Item No 4a

Site: Lord Tennyson , 72 Rasen Lane, Lincoln, LN1 3HD

Application No: 2013/0189/F

Target Date:

Agent: White Design Ltd

Applicant: Mr Colin Holden

Development: Erection of 2 two storey buildings with dormers to south and east elevations to accommodate 54 bedrooms within 9 student apartments with associated parking to the rear (RESUBMISSION)

Background The application is for the development of the site of the Lord Tennyson Public House site on Rasen Lane as student accommodation. The site sits on the corner of Rasen Lane and an access road which leads to existing Council owned garages, providing pedestrian access to residential flats within Sastangate House. The site currently accommodates the two storey public house, with a single storey off shoot, which sits on the western part of the site fronting Rasen Lane. The remainder of the site is a car park, surrounded by a dwarf brick wall, which sits directly adjacent to the access road. The public house currently sits adjacent to 74 Rasen Lane and its adjoining terrace, whilst to the east the car park and open grass verge provide a visual break in the townscape. More generally, Rasen Lane itself forms an important link road between Burton Road and Newport and consists of a mix of terraced properties of various architectural styles, interspersed with a small number of retail uses. The application site sits outside but adjacent to the Newport and Nettleham Road Conservation Area no.9.

View of the public house from the front, and looking west along Rasen Lane

The Proposal The application is a resubmission of 2012/1376/F which was refused at Planning Committee on 27th February 2013, and was subject to substantial local objections. The application proposes development of the site in two blocks which are essentially three storey, although appear as two storey with dormer windows. One of the blocks would front and be accessed from Rasen Lane, with the second block fronting the adjacent access road and again with its own, dedicated access. In total, the proposal would provide 9 student apartments incorporating 54 bed spaces, with associated cycle storage and bin storage. The site would be operated and managed by both the applicants and Bishop Grosseteste University, and the development would be occupied by Bishop Grosseteste students.

View of the relationship with 74 Rasen Lane, and longer view of the site looking west

The Site

The physical form and quantum of the development remains the same as previously proposed, and as part of its previous consideration of this proposal, Planning Committee considered that issues such as the principle of the development, the loss of the existing building, the design of the proposal, its impact on the character of the area and flood risk were acceptable. Such issues can now not be taken into account as part of your consideration of this revised proposal. The application was refused specifically on the grounds of no parking being provided on site and the lack of sufficient controls proposed to limit vehicular usage by those occupying the site, as well as those visiting and undertaking deliveries, and the resultant harm this would cause to the amenities of the local residents. The applicants have again committed, as part of their submitted management statement, to include a proviso that each individual student will not be allowed to bring cars to the development. As well as this, this application proposes the addition of 9 parking spaces to serve the site, which would purely be for visitors, guests and drop off/pick up. The spaces would be located in the north western corner of the site, with 6 being located within the site of the former public house. The remaining three would be located to the rear of 74 Rasen Lane, which is in the ownership of the applicant, on part of what is currently the rear garden for this property. Access to the spaces would be from Naam place, which is one way and allows access from Burton Road and egress to Rasen Lane.

Site Visit Undertaken on 14th February 2013 and 2nd February 2013. Issues It is for Members to consider whether the addition of the nine spaces, together with the proposed arrangements for access and egress to and from the site, are acceptable and sufficiently overcomes the previous reason for refusal. Policies Referred to Policy 34: Design and Amenity Standards Policy 60: Student Accommodation National Planning Policy Framework: - Chapter 4: Promoting sustainable transport Chapter 7: Requiring good design Chapter 10: Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and

costal change Chapter 11: Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Chapter 12: Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

Other relevant Policy Lincoln Townscape Assessment Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) Consultations Consultations were carried out in accordance with the Statement of Community Involvement, adopted June 2006. Responses Mr and Mrs G Sleber 13 Wake Street Comments Lincoln LN1 3HS Mr and Mrs Bristow 3 Sastangate House Objection Lincoln LN1 3HE Highways & Planning Lincolnshire County Council Objection Mrs J Anderson & Mr John Anderson 33 Saxon Street

