Proposed venue: Committee Suite, Trafford Town Hall, Talbot Road, Stretford, Manchester M32 0TH (Attendance via registration only)
Contact: Michelle Cody Governance Officer
Note: Please refer to Agenda papers previously circulated for the meeting on the 10th March, 2022. To view this meeting please paste the following into your browser's address bar: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjwbIOW5x0NSe38sgFU8bKg/videos
APPLICATIONS FOR PERMISSION TO DEVELOP ETC
(a) Application 105847/FUL/21 - Hare and Hounds Hotel, Wood Lane, Timperley, WA15 7LX
[Note: The Chair allowed consideration of this Item as Urgent Business as a view was sought in advance of submission of the Council’s Statement of Case on 29th March, 2022 for the forthcoming Public Inquiry.]
The Head of Planning and Development submitted a report concerning an application for planning permission for the erection of 59 retirement living apartments and 9 retirement living cottages - including lodge managers office and reception, communal facilities, guest suite, car parking and landscaping following demolition of the existing public house.
RESOLVED: That Members are minded to refuse planning permission for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed development would lead to the total loss of a non-designated heritage asset which would have an adverse and irreversible impact on its significance. On balance, the benefits of the scheme would not outweigh the severe harm that would be caused to this non-designated heritage asset. As such the proposal is contrary to Policies L7 and R1 of the Trafford Core Strategy and the NPPF.
(2) The proposed development would lead to the loss of a functioning public house as a local community facility, contrary to Paragraph 93 of the NPPF and the principles of sustainable development within it. In particular, the application fails to demonstrate that the existing public house is no longer viable.
(3) The proposed development, by virtue of its design, scale, height, massing, siting and layout would result in a building which would be seriously detrimental to and out of keeping with the character of the area. As such the proposal does not represent good design and is contrary to Policy L7 of the Trafford Core Strategy, the NPPF and the NDG (National Design Guide).
(4) The proposed development fails to provide a good standard of external amenity space for future residents by reason of its quantity and quality given the scale and siting of the amenity space by virtue of its proximity to Wood Lane and Shaftesbury Avenue and the proposed on-site car parking. As such the proposal is contrary to Policy L7 of the Trafford Core Strategy and the NPPF.
(5) The proposed development would not provide a development plan policy compliant level of planning obligations in relation to affordable housing or open space provision. The appellant has failed to demonstrate that affordable housing cannot be provided on site or – if an off-site commuted sum is justified - that there is a robust viability case to demonstrate that the scheme could not offer a policy compliant level of affordable provision. The proposed development is therefore contrary to Policies L2 and L8 of the Trafford Core Strategy and the Council’s adopted Revised Supplementary Planning Document 1 (SPD1) – Planning Obligations and the NPPF.