Committee Date: 14/11/2013 Application Number: 2013/06789/PA Accepted: 06/09/2013 Application Type: Full Planning Target Date: 06/12/2013 Ward: Perry Barr Holford Drive, Land Opposite No's 94 & 96, Perry Barr, Birmingham Erection of a police custody suite together with associated car parking Applicant: Agent: Recommendation Approve Subject To Conditions Police and Crime Commissioner for West Midlands Lloyd House, Colmore Circus Queensway, Birmingham, B4 6NQ Ingenium Archial Ltd Walker Building, 58 Oxford Street, Birmingham, B5 5NR 1. Proposal 1.1. The Police and Crime Commissioner for the West Midlands proposes the erection of a two storey custody building that would receive, register and hold (if deemed to be necessary under the law) people until they are either released without charge or cautioned (after being held for a short period of time usually no greater than 24 hours) or until they are brought before a court or magistrate. 1.2. The proposed new building would be secured by a mixture of 2.1m high weldmesh fencing and 3.2m high perimeter wall (to obscure views of the secure yard to rear) 1.3. For security reasons the site layout details are considered sensitive for full public disclosure and as such will, in brief, comprise the building set back from the public highway, public parking to the front, a secure rear yard in which custody vehicles will be brought into and suspects transferred to holding cells within the building as well as additional office accommodation for the police. 1.4. The premises will effectively operate as a holding centre with police administrative functions. 1.5. In addition to the 12 public car parking spaces in the front of the site, the site would also offer 168 staff parking spaces and 49 car/van operational spaces. 15 cycle storage spaces would also be provided. 1.6. The development would also be provided with its own external plant and equipment which will include an enclosed services/chillers compound with generator and fuel provision largely set behind the building. 1.7. The design and layout of the proposed building would largely follow its function. The front elevation would appear flat and incorporate windows along most of its façade on each floor. It would also have a main entrance which would be accessible by the public. The side elevations would incorporate varying roof slopes and for security reasons incorporate less glazing than that to the front. The rear elevation would Page 1 of 8
appear more modern in appearance and would be screened entirely from public view due to security reasons. 1.8. The building would be mainly constructed out of high quality brickwork with a standing seam metal roof. 1.9. Landscaping would be provided through the site including tree planting along the front. 1.10. The development would also see the creation of a footpath along the front of the site where there is none currently. 1.11. Whilst no specific details with regard to the number of employees that would be accommodated within the building have been provided, the development is expected to accommodate a large number of existing staff that would be transferred from existing facilities such as Steel House Lane which are deemed unfit for modern purposes and earmarked for closure. In effect the WM Police property rationalisation programme process in order to meet modern standards, has resulted in the need for this development. 1.12. The applicant has submitted a design and access statement, flood risk assessment, heritage assessment (archaeological report), ground investigation report, transport statement, statement of community involvement, drainage statement, travel plan, arboricultural survey, ecological assessment and noise report. 1.13. The gross internal floor area to be created would measure 7667 sq.m. Proposed Elevations Proposed layout 2. Site & Surroundings 2.1. The application site is a piece of former City Council playing field land which was granted consent for the erection of B1 (b,c), B2 and B8 building. That approval has not been implemented. To the east and south of the site lies the remainder of the playing field site (which is currently under development in order to provide a sports pavilion and upgraded sports facilities). Site Plan Street View 3. Planning History 3.1. 05.08.2010-2010/02627/PA- Application for a new planning permission to replace an extant planning permission, in order to extend the time limit for implementation of 2006/04661/PA. Erection of two-storey building for B1(b) & (c), B2 or B8 use (business, general industry, storage or distribution), formation of car park and alterations to vehicular access- approved. 4. Consultation/PP Responses Page 2 of 8
4.1. Surrounding occupiers, local councillors, resident association and MP notified as well as site and press notice displayed- 1 letter received from Veolia Environmental who operate the waste site across the road. They state that the new building would need a third lane access road on Holford Drive as this road is blocked by the heavy traffic from Birmingham Council waste collection vehicles and general public using the transfer station and household recycling centre. Traffic congestion may also pose a security risk in terms of potential escape. 4.2. 1 letter of objection received from Broadway Academy located on The Broadway. The concerns expressed relate to students using the adjacent sports facilities whilst prisoners are being released from custody. 4.3. Transportation Development- no objection subject to safeguarding conditions. 4.4. Regulatory Services- no objection subject to safeguarding conditions to control noise and light pollution. 4.5. Environment Agency- no objection 4.6. Sport England- comments awaited. 4.7. West Midlands Fire Service- the water supplies for firefighting appears to be inadequate. 4.8. Severn Trent- no objection subject to safeguarding condition. 5. Policy Context 5.1. UDP (2005), NPPF (2012), SPD Loss of Industrial Land and emerging Birmingham Development Plan. 6. Planning Considerations 6.1. The proposed development gives rise to a number of issues which are considered below:- 6.2. Principle- This application involves the loss of playing field land which has in the recent past been granted consent for industrial development. Therefore the principle of the loss of this playing field land has already been accepted. No interest in developing the site for industrial purposes has been shown despite the site being marketed for such purposes for over 18 months. On this basis, the principle of the loss of this land which has authorised industrial consent is acceptable. 6.3. Highway/Parking impact- Transportation Development raise no objection subject to safeguarding conditions. I concur with this view. Approximately half of the new floorspace would be used for police office based type activity. This would equate to approximately 3,500 sq.m which based on a ratio of 1 parking space per 30 sq.metres for B1(a) office space (the nearest comparative land use) as indicated in the adopted SPG Car Parking Guidelines, would equate to a need for 117 parking spaces. Whilst the development would provide a level of parking greater than this the additional parking would provide for the remaining floor area that will be largely occupied by cells. Page 3 of 8
