would be a significant investment in the Corridor, is consistent with policy H12 and would provide 2,302 beds and meet demand for student accommodation at All Saints Campus. It is also a site identified in the Council’s Student pipeline.”

“Public realm would improve connectivity and provide a pedestrian friendly environment. There would be accommodation created that would meet accessibility needs. 413 discounted rooms would be created. A local labour agreement would ensure that Manchester residents are prioritised for construction jobs.”

Officer report

What people said

Most representations objected, particularly to cycle-route changes, loss of openness, building height, privacy, overshadowing, visual impact, traffic, noise and student housing need.

“Some cyclists will continue using the most direct route, resulting in some cyclists using pedestrian only space if it is the most direct route and there is no way to prevent this without barriers or constant enforcement, so the proposal will make the situation worse. The proposals introduce a constrained route between Cambridge Street and All Saints Park which will be dangerous if used by cyclists.”

“Need - There is no need for yet more student flats in the area; there is already adequate accommodation in the city. Student accommodation is dominating the community around the Universities, with no housing for Manchester people. Students are not from Manchester, pay no council tax and leave lots of destruction behind them. More housing for Manchester residents should be prioritised.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant spoke about campus quality, jobs, affordability, student housing need and carbon aims; councillors described discussions with the university and welcomed the scheme.

What members discussed

Members discussed affordable accommodation, active travel, whether further information could be considered during construction, and United Utilities’ objection.

“Councillor Kilpatrick stated that it was very positive to see an application from the university comprising some affordable and high quality accommodation. He raised a question concerning the active travel aspect of the development, whether it could be left late so more information could be considered during the construction process and also if the Planning Officer could comment on United Utilities objection to the scheme.”

“The Planning Officer stated that the active travel issues would be addressed within the construction management plan. The United Utilities objections were addressed by the conditions.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee was minded to approve the application subject to conditions, a section 106 agreement, the consultation period expiring and amendments to conditions.

“Councillor Andrews moved the Officers recommendation of Minded to Approve, subject to conditions as set out in the reports of both agendas.”

“The Committee resolved to be Minded to Approve for the application, subject to conditions within the report and:”

Minutes