Coventry City Council Blank Template



Public report

Cabinet Member

A separate report is submitted in the private part of the agenda in respect of this item, as it

contains information required to be kept private in accordance with Schedule 12A of the

Local Government Act 1972 as amended. The grounds for privacy are that it contains

information relating to the financial and business affairs of any particular person (including

the authority holding that information). The public interest in maintaining the exemption

under Schedule 12A outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information

Cabinet Member for Jobs, Regeneration and Climate Change 13 May, 2024

Name of Cabinet Member:

Cabinet Member for Jobs, Regeneration and Climate Change - Councillor J O’Boyle

Director Approving Submission of the report:

Director of Property Services and Development

Ward(s) affected:

Westwood

Title:

Progress House, Westwood Way Westwood Business Park Coventry – Lease

Regear.

Executive Summary:

This report brings commercial terms to the Cabinet Member for consideration, requesting

approval to the surrender of the current lease on Progress House and to the regrant of a

new lease. This would enable the demolition of the existing building to be replaced with

purpose built student accommodation and ancillary commercial accommodation.

Regeneration across the City continues to be a key priority of the Council. Westwood

Business Park and its continued success as an evolving commercial asset for the Council,

enabling economic opportunities for the City and delivering significant financial returns to

support the delivery of services to the people of Coventry is strategically important.

Purpose built student accommodation supports the University of Warwick as a leading

place of learning and research in the UK, providing businesses an opportunity to recruit its

future skilled workforce and strengthen the wider City’s economy.

A paper and an e petition, bearing a total of 405 signatures seeking assurances that the

Council, acting as landowner, would not allow the demolition of Progress House “until a

planning application for reasonable restoration of the site has been approved” was

received.

At the time of the receipt of the petition, a planning application, seeking approval to

redevelop the site for student housing, had been refused by the Planning Committee. The

applicants had appealed the decision and were awaiting a determination by the Planning

Inspectorate. This appeal decision, dated 8

March 2024, has been subsequently allowed,

and grants planning for the demolition of the existing office building and erection of new

building comprising student accommodation and commercial, business and service

accommodation.

Recommendations:

The Cabinet Member for Jobs, Regeneration and Climate Change is recommended to:

1. Note the petition requesting that the Council does not allow the demolition of the

building known as Progress House “until a planning application for reasonable

restoration of the site has been approved”.

2. Accept the surrender of the existing lease across the former Progress House site

at Westwood Business Park and grant a new 150 year lease to Barnwell Gate

Limited or their nominated investment fund or investor, to facilitate the development

of up to 544 bed Purpose Built Student Accommodation with a minimum initial

ground rent as outlined in the private version of this report.

3. Delegate authority to the Director of Property Services and Development, following

consultation with the Director of Finance and Resources and the Director of Law

and Governance, to negotiate and finalise the terms of the grant of the new lease,

to undertake the necessary due diligence and complete all necessary legal

documentation to facilitate the completion of the transaction.

4. Delegate authority to the Director of Property Services and Development, following

consultation with the Cabinet Members for Jobs, Regeneration and Climate

Change and the Cabinet Member for Strategic Finance and Resources, for any

subsequent variation in terms.

List of Appendices included:

Appendix 1 - : Site plan .

Appendix 2 - The Planning Inspectorate Appeal Decision

Other useful background papers:

Has it been or will it be considered by Scrutiny?

Has it been or will it be considered by any other Council Committee, Advisory Panel

or other body?

Will this report go to Council?

Report title: Progress House, Westwood Way Westwood Business Park Coventry –

Lease Regear

1. Context (or background)

1.1 The subject property, built as office accommodation in the 1990’s, is located on the

southern side of the main atrial road through the estate, Westwood Way. It has been

occupied by the RAS Examinations Boards since its construction however the

organisation has decided to relocate to more modern and efficient office

accommodation in Coventry’s city centre.

1.2 The lease on the site, which extends to approximately 2.47 acres ( 1 Ha) was granted

for a term of 125 years from 8

May 1990 expiring on the 7

May 2115. A capital

premium payment was received by the Council when granting the original lease

hence the current rent passing is a peppercorn. The lease currently restricts the use

to that of offices.

1.3 Barnwell Gate Limited (guaranteed by their parent company Gilltown Limited), acting

as the developer for the scheme, are proposing to construct a purpose built student

housing development of up to 544 beds with some ground floor commercial retail.

1.4 They are seeking a new 150 year lease which allows the proposed development.

1.5 Barnwell Gate intend to forward sell the completed development to an investor of

investment fund. As such the Council may be asked to grant the lease in the name

of the fund or investor.

1.6 The Council has been professionally advised by independent property consultants

Avison Young in the commercial negotiations around the terms of the new lease to

ensure ‘best consideration’ is obtained.

