Agenda item
Site at corner of King Lane and The Highway and site at 448 Cable Street (Juniper Hall) (PA/12/03138)
Decision:
Update report tabled.
On a vote of 1 in favour and 1 against with the Chair using his casting vote in favour, the Committee RESOLVED:
1. That planning permission Site at corner of King Lane and The Highway and site at 448 Cable Street (Juniper Hall) (PA/12/03138) be GRANTED for the construction of a part four/part ten storey building on the corner of King David Lane and the Highway to provide 37 new residential units (comprising 8 x one bed; 21 x two bed; 7 x three bed; 1 x four bed), and the conversion of Juniper Hall to provide 2 x two residential units, together with associated works including disabled parking and cycle parking, landscaped public open space and private amenity space subject to:
2. The prior completion of a legal agreement, to the satisfaction of the Assistant Chief Executive (legal Services), to secure the matters set out in the report
3. That the Corporate Director of Development and Renewal is delegated powers to negotiate the legal agreement indicated above acting with normal delegated authority.
4. That the Assistant Chief Executive (Legal Services) is delegated power to complete the legal agreement.
5. That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to impose conditions and informatives on the planning permission to secure the matters set out in the report AND the update report.
6. That, if within three months of the date of this committee the legal agreement has not been completed, the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to refuse planning permission.
Councillor Anwar Khan joined the meeting during this item (7:25pm) therefore did not vote.
Minutes:
Update report tabled.
Jerry Bell (Applications Team Leader) introduced the report regarding site at corner of King Lane and the Highway and site at 448 Cable Street (Juniper Hall) (PA/12/03138) to provide residential units with associated works.
The Chair invited the registered speakers to address the meeting.
John Wright spoke in objection to the application. He expressed concern about the King David’s site application about the following issues:
- Increased noise from the highway and the junction. The highway was already very busy and noisy. This would significantly worsen if granted. The noise assessment failed to take into account the bus stop on the corner. The noise levels exceeded policy.
- Air quality in relation to the roof top space. The play space was in a very confined area and would be exposed to traffic fumes. There, was a danger of pollution and contamination.
The Council had set up the Glamis Estate Board to oversee the redevelopment of the estate. However, the views and feedback from residents in this case had been ignored by the applicant. Mr Wright requested that the application be deferred to enable the applicant to prepare a safer scheme for children and families.
Maria Pennycuick spoke in objection to the application as a resident of Glamis Estate.She considered that the scheme would have a harmful impact on residents amenity (in terms of light levels, privacy). The plans would restrict the emergency access routes. The plans overlooked the two existing covenants for the estate. They related to the right of way and the servicing turning circle. She sought clarity on the s106 assessment. Particularly, the sum for public open space. She questioned who would cover the costs? How had it been calculated? She requested that the application be deferred and a new application be submitted that was financially realistic and based on proper consultation with residents.
Steven Inkpen (Applicant’s agent) spoke in support of the application. He highlighted the merits of the scheme, based on extensive public consultation. This included the delivery of new housing, improvements to the community space, public realm and also improved safety and security for the site. He also highlighted the plans to convert the community hall into two affordable units for elderly occupiers at Juniper Hall.
He explained the scope of their public consultation. This included a discussion at theGlamis Estate Board, leafleting and meetings with residents. As a result, the height and density of the scheme had been reduced (from 12 to 10 storeys) due to the feedback. There were also set backs in the design to protect amenity. He referred to the plans for the wider estate works supported by government subsidy. It was intended that the applicant would work with residents to implement these community works.
In reply to Members, he underlined the scope of the public consultation and the alterations made in response (as outlined above). The applicant believed that they had fully taken on board the residents concerns.
David Black (Applicant’s agent) spoke in support of the scheme. He referred to the outcome of the air quality testing carried out by specialists. The study took into account the most recent information including the nearby bus stop. The methodology had been approved by the relevant Council experts. The findings showed that the proposed mitigation (such as the mechanical ventilation systems) could adequately deal with emissions. The findings also showed that the air quality to the play space fell within acceptable standards.
The applicant had appointed a specialist to carry out a similar survey of the noise impact. The methodology had also been approved by the relevant Council experts. This found that the plans could attain a good standard of noise insulation.
Mr Black also considered that the impact on sunlight and day light was acceptable. The majority of windows would achieve the required standards.
Shay Bugler(Planning Officer) presented the detailed report and the update. He explained the site location for the St David Lane site and the surrounding area. He highlighted the good transport links for the site. He explained in detail the floor plans including the access routes, the car parking plans, the child play pace and the housing mix with a good level of social housing.
He explained the outcome of the Council’s consultation and the addressed the issues raised. On balance, taking into account the key issues (land use, density, design, amenity, transport, open space), Officers considered that the proposal was acceptable and in line with policy.
The community play space was in excess of policy and there was dedicated play space for younger children. It was also considered that the plans adequately catered for older children given the levels of off site play space and contributions for open space. It was considered that the servicing and emergency vehicle access plans were acceptable with adequate manoeuvring space for such vehicles.
As explained above, a noise and air quality assessment had been carried out of the development. Officers in Environmental Health were satisfied with the findings and had no objections with regard to noise and air quality subject to the imposition of the conditions. Officers listed the mitigations measures to ensure this throughout the scheme and for the roof top space in particular.
Mr Bugler also explained the plans for the Juniper Hall site.
In summary, given the benefits of the scheme, Officers were recommending that the scheme be granted.
Members asked a number of questions. In response, Officers clarified the car parking plans. Officers also explained the purpose of the monitoring fee for the s106 based on a standard calculation. They outlined the scope of the statutory consultation (the findings of which were set out in the report), and the expectations about the applicant’s consultation.
On a vote of 1 in favour and 1 against with the Chair using his casting vote in favour, the Committee RESOLVED:
1. That planning permission Site at corner of King Lane and The Highway and site at 448 Cable Street (Juniper Hall) (PA/12/03138) be GRANTED for the construction of a part four/part ten storey building on the corner of King David Lane and the Highway to provide 37 new residential units (comprising 8 x one bed; 21 x two bed; 7 x three bed; 1 x four bed), and the conversion of Juniper Hall to provide 2 x two residential units, together with associated works including disabled parking and cycle parking, landscaped public open space and private amenity space subject to:
2. The prior completion of a legal agreement, to the satisfaction of the Assistant Chief Executive (legal Services), to secure the matters set out in the report
3. That the Corporate Director of Development and Renewal is delegated powers to negotiate the legal agreement indicated above acting with normal delegated authority.
4. That the Assistant Chief Executive (Legal Services) is delegated power to complete the legal agreement.
5. That the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to impose conditions and informatives on the planning permission to secure the matters set out in the report AND the update report.
6. That, if within three months of the date of this committee the legal agreement has not been completed, the Corporate Director Development & Renewal is delegated power to refuse planning permission.
Councillor Anwar Khan joined the meeting during this item (7:25pm) therefore did not vote.
Supporting documents: