Agenda item

Redevelopment of car park site and relocation of electricity sub station. Erection of a number of buildings ranging from 2 to 6 stories to create 114 units of temporary accommodation.

Ward: West Thornton

Redevelopment of car park site and relocation of electricity substation. Erection of a number of buildings ranging from 2 to 6 stories to create 114 units of temporary accommodation.

Ward: West Thornton

Rhea Shephard from HTA Architects, Simon Toplis from HTA Design and Tom Sweetman from DP9 attended the virtual meeting to give a presentation and respond to Members' questions and issues raised for further consideration prior to submission of a planning application.

The main issues raised at this meeting were as follows:

Principle of proposed development:

§  There was general support from Members for the type of development and accommodation proposed, though there were discussions around the use class and whether the accommodation should be C3 or sui-generis use.

§  Members welcomed the development being part of the community and was keen for it to integrate well into the community.

Function, nature, mix, quality and management of accommodation:

§  Members supported the type of unit accommodation which was considered to be of a better standard of accommodation than currently provided in the Borough for this type of accommodation, and additionally raised concerns around the length of time residence would occupy in the accommodation, which raised questions around the type of units.

Townscape and design:

§  There were positive comments from Members relating to the designs and the way it was evolving.

§  Members debated on whether the design should form a two or three-story building next door to the properties on Woodcroft Road was appropriate.

§  There was a lot of debate from Members around the car parking, though it was acknowledged that the balance of parking versus homes needed to be correct, reviewing other facilities within the borough to support this was recommended. Members also requested for the developer to provide pragmatic provision for cycle parking.

§  Further, Members would like to see that the development provided sufficient space for deliveries and waste storage.

Impacts on amenities of adjoining occupiers:

§  There were discussions around whether the developer would allow social distancing or wider areas within the communal spaces.

§  Members commented on the need for the community area and café to be opened to the wider area and questioned whether the area provided work space which should be sufficient for the number of occupants.

§  Members wanted to see access for the disabled, where people with disability had access to all parts of the building including exits.

Other considerations:

§  In light of the pandemic and the future, Members requested for technology to be introduced into the building within the public areas for residents to remain in touch with their loved ones.

§  Members would like to see the replacement of trees and urban greening and ecology provisions on the site to be provided within the development.

At 8:00pm the Planning Committee adjourned for a short break.

At 8:05pm the Planning Committee resumed the meeting.

Ward Member Councillor Stuart King was invited to share his local viewpoint on the development presentation.

The Chair thanked the applicants for their presentation, and looked forward to their application returning to the Committee at a later stage.