Agenda item

To consider an application for change of use and alterations to former offices to form a 61 bed, 6 ward bespoke hospital at 64 Brighton Road, Rhyl (copy attached).

An application was submitted for change of use and alterations to former offices to form a 61 bed, 6 ward bespoke hospital at 64 Brighton Road, Rhyl.

Public Speaker –

Mr. J. Horden (agent) (For) – argued against grounds for refusal on the basis that there was no requirement or demand in Rhyl for large scale office accommodation with little prospect for sale or let of the site in this case which would be put to good use and generate employment if consent for the hospital was granted.

General Debate – Councillor Barry Mellor (Local Member) spoke against the proposal, arguing that that such a facility would not be appropriate for the proposed location, and he highlighted the impact on nearby residents in terms of disturbance and fear of crime and referred to submission of a petition which demonstrated the wealth of public objection to the proposal.  Reference was made to the business case and proposed service model with concerns raised regarding the demand for services and viability of the proposal together with the subsequent impact on other local health board facilities and associated services and the North Wales Police who had raised concerns about security arrangements.  Finally concerns were raised over the loss of land for employment use should the application be granted.

During debate members considered the merits of the application and the policy criteria to be applied with further discussion focusing on the policy tests in respect of Local Development Policy PSE 3 and principle of the development on which officers had based their refusal recommendation.  Officers had concluded that the tests had not been met given that there was no real evidence that alternative sites for the development had been explored or that a marketing process had been followed to demonstrate the proposed site was no longer capable of providing employment accommodation and therefore should be permanently relinquished for another use.  It was considered that the loss of the use would prejudice the ability of the area to meet a range of local employment needs.  Reference was also made to Technical Advice Note 23 relating to economic development and the Council’s Economic Development Officers had advised of a shortage of properties that size that could be used for office space – whilst there may not be an identified use at this time it was not to say there would not be one in the future.  Councillor Brian Jones also referred to the likely future need for employment land and buildings in connection with projects arising from the North Wales Economic Growth Deal.

Members also considered other potential planning considerations relating to the fear of crime and impact that the proposal could have on the area – officers had not included the fear of crime element as grounds for refusal given that the concerns raised by the Police had not been clearly evidenced and if consent was granted it may be possible to control those concerns through the imposition of conditions.  Officers also confirmed the lack of evidence provided with regard to significant impact on community infrastructure and policy requirement in that regard and therefore impact on local infrastructure was not considered an appropriate ground for refusal in this case.  Consequently officers had made a clear recommendation to refuse on the basis that the proposal did not comply with Policy PSE 3.

Councillor Mark Young referred to the lack of capacity in the health service and noted that the site had been for sale for over two years.  He considered the opportunity of significant job creation and bringing a deteriorating building back into use against the potential that the site would continue to decline and remain unused for years to come if the application was refused.  Whilst acknowledging the concerns raised with regard to the development he sought further clarification on the category of provision applied; whether Rhyl Town Council was for or against the development, and how many residents had raised concerns regarding fear of crime.

Officers responded as follows –

·         explained the different use categories with the applicant having confirmed a C2 category of use which included care homes and convalescent homes and not category C2A which covered secure residential institutions

·         in their subsequent response Rhyl Town Council had clearly raised concerns but had not stated whether or not they wished to object to the application

·         pointed to page 183 of the report detailing objections received from residents with eight letters of objection received.  A petition containing 128 signatories had also been referenced within the late supplementary papers (blue sheets)

·         confirmed members would need to consider what weight to apply to the prospect of a vacant, derelict and underused building being reused and the potential for 150 jobs as had been specified within the report against the other issues raised in terms of Policy PSE 3 and advice received from the Council’s Economic Development Officers.

Proposal – Councillor Alan James proposed the officer recommendation to refuse the application, seconded by Councillor Pete Prendergast.

VOTE:

GRANT – 1

REFUSE – 15

ABSTAIN – 0

RESOLVED that permission be REFUSED in accordance with officer recommendations as detailed within the report.

At this point (10.45 a.m.) the meeting adjourned for a refreshment break.