Following several meetings with constituents, I have written to the planning department objecting to plans which will drastically change Regent Road retail park.

These plans won’t help tackle the urgent need for social and affordable housing, won’t help with the loss of shops, existing employment and parking, and will drastically impact Salford’s skyline.

You can read my letter in full below.

Development Management
Technical Services
Salford Civic Centre
Chorley Road
Swinton
M27 5AS
BY EMAIL

1 August 2024

Dear Sirs,

Re: PA/2024/0962 | Regent Retail Park, Ordsall Lane, Salford | Outline Planning Application (with all matters reserved except for Access to, but not within, the Application Site) for a Mixed-Use Development Comprising a maximum of 10,000 sq. m new Commercial and Community Floorspace (Use Classes E and F.2) and up to a maximum of 3,300 new Residential Dwellings (Use Class C3) and a new Public Park and associated infrastructure and works

I am writing to you on behalf of my constituents, to register a number of concerns regarding the above planning application. My objections are based on several conflicts with the Salford Local Plan policies, which are crucial to ensuring sustainable and inclusive development here in Salford.

I set out each area of concern as follows:

• Affordable Housing

The proposed development, along with the viability study provided, does not adequately address the need for affordable and social housing in Salford. Whilst acknowledging that Salford’s Local Plan requires 20% of any development to be affordable housing in this location, the applicant is proposing that this development is unable to provide any affordable housing in this scheme if it is to remain viable. The 3300 residential dwellings the application proposes are instead to be split, with half for market sale, and half for buy to rent, completely disregarding the requirements in the local plan.

Salford’s local Plan advises that “All developments that provide 10 or more net additional dwellings, or are on a site of 0.5 hectares or more in size and provide any number of dwellings, shall deliver at least 20% of those dwellings as affordable housing”, and whilst the applicant may argue that Salford’s local plan advises “A reduced proportion of affordable housing from the above requirements may be considered acceptable” this is “only where: 1) It has been clearly demonstrated that all practicable options have been exhausted for delivering the minimum affordable housing requirement”.

Further, the viability study also seeks that S106 contributions should also be relaxed on viability grounds for the proposed development, however detail supporting this request appears to be insufficient.

It is important to note that the viability study does not appear to clearly demonstrate the need for a reduced proportion, nor the practicable options that have been exhausted, nor a clear rationale for relaxing S106 contributions. Rather, it indicates the significant margins of profit the development will make for the developer and any investors, whilst not providing what the City of Salford desperately needs i.e. truly affordable and social housing.

Furthermore, Salford’s local plan also states that “as of 1 September 2019, there were 6,514 households on the housing register seeking affordable housing in Salford, with the vast majority of these being in priority need. Using the methodology in the national planning practice guidance, the 2019 Greater Manchester Strategic Housing Market Assessment identifies a need for 613 affordable homes per annum in Salford if the backlog of need were to be addressed over the next five years.” It is clear therefore that any large scale development of this size must seek to meet at least the required 20% of affordable housing in order to make a real difference to the need for affordable housing here in Salford.

The current proposals fail to meet the requirements set out in the local plan, and potentially exacerbates the housing crisis by excluding lower-income residents from benefiting from new developments. To address the housing crisis here in Salford we need more social and affordable housing in all areas of the city, so the very least a developer can propose is to meet the requirements for the affordable housing provision within this application, to align with Policy H4.

• Low Number of Car Parking Spaces and Its Impact on Nearby Communities

On the issue of car parking spaces, the planning application indicates “a total of approximately 600 parking spaces will be provided, with up to 500 spaces reserved for use by future residents of the Site, whilst up to 100 spaces will be reserved for visitors to the Site.” Sadly, this amount does not provide the necessary spaces needed for a development of this scale nor visitors to any retail on the site. Further, it is not clear that any of the visitor spaces will be made available to those who simply wish to avail of any retail at the site rather than simply wishing to visit development residents.

