 |
|
|
Part 2
3 - HOUSING AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES |
| |
|
 |
| |
|
|
|
| H1 |
Housing Land Provision |
| Land will be made available
to enable an average of 370 new dwellings per year, net of clearance,
to be provided in the Borough from April 2002 to March 2011 inclusive,
or to the date when a reviewed plan is adopted if earlier. |
| Land will be made available,
in addition, to allow for the replacement of dwellings lost through
clearance. This is predicted to average 170 dwellings per year from
April 2002, subject to monitoring the actual number of dwellings cleared
and the possible need to reduce the rate of replacement in light of
the tenure and occupancy of the stock which is lost. |
| The Council will give priority
to the construction of new dwellings on previously developed sites
and the reuse of empty and underused buildings for residential purposes,
and will aim to provide at least 80% of new dwellings on such sites
between April 2002 and the end of the plan period. |
| Development of phase 2 greenfield
sites will not be permitted unless an adequate five year supply is
no longer available through outstanding commitments and remaining
allocated sites, inclusive of an appropriate allowance for brownfield
windfalls. |
| Housing capacity studies
will be undertaken to assess the potential for further housing development
on brownfield sites within the urban area of the Borough and to inform
the need for plan review. |
| The Council will monitor
and manage the release of land to achieve the annual average rate
of housing provision set out in RPG13 and in doing so will minimize
the amount of land needed for new housing. |
| In PPG3 the
Government expects regional planning bodies to prepare draft regional
planning guidance and local planning authorities to prepare development
plans which aim to provide sufficient housing to meet the likely housing
requirements of their areas. UDPs should include policies for the
release of sites for housing development on the presumption that previously
developed (brownfield) sites are developed before greenfield sites.
Sufficient sites should be shown on the proposals map to accommodate
at least the first five years of housing development proposed in the
plan, with allowances made for windfalls (sites which have not been
identified as available in the plan process). Local Planning Authorities
should closely monitor the uptake of sites and be prepared to revise
plan policies in the light of this. |
| The final version
of Regional Planning Guidance for the North West (RPG13) was published
by the Government Office for the North West in March 2003. Policy
UR7 says that local planning authorities should monitor and manage
the availability of land in development plans to achieve the annual
average rates of housing provision set out in the guidance, and in
doing so should seek to minimise the amount of land needed for new
housing by various means. The average rate set for Tameside is 370
dwellings per annum, net of clearance. The annual average rate of
provision should apply from April 2002 to 2006, and where new plans
extend beyond 2006 they should continue to provide for additional
dwellings at the same rate until any different rate is adopted following
review of the guidance. An allowance should be made for clearance
replacement to reflect local circumstances, as a mechanism for the
creation of viable and sustainable neighbourhoods. Policy UR4 of the
guidance sets a target for Greater Manchester and Warrington, excluding
Manchester and Salford, that at least 80% of new dwellings, including
conversions, should use previously developed land and existing buildings
in sustainable locations. |
| Tameside has
been a popular area for house building for the past 20 years and demand
for housing sites remains buoyant. From July 1986 (the start date
for the housing land policy in the previous UDP) to March 2003 inclusive
a total of nearly 10,000 new dwellings have been provided in the Borough.
This is a gross average of nearly 590 per annum, although individual
years have fluctuated from as low as 292 (1997/98) to as high as 1167
(1989/90). After taking account of clearance, net completions in the
same period were 7650 or an average of 450 per annum. The RPG13 rate
of 370 net completions per annum therefore represents an 18% reduction
compared with the average over the last 17 years, but is well above
the average of only 135 over the last 5 years during which an exceptional
number of dwellings have been cleared. |
| The total
supply and the 5 year supply of housing in Tameside, as at April 2003,
is shown in Table 1 below, with details of the sites in Tables 2 and
3. |
| Dwelling numbers
are taken from the most recent planning permissions but for sites
allocated in the plan where no planning permission has yet been granted
the yield has been estimated. The 5-year supply is arrived at simply
by removing the phase 2 greenfield sites and allowing for just 5 years
of brownfield windfalls at 145 per annum. No allowance is made for
greenfield windfalls. |
| |
| Table 1: |
|
HOUSING LAND SUPPLY AT 1st APRIL 2003
|
| |
5 YEAR
|
TOTAL
|
| Under Construction or remaining
on sites already started (see Table 2 for details) |
1078 |
1078 |
| With planning permission on
sites not started (see Table 3 for details) |
906 |
906 |
| Allocated in the plan - except
phase 2 (see site specific proposals) |
1544 |
1544 |
| Allocated in the plan - phase
2 (see site specific proposals) |
|
413 |
| Windfall allowance |
725 |
1160 |
| TOTAL |
4253 |
5101 |
|
| |
| Whilst all
the committed and allocated sites (apart from those in phase 2) are
capable of being completed during the 5 years from April 2003, the
