Agenda item

To consider the report of the Head of Planning and Building Control.

(Report circulated)

The Chair agreed to accept this item as a matter of urgency in order that the petition could be considered together with other representations received, prior to the confirmation of the Article 4 Direction by 31 December, in accordance with the agreed timetable. The petition, which had been signed by 772 residents of St James ward, had been presented to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Development and Transport on 1 December 2010.

The report of the Head of Planning and Building Control was submitted.    He reported that a meeting had been arranged for members of the six affected wards on 14 December to brief them on the results of the consultation and receive feedback before the delegated power to consider representations was exercised.  In response to the request of the petitioners to implement urgently the planning policies, including the Article 4 Direction, he reported that the Council had already moved as quickly as possible.  The twelve month notice agreed by Executive prior to the Article 4 Direction taking effect sought to avoid any compensation liability and was in accordance with the decisions of the four other local authorities in the country who had so far sought a Direction.

In response to the specific points raised in the petition, he advised members that Executive on 28 September had requested officers to undertake informal consultation on amending Council policy on student accommodation in residential areas and to report back to Planning Member Working Group on a draft amended document for further consultation.  This would include the review of the Nine Principles policy, which required 75% of accommodation to be purpose-built, as well as the Supplementary Planning Guidance on student accommodation.  The Localism Bill which was due to be published shortly may also have implications for the Council’s ability to allocate sites for family housing and this would be addressed.

Councillor Mitchell attended the meeting and spoke on this item under Standing Order 44. He emphasised that the context of the petition was not anti-student but a desire by residents to preserve a balanced community in St James. They acknowledged the University’s significant economic investment in the City, the voluntary service of the students and the work of the University Liaison Officer and their team.  He identified the high percentages of student accommodation in the streets of the ward and outlined the problems, including noise, rubbish and car parking which arose in a densely populated area.   Whilst understanding the reason for the 12 month notice period in respect of the Article 4 Direction, he sought reassurance that other measures to control student accommodation would be implemented as soon as possible. He also challenged the reference in Policy H5 to student accommodation being “close” to the campus and suggested that it could be spread out over a wider area given the small size of the City and effective transport links.  

Councillor Sutton stated that she was happy to receive the petition from residents and that their views would be considered alongside other representations received.  She re-iterated that the Article 4 Direction was not “anti-student”. Many students wanted to live within the community and made a positive contribution to the vibrancy of areas but she acknowledged the need to manage the situation effectively.  The spread of accommodation throughout the city was dictated by students and landlords and not the Council itself.

Whilst expressing sympathy for the views of the residents of St James and understanding their wish to preserve family accommodation in the community, members endorsed the need for the 12 month notice period in view of the potential compensation liability.  They requested the Head of Planning and Building Control to review other policies relating to student accommodation and to bring forward a report including a timescale for implementation as soon as possible in order to expedite other measures of control.

Executive resolved that:-

(1)    the petition in respect of the proposed Article 4 Direction be considered by the Head of Planning and Building Control, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder Sustainable Development and Transport, in association with other responses to the recent consultation exercise;

(2)    any other petitions received on the proposed Article 4 Direction be treated in the same manner; and

(3)    the representations in respect of future policy on HMOs, purpose built university related accommodation and strengthening the character of St James Ward be referred to Planning Member Working Group for initial consideration.

The Chair agreed to accept this item as a matter of urgency in order that the petition could be considered together with other representations received, prior to the confirmation of the Article 4 Direction by 31 December, in accordance with the agreed timetable. The petition, which had been signed by 772 residents of St James ward, had been presented to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Development and Transport on 1 December 2010.

The report of the Head of Planning and Building Control was submitted.    He reported that a meeting had been arranged for members of the six affected wards on 14 December to brief them on the results of the consultation and receive feedback before the delegated power to consider representations was exercised.  In response to the request of the petitioners to implement urgently the planning policies, including the Article 4 Direction, he reported that the Council had already moved as quickly as possible.  The twelve month notice agreed by Executive prior to the Article 4 Direction taking effect sought to avoid any compensation liability and was in accordance with the decisions of the four other local authorities in the country who had so far sought a Direction.

In response to the specific points raised in the petition, he advised members that Executive on 28 September had requested officers to undertake informal consultation on amending Council policy on student accommodation in residential areas and to report back to Planning Member Working Group on a draft amended document for further consultation.  This would include the review of the Nine Principles policy, which required 75% of accommodation to be purpose-built, as well as the Supplementary Planning Guidance on student accommodation.  The Localism Bill which was due to be published shortly may also have implications for the Council’s ability to allocate sites for family housing and this would be addressed.

Councillor Mitchell attended the meeting and spoke on this item under Standing Order 44. He emphasised that the context of the petition was not anti-student but a desire by residents to preserve a balanced community in St James. They acknowledged the University’s significant economic investment in the City, the voluntary service of the students and the work of the University Liaison Officer and their team.  He identified the high percentages of student accommodation in the streets of the ward and outlined the problems, including noise, rubbish and car parking which arose in a densely populated area.   Whilst understanding the reason for the 12 month notice period in respect of the Article 4 Direction, he sought reassurance that other measures to control student accommodation would be implemented as soon as possible. He also challenged the reference in Policy H5 to student accommodation being “close” to the campus and suggested that it could be spread out over a wider area given the small size of the City and effective transport links.  

Councillor Sutton stated that she was happy to receive the petition from residents and that their views would be considered alongside other representations received.  She re-iterated that the Article 4 Direction was not “anti-student”. Many students wanted to live within the community and made a positive contribution to the vibrancy of areas but she acknowledged the need to manage the situation effectively.  The spread of accommodation throughout the city was dictated by students and landlords and not the Council itself.

Whilst expressing sympathy for the views of the residents of St James and understanding their wish to preserve family accommodation in the community, members endorsed the need for the 12 month notice period in view of the potential compensation liability.  They requested the Head of Planning and Building Control to review other policies relating to student accommodation and to bring forward a report including a timescale for implementation as soon as possible in order to expedite other measures of control.

RESOLVED that:-

(1)    the petition in respect of the proposed Article 4 Direction be considered by the Head of Planning and Building Control, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder Sustainable Development and Transport, in association with other responses to the recent consultation exercise;

(2)    any other petitions received on the proposed Article 4 Direction be treated in the same manner; and

(3)    the representations in respect of future policy on HMOs, purpose built university related accommodation and strengthening the character of St James Ward be referred to Planning Member Working Group for initial consideration.

(Report circulated)