Agenda item

Demolition of extensions and outbuildings and conversion of former Police Station to erect new residential building to provide 32 dwelling units in a mixture of unit sizes, including one, two and three bedroom flats and four bedroom houses, parking provision, cycle and refuse storage.

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions and subject to a s106 legal agreement.

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for the demolition of extensions and outbuildings and conversion of the former St Ann’s Police Station to erect a new residential building to provide 32 dwelling units and four bedroom houses. The report set out details of the proposal, the site and surroundings, planning history, relevant planning policy, consultation and responses, analysis, equalities and human rights implications and recommended to grant permission subject to conditions and subject to a s106 legal agreement.

The planning officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report. The Committee were read out a letter of objection received from David Lammy MP concerned with the low proposed affordable housing contribution and an email from local ward councillors B. Blake and Morton expressing broad support for the scheme.

An objector addressed the Committee and raised the following points:

·         Demolition should not be permitted of the rear extension to the police station.

·         The scale and massing of the new building would create a street canyon effect for pollution.

·         Additional concerns with the scheme were raised over parking provision, site cramming and the low affordable housing contribution.

·         The accuracy of the PTAL rating (public transport accessibility level) awarded to the site was questioned, including the disparity with the rating given to the nearby St Ann’s hospital site and errors given in the details of bus routes serving the area.

·         Concerns were raised about the proposed height of the new building, particularly as it would overlook a children’s playground.

·         A lack of detail had been provided on waste management arrangements for the site.

A representative for the applicant addressed the Committee and raised the following points:

·         The applicant, One Housing, was a non profit housing organisation.

·         The scheme would bring a heritage asset back into use including securing ongoing maintenance as well as providing a good mix of new housing units.

·         The applicant had consulted with local residents on the scheme and taken concerns raised into account.

·         The scheme was of high design quality.

·         The physical constraints of the conversion of the locally listed police station building impacted on the cost of the scheme and thereby the viability assessment.

·         Onsite parking spaces would be allocated to the larger family and disabled access units. 

The Committee raised the following points in discussion of the application:

·         Although a copy of the viability assessment had been circulated to members of the Committee under confidential copy, concern remained on the low 13% affordable housing contribution proposed. The applicant advised that this figure reflected the maximum possible taking into account the costs associated with the conversion of the locally listed building. Additional benefits associated with the scheme were emphasised including s106 contributions, the provision of new housing and local employment opportunities.

Further assurances were sought from officers regarding the contribution put forward by the applicant. Officers informed that the viability assessment had been independently assessed and which had validated the 13% level as a consequence of the sales values of the area and refurbishment costs. A mechanism would be added to any permission to review the contribution should the scheme not be implemented within 18 months. The legal officer reminded the Committee that as the affordable housing contribution had been assessed as policy compliant, legally it could not successfully be used as a grounds for refusal.

·         Concerns were raised over the potential for the police station building to be visually diminished from the variation in finish selected for the new building. Officers advised that the approach of varying the materials used and window design to the new building had been taken to avoid a pastiche. 

·         Clarification was sought on whether the density of the scheme had been reduced following the Committee’s consideration of the scheme at pre-application stage. It was advised that a slight reduction had been made and that officers were satisfied that the density was within acceptable range taking into account the PTAL of the site.

·         The potential of adding a condition to require the planting of additional trees to the Hermitage Road street frontage was queried. The applicant agreed to discuss with officers the potential incorporation of this within the landscaping condition.

·         Concerns were raised over the Conservation Officer’s initial objections to the scheme and that the officer was not present at the meeting to outline whether these had now been allayed. The Head of Development Management apologised for the officer not being present but confirmed that her initial concerns regarding the proposed variation in colour of bricks to the new building had been allayed through her input into the discharge of condition 3 covering the approval of external materials. The wider overall benefit of bringing the locally listed building back into use had also been taken into account. 

·         Clarification was sought on the number of single aspect units within the scheme. The applicant advised that there would be two sited in the new building as a consequence of the orientation of the police station building.

·         Concerns were raised over the potential storage of refuse bins on the pavement. It was advised by the applicant that well designed, on-street bin stores were planned as part of an effective waste management plan for the scheme. 

·         The allocation arrangements for the onsite parking spaces were queried. The applicant advised that although allocation principles had yet to be decided, priority would likely to given to the larger family units. In response to concerns regarding the impact of the scheme on on-street parking provision, it was identified that the s106 agreement would include a contribution towards car club membership and a future CPZ review.

·         Clarification was sought on the concerns raised by the NHS Mental Health Trust of the scheme causing overlooking to mental health accommodation. Officers advised that they had taken the view that the separation distances and angle of window to window sightlines would be sufficient to safeguard privacy in this regard. 

Cllr Bevan put forward a motion, seconded by Cllr Carter, to reject the application on the grounds of overdevelopment as identified by the Design Review Panel, the outstanding concerns of the Conservation Officer regarding the impact of the design of the scheme on the Conservation Area and the allocation by private sale of the parking spaces and the lack of their allocation to the affordable housing units. At a vote, the motion was carried. It was therefore

RESOLVED

·         That planning application HGY/2015/0034 be refused on the grounds of overdevelopment as identified by the Design Review Panel, the outstanding concerns of the Conservation Officer regarding the impact of the design of the scheme on the Conservation Area and the allocation by private sale of the parking spaces and their lack of allocation to the affordable housing units.