Council does not expect all these dwellings to be provided. Rather,
the figure simply demonstrates a five-year supply. Sites may be delayed
or not implemented for a variety of reasons, such as marketing or
ownership factors, or the number of dwellings may be changed through
subsequent applications. Also it may be necessary to introduce a supplementary
planning document to ensure annualized provision rates are to be met. |
| Windfalls are
sites unallocated in the plan but which subsequently come forward
for development. These have made a substantial contribution to housing
land supply in the Borough over a number of years and it is anticipated
that this pattern will largely continue. By definition the rate of
windfalls cannot be predicted with complete reliance. The estimate
of 145 per year which is included in the table reflects past performance
and knowledge of potential in the Borough but acknowledges that previously
achieved rates may decline as the more straightforward opportunities
become scarcer. In the light of PPG3 and policies H1 and H2, it is
assumed that windfalls will normally arise from brownfield sites and
there is no expectation in this allowance of greenfield windfalls. |
| |
Table 2:
DWELLINGS UNDER CONSTRUCTION OR REMAINING ON SITES ALREADY STARTED
AT APRIL 2003 (net of any dwelling losses) |
| Site Name |
Town
|
Total
No. of Units
|
Total Area
(ha)
|
No. under construction
or remaining
|
| LARGE SITES (10 DWGS
OR MORE IN TOTAL) |
| PORTLAND BASIN area, WHITTINGTON STREET
/ HILL STREET |
ASHTON |
152
|
2.12
|
130
|
| "THE BEECHES" (former land adjoining
Box Tree Lodge) off CRAWFORD STREET |
ASHTON |
12
|
0.28
|
8
|
| 122 & 124 STAMFORD STREET and 27A OLD
STREET |
ASHTON |
23
|
0.26
|
8
|
| QUEENS ROAD RESERVOIRS |
ASHTON |
54
|
1.91
|
54
|
| RICHMOND PARK ESTATE REDEVELOPMENTS,
BROOK STREET EAST |
ASHTON |
17
|
0.29
|
17
|
| Land north of SPRINGWOOD WAY |
ASHTON |
15
|
0.6
|
15
|
| PUBLIC CAR PARK off CRICKETS LANE |
ASHTON |
21
|
0.19
|
21
|
| "POETS CORNER" (former Sunnyside) off
MEADOW LANE |
DENTON |
15
|
0.45
|
1
|
| "SANDRINGHAM GARDENS" (former Cromwell
School) THORNLEY LANE SOUTH |
DENTON |
110
|
1.91
|
110
|
| "THE HAWTHORNS" (former Thornage Care
Home) 11 HAWTHORN ROAD |
DENTON |
10
|
0.09
|
10
|
| SHELTON HOTEL, 121 TOWN LANE |
DENTON |
22
|
0.11
|
22
|
| "HOLLYBANK CHASE" (former Reyner's
depot) NEWTON STREET |
DROYLSDEN |
122
|
4.07
|
110
|
| Land adjoining ST PAULS R.C. SCHOOL,
NEWMAN STREET |
HYDE |
26
|
0.25
|
14
|
| ST JOHN'S SCHOOL and adjoining land,
off SHEFFIELD ROAD |
HYDE |
37
|
0.75
|
37
|
| "THE WOODSIDE" (former Godley Sand
Quarry) off MOTTRAM ROAD |
HYDE |
64
|
2.5
|
6
|
| GOWER HEY BANK and BURNSIDE, OSBORNE
ROAD |
HYDE |
24
|
0.47
|
24
|
| FERN BANK FARM, STOCKPORT ROAD, GEE
CROSS |
HYDE |
12
|
0.15
|
9
|
| HAREWOOD LODGE, MOTTRAM ROAD, BROADBOTTOM |
LONGDENDALE |
17
|
1.76
|
6
|
| "LOCK KEEPERS MEWS" (former Union Mill),
MANCHESTER ROAD |
MOSSLEY |
24
|
0.45
|
8
|
| "CHURCHFIELDS" & "ASHLEIGH GREENE",
HUDDERSFIELD ROAD, MILLBROOK |
STALYBRIDGE |
249
|
12.5
|
104
|
| "MILLERS WHARF" (former Corn Mill buildings),
MOTTRAM ROAD |
STALYBRIDGE |
41
|
0.24
|
41
|
| STOKES MILL, HIGHER TAME STREET |
STALYBRIDGE |
20
|
0.24
|
20
|
| "STONEMEAD" (former Calprina Works)
BUCKTON VALE ROAD, CARRBROOK |
STALYBRIDGE |
124
|
3.27
|
124
|
| TOTAL LARGE SITES |
|
|
|
899
|
| SMALL SITES (LESS THAN
10 DWELLINGS IN TOTAL) |
179
|
| TOTAL ALL SITES |
|
|
|
1078
|
|
| |
| TABLE 3: |
| DWELLINGS WITH PLANNING PERMISSION ON SITES
NOT STARTED AT APRIL 2003 (net of dwelling losses and excluding
permissions in parts of allocated sites) |
| Site Name |
Town
|
Planning Status
|
Area
(ha)
|
Total
Units
|
| LARGE SITES (10 DWELLINGS
OR MORE) |
| ROGERS HOUSE and adjoining HOUSING
CLEARANCE site, ROSE HILL ROAD |
ASHTON |
OPP |
2.01 |
70 |
| PALACE MILL (aka Tahiti Aquariums)
QUEENS ROAD |
ASHTON |
FPP |
0.64 |
33 |
| NATIONAL PARK FOOTBALL GROUND (Curzon
Ashton FC) BURLINGTON STREET |
ASHTON |
OPP |
1.32 |
53 |
| HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT SITE, PORTUGAL
STREET / BENNETT STREET |
ASHTON |
FPP |
0.25 |
16 |
| HURST INFANT SCHOOL and HEARING IMPAIRED
UNIT, ALDERLEY STREET |
ASHTON |
OPP |
0.49 |
20 |
| THE HEYS PRIMARY SCHOOL, HERRIES STREET |
ASHTON |
OPP |
0.64 |
40 |
| HYDE HALL FARM, TOWN LANE |
DENTON |
FPP |
1.05 |
15 |
| CASTLE SERVICE STATION, STOCKPORT ROAD |
DENTON |
FPP |
0.18 |
26 |
| SHAKESPEARE PUBLIC HOUSE, MANCUNIAN
ROAD |
DENTON |
FPP |
0.4 |
43 |
| PETROL STATION adjoining 89 MEDLOCK
STREET |
DROYLSDEN |
FPP |
0.13 |
10 |
| CHILDREN'S PLAYGROUND adjoining 31
YEW TREE LANE |
DUKINFIELD |
OPP |
0.32 |
10 |
| CLARENDON COLLEGE PLAYING FIELDS AND
ST PAUL'S SCHOOL, off VICTORIA ST |
HYDE |
OPP |
1.44 |
60 |
| SMITH BROTHERS WORKS, off READ STREET
WEST, MILL LANE |
HYDE |
OPP |
1.06 |
32 |
| HYDE TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL - ENTRANCE WAY,
TURNING AREA and TENNIS CTS |
HYDE |
OPP |
0.61 |
12 |
| HYDE TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL - PLAY AREA
and FORMER CHURCH SUNDAY SCH |
HYDE |
OPP |
0.8 |
25 |
| BEE HIVE INN, 32 COMMERCIAL STREET |
HYDE |
OPP |
0.1 |
11 |
| Land at ROSE BANK, off PRINTERS FOLD |
LONGDENDALE |
OPP |
0.65 |
10 |
| Land adjoining KENDAL HOUSE, AMBLESIDE
/ SCHOOL CRESCENT |
STALYBRIDGE |
OPP |
0.35 |
11 |
| Land between 43 and 63 MOTTRAM OLD
ROAD |
STALYBRIDGE |
OPP |
0.57 |
10 |
| BRUSHES QUARRY, BRUSHES ROAD |
STALYBRIDGE |
OPP |
1.73 |
55 |
| Land at BOOTH STREET, rear of 122-134
HIGH STREET |
STALYBRIDGE |
OPP |
0.14 |
13 |
| TOTAL LARGE SITES |
|
|
14.88 |
575 |
| SMALL SITES (LESS THAN 10 DWELLINGS) |
|
|
10.53 |
331 |
| TOTAL ALL SITES |
|
|
25.41 |
906 |
|
| |
| Clearance is
an important factor in the housing requirement and supply equation.
