Issue - meetings

Demolition of existing single storey rear building, erection of a new 2 storey rear wing to provide new operating theatre suite; erection of a two storey extension to existing rear wing to provide 14 additional single patient rooms and storage space;. New plantroom space and some refurbishments to the existing building. Creation of a waste store to the front of the building.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions.

The Committee considered a report, previously circulated, which gave details of the application, the applicant’s case, the site and its environment, planning history and all of the relevant planning factors and policies.

A Members site visit had taken place prior to the meeting.

It was noted that, in addition to those listed in the report, further representations had been received from the Fire Brigade stating that the current application did not meet fire regulations.

Further objections had also been received from Councillor Allison and Councillor Williams on the following grounds:

• The additional delivery’s to the hospital would cause disturbance to local residents
• Insufficient parking
• Loss of privacy
• Potential conversion to residential use

The Highgate Society had also raised objections on the following grounds:

• Use of hard surfacing would set an undesirable precedent
• The proposed development would constitute over development 
• Loss of trees on the site was unacceptable

The Committee discussed the application and in response to concerns that the Arboriculture Report had not identified any trees that should be protected with a TPO the Committee was advised that none of the trees on the site were considered to be of sufficient significance to merit a TPO.  There was a criteria against which trees were assessed that took into account the species age and health of a tree.

It was noted that the objections raised by the Fire Brigade were not sufficient to warrant refusal as they were dealt with under separate regulations.

Concern was raised that the additional pressure placed on parking would be greater than suggested. It was contended that the number of staff already parking in nearby streets put unacceptable pressure on residents.

Councillor Wilson addressed the Committee and noted that he considered that the proposal would constitute over development and that it would have an unacceptable impact upon the residential amenity of number 21.

He noted that trees situated in the north west of the site would need to be felled significantly to allow for construction and that this would alter the character of site appreciably. Similarly the bulk and size of the proposal was out of character with existing street scene.

Councillor Wilson noted that if the current Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) was extended this would mean that staff would have to find alternative areas to park and this would place pressure on surrounding streets.

Mr Cuss, the applicants architect, spoke in support of the application and following his statement he answered questions from the Committee. It was confirmed that the applicant was happy to make the amendments required by the Fire Brigade.

In response to a question Mr Cuss advised that a survey had been carried out to assess the loss of light and the impact of this upon properties adjacent to the site. This had concluded that there was virtually no impact to the higher levels.

Mr Cuss advised that an extensive landscaping scheme would be employed and that the additional wing being built would not cause a loss of light that would inhibit  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23