Agenda item

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding a new build residential care home.

 

 

Prior to the start of this application Cllr. Coulson informed the Panel that the nursery on Ratcliffe Lane was private and not in Council ownership and indicated in the report.

 

The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an application for a new build care home on the site of the former Musgrave Court care home.

 

Members noted updates to the conditions as follows:

·  Condition 13 Travel Plan implementation to include a monitoring fee;

·  Condition 23 Reinstatement of redundant footpath crossings also to include the need for vehicle crossings

 

Members were also asked to note further representations from Stuart Andrew MP who raised concerns in regard to the proposed number of patients to be cared for at the home and of the scale of the proposals.

 

Cllr. Richard Lewis had also raised concerns in regard to the mass of the proposed building and access issues along Ratcliffe Lane.

 

Members were informed that the previous care home of 36 beds had been demolished in 2014 as it was deemed not economically viable for the Council to run and the land had been sold.

 

Members had visited the site earlier in the day. Plans and photographs were shown throughout the presentation.

 

Members were requested to note the change in levels in the area and the mature trees in the area and on the site.

 

10.10 of the submitted report was brought to the Panel’s attention which set out the measurements of the proposed building with the boundaries of neighbouring properties.

 

The Panel was informed of the following points:-

·  The build was to be part 2.5 storey, and part 3 storey comprising of 86 bed spaces;

·  Floors to be reached via 2 staircases or 2 lifts, the housing for the lifts would be in the loft space;

·  The loft space would be used for staff area and laundry;

·  The build would be stone with a slate style roof;

·  5 trees would have to be removed to allow access to parking area, the trees are not protected;

·  Car parking for 27 cars which would include 2 disabled bays 1 car share space,1 electric vehicle space, bay for ambulance and space for moteorcycles and bicycles;

·  Access to parking taken off Crawshaw Road;

·  Refuse vehicle would need to reverse into site.

 

 

Members were informed that car parking did fall 2 spaces short however, it was similar to other care homes in Leeds.

 

Members were also informed that the applicant had worked with officers on the design of the building to break up the roof line to alleviate the dominance over neighbouring buildings.

 

Graham Oak, Professor Mike Stein and Emma Firbank were at the meeting speaking against the recommendation they informed the Panel of the following points:-

·  The proposal contravened guidelines set out in the Supplementary Planning Design Guide for this type of building;

·  No conservation officer report although it had been requested and reassurance that there would be one;

·  Only two storey buildings in the area;

·  Loft space unnecessary so could reduce height;

·  Laundry services could be provided elsewhere;

·  Highways guidelines had stipulated that all vehicles should be able to access and leave site forward facing;

·  No ventilation was shown on plans for mechanical systems which would be required;

·  No materials had been specified;

·  Reference to coverage by foliage was misleading as the building would dwarf the lower trees and bushes;

·  New care home would be an increase of 136% in residency;

·  30% increase in height;

·  The proposal would change from a care and caring home with strong community links to a large institution;

·  Increase in traffic and associated air pollution, air pollution had not been addressed in the report;

·  Increase in parking on Crawshaw Road and surrounding streets which already has limited parking pace and limited parking at town centre car parks; and

·  Safety concerns due to increase in traffic especially with service vehicles using single track road to access the site.

 

Professor Stein said that he had lived in the area a number of years and speaking to neighbours they were in favour of replacing the care home with another care home. They recognised the needs of an aging population but felt that the proposed building was too big, too high, too institutionalised and too overwhelming.

 

Gary Kettlewell and Richard Burrows agents for the applicant informed the Members of the following points:-

·  Angela Swift Development have purpose built care homes in the North;

·  All homes rated good or excellent with the Care Quality Commission;

·  As an operator they have a duty of care to the Care Quality Commission and to residents to ensure financial viability;

·  In the past 5 years 126 care homes had closed in the North with only 43 new builds to replace them;

·  The growing need for dementia care and the plan for this home to have specialist dementia care facilities;

·  80 people to be employed at the home covering a 24 hour period with most employed from the local area as is their policy;

·  Employment of local people most of whom live in walking distance so would negate the need to use car and car parking spaces;

·  Family run business which see the home as part of the community providing local employment and using services of local businesses;

·  Large vehicles would not be used to service the home;

·  Potential contractors for build are number one in the country for considerate construction scheme and have received awards for work in the community;

·  Discussions had taken place with officers and it was noted that C2 use was acceptable for this site;

·  Agreed parking levels were acceptable;

·  The home is close to the Town Centre with reasonable transport provision;

·  Scale and height of the building had been reduced following negotiations with officers;

·  Impact on conservation area had been addressed at point 10.19 to 10.22 of the submitted report;

·  Access off Crawshaw Road was deemed as acceptable;

·  The refuse vehicle can exit the site in a forward gear.

 

Members discussed at length the following issues:-

·  Consultation with local residents;

·  The demographics of the area;

·  Viability of less bed spaces;

·  Reduction in scale and height if building;

·  Car parking on the site;

·  Car parking in the surrounding area;

·  Access for larger commercial vehicles;

·  Number of staff to be employed at the care home including how many on site at one time and facilities for them such as parking.

 

At the conclusion of discussions Members were agreed that further negotiations were need in relation to this site and that Ward Members should be invited to join the negotiations.

 

RESOLVED – To defer the application for further negotiations to reduce the massing and dominance.

 

 

Cllr. Bentley joined the meeting during this item.