Agenda item
APPLICATION NO. 45/2019/0156/PF - 64 BRIGHTON ROAD, RHYL
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).
Minutes:
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.
Supporting documents:
- ITEM 10 - 64 BRIGHTON ROAD, RHYL, item 7. PDF 6 KB
- ITEM 10 - 64 BRIGHTON ROAD, RHYL - APPENDIX, item 7. PDF 2 MB