1.7 The Business Park has already seen other sites on the estate redeveloped for high

quality student housing and the advice provided by Avison Young is that due to the

changing nature of the way offices are occupied, the demand for older second-hand

space is low and does not show signs of improvement. Therefore finding suitable

alternative uses for the land which supports the continued growth and improved

experience of students attending the University of Warwick will play a part in the

future economic and economy of Coventry.

Detail of the formal planning appeal decision is attached as Appendix 2

Petition

1.8 An e petition and paper petition bearing a total of 405 signatures , requested that the

Council, acting as landowner, did not allow the demolition of Progress House to take

place until a planning application for reasonable restoration of the site had been

approved.

1.9 Council officers met representatives of the petitioners, including the petition sponsor,

Councillor M Lapsa and confirmed the Councils position that, under the terms of the

lease the Council had written to the tenant advising that they would not give approval

to the demolition of buildings on the site prior to a planning consent having been

obtained.

1.10 In light of the fact that planning permission has now been granted as the result of the

appeal to the Planning Inspectorate, it is recommended that the petition be noted.

2. Options considered and Recommended Proposal

Option 1 – Proceed with the grant of a new lease (Recommended)

2.1 To accept the surrender of the existing lease with RSA Examination Board (current

leaseholder) and grant a new 150 year lease to Barnwell Gate Limited or their

nominated investment fund or investor (new leaseholder)

2.2 The lease to be granted on the basis of a new annual ground rent. The initial rent

and terms of the lease are outlined in the private version of this report.

Option - 2 Not to proceed with the redevelopment

2.3 To not accept the surrender and regrant of a new lease will mean that the current

property owners will have to review their move and or continue to try and let the

vacant offices

2.4 During this period the Council would not benefit from any improvement to its income

from the site.

2.5 It is anticipated that due to the limited demand for second hand offices, the leaseholder

would need to seek other alternative uses and would need to come back to the Council

as landowner

3. Results of consultation undertaken

No public consultation has been undertaken

4. Timetable for implementing this decision

4.1 Subject to the approval of the recommendations contained in this report, it is advised

that the lease agreements are in a form which can be completed and would be ready

for signature within 4 weeks. The agreement for lease would be conditional on

securing planning consent and entering into the building contract for the delivery of

the works.

4.2 Having secure planning consent the developer is seeking to commence

development as soon as possible to try and deliver the development to be ready for

students to occupy the building at the start of the 2026 academic year. To achieve

this, the developer is looking to complete agreements by the 20

May, 2024. If this

timescale is not achieved, then a delay of a further 12 months would be incurred

which would mean that the improved income for the Council is also delayed by a

year. In light of the timescale, the Chair of the Scrutiny Co-ordination Committee,

Councill N Akhtar, has been invited to attend the meeting to agree the grounds of

urgency such that call-in will not apply to this decision.

5. Comments from the Director of Finance and Resources and the Director of Law

and Governance

5.1 Financial implications

5.1.1 The proposal will see a positive improvement the current ground rent income from

the land increase from a peppercorn to a commercial ground rent.

5.1.2 There is an interim rent to be charged during the construction phase which again

improves the Council financial position by granting the new lease.

5.1.3 Financial due diligence on the named party seeking to take the new lease will be

undertaken to ensure that they have the financial ability to complete the

development.

5.2 Legal implications

5.2.1 The proposed lease includes the standard clause in a long lease which protects the

Council interest. Specifically, the rent would become payable even if the

development hasn’t been completed after 24 months from entering the agreement.

This incentivises the developer to complete the development granting the new lease.

This helps to ensure that the developer doesn’t get value in a new longer lease and

then not deliver the changes proposed.

5.2.2 Section 123 (2) of the Local Government Act 1972 enables the Council to dispose of

land or property for the best consideration reasonably obtainable. An independent

valuation has been obtained which supports this transaction as meeting it legal duty.

5.2.3 Acting on the recommendations is within the Councils powers as set out in the

above statutory provisions.

6. Other implications

6.1 How will this contribute to achievement of the One Coventry Plan?

Facilitating the redevelopment of the property will support the economic development

of the City but also provide additional long term revenue which can be allocated to

support the delivery of Council services into the future.

6.2 How is risk being managed?

The risks around the delivery of the development are mitigated with the developer

already having secured planning consent for the scheme. In addition, with the rent

commencing within 24 months of the commencement of the lease this incentivises

the developer to complete the scheme.

6.3 What is the impact on the organisation?

The impact to the organisation is limited to the reduction of commercial income

generated by the land into the future.

6.4 Equality Impact Assessment (EIA)

6.4.1 An Equality Impact Assessment has not been undertaken as the proposal concerns

the disposal of land for redevelopment and no Council service or group will be

impacted.

6.4.2 An equality impact assessment is a process designed to ensure that a policy project

or service does not discriminate against any disadvantaged or vulnerable people.

Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 imposes an obligation on Local Authorities to

carry out an equality impact assessment when the local authority is exercising a

public function.

6.5 Implications for (or impact on) climate change and the environment

The newly completed development will deliver an environmentally more efficient

building helping the city de carbonise by reducing it energy consumption.

6.6 Implications for partner organisations?

There are no implications for any partner organisations.

Report author(s):

Name and job title:

Paul Beesley, Head of Property Development, Disposal & Acquisitions

Directorate:

Place Directorate

Tel and email contact:

024 7697 6746 [email protected].uk

Enquiries should be directed to the above person(s).

Contributor/approver

name

Title

Service Area

Date doc

sent out

Date response

received or

approved

Contributors:

Suzanne Bennett

Governance

Services Co-

ordinator

Law and

Governance

April

2024

29th April 2024

Names of approvers

for submission:

(officers and members)

Finance: Helen

Williamson

Finance

Manager

Finance

29th April

2024

April2024

Legal: Emma Kirby

Major

Projects Lead

Lawyer

Law and

Governance

April

2024

April 2024

Director: Richard Moon

Director of

Property

Services and

Development

Property

Services and

Development

April

2024

April 2024

Members: Cllr J O’Boyle

Cabinet

Member for

Jobs,

Regeneration

and Climate

Change

April

2024

2nd May 2024

This report is published on the council's website:

www.coventry.gov.uk/meetings

Appendix 1

Appendix 2

Appeal Decision

Site visit made on 6 February 2024

by Benjamin Clarke BA (Hons.) MSc MRTPI

an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State

Decision date: 08 March 2024

1 Appeal Ref: APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

Progress House, Westwood Way, Coventry CV4 8JQ



The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended)

against a refusal to grant planning permission.



The appeal is made by Gilltown Limited against the decision of Coventry City Council.



The application Ref is PL/2023/0000654/FULM, dated 29 March 2023, was refused by notice

dated 21 July 2023.



The development proposed is the demolition of existing office building and erection of new

building comprising student accommodation (Use Class Sui Generis) and commercial, business

and service accommodation (Use Class E), amenity spaces, car parking, landscaping and

associated works.

2 Decision

1. The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for the demolition of existing

office building and erection of new building comprising student accommodation (Use

Class Sui Generis) and commercial, business and service accommodation (Use Class E),

amenity spaces, car parking, landscaping and associated works at Progress House,

Westwood Way, Coventry CV4 8JQ in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref

PL/2023/0000654/FULM, dated 29 March 2023, and subject to the attached schedule of

conditions.

3 Main Issues

2. The main issues relevant to this appeal are:

 the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the

area; and

 the effect of the proposed development upon the living conditions of the occupiers of

neighbouring residential properties, with particular reference to outlook.

4 Reasons

Character and appearance

3. The existing building within the appeal site, as well as the immediately neighbouring

commercial properties, currently feature relatively limited heights, when compared to

other buildings in the commercial area. Although building designs differ, a unifying trend

is the presence of pitched roofs. There is a thick band of trees, which contains a footpath,

beyond the rear boundary of the site. These factors, when combined, give the area a

unified and verdant character.

Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

4. The proposed development, at its highest point, would be of six storeys and is described

as 20m in the Council’s Statement of Case. Although the sixth storey would be recessed,

the degree of setback is relatively small. Whilst the sixth storey would not occupy all of the

building’s footprint, a large proportion of the remainder of the building would be five

storeys. This is a height significantly greater than several of the neighbouring buildings.

Therefore, the side elevations of the proposed development would be readily perceptible.

Given that the proposed development would have a large footprint, a long front elevation

with little variety in height and a flat-roof design, the building would have a substantial bulk

and mass.

5. These elements would give the proposed development a monolithic appearance. The

proposal would be readily viewed alongside immediately neighbouring buildings that

have lower heights, pitched roofs and, in some instances, smaller footprints.

Therefore, the proposed development’s bulky

design would result in it appearing unusually prominent and thus incongruous. As this would

be combined with a proximity to the side boundaries of the site, the appeal scheme would

result in an erosion of the area’s consistent and open character.

6. Turning to the visual impacts of the proposed development, the appellant has submitted

a Townscape and Visual Amenity Statement, which has considered the effects of the

development from various representative viewpoints. I have had regard to this document

and have viewed the site from these locations. The Council have not objected to the

methodology used in this Statement or the locations selected.

7. In respect of viewpoints 1, 2, 3, 9, 10 and 16 the proposed development would not be visible.

This is due to the presence of other buildings and landscaping in the surrounding area and

the general road layout. Therefore, there would be no adverse effect upon these locations.

