Comment

A route to approval through Manchester’s virtual planning committee

Directors, Emma Dickson and Mark Worcester provide a 5-minute read, sharing their insights into patterns of decision-making by Manchester’s Planning and Highways Committee. They highlight how, after a period of relative turbulence, stability appears to be returning, albeit applications still require careful preparation and promotion through the planning and political landscape.

Manchester is one of the fastest growing cities in Europe, with a recently transformed city centre supported by neighbourhoods of choice, with the infrastructure to attract and retain the very best businesses and talent from around the world.

Underpinning this growth and development is a significant Labour stronghold, anchored by stable leadership within the city council for almost 30 years. Many have attributed Manchester’s regeneration to the vision and leadership provided by Sir Richard Leese and, prior to his departure, Sir Howard Bernstein, who together with a trusted cohort of senior officers and a cohesive Labour group have provided clear direction on planning and economic development in the city.

This in turn led to a pattern of positive and consistent decision making by the city’s Planning and Highways Committee with members rarely challenging the advice of senior officers; thus providing the investment and development community with significant confidence to invest in Manchester. Planning certainty and stability has been a cornerstone of Manchester’s rise.

What has happened more recently?

Over the last couple of years, changes in senior officer leadership alongside the rise of the ‘Momentum’ movement within the Labour party, both nationally and locally, have resulted in the city council’s approach to planning experiencing a period of relative turbulence. This has had a direct impact on the decision-making of the Planning and Highways Committee, where we have seen previously ‘safe bet’ recommendations by senior planning officers challenged on more occasions than ever before.

This hasn’t resulted in a significant number of refusals but we have certainly witnessed a greater propensity for the committee to question the city’s growth agenda and raise questions around who the city is seeking to grow for and to what end, and to challenge the quality of design and its inclusivity. Areas of particular focus and challenge have included affordability, impact on heritage, and the quality of residential accommodation being proposed.

What effect has the pandemic had on decision-making?

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 and subsequent lock-downs presented the city council with a number of additional challenges to its decision-making processes. Whilst the Coronavirus Bill soon provided the legislation required to allow local authority meetings to be conducted remotely, to maintain progress decision making in Manchester was for an interim period delegated to the council’s Chief Executive, Joanne Roney OBE, Councillor Basil Curley, Chair of the Planning Committee, and Deputy Chair Councillor Nasrin Ali. 

During this period, greater stability was restored and a number of major schemes were approved, including some which had had been resisted by committee members on more than one occasion. This attracted criticism that the approach was “undemocratic” from some quarters.

Following the return of decision-making to the full Planning and Highways Committee members on the 30 July 2020, there was initial evidence of continued variability. Most major development schemes with positive officer recommendations were approved by committee, however certain notable schemes experienced challenge, not least those entailing co-living proposals.

What happened to co-living schemes during this period? 

Whilst now approved, Downing’s proposals for a cluster of co-living at First Street and Vita Group’s Water Street scheme both met with initial resistance from the committee, which required the submission of additional information and consideration at meetings in July, August and September 2020.

The resistance was due largely, it would appear, to some members of the committee not fully understanding the particular characteristics of the co-living model of accommodation and having significant concerns about matters such as space standards, rather than being fundamentally opposed to the proposition. Even so, it was a period of concern for the sector and not a positive message for the market; the council’s executive only having endorsed a new policy framework for the consideration of such applications in early July 2020.

What about the future for co-living looking ahead? 

Following the endorsement of the new policy framework and the approval of the aforementioned ‘test’ cases, we now have a clear picture as to where and in what form the committee is likely to support further applications for co-living up to a defined limit of 5,000 units. Location will be critical with schemes being directed to St Johns, Piccadilly / Northern Quarter and First Street/ Oxford Road Corridor in the first instance, as well as compliance with residential space standards (although a degree of flexibility exists for short term stays and where conversion to mainstream residential is proven to be possible).

Other significant approvals

Despite the difficulties experienced over a number of months, including after the committee returned post-lockdown, it is reassuring to note that during the July – October 2020 period, a number of large scale, significant proposals have been approved by committee, in line with officer recommendations.  

At recent meetings, planning permission has been granted for over £1billion of investment including the New Eastlands Arena, the Far East Consortium’s Northern Gateway scheme and, in the city centre, residential development of up to 37 storeys at Dantzic Street, a 17 storey office building on Deansgate and a new hotel on Whitworth Street. A number of these attracted significant objection.

Despite the challenges brought about by COVID-19, and undoubtedly a more complex local political environment than in the past, recent approvals provide comfort that there remains a strong and largely reliable connection between officers and committee members. Whereas it may not presently have the same level of certainty that it became renowned for, planning in Manchester is still a more certain and clear process than in many other locations. Manchester remains open to investment in high quality proposals in the right locations, particularly that which will drive economic recovery and growth.

If you would like to find out more please contact Emma Dickson, Director or Jack Boyce, Senior Consultant in our Strategic Communications team or Mark Worcester, Planning Director.

12 November 2020