After 12 years during which it averaged only 43 dwellings per annum,
clearance from July 1998 to March 2003 inclusive totalled over 1,650,
or an average of around 350 p.a. Prior to 1998, clearance in the Borough
was mostly limited to activity in Renewal Areas, with occupiers often
moving to specially built new homes close by and the cleared sites
being quickly recycled. Since then the level has risen sharply as
a result of hard to let or unsatisfactory Council or registered social
landlord accommodation being removed from stock. Some of these units
may have been empty for some time, or tenants may have been rehoused
in existing rented stock thus reducing the vacancy rate, thereby moderating
the impact on requirements for replacement dwellings. |
| In the year
from April 2002 (the effective start date set by RPG13) 350 dwellings
were cleared and it is estimated that around 700 further dwellings
could be cleared in the 5 years from April 2003, mostly in the Ashton
Renewal Area and Hattersley where regeneration initiatives are currently
being focussed. In the next 5 years it is likely that a much greater
proportion of the dwellings which are to be cleared will be occupied.
The predicted total of just over 1,000 in a 6-year period is equivalent
to an average clearance rate of around 170 per annum. Some of the
brownfield land made available through clearance is likely to be recycled
for new house building and may therefore contribute further to the
windfall supply. |
| Careful monitoring
and management of the housing land situation, including urban housing
capacity studies, is crucial to the successful operation of this policy
and to ensure that the right amount of new housing is provided annually
and that excessive house building does not occur, particularly on
greenfield sites. An annual report available to the public will monitor
the indicators listed in paragraph 77 of PPG3 and assess the impact
of clearance on the requirement. The monitoring process will also
act as an early warning of the need for further review of policies
if housing land supply consistently falls below or rises above annualized
figures. |
| |
| Sites for Housing Development
(including Development Opportunity Areas with identified housing potential): |
| (1) |
Booth Road, Audenshaw (former AUD5) |
| |
This 2.9 hectare triangular shaped plot
of vacant and predominantly brownfield land west of the Booth Road
railway bridge comprises a redundant length of railway trackbed, embankments,
a sloping field and a former builders merchants yard. The site is
bordered by an operational railway line, wooded grounds near a golf
clubhouse and open land beyond the Manchester boundary. The scheme
needs to incorporate a link through to a footpath / cycleway being
established in Manchester along the line of the former Fairfield to
Hyde Road railway line. There are issues concerning the access to
this site by way of Booth Road and the railway bridge which need to
be addressed in any scheme. In addition, Environment Agency records
indicate the presence of great crested newts on the site and this
will need to be investigated. In November 2004 outline planning permission
was granted for a residential development comprising a maximum of
93 dwellings, which addresses the above issues. |
| |
|
| Please note.
Proposal H1(2), relating the Depot Site at Audenshaw Road has been
deleted. |
| (3) |
Staley Road, Mossley (former
MOS4) |
| |
This site of
the former Hollins and Springbank Mills at Staley Road was allocated
for housing development in the previously adopted UDP (as MOS4). It
comprises approximately 2.9 hectares of vacant, brownfield and partly
derelict land. It is located within the steeply sloping valley of
the Staley Brook and whilst the two original mills have been cleared
some ancillary buildings are still present. The intention is that
a strip should be retained alongside Staley Brook for a landscaped
footpath link through to Huddersfield Road. A full planning application
to build 62 dwellings on the site was submitted in August 2002 and
was awaiting determination in July 2003. Although this is a lower
density than advised in PPG3 it is realistic in view of the constraints
on the site. |
| (4) |
Oakwood Mill and land around
Stayley Cricket Club, Millbrook, Stalybridge |
| |
Oakwood Mill,
a Grade II Listed Building, is a traditional but disused and fire
damaged mill complex. It is a dominant feature within Millbrook village,
which is designated as a Conservation Area. Despite its condition
it is therefore still important to try to secure the future of the
building through conversion and rehabilitation for residential use,
rather than total redevelopment, although some new housing may also
be possible in parts of the site. The Council has been involved in
efforts to prevent the building from deteriorating further. |
| |
The approximately
5.3 hectares site shown on the proposals map includes Oakwood Mill
itself along with open land north of this, on both the west and east
sides of Stayley Cricket Club's ground. It is bordered to the west
by open land at Swineshaw Clough and to the north by a narrow strip
of open land beyond which lies the housing development currently under
construction by McLean Homes. Much of the open land included within
the site is unused and in poor condition, but it has been designated
previously as a green wedge to separate the aforementioned housing
development from Millbrook village. It is now envisaged that the outline
of the green wedge would be reshaped and some housing development
take place within this area, in order to achieve a number of benefits.
