greater manchester combined authority revised … · combined authority revised draft greater...

[email protected] | www.houriganconnolly.com

CLIENT: The Strategic Land Group

DATE: 27 February 2019

GREATER MANCHESTER COMBINED AUTHORITY

REVISED DRAFT

GREATER MANCHESTER SPATIAL FRAMEWORK

JANUARY 2019

SUBMISSIONS RELATING TO LAND AT POLE LANE, BURY:

QUESTION 20 - POLICY GM -STRAT 7 –

M62 NORTH EAST CORRIDOR

QUESTION 74 - POLICY GM ALLOCATION 1 NORTHERN GATEWAY

QUESTION 77 – POLICY GM ALLOCATION 1.3

WHITEFIELD (NORTHERN GATEWAY)

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.houriganconnolly.com/

Report Drafted By Report Checked By Report Approved By

MH MH MH

22.02.19 22.02.19 27.02.18

This document has been prepared by Hourigan Connolly Limited trading as Hourigan Connolly.

No part of this document may be reproduced without the prior written approval of Hourigan Connolly.

Hourigan Connolly 7 Swan Square 15 Swan Street

Manchester M4 5JJ

t/ 0161 300 3476

e/ [email protected] w/ www.houriganconnolly.com

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.houriganconnolly.com/

Greater Manchester Combined Authority Revised Draft Greater Manchester Spatial Framework January 2019 Policy STRAT 7, Policy GM Allocation 1 Northern Gateway & Policy GM Allocation 1.3 Whitefield (Northern Gateway) Submissions On Behalf of The Strategic Land Group

1

CONTENTS

PAGE NUMBER 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 2 2. POLICY GM – STRAT 7 M62 NORTH EAST CORRIDOR – QUESTION 20 ............................................. 3 3. POLICY GM ALLOCATION 1 NORTHERN GATEWAY)– QUESTION 74 ................................................. 4 4. POLICY GM ALLOCATION 1.3 WHITEFIELD (NORTHERN GATEWAY) – QUESTION 77 ..................... 5 5. CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 10

Appendices

Appendix 1 – Development Prospectus (June 2018).

Appendix 2 – Framework Plan.

1


2

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) which is being produced by the Greater

Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) will provide a strategy for growth across the whole of

Greater Manchester, it will seek to ensure that investment and growth in houses and jobs is

delivered but also to ensure it benefits residents and makes Greater Manchester a better place

to live and work.

BRIEF

1.2 We are instructed by The Strategic Land Group (hereafter referred to as our client) in respect of

its land interests at Pole Lane, Bury (hereafter referred to as the site).

1.3 The site is proposed to be allocated for residential development (together with two other sites

forming the Northern Gateway) in the Revised Draft GMSF.

1.4 Our client has worked closely with Bury Council in assessing the suitability of the site for

development and having gained an understanding of technical issues affecting the land and

surrounding area it produced the Development Prospectus (see Appendix 1) and Development

Framework Plan (see Appendix 2) in June 2018 to support the Council/GMCA in drafting the

GMSF policy for the site1. The Development Prospectus also illustrates how development could

be brought forward here.

1.5 We are now instructed to assess Revised Draft Policy GM Start – 7 and, Policy GM Allocation 1

Northern gateway and Policy GM Allocation 1.3 Whitefield (Northern Gateway).

1.6 Notwithstanding the detailed observations made in this submission it is worth noting, at the outset,

that our client obviously supports the allocation of land in its control for housing.

1.7 Additionally, at this point it is also worth noting that this is a site that could be brought forward and

developed quickly following adoption of the GMSF and in that respect further details are given in

the Development Prospectus (see Appendix 1).

1 In due course the Development Prospectus will be up-dated to reflect up-to-date planning policy.


3

2. POLICY GM – STRAT 7 M62 NORTH EAST CORRIDOR –

QUESTION 20

2.1 Our client Agrees with Policy GM-Strat 7 M62 North-East Corridor having regard to their interests

at Policy GM Allocation 1 Northern Gateway.


4

3. POLICY GM ALLOCATION 1 NORTHERN GATEWAY)–

QUESTION 74

QUESTION 74

3.1 Our response in respect of Question 74 is that we Mostly Agree with proposed Policy GM

Allocation 1 Northern Gateway. Our detailed response is set out below.

3.2 The only comment we would make relates to the requirement for delivery of the allocation and its

associated infrastructure to be supported by a comprehensive masterplan to be agreed with the

relevant local planning authorities. In that respect the first point to note is that no objection is

raised to the production of a masterplan for each individual allocation within the Northern Gateway

and in the interests of good planning each masterplan ought to consider the neighbouring

allocation. However if it is the intention that development could not proceed until an agreed

masterplan is in place across the Northern Gateway then that would be a concern because in the

case of our client’s interests in Policy GM Allocation 1.3: Whitefield (Northern Gateway) (see

Chapter 4) development here has the potential to come forward early following adoption of the

GMSF and a scheme that could be completed well before then end of the Plan period in 2037.

This is in stark contrast to other allocations within the Northern Gateway which are scheduled to

be completed well beyond the end of the Plan period because they require significant amounts of

new infrastructure to be brought forward.

3.3 Having a range of site sizes in the GMSF is important to ensuring both delivery throughout the

Plan period and a sustainable pattern of development. Splitting the Northern Gateway into

smaller parcels – as the GMSF proposes - enables early delivery of parts at different points in the

Plan period. That is also necessary to ensure that the housing targets are met early in the Plan

period while some of the larger sites will take longer to come on stream and start delivering new

homes. The approach can also support quality by helping deliver areas of a different character

while still being part of a coherent whole.