6.4. The submitted amended plans show visibility splays that would enhance driver safety. However the visibility splay for the western access/egress point would include land under third party ownership (City Council) which has plantation on it which may impede driver visibility. For this reason, it is recommended that the applicant enter into an appropriate agreement to secure required visibility on this third party land. This can be conditioned. It is also considered the turning points at the each entrance/egress point will require further modification to ensure satisfactory operation. This can be conditioned and can be considered within S-278/S-38 agreements. In addition to that the provision of a footpath along the front of the site, where none currently exists, would enhance pedestrian and driver safety. A S-38 agreement would be required for dedication of this as a public highway. 6.5. In addition to this, the site is located within walking distance of Aldridge Road which is well served by public transport thereby reducing the need for car based journeys. 6.6. Noise and disturbance- Regulatory Services raise no objection to the proposal subject to safeguarding conditions including those relating to control noise. I concur with this view. The proposed development would be located in a mainly industrial area which also includes a sports facility which is currently being upgraded. In addition to this Holford Drive is a busy road which is used by HGVs frequently. For this reason the ambient noise level is high. The introduction of this use, is not expected to significantly increase this. Other than the two cottages across the road, which appear to be associated with the waste depot, the nearest residential dwellings are student accommodation located 150 metres away to the south west. In addition to this the proposed development would have a high wall running along a large part of the rear boundary and part of the western boundary which will help reduce noise transmission. For these reasons, I do not consider that the proposed development would give rise to any adverse noise or disturbance impact subject to safeguarding conditions. 6.7. Design- The design of the proposed new building would fit in with the surrounding area which is predominantly industrial and made up of large modern shed type structures. The development would, in contrast to other larger buildings in proximity, provide an active frontage with glazing and a glazed public entrance. This would enhance the appearance of the building and provide relief in this industrial setting. Whilst the function that the building would serve ensures the need to maintain security is paramount, the development would still enhance the appearance of the street scene by not only introducing an active frontage to the street but also tree planting and landscaping. Those areas which will largely be screened by the security wall will largely be out of public view or set and at an angle away from the main road. In summary, no adverse visual impact identified. 6.8. Trees- The proposed plans show 5 car parking spaces under tree canopies and within root protection areas. As there is a bank in this location, this will give rise to the need to excavate the bank. This is likely to compromise the third party trees and so it is recommended that those parking spaces are relocated. This can be secured through a condition requiring an amended car parking layout. 6.9. Firefighting- I note the comments from West Midlands Fire Service identifying a lack of water supplies for fire fighting purposes in terms of proximity to hydrant points. This applicant has been notified of this and it will remain the responsibility of the applicant to resolve under separate legislation. 6.10. Overlooking- No overlooking issue identified. Page 4 of 8
6.11. Loss of light/outlook- No loss of light or outlook issue identified. 6.12. Comments provided by Broadway Academy- I note the concerns raised by Broadway Academy regarding the location of this proposed development in proximity to the neighbouring sports facilities, with particular concern regarding the release of custodians from the premises. In response I note that the premises would be for people who have been brought to the establishment by the police for a short duration, some of who will be released quickly if they are not charged with any offence. Others that are considered to have committed a crime will be charged and likely to be held until being brought before a court or magistrate. In addition to this I note that the new establishment would replace existing facilities such as on Steel House Lane which are located in close proximity to other institutions such as the Children s Hospital and as such have proven themselves, particularly with the relatively high level of police presence in the locality which is expected to be the case in this instance, to have had no harmful impact on those other sensitive land users from a crime and disorder perspective. 7. Conclusion 7.1. The proposed development would fit in with the surrounding area and is not expected to give rise to any adverse impact subject to safeguarding conditions. 8. Recommendation 8.1. That planning permission is granted subject to safeguarding conditions. 1 Requires the prior submission of boundary treatment details 2 Requires the prior submission of sample materials 3 Limits the noise levels for Plant and Machinery 4 Requires the prior submission of a lighting scheme 5 Requires the prior submission of a drainage scheme 6 Requires the submission of a sustainable drainage scheme for the site 7 Requires the prior submission of hard and/or soft landscape details 8 Requires vehicular visibility splays to be provided 9 Requires the prior submission of cycle storage details 10 Requires details of associated compound 11 Requires the submisison of a plan(s) showing an amended car park layout as well as site egress and access arrangements Page 5 of 8
12 Requires the development shall be implemented in accordance with the recommendations set out in the Ecological Assessment 13 Requires the prior submission of a scheme for ecological/biodiversity/enhancement measures 14 Requires the prior submission of a construction method statement/management plan 15 Removes PD rights for boundary treatments 16 Requires the applicants to join Travelwise 17 Requires the prior submission and completion of works for the S278/TRO Agreement 18 Pedestrain and vehicle visibility splays to be incorporated and maintained 19 Car parking and vehicle circulation areas are not to be used for any other purpose. 20 Requires the scheme to be in accordance with the listed approved plans 21 Limits the approval to 3 years (Full) Case Officer: Wahid Gul Page 6 of 8
Photo(s) Figure 1- Site boundary along Holford Drive Figure 2 The site frontage with trees and vegetation to the side Page 7 of 8
Location Plan L This map is reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Birmingham City Council. Licence No.100021326, 2010 Page 8 of 8