These would include an enlargement to the cricket ground and improvement
of its facilities, the formation of a new road access to Oakwood Mill
from the spine road within the McLean Homes site, and enhancement
of landscape, nature conservation value and recreational access. It
is estimated that around 90 dwellings could be provided on the site,
including the Oakwood Mill conversion. Although the site is partly
greenfield it would not be appropriate to include it in phase 2 as
development of land north of the mill is necessary to enable the restoration
of the listed building as a matter of urgency. A full planning application
for 73 dwellings at Oakwood Mill and to the west of the cricket ground
was submitted in May 2002 and was awaiting determination in July 2003.
|
| (5) |
Longlands Mill, Castle
Street, Stalybridge (former STC9) [shown on map as E2(8)] |
| |
The reasoned
justification for this Development Opportunity Area is set out under
policy E2(8). The site has an area of 2.1 hectares and an assumed
yield of at least 100 dwellings at the higher end of the density range
advocated in PPG3. In this town centre location, and with converted
buildings involved as well as vacant land, it is likely that many
more than 100 dwellings will actually be provided, although the precise
number will not be known until the design process is more advanced. |
| (6) |
Mossley Mills, Manchester
Road, Mossley (former MOS2) [shown on map as E2(7)] |
| |
The reasoned
justification for this Development Opportunity Area is set out under
policy E2(7). |
| (7) |
Market Street / Manchester
Road / Fairfield Locks, Droylsden (former DRO7) [shown on map as E2(4)]
|
| |
The reasoned
justification for this Development Opportunity Area is set out under
policy E2(4). It is estimated that at least 200 dwellings could be
provided on around 4 hectares becoming available for redevelopment,
at the higher end of the density range advocated in PPG3. In this
town centre location an even higher density may be possible, although
the precise number of dwellings will not be known until the design
process is more advanced. |
| |
|
| Please note.
Proposal H1(8) relating to the Reyners Depot Site in Droylsden, has
been deleted due to work commencing on site. |
| Please note.
Proposal H1(9) relating to the Army Pay Office Site in Ashton-under-Lyne,
has been deleted due work commencing on site. |
| |
|
| (10) |
Tame Street / Manchester
Road, Mossley (extended former MOS1) |
| |
This 3.9 hectare
site is located on the eastern side of the River Tame and on both
sides of the Huddersfield Canal at the northern tip of Mossley. It
comprises a partially reclaimed, former gas holder site fronting onto
Manchester Road at the southern end (MOS1 in the previously adopted
UDP), an area of stables and paddocks in the centre, and fields on
each side of the canal north of that. The northern section has previously
been protected as river valley open land but its overall appearance
is fairly poor. The adjoining area to the south and east was formerly
industrial in character but over recent years housing has been developed
on several nearby sites. It will be necessary to provide an improved
access to the site. In addition, suitable design and treatment will
be required at the riverside, canalside and along the northern edge
of the site, so as to protect the character of the waterways and avoid
any detrimental effect on the visual amenity of the Green Belt across
the Borough boundary in Oldham. These requirements are likely to reduce
the developable area and it is estimated that around 90 dwellings
could therefore be accommodated at 30 per hectare. Although the site
as a whole is predominantly greenfield it would not be appropriate
to include it in phase 2 as development of the northern part is necessary
to facilitate the regeneration of the brownfield area closest to Manchester
Road and the provision of suitable infrastructure. |
| |
The Huddersfield
Narrow Canal, south of Roaches Bridge (the southern corner of the
site) is a Site of Special Scientific Interest and any development
proposed in the vicinity of the canal will be subject to close scrutiny
to establish whether it might have an adverse effect on the special
nature conservation interest of the site. The canal north of Roaches
Bridge is a Grade A Site of Biological Importance and this should
also be taken into account in any development. |
| |
| Please note.
Proposal H1(11) relating to the former Cromwell School Site in Denton,
has been deleted due to work commencing on site. |
| |
|
| (12) |
Land between Hey Farm and
Micklehurst estates, Huddersfield Road, Mossley (amended former MOS18
with suitable relocation of school playing fields) - Phase 2 site |
| |
This extensive
hillside site has a total area of approximately 18.0 hectares and
is located on the east side of the Tame Valley, between Huddersfield
Road and the Puddle Clay Pits and Staley Way footpath along the former
railway line to the west. Although an entirely greenfield site, it
effectively lies within the urban framework of Mossley. The larger,
northern part of the site (most of former MOS18) is in agricultural
use as grassland but has been allocated for residential development
for many years. The former MOS18 included a Site of Biological Importance
(Puddle Clay Pits - Grade B) covering 4.5 hectares on its lower, western
side, but this is now excluded entirely from site H1(12). There will
nevertheless be obligations on the housing developer to protect the
SBI against both the direct and indirect impact of development and
to ensure its future management. In view of concern about landslips
on the site, any development proposals will need to be accompanied
by a specialist slope stability report. |
| |
The Council
prepared a development brief for the former MOS18 area in 1996, addressing
issues such as safety of the road access, protection of the ecological
value of the Puddle Clay Pits, wildlife links through the site, adequacy
of local school provision, local playspace and shopping facilities.
This brief will need updating at the appropriate time. In this UDP
the original site is extended south to incorporate the detached playing
fields used by Mossley Hollins School, which would significantly increase
the developable area served by a new access. However, the playing
fields would have to be replaced closer to the school on the east
side of Huddersfield Road at the developer's expense, and the practicality
of forming suitable flat playing areas on the hillside would need
to be demonstrated to both the Council and Sport England. It will
be necessary to ensure that this replacement provision is in place
prior to the commencement of development (on the playing field site).
It is estimated that around 12 hectares of the overall site would
be developable, yielding approximately 360 dwellings at 30 per hectare. |
| (13) |
Godley Hill / The Thorns / Hare Hill /
Mottram Road, Hyde |
| |
The reasoned
justification for this Development Opportunity Area is set out under
policy E2(5). It is estimated that around 13 hectares are developable
for housing, providing approximately 390 dwellings at 30 per hectare.
