Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which sets out details of an outline planning application including the demolition of the former nurses' home and other buildings and the construction of new adult and children's healthcare facilities, a multi-storey car park, new access and egress points into hospital grounds with landscaping at the Leeds General Infirmary, Great George Street, Leeds, LS1 3EX.

(Report attached)

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which set out details of an outline planning application, including the demolition of the former nurses home and other buildings and the construction of new adult and children’s healthcare facilities, a multi-storey car park, new access and egress points into hospital grounds with landscaping at the Leeds General Infirmary, Great George Street, Leeds, LS1 3EX.

Members visited the site prior to the meeting.  Site photographs and plans were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

Planning Officers addressed the Panel, speaking in detail about the proposal and highlighted the following:

·  Site/ location/context

·  New upgraded health facility for Leeds and the North of England region

·  Creation of a new adult and children’s service health facility, linked building, a new multi storey car park, new access and egress points and landscaping scheme.

·  Some buildings have historic / architectural merit

·  Some buildings being decommissioned for future development

·  Off-site highway works

·  Vehicular routes

·  Drop off areas

·  Pedestrian routes

·  Massing/ elevations/ materials

·  Townscape impact

·  Key views

Members raised the following questions to officers:

·  The design concept, as demonstrated within the presentation, was it likely to be an accurate representation

·  Is the development likely to achieve a BREEAM excellence rating

·  Had there been any discussions with WYCA in respect of the pick-up and drop-off areas

·  Height differential between the proposed new development and the existing Brotherton Wing

·  The proposed new development would be twice the height of the existing Brotherton Wing, therefore a quality design and materials would be very important

·  Could some thought be given to the patient experience and assistance in getting around the building, particularly when distances between different hospital departments was likely to be considerable

·  What was proposed for the open space/ green space and relaxation areas

·  What was the timescale for the development and subsequent opening/ operation of different elements of the new facility

·  The Calverley Street/ Portland Way Junction is very busy, are there any plans to upgrade it

·  Was there potential for the City’s Park & Ride services to access and service the new facility

·  Decommissioned buildings/ empty buildings could be unattractive, what was envisaged for these buildings, what was the Masterplan

·  One Member expressed concern about the size of the multi storey car park (650 spaces)

·  One Member queried whether the provision of secure cycle spaces (100 spaces) was sufficient 

·  Consideration and monitoring of air quality around the new development, particularly having regard to controlling smoking around main hospital entrances and on the site as a whole

In responding to the issues raised, Planning Officers/ the applicant’s representatives said:

·  Members were informed that the design was a representation based on the design parametres for the outline application.  The internal designs shown on the ‘fly-through’ were also illustrations of what it is hoped will be achieved . The full design details will be informed by a design brief and competition and will be secured via a procurement process.

·  Members were informed that the vision was to push the sustainable design and construction agenda and to meet the requirements of Policies EN1 and EN2.

·  The nature of the building’s use inevitably means that it has a heightened energy consumption, but there is an aim to ensure the development is sustainable while also meeting all the relevant clinical aims and requirements.

·  The aim of the applicant is to ensure that, in both design and sustainability, there is innovation and an ability to respond to future changes and developments within the market.  As much remains to be determined in the longer-term as part of the design competition and ongoing development process, the applicant is aware of the need to ‘future proof’ so that the development can respond to innovation over time.

·  Members were informed that that there were currently 6 bus stops in the vicinity of the LGI, there was also a staff shuttle bus service operating between the LGI and St James’s Hospital.  WYCA had indicated that this was sufficient at this stage, but, it was accepted that further discussions were required with WYCA to understand existing provision and to identify future provision (Possible Park and Ride Facilities).

·  The Architect said the new development would be 13 storey’s in height, but that there was also a change in levels that accounts for 2-3 storeys. This was a very important building and the developers were keen to deliver a high quality design.

·  It is intended the Design Brief which would form part of the design competition would emphasise the importance of these being ‘strong’ buildings and how important the design is, such that the buildings created would be innovative but also reflect their surroundings.  The overall design would return to Panel via the reserved matters approval process.

·  The Architect said the main entrance to the building had been centralised, and the new multi storey car park was also located close by.  This was intended to strengthen the patient experience and enable increased staff assistance to be provided to patients where required.

