Agenda item

Alterations and refurbishment of Guildhall complex to create conference rooms, meeting rooms and offices, refurbishment and part rebuild of existing south range to provide cafe and ancillary accommodation, and erection of extension on north side of complex to form restaurant and office accommodation.

[Guildhall Ward]

Consideration was given to a major full application by the City of York Council for the alteration and refurbishment of the Guildhall complex to create conference rooms, meeting rooms and offices, refurbishment and part rebuild of the existing south range to provide a cafe and ancillary accommodation, and the erection of an extension on the north side of the complex to form a restaurant and office accommodation.

 

Officers circulated an update which covered both this and the following listed building application which confirmed that:

·        Condition 2 required amendment to include a number of plan references

·        York Civic Trust had submitted a further response maintaining their objections to the proposals owing to their impact on 10-14 Lendal

·        Two further letters of objection received expressing concern in relation to the Guildhall building, specifically the additional opening, the proposed draught lobby and the proposed alterations to the existing screen and dais

·        Historic England’s supportive comments of the principle of the development subject to a number of points relating to the dais screen and seating, gutter details, glass roof over the southern courtyard and the new porch

·        A3 colour plans, diagrams and visualisations of the Guildhall complex were also circulated

 

Members then questioned a number of points arising from the update, including:

·        The reasons behind the delisting of the garages which it was explained had been a statutory process to exclude the 1930’s garages from the listing

·        Heritage statement and conservation plan for the Guildhall complex; it was confirmed that the statement had formed the basis for initial discussions and had recently been updated, however a conservation plan had not been produced

·        Accessibility at both ends of the complex

·        During construction and demolition works compliance with the hours of operation to protect local residents

·        Security of civic party, which it was confirmed would be assessed as part of the management plan

 

The Council’s Legal Officer reminded Members of their need to consider the planning balance and give significant weight to the importance and preservation of the listed building and its setting and the character and appearance of the conservation area even if the harm to the building was considered less than substantial.

 

Guy Bowyer, representing the York Conservation Trust, spoke in objection to the scheme, highlighting its impact on the Grade II building at 10-14 Lendal. He referred to the impact of the northern extension and to the affect on the residential amenity of occupants of the flats by virtue of the loss of daylight and the riverside aspect and the loss of privacy by virtue of noise pollution.

 

Honorary Alderman David Horton, also spoke in objection to the scheme, in particular to the lack of consultation, the demolition of the Mansion House garages and proposed alterations to the dais and formation of a new south side entrance to the Guildhall. He requested Members to reject the current scheme.

 

Honorary Alderman Brian Watson, also spoke in objection expressing his concern at the current scheme for the complex. He felt that the proposals would not enhance the Guildhall, in particular his concerns regarding proposals for the dais, the new access and the removal of the garages from the Guildhall Yard.

 

David Ruddock, a local resident spoke of his interest in the works and to his objection to the scheme, particularly the details provided for the additional doorway from the Guildhall and the loss of the existing dais and screen.

 

David Fraser, spoke as Chief Executive of the York Civic Trust to confirm the Trust’s involvement from the inception development and to express his support for earlier proposals. He referred however to the number of drawing variations since December which the Trust had had insufficient time to consider which meant that the Trust were therefore unable to support the current application.

 

David Warburton spoke as the Council’s Project Manager on the Guildhall project confirming his involvement in the project since 2013. He referred to the deterioration of the current complex and the need for updating and reuse of the building whilst also retaining its civic use and provide security for the future of the complex. He referred to ongoing discussions and management arrangements to cover the usage of the space and operational links with the Guildhall and Mansion House.

 

Members went on to raise a number of questions in relation to the earlier speakers’ comments, including:

·        The consultation undertaken on the various schemes

·        Withdrawal of support from the Civic Trust

·        Details of the design of the new screen and its prevention of noise

·        Catering for large events

·        Operational use of the Guildhall Yard

·        Accessible access

 

Aidan Ridyard addressed the Committee as the lead Architect for the project referring to the unique building and the need for continuity of the civic function whilst providing a flexible modern workplace. He outlined the various uses proposed including the provision of a civic and event space within the central section of the building which would revitalise the site.

 

Charles Storr spoke as Business Growth Manager at Make it York referring to the central location of the building and its current underuse. He confirmed Make it York’s support for the development and the provision of high quality office space for which there was a strong demand from small businesses.

 

Members questioned a number of additional points including:

·        Disabled access to all areas

·        Vertical orientation of windows in the first floor cafe area

·        Creation of the new lobby area at the entrance to the Guildhall

·        Assurances regarding demand for office space

·        Importance of finding a long term future for the building

·        Affect on amenity of future residents in Lendal

·        Concerns regarding garaging of Lord Mayor’s vehicles on site

·        Design should be based on a Planning Brief developed with key stakeholder

·        Availability of rooms prior to future Council meetings

 

Following further lengthy discussion Cllr Galvin moved refusal, which was seconded by Cllr Shepherd on the grounds of:

·        Harm to a listed building with the insertion of a doorway in the southern wall

·        Harm to the Guildhall with the removal of the dais

·        Removal of the garages which have a use by future Lord Mayors

·        Harm caused by reasons of overlooking of 10-14 Lendal

 

On being put to the vote the motion was lost.

 

Cllr Galvin then moved and Cllr Richardson seconded the inclusion, in any approval, of a condition to state that the garages should not be demolished until such time as a cafe operator had been appointed. On being put to the vote this motion was also lost.