Although part of the DOA is greenfield, it would not be appropriate
to include it in phase 2 as it may be needed as a key element in a
package of measures to regenerate the Hattersley area and help create
a more balanced community. |
| (14) |
Other sites to be made available in accordance
with a strategic masterplan for the regeneration of the Hattersley
area. |
| |
The Hattersley
and Mottram estates were built to house people from Manchester but
subject to the necessary ballot of tenants the City Council is now
proposing that their remaining stock of rented dwellings should be
transferred to a housing association. As part of the regeneration
process and lead up to the ballot, a draft masterplan for the regeneration
of Hattersley and Mottram has been drawn up by consultants on behalf
of a partnership of residents, Manchester and Tameside Councils and
Portico Housing Association. Consultations took place in early June
2003 and it is intended that the finalised masterplan will form the
basis of supplementary planning guidance to be adopted by Tameside
MBC later that year. The masterplan identifies a number of predominantly
brownfield sites which could be developed for new housing as part
of the overall regeneration. These have either been made available
through recent demolition of hard to let properties or vacant commercial
units, or are expected to become available from similar sources in
the next few years including redundant school sites. The estates are
laid out at a low density and the masterplan is also proposing housing
development on certain areas of underused open space. The full extent
of the potential is not yet known, but in late 2002 it was estimated
that up to 22 sites with a combined area of 5.8 hectares could be
reused for housing, although some may be redeveloped for non-residential
purposes such as employment. If all were developed at 30 per hectare
they could produce approximately 180 dwellings, although higher densities
may be feasible and desirable. |
| (15) |
Fairfield Golf and Sailing
Club clubhouse and car park, Booth Road, Audenshaw (former AUD8) |
| |
This 1.0 hectare
site, situated immediately south of the Booth Road railway bridge,
is occupied by the clubhouse of Fairfield Golf and Sailing Club and
associated car parking areas. The remaining land owned by the club
contains a large number of mature trees which are protected by a Tree
Preservation Order, and is therefore unsuitable for development. An
outline planning application for residential development on this site
was considered by the Council in 1994, which was minded to approve
it subject to the signing of a Section 106 Agreement. Allowing for
the physical characteristics of the site there is considered to be
potential for around 20 dwellings. |
| (16) |
Stayley Hall and adjoining
land, Howard Street, Stalybridge |
| |
Stayley Hall
is a derelict, 16th Century, timber framed manor house and a Grade
II* Listed Building, situated in a prominent position on an area of
open land overlooking the Tame valley west of Millbrook village. Whilst
it has been the Council's policy for many years that this important
historical asset should be suitably restored, the resources to make
this happen will have to come primarily from the private sector. Urgent
works have been carried out recently to protect the building from
further deterioration and this has been followed by a marketing exercise
on behalf of the site owners. Although hotel or pub/restaurant uses
had originally been favoured, the exercise has shown that residential
use would be the only practical way to generate the substantial funds
required for sensitive restoration. |
| |
The site has
a total area of around 5.5 hectares and the restoration scheme would
be accompanied by further residential development on the open land
to the south of the hall. It will be important to ensure that any
development does not detract from the general appearance and setting
of the hall itself, and also that the steeply sloping banks on three
sides of the hall remain open for the same reason. Access will be
through the existing housing development south of the site. Allowing
for the physical characteristics of the site it is estimated that
approximately 50 dwellings could be provided including the conversion,
subject to appraisal of the impact of any proposals on the historic
environment. Although the site as a whole is predominantly greenfield,
it is not appropriate to include it in phase 2 because development
of the land adjoining the hall is necessary to enable the restoration
of the listed building as a matter of urgency. |
| |
In November
2002 planning and listed building applications were submitted for
the partial demolition, refurbishment and rebuilding of Stayley Hall
and associated outbuildings to form 16 residential units, along with
an outline planning application for residential development on the
land to the south. These applications were awaiting determination
in September 2003. |
| (17) |
Ashton Road and Cundy Street,
Hyde |
| |
This 2.4 hectare
brownfield site is located in the mostly residential area of Newton
alongside the Manchester - Glossop railway line just north of the
bridge at Commercial Brow. The original use was as a railway yard
but over a number of years a scrap yard and other commercial uses
have become established on the site. It has been identified in connection
with Hyde Renewal Area as a site with residential potential, and redevelopment
for this purpose would have the additional benefit of improving the
appearance of the area. However, it is clearly possible that contamination
may exist on the site and it is important that this is dealt with
satisfactorily before housing is built. A detailed planning application
for the erection of 93 dwellings and apartments on this site was submitted
in December 2002. The Council was minded to approve this in February
2003 although in September of that year it was still awaiting the
signing of Section 106 agreement. |
| (18) |
Micklehurst Road, Mossley
(former MOS5) - Phase 2 site |
| |
This site at
Micklehurst Road was allocated for housing development in the previously
adopted UDP (as MOS5). It comprises approximately 2.1 hectares of
sloping, vacant, predominantly greenfield land which, although in
private ownership, is used by local people for informal recreation.