5

4. POLICY GM ALLOCATION 1.3 WHITEFIELD (NORTHERN

GATEWAY) – QUESTION 77

QUESTION 77

4.1 Our response in respect of Question 77 is that we Mostly Agree with proposed Policy GM

Allocation 1.3: Whitefield (Northern Gateway). Our detailed response is set out below.

EXTENT OF THE ALLOCATION

4.2 In response to Question 77 of the consultation we support the extent of land identified for

development under Policy GM Allocation 1.3 Whitefield (Northern Gateway).

QUANTUM OF DEVELOPMENT

4.3 In terms of the quantum of residential development identified (around 600 houses) this is generally

supported although our client’s assessment of the site has resulted in a figure of between 620

and 660 homes being potentially achievable. Use of the word “around” is helpful although this

should not be considered a ceiling if an efficient use of land results in a higher number of dwellings

being brought forward which are acceptable in planning terms.

POLICY SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

4.4 Having regard to the 13 criteria contained within the draft policy we comment as follows:

CRITERION 1 – DELIVERY OF A RANGE OF HOUSING TYPES

4.5 Given the scale of the proposed allocation this is a site that could deliver a broad range of house

types. However, apartments should also not be ruled out here (particularly in the proposed local

centre). Accordingly, we would suggest that the word houses be changed to homes in criterion

1. Our proposed amendments would accord with Paragraph 123 of the Framework (which is

concerned inter alia with ensuring that Plans contain policies which make the optimum use of

land. Our proposed amendments also reflect Revised Draft GMSF Policy GM-H 4 which is

concerned with the density of new housing and seeks to ensure optimum use of land.


6

CRITERION 2 – DELIVERY OF AFFORDABLE HOMES

4.6 There are no known viability issues with the site at this stage of Plan making. Revised Draft Policy

GM-H-2 of the GMSF notes that affordable housing policies will be set by Local Planning

Authorities, so these are matters to deal with in respect of the Bury Local Plan.

CRITERION 3 – RECREATIONAL FACILITIES

4.7 Our client fully supports the requirement that the allocation contains adequate recreation facilities

to meet the need of the prospective residents. However, the scheme also provides an opportunity

to improve the existing recreation facilities on the site at Boz Park for the benefit of the wider

community. The Development Prospectus illustrates how this might be achieved whilst also

meeting other requirements of the revised draft policy.

CRITERION 4 – EDUCATION FACILITIES

4.8 These are matters for a planning application to deal with. Any contributions sought will need to

meet the tests set out within the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations. However, there is

no objection to the payment of contributions in principle where there is a demonstrable need.

CRITERION 5 – HIGHWAYS ACCESSIBILITY

4.9 It is accepted that the local highway network will require alteration to accommodate the proposed

development. Local highway improvements are summarised in the enclosed Development

Prospectus. We have no further comments on the wording of this criterion.

CRITERION 6 – PUBLIC TRANSPORT

4.10 Making the site accessible to public transport is also supported although the detailed

requirements are a matter to be dealt with at the planning application preparation stage.

CRITERION 7 – LOCAL CENTRE

4.11 The provision of a local centre containing both retail and community facilities is supported. The

enclosed Development Prospectus illustrates how this might be sited within the centre of the

development.


7

CRITERION 8 – EFFECTIVE INTEGRATION

4.12 The Development Prospectus illustrates how the site could be integrated with the surrounding

community through new pedestrian, cycle and vehicular links and greenways connecting existing

and proposed areas of open space. The proposals also provide for pedestrian and cycle links to

Policy GM Allocation 1.1 Heywood/Pilsworth (Northern Gateway) via the existing bridge across

the M66. As this part of the Northern Gateway comprises strategic employment development

residents at the subject site will have an opportunity to access this employment area in a

sustainable manner.

CRITERION 9 – GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

4.13 The Development Prospectus illustrates how the site could deliver significant amounts of publicly

accessible green infrastructure thereby resulting in net benefits to the community.

CRITERION 10 – MANAGEMENT OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE & OPEN SPACE

4.14 Management of green infrastructure and open space would be dealt with by a private

management company. Such provisions can be secured by condition and Section 106

Agreement. Management of the facilities would not burden the public purse.

CRITERION 11 – ECOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

4.15 The site was the subject of an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey in April 2018. This report

concluded that the site is of low ecological value but that there are opportunities for habitat

enhancement as part of the development proposals. Clearly development here could deliver net

gains for biodiversity and in that respect the Development Prospectus illustrates how significant

areas of managed open space and new habitat could be provided on the site.

CRITERION 12 – FLOOD RISK

4.16 The Environment Agency’s Flood Map for Planning notes that the site is located within Flood

Zone 1 (land assessed as having a less than 1 in 1,000 annual risk of flooding from rivers of the

sea. In relation to sustainable urban drainage the site contains enough space to accommodate

a sustainable urban drainage scheme which would be designed at the detailed design stage.

Allowance for a sustainable urban drainage scheme has been made in the framework plan

contained within the Development prospectus.


8

CRITERION 13 – NOISE & AIR QUALITY

4.17 The proximity of the motorway network is acknowledged in respect of noise and air quality.

Preliminary assessments have been undertaken which have concluded that standard mitigation

measures can be deployed in new homes which would safeguard resident’s amenities.

Additionally, the framework plan enclosed as part of the Development Prospectus provides for an

acoustic fence adjacent to the motorway network together with a 30 metre planted woodland belt.

These measures together with the varying topography (particularly along the eastern side of the

site) will assist in safeguarding amenity.

