The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed.

The Committee considered the report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing that presented an application relating to the erection of a 20 storey building to create a 154 bedroom hotel (Class C1) above 2 basement levels with ancillary café / bar / restaurant and gym and other associated works including highway improvements, cycle parking and creation of accessible parking bay following removal of on site structures.

Seven letters of objection had been received (including three from the same party) and one anonymous letter.  The grounds of objections were concerning the design, traffic impacts of reconfiguring the Laystall Street junction, inadequate pre-application consultation and the prejudicial impact of developing this site in isolation of the adjoining site.

The Planning Officer did not have anything to add to the report or late representations received.

The applicant’s agent addressed the Committee stating the design of the building proposed made efficient use of the site whilst not compromising any development on adjacent land.  The applicant had an excellent track record and reputation for delivering and operating hotel development across the UK.  Proposals were designed to deliver a high quality building, developed in close consultation with Council officers.  The proposals had been subject to rigorous townscape and heritage assessments and would meet highest of sustainable construction standards and would reduce the demand for alternative form of visitor accommodation in the city.

The Chair invited the Committee to make comments or ask questions to the Planning Officer.

Councillor Hewitson addressed the Committee and sought clarity on the proposed amendment to the road layout and direction exiting Laystall Street.  In connection to this Councillor Davies sought clarity as to whether the proposed change had come from the Council’s Highways department as part of a wider programme of changes to road layouts or whether any consultation with local residents had taken place.  Councillor S Ali also expressed his concern in relation to the proposed traffic remodelling.

The Planning Officer confirmed that at present traffic exiting Laystall Street could turn left or right.  Within the proposals submitted, traffic would only be able to turn left.  This proposal had been subjected to traffic modelling and it had been determined that this proposal would have no adverse effect on traffic and would improve the environment for pedestrians around the site.  In addition, it was confirmed that the proposed change had been submitted by the applicant and discussed and whist agreed by the Council’s Highways Department.  the proposal would still need to a formal Section 278 agreement and if it did not pass, alternative proposals would need to be considered, however, this should not affect the application going forward.

Councillor Andrews sought clarity on whether the application would need to be reconsidered by the Committee should the Section 278 agreement not be passed. 

The Planning Officer advised that if the Section 278 Agreement was not passed, the application could still go forward subject to a minor modification to the application in relation to the proposed traffic modelling.

Councillor Curley enquired as to whether there was any possibility of increasing the  number of proposed disabled parking bays.

The Planning Officer advised that in addition to the proposed disabled bay, the applicant would also be providing a valet parking service a spart of the operational management plan.

Councillor Andrews proposed a motion to approve the application.

Councillor Hughes seconded Councillor Andrews’s proposal.

Decision

The Committee Approves the application as set out in the report submitted.