Public questions of which due notice has been given and which are relevant to the business of the committee.
Minutes:
One public question was received in relation to item 3 of the agenda, Disposal of the Former Sports and Tennis Centre. The question and answer are detailed below:-
Question 1: Mr Adrian Perry
"We give guarded support for the possible sale of the listed Pavilion. We use the word guarded because Scarborough College are the owners of another listed tennis pavilion on the Bramcote site which they have consistently neglected. The Civic Society has brought this to people’s attention over several years; most recently in 2021 when the following comment about the Bramcote tennis pavilion was made by an SBC Officer: comments by, Stephen Gandolfi, Conservation Officer – January 2021." I note the Scarborough Civic Society has raised concern regarding the condition of the former pavilion and whilst this matter falls outside of the consideration of this planning application, it is certainly something the Local Planning Authority is aware of and will address independently."
Almost two years later and still nothing has been done to bring the Bramcote tennis pavilion back from further dereliction. Historic England’s listing states: "a very early and rare surviving purpose-built lawn tennis pavilion dating to the earliest days of the modern sport, and therefore one of the earliest surviving lawn tennis buildings in the world"
Because of this we question the selling of another historic grade II tennis pavilion to an organisation which doesn’t appear to have any regard for the maintenance of such property.
In the Brief it states one of the aims is: Sustainable redevelopment of the Filey Road site with ultra-low-density residential development. It’s clear that 24 homes on this site is not in keeping with the low density of the Conservation Area. Most of the buildings are three storeys and very close together. If you look at the drawings showing the existing properties in the conservation area you can see that there would be room for around 6 properties not 24.
So my question is how can 24 houses clustered in one part of this site be considered ultra low-density ?"
PLACES AND FUTURES RESPONSE:
"The Council will seek all the necessary reassurances, commitments and obligations surrounding the need to repair and upgrade the listed pavilion from the proposed purchaser of the Sport Centre buildings and Grade 2 listed pavilion as part of its conditions of sale. Notwithstanding this Historic England and the Planning Authority have additional powers through the Planning process and via Listed Building Consent to ensure the works to the pavilion are both appropriate and timely. At worst case, the new owners could be served with an ‘Urgent works notice’ if the building is seen to be under threat or unsafe requiring the new owner to implement emergency works.
The number of units proposed for the site (24No) is significantly less than the previous planning application (March 2019) which proposed 42 units. The latest development brief aims to respond to the earlier concerns by the Planning Authority and Historic England regarding the density, plot sizes and the character of the development and hence we have fewer, larger plots and the use of a semi-detached house type helps to continue a theme of larger houses set within large garden plots.
The density of the proposed development (without the College) was to provide 32 homes - this equated to circa 13 dph. The proposed density with the College’s proposal will reduce development further to 24 homes at a density of 9.8 dph. (excluding College Halls). Densities of less than 20-30 dwellings per hectare are considered to be low density under planning guidance. Officers and advisers believe this lower-level of redevelopment now proposed (with or without the College) is now appropriate and the Council have reassurances from the LPA and Historic England that housing density at this level on this site is acceptable in principal."