SUPPORTING TEXT

4.18 In terms of the supporting text to the policy we would note the following:

4.19 At Paragraph 11.41 it is suggested that local road infrastructure must be substantially upgraded.

That is somewhat different terminology to the text used at Criterion 5 of the policy. Local highway

improvements are acknowledged as a requirement but whether they are substantial is debatable.

In our view the word substantial should be deleted. The degree of upgrading will be that which is

required to make the development acceptable in planning terms.

SUMMARY

4.20 In summary the information collated to date indicates that a development here could come forward

in compliance with Policy GM Allocation 1.3 Whitefield (Northern Gateway).

DELIVERABILITY

4.21 The Glossary of the revised Framework published on 19 February 2019 sets out the definition of

deliverable in relation to housing in planning terms:

“Deliverable: To be considered deliverable, sites for housing should be

available now, offer a suitable location for development now, and be

achievable with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on the site

within five years. In particular:

a) sites which do not involve major development and have planning

permission, and all sites with detailed planning permission, should be

considered deliverable until permission expires, unless there is clear evidence

that homes will not be delivered within five years (for example because they

are no longer viable, there is no longer a demand for the type of units or sites

have long term phasing plans).


9

b) where a site has outline planning permission for major development, has

been allocated in a development plan, has a grant of permission in principle,

or is identified on a brownfield register, it should only be considered deliverable

where there is clear evidence that housing completions will begin on site within

five years”.

4.22 As set out at the outset of these submissions this is a site that could be brought forward quickly

following adoption of the GMSF. Further details on how the site could be brought forward, timings

and anticipated rates of delivery are set out in the accompanying Development Prospectus.


10

5. CONCLUSIONS

5.1 The Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) which is being produced by the Greater

Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) will provide a strategy for growth across the whole of

Greater Manchester, it will seek to ensure that investment and growth in houses and jobs is

delivered but also to ensure it benefits residents and makes Greater Manchester a better place

to live and work.

5.2 In respect of the M62 North East Corridor and Policy GM-Strat 7 this is clearly nationally significant

area for development and hence our client supports the proposed policy having regards to its

interests in the Northern Gateway.

5.3 In respect of Policy GM Allocation 1 Northern Gateway our observations are simply made to

ensure that Policy GM Allocation 1.3 Whitefield (Northern Gateway) can be delivered quickly

following adoption of the GMSF as the site does not have the same infrastructure requirements

as other allocations within the Northern Gateway.

5.4 Policy GM Allocation 1.3 Whitefield (Northern Gateway) is clearly an important element of the

overall strategic housing strategy and for the reasons set out in this document our client mostly

agrees with the revised draft policy. The suggestions made herein in respect of amendments to

the policy and supporting text are simply aimed at making the policy as flexible as possible whilst

ensuring that a high quality development is delivered here quickly for the benefit of new and

existing residents.

5.5 We would like to thank the GMCA for this opportunity to comment on the emerging GMSF. We

look forward to further positive discussions with the GMCA and Bury Council in bringing forward

this important strategic development area.

Appendix 1

1

LAND AT POLE LANE, WHITEFIELD A sustainable choice for new homes in Bury

June 2018

3

Contents

Introduction 5

Site and surroundings 9

Policy analysis 15

Technical considerations 19

Design proposals 29

Delivery strategy 35

Conclusion 39

Contact

Bowsall House3 King StreetSalfordM3 7DG

0161 220 [email protected]@Strat_land

Production

Date of production: June 2018

Disclaimer

This drawing/document is for illustrative purposes only and should not be used for any construction or estimation purposes. Do not scale drawings. No liability or responsibility is accepted arising from reliance upon the information contained in this drawing/document.

Copyright

© The Strategic Land Group

5

Introduction

This section explains the purpose and contents of the document.

6

IntroductionAn area of land bisected by Pole Lane in Bury is being promoted by The Strategic Land Group ('SLG'). SLG has a track record of successfully promoting strategic sites through the planning system on behalf of land owners before selling to a developer. Phased disposal strategies are typically used in order to accelerate delivery.

The site forms a substantial part of a proposed development allocation in the emerging Greater Manchester Spatial Framework. As well as commenting on the specific site controlled by SLG, this document also considers that allocation overall. It has been prepared with the knowledge and cooperation of James E. France & Company Ltd. who own an area of 13 hectares to the south of the allocation, between Mode Hill Lane and the Simister Island motorway junction.

The 12.5 hectare site controlled by SLG is capable of providing a range of attractive family homes benefiting from the highest standards of design and layout. It is envisioned that the site could be developed for at least 275 new homes as part of a wider new neighbourhood of more than 600 new homes, which would include a new neighbourhood centre, new open space and improvements to the existing recreation facilities.

This vision document presents a thorough analysis of the site context and the technical considerations for developing both the site and the allocation. That analysis has in turn informed a development framework plan showing one way in which the allocation could be developed.

A summary of the planning policy context for the allocation is also provided.

7

View to the south from Hills Lane across the area between Pole Lane and M66 Motorway

View to the west from Pole Lane towards Boz Park and Hillock

9

Site and surroundings

This section provides a general description of the site and the immediate surrounding area.

10

The site, shown edged in red on the plan on the next page, is located to the east of Whitefield and to the south of Unsworth in Bury. It totals 12.45 hectares and is currently used for the grazing of horses. There is also evidence of fly-tipping across the site.

Pole Lane, which is a Public Right of Way, runs through the centre of the site. To the east, the site is bound by the M66 motorway, and to the west by a combination of existing residential development and Boz Park.