 

Cllr Reid then moved the Officer recommendation for approval subject to the updated list of conditions and revision of the informative relating to the management arrangements for the usage of the Guildhall Yard, which was seconded by Cllr Cuthbertson and on being put to the vote it was

 

Resolved:  That subject to the expiry of the consultation period in relation to the amended plans and no new planning issues being raised, delegated authority be given to the Assistant Director of Planning and Public Protection to approve the application subject to the conditions listed in the report and the following amended conditions and informative:

 

Amended Condition 2.

AL(0)0100.P1 

AL(0)0101.P2 Block Plan

AL(0)1000.P1 Proposed Roof Plan in Context

AL(0)1200.P3 Proposed Site Plan

AL(0)1300.P8 Proposed Basement Plan

AL(0)1310.P4 Proposed Basement Plan - Referenced

AL(0)1400.P16 Proposed Ground Floor Plan

AL(0)1410.P9 Proposed Ground Floor Plan - Referenced

AL(0)1500.P11 Proposed First Floor Plan

AL(0)1510.P5 Proposed First Floor Plan - Referenced

AL(0)1600.P14 Proposed Second Floor Plan

AL(0)1610.P7 Proposed Second Floor Plan - Referenced

AL(0)1700.P14 Proposed Tower Plan

AL(0)1710.P7 Proposed Tower Plan – Referenced

AL(0)1900.P11 Proposed River Front Elevation

AL(0)1901.P9 Proposed North Annexe Elevation From Boat Yard

AL(0)1903.P6 Proposed River Front Elevation In Context

AL(0)1910.P8 Proposed South Range Elevation From Revs Bar

AL(0)1911.P7 Proposed Guildhall Elevation From Common Hall Yard

AL(0)1950.P8 Proposed Section AA - North Range

AL(0)1952.P5 Proposed Section CC - Secondary Entrance

AL(0)1953.P7 Proposed Section DD - South Range Café/entrance

AL(0)1954.P10 Proposed Section EE 1 (north)

AL(0)1955.P8 Proposed Section EE 2 (south)

AL(0)1956.P4 Proposed Section FF

AL(0)1960.P7 Proposed Section JJ - Council Chamber

AL(0)1963.P11 Proposed Section MM - Restaurant

AL(0)1964.P9 Proposed Section NN - North Annexe From Lendal

AL(10)0301.P4 Proposed Basement Demolition Plan: North

AL(10)0302.P4 Proposed Basement Demolition Plan: South

AL(10)0401.P4 Proposed Ground Floor Demolition Plan: North

AL(10)0402.P6 Proposed Ground Floor Demolition Plan: South

AL(10)0501.P5 Proposed First Floor Demolition Plan: North

AL(10)0502.P4 Proposed First Floor Demolition Plan: South

AL(10)0601.P4 Proposed Second Floor Demolition Plan: North

AL(10)0602.P4 Proposed Second Floor Demolition Plan: South

AL(10)0701.P4 Proposed Tower Demolition Plan

AL(10)0801.P4 Proposed Roof Demolition Plan

AL(80)1300.P4 Proposed Basement Fire Strategy Plan

AL(80)1301.P4 Proposed Basement Fire Strategy Plan: North

AL(80)1302.P4 Proposed Basement Fire Strategy Plan: South

AL(80)1400.P5 Proposed Ground Floor Fire Strategy Plan

AL(80)1401.P4 Proposed Ground Floor Fire Strategy Plan: North

AL(80)1402.P5 Proposed Ground Floor Fire Strategy Plan: South

AL(80)1500.P4 Proposed First Floor Fire Strategy Plan

AL(80)1501.P4 Proposed First Floor Fire Strategy Plan: North

AL(80)1502.P4 Proposed First Floor Fire Strategy Plan: South

AL(80)1600.P4 Proposed Second Floor Fire Strategy Plan

AL(80)1601.P4 Proposed Second Floor Fire Strategy Plan: North

AA(0)0100.P1 Proposed South Range WC Block Wall Detail

AA(0)0102.P1 Proposed Guildhall Glazed Draught Lobby Details

AA(0)0103.P1 Proposed Guildhall & South Range Seating Details

AA(0)0104.P1 Proposed Guildhall & South Range Entrance Details

AA(0)0104A.P1 Proposed Guildhall & South Range Alternative

AA(0)0105.P1 Proposed Guildhall & South Range Slype Details

AA(0)0106.P1Proposed South Range Café Window Details

AA(0)0107.P1 Proposed Benching Details

AA(0)0108.P2 Proposed Council Chamber Details

AA(0)0113.P3 Proposed River Terrace Balustrade Details

 

Additional Condition to replace Informative:

Prior to the commencement of internal refurbishment works a detailed management plan to include arrangements for the parking and manoeuvring of vehicles (including delivery vehicles, provision for Mansion House associated parking within the Guildhall yard and the servicing of functions taking place within the complex) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thenceforth be undertaken in strict accordance with the terms of the management plan.

 

Reason:  To safeguard the character of the Central Historic Core Conservation Area, the significance of this complex of historic assets, and to safeguard the residential amenity of neighbouring properties.

 

Reason:     Having attached considerable importance and weight to the desirability of avoiding the harms identified to the heritage assets, it is considered that the increased degree of public usage of the complex together with the on-going investment to secure a viable economic use would constitute a substantial public benefit that would clearly outweigh these harms. The other impacts identified including the impact upon the amenity of adjacent  existing and future occupiers, flood risk, and ecological impact are  considered to have been satisfactorily addressed  as to be acceptable in Planning terms.