8. Views of the development would be apparent from viewpoints 4, 5 and 6 as it would have

a greater height than other buildings. Although some screening would be offered by

neighbouring buildings, this effect would be relatively limited given the greater height of

the appeal scheme. However, as views would be over a relatively large distance, only

parts of the development would be visible. Therefore, the development would give rise to

a limited adverse visual effect when viewed from these locations.

9. At viewpoints 7, 8, 11, 12 and 13, the proposed development would be readily perceptible

owing to the overall height of the proposed building and the relatively long frontage, when

compared to the near neighbouring buildings. However, such views would be localised. In

addition, the existing landscaping would soften views of the building.

10. Whilst any new landscaping would reduce some views, it would not completely overcome

the effect arising from the scale and mass of the proposed development upon Westwood

Way. In addition, there are limited other physical structures that might screen the

development. Therefore, the contrasting scale and mass would result in an inharmonious

visual impact. However, as discussed, such views would be for a relatively short stretch of

Westwood Way meaning that there would be a moderate adverse effect upon the

character of the area.

Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

11. Views of the development would also be possible from the footpath to the rear of the

appeal site (viewpoints 14 and 15). However, the design of the development is such that

the tallest elements of the proposed building would be located a significant distance away

from these viewpoints. This would reduce the prominence of the development at these

locations. In addition, such views would be for a limited distance of the path and would also

be significantly diffused due to the presence of landscaping that is present within this area.

This screening effect would be supplemented by the new landscaping that would be

included near to the development’s rear boundary. This means that the development would

have a limited adverse effect upon the character and appearance of these viewpoints.

12. Therefore, given the localised impact of the greatest adverse effect and the lower

effect that would be experienced in locations within the wider area, cumulatively the

building would have a moderate adverse effect upon the character and appearance of

the surrounding area.

13. I therefore conclude that the proposed development would have a moderate adverse

effect upon the character and appearance of the area. The development, in this regard,

would conflict with the requirements of Policies DE1 and H10 of the Coventry City Local

Plan (2017) (the Local Plan). Amongst other matters, these require that development

proposals respect and enhance their surroundings and positively contribute towards the

local identity and character of an area; and reflect and support or enhance the

appearance and character of the area.

Living conditions

14. The appeal site is in a commercial area. There is a landscaped area containing many

trees beyond the site’s rear boundary. Adjacent to this landscaped space is a residential

area. The nearest streets are Sandringham Close and Highgrove. Of those, four houses

(Nos. 14-20 Sandringham Close) have rear elevations that are orientated towards the

appeal site. A further two houses (15 Sandringham Close and 24 Highgrove) have a side

elevation that faces the appeal site. There are gardens adjacent to these elevations.

15. Although the proposed building would have a maximum height of six stories, the design

that has been utilised includes various setbacks in the rear elevation. Therefore, the

section nearest to the rear boundary of the site has a height consistent with the existing

building. This element of the proposed building would be approximately 39.4m from the

nearest house.

16. The section of the building that would have five storeys is approximately 47.5m away from

the nearest home, with the six-storey section being approximately

85.3m away. Therefore, there would be a significant distance between the proposed building

and the existing homes and their gardens. The development also includes new evergreen

tree planting to the rear of the site, which would provide further screening.

17. The Design Guidance for New Residential Development and householder Design Guide

Supplementary Planning Document (the SPD) is relevant to this appeal. Amongst other

matters, this seeks to ensure that a minimum distance of at least a 20m window to window

separation distance should be achieved and that a minimum of 12m is required between

the rear of one property and the side, blank gable of another property. The development

would comply with these

Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

distances. However, the SPD is also clear that in case specific circumstances, the

minimum distance can be increased.

18. In this instance, views would be interrupted by various landscaping and the tallest

elements would be a large distance away. The topography of the vicinity means that the

development would not be perceived as having a greater height than designed. This means

that there is no reason to insist upon a larger separate distance above that specified in the

SPD.

19. The proposed development would be set in from the rear boundary of the appeal site by a

greater distance than the existing building. The scale of the building is such that it would

be visible from the upper storey windows of the nearby houses and their gardens.

However, such views would be filtered by the landscaped area between these

neighbouring properties and the appeal site and therefore the proposal would not appear

dominant.

20. Therefore, although the development would be visible, any such views would be in the

context of significant separation distances and a verdant, undeveloped, foreground. In

consequence, the resultant building would not be imposing or have an enclosing effect

upon the windows or gardens of the nearest domestic properties.

21. I therefore conclude that the proposed development would not have an adverse effect upon

the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. The development, in this

regard, would comply with the requirements of Policy H10 of the Local Plan. This seeks to

ensure that developments do not materially harm the amenities of occupiers of nearby

properties.

5 Other Considerations

22. The current level of housing land supply is indicated, in the appellant’s Statement of

Case, as being 1.83 years. There is no other evidence before me that indicates that the

housing supply is any different to this figure and the Council has not disputed this figure.