To the north, the site’s boundary is Pole Lane at the junction with Hills Lane. Beyond the northern boundary is Unsworth Cricket Club and Castlebrook High School.

The southern boundary of the site adjoins two smaller areas of grazing land in third party ownerships, beyond which is the James E. France & Company land to the south of Mode Hill Lane.

The site is gently undulating, with a general fall from the motorway in the east to the edge of the existing settlement to the west. An intermittent hedgerow runs adjacent to Pole Lane, although there are no other substantial areas of hedgerow or trees within the site.

The areas immediately surrounding the site, shown edge in blue on the plan on the next page, are all included within a proposed development allocation in the emerging Greater Manchester Spatial Framework. This wider area will be referred to as 'the allocation' in this document.

Site and surroundings

11

Market Court20-24 Church StAltrinchamWA14 4DW0161 929 7622

CHESHIRE SURREY

100 High StEsherSurreyKT10 9QJ01372 203 335

STRATEGIC LAND GROUP

POLE LANE, WHITEFIELD LOCATION PLAN - SITE EDGED RED

DATE: 05.04.18DWG: 18066 (Fe) 002

SCALE: 1:2500 @ A1 DRAWN: RJH

SHEFFIELD

Electric Works3 Concourse WaySheffieldS1 2BJ0114 250 7983

N

Site Location PlanThe site controlled by SLG is edged in red, the proposed development allocation in blue

12

Existing dwelling off Pole Lane at the northern end of site

Existing residential properties off Mode Hill Lane

Residential properties off Roch Crescent

13

Unsworth Cricket Club offers formal recreation provision

Unwsorth Village Centre provides a range of retail and service provision

Boz Park offers a Multi-Use Games Area but would benefit from improvement

15

Policy analysis

This section includes an overview of the planning policy that is relevant to the site.

16

Development in Bury is currently managed by the Bury Unitary Development Plan (‘UDP’). The UDP was adopted in 1997 and aimed to identify sufficient land to meet the borough’s housing needs until mid-2001. The Policies Map associated with the UDP identifies the site as falling within the Green Belt, where development would normally be prevented.

Due to both the age of the UDP and a number of subsequent policy changes, including the introduction of the National Planning Policy Framework in 2012, Bury Council are in the process of preparing a new Local Plan to cover the period until 2035.

At the same time as Bury are preparing their Local Plan, the Greater Manchester Combined Authority is working to produce a Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (‘GMSF’). The GMSF will cover the whole of Greater Manchester and also seeks to guide development until 2035.

Over that period, the GMSF intends to identify enough land to deliver at least 227,000 new homes. The most recent analysis of the urban land supply in Greater Manchester identifies sites that can deliver around 175,000 of those homes. Some, if not all, of that shortfall will need to be accommodated on sites which are currently in the Green Belt.

A similar pattern exists in Bury. Depending on the methodology used, the housing need for the borough is somewhere between 597 and 625 homes per annum. In a previous Housing Topic Paper, prepared to support the preparation of a Core Strategy, it was noted that “a housing target above 400 cannot be accommodated unless a significant amount of Green Belt land is released.” That statement is still true now.

To address that challenge the draft GMSF, which was issued for consultation in October 2016, identified a number of areas of Green Belt which were proposed to be released for development purposes.

Those releases included the subject site as part of the wider Northern Gateway allocation.

Located to the north of Greater Manchester around the junction of the M62, M60 and M66 motorways, the Northern Gateway is described as a “nationally significant growth area” which could accommodate over 2,750,000 square metres of employment floor space and 9,500 new homes.

The Northern Gateway is split into a number of separate allocations, each with its own policy objectives. The subject site forms part of allocation NG1c. That policy recognises how well contained the site is by existing development and highway infrastructure. It goes on to set out nine criteria for the site’s development, which can be summarised as follows:

1. Provide a broad mix of housing to diversify the housing offer in the area.

2. Provide new schools and/or additional capacity in existing schools.

3. Improve accessibility by public transport and upgrade highways infrastructure.

4. Provide a new district centre and neighbourhood facilities.

5. Encourage walking and cycling by both new and existing residents.

6. Incorporate flood mitigation and sustainable drainage systems.

7. Provide on-site recreational facilities.

8. Protect and enhance the existing facilities at Boz Park, Unsworth Cricket Club and Castlebrook High School playing fields.

9. Incorporate noise and air quality mitigation along the M62 and M66 corridors.

The remainder of this document responds to those policy objectives.

Planning policy analysis

17

Extract from the draft Greater Manchester Spatial Framework showing the proposed development allocation

Extract from the Bury UDP Proposals Map showing the Green Belt designation of the site and the allocation

19

Technical considerations

This section includes an overview of the various technical considerations which could influence the suitability of the site for development.

20

Highways and accessibility

The highways impacts of the proposed allocation and the site's accessibility have been assessed by i-Transport.

The proposed residential development will be supported by its own district centre and a range of open space and leisure uses. A wide range of additional employment, education, retail and leisure uses can also be found within the neighbouring communities of Whitefield and Unsworth. The proximity of these uses to the site mean they are readily accessible by non-car modes of transport.

For longer journeys, Metrolink stops at Whitefield and Besses O' Th' Barn are both within approximately 2km of the site.

The location of all these services and facilities, along with the 1km and 2km walking catchments, are shown on the plan on the next page.

An assessment of levels of trip generation and the purpose (and therefore destination) of those trips has been carried out to gain an understanding of the likely impacts on the wider highway network. This was conducted on a worst-case basis, without reflecting any reductions in traffic associated with capturing some of the retail, leisure and work trips within the allocation.

