View
19
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
info@houriganconnolly.com | 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)
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/ info@houriganconnolly.com w/ 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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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).
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
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.
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
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
2
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 2935info@strategiclandgroup.co.ukwww.strategiclandgroup.co.uk@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
4
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
8
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
14
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
18
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
28
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
31
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
34
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
37
38
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
41
Appendix 2
Recommended