Agenda item

Demolition of Kepier House & erection of 35 apartments with associated external works

The Committee considered a report of the Senior Planning Officer regarding the demolition of Kepier House and erection of 35 apartments with associated external works(for copy see file of Minutes).

The Senior Planning Officer provided the Committee with a detailed presentation which included photographs of the site and a plan of the proposed layout.  Members were advised that the number of parking spaces referred to in the report should reflect 36 and not 47.

In response to a query from Councillor J Clark, the Senior Planning Officer clarified that 25 parking spaces would be underground and the remaining 11 would be situated at street level.

Councillor Freeman moved refusal of the application. He felt the proposed design was not in keeping with surrounding properties, with the proposed development to be up to 4 storey’s high, whereas surrounding properties were only a maximum of 2 storey’s. As such, he felt that the development would overshadow other properties and furthermore the proposed flat roof would be the only one in The Sands. He further felt that the design was not innovative.

Councillor Freeman contested the suggestion within the report that the design was not dissimilar to that which was proposed previously. He highlighted that the previous proposals had been for 16 apartments, town houses and the preservation of Kepier House. The current proposal was for a development twice the size with the demolition of Kepier House.

In relation to traffic, Councillor Freeman suggested that 35, 2 bed apartments would demand 70 parking spaces, he therefore stated that he did not wish to see residents with an entitlement to street park on Ferens Close.

The Highways Officer clarified that no parking permits would be given to residents of the new development and any visitors to the apartments would be required to use pay and display facilities.

In response to a query from Councillor A Bell, the Senior Planning Officer clarified for developments within the city, a S106 agreement would be set at £1000 per dwelling and so to request more than that would not comply with policy. Furthermore it had been agreed that to request a proportion of affordable housing would not be viable.

Councillors Lethbridge and Moir expressed disappointment that there would be no provision of affordable housing. Councillor Moir highlighted that far from anything being conserved in the area, what was being proposed was a greater critical mass in The Sands and the loss of a historic building within the Conservation Area. He disliked the design choice and he queried what recreational facilities could be proposed at The Sands from the S106 monies. He seconded the motion for refusal of the application.

Councillor Kay asked whether the level of £1000 per dwelling mentioned was on a county wide basis and the Solicitor replied that it varied at the present time due to the 7 former district Local Plans.

Councillor Conway also raised concerns regarding the lack of affordable housing. He felt it should be included as current relative market values would make affordable housing more viable than back in 2004.

A representative for the developer was in attendance at the meeting. In response to Members concerns, he clarified that the initial cost of the land coupled with poor ground conditions, meant that affordable housing was not viable. He further advised that there had not been any proposals for affordable housing in the 2004 application.

Councillor Freeman clarified that the reasons for refusal were that the application was contrary to paragraph 14 of NPPF Part 7, Local Plan Policies H13 and Q8, and Policies 15 and 18 of the emerging County Durham Plan.

The Senior Planning Officer showed the Committee the previous scheme as put forward in 2004, by way of comparison. Councillor Freeman stood by his reasons and he therefore moved refusal of the application which was seconded by Councillor Moir.  Councillor Kay also moved the Officer’s recommendation for approval and that was seconded by Councillor Shaw.   Upon a vote being taken on the proposal to refuse, this was voted down on the Chairman’s casting vote.  The proposal to approve was then voted upon and carried on the Chairman’s casting vote. 

Resolved:

That the application be approved subject to the conditions in the report and a S106 Agreement to secure the payment of £1000 per dwelling for open space/recreational facilities and public art.