The conclusion of that work is that the most significant impacts are likely to be on Oak Lane and Thatch Leach Lane, which will see an additional 2 to 3 two-way car trips per minute in the morning and evening peak hours. Elsewhere, the site's highly accessible location results in traffic quickly dissipating across the surrounding road network.

It is proposed to access the allocation from two separate points which will be connected by a new 6m wide link road through the allocation. This access strategy has been informed by recent traffic count data, site observations and

the predicted trip rates from the allocation.

The first access would be taken from Pole Lane at the north of the site. In this location, Pole Lane is a generous 6 to 7 metres wide, providing capacity for additional vehicle movements.

Traffic using this route would emerge at the Pole Lane/Parr Lane junction. This is a priority junction but is very close to the mini-roundabout at the Parr Lane/Sunny Bank Drive junction. In effect, these two junctions operate as one.

Despite that complexity of that junction, modelling suggests it will continue to operate within capacity once traffic flows from the development are taken into account. However, it may be possible to improve the operation of that junction by replacing the mini-roundabout with traffic signals and introducing a formalised pedestrian crossing.

With or without those improvements, this access could accommodate the vehicle movements associated with around 400 new homes.

The second access would be taken from Tonge Close. The existing highway would be extended into the allocation along the southern edge of Boz Park, before connecting with the Pole Lane access. This access would direct traffic onto Oak Lane, which is of adequate scale to accommodate additional traffic flows. Modelling of this new junction and the wider highways network indicates it could accommodate the vehicle movements associated with all 600 new homes proposed for the allocation.

In combination, therefore, the two new access points and the link road could serve around 1,000 new dwellings in combination - a figure well in excess of the number expected to be delivered. The residual impacts of the development would not be severe.

For clarity, the existing route of Mode Hill Lane need not be used to as part of the vehicular access strategy.

Technical considerations

21

TITL

E:

FIG

UR

E N

o:

POLE

LAN

E, B

URY

KEY

FACI

LTIE

S PL

AN

FIG

URE

3.1

© C

ROW

N C

OPY

RIG

HT R

ESER

VED.

REP

RODU

CED

FRO

M T

HE O

RDN

ANCE

SU

RVEY

MAP

WIT

H TH

E PE

RMIS

SIO

N O

F TH

E CO

NTR

OLL

ER O

F HE

R M

AJES

TY'S

STA

TIO

NER

Y O

FFIC

E. L

ICEN

CE N

o. 1

0004

4286

.

Tel: 0

161 8

30 21

72Fa

x: 01

61 83

0 217

3

www.

i-tran

spor

t.co.u

k

Cent

urion

Hou

se, 1

29 D

eans

gate,

M

anch

ester

, M3 3

WR

1

1

1

Heal

th1

Uns

wor

th M

edic

al C

entr

e

5432Ro

wla

nds P

harm

acy

Uns

wor

th S

mile

Clin

ic

Wel

l Whi

tefie

ldTh

e El

ms M

edic

al C

entr

e

6Ba

rash

Pha

rmac

y7 8

The

Dent

al P

rac�

ceW

hite

field

Hea

lth C

entr

e

Reta

il1 765432

Haze

l Roa

d Pr

emie

r Min

i Mar

ket

SPAR

& L

ocal

Sho

psU

nsw

orth

Pos

t Offi

ce

Mor

rison

s

Go

Loca

l Ext

ra

The

Co-o

p (V

ario

us)

Bury

New

Roa

d - L

ocal

Sho

ps

(Var

ious

) 8

Aldi

9O

ne-S

top

Conv

inie

nce

Stor

e10

Loca

l Sho

ps o

n Su

nny

Bank

Roa

d11

McC

oll’s

Con

vini

ence

Sto

re

Leisu

re1 8765432

Pike

Fol

d G

olf C

lub

Sunn

yban

k Co

mm

unity

Cen

tre

Tota

l Fitn

ess W

hite

field

Whi

tefie

ld G

arric

k Th

eatr

eBu

ry N

ew R

oad

- Loc

al S

hops

Play

ing

Fiel

ds o

ff M

erse

y Cl

ose

Uns

wor

th C

ricke

t & Te

nnis

Club

9 10U

nsw

orth

Sou

th S

ocia

l Clu

bBo

z Par

k

11W

hite

field

Gol

f Cou

rse

12Li

fest

yle

Fitn

ess

Park

& P

layg

roun

d off

Tha

tch

Leah

La

ne

KEY:

Empl

oym

ent

1 32W

hite

field

Cen

tre

Stan

ley

Road

Tra

ding

Est

ate

Indu

stria

l uni

ts o

ff Al

bert

Clo

se

Site

Bou

ndar

y

21Ca

stle

broo

k Hi

gh S

choo

lEl

ms B

ank

Spec

ialis

t Art

s Col

lege

Educ

a�on

1 2

Bury

& W

hite

field

Jew

ish

Prim

ary

Scho

olM

erse

y Dr

ive

Com

mun

ity

Prim

ary

Scho

ol3 4

Uns

wor

th P

rimar

y Sc

hool

All S

aint

s C o

f E P

rimar

y Sc

hool

5 6St

Mic

hael

’s RC

Prim

ary

Scho

olRi

bble

Driv

e Pr

imar

y Sc

hool

7Su

nny

Bank

Prim

ary

Scho

ol8

Whi

tefie

ld C

omm

unity

Pr

imar

y Sc

hool

9He

aton

Par

k Pr

imar

y Sc

hool

10St

Mar

gare

t’s C

of E

Prim

ary

Scho

ol11

High

er L

ane

Prim

ary

Scho

ol

43Ph

illip

s Hig

h Sc

hool

Parr

enth

orn

High

Sch

ool

2

3

4

56

7

8

9

1011

1

2

3

4

23

45

6

87

12

34 5

6

7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

2

3

1km

Wal

king

Cat

chm

ent

2km

Wal

king

Cat

chm

ent

7

7

7

12

1

1 8

910

10

M

M

MM

etro

link

Stop

P&R

216

Key Facilities PlanThe location of key services and facilities relative to both the site and the allocation

