Agenda item

Report No: DEV/SE/18/008

Planning Application - 1no. storage building (following removal of part of existing industrial building)

Planning Application - 1no. storage building (following removal of part of existing industrial building)

This application had been referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel.  The item had been presented to the Delegation Panel at the request of Councillor Jason Crooks (Ward Member: Haverhill South).

Haverhill Town Council objected to the scheme on the grounds of overdevelopment of the site and the impact on residential amenity.

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.  Officers were recommending that the application be approved, subject to conditions, as set out in Paragraph 32 of Report No: DEV/SE/19/008.

Speakers:    Councillor Maureen Byrne (Haverhill Town Council) spoke  against the application

                   Mr Lee Frere (agent) spoke in support of the application

Concern was expressed by Councillor Jason Crooks, one of the Ward Members, that the amended plans were not sufficiently significant to warrant approval of the application.  Specific concerns raised included that:

·         The buffer zone between the industrial estate and residents’ rear gardens was not insufficiently substantial to mitigate potential adverse impact on these residents’ amenity;

·         Despite the plans being amended, the proposal was considered to remain an overdevelopment of the site that adversely impacted residential amenity;

·         More clarity was needed on the industrial Use Classes intended for the building;

·         A noise assessment report had not been undertaken to accompany the application;

·         No additional employment would be created as a result of the new building; and

·         Should permission be granted, a sprinkler system should be installed.

Councillor Crooks moved that the application be refused, contrary to the Officer recommendation, on the grounds that Officers had previously considered the original proposal to be unacceptable in terms of its impact on residential amenity, and although the application had been amended, the changes were not sufficiently significant to mitigate this impact. The motion was duly seconded.

Other Members shared Councillor Crooks’ concerns, particularly in respect of the potential noise impact on neighbouring residents due to the perceived lack of depth to the buffer zone and whether a change of use to residential could take place under Permitted Development rights. 

In response to questions and the concerns raised, the Committee was informed that:

·         Proposed Condition 8 specified that the unit should be used for storage (Use Class B8) associated with that use.  Should the application be approved, an additional condition could be imposed that sought to restrict the potential for any further change of use of this building using Permitted Development rights. The applicant could therefore not use the building for residential use without prior permission being sought (*see note at the foot of this minute);

·         A noise assessment report had not been submitted by the Council’s Environmental Health and Housing service as it was not considered necessary or proportionate;

·         Issues regarding the installation of a sprinkler system would form part of discussions between the Fire Service and the Building Regulations team;

·         The operating hours for deliveries/despatch to and from the building would be restricted to 8am to 6pm on Mondays to Saturdays with no operation permitted on Sundays or Bank Holidays.  The Council’s Public Health and Housing service was satisfied with these operating hours and it would be unreasonable and disproportionate to make further restrictions; and

·         The site was located on an industrial estate therefore there was no ability to restrict articulated lorries from accessing the building via Duddery Hill.

Upon being put to the vote and with 5 voting for the motion, 8 against and no abstentions, the motion for refusal was defeated.

The debate continued with a discussion held on the acceptability of the proposal following the amendments to the original plans.  Members reasoned that the proposed building would be located on an existing industrial estate which provided the existing use requested; the applicant had amended their plans in response to comments received from those objecting to the original scheme and it was not now considered to be overbearing, intrusive or have a detrimental impact on the residential amenity of the neighbouring properties.

A motion for approval was then moved and duly seconded with the additional imposition of a condition that sought to restrict the potential for any further change of use of this building using Permitted Development rights. (*see note at the foot of this minute)

