Birmingham City Council Planning Committee 04 July 2019
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Birmingham City Council Planning Committee 04 July 2019 I submit for your consideration the attached reports for the City Centre team. Recommendation Report No. Application No / Location / Proposal Refuse 9 2019/03182/PA 315 Summer Lane Aston Birmingham B19 3RH Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a four and six storey student housing scheme comprising 174 bed spaces with associated communal space and associated works Page 1 of 1 Strategic Director, Inclusive Growth Committee Date: 04/07/2019 Application Number: 2019/03182/PA Accepted: 29/04/2019 Application Type: Full Planning Target Date: 29/07/2019 Ward: Newtown 315 Summer Lane, Aston, Birmingham, B19 3RH Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a four and six storey student housing scheme comprising 174 bed spaces with associated communal space and associated works Recommendation Refuse 1. Proposal 1.2 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of existing buildings and erection of a four and six storey student housing scheme comprising 174 bed spaces with associated communal space and associated works (2,364sqm). 1.3 The proposed plans are for three linked blocks positioned alongside one another, in parallel with the Summer Lane frontage. The frontage block would be positioned on the edge of the pavement with a repositioned central access leading to the first of two inner courtyards, a single parking / loading-unloading space and a covered link to a second, six storey, block. The link would continue through the six storey middle, block into a second inner courtyard and on to a third, four storey block located on the westernmost part of the site. The third block would be partly set into the ground with a subterranean basement. The link would be repeated at upper levels providing a bridge between access towers, containing lifts and stairs, and the student bedrooms and living accommodation. 1.4 The proposed accommodation is shown arranged across the floors in a mixture of studio and cluster units, on a 30:70 ratio, with communal lounge areas, gym, cinema, and laundry, refuse and cycle storage located at ground floor /basement level. Provision is made for disabled students. All windows are shown located on the proposed east and west facing elevations leaving the north and south elevations blank. According to the Design and Access Statement this is to allow light to permeate the site and to safeguard the potential similar redevelopment of neighbouring sites. 1.5 The proposed buildings are shown constructed from brick with an aluminium flat roof and uPVC windows. 1.6 The 25 existing parking spaces are to be replaced by one accessible space and 42 cycle parking spaces. 1.7 The application is accompanied by a suite of supporting information and reports: - Design and Access Statement - Planning Statement - Noise Assessment Page 1 of 17 - Statement on Loss of Employment Land - Statement on Marketing - Student Needs Assessment - Ecological Impact Assessment - Transport Statement - Ground Contamination Desk Study - Environmental Noise Assessment - Air Quality Assessment - BREEAM Pre-Assessment Report - Sustainable Drainage (SuDS) Strategy 1.8 One letter in support of the application has been submitted with the application. It states:- ‘’Despite rigorous efforts to market the site for either occupancy, refurbishment or redevelopment the limitations of the site with regard to its condition, location and the availability of better premises in better locations has resulted in little interest, apart from limited, occasional and short term occupancy.’ 1.9 Link to Documents 2. Site & Surroundings 2.1 The application site is a rectangular shaped piece of land (0.24ha) with a relatively narrow frontage onto Summer Lane. The frontage is occupied by a two storey commercial building which provides the only access, vehicular and pedestrian, to the rear units and their parking / service yard. Ten commercial units surround the courtyard. Some are occupied; including one by a religious use (Use class category D2), others are currently vacant but most have B1 engineering and B8 warehousing uses. The buildings and the rear service yard/ parking court appear in a good state of repair. 2.2 The surrounding area is predominantly commercial in character with industrial and warehouse buildings on the eastern side of Summer Lane, opposite the frontage building, and backing onto the rear of the site from Brearley Street and Hospital Street, to the north and west respectively. 2.3 Only the southern part of the site is separated from the neighbouring uses by a 3-4m high brick boundary wall. On the opposite side of this is a hardstanding which is used as a car park and a children’s day nursery which occupies a large three storey former factory building. 