It was originally included in a full planning application for housing
development including site H1(3) which was submitted in August 2002,
but was subsequently deleted from that application site due to difficulties
with acquisition. It is considered to be developable independently
of site H1(3) however and may therefore be the subject of a separate
planning application at a later date. An assumed yield of 53 dwellings
(the residue of the original application) represents a lower density
than advised in PPG3 but is realistic in view of the constraints on
the site. |
|
|
| H2 |
Unallocated Sites |
| Unless other considerations
take precedence in a particular case, the Council will permit the
redevelopment of previously developed land for residential use and
the conversion of existing buildings to such use, where these are
not specifically allocated for this purpose in the plan. Residential
development on greenfield land which is not specifically allocated
for this purpose in the plan will not be permitted unless an adequate
five year supply is no longer available through outstanding commitments
and remaining allocated sites, inclusive of an appropriate allowance
for brownfield windfalls. |
| This policy
is intended to facilitate the approval of brownfield windfall (unallocated)
sites for housing development through the plan period. Windfalls have
made a substantial contribution to overall housing supply in the Borough
during recent years, helping to regenerate the urban area and reduce
pressure on greenfield sites, and it is anticipated that this will
continue. However, in line with the principles of PPG3 there is no
reliance on windfalls on greenfield sites forming part of this on-going
supply. The adequacy of the on-going 5 year supply of land for housing,
in relation to the requirements set by RPG13 and policy H1, will be
assessed through the annual monitoring process also referred to in
policy H1. As of April 2003 the 5 year supply is sufficient to meet
these requirements and there is no justification for approval of any
greenfield windfall sites which may be proposed. If this situation
were to change at a future date, proposals would still need to conform
with other relevant policies in the plan, particularly OL4 on protected
green space. Neither would policy H2 in any way override the protection
of the Green Belt. Whilst this policy provides a general presumption
in favour of brownfield windfalls, proposals which come forward would
still need to satisfy relevant policies in other sections of the plan,
such as those concerned with conversions within the Green Belt or
retention of local employment opportunities. |
| |
|
| Please note
that policy H3 (Design Quality) has been removed from the plan. |
|
|
| H4 |
Type, Size and Affordability
of Dwellings |
| The overall provision of
new housing in the Borough should incorporate a range of dwelling
types, sizes and affordability to meet the needs of all sections of
the community and to help create better balanced communities for the
future. |
| In areas of the Borough
where there is a demonstrable lack of affordable, supported or particular
types of market housing to meet local needs, the Council will require
developers to provide an element of subsidised or low cost market
housing on suitable residential sites of 25 or more dwellings or 1
hectare or more in size. |
| When assessing the suitability
of residential sites for the provision of affordable housing in areas
of need, the Council will have regard to: |
| (a) |
the proximity of local
services, facilities and access to public transport, and |
| (b) |
whether there are particular
costs associated with the development, and |
| (c) |
whether the provision of
affordable housing would prejudice the realisation of other planning
objectives that need to be given priority in the development of the
site. |
| Where the site is suitable,
consideration should be given as to whether a mixture of affordable
housing types is required. |
| In exceptional circumstances
it may be acceptable for the element of affordable housing to be located
on another site in the locality. In these instances the Council will
require the developer to provide an appropriate financial contribution
towards such provision. |
| To ensure that both initial
and subsequent occupiers are able to benefit from the provision of
affordable housing, the Council will encourage the involvement of
registered social landlords in the development process. Where appropriate
the Council will impose conditions or negotiate legal agreements under
Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to control the
occupancy of the dwellings. |
| The Government
wishes to see the planning system help create mixed and inclusive
communities which offer a choice of housing and lifestyle, and avoid
creating large areas of housing of similar characteristics (PPG3).
It also accepts that a community's need for affordable housing is
a material planning consideration which should be taken into account
in formulating development plan policies (PPG3 and Circular 6/98).
Other reasons for having a range of housing types are the growing
number of one person and frail elderly households, and the Council's
desire to see an increased supply of high quality owner occupied housing
so as to help attract new companies to relocate on the Borough's key
development sites. Having transferred the whole of its stock to a
Housing Trust in March 2000, the Council is now focusing on its strategic
enabling role. It has recently carried out a stock condition survey
and commissioned a comprehensive housing demand and needs study analysing
all housing types and tenures within the Borough. Among other things,
this study was intended to inform the provision of affordable housing
in private housing developments through this policy and related supplementary
planning guidance (SPG) that was due to be prepared. |
| The Tameside
MBC 2001 Housing Demand and Needs Survey, which was completed during
2002, indicates substantial continued demand for social rented properties
in the Borough over the period 2001 - 2006. However, a large proportion
of this demand is likely to be met through properties becoming available
through household dissolution over the next five years. The Borough
also contains void, unfit and difficult to let properties, which,
notwithstanding their problems, also form part of the supply of affordable
housing. The survey does not show sufficient demonstrable evidence
of a need for additional affordable housing to meet local needs in
any areas of the Borough. Despite some mismatches in demand by type
and size for social rented properties, there is insufficient evidence
in the survey to justify a requirement for developers to provide an
element of subsidised or low cost market housing on residential sites
in line with national guidance. Therefore, the Council will not require
developers to provide for a specified element of affordable housing
on any sites at the present time, although the more general first
paragraph of this policy will continue to apply. |
| Although the
2001 survey proved inconclusive regarding the need for additional
affordable homes in the Borough right now, circumstances could change
and it is possible that future studies could indicate a local need
later in the plan period. The rest of this policy will therefore remain
dormant in the plan so as to allow the Council to react to possible
future changes in the need for affordable housing. If circumstances
do change and a demonstrable lack of affordable housing emerges in
the future, SPG will be produced at that time to give a more detailed
explanation of how the affordable housing element of this policy will
work. Any SPG produced will be in accord with the provisions of Circular
6/98 and PPG3. |
| In areas of
the Borough where a demonstrable need for affordable housing may be
indicated by a future survey, the Council would seek to negotiate
10% of the total dwellings on each suitable site as affordable housing.
The definition of affordability cannot be fixed at this point, but
the 2001 survey deemed that households were living in unaffordable
accommodation if their housing costs were more than 30% of net equivalent
income and this was less than £763 per month. Where appropriate the
Council would include targets of affordable housing in planning briefs
for particular sites and would impose conditions or negotiate with
developers for planning agreements to both secure such provision and
ensure that it is retained for the benefit of future occupants in
need of such provision. It would only be acceptable for a financial
contribution to affordable housing to be located on another site in
the locality if the Council and developer both consider that this
would be preferable. |
|
|
| H5 |
Open Space Provision |
| Where there is a deficiency
of children's play areas, informal local recreational open spaces
or sports pitches in an area, either prior to or as a result of the
scheme involved, developers seeking planning permission for housing
will be required to provide open space and facilities, proportional
to the intended number of occupants, in a safe and convenient location
within or in close proximity to the site, and to make suitable arrangements
for on-going maintenance. |
| Where it is not practical
or desirable to accommodate some or all of the required open space
and facilities as part of the development itself, the Council will
seek an equivalent payment for the remainder or all of the provision.
