Agenda item

Change of use, demolition and erection of new buildings to create residential care community with 172 residential units and communal areas, creation of public open space, sports pitches, public right of way and associated Infrastructure [Guildhall Ward]

 

Members considered a major full application from Tetlow King Planning (agent) Enterprise Retirement Living Limited and NHS Property Services (applicants) for a Change of use, demolition and erection of new buildings to create residential care community with 172no. residential units and communal areas, creation of public open space, sports pitches, public right of way and associated Infrastructure at Bootham Park Hospital Bootham York.

 

The Principle Development Management Officer gave an update advising Members of new conditions 21 (cycle route design) and 22 (east access works) and variations to conditions 18 (cycle parking) and 20 (travel plan) and of comments from York Cycle Campaign. It was noted that the report did not comments from Historic England. A presentation on the application was then given.

 

Public Speakers

Brandon Gebka spoke in objection to the application. He noted that the benefits of it were not of enough significance to demolish a grade 2 listed buildings and he noted the impact on the historical setting of the site. He explained that his main concern was the demolition of the estate cottages. In response to a question from a Member he noted that that he had expressed strong concern regarding the application.

 

Ann Weerakoon spoke in objection to the application. She explained that she represented citizens with an interest in history. She explained that the building could not be left to deteriorate and he plan to demolish the grade 2 parts if the building were unacceptable and he noted his concerns regarding the alterations to grade 1 parts of the building. She added that the new 3 storey building was out of character for the area.

 

Sylvia Graves, a former Ward Manager at Bootham Park Hospital spoke in objection to the application. She questioned if the new buildings could last 245 years. She then distributed a number of photos of the inside of the hospital at different points in time. In answer to Member questions she explained that she had been around the building with the photographer before the hospital had closed. Asked her view on the hospital’s history of mental health treatment, there needed to be a nod to the history of the building.

 

Peter Martin, the Applicant, spoke in support of the application. He explained that Bootham Park hospital was one of York’s most historic sites and he believe that a retirement community was the best use of the site, where they would have full support for their needs. He noted that there was evidence that living in an integrated community reduced their need for care. He acknowledged that there were harms and he noted that the applicants had worked hard to minimise this.

 

Peter Martin had a number of colleagues in attendance to answer Member questions. They were asked and explained that:

How the building materials were selected for the site.

NHS property services was a public body and the site was private. The area that were to be made public access were listed.

How parking would be managed.

Access to car parking would be controlled by a barrier to the south east of the superintendents lodge.

Regarding the internal fittings of the grade 1 listed buildings, the whole site was being laser scanned to record where the fittings were.

The changes to the ladies wing were explained.

Regarding the pauper wings, they had worked through a number of options and had undertaken research on pauper wings. The pauper wings were not of sufficient merit to retain and it was accepted that there was harm and which was outweighed by public benefits.

Members could be assured that the applicant did consider alternatives and an explanation was given as to why the pauper wings were not suitable.

Concerning honouring the history of mental treatment over time, the scheme would be beneficial to the mental health of residents living there.

Concerning making the cycle path 3m wide, there were two 2m lanes which had been designed by CYC highways.

It was not known if there was road priority for the cycle path.

The access to the back of the hospital had been agreed via a legal agreement.

There had been a number of meetings with the CYC Conservation Architect. The applicant had

The salvaged bricks from the demolished buildings would be used in landscape treatments.

The applicants had to juggles lots of opinions about the design of the scheme.

The sports facility would be used and managed by Bootham School when not in use by the school. There was not provision for changing rooms and there would be a toilet in the bistro. This would be available to the public.

The public benefits of the scheme was that there was no extra care. There had been consultation with housing officers on the gap in provision for extra care.

Some trees had been removed because of issues with building foundations.

The rationale for the enclosed courtyard was explained.

 

[The meeting adjourned from 17.45 to 17.50]

 

Members then asked officers questions to which they responded that:

Historic England had concerns, with the greatest impact on the pauper wings as the biggest harm and they also noted the public benefits of the scheme. The quotes included in the report were taken from the most recent comments from Historic England.

Concerning conditioning access and public benefits, there were conditions that secured some elements of this. The council had a an agreement with the developer which went to Executive in December 2021. It was explained how the legal agreement would be made.

Regarding the statement that there was no extra care provision in York, this was complicated as care falls into different categories. In terms of the type of accommodation in the local plan, the scheme was part of the overall housing need.

The cycle path was part of the cycle network and the highway was on private land. The legal agreement addressed the part of the cycle path that was open to the public.

A legal agreement would permanently allow public access and Bootham School would look after the sports pitches and the administration of their use. Officers were asked and confirmed that it was not know how this would be advertised.