·  Members were informed that a landscape strategy would come forward in due course.  There was an awareness that public realm and greenspace provision surrounding the hospital was currently lacking.  While the built-up nature of the site and its City Centre location creates difficulties with this, good public and open space provision is a key driver behind the redevelopment.

·  The applicant suggested that the development would be operational by the end of 2025.

·  The applicant indicated that the plan was to open both the children’s and adult’s facilities as one joined hospital in terms of functionality, particularly as there will be a link between the two on upper floors.  However, there will be some departments that then open on a staggered basis thereafter.

·  The LCC Highway Officer reported that the junction layout would remain the same, but additional crossing points would be created, new signals would also be provided together with changes to lane allocations and Kerb lines.  Access would not be brought back to Panel as it was not a reserved matter, but the changes outlined were what the consultants and Highway Officers felt was deliverable within the parameters and restrictions imposed by the site’s City Centre location.

·  The applicant suggested the surplus estate was a regeneration area, so could possibly incorporate Med Tech Research Facilities and other uses complimenting the hospital.  A number of parties could be involved with that (e.g. Universities and other partners) and this was part of long-term and ongoing discussions.

·  Previous proposals for the site had included residential use within the decommissioned buildings.  This remained a possible part of the overall development proposal / masterplan for the site, but much discussion was still needed in the longer-term about how the surplus 5 hectares on the LGI estate would be used – to ensure a vibrancy of use, but one that was also complimentary to the hospital functions.

·  Members were informed that the hospital was a major trauma centre and so would attract patients/ visitors from a wide area, many arriving by car and taxi. The central location of the main entrance, the drop off areas and the multi storey car park would all contribute to easing traffic flow and reducing City Centre congestion, potentially avoiding vehicles circling surrounding roads to secure parking.

·  The multi storey car park would be fitted with the number of electric vehicle charging points as required under policy.

·  The shuttle bus and travel subsidies are already offered for LGI staff.  In addition, there are currently 95 secure cycle spaces – so the number proposed as part of the development was an increase on this.  In addition, there would be the creation of a cycle hub, bringing together cycle storage and repair / maintenance facilities.

·  There was a delicate balance to be ‘struck’ between creating somewhere that does not feel like a hospital for long-term patients, but that does meet clinical needs and also satisfies the requirements of short-term or day patients who perhaps require a more clinical and functional space to be provided.

·  All NHS sites were designated no smoking.  While this becomes hard to enforce, a strengthening of the approach is something that will aim to be addressed via the redevelopment.

·  Draft Condition 6 aims to ensure appropriate air quality monitoring and mitigation as part of the redevelopment.

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

·  All Members were supportive of the proposal, suggesting the concept was going in the right direction and once complete would be transformational.

·  It was accepted by the majority of Members that a multi storey car park was essential, given this was a major trauma centre.

·  Close attention must be paid to ensuring innovative and high-quality design, but that is sympathetic to surrounding buildings and the LGI’s place within the wider civic and education quarter.  Attention would also need to be paid to preserving historic views and sight-lines.

·  A number of Members expressed concern about the Calverley Street/ Portland Way junction layout suggesting a further look at the layout was required to provide improved pedestrian crossing facilities. Officers agreed to do this before determination of the application.

The Chair thanked the developers for their attendance and presentation, commenting that once complete this would be a world class facility. He suggested that Members appeared to be supportive of the application. It was requested that the applicant keeps all Members of the Council fully informed with progress, particularly in view of this coming forward as a leading healthcare facility and important development for the city as a whole.

RESOLVED –

(i)  That the application be deferred and delegated to the Chief Planning Officer for approval subject to further consideration of the pedestrian crossing arrangements for the Calverley Street/Portland Way junction, the conditions specified in Appendix 1 of the submitted report (and any others which he may considers appropriate) and subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the following obligations:

·  The employment and training of local people

·  The provision of publicly accessible areas

·  A Travel Plan fee of £24,000.00

·  A contribution of £15,000.00 towards any Traffic Regulations Orders found to be required on Calverley Street

(ii)  In the event of the Section 106 Agreement having not been completed within 3 months of the resolution to grant planning permission, the final determination of the application shall be delegated to the Chief Planning Officer.