This will contribute to the provision and maintenance of new or enhanced
facilities in the area which are fairly and reasonably related to
the needs of the proposed housing development and which will be of
direct benefit to the occupiers. |
| This policy will apply to
all housing developments, excluding those which do not result in a
net increase in the number of dwellings and specialised schemes where
the occupiers will have no need for open space. Where necessary, developers
will be expected to enter into planning agreements to secure the provision. |
| The need for
children's play areas and local recreational or amenity open spaces
within easy reach of the home is well established, such as through
the work of the National Playing Fields Association, and the opportunity
to incorporate such provision within housing development schemes is
acknowledged in both PPG3 and PPG17. Whilst quality has been improved,
there are too few equipped play areas to ensure NPFA standards of
local accessibility throughout the Borough. Although informal playspace
is potentially in good supply in the Borough in terms of the amount
of land available, it is often not laid out specifically for the purpose
and may not all be accessible enough. There is a substantial under
provision of sports pitches in the Borough in relation to NPFA standards.
The Tameside Sport and Recreational Facilities Strategy, and accompanying
Playing Pitch Assessment, which was carried out by consultants and
completed in 2002, identified the poor quality of the Borough's grass
pitches and ancillary facilities as the main issue. The assessment
also made recommendations on standards of provision for playing pitches
in the Borough however, which will be taken into account in the preparation
of supplementary planning guidance associated with this policy. |
| It is a reasonable
and generally accepted requirement that developers of housing schemes
should directly provide or make a payment to the local authority for
the play area or local open space needs generated by their development.
In the past this has been negotiated for larger schemes alone, taking
account of existing provision in the area, whereas all new housing
in fact places some demand on the facilities available in the Borough.
This policy differs from the previous approach because, where a deficiency
exists, virtually all new housing developments that result in an increase
in residential capacity will now be expected to provide appropriate
amounts of open space either directly on or adjacent to the site,
or to contribute to provision elsewhere in the area. |
| More detailed
explanation of how this policy will work will be provided in supplementary
planning guidance. In outline, local standards taking account of distance
from facilities will be established for children's play areas, informal
local recreational open spaces, and sports pitches, so that deficiencies
in particular parts of the Borough can be identified. When a planning
application for housing development is submitted (or a planning brief
is prepared) it will then be possible to assess on a rational basis
whether there is a need for open space provision. Depending on the
circumstances, it is possible that a housing scheme could require
open space provision either to meet the needs generated by its own
occupiers or to help overcome a deficiency which already exists in
the local area. But it could also be possible that no provision is
required, if for instance the site lies close to a park with a range
of facilities. |
| The amount
of open space required and the extent of any facilities will be set
out in the SPG and will be proportional to the intended number of
occupants. On large schemes it may often be feasible for the developer
to provide some or all of this on-site as part of the overall development.
However, on smaller schemes the provision could well be impractical
as a free standing open space and this is where an equivalent payment,
again to be set out in the SPG, would be expected instead. Such payments
will be combined into a special, ring fenced fund from which appropriate
open space projects meeting the needs of the local area could then
be financed, in accordance with clear rules and safeguards to be set
out in the SPG. Any contributions which were not used within a prescribed
period would be returned to the developer. |
|
|
| H6 |
Education and Community
Facilities |
| Where proposals are submitted
for new housing developments, and the schools or other community facilities
in the surrounding area would be unable to satisfactorily accommodate
the additional demands, the Council will require developers to provide
a contribution towards the provision of additional or extended facilities,
in proportion to the number of intended occupants. |
| This policy will apply to
housing developments of 25 or more dwellings, excluding specialised
schemes where the occupiers will have no need for education or community
facilities. Where necessary, developers will be expected to enter
into planning agreements to secure the provision. |
| New housing
developments can place additional demands on existing education and
community facilities in the area, such as where a local school is
already operating close to its classroom capacity. For the purposes
of this policy, community facilities will comprise the following broad
types of facilities, acknowledging that descriptions can differ and
multi-use often occurs: (1) community centres, youth clubs, halls
and other forms of meeting, activity or recreational rooms, (2) clinics,
surgeries, medical, health and welfare centres, and (3) crèches and
day nurseries. The areas of the Borough where such capacity problems
exist will be monitored by the Council so that when a planning application
for housing development meeting the criteria is submitted (or a planning
brief is prepared) it will be possible to assess on a rational basis
whether there is a need for additional provision. |
| More detailed
explanation of how this policy will work will be provided in supplementary
planning guidance, including the basis for setting the level of proportional
contributions. In the case of large housing schemes it may be practical
to achieve the necessary improvement, such as an additional classroom
at a local school, through a single contribution. For smaller schemes,
individual sums will be combined into a special, ring fenced fund
from which appropriate projects meeting the needs of the local area
can then be financed, in accordance with clear rules and safeguards
to be set out in the SPG. Any contributions which were not used within
a prescribed period would be returned to the developer. |
|
|
| H7 |
Mixed Use and Density |
| The Council will encourage
and permit the development of: |
| (a) |
schemes which contain mixed
uses incorporating housing, either on parts of a site or within individual
buildings, such as flats above commercial uses, and |
| (b) |
schemes which make efficient
use of land through housing densities of between 30 and 50 dwellings
per hectare net, or greater in locations highly accessible by public
transport, and |
| (c) |
schemes which include limited
provision of off-street car parking taking account of the needs of
the potential occupiers and the availability of alternative means
of transport. |
| Such schemes will be appropriate
throughout the Borough but are particularly encouraged within or adjoining
town centres, in the vicinity of rail or Metrolink stations, and within
high quality / high frequency bus corridors. This will be subject
in all cases to creating or maintaining high quality residential environments
in line with policy H10. |
| The Government's
promotion of mixed use development is demonstrated in both PPG1 and
PPG3, particularly in the case of town centres where conversion of
vacant commercial buildings and the upper floors of shops, identifying
and assembling sites for development, and adopting flexible standards
for parking and density are given as ways of encouraging more housing.