Upon being put to the vote and with 9 voting for the motion, 4 against and no abstentions, it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Time limit - The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than 3 years from the date of this permission.
2. Compliance with plans - The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the following approved plans and documents:
3. Parking/manoeuvring to be provided - Prior to first use of the development hereby permitted, the area(s) within the site shown on drawing No. 18012-02 C for the purpose of loading, unloading, manoeuvring and parking of vehicles has been provided.  Thereafter the area(s) shall be retained and used for no other purpose.
4. Deliveries to and from the unit - No deliveries shall be taken or despatched outside the hours of 08:00 - 18:00 Mondays to Saturdays and no deliveries shall be take or despatched on Sundays and Bank Holidays unless agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.
5. Construction hours - The site demolition, preparation and construction works shall be carried out between the hours of 08:00 to18:00 Mondays to Fridays and between the hours of 08:00 to 13:30 Saturdays and at no time on Sundays or Bank Holidays without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
6. Security/floodlights - No security lights or floodlights shall be erected on site without the submission of details to, and written approval from, the Local Planning Authority to ensure a lighting environment of low district brightness at residential properties.
7. Soft landscaping - No development above ground level shall take place until a scheme of soft landscaping for the site drawn to a scale of not less than 1:200 has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The soft landscaping details shall include planting plans; written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment); schedules of plants noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/ densities. The approved scheme of soft landscaping works shall be implemented not later than the first planting season following commencement of the development (or within such extended period as may first be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority). Any planting removed, dying or becoming seriously damaged or diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced within the first available planting season thereafter with planting of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent for any variation. 
8. Unit to be used in conjunction with Bradnams Joinery only for storage associated with that use - The building hereby permitted shall be used only for ancillary storage associated with the existing joinery business taking place within the red line shown on drawing number 1 8 0 1 2 - 0 2, and not for any manufacturing or other process otherwise within class B2 of the use classes order.
9. Additional condition: to restrict the potential for any further change of use of this building using Permitted Development rights(*see note at the foot of this minute)

NOTE OF IMPORTANCE:

(Subsequent to the meeting following consideration of the above application, the Committee resolved to grant planning permission. Part of this resolution included the imposition of a condition that sought to restrict the potential for any further change of use of this building using Permitted Development rights.

Having given some further thought to this matter since the meeting, in discussion with the Chairman, and for the reasons set out below, on reflection it is not considered that the imposition of such a condition is necessary and that such should not be imposed.

It was mistakenly understood by the Committee and by Officers that this proposed building will fall within a B8 storage use. Had this been the case then yes, it would in theory have been capable of a change of use, in due course, to residential under the Permitted Development rights. However, this misunderstands the situation of the planning unit. The red line extends around the entire joinery site, and the building proposed is for storage associated with and ancillary to that joinery use. In planning law therefore it actually falls within a B2 use class, general industrial, as a constituent part of the wider planning unit. It was for this reason that Paragraph 26 of Report No DEV/SE/19/008 was written as follows:–

26. It is also the case that the wider planning unit, noting the manufacturing processes undertaken, would appear to fall within B2 use. Noting the proximity of this building to offsite dwellings, the undertaking of any B2 type activities within the building might otherwise be prejudicial to amenities. On this basis, and noting that the proposal is submitted as a storage building associated with the manufacturing use on site, it is proposed to limit the use of the building to storage purposes only, in association with this use, in the interest of limiting the scope of the consent, in the further interests of residential amenity.

This was to ensure that any B2 manufacturing use did not take place in the building, noting the proximity to dwellings. However, in this light, and noting that the only permitted change away from B2 is to either B8 or B1, Officers advise that a condition in the terms resolved by Committee is not actually necessary, since there is no need to restrict something that otherwise needs permission anyway, and any change to residential for example could never take place. What could of course take place would be a change of use to B1 or B8, but it is suggested that restricting such would not be necessary, and clearly was not the intention of the Committee last week.  

Officers have drafted the following as a simple condition, but clearly this does not now, noting there is not in fact a need, seek to restrict Permitted Development. This approach has been agreed with the Chairman and all Members of the Committee have been appraised of this position:  

The building hereby permitted shall be used only for ancillary storage associated with the existing joinery business taking place within the red line shown on drawing number 1 8 0 1 2 - 0 2, and not for any manufacturing or other process otherwise within class B2 of the use classes order.

Reason: In the interest of limiting the scope of the consent, in the further interests of residential amenity.)