 

The council Conservation architect was asked and clarified:

His concerns that the design was too generic.

The design would detract from the John Carr building and he felt that a more sensitive approach could have been achieved.

His concerns about the design and height.

That the harm to heritage assets was at the highest level.

Regarding York Civic Trusts suggestion that a lighter brick would be more suitable, it was important that new build elements were different. The condition for the colour of the brick was noted.

Officers then responded to further questions from officers, to which they explained:

How the bricks would contrast with the John Carr building and chapel. This was included in Condition 14.

The conditions in relation to the board room and preservation of the subscription boards. The features of the John Carr building were preserved via the listed building consent.

The public benefit was that the scheme contributed to housing supply and as there was a limited amount of that housing it had been given a high level of weight. There was a shortfall of accessible sports provision in the ward and this also given a high level of weight. There was also an investment of £2million for landscaping.

There would need to be a road safety audit for cycle priority and the cycle access to the NHS site was not in the control of the applicant.

Reference was made to the block plan of the John Carr building to show how internal aspects of the building were being preserved.

The CEMP condition included details on deliveries.

Public access to the café could be conditioned.

 

Following debate, Cllr Fenton proposed the officer recommendation  to approve the application subject to referral to the Secretary of State and subject to the below new conditions 21 (cycle route design) and 22 (east access works), variations to conditions 18 (cycle parking) and 20 (travel plan) and an additional condition relating to the café having public access at all times during the hours of operation, retained for the lifetime of the café with the wording of the condition to be agreed by the Chair and Vice Chair. This was seconded by Cllr Daubeney. Following a vote with 8 in favour of the motion and 3 against, it was:

 

Resolved: That the application be approved following referral to the Secretary of State and subject to the below new conditions 21 (cycle route design) and 22 (east access works) and variations to conditions 18 (cycle parking) and 20 (travel plan) and an additional condition relating to the café having public access at all times during the hours of operation, retained for the lifetime of the café with the wording of the condition to be agreed by the Chair and Vice Chair.

 

New condition 21 – Cycle route design

 

The cycle route, as shown on the approved landscaping drawings shall be made available for public use prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted.  The facility shall be constructed to adoptable standards and its final design shall be subject to a Road Safety Audit (RSA).  Details of the final design (following any variations required by the RSA) are shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To secure the public benefits of the scheme which contribute to the justification of granting planning permission, in the interests of promoting sustainable travel and the character and appearance of the area in accordance with NPPF sections 9 and 12.

 

New condition 22 - East access works

 

The development hereby permitted shall not come into use until the following highway works (which definition shall include works associated with any Traffic Regulation Order required as a result of the development, signing, lighting, drainage and other related works) have been carried out in accordance with details which shall have been previously submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, or arrangements entered into which ensure the same.

 

Works required - the footpath as proposed on hard landscape drawing 1777-LANP-ZZ-DR-LA-1202 shall be extended to continue and connect into the footpath along Union Terrace to the east of the site.

 

Reason:  To provide a suitable and inclusive access for pedestrians in accordance with section 9 of the NPPF.

 

Variations to conditions

 

Condition 18 – Cycle parking

Include requirement that provision subject to Council approval and that spaces for staff be covered.

 

Condition 20 – Travel Plan

Insert specific measure to be proactive in seeking to accommodate car club parking spaces on-site.

 

 

Reason:

 

     i.        It is recommended that permission be granted.  This is a large and complex site which requires a new use.  The scheme has been robustly informed by Heritage Appraisals that provide an understanding of significance of the heritage assets affected and on balance allow for redevelopment whilst avoiding harm on areas of highest significance.  The public benefits of the proposed new uses for the site also weigh in favour of the scheme as does the enhancement of the existing landscape in terms of its recreational value and provision of public access. 

 

    ii.        The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires that special regard shall be had to the desirability of preserving listed buildings or their settings or any features of special architectural or historic interest which they possess, and special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of conservation areas.  When applying the requirements of the Act and NPPF paragraphs 201 and 202, the harm is necessary to achieve the public benefits of the scheme, which outweigh the substantial harm and justify granting consent.  Technical matters relating to other material considerations can be addressed through planning conditions.  

 

  iii.        Conditions are recommended to ensure that the facilities and amenities proposed are provided in accordance with the approved scheme, before first occupation of the residential accommodation proposed and occupancy is restricted to those in need of care, in accordance with the submission documents.  Such conditions are necessary to deliver the public benefits that have been identified to make the application acceptable overall.

 

  iv.        Referral to the Secretary of State is required prior to determination because the Amenity Societies have objected to the application (as required by the Arrangements for Handling Heritage Applications Direction 2021).