Lincoln Lincolnshire LN1 3HQ

Objection

Rachael Constable 1 Saxon street Lincoln

Objection

Mark Lloyd 43 Mildmay Street

Lincoln Lincolnshire LN1 3HR

Objection

Mrs G O’Meara & Mrs C Culling 19/29 Chestnut Street Lincoln

Objection

Sandra Thompson 1 Harrison Place Lincoln Lincolnshire LN1 3HG

Objection

Consideration Parking, Access and the Previous Reason for Refusal The main difference between this and the previous application is the inclusion of the nine parking spaces, which would be specifically for visitors to the site, pick up/drop off and guests. As previously, the applicants have committed as part of their submitted management statement that the leases for each individual student will include a proviso that they are not allowed to bring cars to the development. Objections have also again been raised in relation to the impact of the proposal on parking within the area, as well as other issues, such as the loss of the pub and scale of the building, which cannot now be considered. Given the proposed quantum of development on site, it would clearly not be possible to make parking available on site for each individual student who occupied the property. With this in mind, the approach remains the same in not allowing students to bring cars to the development, and this, together with the sustainable location of the site and its proximity to Bishop Grosseteste University, is an acceptable approach advocated by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The NPPF is clear in stating that developments should be located ‘where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport methods can be maximised’ (NPPF Chapter 4). The site is sustainably located in proximity to the goods and services of the City Centre, Burton Road and Newport, as well as the University itself which is also within walking distance, whilst the proposal provides storage for Cycles. This proposal does, however, include the provision of nine spaces which would ensure that visitors have parking available and those picking up and dropping off have ample space to do so without impacting upon the finite parking available within the wider area. This would also ensure that Rasen Lane would now not need to be used for loading/unloading and this can now take place within the site without having an impact on the wider locality. I am satisfied that this is an acceptable approach which, together with the commitment to ensure students do not bring their cars which would form a condition of any consent, results in the parking and overall highway impacts of the development being sufficiently mitigated and the previous reason for refusal overcome. As well as this, the access/egress arrangements have been assessed by the Highway Authority, who have raised an objection to the proposal. The primary issue is the width of Naam Place, and specifically the section of access road which leads to the site and is situated to the rear of the 74 to 96 Rasen Lane. This is a narrow lane and does not allow passage of two vehicles simultaneously and as such Highways feel this would result in additional turning/manoeuvring of vehicles in this locality which would be to the detriment of the safety of other road users. For the most part, Naam Place is one way and this allows access from Burton Road and egress onto Rasen Lane without the need for vehicles to pass each other. The short run of the access road which leads to the site allows access for a small number of vehicles to the rear of the properties here, is approximately 30m and is not one way. It is acknowledged, therefore, that there is the potential for conflict if vehicles arriving and leaving the site meet at this point in the road. The parking proposed as part this development would, however, only be for visitors to the site and the frequency of trips

would be relatively low, whilst any dropping off or loading/unloading will only take place at specific times of the year and would not be an ongoing problem. It is not felt, therefore, that the problem would be so significant to warrant refusal of the application on these grounds alone. In the wider context, the area to the rear of 92, 94 and 96 Rasen Lane is already used for parking of approximately 6 vehicles, with other properties in the locality afforded vehicular access, which demonstrates that Naam Place in itself currently operates successfully without conflicts for existing vehicles. The additional usage of this road, and specifically the section which allows access to the site, given the amount of parking proposed and the likely vehicular movements this development would create compared to the existing movements within this locality, would not therefore result in unacceptable harm being caused to highway safety.

The existing parking area to the rear of 92/94/96 Rasen Lane and the access Lane to the application site

It should be borne in mind that any development of this site, given its size and location, is likely to have an impact on the parking situation within the wider area. In particular, any residential development of the site would be unlikely to provide one for one parking and even if this were proposed, as members will be aware one house can occupied by up to six people, each of whom could have a car which would have to park within the area. In addition, associated visitors would also have an impact which would again have to be absorbed within the existing network. In terms of this application, students by their nature are less likely to have a car, and taking this into account as well as the sites location it is practical to restrict car usage at the site in the manner proposed on this occasion. It is unlikely, however, that such restrictions would be reasonable should another form of open market residential development be brought forward at the site. It is felt that the restriction on students bringing their cars, together with the nine spaces proposed, is an appropriate solution to manage the impact of car use at the site and the associated impact on parking. Conclusion In acknowledging the existing parking issue within the area and the subsequent potential for this site to have a detrimental impact on this, the package proposed ensures that measures are in place to restrict car use from the site, whilst the additional parking for visitors, guests, pick up and drop off further reduces the impact of the development on the parking within the locality. This ensures that the proposal has sufficiently overcome the reasons for refusal and, given that all other issues were previously assessed and considered acceptable, the proposal would therefore be in accordance with local and national policy.

Land to the rear of the application site with the access road (far right) with arrow denoting the area to the rear of 74 Rasen Lane to be used for parking

Financial Implications None. Legal Implications None. Application Negotiated Either at Pre-Application or During Process of Application Yes – pre-application and throughout the process. Equality Implications None. Application Determined Within Target Date Yes.

Recommendation Grant Conditionally. Conditions Standard years and plans Development for student occupation only Level 1 Building Recording Archaeology Operation in accordance with the Management Statement which prohibits the

occupiers of the development from bringing their cars Confirmation of schedule of materials and detailing Sample panel Development to comply with Code Level 3 of the Code for sustainable homes Blocking up of existing access Travel Plan Construction Management Plan Details of air sourced heat pumps

Report by: Development Service Manager

Consultation Responses

.