In result, the current housing land supply falls significantly below the minimum five-year

provision specified in the Framework.

23. As a result of this supply level, the provisions of Paragraph 11(d) of the National

Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) apply. This states that planning permission

should be granted unless the adverse effects of doing so significantly and demonstrably

outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a

whole.

24. In assessing the needed housing land supply, the Framework requires that the needs,

size, type and tenure of different groups in the community should be considered. The

Framework identifies students as being one of the groups that should be included in an

assessment of housing need in an area.

25. The evidence before me indicates that there is limited purpose-built student

accommodation within easy reach of Warwick University. In addition, the Council’s

emerging Homes in Multiple Occupation (HMO) Development Plan

Document highlights issues that have occurred owing to the number of HMOs in the city

and identifies that a large proportion of HMOs are occupied by students. Therefore, the

development would seek to address these points. In consequence, I am persuaded that

there is sufficient need for the appeal scheme.

Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

26. Although this appeal has followed the written representations procedure, a Statement of

Common Ground (SoCG) has been prepared by the appellant and Council. This document

agrees that the proposed development, which would accommodate 544 students, would

contribute the equivalent of 361 new homes to the Council’s housing land supply. The

SoCG also confirms that, even when applying significant flexibility, there are no suitable

and available alternative sites that might accommodate the development.

27. Owing to the absence of alternative sites for the development and given the equivalent

number of homes that would be created, the benefits to the local housing land supply

can be attributed a significant amount of weight, particularly as if the development does

not come forward, the opportunity to provide these new homes would be lost.

28. In addition, the Framework states, at Paragraph 124, that planning decisions give

substantial weight to the value of using suitable brownfield land within settlements for

homes and other identified needs. The development would aid in the delivery of

additional homes in Coventry. In consequence, the reuse of previously developed land

carries significant weight.

29. The development would include cycle storage, electric charging points and the building

would be constructed to BREEAM ‘very good’ standard. However, some of these points

are required to comply with planning policies and to ensure compliance with building

regulations. Therefore, these matters carried a limited amount of weight.

30. The proposed development would generate some economic benefits through the

construction and operation of the development. Although some of these would be time-

limited in duration, the number of occupiers means that there would be large amounts of

support for businesses and facilities in the surrounding area. In consequence, this

carries a moderate amount of weight.

31. The development, in this regard, would conflict with the Framework where, at Paragraph

131, it states that the creation of high-quality buildings and places is fundamental to what

the planning and development process should achieve. In addition, Paragraph 139 states

that development that is not well designed should be refused planning permission.

However, the adverse effects would be experienced in a geographically small area.

Therefore, they can be attributed a moderate amount of weight.

32. In result, the benefits of the development cumulatively carry a significant amount of weight.

Conversely, the moderate adverse effect arising from the erosion of the character and

appearance of the surrounding area carries a moderate amount of weight. Therefore, the

adverse effects of granting planning permission would not significantly and demonstrably

outweigh the benefits. This is a material consideration that strongly indicates the proposal

should be determined otherwise than in accordance with the development plan.

6 Other Matters

33. The development would result in the loss of a business premises, but the site is not

allocated for a specific purpose. This is reflective of the wider business area. Therefore,

there is no substantive evidence there would be a net negative effect on the local economy,

particularly as local planning policies seek to direct office developments into the city centre.

Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

34. Although the development would result in a change of use of the appeal site, the evidence

before me, in the form of the appellant’s Transport Assessment (the TA) indicates that the

proposed development would generate less trips being made to and from the appeal site

when compared to the existing use. In addition, as discussed in the TA, there are

appropriate networks of pavements and cycle routes to ensure that future occupiers are

not reliant upon private cars as a means of travel owing to the availability of safe and

convenient alternatives. Having viewed these on my site visit, I have no reason to disagree

with the findings of the TA and there are no objections from the Local Highway Authority.

35. By reason of the separation distances that exist between the proposed building and the

neighbouring properties, the development would not result in a reduction in the levels of

light experienced by existing occupiers. This can be evidenced through the findings in the

submitted daylight and sunlight assessment, to which the Council does not object.

Although internal lights would be used in the building, the separation distances are such

that there would not be disturbance to existing occupiers. These separation distances also

prevent a loss of privacy from arising.

36. The development may result in increased usage of the footpath to the rear of the site.

However, as this is already accessible to the public and owing to the presence of

boundary treatments, the usage of the path would not erode privacy levels for the

occupiers of existing properties.

7 Legal Agreement

37. A completed legal agreement has been submitted. This has been signed by the developer,

land owners and the Council. This agreement secures the provision of financial

contributions for the provision of footway improvements; works to the highway, such as

alterations to parking restrictions; an extension of a cycle hire scheme; an electric bicycle

charging station; and travel plan monitoring.

