Agenda item

RESOLVED: That application 19/02999/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions and reasons in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager and the following amended and additional reasons:

 

Condition 15 to be amended to read:

“Notwithstanding the plans submitted, the parking provision shall be reviewed annually from first occupation for a period of 5 years through monitoring of use and car ownership. Monitoring shall include:

 

    i.       The use of parking spaces using data from weekdays;

   ii.       Car ownership/staff car useage;

  iii.       The provision of active and passive electric vehicle charging;

  iv.       Travel plan initiatives.

 

Car parking provision that is used less than 40% of weekdays throughout that year shall be converted into landscaping to be submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: to ensure that the parking provision is being utilised to capacity.”

 

Condition 26 to be amended to read:

“Prior to occupation, there shall be EV charge bays for all office use car parking bays and all residential use car parking bays. Consideration should be given to a range of slow, fast and rapid charge points. Such bays shall remain operational in perpetuity thereafter.

 

Reason: To contribute to the objective of providing a sustainable transport network and to provide the necessary infrastructure to help off-set the adverse impact of the operational phase of the development on local air quality.”

N.B The Chair called a comfort break at 10:00 PM and the meeting resumed at 10:05 PM.

 

The Committee, Member and Scrutiny Officer took a roll call of Members, Officers, and registered speakers in attendance.

 

Audio Recording – 2 hours 36 minutes and 38 seconds.

 

The Senior Planning Officer provided an update to the report noting that paragraph 4.6.1 should note that the applicant is in agreement with all pre-commencement conditions.

 

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report in respect of application 19/02999/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

 

The Chair invited Mr Anthony Burrows to address the Committee.

 

Mr Burrows thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee in objection to application 19/02999/FP including:

 

·                He had previously been a District Councillor and was now a resident of Letchworth Garden City;

·                He had always advocated for planning decisions to be based on preserving the local character of areas within the District;

·                Town Lodge was in his view an iconic building;

·                Town Lodge was one of 3 buildings designed by architect Cecil Hignett in the Garden City which should be preserved;

 

The following Members asked questions of clarification to Mr Burrows:

 

·                Councillor Daniel Allen

 

In response to questions Mr Burrows advised:

 

·                He did not accept that the site in question was a brown fields site;

·                The façade of the Town Lodge building should be preserved with development taking place behind it.

 

The Chair invited Mr Chris Evans and Mr Chris Wilson to address the Committee.

 

Mr Christopher Evans thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee in support of application 19/02999/FP including:

 

·                Croudace Homes had their regional office based in Letchworth and felt Letchworth was the perfect location for them;

·                Members of staff enjoyed using local businesses in town;

·                The business had outgrown its space in the Spirella Building;

·                Croudace Homes believed the development proposal met the high standards of quality it demands and the Council requires;

·                The development was projected to cost more to build than its end market value but Croudace was willing to make this investment as owner-occupier;

·                All the residential parking and 39 out of 57 of the office car parking spaces would have EV charging stations;

·                The remaining office car parking spaces would have the infrastructure to convert to EV charging stations in the future; 5 of the spaces would be pay-as-you-go stations for public use out of office hours;

·                The office buildings would have integrated photovoltaic charging panels and have a higher fabric efficiency than the current constructions;

·                The proposed design would provide 35 square meters more green space than the present site, boosting biodiversity and following Garden City principles more closely;

·                It would not be possible to keep the existing Town Lodge building;

·                Historic England had assessed the building and decided it did not warrant listing, and reported that its demolition would result in ‘less than substantial harm’ to the Letchworth Garden City conservation area;

·                The current building was not fabric efficient or suitable for an office building, and it also contains a large amount of asbestos;

·                The current building’s location on the site was space inefficient;

·                The proposal overcomes this inefficiency and proposes two buildings providing a business location and a much needed residential development.

 

Chris Wilson, Letchworth BID, thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the committee in support of application 19/02999/FP including:

 

·           This development would strengthen the economic offer of the town centre;

·           The town centre was aging; the next generation required jobs based in Letchworth which this development would support;

·           The creation of public parking spaces and EV charging points would be of significant benefit to the town.

 

The following Members asked questions of clarification:

 

·           Councillor Daniel Allen

 

In response to questions Christopher Evans advised:

 

·                The proposed office would have space for 60-65 employees which would double Croudace Homes employee numbers in Letchworth if filled.

 

The Chair thanked Mr Christopher Evans and Mr Chris Wilson for their contributions.

 

The following Members asked questions and participated in the debate:

 

·                Councillor Sam Collins

·                Councillor Ian Mantle

·                Councillor Val Bryant

·                Councillor Michael Muir

·                Councillor Daniel Allen

·                Councillor Ruth Brown

·                Councillor Tony Hunter

 

In response to questions the Senior Planning Officer advised:

 

·                A condition existed to monitor the level of EV charging point usage with provision to revert hard landscaping back into planted areas where redundancy is identified;

·                The level of car parking at present did not allow for significantly more parking;

·                Two bike sheds were proposed, one for the residential building and one for the office;

·                Ducting for all of the car parking positions was in place and each car parking space could accommodate an EV charging point;

·                There were more parking spaces in the proposal than were required by the current design SPD; the parking spaces were important to the applicant due to the nature of their business;

·                The inclusion of EV charging points and the provision of public parking spaces outside of office hours had been negotiated during pre-application;

·                On balance it was not felt the oversubscription of parking spaces was a reason for refusal;

 

In response to questions the Development and Conservation Manager advised:

 

·                As a matter of planning law Members had to assess the application on its merits blind to any consideration of who the landowners were;

·                There was imprecision in a condition proposing to require a plan to comply with the entirety of an SPD;

·                EV charging point provision would be strengthened;

·                The condition on car park capacity phasing required the applicant to demonstrate the occupancy level of the car park with an annual review, where under used car parking spaces would be converted to other uses such as landscaping;

 

In response to questions the Legal Regulatory Team Manager & Deputy Monitoring Officer advised:

 

·                When applying conditions the test in Paragraph 206 of the NPPF had to be considered: they must be reasonable; relevant to planning; relevant to the development; precise; and enforceable;

·                Members should consider whether a condition requiring a more stringent design standard or compliance with an unpublished document would pass the test of reasonableness;

 

Councillor Ian Mantle proposed and Councillor Mike Hughson seconded and on the vote it was:

 

RESOLVED: That application 19/02999/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions and reasons in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager and the following amended and additional reasons:

 

Condition 15 to be amended to read:

“Notwithstanding the plans submitted, the parking provision shall be reviewed annually from first occupation for a period of 5 years through monitoring of use and car ownership. Monitoring shall include:

 

    i.       The use of parking spaces using data from weekdays;

   ii.       Car ownership/staff car useage;

  iii.       The provision of active and passive electric vehicle charging;

  iv.       Travel plan initiatives.

 

Car parking provision that is used less than 40% of weekdays throughout that year shall be converted into landscaping to be submitted to and agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: to ensure that the parking provision is being utilised to capacity.”

 

Condition 26 to be amended to read:

“Prior to occupation, there shall be EV charge bays for all office use car parking bays and all residential use car parking bays. Consideration should be given to a range of slow, fast and rapid charge points. Such bays shall remain operational in perpetuity thereafter.

 

Reason: To contribute to the objective of providing a sustainable transport network and to provide the necessary infrastructure to help off-set the adverse impact of the operational phase of the development on local air quality.”