Decision deferred on Meanwood H-shaped block of over-55s flats

Plans to build an H-shaped, four-storey structure of 58 apartments for over-55s on a site near Grove Lane, Meanwood would, claim developers, provide extra care for older people in the community.

However, the application has now had more than 300 objections from locals, some of whom told the meeting of the council’s north and east plans panel that it would be out of character with the neighbourhood, and that the green space should remain.

Representing the developers, a planning consultant told the meeting that the site was not accessible and had a “low ecological baseline”, claiming the proposals were a high quality design.

Objector Nigel Lees told a meeting of the north and east plans panel: “There are more than 300 local objections to this.

“It is wholly out of character with the built neighbourhood.”

“We are worried about the parking provision by way of a traffic regulation order to grove lane and its grass verges and trees – overspill parking could be dangerous to traffic.”

“The height of the building is totally overbearing,” claimed another objector, Andrew Doherty. “People are driving for longer and longer.

“I had an uncle die recently who was driving beyond the age of 90. Self-driving cars are going to come in and you are going to need a lot more parking spaces per person than is being allowed.”

Objector Zoe Main added: “The proposed structure will rise a further six feet from us and block our sun by day and disturbing us.

“The two green fields at the side of the goit should remain forever green, and it will be a huge betrayal if development is now allowed.

“The local community have been working hard to keep this is a beautiful valley bottom with kingfishers, foxes, owls and even roe deer, green.

“This land is not even designated for development.”

Jay Everett, a planning consultant, spoke on behalf of applicants Roseville (The Paddock) Ltd.

He said: “The site has no specific amenity value. It’s not publicly accessible, and the site has a low ecological baseline.

“The design solution has evolved over some time – it did include a pre-application submission in 2018. Since then there has been dialogue and discussion over the design.

“The final design is a high quality contemporary design which respects its setting and its context.

“The applicants have responded positively to suggestions – windows have been removed from the upper floors and it has been set further back.

“If approved this will provide important housing and economic benefits for the city.”

He added a ball stop net at eight metres high would be installed to avoid rugby balls hitting the side of the building from nearby pitches.

Commenting on the application, Coun Barry Anderson (Con) said: “I find it difficult to support this application because there are a number of concerns being expressed. We needed to do a lot more in terms of clarity and working with local people.”

Coun Dawn Collins (Con) said: “I can’t support this development. We have shown the new building is not far enough away from (nearby houses).

“I think we need to ensure that when we develop and approve core strategies, we are more rigorous when we look at sites to make sure we are not contradicting ourselves.”

Coun David Jenkins (Lab) said: “I agree with Coun Collins. We have to come down one way or another and it does destroy some green space.

“It needs to be re-thought.”

Coun Mirelle Midgley (Lab) said:” There are too many loose ends. I am not convinced the local housing need has been established.”

Coun Elizabeth Nash (Lab) said: “It’s a great pity we didn’t have a site visit. This is what all the committee members should have visited.

“I have full sympathy with many arguments. But we have to vote with our heads and not our hearts. We have a prime minister who is going to cut red tape and it local authorities put up opposition to housing schemes he is going to allow it.

“If an appeal happened, I cannot see the council winning it, and we will incur costs which we cannot afford.”

Coun Nicole Sharpe (Lab) added: “There are too many loose ends and it has an impact on green space, wildlife and local amenities.”

Coun Trish Smith (Con) said: “I am not a fan of this development as it stands.

“There is going to be a case of overlooking, mass and height. I am also concerned at 58 apartments’ effect on light pollution.

“We don’t have proof for any real need for over-55s accommodation.”

Coun Paul Wray (Lab) said: “Whatever decision we make is going to be a compromised decision. It could go to appeal and be lost, but that doesn’t mean the plan is right.

“This will ultimately be developed, but it should come back as a much better design than it is.”

The committee agreed to defer the decision to negotiate with developers on the design – particularly around issues such as biodiversity and the building’s massing.