38. Such financial contributions are necessary and reasonable for they would ensure that the

occupiers of the development are not reliant upon private cars as a means of travel. In

addition, they would ensure that access to the development is of a safe nature. Such

planning obligations would also be necessary to make the development acceptable in

planning terms; directly related to the development; and fairly and reasonably related in

scale and kind to the development.

8 Conditions

39. In addition to the standard implementation condition, a condition specifying the approved

plans is necessary in the interests of precision.

40. To minimise the effect upon the character and appearance of the surrounding area,

conditions regarding the materials from which the building is constructed from and the

provision of landscaping are necessary.

41. Given the presence of nearby homes, conditions in respect of noise, external lighting and

site management are appropriate to maintain the living conditions of nearby residents. For

similar reasons, a condition requiring the agreement of a Construction Management Plan is

necessary. However, I have amended the wording suggested by the Council in order to

remove what is required in this plan as the contents would be agreed by the Council before

works start.

Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

42. As it is necessary to ensure that the future occupiers of the development have appropriate

living conditions, conditions in respect of contamination, land remediation, unexpected

contamination and refuse storage are necessary. To avoid an adverse effect upon

highway safety and to provide alternatives for car usage, conditions regarding the

provision of the car parking space and cycle

storage, in addition to the provision of the site’s access are also necessary.

43. The Framework requires that developments do not have an adverse effect upon flood risk

on site or elsewhere. This means that conditions regarding the provision of the Sustainable

Urban Drainage System and its maintenance are necessary. Given the importance of

ecology and delivering the biodiversity improvements, conditions in respect of these

matters are necessary. In addition, a condition regarding an updated bat survey is

required.

44. Policy JE7 of the Local Plan requires that developments demonstrate how job

opportunities will be made accessible to the city’s residents. Given this policy support, a

condition requiring the agreement of a strategy to deliver this is appropriate.

45. Where applicable, some of these conditions require details to be agreed prior to the

commencement of development to ensure the provision of the works at an appropriate

stage in the development process. Furthermore, I have omitted mechanisms from the

conditions that might allow for the agreement of alternative details outside of the planning

process.

46. The Council has suggested a condition that would limit the usage of the development to

student accommodation. However, given that the proposal is a sui generis use, a fresh

application for planning permission would be required if there was an intention to change

the use of the resultant building to another purpose. In addition, the usage of the

development in line with a previously submitted management strategy would be secured.

Therefore, this condition is unnecessary.

47. The Council has suggested conditions regarding the provision of electric car charging

points. However, it has not been demonstrated that this matter would not be addressed

through Building Regulations. Therefore, such a condition is unnecessary. A condition

removing permitted development rights for the future installation of plant and equipment

would be unreasonable as the Framework is clear that permitted development rights

should only be removed in exceptional circumstances. There is no evidence before me

indicative that such circumstances apply to the appeal scheme.

9 Planning Balance and Conclusion

48. The development would not harm living conditions but would generate moderate harm to

the character and appearance of the area. It would therefore be at odds with the

Development Plan taken as a whole. However, material considerations, namely the

Framework, indicate that in this instance the proposal should be determined otherwise

than in accordance with the Development Plan. Accordingly, I conclude that the appeal

should be allowed; and planning permission granted subject to conditions.

Benjamin Clarke

INSPECTOR

Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

10 Schedule of Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this

decision.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following

approved plans 21021-GDL-A1-00-DR-A-0100-S; 21021-GDL-A1-00- DR-A-0100-S3 5;

21021-GDL-A1-XX-DR-A-2200-S3 2; 21021-GDL-A1-XX-DR-

A-2201-S3 2; 21021-GDL-A1-XX-DR-A-2202-S3 2; 21021-GDL-A1-XX-DR-A-

2203-S3

21021-GDL-A1-00-DR-A-2100-S3

21021-GDL-A1-01-DR-A-

2100-S3

21021-GDL-A1-02-DR-A-2100-S3

21021-GDL-A1-03-DR-A-

2100-S3

21021-GDL-A1-04-DR-A-2100-S3

21021-GDL-A1-05-DR-A-

2100-S3 8; 21021-GDL-A1-R-DR-A-2100-S3 2; 21021-GDL-A1-XX-DR-A-

2300-S3

21021-GDL-A1-XX-DR-A-2301-S3

21021-GDL-A1-XX-DR-A-

2302-S3 2; 21021-GDL-A1-XX-DR-A-2303-S3 2; PRO-UBU-XX-XX-DR-L-1000 F;

WL_2114_013 P1; and PRO-UBU-XX-XX-DR-L-1000 C.

3. Prior to any above ground works taking place, full details of all external materials shall be

submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Development shall

be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained thereafter.

4. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, details of both hard and

soft landscaping works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning

Authority. Details of hard landscaping works shall include boundary treatment, including full

details of the proposed boundary walls, railings and gates to be erected, specifying the type

of bricks and colour of the railings and gates; footpaths; and hard surfacing (which shall be

made of porous materials or provision shall be made to direct run-off water from the hard

surface to a permeable or porous area). The hard landscaping works shall be completed in

strict accordance with the approved details within three months of the first occupation of the

student accommodation hereby permitted; details of soft landscaping works shall include:

a) details of the proposed tree and shrub planting including their species, number, sizes and

positions, together with grass seeded/turfed areas and written specifications (including

cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment i.e. depth of

topsoil, mulch etc),

b) details of the existing trees and hedgerows to be retained as well as those to be felled,

including existing and proposed soil levels at the base of each tree/hedgerow and the

minimum distance between the base of the tree and the nearest edge of any excavation,

c) details of the hard landscaping including hard surface areas, pavements, pedestrian areas

and steps.

d) programme for implementation.

All planting shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details within the first

planting and seeding seasons following the first occupation. Any tree(s) or shrub(s) which

within a period of five years from the completion of the development dies, is removed or

becomes; in the opinion of the Local Planning

Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Authority; seriously damaged, defective or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting

season with another of similar size and species. All hedging, tree(s) and shrub(s) shall be

planted in accordance with British Standard BS 8545:2014 Trees: from nursery to

independence in the landscape - Recommendations and BS4428 - Code of Practice for

General Landscape Operations.

5. An investigation and risk assessment (in addition to any assessment provided with the

planning application), must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature

and extent of any contamination on the site; whether or not it originates on the site; and any

report of the findings must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning

Authority prior to the commencement of development (excluding any above ground

demolition, site clearance or other preparatory works). The report of the findings, to be

conducted in accordance with Environment Agency Guidance Land Contamination: Risk

Management (2021) and must include (i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of

contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risk to; human health, property (existing

or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and

pipes, adjoining land, groundwaters and surface waters, ecological systems, archaeological

sites and ancient monuments; (iii) an appraisal of remedial options and proposal of the

preferred option(s).

6. The development (excluding any above ground demolition, site clearance or other

preparatory works) shall only be undertaken in accordance with a detailed remediation

scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing

unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and

historical environment, which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local

Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed

remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management

procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land

under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the

land after remediation.

7. The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior

to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out the remediation.

The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of

commencement of the remediation scheme works.

8. Prior to occupation of the development hereby permitted and following completion of the

measures identified within the remediation scheme approved under condition No. 6, a

verification report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must

be produced and submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing.

9. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved

development, that was not previously identified, it must be reported in writing immediately

to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken

in accordance with the requirements of condition 6 and where remediation is necessary a

remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of condition

7which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Following

Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report

must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

10. Prior to the installation of any plant equipment, including any screening, a plant noise

assessment to the methodology of BS4142 and details of any screening will be submitted

to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details will provide full

details of external plant requirements to demonstrate that the cumulative noise rating level

from all plant does not exceed the limits specified in table 4 of the submitted Noise Impact

Assessment (ref. 9814.1 Rev. A, dated 6th April 2022). Once approved, such details shall

be fully implemented prior to the first occupation of the development and retained

thereafter.

11. Prior to the commencement of development (excluding any demolition, site clearance or

other preparatory works), a scheme for targeting and utilising local people for construction

and employment shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning

Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

12. Prior to any above ground works taking place, full engineering and constructional details

for the alterations to the vehicular access to provide pedestrian and cyclist priority shall be

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be

carried out in accordance with the approved details, be fully implemented prior to the first

occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall be retained thereafter.

13. The demolition of the Site shall be completed in accordance with the Demolition

Management Plan, referenced ‘December 2023’ and prepared by Ridge & Partners,

approved as part of the prior approval for demolition consent (ref:

PL/2023/0002547/PAPD). No development (excluding any demolition, site clearance or

other preparatory works) shall take place unless and until a Construction Management Plan

(CMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Thereafter, the approved details within the CMP shall be strictly adhered to throughout the

construction period.

14. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, a revised plan detailing

the provision of seven accessible car parking spaces shall be submitted to and approved

in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance

with the approved details, be fully implemented prior to the first occupation of the

development hereby permitted and shall be retained thereafter.

15. Prior to the commencement of any above ground works, a scheme shall be submitted to,

and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority for the provision of a Sustainable

Urban Drainage System (SuDS). The submission shall include all relevant details and

calculations to enable a full evaluation to be undertaken, and clear and accountable

consideration shall be given to the following features:

 General below ground attenuation, aimed solely at managing the quantity of water on site.

Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

 The deployment of green roof technology on suitable roof structures within the development.