Mixed use development incorporating housing can create vitality and
diversity and be more sustainable than single use schemes by reducing
the need to travel. However, for higher densities and lower car parking
provision to be successful in the Tameside context it will be necessary
to ensure a high quality of design and layout, to tailor schemes to
the needs and aspirations of the potential occupiers, and to concentrate
such schemes in areas of good public transport accessibility. PPG3
advises that car parking standards that result, on average, in developments
with more than 1.5 off-street car parking spaces per dwelling are
unlikely to reflect the Government's emphasis on securing sustainable
residential environments. Policy T10 deals with the Council's parking
standards, but schemes which are put forward on the basis of policy
H7 should in most circumstances be able to meet the Government's expectations
on this issue. |
|
|
| H8 |
Gypsies, Travellers
and Showmen |
| Development proposals to
accommodate gypsies, other travelling people or showmen will be permitted
subject to the following criteria, taking into account the requirements
and characteristics of particular types of sites along with mitigation
measures which may be incorporated and operational conditions which
may be imposed. Sites should: |
| (a) |
be reasonably accessible
to employment opportunities, town or local centres, shops, schools,
medical, social and other essential services, and |
| (b) |
incorporate a suitably
located work and/or storage area, if appropriate, and |
| (c) |
have suitable road access
and preferably proximity to a bus route, and |
| (d) |
be linked to water, sewerage
and other main services, and |
| (e) |
not be likely to cause
an unacceptable environmental impact, through noise, pollution or
other conditions which may adversely affect local people, nor conflict
with other interests such as those of agriculture or utilities. |
| Circular 1/94
requires local planning authorities to indicate the regard they have
to meeting gypsies' accommodation needs. Following repeal of the previous
duty on local authorities to provide gypsy sites the Government expected
that more applications would be submitted for private sites, although
this has not been evident so far in Tameside. Although the need for
gypsy accommodation in the Borough has not been systematically assessed
in relation to this plan, there has been little indication of demand
or associated problems in this area in recent years. Demand does exist
however for showmen's accommodation, as evidenced by both established
sites and planning applications for new or replacement provision.
Overall, the situation does not point to the need to make specific
site allocations for gypsies, travellers or showmen, but it is appropriate
to provide criteria against which any new proposals for sites can
be judged. In assessing the suitability of any site which might be
proposed, the Council will, among other things, take into account
the factors described in Circular 1/94. |
|
|
| H9 |
Backland and Garden
Development |
| New residential development
within the curtilage of existing dwellings, or on sites where access
cannot be provided independently, will only be permitted where: |
| (a) |
arrangements can be provided
for access and parking for both the existing and proposed dwellings,
and |
| (b) |
garden areas can be retained,
and |
| (c) |
privacy can be maintained
between existing and proposed dwellings and between their gardens,
and |
| (d) |
no serious detriment will
occur to the character of the area enjoyed by other residents. |
| A comprehensive approach
will be required where backland development is envisaged covering
a number of plots within a particular area, including the preparation
of a brief for the area as a whole. |
| Proposals to
split off part of an original housing plot for the building of one
or more additional dwellings require particularly careful consideration,
even where the plot is larger than average. Otherwise, reasonable
expectations of access, privacy and outlook could easily be compromised,
and where a number of such developments take place it is possible
that the general character of an area could be adversely affected.
This policy does not rule out all such developments, but indicates
the basis on which proposals will be critically assessed and calls
for a planned approach where a number of adjacent plots could be involved.
|
|
|
| H10 |
Detailed Design of
Housing Developments |
| The layout, design and external
appearance of proposed housing developments, which are acceptable
in relation to other relevant policies in this plan, will be required
to be of high quality and to meet the following more detailed criteria: |
| (a) |
a design which meets the
needs of the potential occupiers, provides an attractive, convenient
and safe environment for the local community, and complements or enhances
the character and appearance of the surrounding area, and |
| (b) |
suitable arrangements for
parking, access to and from the highway, and delivery, refuse and
emergency vehicles, including access by pedestrians, cyclists and
disabled people, and for convenient access to public transport where
appropriate, with no unacceptable impact on the surrounding highway
network, and |
| (c) |
suitable landscaping and
fencing, including retention of existing features such as trees and
hedges where practical, which enhance the appearance of the development,
ensure privacy and security where necessary, enable discrete storage
of wheelie bins and minimise the visual impact on surrounding areas,
and |
| (d) |
no unacceptable impact
on the amenity of neighbouring properties through noise, loss of privacy,
overshadowing, or traffic, and |
| (e) |
minimisation of the opportunities
for crime and anti-social behaviour. |
| The Council will encourage
and permit new and innovative design solutions wherever this can be
achieved without adverse effects on existing character. |
| In any proposed
housing scheme there will be a wide range of detailed matters requiring
consideration, even though the general principle of the type of development
in that particular location may be acceptable. It is intended that
updated supplementary planning guidance will be prepared by the Council
to explain and illustrate these requirements in more detail. This
guidance will also draw attention to and explain other policies in
the plan which may be of relevance when proposals for housing development
are considered. The guidance will be the subject of public consultation
before it is adopted by the Council. |
| Promoting good
design in new housing development is a priority of both the Government
(PPG1 and PPG3) and the Council, and is a key element in successful
urban regeneration. Residential schemes should not be designed in
isolation however, and understanding the townscape and landscape context
of the area in which they are proposed will be crucial. High quality
layout design also has an important role in helping to create a safe
and secure environment, and in enabling higher densities to be achieved
where appropriate. The Council will provide more information on design
issues in supplementary planning guidance for housing development,
in urban design frameworks for areas of the Borough (see policy C1)
and in development briefs for particular sites. In preparing such
information, the Council will have regard to good practice guides
published by the Government and others, and will consult with the
local community. |
| |
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|