Agenda item

Report of Head of Planning

(copy herewith)

Ward: Castle

Councillor Yates left the meeting in accordance with his declaration of interest set out in minute 4 above.

The Head of Planning submitted a report in respect of application no N/2012/0067, elaborated thereon and referred to the Addendum that set out the effects of the NPPF on the application, an amended reason if the application were to be approved taking into account the NPPF, four further representations about the application, comments from the Environment Agency and Anglian Water and comments from the Highway Authority including additional conditions. He reported that two further representations from residents had been received. The Head of Planning described the development of the site from 1740 to present and emphasised the elevations for each side of the site and also emphasised the steps taken to mitigate the daylight effect on residents in Bloomsbury House. He believed that the final proposal represented a better solution than if the normally accepted standard in respect of daylight had been agreed. The Head of Planning noted the Highway Authority improvements to Swan Street and St John’s Street to make them two-way were part of a wider scheme of road improvements not related to this application. He commented that the principle of residential development of the site was established but it was not possible for planning to differentiate between different types of residential development.

Mrs Hallissey, on behalf of residents of Bloomsbury House, Guildhall Road and Victoria Promenade, commented that she was not adverse to student accommodation in the town centre but queried whether this was the right location for it. She referred to Policy H21 of the Northampton Local Plan that proposed that there should be a mixed development of the site that included some residential use. She believed that this proposal would lead to a lack of privacy, light and peace for existing residents; Bloomsbury House had been designed to be predominately south facing to take advantage of the topography but this would now be nullified. Mrs Hallissey commented that the Highway proposals for Swan Street and St John’s Street would create a rat run and that residents of Bloomsbury house had already lost the use of St John’s Multi Storey Car Park. She believed that the scale of the proposal had been dictated by the need to have a financially viable scheme. In answer to questions Mrs Hallissey commented that only those residents who had bought a car park space with their flat were able to use the underground car park at Bloomsbury House; other tenants at Bloomsbury House had acquired a ten year lease of parking spaces at St John’s Multi Storey Car Park but these had come to an end; some residents did currently use St John’s surface car park; and residents amenity at Bloomsbury House would be effected by looking out onto bricks and windows rather than the existing open aspect.

Mr Richardson, a local businessman, stated that his business interests in the Town Centre were likely to benefit from this proposal, however, notwithstanding this, he was opposed to it. There was an expectation that the Council wanted this development and the University wanted it but he believed that it was not in the public interest for it to go ahead. He commented that other town centre car parks were due to close such as at Angel Street, Albion Place and the Plough Hotel and that such a combined loss of car parking within the town centre ring road was not in the best interests of the vibrancy and development of the Town Centre. He believed that history would judge harshly if this application were to be approved. Mr Richardson stated that the Council was wrong to “sell the family silver” merely to fill a financial black hole. He referred to the car park survey that showed that there were 1,800 unused car park spaces in the Town Centre; he believed that this revealed not that there were too many car park spaces provided but rather that the retail offer in the Town Centre was not good enough. Good Town Centre parking was needed rather than building on it.             Mr Richardson stated that student accommodation should be located at one of the alternative sites that had been suggested for it. In answer to questions Mr Richardson stated that there were limited car parks in the Town Centre and given a choice people seemed to prefer surface car parking; that if the Town’s population were to expand as predicted then all the car parking that could be found would be needed; that it was his belief that the loss of car parking would affect the Royal and Derngate Theatres; that a lot of effort was being made into improving the Town Centre and the prospect in the report of CCTV cameras, security staff and bouncers lowered the tone; and that whilst the St John’s Multi Storey Car Park might be able to cope with the loss of parking from the surface car park in the short term, it would not be adequate in the longer term.     

Councillor Stone, as a Ward Councillor, commented that she was representing constituents whose views she had taken seriously. She noted that the report referred to inclusion but the existing demographic of surrounding residents was already very broad taking in an age range from young to old and tenures from owner occupiers through rented to social housing. She believed that the proposal would be a ghettoised development forcing people out from around the edges; the surrounding streets would not be safe. CCTV cameras were already being planned to counter anti-social behaviour. Councillor Stone commented that this was a gateway site that should invite people into the Town Centre: this proposal would not do that. It was more likely to chase existing residents out. This area would become more difficult to manage. She noted that there would be 35 windows overlooking existing homes that would be detrimental to existing residents’ amenity.

