Agenda item

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Erection of three Class E (former B1C, B2 and B8) units with associated car parking and ancillary works.

RESOLVED: That application 20/01017/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions and reasons contained in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

Audio recording – 1 hour 46 minutes 38 seconds

Erection of three Class E (former B1C, B2 and B8) units with associated car parking and ancillary works.

The Development and Conservation Manager presented the report in respect of application 20/01017/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans and provided the Committee with the following updates:

·                There had been discussion with the applicant’s agent and the description of the development had been changed to read as follows: Erection of three Class E (former Class B1C units), B2 and B8 units with associated car parking and ancillary works. This clarified that it was only the former Use Class B1C that fell within the new Use Class E.

·                The wording of recommended Condition 3 had also been changed to read: Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2020 Order the approved units should only be used for uses falling within Use Class E(g) which was former Use Class B1, B2 and B8, and should not be changed to any other use including any other uses within the new Use Class E which could include A1, A2, A3, D1 without first obtaining a specific planning permission from the local planning authority;

·                Because of those changes to the recommendation, there needed to be subsequent changes to paragraphs 4.32, 4.33 and 3.33.

The Development and Conservation Manager clarified that in September 2020 a new Use Class Order was produced which had replaced Use Classes B1A, B1B, B1C and D1 with a new Class E which related to Commercial Business and Service Uses. The agent and applicant had confirmed that they continued to seek a flexible planning permission for one element of Class E which was former Class B1, B2 and B8, i.e. a flexible permission for office use, light industrial, general industrial and warehouse storage and distribution uses. It was a speculative planning application with no identified end user for each of the proposed units. The purpose of recommended Condition 3 was to prevent changes of use to other uses within the new Class E such as retail, leisure or any other uses without planning permission, i.e. it was not a completely open-ended commercial planning permission. Condition 3 however did allow changes of use within the scope of office, light industrial, general industrial and storage use.

The Development and Conservation Manager further updated the Committee as follows:

·                Recommended Condition 15 had been removed as the Environmental Protection Officer had advised that the application site boundary was not adjacent to the site which housed an electricity substation, therefore it had been accepted that no further intrusive investigation was required at that site;

·                With regard to the Materials Condition (4) it had been suggested that graded panelling be used to make the building more recessive although it was acknowledged that graded panelling tended to work better on buildings that had a flat roof. The applicant’s agent responded to say that they did not consider graded panelling to be an appropriate response in this location and for this scale of building. As detailed in the Planning Officer’s report at 4.3.31, the applicant’s agent advised that:

‘The request to replace the pitched roof with a flat roof in the design has not been possible to accommodate having regard to potential occupier demand. Maintaining the roof slope in its current form allows for the proposed rooflights and provides an opportunity for solar panels.’

As such Condition 22 has been recommended requiring details of the solar panels to be submitted and approved by the local planning authority.

In any case, Condition 4 requires that details of materials be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The issue of cladding can be considered when an appropriate application is made for approval of the details required by that condition;

·         Condition 21 – Electrical Vehicle (EV) charging points. On the advice of the Environmental Protection Officer in relation to air quality, Condition 21 has been recommended requiring 10% of the car parking spaces to be designed for plug-in electric vehicles and served by EV-ready charging points in line with the emerging Local Plan Policy D4;

·         The proposed number of car parking spaces at the site fell short of the maximum standard for this site (based on the Car Parking Supplementary Planning Document) by 27 spaces. This was considered acceptable given the sustainable location and the fact that more than double the minimum number of cycling spaces had been proposed;

·         In relation to Section 106 and Sustainable Transport Solutions, although in theory a £65,000  fund was available, a suitable local infrastructure project had not been identified by Hertfordshire County Council, therefore no tariff could not be levied on the developer for this.

The following Members asked questions:

·                Councillor Daniel Allen;

·                Councillor Sue Ngwala;

·                Councillor Ruth Brown;

·                Councillor Tony Hunter;

·                Councillor Tom Tyson.

The Development and Conservation Manager responded as follows:

·                The solar panels would fit between the windows. Condition 22 required details of solar panels to be provided prior to the commencement of development which would ensure this commitment was delivered;

·                The Section 106 regulations had been tightened from 2010 and S.106 could not now be used as a tariff, rather a project had to be identified at the planning permission stage that the scheme would impact on in order to access the funding;

·                An additional shuttle bus service would be funded by the Business Improvement District (BID) through the businesses who occupied the premises;

·                The District Council’s Transport Officer had been consulted as well as Hertfordshire County Council regarding potential sustainable transport projects.

Ms Stacey Rawlings thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee in support of application 20/01017/FP.

Ms Rawlings gave a verbal presentation including:

·                The development of the site would offer a range of significant benefits including the provision of 100+ jobs anticipated to be available from the end of 2021;

·                The developer hoped to commence on site in Spring 2021 and there would be an approximate 8 month construction period;

·                The development offered the construction of three small to medium-sized commercial units tailored to meet the demand for the local area and to help deliver the Council’s employment strategy;

·                Sustainable transport measures had been provided on site to encourage walking, cycling and bus use. Several other recent schemes had contributed S.106 funding for sustainable transport projects in the area;

·                A landscaping scheme had been produced;

·                There was extant planning permission for the site.

It was proposed by Councillor Tony Hunter, seconded by Councillor Morgan Derbyshire, and

RESOLVED: That application 20/01017/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions and reasons contained in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.