 An appropriately scaled intrusive ground investigation report must be provided to establish

the depth and type of strata, including percolation results in accordance with BRE 365 and

identifying the presence and risk associated with migrant or soluble contaminants. Please

provide evidence of existing groundwater levels and seasonal variation, in order to inform

the drainage design.

 Evidence must be provided to show the management of overland flow routes in the event of

exceedance or blockage of the drainage system. Details should include demonstration of

how the building will be protected in such an event.

Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details, be fully

implemented prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall be

retained thereafter.

16. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted. A detailed strategy

document must be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority for

the long-term inspection and maintenance of the SuDS and other surface water drainage

elements on site. (It should also mention any notable Health and Safety or specialist training,

and special equipment required as part of the routine maintenance.) The drainage systems

shall be maintained in full accordance with the approved details thereafter.

17. The stormwater discharge rates from the development shall be managed in order to reduce

flood risk to surrounding sites, downstream areas or the wider environment by means of a

flow control mechanism (or mechanisms) limiting the total site discharge offsite to Qbar

greenfield rates or 5 l/s, whichever is greater.

18. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted details of bat enhancement

measures, including bat boxes and planting to encourage night flying insects shall be

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The bat enhancement

measures shall be fully installed prior to the first occupation of the development and retained

thereafter.

19. No development (including any demolition or preparatory works) shall commence unless

and until a scheme for the retention of the bat roost(s) and the retention of the existing

entry/emergence routes, or the provision of alternative roost space and new

entry/emergence routes, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local

Planning Authority. The scheme shall include a programme for the implementation of the

development which avoids any building or other operations likely to affect the bat roost

being undertaken between 1st March to 31st August (inclusive), whilst also ensuring that

at no time provision for roosting bats is lost from the site. The development shall be carried

out in accordance with the approved scheme.

20. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted a Landscape and

Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the

Local Planning Authority. The LEMP plan shall be implemented in accordance with the

approved details within three months of the first occupation of the development and retained

thereafter.

Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/23/3328984

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

21. No development or other operations (including any demolition, site clearance or other

preparatory works) shall commence unless and until tree protection measures have been

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The tree protection

measures shall safeguard against damage or injury during construction works (in

accordance with Clause 7 of British Standard BS5837) all trees on the site, or those trees

whose root structure may extend within the site and which are the subject of the City of

Coventry (Westwood Way No. 1) Tree Preservation Order 14th February 2013. The

approved mitigation and / or protection measures shall be put in place prior to the

commencement of any works and shall remain in place during all construction work.

22. Before any development commences on site (including any demolition, site clearance or

other preparatory works) the following shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the

Local Planning Authority: a) Tree Survey - a detailed scaled plan (to a scale and level of

accuracy appropriate to the proposal) showing the position of every tree on the site, and

every tree on land adjacent to the site (including street trees) that is likely to have an effect

upon or be affected by the proposal (e.g. by shade, crown overhang from the boundary,

intrusion of the Root Protection Area etc) with a stem diameter over the bark measured at

1.5 metres above ground level of at least 75 millimetres; b) a schedule of the trees surveyed

as specified in chapter 4.1-4.5 of BS 5837 : 2012 Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition

and Construction - Recommendations; c) a Tree Constraints Plan (5.1-5.3); d)

Arboricultural Impact Assessment (5.4) to assess the direct and indirect implications of trees

upon the proposal and visa-versa, including locations for under-ground/ over- ground

services, level changes within RPA's etc.; e) Arboricultural Method Statement (6.1); and f)

a Dimensioned Tree Protection Plan (to include protection measures during and after

construction and any construction exclusion zones) (in accordance with 5.5/ Table B.1),

site monitoring (6.3) of British Standard BS5837:2012 - Trees in relation to design

demolition and construction - Recommendations, which shall also include any proposal for

pruning or other preventative works. The approved mitigation and / or protection measures

shall be put into place prior to the commencement of any works and shall remain in place

during all construction work.

23. Prior to the first occupation of the building hereby permitted, details of cycle parking facilities

shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The cycle

parking facilities shall be provided in accordance with the approved details prior to the first

occupation of the building and retained thereafter.

24. No lighting or illumination of any part of any building or the site shall be installed or operated

unless and until details of such measures have been submitted to and approved in writing

by the Local Planning Authority and such works, and use of that lighting and/or illumination,

shall be carried out and operated only in full accordance with those approved details.

25. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied unless and until the bin storage

area(s) have been laid out and provided in full accordance with the approved details and

shall be retained thereafter.



26. Prior to any above ground works taking place, details of a scheme which sets out where and

how 'Secured by Design' standards will be incorporated into the development, shall be

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These measures should

be installed in accordance with the approved details prior to first occupation of the development

and retained thereafter.

27. The development hereby permitted shall only operate in full accordance with the Student

Management Plan submitted with the application.