Councillor Strachan, as a Ward Councillor, commented that a number of comments had been made of the proposals and changes had been made to the design, materials, lighting and landscaping of this scheme. There remained some highways issues including the safety of pedestrians; the development would not slow traffic coming down Guildhall Road. He had recently observed a person in a disabled electric chair have difficulty in crossing Guildhall Road. Councillor Strachan commented that there was a need to give young people the skills that were needed for jobs in the future and also to create those jobs. New technologies had to be explored. The University was a starting point for this. He commented that he supported the proposal in principle. In answer to a question Councillor Strachan stated that he did not believe that the proposal would ghettoise the area.    

Mr Rowley, the Agent, stated that the site was important and was allocated for development as a sustainable brownfield site. The University had a pressing need for student accommodation and this was a good site for it: bringing people and extra spend into the Town Centre. They had worked hard to meet the Officers concerns to mitigate the effects on existing residents by the clever use of design and materials. The development was seen as a long term project and the development would he closely monitored; there would be security staff on site, a named contact for neighbours and students would have to adhere to a code of conduct. The University wanted the scheme to  work for neighbours as well. In answer to questions Mr Rowley commented that a decision as to when the main entrance doors would close had yet to be made but was likely to be around 9 or 10pm, entry after this would be through a key fob mechanism; that the University had considered other sites but had concentrated on those allocated for development; that he had sympathy with existing residents but the site was allocated for development; that there had been two public consultations that had included the management of the development and the results of these had been built into the proposals set out in the report; and that he would be happy to discuss with the University the creation of a management committee to work with residents notwithstanding the contact point that was already provided for.    

Professor Petford, Vice Chancellor Northampton University, commented that this proposal was critical for the University. The University had a turnover of £100m, employed 1,100 people and had 15,000 students. It was committed to Northampton and viewed their success and that of the Town and County as the same. He observed that other Universities in nearby towns and cities were spending large sums of money on developments in their respective town and city centres. It was important for the University to develop and enhance the skills base for Northamptonshire; it also needed to be attractive to students to want to come here. Two public consultations on the proposals had been carried out and the results of which had been taken into account in the proposals now before the Committee. Arrangements would be put into place to ensure that students took responsibility for their own behaviour. Professor Petford understood that the Royal and Derngate Theatres supported the application. He commented that the University took its community role very seriously and gave his personal guarantee to make the management of the site work. In answer to questions Professor Petford commented that projected figures of the reduction of student numbers did not effect this proposal as the accommodation could be filled five times over; that cars could not be brought onto the site and it was commonplace for Universities to ban cars from halls of residence; that the incidence of bad behaviour by students was no greater than in the general population and that there would be 24hr onsite security; there would not be bouncers as had been rumoured; that the University was keen to work with residents; that students would have 24 hour access to the building and that Sheffield and Ipswich were examples of where similar developments had brought benefits to the local economy across a wide range of goods and services; that students would get to the main campuses via bus, cycling or walking and that a transportation plan was being discussed with the County Council; and that the University had a good reputation for getting students to volunteer to help charities and other organisations as a way of integrating with the Town.

The Head of Planning commented that paragraph 8.17 referred to the car parking issues, paragraph 8.20 and onwards referred to the management of the site and paragraphs 8.5 to 8.12 referred to the status of the site as brownfield land. He reminded the Committee that it needed to consider the application in terms of the proposed site and confirmed that the Royal and Derngate Theatres had not expressed any adverse comment on the application. He also noted that it was relatively unusual for a University Town not to have halls of residence in the town centre.            

The Committee discussed the application.

RESOLVED: (1)  That the application be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report as amended by the NPPF and the additional conditions and amendment set out in the Addendum as the proposed development would respect the character and appearance of the setting of adjoining Derngate Conservation Area, Statutory and locally listed buildings, would not significantly adversely affect impact upon the amenities of surrounding residential occupiers and would not be prejudicial to highway safety. For these reasons, the proposal would comply with the thrust of saved policies D29, E9, E20 of the Northampton Local Plan, Central Area Action Plan Pre Submission Policies 2, 17 & 21, West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Pre Submission and conforms with the NPPF.

(2)         That the County Council's Transportation Department be advised of the need to consult with local Councillors / residents and business on the proposed highway improvement works along St John’s Street / Swan Street / Guildhall Road and on any proposed future bus rerouting or siting of bus stops in the vicinity and the Draft Parking Strategy.