Policy A7 highlights the need for adequate parking provision to avoid overspill into surrounding areas and minimise congestion. The policy aims to ensure that parking needs are met on-site to prevent negative impacts on neighbouring communities, however the low number of parking spaces will likely lead to parking issues in nearby communities, increasing traffic congestion and negatively affecting the quality of life for current residents.

Across Salford, new developments without a suitable amount of car parking spaces are causing obstruction and loss of amenity for pedestrians and residents of nearby estates, and this proposed development will make the situation much worse. Ordsall estate to the south of the development, and Islington Estate to the north are already feeling the impact of this issue due to the high numbers of high density apartments that have been built in the ward and neighbouring wards, while pavements surrounding new building are being overrun by cars blocking the paths.

This application does not provide a realistic parking provision that aligns with the expected demand. This proposed development could bring an additional 5-6000 new residents to the
area, with the provision of spaces allowing space for less than 10% of the total number of residents, and it is most likely that residents of nearby estates will be those most affected by  the development.

• Loss of Shops and Employment

The redevelopment plan in the application involves the demolition of existing retail units, which will lead to a loss of shops, employment and opportunities. Policy EC1 prioritises the retention and enhancement of existing employment areas to support the local economy and provide jobs for residents. The current retail units play a vital role in the local economy, offering employment to a significant number of people and providing essential services to the community. The loss of these retail spaces could have a detrimental impact on the local economy, displacing businesses and workers.

This application does not demonstrate that any new commercial spaces provide equal or greater employment opportunities to mitigate this loss, or that any displaced businesses and employees would be considered in any new retail space. The application cannot demonstrate what businesses, if any, will be in the commercial space they are proposing, and therefore this proposed development is looking to demolish one of the city’s busiest retail and employment hubs, whilst seemingly giving nothing back to the local community.

It is also important to note that the ground floor retail space proposed is vastly reduced compared to the existing site and the new units proposed do not seem to be of an appropriate size or nature to meet the needs of many of the big retailers currently at the site. Residents have expressed to me that many of these retailers are a lifeline to them due to their wide range of goods, nature of products they sell and their affordability. Many residents stress that they will not be able to travel many miles to the next nearest branches putting them at a significant social and economic advantage.

Additionally, whilst the proposed application indicates a return of retail space on the ground floor, if any businesses do go on to fill these spaces, they will arrive many years after the closure of the current shops and loss of employment, as well as lacking customer parking, which will further impact the local community and the Sainsbury’s supermarket. Without the necessary car parking facilities for customers, the application is sadly declaring that the proposed retail units are primarily for the use of residents of the new development, rather than the existing local community.

• Local Character and Distinctiveness

Finally, the scale and density of the proposed development, including the construction of six tall towers up to 273m are not in keeping with the local character and distinctiveness of the area. Whilst the applicant may refer to the nearby developments of Middlewood Locks and Wilburn Basin, this application is proposing to build significantly higher than these developments, and the new towers will be overlooking the nearby Ordsall housing estate.

In the Salford local plan, Policy D2 emphasises the importance of development respecting and enhancing the local character, advocating for developments that contribute positively to the visual and cultural landscape of Salford. The height and massing of the buildings could dramatically overshadow the surrounding areas, leading to a loss of local identity and negatively impacting the visual landscape much further than any previous development has done.

Conclusion

Application PA/2024/0962 fails to meet the standards required for the proposed residents of the development and the existing local community, based on planning policies of Salford’s Local Plan as outlined above.

There are legitimate concerns that the application does not meet the requirements outlined in at least the following polices:

• H4: Affordable Housing
• A7: Motor Vehicle Parking Provision
• EC1: Existing Employment Areas
• D2: Local Character and Distinctiveness

Whilst residents and I support fully the urgent need for housing, it is essential that any proposed development aligns with the policies laid out in the Salford Local Plan, is sympathetic to the interests of the existing communities, and helps to address the housing crisis in Salford. Sadly, for the reasons outlined above, the application fails to do that. I therefore request that both the Planning Department and Planning Panel agree that this application is not suitable and needs to be refused in the first instance.

Yours sincerely,

Rebecca Long-Bailey
Member of Parliament for Salford

—Ends—