Agenda and minutes

Councillor Eddy welcomed everyone to the meeting and issued the safety information.

Announcements

The Deputy Head of Planning, Development Management made two announcements.

(i)                  On 19^th December 2023 the Secretary of State made an announcement relating to the reporting of Appeals lodged against Planning Committee decisions where the final decision is the same as the Officer recommendation, as it is considered that the overturning of the Officer recommendation should be rare and infrequent.

(ii)               The Secretary of State has announced that due to the time taken by BCC to decide on some planning applications, from 9.00 am this day (6^th March 2024) until revocation, in certain circumstances developers may apply to the Planning Inspectorate rather than BCC for planning approval. As a result of this announcement an Action Plan will be prepared by the Service and in the meantime work will continue in clearing the backlog of applications.

Apologies were received from Cllr Farah Hussain, substitutes Amal Ali.

To note any interests relevant to the consideration of items on the agenda.

Please note that any declarations of interest made at the meeting which are not on the register of interests should be notified to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion.

The following was received:

Cllr Eddy – Agenda Item No. 10a, he attends St James Priory.

To agree the minutes of the last meeting as a correct record.

Resolved - that the Minutes be confirmed as a correct record of the Meeting.

The Committee is requested to note any outstanding actions listed on the rolling Action Sheet for DCA Committee.

Noted.

To note appeals lodged, imminent public inquiries and appeals awaiting decision.

The Deputy Head of Planning, Development Management introduced the report.

To note recent enforcement notices.

The Deputy Head of Planning, Development Management introduced the report.

Councillor Eddy advised that if any Members have questions relating to this item, these questions should be sent to the Deputy Head of Planning, Development Management and copied to the Democratic Services Officer. All answers will then be circulated to all Members of the Committee.

Up to 30 minutes is allowed for this item.

Any member of the public or Councillor may participate in Public Forum.  The detailed arrangements for so doing are set out in the Public Information Sheet at the back of this agenda.  Public Forum items should be emailed to democratic.services@bristol.gov.uk and please note that the following deadlines will apply in relation to this meeting:-

Questions - Written questions must be received 3 clear working days prior to the meeting.  For this meeting, this means that your question(s) must be received in this office at the latest by 5 pm on Thursday 29^th February 2024.

Petitions and Statements - Petitions and statements must be received on the working day prior to the meeting.  For this meeting this means that your submission must be received in this office at the latest by 12.00 noon on Tuesday 5^th March 2024.

PLEASE NOTE THAT IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK AT THE COMMITTEE, YOU ARE REQUESTED TO INDICATE THIS WHEN SUBMITTING YOUR STATEMENT OR PETITION. ALL REQUESTS TO SPEAK MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A WRITTEN STATEMENT.

In accordance with previous practice adopted for people wishing to speak at Development Control Committees, please note that you may only be allowed 1 minute subject to the number of requests received for the meeting.

If you have any futher questions, please see the Public Forum FAQ page on the Development Control Committee A page of the Bristol City Council website

https://democracy.bristol.gov.uk/documents/s86621/Public%20Forum%20FAQ%20for%20Development%20Control%20Committees.pdf

Members of the press and public who plan to attend a public meeting at City Hall are advised that you will be required to sign in when you arrive and you will be issued with a visitor pass which you will need to display at all times.

Membersof theCommittee receivedPublic ForumStatements inadvance ofthe meeting.

The Statementswere heardbefore theapplication theyrelated toand weretaken fullyinto consideration by the Committee prior to reaching a decision.

The Presenting Officer introduced the report, summarised it for everyone and gave a presentation.

The application is for the demolition and redevelopment to provide co-living units (sui generis) and student accommodation (sui generis), associated amenity spaces, ground floor uses (Class E), access, servicing, landscaping, public realm, and associated works. (Major).

The following answers were provided to questions:

·       There has been a lot of discussions with the applicants including with the Regeneration Team and taking into account the Central Area Plan, resulting in improvements to the Bus Station access; there is a lot a support for the scheme

·       The applicant has had discussions with the Health Trust and there no issues in relation to the BRI Helipad

·       The St James Priory Project’s objections have been taken account of are included in the report

·       If the application was to be refused on the grounds of concentration, it would have to be demonstrated that the development would cause harm by for instance noise or amenity; there would have to be a different view taken on concentration in this type of area as opposed to a residential area

·       In relation to the amount of student accommodation, the emerging Local Plan is considering this but at present there is not enough information available to come to a conclusion on the amount of student accommodation required and its relationship to the housing targets; there will be a commercial limit but at the moment there is still a lot of demand for student accommodation

·       The Officer recommendation has been very carefully considered and Members need to be mindful of this if they are minded to go against the recommendation; the report sets out the issues relating to the application; Members have to come to a conclusion based on planning issues

·       Although the lifespan of buildings is not specified, Planning Guidance suggests that commercial buildings last about 60 years and residential buildings about 100 years

·       This application is the first large scale co-living scheme in the city

·       There is no policy on this type of accommodation as it is a new concept; if this application is approved it may encourage other developers to apply for similar schemes

·       There may be times during the year outside term times when the student accommodation will not be occupied, but the building is designed flexibly so it may be possible to use the accommodation for other purposes when not in use by the students

·       If Historic England considered that the development would cause substantial harm they would have made it as a specific objection; the test for substantial harm is quite a high threshold

·       In relation to the adjacent Debenham’s site, this application has to be treated as a stand alone application which is to be determined before the application for the Debenham’s site is determined

·       Whilst under normal circumstances views would not be given much weight, but as this is in a conservation area and the impact assessment takes account of them some weight can be given to them

·       The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

The Presenting Officer introduced the report, summarised it for everyone and gave a presentation.

The application is for the demolition of the existing multi-storey car park/retail units and site clearance to allow redevelopment of site to accommodate a new mixed-use development comprising flexible retail/commercial floorspace (Use Class E) and/or community floorspace (Use Class F2(b)), public car park accessed from Rupert St, purpose-built shared living (co-living) accommodation (sui generis) and purpose-built student accommodation (sui generis) with associated amenity space, cycle parking, refuse storage, landscaping / public realm enhancements and new vehicular access arrangements, including provision of service road between Rupert Street and Lewins Mead (Major).

The following answers were provided to questions:

• The affordable housing will involve BCC in the management of them and there will be 50 co-living units with occupants paying 20% of market rent
• There are a growing number of students in Bristol, well beyond the numbers anticipated by Bristol University when the Supplementary Planning Guidance was prepared in 2006.

Debate

• This is a positive scheme relacing an old car park with co-living including affordable housing, student accommodation and a smaller but modern car park; there are concerns but these minimal in comparison to the benefits of the scheme which is located in a very sustainable position
• The benefits of the scheme outweigh the negatives of it
• Concerns about some of the people who may move into the co-living units but the development is a very good design, the height and the massing blend in with the local area
• This development will transform the site
• The design and public art are very attractive
• The design suits the site; care has been taken with the design and the public art

Cllr Eddy moved the Officer Recommendation to Grant the application including delegated authority to prepare planning conditions and finalise the S106 agreement.

Cllr Varney seconded this motion.

On being put to the Vote it was

Resolved – (Voting 9 for, 0 against) that the application be Granted subject to a Planning Agreement including delegated authority to prepare planning conditions and finalise the S106 agreement.

Wednesday 24^th April 2024 at 2.00 pm.

24^th April 2024 at 2.00 pm.

Noted.