22

Flood Risk and Drainage

The site is located within Flood Zone 1 where the risk of flooding is considered to be low. Observations on site and historic aerial photography indicate that there is an area of standing water that frequently appears in the centre of the site, adjacent to the boundary of Puel Farm. This represents one of the lowest lying parts of the allocation and, anecdotally, started occurring following works on the water main which crosses this area. It may be possible to remove this issue as part of any development, although the masterplan shows an attenuation pond in this location as part of the proposed new drainage system.

Betts Hydro carried out an initial drainage assessment of the site in June 2018. This review concluded that the site is capable of being drained satisfactorily ad provided further advice summarised below.

Any development of the site would include a sustainable drainage system (‘SuDS’). This would be designed to limit surface water flows to the greenfield run-off rate plus an allowance for climate change, so as not to increase the risk of flooding either on the allocation or elsewhere.

As development would increase the impermeable area of the allocation, it is likely that surface water will need attenuating as part of any drainage scheme. That could be done by way of new storage ponds, which would also be designed to provide ecological benefits.

The scale of the allocation means there is likely to be a need for a network of ponds across the site. Additional SuDS features such as swales, rainwater harvesting and permeable paving could be incorporated into the scheme at the detailed design stage.

From the storage ponds, surface water would be discharged in accordance with the following SuDS hierarchy:1. Into the ground (via infiltration).

2. Into a watercourse.3. Into a surface water sewer.4. Into a combined sewer.

Ground conditions suggest that infiltration would appear not to be a technically feasible solution, although this would be confirmed by intrusive ground investigations at a future date.

There are no watercourses crossing the allocation, however there is an existing surface water sewer system to the south which ultimately discharges into Parr Brook. This could provide a suitable point of connection.

Further investigation is required to identify the exact point of discharge for surface water drainage. However it is clear that the allocation can be satisfactorily drained.

There are therefore no flood risk or drainage reasons why site should not be developed.

Ecology

An Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey of the site was carried out by Rachel Hacking Ecology in April 2018.

The majority of the allocation is grazed by horses and consequently the site largely consists of improved grassland that is species poor. The habitats present on site are common throughout the UK, with no nationally or locally rare plane species identified during the survey.

The waterbodies on site score "poor or below average" under HSI criteria, while the improved grassland offers negligible terrestrial habitat for Great Crested Newts. However, as some records of Great Crested Newts exist for the ponds elsewhere in the allocation, further surveys would be required as part of any planning application in order to determine the population size and design suitable mitigation.

The masterplan has therefore retained those existing ponds and linked them with green corridors to ensure that any newt population can

23

An area of standing water on the boundary between Puel Farm and the site

Example of the intermittent hedgerow along Pole Lane

24

move between them. Suitable newt protection measures would also be needed during the construction phase.

The site is considered to offer limited potential for bats and badgers, and no further survey work is proposed.

In the western part of the allocation, which is presently occupied by Puel Farm, there are two Priority Habitat sites. These should be retained as part of any masterplan.

The motorway embankments for the M60 and M66 motorways are identified as Wildlife Links and Corridors. These should be retained and strengthened as part of any development.

The existing route of Pole Lane is, in part, lined by hedgerows. Where possible, these should be retained and reinforced with gap planting.

Soft landscaping proposals would include the provision of native flowering shrubs and trees to enhance the biodiversity of the allocation.

No statutorily protected sites lie within the site or within 6km of it. The nearest non-statutory site, Hollins Vale Local Nature Reserve, lies approximately 1.2km and is separated from the site by adequate buffer habitats. The proposed allocation would therefore have no deleterious effect on it.

Overall, there are no ecological reasons why the site should not be developed.

Noise and Air Quality

BWB Consulting carried out a preliminary noise assessment of the site in May 2018. This assessment confirmed the main noise sources as the M60 and M66 motorways.

Noise mapping from DEFRA shows the noise regime is broadly comparable across all those parts of the allocation which are close to the motorway. The proposed mitigation measures are therefore likely to be suitable across the

whole allocation.

The report confirmed that with appropriate glazing and ventilation, internal noise level criteria could be met across the site. An acoustic barrier to the boundary with the motorway would reduce noise levels in gardens. The report concludes that the site is suitable for residential use from a noise perspective.

An Air Quality Assessment was completed by BWB Consulting in June 2018. This was intended to consider the impact of pollutants from the M66, an Air Quality Management Area, on the site. The assessment used DEFRA data from 2016 and therefore doesn't reflect expected future reductions in vehicle emissions. It can therefore be considered to have been carried out on a conservative basis.

The Assessment concluded that the site is suitable for residential development. Should dwellings be proposed within approximately 40m of the motorway hard shoulder, mitigation measures such as increased levels of air tightness, would be required. Further assessment, including site specific monitoring, has the potential to reduce the size of the buffer required. The implications for the wider allocation are likely to be similar, and the framework masterplan therefore reflects this buffer.

Despite the proximity of parts of the allocation to the motorways, the analysis carried out by i-Transport suggests additional traffic flows on the motorway in the peak hours ranging from 7 to 46 two-way trips. The proposals are therefore unlikely to materially worsen the existing air quality.