2.4 The site lies within the designated Core Employment Area. 2.5 site location 3 Planning History 3.1 Ref 1998/02108/PA Retention of two 48 sheet illuminated advertisement signs Refused, allowed on appeal 14/05/1999 Page 2 of 17 4. Consultation/PP Responses 4.1 Lead Local Flood Authority –Given the information provided, the LLFA object to the proposed development. A Sustainable Drainage Strategy report has been submitted in support of this application, however the following points should be addressed:- - Where infiltration may be considered unviable, the LLFA require that all development (greenfield & brownfield) limit surface water discharge to the equivalent site-specific greenfield runoff rate for all return periods up to the 1 in 100 year plus climate change event. The LLFA does not accept the proposed discharge rate of 13l/s and as such this should be revised. The LLFA does accept 5l/s as a practicable minimum discharge rate. - The LLFA actively promote and encourage the implementation of SuDS on all developments, and require evidence of the use of sustainable drainage principles and exploration of suitable SuDS to achieve the key principles of SuDS; Quantity Control, Quality Control and Biodiversity & Amenity Value. It is expected that the discharge hierarchy has been followed and all opportunities to implement green/traditional SuDS have been undertaken and as far as reasonably practicable. Some consideration has been given to SuDS selection however a number of features have been discount without providing justification. As such, further justification is required and the LLFA recommends further consideration be given to the inclusion of small-scale SuDS such as rain-gardens into the landscaping. 4.2 Seven Trent Water - Have no objections to the proposals subject to the inclusion of conditions requiring submission, approval and implementation of drainage detail plans. Advise that there may be an adopted public sewer located within the application site which may not be built close to, directly over or be diverted without consent. 4.3 BCC Transport - No objection subject to conditions relating to crossing provision and bollards; implementation of cycle parking and requiring the Student Management Plan to be in place prior to first occupation. Comment that BCC car parking guidelines seek a maximum 23 parking spaces and minimum 44 cycle spaces. 4.4 BCC's Employment Team:- Seek the inclusion of Employment Obligations within the planning approval for this development. S106 agreement or employment conditions 4.5 BCC Regulatory Services:- The site is located within an area of largely industrial/commercial uses and this will have an impact on this development and the existing site use is industrial. There are three key potential impacts of this scheme - contaminated land, air quality and noise. Contaminated Land - the application is supported by a desk study that suggests that as the site has not been determined under Part 2A of the EPA'90 the site is low risk and concludes that contamination is unlikely. This is not accepted. The report further suggests possible further investigation - this can be dealt with by condition but the report does not fully scope the required investigation (for example we would require a ground gas and groundwater assessment) and we would expect a full intrusive investigation. Air Quality - the application is supported by an air quality assessment. This report is not accepted. It does not provide any effective assessment of possible air quality impacts on new receptors at the development site, does not include any real assessment of traffic flows or air quality and incorrectly states that the nearest Page 3 of 17 diffusion tubes (BHM 67 and 93) are below the air quality objective limits. This is not correct - the data for these tubes has always exceeded the limit and by up to 40%. This is not an acceptable air quality assessment. Noise - the application is supported by a noise assessment. The assessment fails to reference our PCGN guidance on noise assessments and does not make any assessment of potential industrial noise sources other than a statement that during a walk around the area no noise sources could be heard. The area has a distinctly industrial character and further details on local industry within the area and a thorough BS4142 assessment would be required to allow an effective assessment. The data provided on traffic noise is broadly consistent with our data sets. The report fails to provide an assessment of glazing performance required and although suggest air conditioning does not provide any further detail. Although the data is not provided in a summary form the report summarises that the 'It shows that the levels at the road side façade of the buildings would be around 71 in the daytime and 65 at night'. Assuming this refers to Laeq equivalent daytime and night-time this is very close to the levels included in the PCGN at which we would not support permission without a detailed design. I would expect additional monitoring to scope out the levels over a longer period, a noise mitigation design (ventilation, glazing and overheating assessments) and a thorough industrial noise assessment before I would be able to effectively assess this application.