Agenda item

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer for an outline application for the demolition of existing buildings to provide a new pathology facility including partial basement, new external waste compound, associated hard landscaping and access arrangements at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. St James Hospital, Beckett Street, Burmantofts, Leeds.

(Report attached)

 The report of the Chief Planning Officer presented an outline planning application for the demolition of existing buildings to provide a new Pathology Facility including partial basement, new external waste compound, associated hard landscaping and access arrangements, at St James University Hospital, Beckett Street, Burmantofts, Leeds.

This application was presented to the North and East Plans Panel following an earlier pre-application presentation to Members at a meeting held in November 2019. Members had made a number of comments at that meeting and had also requested that the formal planning application be brought to North and East Plans Panel for consideration.

The scheme was submitted in outline and seeks to demolish the existing vacant buildings to provide a new Pathology Facility. Only the means of access had formally been applied for at this stage.  However indicative plans had been provided.

The site is located to the rear of the main site of St James Hospital with a residential area of terraced houses located adjacent to the north side of the site.

The Panel were shown photographs, maps and drawings throughout the presentation. Members had been on a site visit at the pre-application stage in November 2019.

Referenced in the submitted report were a number of listed buildings which form part of the NHS Trust’s property portfolio. It was noted that the proposed site was not near these buildings. It was also noted that an oak tree within the proposed site had been referenced within the report.

Members were provided with the following information:

·  Adjacent terraced houses have gables some of the these gables do have windows which face directly on to the site;

·  The site slopes downwards and so some elements would be used as an undercroft for the proposed building;

·  There will be spaces provided for deliveries to the facility;

·  The elevations indicate a two storey building with part of the building to be single storey;

·  The Coach House to the side of the proposed building would be retained;

·  The proposed building is indicatively shown to be circa 27 metres away from existing houses which is much more than existing;

·  Officers had expressed no serious concerns in relation to parking;

·  There would be some tree loss on this site;

·  This application would require a section 106 agreement;

·  There were no third party comments to the proposal;

·  Cllr Grahame, the Ward Member had made comments as referred to at paragraph 12 of the submitted report. These comments had been addressed in the report.

There were no speakers for this application. However, Jonathan Standen (the agent) and Mike Bacon (from the Trust) and Javid Hussain (highway consultant) attended the meeting to answer any questions from Members.

In response to Members questions to officers, the Plans Panel were provided with the following information:

·  The green wall suggested by Members at the November 2019 meeting was acknowledged and officers would continue to negotiate on this alongside details for landscaping;

·  Members requested that a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) be put on the large oak tree within the site. It was noted that this would be dealt with outside of this application. Advice was provided to officers that the cypress tree should be removed so as not to impact on the oak tree;

·  The noise and dust would be dealt with by way of a condition which would require adherence to a Construction Management Plan, including outlining construction hours of work and damping down to restrict dust;

·  There had been two consultation events and a leaflet drop to the surrounding area at the pre-application stage. There had also been a second leaflet drop to local residents providing contact details. It was noted that residents in the area may not have English as a first language and leaflets should be provided in different languages in any future consultations;

·  For each tree moved from a development site, three more trees should be planted in accordance with the Council’s 3:1 tree replacement policy. The Agent assured Members that this part of the site was currently ‘unloved’, such that the development proposed would bring benefits and added value with landscaping and planting of trees;

The Chair suggested there was a need to keep quality assets and that a Capital Asset Value for Amenity Trees (CAVAT) be carried out on the oak tree.

It was noted that a condition giving clear direction for a green wall can be added to the decision. A direction can also be included to provide clear guidance regarding the design of the building.

Members were advised that the TPO would be pursued.

Members were advised that the area already has TROs, but that these can be reviewed and the s106 Agreement could be used to secure further contribution(s) from the applicant if there was a need for further restrictions.

RESOLVED – To defer and delegate to the Chief Planning Officer as set out in the summited report with additional guidance as follows:

·  A CAVAT assessment be undertaken in respect of the oak tree and that it be retained as part of the detailed scheme;

·  A green wall to be detailed within the landscaping condition;

·  Review of parking requirements (with introduction of further off-site restrictions if required);

·  Direction added to ensure the development to be of good quality design and build.

In addition, the Panel instructed officers to progress a TPO for the Oak tree