Agenda item

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the erection of student accommodation (up to 7 storeys) comprising 29 cluster flats providing228 rooms with associated communal space, landscaping and parking

The report of the Chief Planning Officer referred to an application for erection of student accommodation (up to 7 storeys) comprising 29 cluster flats providing 228 rooms with associated communal space, landscaping and parking at Leeds Trinity University College, Brownberrie Lane, Horsforth, Leeds.

Members attended a site visit prior to the meeting.  Site plans and photographs were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion on this item.

Further issues highlighted in relation to the application included the following:

·  The University was looking to expand and additional accommodation was key to attracting students.

·  Reference to Ward Member and residents complaints – that the building was too close to existing properties and could lead to problems with noise disturbance and litter.

·  Members were shown details of arrangements for a replacement car parking on the site.

·  The proposed building would be at least 100 metres from the nearest residential property.

·  The University had a green travel plan.

·  Residents would have permits to park on the site and there would be funding for any necessary traffic regulation orders and payments towards public transport facilities.

·  There had not been any complaints about noise from the existing halls of residence on the site.

·  It was recommended that the application be deferred to the Chief Planning Officer for approval.

Local residents addressed the Panel.  Issues raised included the following:

·  The proposals were not sympathetic to the site and area.

·  There had been over 50 complaints including Horsforth Town Council and the local MP.

·  The height, massing and location should all be reconsidered.

·  The proposals would cause noise and light pollution to local residents.

·  Concerns regarding car parking in the area – many students used off site parking on local streets which caused problems for residents.

·  Problems with litter.

·  Concerns regarding the consultation process.

The applicant’s representatives addressed the Panel.  Issues raised included the following:

·  There had been three consultation events during the development of the proposals.

·  The University carried out annual parking surveys in relation to the travel plan and the numbers of students parking had reduced.

·  There had not been any problems with litter or noise and the University had a robust noise mitigation plan.

·  Traffic regulation orders could be used to prevent students parking on local street s and provide permits for local residents.

·  There were reciprocal parking arrangements with the local rugby club.

·  There was a community forum and meetings took place with local residents.

In response to comments and questions, the following was discussed:

·  Further concern regarding car parking and the impact of having additional students and staff at the site.  It was felt that the proposals would be sufficient for extra parking and it was suggested that an extra condition be attached to the application to monitor this position.

RESOLVED – That the application be deferred to the Chief Planning Officer for approval as per the officer recommendation outlined in the report and athat condition 17 be altered to include surveys and monitoring abd review of car parking provision to inform possible further mitigation if required.