Agenda item

The Planning Manager:

 

a.    advised that planning permission was sought for the erection of 77 no 6 bedroom townhouses to provide a total of 462 en suite bedrooms to be occupied as Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs), sited to the south west of the city centre on land formerly occupied by Lincoln Superbowl, which closed in 2015

 

b.    described the design of the townhouses arranged in a series of four storey linear blocks overlooking private and secure landscaped courtyards, with controlled access to the development at the entrance to the new access road, which served a 90 space car park

 

c.    highlighted that the submitted Design and Access Statement predicted a shortfall in student accommodation for September 2018 together with an increasing demand for student accommodation; this application aimed to meet this demand with a joint venture between the applicant and the University of Lincoln

 

d.    reported that the site was owned by the City Council and therefore the application was being presented to members of Planning Committee for consideration and determination

 

e.    provided details of the policies pertaining to the application as follows:-

 

·         Policy LP1: A Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

·         Policy LP2: The Spatial Strategy and Settlement Hierarchy

·         Policy LP10: Meeting Accommodation Needs

·         Policy LP13: Accessibility and Transport

·         Policy LP16: Development on Land Affected by Contamination

·         Policy LP18: Climate Change and Low Carbon Living

·         Policy LP25: The Historic Environment

·         Policy LP26: Design and Amenity

·         National Planning Policy Framework

 

f.     outlined the responses made to the consultation exercise

 

g.    referred to the update sheet which contained a letter of support for the application from the University of Lincoln and the following statement from officers regarding flood risk and drainage:

 

‘The committee report identified that the agent was still in discussions with the Environment Agency (EA) regarding the proposal. Since writing the report further discussions and a meeting have taken place, as well as the consideration of a revised Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and additional technical information. The EA has raised no objection in principle although require a further revision to the FRA before submitting a final response with conditions. Officers therefore request that this matter be delegated to officers to finalise to the satisfaction of the EA, as well as the Lincolnshire County Council as Lead Local Flood Authority’.

 

h.    highlighted the main issues relating to the proposals as follows:-

 

·         The Principle of Use

·         Visual Amenity

·         Residential Amenity

·         Access and Highways

·         Flood Risk and Drainage

·         Contaminated Land

·         Trees and Landscaping

·         Network Rail

 

i.      concluded that:

 

·         The principle of the use of this unallocated site for residential purposes was considered to be acceptable and the development would contribute towards the continued growth of the University.

·         The design of the development had been well thought out, improving on the architectural style of the local surroundings.

·         There were no residential properties in the vicinity that would be impacted upon by the proposal and the amenities for future occupants had been carefully considered through noise and light assessments.

·         The site was in an accessible location, also providing cycle and car parking to meet an identified need.

·         The Highway Authority had raised no objection in principle to the access or parking arrangements.

·         Matters relating to contamination, archaeology, the railway/level crossing and refuse could be dealt with appropriately by condition.

·         Subject to further details of flood risk and drainage being to the satisfaction of the relevant consultees it was considered that the proposal would be in accordance with the requirements of Central Lincolnshire Local Plan Policies LP1, LP2, LP10, LP13, LP16, LP18, LP25 and LP26, as well as guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

Mr Simon Parkes, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, University of Lincoln, addressed Planning Committee in support of the proposed development, covering the following main points:

 

·         The University of Lincoln offered its support to this planning application.

·         HMO style accommodation was in demand and somewhat constrained in the city.

·         This type of accommodation was suitable for students. It incorporated limited car parking spaces.

·         The University of Lincoln continued to grow requiring additional accommodation.

·         The proposed development met the needs of the University in ways that others did not.

·         He looked forward to hearing the members’ recommendation.

 

Members discussed the content of the report in further detail, raising individual concerns in relation to:

 

·         The lack of recognisable benefits to the local community in respect of this type of scheme who had to cope with extra traffic/people on the streets in their local area. It was hoped that monies gained would be used to solve problems of limited car parking space for local communities.

·         Whether the student accommodation was ideally placed within a predominantly trading estate area.

·         Whether the design of the building was suitable in terms of scale/massing/having a flat roof.

·         The disappearance of trees/hedging within the scheme and its effect on wildlife in the area.

·         Issues in respect of the ratio of car parking spaces to residents at the development.

·         The lack of traffic infrastructure to cope with these types of development especially having to compete with commercial traffic in the area.

 

Members offered support to the scheme raising the following comments:

 

·         The need for additional student accommodation in the city was recognised.

·         Cosmopolitan change would come along as the city expanded which was not a bad thing.

·         The development was beneficial in that it provided purpose built accommodation suitable for students which took away the pressure from family homes therefore improving community life.

·         The Highways Authority had raised no issues in relation to the proposed development. The city enjoyed the benefits of a thriving University. Asking students to commute from the perimeter of the city would only cause a problem there. However, it was important to involve the community in matters that affected them.

·         The accommodation would not be seen from the main road similar to the previous use of the land as a Superbowl.

·         The size/massing of the building was acceptable amongst other existing warehouse buildings.

 

The Planning Manager offered the following points of clarification:

 

·         The concerns raised regarding highway impact centred on the level of parking provision for the development and impact on the highway network.

·         During its previous use of the land as the Superbowl, its car park had a 200 vehicle capacity. Other use could create a similar amount of cars, whereas this proposal offered an improved position.

·         The proposed accommodation was close to the University and was serviced by a cycle track/footpath into the city close by.

·         The design of the building was subjective. It was important for members to filter out their own personal preferences to focus on whether it was appropriate in the context of the large retail units in the area.

 

RESOLVED that planning permission be delegated to the Planning Manager to grant subject to finalised arrangements for the consideration of a revised Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and additional technical information to the satisfaction of the Environment Agency, as well as Lincolnshire County Council as Lead Local Flood Authority, and subject to the following conditions:

 

• Time limit of the permission
• Development in accordance with approved plans
• Samples of materials
• Site levels and finished floor levels
• Noise mitigation strategy
• Off-site lighting assessment
• Highways- reinstatement of footpath, adjustment of double yellow lines and tactile crossing point
• Contamination
• Surface water drainage and management strategy
• Foul sewerage strategy
• Refuse management plan
• Archaeology
• Implementation and maintenance of access gate to turning head
• Landscaping- including Network Rail requirements
• Network Rail- construction safety, drainage and lighting
• Use restriction and requirement for management by higher/further education body
• Electric Vehicle Charging points before occupation