There are therefore no noise or air quality issues which would prevent the development of the site.

25

An example of the quality of the grassland in the areas grazed by horses. An existing pond can also be seen.

M66 motorway viewed from the southern end of Pole Lane near Cowlgate Farm

26

Ground Conditions

E3P carried out a Phase 1 Geo-environmental Site Assessment in May 2018.

The allocation is greenfield and is not known to be subject to any contamination that would preclude development. There are not anticipated to be any risks to controlled waters.

A review of historic mapping indicates the allocation has not previously been developed, save for the farm buildings that are still present and a collection of farm buildings previously found to the west of Pole Lane. There may be some localised areas of contamination from infilled ponds and any fuel storage associated with the past agricultural use.

A small part of the allocation, to the south of Boz Park, may be underlain by peat. This would need to be considered in foundation designs.

A Ground Stability Report from the Coal Authority confirms that the site is not in an area that would be effected by historic mine workings.

A Contaminated Land Risk Assessment, carried out by Argyll Environmental, has indicated that there is a low to moderate risk of contamination on site, as would be expected of a site of this nature.

There is therefore no reason why the allocation could not be viably developed.

Services

Searches of the main utilities providers have been carried out. These have confirmed that all main services are available in this locality, and that connections can be made to the allocation.

The only infrastructure to cross the allocation is a Large Diameter Trunk Main containing Treated Water, which runs broadly north-south, and a Trunk Main which branches from it and runs east-west beneath Boz Park. The location of these pipes should be reflected in any

development, with appropriate maintenance easements provided.

Landscape and Visual Impact

The allocation consists of agricultural fields located between the current edge of the urban area and the M60 and M66 motorways. It has an edge of settlement character and is well contained with strong, permanent, defensible boundaries.

The allocation generally slopes from east to west, away from the M66 towards the urban area. Across the allocation, the topography can be characterised as undulating.

Pole Lane is a public right of way that crosses the site north-south. The only other public footpath in the vicinity of the allocation is to the east of the M66, and provides no view into the allocation.

The result is an area with a tightly constrained visual envelope, with few long range views of the allocation. It is not visually prominent, as the photos on the next page illustrate.

Views of the allocation are largely limited to close range views from Pole Lane, Mode Hill Lane and existing residential properties on (broadly) Roch Crescent, Oak Lane and Marston Close. Much of the visual impact on these properties will be mitigated by the retention of Boz Park and two smaller areas of existing recreation space off Mode Hill Lane and Marston Close respectively.

There is therefore no reason in landscape and visual impact terms why the site could not be satisfactorily developed.

27

An example of the general fall of the site from the motorway to the east to the urban area in the west

View across Boz Park towards the site showing the visual protection it provides to residents of Hillock

29

Design proposals

This section explains how a framework masterplan has been developed in response to the policy requirements.

30

The framework masterplan show on the next page illustrates how the allocation could be developed in a way that reflects the various technical considerations but also seeks to maximise the opportunity to deliver a high-quality residential development in accordance with urban design best practice. It is expected that this framework plan will evolve as more surveys are carried out and feedback is received from the council over the coming months.

Access and Movement

The main vehicular access point will consist of a link road running from Pole Lane in the north to Tonge Close in the west. This link road would be set in a landscaped corridor, delivering an attractive boulevard-style character.

Overall, the link road will deliver a loop through the allocation, providing connections both north to Unsworth and west to Whitefield.

At the southern end of the site, Mode Hill Lane would be used as a pedestrian/cycle access only. The existing routes of Pole Lane and Mode Hill Lane, which are a Public Right of Way, would be retained as either part of the new road network or as pedestrain/cycle route.

Individual development parcels will be served by estate roads branching from this link road via priority junctions. It is intended that, as far as possible, these estate roads would loop back round to the link road, providing secondary circulation routes. As well as enhancing permeability, this approach ensures that each of the land ownerships in the allocation will benefit from its own point of access.

Complementing this vehicular movement network will be extensive pedestrian and cycle routes. Main routes will be provided in landscaped corridors adjacent to the link road; along the line of the water main easement; as a woodland route adjacent to the motorway; and an east-west route connecting Boz Park with the link road and woodland walkway.

To the north of the site, these routes will connect to Hills Lane allowing the existing motorway bridge to be used as a pedestrian and cycle connection into the proposed employment allocation to the east of the M66. It is envisaged that this bridge will be closed to motor vehicles.

Each of the main pedestrian and cycle routes will be connected by a network of other routes providing access to and across the whole allocation. This includes providing connections through Boz Park to the existing residential areas on Roch Crescent and Oak Lane, ensuring that the allocation integrates with the existing settlement.

Layout

The framework masterplan shows three main residential development zones; one to the north of the side straddling the link road; one on the current site of Puel Farm; and one to the south of the allocation around the current position of Mode Hill Lane. These three parcels will be connected to each other and centred around a new neighbourhood centre, an extension to Boz Park and a potential school site creating a heart for the new community.

The scale of the allocation means a variety of types and sizes of home would be provided, including apartments over the new neighbourhood centre. Homes would be positioned to front on to roads and areas of public open space.

The range of accommodation and the road hierarchy also provide an opportunity to introduce distinctive character areas into the scheme at detailed design stage, helping to create a new neighbourhood with a clear sense of place.

The framework masterplan shows a net developable area of approximately 17.7 hectares. At 32 dwellings per hectare, this would yield 565 new homes, rising to 600 once apartments in the neighbourhood centre are included. At a slightly higher density of 35

Framework masterplan

32

dwellings per hectare, the site could deliver 620 homes, rising to around 660 taking into account apartments in the neighbourhood centre.

Primary School

The draft policy for the allocation includes reference to providing a new primary school. However, it is in understood that this may not be required, and that improvements to local schools could be adequate to meet the need arising from the development.

Given the uncertainty, a c. 1.8ha parcel to the south of the allocation has been identified as a potential primary school site. This location is adjacent to the neighbourhood centre and maximises the distance between the new school and the existing Mersey Drive Primary School. If a primary school is not needed, this part of the allocation could revert to residential development, increasing the development yield by approximately 55 dwellings.

Neighbourhood Centre

A new Neighbourhood Centre, of c. 0.86ha, is proposed adjacent to the new link road. This location is roughly equidistant between the existing shopping centres at Unsworth and Oak Lane. It sits adjacent to the existing area of open space on Mode Hill Lane, which is to be retained and connected to Boz Park. The potential new primary school is adjacent to the same area of open space, creating a clear focal point for the new community.

The precise composition of the retail centre would be determined at planning application stage, but it is envisaged it would accommodate a small food retail offer (for everyday needs) in addition to a modest number of other retail units and car parking. Apartments would also be provided above the shops to increase the overall scheme density.

A community facility could also be provided, the nature of which would be informed by discussions with local residents and councillors.

Public Open Space

A large amount of public open space already exists within the allocation. This includes the school playing fields at Castlebrook High School, Unsworth Cricket Club, Boz Park and two smaller areas of open space located north of Mode Hill Lane and south of Marston Close respectively. The proposed masterplan retains all of those areas and provides the opportunity for them to be enhanced through planning gain.

The new link road will run along the southern edge of Boz Park, reducing the area of the existing park. To compensate for this, the park has been extended in the east resulting in an overall increase in the size of the park. Further substantial arms of open space extend from the park towards both the village centre and the woodland walkway.

A new community orchard would be provided on the area of open space connecting the Neighbourhood Centre to the potential Primary School and Boz Park. As well as delivering biodiversity benefits, the orchard would act as a focal point for the community, providing a different type of space for interaction. Community orchards are also known to promote healthy eating through both people picking fruit from the trees and encouraging residents to plant fruit trees in their own gardens.

Local areas of play would be provided within the development parcels, with more informal open space around the proposed attenuation ponds.

Each of the areas of open space would be connected by pedestrian and cycle routes which would themselves be set in green corridors. As well as encouraging movement around the allocation, this linear network of open space would be designed to deliver ecological benefits. For example: the existing and proposed ponds would be connected by these corridors allowing for the migration of any newt population between them; the buffer to the motorways would comprise a woodland belt reflecting the designation of that area as a Wildlife Corridor.

33

To the south of the site, the existing route of Mode Hill Lane will be turned into a pedestrian and cycle route

An example of an existing pedestrian access from Roch Crescent which would be extended into the site

35

Delivery timetable

This section sets out how the development could be delivered following any allocation for development.

36

The Strategic Land Group have a track record of ensuring sites such as this are delivered. As a land promoter, it is in their best interests to ensure that the site is sold as quickly as possible once planning permission is secured.

As the site will be sold following a competitive tender exercise, there can be confidence that the developer buying the site is doing so to build the homes rather than simply grow their land bank.

The technical work that has already been carried out to support the potential allocation of the site means that an outline planning application could be submitted within six months of a development allocation being confirmed.

Once permission was granted, the site would be marketed for sale to a suitable development partner who would start work on the site as soon as a reserved matters permission was secured.

It is anticipated that around four months will be required for site preparation and infrastructure

works before work can start on the first home.

The scale of the allocation and the presence of two main access routes means that it could support at least two developers each with their own sales outlets. Each could be expected to deliver 30 completions per year.

The deliver programme for the site is summarised in the table below. This confirms that the entirety of the allocation can be comfortable delivered within the period covered by the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework.

Delivery timetable

39

Conclusion

This section summarises the contents of this document and considers the suitability of the site for residential-led development.

40

The land adjacent to Pole Lane provides an opportunity to address a significant need for housing in both Bury and Greater Manchester.The Greater Manchester Combined Authority is working to produce the first Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (‘GMSF’) at the same time as Bury Council is preparing a new Local Plan. It is apparent that the housing needs of the area cannot be met without releasing land from the Green Belt.

The release of this allocation from the Green Belt would not compromise the purposes of the Green Belt outlined in the National Planning Policy Framework. The allocation adjoins the existing urban area on two sides, while the M60 and M66 motorways provide strong defensible boundaries on the other two sides. The result is an area with a strong sense of containment.An investigation of the technical considerations affecting the allocation confirms that it is suitable for development, and that a development would be achievable.

The site is being promoted by The Strategic Land Group who have an established track record of delivering sites of this nature. It is therefore available for development.

The framework masterplan has been developed following a review of the allocation constraints and opportunities, including the proposed GMSF policy relating to it. It demonstrates that the allocation can accommodate at least 600 new homes. It provides for a substantial amount of public open space, a new neighbourhood centre and a potential new primary school. Key features such as hedgerows and ponds would be retained wherever possible.

To conclude, the allocation is a sustainable location for the development of at least 600 high-quality homes. It would provide an attractive living environment, integrate well with the existing settlement form and contribute to meeting the identified development needs of the area.

The site is suitable for development, development would be achievable and the site is available for development.

It represents a logical, sustainable choice for delivering a high-quality development that can make a meaningful contribution to housing need in both Bury specifically and Greater Manchester as a whole.

Summary and conclusion

Appendix 2

greater manchester combined authority revised … · combined authority revised draft greater...

Documents