Retail store and student accommodation at Land South Of South College The Drive, Durham

What was proposed

The application proposed a convenience store, 93 student bedrooms, ancillary facilities, parking, landscaping and cycle provision.

“The mixed use of the site proposed is for a retail convenience store 428m2 in area and for a Purpose Built Student Accommodation (PBSA) development of 93 bedrooms. The application has been amended in process, it being originally proposed for 89 beds.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is sloping grassland at the Mount Oswald entrance, beside South College, a nursing home, woodland, footpaths and transport links.

“There are three entrances into the Mount Oswald development, all from the A177, South Road; a central one, where the historic gatehouses are being rebuilt that serves The Storey, with a north and south entrance into the housing and college developments. These are not interlinked for vehicles, but there are cross-site pedestrian and cycle links.”

“The proposed development site is separated from the A177 by a mature, protected tree belt and a retained area of grassland upon which there is a small gas governor, housed within a small functional structure. The site is bounded to the north by The Drive, the access to the housing developments in the north part of the site. The Drive has a footpath on either side, with a full standard cycle path on the north side. Facing across The Drive is South College.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier permissions established a wider mixed-use Mount Oswald development, including student accommodation and retail, with the outline permission later lapsing for reserved matters.

“CMA/4/83 Outline planning application with access details (all other matters reserved) for a mixed-use development comprising 291 dwellings, to include specialist market housing for the elderly, student accommodation, office, retail, community uses and associated approved in 2013. This outline planning permission lapsed in 2020 in terms of potential for reserved matters applications but remains material in any planning assessment.”

“DM/14/03391/RM Reserved matters application pursuant to outline planning permission CMA/4/83 in respect of internal western shared access road and associated earthworks and drainage approved in December 2014.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the retail benefits and additional student accommodation outweighed identified concerns about quantitative demand and landscape harm.

“The development proposes two uses – a retail convenience store, and the provision of Purpose Built Student Accommodation. The first element is accorded significant positive material weight in the required assessment of the planning balance. The unit was set out as an integral and essential element of the approved outline scheme to support the proposed residential and student developments, increasing the sustainability of both.”

“All parties acknowledge the difficulties in assessing the demand for student housing in its many sub-types. The lack of objection from any quarter to student housing in this location is considered relevant, and whilst the accommodation is proposed for a defined group, the introduction of additional units, in addition to additional choice, could be argued to have the potential to take a degree of demand away from areas of the City and its surroundings where student…”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways and other consultees raised no objections subject to conditions, while the University confirmed meaningful consultation but retained concerns about quantitative need.

“Banks Group acknowledged our comments on the need for such spaces to be flexible to differing student demands on shared space across the academic year. Future engagement with an operator for the scheme has been discussed and we would welcome this. • We acknowledge with Banks Group that quantitative need is a complex picture, with varying means of determining and demonstrating need, however the matters raised around quantitative need remain.”

“We are minded to refer back to the Housing Needs SPD which supports Policy 16.2 of the County Durham Plan (Durham University Development, Purpose Built Student Accommodation and Houses in Multiple Occupation). Our response aims to support judgement of whether Policy 16.2, criterion (b) “consultation with the higher education provider pursuant to the identified need” is met and, to that end, we can confirm we are satisfied that meaningful consultation has taken place.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant’s development planner supported approval and highlighted the scheme’s role in completing the masterplan and providing retail and student accommodation.

What members discussed

Members discussed parking management, student drop-off, construction hours, open-space spending, retail need, student housing benefits and affordability.

“Councillor M Wilkes noted the University’s comments in relation to the shop and sale of alcohol adding he felt it was likely, given the demographics of the area. He asked as regards the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), noting only one parking space per 15 students, and whether there would be conditions in terms of drop off and pick up at the beginning and end of term.”

“The Senior Planning Officer noted that the report included a condition requiring a Construction Management Plan to be submitted and agreed by the Local Planning Authority, and this would contain hours of operation, however, it could be stipulated via condition if Members were so minded. He noted that in respect of parking arrangements, the design had been in line with the overlapping uses.”

Minutes

The vote and decision

Members voted to approve the application, subject to the conditions and legal agreement, with amendments to the parking-management condition.

“Councillor D Freeman moved that the application be approved, he was seconded by Councillor J Elmer and upon a vote being taken it was:”

“That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions and s106 Legal Agreement as set out within the report, with amendments to Condition 6 as discussed by the Committee.”

Minutes