Amended application for the erection of a new building to
provide 48 living units for students
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor
John Wynn Jones
Minutes:
Amended application to erect a new
building in order to provide 48 living units for students
Attention was
drawn to the additional observations that had been received
(a) The Planning Manager elaborated on the background to the application,
noting that this was a full application to construct a new building in order to
provide 48 living units with 57 bed spaces for students. The units would provide
45 self-contained studio units and three cluster living units each with four
bedrooms each and one communal kitchen and lounge.
The proposal involved erecting a three-storey building
opposite houses 1-10 on Euston Road which would step down in keeping with the
Euston Road slope to a four-storey section opposite the gable ends of the
houses of Ffordd Denman, close to Bangor City centre and within the development
boundary. The Railway Club building which previously stood on the site had been
demolished and cleared through a previous permission (on appeal) in order to
erect a three-storey building to create a total of 27 flats with 39 student bed
spaces. Subsequently, permission was granted to amend this permission by
amending the internal layout of the building to provide 29 units with 47 bed
spaces; the proposal in question involved 48 units
(57 bed spaces); an increase, therefore, of 10 bed spaces. Consequently, there
was a need to weigh up the material considerations when determining whether the
principle of the proposed development in this particular location was
acceptable or not.
In the context of general and residential amenities, it
was noted that the design and size of the building had changed since the
previous permissions. It was explained
that the building would continue to step down the Euston Road, in accordance
with the existing permission; that the height of the ridge would be lower than
that of the houses located opposite (numbers 1-10 Euston Road) and would be in
keeping with the houses that directly abut it (11 and 12 Euston Road). The
design and materials would be in keeping with the traditional design of the
houses in the area. It would look like a development of a residential
terrace/flats in terms of its size, form and design.
With an increase
of 10 additional bed spaces, it was not considered that this would
significantly harm the residential amenities of nearby residents with regard to
noise or disturbance. A students' management plan was received as part of the
application in order to show management of the students and to ensure that the
development would not have a detrimental impact on the surrounding area. It was considered reasonable to impose a condition to
ensure that the building be managed in accordance with the submitted plans.
Although the
concern raised by objectors was acknowledged, the plan was not considered to be
an over-development of the site. It was considered that the proposal was
acceptable and complied with local and national policies and guidance.
(b) The following main points were made by the local member (not a member of
this Planning Committee):
·
That the proposal was
an over-development. The developer had already been granted permission for 47
and that this was sufficient
·
The site was not
convenient for Coleg Menai students and was not on a local bus route
·
He suggested that the
developer install parking bays to assist with the situation in the community
·
Needed to consider
the argument that students' hostels released houses for families in the city. Suggestion
to assess how many houses in multiple occupancy would be returned to use
·
That he objected the
application
c)
Proposed and seconded to refuse the application, contrary
to the recommendation on the grounds of over-development.
ch) During the ensuing discussion, the following main
observations were noted by members:
·
That the Local Member’s comments needed to be considered
·
Agreed that work needed to be carried out to assess the
situation of houses in multiple occupancy
·
Accept the suggestion to ensure additional parking spaces
·
That the proposal was an over-development and,
consequently, there would be an increase in noise, waste and an impact on local
residents' facilities and amenities
·
When would it be acceptable to say enough is enough with
regard to the development of students' hostels?
·
Cumulative impact
a cause for concern
·
That amending
plans for a third time was frustrating
·
10 additional bed spaces was not a great change to what
already existed
·
That the demand for student housing was on the increase
RESOLVED to refuse
the application on the grounds that it is an over-development which would have
an impact on the general amenities of local residents.
Supporting documents: